Image © Jose & MidJourney
I have an entrepreneurial streak in me! I launched my first start-up in 1997, 6 years later sold it to my then partners. Launched a second one in 2008, 2 years later sold it to my biggest customer. Both start-ups made a mark in Portugal’s design history, they both survived in some form. I didn’t become rich, but didn’t break the bank, learned a lot, above all about myself, my mother used to say I was much better at planting trees than taking care of them, perhaps she was right. In 2010 I co-founded a start-up accelerator, I was on the inside of an engine that was taking on start-up founders and their projects, trying to guide them to success. In these last 12 years I have been part-timing with several institutions, all with the same purpose, supporting and mentoring founders while improving the chances of new, transformative ideas that can help solve local and global challenges.
Last 4 years I have been close to MassChallenge, a nonprofit accelerator connecting startups, experts, corporations, and communities to grow and transform businesses and economies, I proudly serve as their mentor and judge. Last week I was in a virtual room with other judges, listening to founders pitch their company ideas, helping MassChallenge decide on the 100 start-ups that will join their program for the next 3 months. I am always utterly impressed, and humbled, with the volunteer judges that I share the room with, people with true life experience in so many domains, generously listening and then voting in what could become a critical moment for the founders. It’s great to see alumni of the accelerator coming on to be judges, 5, 10 years after they went through the program, some with a successful startup (and exit) under their belt.
I was reflecting on the different founders that showed up, with start-ups in different industries, all more or less in the same early level of maturity, from different parts of the world, all so different and yet, all so alike. To be honest, after having been a founder myself, after so many pitches, so many stories of success and failure, I still can’t really say what makes a successful start-up.
We could talk about the quality of the idea, but with so many recognizable biases we all have, sometimes I am unsure if we are able to distinguish a good from a bad idea if it presents itself as different. I have seen so many ideas I thought were, in my opinion, uninteresting, undifferentiated, even bad, and then they end up succeeding via a mix of small or large pivots, timing, right place, etc. And I have seen some ideas that I am excited about, that I really see a potential for disruption and scale, and they wither and die. Sometimes founder related, sometimes over confidence and investment, sometimes poor execution, etc.
We could talk about the quality of the founders, but we tend to put too much trust in the extrovert full of confidence driver, when so many times the idea grows because of the unseen, silent introvert that works in the “kitchen”. Even if we try and identify great teams, the true collaboration and way of working between them is what matters, and so many times founders get people with experience just to show off their “hall of fame”, but in the end comes down to the entrepreneur her/ himself. Things like persistence and resilience are hard to identify, the number of times you failed does not necessarily mean you have what it takes. And what we might consider a good founder, one that listens to mentoring and advice, may turn into a founder that does not know her/ his way, while the opposite founder that does not seem to listen and has a high opinion of her/ himself, often end up ploughing through obstacles and takes a project to the next level (may hit a ceiling sooner or later, but still).
We could talk about industry, blue versus red oceans, niche versus mass markets, more or less regulated, first mover advantage, all those analogies and acronyms that folks in these places tend to use, but studies trying to track this and name that secret ingredient, that specific recipe, don’t seem to agree on what makes a successful start-up. So, what do I pay attention when I engage these founders? Two things, one is preparation. I value those founders that do the work of getting to know where they operate, the market conditions, the competition, the financials, the underlying workings of what might impact success in the foreseeable future. There is a limit to this quality, if you become cocky, you might lose sight of reality, but I value preparedness. The second thing, the team, a true team where you can see different voices, different roles, different experiences, a team where you can’t actually identify a driver, but many, and all involved in healthy coopetition, yet aligned with the idea and the focus of the start-up. I have not gone back and analyzed how many of the start-ups that I have encountered in my last 30 years made it or not, or in what cases did my support have any if at all impact, I can only trust my educated gut on what I believe sets some founders and startups apart.