How can I tell if I am failing at my entrepreneurial venture or start-up?(cenedella.com)
cenedella.com
How can I tell if I am failing at my entrepreneurial venture or start-up?
http://www.cenedella.com/job-search/how-can-i-tell-if-i-am-failing-at-my-entrepreneurial-venture-or-start-up/
37 comments
Hi Phu -- the topic is addressed to internet entrepreneurs, not hard-working small business people. I agree with you.
M
M
Competition != death.
Plenty of companies had the same basic idea as an existing company and still made it big. Sometimes execution really is the most important part ex: Dropbox.
Plenty of companies had the same basic idea as an existing company and still made it big. Sometimes execution really is the most important part ex: Dropbox.
You're failing from the moment you start. Your whole mission is to get to a point where you're not failing anymore.
If each day you're making progress towards the things that will make you're specific venture sustainable then you're on the right track. otherwise its time to adjust.
If each day you're making progress towards the things that will make you're specific venture sustainable then you're on the right track. otherwise its time to adjust.
"You are asserting that, despite the presence of 7 billion other people on the planet, and a US economy that produces $14 trillion in goods and services each year, and over 100 mm white collar workers in our country, that you, little old you, have come up with an idea, a business, a company that none of those other wonderful human beings have thought to invent yet."
Not really. Most entrepreneurial ventures are not based around ideas that nobody else has done yet. They usually involve a known business model or idea done better, in a different place, or at a more opportune time.
Not really. Most entrepreneurial ventures are not based around ideas that nobody else has done yet. They usually involve a known business model or idea done better, in a different place, or at a more opportune time.
I think that in the beginning you really have to redefine success as: "Am I Making Progress?"
After lots and lots of progress and zero results, then you are probably on the verge of failure.
After lots and lots of progress and zero results, then you are probably on the verge of failure.
No, no, a hundred times no. "Am I Making Progress?" is the worst question you can ask yourself. It results in answers like:
"I've decided on which web framework to use, so yes."
"My tests now have 100% code coverage, so yes."
"I added a new feature that I think may or may not help 1% of my hypothetical customer base, so yes."
As someone who hasn't launched yet, it's easy to wrap yourself in the security blanket of "progress". But progress that doesn't involve customers paying you more money than yesterday is bullshit.
/me leaves to lock himself in his office until he launches.
"I've decided on which web framework to use, so yes."
"My tests now have 100% code coverage, so yes."
"I added a new feature that I think may or may not help 1% of my hypothetical customer base, so yes."
As someone who hasn't launched yet, it's easy to wrap yourself in the security blanket of "progress". But progress that doesn't involve customers paying you more money than yesterday is bullshit.
/me leaves to lock himself in his office until he launches.
I totally agree, but we're on different wavelengths here. I've always had the impression that launching was the first thing you did, and progress was what happened after that.
And then there is that whole thing about results...
And then there is that whole thing about results...
you're entirely right bigsassy. the very polite woman in my post was definitely making "progess" - progress on her studies to create plans to set a schedule to discuss launching a site.
launch, launch, launch, launch.
marc
launch, launch, launch, launch.
marc
progress can be further subdivided into 2 distinct types:
- product development progress
- market/customer development progress
- product development progress
- market/customer development progress
I think progress means : How many users, pageviews, leads (or whatever other metrics matters to your bottom line) you are adding daily/weekly/monthly.
and $$$$....
So products which take a long time to initially build and release simply can't be successful? That just seems like an extreme and limiting economic theory to me, and one which requires a lot more data and lot less rhetoric than the current hype about launching quickly is producing.
The underlying principle is that you have to understand and control the factors affecting your startup's success. If you're not doing so in a meaningful way, you're exposing yourself to large / unknown risk factors, where "large" means "very likely to lead to your failure".
Not having launched the product (esp. in the consumer market) as early as possible is definitely one such factor.
Not having launched the product (esp. in the consumer market) as early as possible is definitely one such factor.
I agree with what you're saying, but I think the original post went much further. Even with respect to what you're saying I think the paradox is that if you discover that people don't like the product you rushed out the door, it might be because you rushed it out the door. And the lessons you learn from customers saying "it doesn't look that valuable" may or may not outweigh the effort it took to launch quickly. Sort of like the way A/B testing can help you make small corrections but probably won't actually create value where there is little to begin with.
The original post went much further because that's the message the first-time internet entrepreneurs need. There's a tendency among experienced businesspeople doing their first startup to look to their experience in successful companies and try to analyze that success and bring some of those things to the new company.
The problem is that successful companies have layers upon layers of processes and refinements, all of which (in a healthy company) play some role in their ongoing success. But the marginal benefit of 99.99% of these things is irrelevant to a startup, and the assets that an (internet) startup has to protect are nil at the beginning.
This is one of the reasons very young people are often successful despite inexperience; they can focus on building a compelling product—something they've known very intimately for their whole lives growing up with the internet and mobile phones—rather than the trappings of "business".
To get back to your point:
> if you discover that people don't like the product you rushed out the door, it might be because you rushed it out the door.
If you built the wrong product up front, then it's better to learn that by getting real feedback, rather than laboring on a false premise in secret. I think stealth mode has pretty much been debunked by now. The bottom line is that you can launch a shitty product, and it doesn't matter because know one fucking cares. You may have all these grandiose dreams, but getting attention and traction is a huge ongoing uphill muddy slog. If you have a seed of a good idea, but it's very poorly implemented, at least you will pick up a few very early adopters, and they will be the ones providing the most valuable feedback to make the next refinement and layer on the next batch of slightly-less-early adopters.
The problem is that successful companies have layers upon layers of processes and refinements, all of which (in a healthy company) play some role in their ongoing success. But the marginal benefit of 99.99% of these things is irrelevant to a startup, and the assets that an (internet) startup has to protect are nil at the beginning.
This is one of the reasons very young people are often successful despite inexperience; they can focus on building a compelling product—something they've known very intimately for their whole lives growing up with the internet and mobile phones—rather than the trappings of "business".
To get back to your point:
> if you discover that people don't like the product you rushed out the door, it might be because you rushed it out the door.
If you built the wrong product up front, then it's better to learn that by getting real feedback, rather than laboring on a false premise in secret. I think stealth mode has pretty much been debunked by now. The bottom line is that you can launch a shitty product, and it doesn't matter because know one fucking cares. You may have all these grandiose dreams, but getting attention and traction is a huge ongoing uphill muddy slog. If you have a seed of a good idea, but it's very poorly implemented, at least you will pick up a few very early adopters, and they will be the ones providing the most valuable feedback to make the next refinement and layer on the next batch of slightly-less-early adopters.
From two of my own baby ventures. Defining success is only a tool to keep you temporarily focused because the more you grow the bigger your idea of success becomes and evolves. As Entrepreneurs we are driven people who always strive to get bigger and better as we improve.
It is those people that only see 12 months or 2 years through an idea that often fail. The realization that comes with experience is that if you want anything to be HUGE is takes more than 2 years. I'm really only coming to grips with that after 5-6 years on naively planning and following dreams.
It is those people that only see 12 months or 2 years through an idea that often fail. The realization that comes with experience is that if you want anything to be HUGE is takes more than 2 years. I'm really only coming to grips with that after 5-6 years on naively planning and following dreams.
I started reading the article, but midway through I got to working on my startup site.
And then you thought, hold on, better let everyone on HN know first?
Awesome! You are learning the lessons well... ;)
How did you get the illustration of yourself (on the right side of your blog)?
It is a Photoshop effect. Fortunately, if you focus on getting real paying customers, you can eventually afford people who are better and smarter than you and know how to create cool effects!
Once a year it often feels like your business is about to fail until it truly reaches the point of a sustainable business.
I think what separates real entrepreneurs from wantrepreneurs is how they handle the barriers and low periods that are natural with any startup.
I think what separates real entrepreneurs from wantrepreneurs is how they handle the barriers and low periods that are natural with any startup.
only once a year pxl? that's better than i did! :)
marc
marc
I agree. I think it is more like 99 times/day. Luckily the one time you feel like you are going to make it, it's give you enough high to not worry about the other 99.
If you want to know if you're succeeding or failing, you should know what the metrics of success look like for your product. Is it number of users? Amount of revenue? Revenue per user?
How do you measure against those goals?
If you know what success is supposed to look like for you, then it should be easy to tell if you're failing or succeeding.
"Released a product" isn't a metric for success. If you haven't released you can't start measuring.
How do you measure against those goals?
If you know what success is supposed to look like for you, then it should be easy to tell if you're failing or succeeding.
"Released a product" isn't a metric for success. If you haven't released you can't start measuring.
The worst part about telling someone your new idea is "It's been done already". Anytime someone says that you know to just stop talking to them and walk away. Burger place? It's been done already! Tech blog? Been done already! I have seen more startups using existing ideas become successful than original ideas.
Find the meaningful stats in your company (customer churn rate, monthly revenue, etc) and show them to your investors.
If you are doing a bad job, they will scream bloody murder. If not, they don't care, and you are doomed anyway.
If you are doing a bad job, they will scream bloody murder. If not, they don't care, and you are doomed anyway.
"free customers"? Leads or prospects perhaps.
"RT @pkedrosky: Polite, patient, purposeful founders fail. http://bit.ly/gXA282 /via @cenedella" http://twitter.com/pkedrosky/statuses/48017595332440064
It's a great sound bite that I think is completely wrong.
It's been my experience that purposeful founders do not fail. Patience is always reqired for success and politeness costs you nothing. If a founding team has a sense of purpose, a realistic idea of the amount of work it takes to succeed (patient), and is able to encourage others to assist them (polite) I normally see these as markers for success.
I think the behaviors he is actually highlighting are perfectionism (not patience), an unwillingess to test your vision by getting out of the BatCave and talking to prospects, and being afraid to take prudent risks.
It's been my experience that purposeful founders do not fail. Patience is always reqired for success and politeness costs you nothing. If a founding team has a sense of purpose, a realistic idea of the amount of work it takes to succeed (patient), and is able to encourage others to assist them (polite) I normally see these as markers for success.
I think the behaviors he is actually highlighting are perfectionism (not patience), an unwillingess to test your vision by getting out of the BatCave and talking to prospects, and being afraid to take prudent risks.
While I agree with you mostly What I saw in this quote is "don't be shy, go for it even if you are a bit rough on the edge" #hustle - Cheers
"Gut level craving" - that is what hit home for me. Enjoyed this. thanks.
you're failing until other people suddenly start to refer to you as successful
"You are asserting that, despite the presence of 7 billion other people on the planet, ... you have come up with an idea, a business, a company that none of those other wonderful human beings have thought to invent yet."
Tell that to the Chinese immigrants running the convenience store around the corner. Their unoriginal idea is putting the kids through college.