THE STARTUPS THAT WERE NEVER BORN

Introduction

This article explores the untapped potential of human ideas in the world, as a catalyst for innovation and economic development. We also explore the systemic issues currently stifling nascent entrepreneurs, and the challenges they may face in bringing their ideas to fruition.

We underscore the power of human creativity and ideas as the basic currency of innovation in addressing many of the most significant problems that the world faces today, while highlighting the impact of unrealized startups in this context.

We ask: what is the opportunity-cost of so many startups failing, for reasons that may have been avoided through evolved thinking regarding entrepreneurial support structures and programs? In other words, are so many startups failing because current models are failing startups?

And finally, we also investigate the concept of “trickle-up” economics as an alternative model for thinking about the hidden or intangible impact of startups on the health and vitality of our economies as a whole.

The Importance of Human Ideas for Innovation

Peter F. Drucker, the Austrian American management consultant, educator and author, once said:

“Innovation is the specific instrument of entrepreneurship. The act that endows resources with a new capacity to create wealth.”

It’s no secret that the overwhelming majority of successful startups depend heavily on innovating to differentiate themselves from the competition. And, in the world of entrepreneurship and startups, as elsewhere, the basic unit of currency of innovation is ideas. Every entrepreneurial journey, and every startup success story, must begin - at base camp - with an idea.

It’s a uniquely human superpower – having ideas. Our capacity to conceive of and entertain ideas, to ideate, distinguishes us from all other creatures. And when you think about it for long enough, it’s hard not to conclude that it’s akin to a form of magic. Ideas, as the alchemical product of our mind’s capacity to think in abstract, non-linear terms, to imagine things as they might be rather than as they are — and then to transmute those intangible ideas into tangible innovations and inventions, to almost literally, will them into existence.

And every once in a while, an individual comes along with a really big idea that changes the world – or even radically reimagines it…

The Power of Ideas: Revolutions and Moonshots

The World Wide Web is one such example of an idea that changed the world, based on a ‘Eureka moment’ that Tim Berners-Lee had back in 1989, while working as a software engineer at CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research. Berners-Lee was frustrated by the chaotic system that had been deployed for sharing and retrieving information among researchers at CERN. The existing system, or lack of one, wasn’t working. So he envisioned a network of hypertextual documents, accessible via the internet, and interconnected via hyperlinks to form a dynamic, accessible, and unified repository of all of CERN’s existing discombobulated research information resources.

Berners-Lee then implemented his idea¹ by developing the foundational technologies required for such a distributed system to function effectively, including: HTML (Hypertext Markup Language); HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol); and URI (Uniform Resource Identifier). The first website went live in 1991 – which marked the beginning of the World Wide Web as we know it today. And the rest, as they say, is history.

It’s fair to say that Tim Berners-Lee’s idea has had a profoundly outsized impact on the world. His invention completely revolutionized communication and information exchange – leading to the internet's widespread adoption, and to the subsequent, wholesale transformation of numerous industries and aspects of everyday life, including the very fabric of commerce itself. But what if he hadn’t received the green-light to run with his project at CERN? Or what if CERN’s original document management system hadn’t been such a complete mess in the first place?

In more recent years, the capacity for big ideas, such as Berners-Lee’s hypertextual document management system, to unleash a tidal wave of innovation has been joined by a new, post-millennial agent of change: the Big Hairy Audacious Goal (or BHAG). It is a term coined by Jim Collins and Jerry Porras² in their 2005 book Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies.

A BHAG is a compelling, long-term goal, which serves as a “North Star” of sorts – i.e. it is inspiring enough for everyone in a company to get behind. Elon Musk is fond of setting such big, hairy, audacious goals to provide a clear focal point around which to drive and crystallize innovation – such as the BHAG of “making humanity multi-planetary”; which is the driving impetus behind his company SpaceX.³ With a BHAG that big, not even the sky's the limit.

But since Collins and Poras initially coined the term, BHAG has also been extended as an organizational concept into the non-profit “impact” sector – where it is not only an organization's employees but also its community at large, typically an ‘online-first’ community of like-minded individuals and stakeholders, who respond to the rallying call to action of a clearly-defined, socially-relevant BHAG.

A recent example of this new type of socially-aligned BHAG - which is already having a profound impact on the world, but which could just as easily have remained at the napkin sketch phase indefinitely - is The Ocean Cleanup, a non-profit organization that is developing and scaling technologies to rid the world’s oceans of plastic.

Described as “a simple idea turned into a moonshot project”, The Ocean Cleanup was founded by a young Boyan Slat; who, after seeing more plastic bags than fish while scuba diving in Greece, asked himself the childlike question: “Why can’t we just clean this up?...”⁴

And it was that question that led him down the rabbit hole of conducting further research on the global scope of plastic pollution as part of a school project – during which time he learned about the unconscionable amount of plastic rapidly accumulating in five large oceanic gyres, the largest of which is called, the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.

Slat subsequently went on to present a TEDx talk in 2012⁵ on how it was possible to use innovative technology to rid the oceans of plastic pollution. And the video of his presentation went viral – creating enough momentum behind his BHAG to actually charter an organization and start taking action at scale. Put simply, the BHAG of The Ocean Cleanup project is to “rid the world’s oceans of plastic”⁴ – with a way-point of “removing 90% of floating ocean plastic by 2040”. They plan to achieve this by: (a) cleaning up the legacy plastic already floating in the ocean; and (b) by halting the incessant, ongoing trash flow from rivers into the ocean.

This is a big, hairy, audacious goal that a huge number of people globally can get behind – hence the overwhelming success of the project. And it is the vision itself - the mission statement, stated in the form of a BHAG, as in “to rid the world’s oceans of plastic” - that becomes the equivalent of the “big idea” that supports the wave of innovation that follows.

A New Global Context for Entrepreneurs

In the midst of so much human ingenuity, and with so many people wanting to connect in new ways to affect positive change in the world, including through projects like The Ocean Cleanup, there’s a great deal to be optimistic about.

And in a 21st Century context, there has perhaps never been a better time to be an entrepreneur or a solopreneur – to transform raw ideas into bleeding-edge innovation, or to set truly audacious, world-changing goals. Modern technologies, including the internet, the World Wide Web, social media networks, mobile connectivity, 3D printing, and more recently artificial intelligence, have all meaningfully reduced the friction and challenges for entrepreneurs, by democratizing access to powerful business tools and software, learning resources, communications channels, international markets, and more.

But one thing remains constant in terms of the entrepreneur stories you get to hear: not all ideas - not even all world-changing ideas, or audacious goals to make the world a better place - go on to become startup success stories. So much of it comes down to execution, discipline, networks, and perhaps even a bit of luck. And there are undoubtedly also systemic and structural issues stifling nascent entrepreneurs, which have nothing whatsoever to do with the strength of their ideas, or their determination or deservedness to succeed. Plus, many entrepreneurs may also face personal challenges and priorities – not least financial challenges, which all entrepreneurs will relate to. All of which may ultimately prevent their ideas from coming to fruition.

How Much Startup Failure is Too Much Failure?

In headline terms, it’s difficult to get reliable information on startup failures at the global level, since both numbers and access to reliable data vary significantly depending on geographical context. In the United States, recent research by Lendingtree⁶ reports, based on the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, that 20.8% of startups in the U.S. fail within the first year. By year 5, 48.4% have failed. And after 10 years, 65.1% of startups no longer exist.

While there may be countless reasons for all of the startup failures, perhaps as varied as the startups themselves - and while the typical pain points experienced by entrepreneurs may differ significantly depending on where they are in the world - there are also clearly some general universal patterns and commonalities at play, which deserve further exploration in isolation.

Certainly, many startups will and do fail for unfixable reasons, such as no market need, a failed pivot, problems between co-founders, or a deeply flawed business model. But some startups will fail because of more intangible aspects, things that have nothing whatsoever to do with startup idea validation or product-market fit; but rather any number of compounding problems, including: a lack of entrepreneurial support and expertise; having insufficient structures in place; lack of team cohesion; the prohibitive cost of professional services; poor access to funding and mentoring; poor cash flow management; or simply because the structural or regulatory challenges involved proved, in the final analysis, too complex to overcome.

It already feels statistically a bit like rolling the dice as an entrepreneur. But things may be in the process of getting much worse – especially in relation to the next generation of young entrepreneurs, destined to become the business leaders and visionaries of tomorrow. Because research is emerging, which indicates that the number of new startups incorporating each year may be in the process of falling off a steep cliff.

“Analyzing data from Crunchbase on 27,000 software companies founded between 2020 and July 2023 in the United States, Israel and the European Union, a consistent and concerning decline in new startup formations becomes apparent. From 2020 to 2023 (estimated), the number of new startups formed in the U.S. is on pace to decrease by approximately 86%, dropping from 6,424 to 1,046. Similarly, Israel is on track to witness a decline of around 89%, from 333 to 34 startups. In the EU, the number, as of mid-year, is on pace to decrease from 5,147 to 640 startups, reflecting a decline of about 87%.”⁷

It’s worth stressing here that small businesses - which would include the vast majority of startups - are the lifeblood of most economies. In the United States, for example, they generate about 50% of gross domestic product (GDP); and - according to the United States Small Business Administration (SBA) - account for 64% of all new jobs in America. Some other countries may depend even more heavily on small businesses - and specifically new startups - as an engine of economic growth.

And everywhere, it is small businesses and startups that spark fresh innovation, create new jobs, and provide opportunities for both individuals and the communities in which they are situated, including women and ethnic minorities, which in turn fuels the local economy – from the bottom up. Not only that: small businesses also provide an innovation flywheel for bigger companies, much higher up the food chain.

And small businesses also tend to grow, if they don’t fail – sometimes into very big companies. Or perhaps another way of putting it: the overwhelming majority of big companies were once small startups too, as this paper on The Importance of Small Business to the U.S. Economy⁸ so clearly intimates in one of its opening paragraphs:

“The millions of individuals who have started businesses in the United States have shaped the business world as we know it today. Some small business founders like Henry Ford and Thomas Edison have even gained places in history. Others, including Bill Gates (Microsoft), Sam Walton (Wal-Mart), Steve Jobs (Apple Computer), Michael Dell (Dell, Inc.), Steve Case (AOL), Pierre Omidyar (eBay), and Larry Page and Sergey Brin (Google), have changed the way business is done today. Still millions of others have collectively contributed to our standard of living.”

This is a roll call worthy of some deliberation. What role have such entrepreneurs and innovators played in the overall success of the US economy? What if Henry Ford, or Thomas Edison, or the Silicon Valley contingent listed above, hadn’t made a success of their startup ventures? Would the United States even be recognizable to us without their collective contributions?

Put simply: if the number of new startups being incorporated in the post-Covid world continues on its current trajectory of rapid decline, the consequences could be catastrophic. Strong action must be taken to reverse this troubling trend.

Thought-Provoking Questions Concerning Startups

With all of this front of mind, we felt compelled to ask some searching questions:

What proportion of startups that fail within the first 5 years are actually being failed by the existing systems and structures built to support and foster entrepreneurship and innovation?

What about all the potentially world-changing startups that never made it past base camp? What impact might they have had if they’d been able to bring their ideas to fruition, to realize their full potential?

Do brilliant people, with brilliant ideas, make brilliant business leaders or strategists? Should we expect them to be? Straight out of the gate?

What exactly is the opportunity-cost to society at large for losing out on any number of brilliant, potentially transformational ideas – ideas that never quite make it past first base?

How many Marie Curies or Nikola Teslas (for example in Africa or India) might we have already overlooked, or missed out on hearing from? Changemakers who failed to break through, for one reason or another – who maybe had to switch focus to more immediate priorities when confronted by immovable objects, or seemingly insurmountable odds, rather than pressing forward to make that key breakthrough?

And perhaps more importantly still:

What really are the toughest challenges for entrepreneurs and inventors, and what are the biggest ‘lost opportunities’ for growth, in the context of our new, hyperconnected, digital world? And based on these existing pain points: what positive steps can we take immediately to help turn more, rather than fewer, of these rough diamonds into the highly polished gemstones they deserve to be?

The Challenges and Barriers for Entrepreneurs

The high failure rates of startups, and the compounded issues of risk aversion, and fear of failure that discourage potential entrepreneurs from pursuing their ideas, are beginning to take their toll, not only on individual entrepreneurs, but also on the startup sector as a whole.

Traditional support structures in many cases are missing the mark. Most startup incubators act more like VC grooming centers than socially-focused innovation hubs. Their primary motivation is maximizing profits, plus there’s also a certain amount of unattainability thrown into the mix for good measure: prestigious startup accelerators⁹ like Techstars and Y Combinator (YC), for example, have a lower acceptance rate (1-2%) than Harvard (5%), leaving the vast majority of non-Ivy League candidates out in the cold, trying to figure out how to startup on their own – albeit without the additional burden of having to join the ‘unicorn cult’; where nothing short of a billion-dollar valuation is going to be considered a success.

More generally, over the last few years, it is troubling to note that startup funding itself has dried up significantly. A Crunchbase article from last year⁷ highlights that funding in the United States, Israel and the European Union has dropped drastically from 2021’s highs, leaving many startups strapped for cash and therefore much more likely to fold when other challenges crowd in. Global funding fell 34% from 2021 to 2022. And by the end of Q3 2023, funding only sat at $193.6B – less than half of 2022’s year-end total. Part of this may be tied into the natural ebb and flow of macroeconomic cycles and liquidity, or indeed the impact of Covid – but either way, the competition between startups for access to limited funding is only increasing.

But money aside, what about a more detailed picture when it comes to the real-world problems faced by entrepreneurs? Based on analyzing a trove of startup obituaries, written by founders, investors, and journalists, CB Insights compiled a list of the top 12 reasons why startups fail.¹⁰ In explaining its results, the market intelligence firm notes that many startups offered multiple reasons for their failure – hence the top reasons don’t squarely add up to 100%, they far exceed it. So a company may have gone bust because it had a flawed business model and there was no market need. But the weightings are instructive, since you can get a much clearer picture of where the pain points are.

While the unavailability of cash is the leading reason given for business closures in the study of startup post mortems, it’s worth noting that the majority of VC-backed businesses also fail. And let’s face it, it’s also no secret that the overwhelming majority of businesses fail exactly when they run out of money, so it’s not the root cause, rather it’s just the final shoe to drop. It’s therefore worth exploring in greater depth the more granular, instructive, second-tier reasons given - i.e. besides “ran out of cash” - that lead to startups failing.

There are a myriad of startup issues to address in this context, as various fractals of the problem areas identified above – not limited to funding, but which have much deeper roots, in market fit demand, team dynamics, scaling prematurely and chasing "growth at all costs"; as well as many nuanced aspects, such as inflexibility in design processes, which is different from common problems associated with wholesale pivots, etc.

There’s a lot to unpack here. And such is the importance of this discussion that we shall return to it another time – to give the topic the dedicated space that it so richly deserves, rather than trying to shoehorn it in here.

But clearly, the fact that companies are arriving at the gates of bankruptcy, before establishing that there is no market need or fit for their product or service, is an indication that the current systems in place for fostering entrepreneurship and innovation are already failing epically.

The MacroEconomic Impact of Entrepreneurship Inaction

In a nutshell: if the current system is failing startups fundamentally, and we believe it is, then should we anticipate failing economies as an inevitable downstream consequence? It can be difficult to prove a negative – in this case concerning the absence of successful startups and entrepreneurs, i.e. the “companies that never existed”, and their hypothetical impact on economic decline. But there is plenty of existing research, academic and otherwise, which clearly demonstrates that startups - and the entrepreneurs who found them - are the very lifeblood of the 21st Century economy.

Entrepreneurship is a Catalyst For Economic Growth and Vitality

The overall importance of small businesses and entrepreneurship to economic growth and vitality has been recognized in the academic literature since at least the 1990s – i.e. around the dawn of the World Wide Web, when the disruptive potential of technology was being embraced by a new generation of entrepreneurs.

Audretsch (1995)¹¹ initiated the discussion about the significance of Small to Medium Enterprises (SME’s) in promoting innovations and generating wealth and economic growth. He argued that economic growth and technological progress are triggered by large and incumbent firms, as well as SMEs and entrepreneurial activities.

And since then, with the internet and the World Wide Web having transformed the potential scope and scale of startups, and how they operate, the role of small businesses and entrepreneurs in supporting thriving, resilient economies has become much more widely understood and expressed in the academic literature, as opposed to just being a kind of afterthought.

Wennekers and Thurik¹² presented an early theoretical framework linking entrepreneurship to economic growth in 1999. And Minniti suggested in 2000 that, “Entrepreneurship creates a network externality that promotes the creation of new markets” – and that “each individual entrepreneurial action has a more than proportional impact on economic growth”.

Audretsch and Keilbach (2004)¹² argued - based on the previous theoretical and empirical studies - that entrepreneurship influences economic growth in three key ways:

1. The diffusion of knowledge
2. Increased competition through increased number of enterprises created
3. Increased diversity because entrepreneurship increases the mixture of enterprises, and hence the selection of goods and services offered in an economy

More recently, international research has echoed these same themes. For example, a 2018 study focused on Kuwait¹³ highlighted the importance of entrepreneurship as a mechanism for “knowledge spillovers” (equivalent to the above term “diffusion of knowledge”), thereby contributing to the economic growth and prosperity of Kuwait. Entrepreneurship was also proposed to be one of the main sources of job creation, and it is therefore seen as being a vital component in helping to meet the high demand for youth employment in Kuwait in the coming years.

Other papers concerning the role of entrepreneurship in economic growth in an international context have arrived at similar conclusions – i.e. that the level of entrepreneurship in a given country has a significant positive effect on the level of economic growth in that country. And it has also been argued that the level of entrepreneurship in a given country cannot be adequately explained by “the levels of the traditional causes of economic growth in that country (specifically the amounts of labor, capital, and knowledge that a country possesses as well as the presence or absence of market friendly government policies)” – but rather that “entrepreneurship acts as an independent factor”.

So, what is this less tangible, “independent factor” that startups and entrepreneurial activity equate to in tangible economic terms? And how do we quantify its impact, especially when discussing the harmful consequences of its nonexistence – as with the topic of “companies that never existed”?

The Importance Of “Trickle-Up” Economics

It’s worth introducing the concept of trickle-up economics in relation to this question. While it’s still frowned upon in some circles, the reality is that trickle-up economics makes considerably more sense than the concept of trickle-down economics, the impact of which we’re all entirely familiar with – for example in the form of banker bailouts and quantitative easing (QE).

Trickle-up economics flips the script on the top-down, centralized approach, starting instead from the bottom and working its way up; stating that policies that directly benefit lower income individuals are most likely to boost the income of society as a whole – because those benefits "trickle-up" in a natural, organic way throughout the population, rather than being sequestered away somewhere, on or off the balance sheet of a bank. "A rising tide lifts all boats", as the expression goes.

"We believe that a rising tide of economic growth should lift all boats, not just the super yachts."

-David Parker, New Zealand MP

The same general principles of trickle-up economics can be applied when exploring the impact of entrepreneurship and startups. Startups are not just amorphous blobs: new ideas and ventures can and do have a profound impact on society at large, starting at the grass-roots level, not only in terms of creating jobs and economic prosperity, but also in terms of community cohesion and the wider ‘butterfly effect’ that entrepreneurship and innovation has on local communities – especially in terms of providing fresh opportunities for economic growth and advancement.

Not to mention the earlier point concerning the fact that some startups go on to materially change the world – or to become massive blue chip companies in the fullness of time. Every oak tree necessarily begins life as an acorn.

But there’s also the wider impact of entrepreneurship, as it works its way up, from the bottom to the top. Entrepreneurs and the startups they found contribute significantly to positive outcomes across the board – even at the macro level of national and regional economies.

For example, a recent economic brief¹⁴ published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond draws attention to the significance of the fall in the startup rate on aggregate outcomes, such as employment and productivity, and draws a dotted line to the secular decline in US business dynamism:

“How significant is the fall in the startup rate for aggregate outcomes such as employment and productivity? Early evidence from the 2001 book chapter "Aggregate Productivity Growth: Lessons From Microeconomic Evidence" indicates that the consequences of a fall in the startup rate could be large. The authors find that more than 25 percent of aggregate productivity growth in the U.S. manufacturing sector is due to the net entry margin, or the role of entering net of exiting firms. While these numbers are a good indicator for the importance of startups, they do not provide quantitative evaluations for the secular decline in the startup rate. Two studies have filled this gap, however. First, the 2016 paper "Older and Slower: The Startup Deficit's Lasting Effects on Aggregate Productivity Growth (PDF) shows that the fall in the startup rate has sizable effects on aggregate productivity. In their counterfactual exercise (holding the economy's startup rate and firm age distribution constant at their 1980 values), the paper's authors find that aggregate productivity over the period 1980 to 2014 could have been 3.1 percent higher. To put this "startup deficit" in perspective, real income for a median family would have been $1,600 higher in 2014 alone. Second, the 2019 paper "Grown-Up Business Cycles" finds that the observed secular decline in the startup rate has a significant impact on aggregate employment. If the startup rate had remained constant between 1987 and 2012, aggregate employment would have been, for example, 11.4 percent higher in 2008. Furthermore, there are important implications for the economy at business cycle frequencies. In one of their examples, the authors show that aggregate employment would have recovered almost a full year earlier after the Great Recession if the startup rate decline would not have occurred.”

So, there’s already a huge amount of supporting data on the outsized, intangible role that entrepreneurial activity and innovation plays in helping to build and maintain a strong and resilient economy. Here are just a few further examples of existing studies and articles related to this “trickle-up” positive impact that startups have in the context of the wider economy.

Entrepreneurship Invigorates Lots of Things – Including the Economy

An article published on the IZA World of Labor platform¹⁵ highlights that productive entrepreneurs have the ability to invigorate the economy by creating jobs, introducing new technologies, increasing productivity and driving innovation. The article also identifies other key factors that indicate the trickle-up concept in play:

1. Increased competition from entrepreneurs challenges existing firms to become more competitive
2. Entrepreneurial activity raises the productivity of firms and economies
3. Entrepreneurs accelerate structural change by replacing established, sclerotic firms

Entrepreneurship Bolsters Economic Health and Resilience

Innovative entrepreneurial vitality, under the moderating effect of economic policy uncertainty, has been found to have a significant positive effect on economic resilience. A research article published on ResearchGate¹⁶ investigates the impact of innovative entrepreneurial vitality on economic resilience, with economic policy uncertainty as a moderating variable. The findings suggest that entrepreneurial vitality, particularly in the context of innovation, contributes to economic health and resilience. Innovative entrepreneurial vitality was found to enhance economic resilience significantly by upgrading the industrial structure, alleviating the income gap, and guiding economic agglomeration in the context of economic policy uncertainty.

The Impacts of Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions on Economic Growth

The impacts of entrepreneurial framework conditions on economic growth have been assessed in a study that focuses on the level of economic development. Published in the journal Economies, the study¹⁷ examines how the conditions for entrepreneurship influence economic growth, and suggests that a favorable entrepreneurial environment can contribute to economic vitality and growth, particularly in developing economies. It is suggested that the study can serve as a basis for policy makers to adjust or develop new policies to accelerate economic growth.

These are just 3 further examples of studies that highlight how startups and entrepreneurial activity have an enormous impact on economies, from the bottom up – with even sizable effects on aggregate productivity and employment, as well as countless other less tangible influences, such as accelerating structural change by replacing established, sclerotic, outmoded firms and business models.

Reframing How Startups Can Think About The Challenges

There are clearly many barriers and obstacles to overcome as an entrepreneur – as evidenced by the number of startups that fail, as well as more recently by all the startups that don’t exist. And if you’re an entrepreneur, we’re pretty sure nobody ever told you that things were going to be easy – but did anyone tell you in plain English what an entrepreneur is up against and the complexities of simply staying in the game?

At the macro level, strategies and alternatives to overcome these barriers, such as fostering a culture of experimentation, providing better access to resources and knowledge, and encouraging outsider perspectives to approach problems differently, need to quickly evolve.

But at the personal level, all of the external complexities can creep in to cloud judgment, or to force entrepreneurs to spend time on constantly sweating all of the small stuff – rather than focusing on their big, hairy, audacious goals, or on alchemizing their ideas into reality. We would encourage entrepreneurs to spend more - not less - time focusing on their audacious ideas and goals, and on first principles, before adding all the bells and whistles on.

People often start businesses for the sole purpose of making money. They build tech quickly, without having a deeper connection to the problem. This is a major cause of startup failure. Businesses that are lasting are born from a place of authenticity, with depth of knowledge, understanding and introspectiveness. This is what makes great entrepreneurs and high-impact startups unique: they innovate from a place of deeper, nuanced understanding, related to the problems they are trying to solve.

It is this practice of considered introspectiveness that we would encourage as an alternative place to begin the work – to begin again. Orientation for founders should start with what they know. They have unique knowledge and experience, and should focus their energies on where their passion lies, instead of feeling daunted by complexities; utilizing technology and proven processes to provide structure to their business – rather than constantly worrying about keeping the plates spinning, at the expense of creative genius.

In summary, we would encourage founders to both draw from their domain knowledge and to remain grounded in their experience, values and beliefs at all times. Let your founder’s path reveal itself along the way. And know, you know a whole lot more than you think you do.

Actions for New Entrepreneurs with Big Ideas

“Follow the path of the unsafe, independent thinker. Expose your ideas to the danger of controversy. Speak your mind and fear less the label of 'crackpot' than the stigma of conformity.”

-Thomas J. Watson

We began with the magical power and importance of ideas. They are the basic currency of innovation, wherever it is found. And it is ideas, rooted in the mission and purpose, that is the heart of what it means to be a true entrepreneur.

Clearly, there is a need for a collective effort to reduce the obstacles faced by startups. And we can’t be comfortable that there aren’t more entrepreneurs in the world – because it’s a risk to solving a lot of the big problems we face.

But the raw power of entrepreneurial innovation comes not from systems and practices, or even from money – it comes from ideas. And so, if you’re someone with a big idea, or an even bigger BHAG, and if you know how to solve a problem because of your domain knowledge, or your precious lived experience, then that’s the singularly best place to begin your founder journey.

References

¹ Youtube: “Tim Berners-Lee: How This Guy Invented the World Wide Web 30 Years Ago”, cited in February 2024 (Source)

² Harpercollins: “Build To Last” cited in February 2024 (Source)

³ SpaceX: “Mission” cited in February 2024 (Source)

⁴ The Ocean Cleanup: “About The Ocean Cleanup”, cited in February 2024 (Source)

⁵ Youtube: “How the oceans can clean themselves: Boyan Slat at TEDcDelft", cited in February 2024 (Source)

⁶ Lendingtree: “Percentage of Businesses That Fail — and How to Boost Success Chances”, cited in February 2024 (Source)

⁷ Crunchbase News: “Alarming Decline In Startup Creation Presents Challenges And Opportunities For Entrepreneurs”, cited in February 2024 (Source)

⁸ Minnesota University: “5.2 The Importance of Small Business to the U.S. Economy”, cited in February 2024 (Source)

⁹ Forbes: “Want To Get Into A Top Startup Accelerator? Try These 3 Strategies.”, cited in February 2024 (Source)

¹⁰ CBinsights: “The Top 12 Reasons Startups Fail”, cited in February 2024 (Source)

¹¹ Ideas.org: “Innovation, growth and survival” cited in February 2024 (Source)

¹² Researchgate: “Entrepreneurship Capital and Economic Performance", cited in February 2024 (Source)

¹³ SciencesPo: ““Entrepreneurship and Economic Growth: Case of Kuwait”, cited in February 2024 (Source)

¹⁴ Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond: "Why Are Startups Important for the Economy?", Cited in February 2023 (Source)

¹⁵ IZA: “Entrepreneurs and their impact on jobs and economic growth”, cited in February 2024 (Source)

¹⁶ Researchgate: “The Effect of Innovative Entrepreneurial Vitality on Economic Resilience Based on a Spatial Perspective: Economic Policy Uncertainty as a Moderating Variable’”, cited in February 2024 (Source)

¹⁷ MDPI: “The Impacts of the Entrepreneurial Conditions on Economic Growth: Evidence from OECD Countries”, cited in February 2024 (Source)