5 ms·

I remember reading once that students who excel in high school (valedictorians and salutatorians) are underrepresented as successful company founders, meaning t

I remember reading once that students who excel in high school (valedictorians and salutatorians) are underrepresented as successful company founders, meaning that they occur at a lower rate than one would expect from chance alone. I think the hypothesis was that these people tended to develop a perfectionistic (or even people pleasing) approach, and that this strategy works really well for "doing what you're told". So they might often end up as a lawyer or a doctor, but they won't start the next big company. As someone who did well academically early on without putting in much effort, I constantly try to avoid this trap of a "successful", but boring life. I think the problem with a lot of these people is that the first sign of failure total demolishes them, because their identity is strongly tied to "being smart" (like the article mentions). I know two people who became valedictorians in high school, mostly on natural talent. The first became a lawyer at one of the best law firms in the country, but she mentally cracked after a few years. She ended up quitting her job on the spot and stays at home now (and drinks way too much). The second finished his PhD and hasn't applied for a job in over a year. No one is really sure why. I've had some personal hardships in my life (chronic injuries and death of close loved ones) that I think has put failure into perspective for me, otherwise I would probably respond the same way.

thwy12321 8y ago
I think it's actually that individuals with high levels of academic success don't need to start a company, they already have very good high paying career options. And so starting a company has a high level of opportunity cost.
- longerthoughts 8y ago
  Do you think most founders didn't have decent career prospects before starting a company? Are you suggesting that people start companies because they think being a founder is likely to be a high paying job? What founders are trading up in salary when they're starting their company?
  - andyidsinga 8y ago
    in his first sentence : s/need/dont want to There seems to be anecdotal evidence. I've read about and talked to founders who have said things like "They just could't get hired" or "couldn't handle working for someone else" and "had no other option but to start their own business". that said - very likely a survivor bias in those samples..
    - longerthoughts 8y ago
      I have no doubt that those founders exist, the question is whether or not they're more common than founders with other options.
CPLX 8y ago
My theory would be that those people have demonstrated they can succeed within the system. So they remain in the system. I'm sure they're well represented as CEO's or leaders of established organizations.
Aloha 8y ago
Its not just that - being successful in high school is very different than being successful in the real world. High School is a very structured environment, where success is easily and narrowly defined - in addition following the rules alone can often lead to significant success alone. In the real world, bucking the system may be (and often is) a requirement for success.
pcpcpc 8y ago
It's anecdotal, but I've noticed this a lot in the years since I've graduated from a "top-ranked" school. I worked on Wall Street after graduating from school and burned out very quickly. I had a very high estimation of my own ability and importance and a desire to accumulate visible markers of success. I saw this in my peers too. I've been working through these feelings personally and now feel much more well adjusted and resilient, but it's not been an easy journey, and sometimes I feel like I'm working through the baggage of being a former "top-performer" in a world that's just too big to really care about me (or most anyone). Happy to share specifics if it'd be helpful to anyone.
- yesh123 8y ago
  Would love to hear what you are doing now and how you've moved away from those expectations. Going through a similar phase (worked in IB, now work in corp fin and do not like it).
  - pcpcpc 8y ago
    Check out my response to your sibling comment.
- 200w 8y ago
  The exact same thing happened to me. Went to a top-ranked school; did internships in finance every summer, despite loathing every one of them; and once full-time came began spiralling down. I think the main issue that propels high-achievers into these careers is simply peer pressure. I was never happy in finance, my stomach churned as each summer internship approached, but I did it all because I couldn't imagine what people would think of me if I didn't get the next big internship or full-time offer. Did he get cut? Did he fail the interviews? Is he not smart? The pang of euphoria from getting the offer had to overcome the everyday loathing of the work and, of course, it never did. Even if you don't believe most work in finance to be difficult, enjoyable, or even that lucrative you cling to the prestige attached to the name of your employer like in no other industry. When you ultimately work up the hutzpah to leave and see your friends moving on gaining new titles, different employers, etc. you still feel pangs of their relative prestige increasing despite all your internal protestations that you don't care anymore. It's insidious and comically absurd to try to explain to people (as I'm sure you've noticed). These vaunted colleges really do a number on many of their students. Would be happy to hear more specifics of your story.
dahart 8y ago
I like your theories, and the other theories here. There are lots of possibilities. People who do well in school may require structured settings and feed off the sense of accomplishment. Maybe it backfires in less structured jobs for those people. People who overly care about meet the expectations of others may not be as good at establishing expectations for themselves. People who do well in school may have something to lose (money & social status), and because they're smart, they are good at risk analysis, so they choose less risky paths. OTOH, contrary to popular belief, high school and college dropouts are also underrepresented in the group of successful founders (and many other groups of people considered successful). People with a college degree is overrepresented relative to the population. Also overrepresented are people who attend elite schools and people with wealthy parents... http://theconversation.com/the-myth-of-the-college-dropout-75760 http://theconversation.com/the-myth-of-the-college-dropout-7...
- taneq 8y ago
  I think all of your listed possibilities sound very plausible. I'd add one more thing: That if you breeze through school, you never have to learn mechanisms for dealing effectively with difficult things. Everyone has a limit to what they can handle on innate talent alone, and the higher that limit the harder you hit it. Keeping detailed notes, organising and filing your paperwork, methodical study methods, even down to getting enough sleep and exercise and eating healthily etc. are all things that 'smart kids' often don't need to do in order to perform well at school, but adults need in order to excel at high level in the real world. If you learn to use them early then you'll perform better than someone 'smarter' but with less discipline.
  - MRD85 8y ago
    I coasted through high school, I wouldn't do homework or study and I'd just rush through work so I could muck around. Despite this I had amazing grades, I was placed first of 350 in my year in maths and was voted most likely to succeed. I went to university and I hit a hard wall at second-year chemistry, which led to me dropping out of university rather than learn proper habits. Years later I'm back at university and I'm studying properly and it shows. I"m halfway through my CS degree and I'm smashing it. Discipline trumps intelligence.
cbsmith 8y ago
I would argue you don't have to be a successful company founder to avoid leading a boring life. There's a simpler reality: if you are really smart, there is less of a need to take the kind of risks and invest the kind of effort involved in a founding a company in order to achieve the lifestyle you want.
wannabeeanon 8y ago
I think a certain type of person is attracted to being valedictorian, generally people who seek approval from others and society. On the other hand I knew a person that intentionally got a B in a elective because he didn't want to give a speech. Personally I follow the 80/20 rule, I could get A's and B's with no effort while getting a 4.0 would have taken quite a bit more effort. I was able to learn about the things I wanted to learn outside of school. Result of that was only having a 3.4 GPA but having the highest standardized test scores in my class, to the surprise of the teachers and admin when their dutiful valedictorians were surpassed by the slacker. TLDR: the type of person who actually cares about being valedictorian typically isn't the type to go outside the lines set up for them and create startup or business
whack 8y ago
> I remember reading once that students who excel in high school (valedictorians and salutatorians) are underrepresented as successful company founders, meaning that they occur at a lower rate than one would expect from chance alone I've tended to notice that as well. Perhaps it's because being a startup founder is a financially irrational choice. If you're extremely smart, you can go into medicine/finance/law/comp-sci and make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, potentially over a million. You don't ever have to shoulder significant risk or periods of "poverty". You would spend your entire post-college life enjoying the social status and perks associated with having a high-prestige job and boatloads of money. Why would you give that up to be a founder? "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

thwy12321 8y ago

I think it's actually that individuals with high levels of academic success don't need to start a company, they already have very good high paying career options. And so starting a company has a high level of opportunity cost.

longerthoughts 8y ago
Do you think most founders didn't have decent career prospects before starting a company? Are you suggesting that people start companies because they think being a founder is likely to be a high paying job? What founders are trading up in salary when they're starting their company?
- andyidsinga 8y ago
  in his first sentence : s/need/dont want to There seems to be anecdotal evidence. I've read about and talked to founders who have said things like "They just could't get hired" or "couldn't handle working for someone else" and "had no other option but to start their own business". that said - very likely a survivor bias in those samples..
  - longerthoughts 8y ago
    I have no doubt that those founders exist, the question is whether or not they're more common than founders with other options.

CPLX 8y ago

My theory would be that those people have demonstrated they can succeed within the system. So they remain in the system. I'm sure they're well represented as CEO's or leaders of established organizations.

Aloha 8y ago

Its not just that - being successful in high school is very different than being successful in the real world. High School is a very structured environment, where success is easily and narrowly defined - in addition following the rules alone can often lead to significant success alone. In the real world, bucking the system may be (and often is) a requirement for success.

pcpcpc 8y ago

It's anecdotal, but I've noticed this a lot in the years since I've graduated from a "top-ranked" school. I worked on Wall Street after graduating from school and burned out very quickly. I had a very high estimation of my own ability and importance and a desire to accumulate visible markers of success. I saw this in my peers too. I've been working through these feelings personally and now feel much more well adjusted and resilient, but it's not been an easy journey, and sometimes I feel like I'm working through the baggage of being a former "top-performer" in a world that's just too big to really care about me (or most anyone). Happy to share specifics if it'd be helpful to anyone.

yesh123 8y ago
Would love to hear what you are doing now and how you've moved away from those expectations. Going through a similar phase (worked in IB, now work in corp fin and do not like it).
- pcpcpc 8y ago
  Check out my response to your sibling comment.
200w 8y ago
The exact same thing happened to me. Went to a top-ranked school; did internships in finance every summer, despite loathing every one of them; and once full-time came began spiralling down. I think the main issue that propels high-achievers into these careers is simply peer pressure. I was never happy in finance, my stomach churned as each summer internship approached, but I did it all because I couldn't imagine what people would think of me if I didn't get the next big internship or full-time offer. Did he get cut? Did he fail the interviews? Is he not smart? The pang of euphoria from getting the offer had to overcome the everyday loathing of the work and, of course, it never did. Even if you don't believe most work in finance to be difficult, enjoyable, or even that lucrative you cling to the prestige attached to the name of your employer like in no other industry. When you ultimately work up the hutzpah to leave and see your friends moving on gaining new titles, different employers, etc. you still feel pangs of their relative prestige increasing despite all your internal protestations that you don't care anymore. It's insidious and comically absurd to try to explain to people (as I'm sure you've noticed). These vaunted colleges really do a number on many of their students. Would be happy to hear more specifics of your story.

dahart 8y ago

I like your theories, and the other theories here. There are lots of possibilities. People who do well in school may require structured settings and feed off the sense of accomplishment. Maybe it backfires in less structured jobs for those people. People who overly care about meet the expectations of others may not be as good at establishing expectations for themselves. People who do well in school may have something to lose (money & social status), and because they're smart, they are good at risk analysis, so they choose less risky paths. OTOH, contrary to popular belief, high school and college dropouts are also underrepresented in the group of successful founders (and many other groups of people considered successful). People with a college degree is overrepresented relative to the population. Also overrepresented are people who attend elite schools and people with wealthy parents... http://theconversation.com/the-myth-of-the-college-dropout-75760 http://theconversation.com/the-myth-of-the-college-dropout-7...

taneq 8y ago
I think all of your listed possibilities sound very plausible. I'd add one more thing: That if you breeze through school, you never have to learn mechanisms for dealing effectively with difficult things. Everyone has a limit to what they can handle on innate talent alone, and the higher that limit the harder you hit it. Keeping detailed notes, organising and filing your paperwork, methodical study methods, even down to getting enough sleep and exercise and eating healthily etc. are all things that 'smart kids' often don't need to do in order to perform well at school, but adults need in order to excel at high level in the real world. If you learn to use them early then you'll perform better than someone 'smarter' but with less discipline.
- MRD85 8y ago
  I coasted through high school, I wouldn't do homework or study and I'd just rush through work so I could muck around. Despite this I had amazing grades, I was placed first of 350 in my year in maths and was voted most likely to succeed. I went to university and I hit a hard wall at second-year chemistry, which led to me dropping out of university rather than learn proper habits. Years later I'm back at university and I'm studying properly and it shows. I"m halfway through my CS degree and I'm smashing it. Discipline trumps intelligence.

cbsmith 8y ago

I would argue you don't have to be a successful company founder to avoid leading a boring life. There's a simpler reality: if you are really smart, there is less of a need to take the kind of risks and invest the kind of effort involved in a founding a company in order to achieve the lifestyle you want.

wannabeeanon 8y ago

I think a certain type of person is attracted to being valedictorian, generally people who seek approval from others and society. On the other hand I knew a person that intentionally got a B in a elective because he didn't want to give a speech. Personally I follow the 80/20 rule, I could get A's and B's with no effort while getting a 4.0 would have taken quite a bit more effort. I was able to learn about the things I wanted to learn outside of school. Result of that was only having a 3.4 GPA but having the highest standardized test scores in my class, to the surprise of the teachers and admin when their dutiful valedictorians were surpassed by the slacker. TLDR: the type of person who actually cares about being valedictorian typically isn't the type to go outside the lines set up for them and create startup or business

whack 8y ago

> I remember reading once that students who excel in high school (valedictorians and salutatorians) are underrepresented as successful company founders, meaning that they occur at a lower rate than one would expect from chance alone I've tended to notice that as well. Perhaps it's because being a startup founder is a financially irrational choice. If you're extremely smart, you can go into medicine/finance/law/comp-sci and make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, potentially over a million. You don't ever have to shoulder significant risk or periods of "poverty". You would spend your entire post-college life enjoying the social status and perks associated with having a high-prestige job and boatloads of money. Why would you give that up to be a founder? "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."