5 ms·

I keep hearing over and over again how the idea doesn't matter and it's all about "execution execution execution!". I get that execution is important, but can w

by pontus 6y ago

I keep hearing over and over again how the idea doesn't matter and it's all about "execution execution execution!". I get that execution is important, but can we also agree that the idea is important too? I get that good ideas are easier to come by than good execution, but I kind of feel like completely discounting the idea also missed the point. Maybe I'm wrong, but I have a hard time coming up with a super successful company based on a bad idea. Just to be clear, I'm not discounting execution at all, it's obviously incredibly important. All I'm saying is that it bugs me when people always discount ideas as unimportant.

garry 6y ago
Ideas are just a multiplier on execution. Derek Sivers was a big influence on startups when I came up in 2008. Classic: https://sive.rs/multiply https://sive.rs/multiply
raverbashing 6y ago
True, and though selling soap and toothpaste is now 99.9% execution and 0.1% idea you probably won't get a billion dollar business out of it today. I guess a good idea now also contains a good idea on how to execute it as well.
- sjg007 6y ago
  I dunno. Kylie Jenner turned her makeup line into a billion dollars.
amandavinci 6y ago
Ideas must change in response to feedback from the problem to be solved. The initial idea and its nth iteration are downstream from the real problem. What matters, therefore, is the iterative execution of those solutions. So instead of basing our judgment on the quality of the idea, we should rely on the execution ability because that is fairly constant in the development loop. If you end up on the far-side of an idea-driven development process, you'll have solutions looking for a problem.
Pyramus 6y ago
You are right. I find it helpful to look at risk. Broadly speaking there are two types of risks when starting a startup: 1. Customer/market risk 2. Invention risk When invention risk >> customer risk (you can be certain there are customers, they have a need, you can satisfy the need), then a good idea will play a bigger role relative to execution (which still remains crucial). However, we tend to grossly under-estimate customer risk, hence the "ideas are cheap" warning.
- pontus 6y ago
  I think this is a good framework to think about this. Thanks for sharing!
fxtentacle 6y ago
I believe that greatly depends on how you define the idea. In my definition, the idea for Google was: "Get advertisers to pay for a free information portal." That idea doesn't seem much different to "Advertisers pay for a free newspaper", which was common practice at the time. Similarly, "Advertisers pay for free classified ads" was common, too, but it's how Facebook started out. "Pay for a car ride" = Uber also doesn't seem that new. Or how about "Rent out rooms for money" = AirBnb. In my opinion, all of those are ideas that aren't really new. But they were executed in a new way and that made all the difference. HomeAway was already well-known and successful at the time when AirBnb was founded. But the latter reached more potential landlords, due to their specific execution. I remember using AltaVista for years before I ever heard about Google. So their business idea and business model wasn't new. Their initial execution was incredible, though. And before I heard of Facebook, I was using MySpace, which was kind of the same basic idea, but pretty badly executed. Until 2 years after the iPhone came out, MySpace was actually larger than Facebook. So my guess would be that it was Facebook's superior execution of their mobile experience that crowned them.
- crusty 6y ago
  "...advertisers pay for free classifieds" - profit or brain melt?
- worldsayshi 6y ago
  The important ideas that made those companies get big wasn't what problem to solve but how to solve it. Google had PageRank and various other smart ways to make their search better than the competitors at the time. Facebook had better UX. Airbnb made renting out rooms ten times easier. The important ideas here is in the realm of "how". And that realm is both ideas and execution. Ideas of how to execute?
- Retric 6y ago
  When people talk about ideas it’s not that great ideas win, it’s bad ideas lose. Starting by selling books online like Amazon is better than selling pet food online like Pets.com from both a shipping cost per lb and the value of having a usefully huge selection vs basically selling commodities. Pet owners often care about buying the same food every time, but few people are buying hundreds of copies of the same book.
aaron695 6y ago
> but can we also agree that the idea is important too? No > a super successful company based on a bad idea. Magic Leap Super successful companies based on nothing ideas are a dime a dozen. Almost all sites. - Amazon, it sells things. It's execution was cutting edge. - Rocket-internet is a great example - https://www.businessinsider.com.au/rocket-internet-companies-2014-8 https://www.businessinsider.com.au/rocket-internet-companies... Even the great mathematical ideas were execution. Working out how to create protocols is execution. Lots of drunk discussions about internet currencies in the 2000's but no one implemented the mathematics - Satoshi Nakamoto also released bitcoin software on Sourceforge. Bram Cohen created torrent protocol and also release the software and filled it with porn.
- pontus 6y ago
  I would argue that Magic Leap is not super successful. They have raised tons of money in the private market but much of it seems to have been smoke and mirrors (similar to e.g. Theranos). Could you point me to a super successful public company with a proven track record, high revenues, rising stock price, etc. that is focused around a bad idea?
  - aaron695 6y ago
    Medical equipment and software. It's over engineered. It needs to break more. But you could just say the idea is playing to medical regulation and a dumb public. So the answer is any company that pivots. ie. Youtube - https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/308975 https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/308975 OT: Scott Adams tried to sell an idea - https://www.scottadamssays.com/2012/10/01/selling-an-idea/ https://www.scottadamssays.com/2012/10/01/selling-an-idea/ Read it and follow it up how he went. It might interest you.
    - pontus 6y ago
      If anything, I think the example of medical equipment sounds more like a good idea with poor execution.
- pontus 6y ago
corobo 6y ago
I always liked Sivers' version of this, which might help a little here https://sive.rs/multiply https://sive.rs/multiply
capnorange 6y ago
I do believe execution is all the matters(from my experience) because ideas can always change.
- pontus 6y ago
  Sure, if you're allowing ideas to change then yes the very first idea is not important. Using your same logic, you could then also argue that execution doesn't matter because you can always fix mistakes in execution (e.g. Netflix tried spinning off Qwikster which many people thought was a mistake, but Netflix is still super successful today).
  - capnorange 6y ago
    I think of execution more in terms of the capability of a team to deliver something. This has more to do with founder & the teams passion, experience etc, which is fairly constant.
robomartin 6y ago
I think the problem is in that people use the term “idea”. Ideas are worthless. What you want are opportunities. Here’s the difference: “I think people would buy a screwdriver with a built-in hammer” “I just spoke to company XYZ and they would buy 1,000 screwdrivers with integrated hammers if we made them” The difference is obvious to anyone. You can execute like a star on the idea and make it if you get lucky and a market exists. The opportunity only requires “minimum viable execution” to capture it. One is a push, the other a pull.

by pontus 6y ago

garry 6y ago

Ideas are just a multiplier on execution. Derek Sivers was a big influence on startups when I came up in 2008. Classic: https://sive.rs/multiply https://sive.rs/multiply

raverbashing 6y ago

True, and though selling soap and toothpaste is now 99.9% execution and 0.1% idea you probably won't get a billion dollar business out of it today. I guess a good idea now also contains a good idea on how to execute it as well.

sjg007 6y ago
I dunno. Kylie Jenner turned her makeup line into a billion dollars.

amandavinci 6y ago

Ideas must change in response to feedback from the problem to be solved. The initial idea and its nth iteration are downstream from the real problem. What matters, therefore, is the iterative execution of those solutions. So instead of basing our judgment on the quality of the idea, we should rely on the execution ability because that is fairly constant in the development loop. If you end up on the far-side of an idea-driven development process, you'll have solutions looking for a problem.

Pyramus 6y ago

You are right. I find it helpful to look at risk. Broadly speaking there are two types of risks when starting a startup: 1. Customer/market risk 2. Invention risk When invention risk >> customer risk (you can be certain there are customers, they have a need, you can satisfy the need), then a good idea will play a bigger role relative to execution (which still remains crucial). However, we tend to grossly under-estimate customer risk, hence the "ideas are cheap" warning.

pontus 6y ago
I think this is a good framework to think about this. Thanks for sharing!

fxtentacle 6y ago

I believe that greatly depends on how you define the idea. In my definition, the idea for Google was: "Get advertisers to pay for a free information portal." That idea doesn't seem much different to "Advertisers pay for a free newspaper", which was common practice at the time. Similarly, "Advertisers pay for free classified ads" was common, too, but it's how Facebook started out. "Pay for a car ride" = Uber also doesn't seem that new. Or how about "Rent out rooms for money" = AirBnb. In my opinion, all of those are ideas that aren't really new. But they were executed in a new way and that made all the difference. HomeAway was already well-known and successful at the time when AirBnb was founded. But the latter reached more potential landlords, due to their specific execution. I remember using AltaVista for years before I ever heard about Google. So their business idea and business model wasn't new. Their initial execution was incredible, though. And before I heard of Facebook, I was using MySpace, which was kind of the same basic idea, but pretty badly executed. Until 2 years after the iPhone came out, MySpace was actually larger than Facebook. So my guess would be that it was Facebook's superior execution of their mobile experience that crowned them.

crusty 6y ago
"...advertisers pay for free classifieds" - profit or brain melt?
worldsayshi 6y ago
The important ideas that made those companies get big wasn't what problem to solve but how to solve it. Google had PageRank and various other smart ways to make their search better than the competitors at the time. Facebook had better UX. Airbnb made renting out rooms ten times easier. The important ideas here is in the realm of "how". And that realm is both ideas and execution. Ideas of how to execute?
Retric 6y ago
When people talk about ideas it’s not that great ideas win, it’s bad ideas lose. Starting by selling books online like Amazon is better than selling pet food online like Pets.com from both a shipping cost per lb and the value of having a usefully huge selection vs basically selling commodities. Pet owners often care about buying the same food every time, but few people are buying hundreds of copies of the same book.

aaron695 6y ago

> but can we also agree that the idea is important too? No > a super successful company based on a bad idea. Magic Leap Super successful companies based on nothing ideas are a dime a dozen. Almost all sites. - Amazon, it sells things. It's execution was cutting edge. - Rocket-internet is a great example - https://www.businessinsider.com.au/rocket-internet-companies-2014-8 https://www.businessinsider.com.au/rocket-internet-companies... Even the great mathematical ideas were execution. Working out how to create protocols is execution. Lots of drunk discussions about internet currencies in the 2000's but no one implemented the mathematics - Satoshi Nakamoto also released bitcoin software on Sourceforge. Bram Cohen created torrent protocol and also release the software and filled it with porn.

pontus 6y ago
I would argue that Magic Leap is not super successful. They have raised tons of money in the private market but much of it seems to have been smoke and mirrors (similar to e.g. Theranos). Could you point me to a super successful public company with a proven track record, high revenues, rising stock price, etc. that is focused around a bad idea?
- aaron695 6y ago
  Medical equipment and software. It's over engineered. It needs to break more. But you could just say the idea is playing to medical regulation and a dumb public. So the answer is any company that pivots. ie. Youtube - https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/308975 https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/308975 OT: Scott Adams tried to sell an idea - https://www.scottadamssays.com/2012/10/01/selling-an-idea/ https://www.scottadamssays.com/2012/10/01/selling-an-idea/ Read it and follow it up how he went. It might interest you.
  - pontus 6y ago
    If anything, I think the example of medical equipment sounds more like a good idea with poor execution.
pontus 6y ago

corobo 6y ago

I always liked Sivers' version of this, which might help a little here https://sive.rs/multiply https://sive.rs/multiply

capnorange 6y ago

I do believe execution is all the matters(from my experience) because ideas can always change.

pontus 6y ago
Sure, if you're allowing ideas to change then yes the very first idea is not important. Using your same logic, you could then also argue that execution doesn't matter because you can always fix mistakes in execution (e.g. Netflix tried spinning off Qwikster which many people thought was a mistake, but Netflix is still super successful today).
- capnorange 6y ago
  I think of execution more in terms of the capability of a team to deliver something. This has more to do with founder & the teams passion, experience etc, which is fairly constant.

robomartin 6y ago

I think the problem is in that people use the term “idea”. Ideas are worthless. What you want are opportunities. Here’s the difference: “I think people would buy a screwdriver with a built-in hammer” “I just spoke to company XYZ and they would buy 1,000 screwdrivers with integrated hammers if we made them” The difference is obvious to anyone. You can execute like a star on the idea and make it if you get lucky and a market exists. The opportunity only requires “minimum viable execution” to capture it. One is a push, the other a pull.