4 ms·

Age and the entrepreneur, part 1: Some data

40 points by terpua 19y ago

mynameishere 19y ago
I remember a Forbes article on a new small airplane business, featuring profiles of the 5 founders. The youngest, if I remember correctly, was in his 40s, and he was an accountant. The engineers were all old. There is very, very little innovation to be had in the airplane business (the US military is, remember, still flying planes designed in the 70s) and success is dependent upon age--which brings a tendency to 1) Not make fool mistakes 2) Understand horrendously complicated, but mature, technology, 3) Have critical contacts, 4) Have personal wealth to risk. Something like...say...Twitter. What 50-year-old would even consider doing something like that? And if a kid does it, and botches it, no one gets hurt. Clearly the trade-offs between enthusiasm and experience are at work. Dr. Simonton points out that the periods of Beethoven's career that had the most hits also had the most misses I can't find that in the article. If by "hits" he means contemporary hits, perhaps. But Beethoven's late stage was both sparse, and choked with his greatest works. Compare that to rock music...the rolling stones' past 30 years can't compare with any 3 consecutive months in the 1960s.
- dpapathanasiou 19y ago
  There is very, very little innovation to be had in the airplane business Have you heard about the Boeing 787 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6282820.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6282820.stm)?
  - mynameishere 19y ago
    For all intents and purposes, that's a 737 with an efficiency tweak. It's like going from merge sort to quick sort. Have you heard about the concorde? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concorde http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concorde (maiden flight: 1969, when the Rolling Stones were peaking.)
    - dpapathanasiou 19y ago
      For all intents and purposes, that's a 737 with an efficiency tweak. It's like going from merge sort to quick sort. Is it? It's an all-new design, using a new material for the first time, etc. I didn't mean to be so blunt in my first reply, but there are tons of improvements that can be made in that industry, especially if you look at old problems with new eyes.
      - sanj 19y ago
        Bizjets have been using those materials and avionics for years. If you want to talk about all new designs and brilliance in aerospace, look at Burt Rutan.
        dpapathanasiou 19y ago
        You're right, there is innovation in that industry. And the point is: if a generalization about an industry is incorrect, it's not a good idea to use that as a logical foundation for predicting the age of entrepreneurs in that industry.
- run4yourlives 19y ago
  There's a huge amount of innovation in the airplane business. If it isn't the plane itself, it's the business model (westjet/southwest?). The problem with the industry - like others such as insurance, banking etc. - is the huge startup costs. When you have larger start-up barriers, you get less incentive to innovate. If you're being bankrolled, you'll innovate, which is why the USAF had a new fighter every ten years when the cold war was on.
epi0Bauqu 19y ago
This reminds me of "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by Thomas S. Kuhn (http://www.amazon.com/Structure-Scientific-Revolutions-Thomas-Kuhn/dp/0226458083/ http://www.amazon.com/Structure-Scientific-Revolutions-Thoma...). Kuhn dissects the idea of the "paradigm shift" in scientific thinking in the context of classical physics. It is basically argued that it takes people who aren't indoctrinated with the "old thinking" to come up with the "new thinking." In physics, this usually turns out to be people younger than 26, often through seminal PhD theses. But not always. Sometimes people dabble in secondary fields at older ages and come up with significant breakthroughs, like Linus Pauling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling). I'm not sure what I think about this regarding entrepreneurship. It seems that very successful entrepreneurs are not always coming up with revolutionary thinking, but instead executing well and paying attention to small details that make things work where they haven't before. As such, the age indoctrination barrier may not be as present as it is in physics. But of course there are the risk and drive barriers--people get settled and less willing to take risks and go through the arduous process of starting something new later in life.
iamyoohoo 19y ago
This is a classic case of making a really simple analysis complicated. The reason for age was simple - as you grow up there are more dependencies which demand a share of your time and more responsibilities to live up to - which is what pulls you down. The age question was not about productivity. Given equal circumstances and responsibilities, there is no question that this thesis would hold true - however that is not the case !! Sorry Marc - this time it was thought through a little tooooo much and the original reasons that started this debate were largely ignored. I hope you read this comment.
- run4yourlives 19y ago
  You can't overemphasize the age issue though to the point that business success becomes a matter of how much you're not distracted by other commitments.
  - portLAN 19y ago
    Hmm... actually you can probably do precisely that.
    - run4yourlives 19y ago
      heh, well, you can, but you'd be missing a huge part of the puzzle.
terpua 19y ago
I think it comes down to passion, no matter the age.
- portLAN 19y ago
  Passion is emotional/hormonal and therefore age is a major factor. People do crazy, irrational things when they're younger, just to entertain their buddies.
sbraford 19y ago
"If you want to increase your success rate, double your rate of failure." - Thomas Watson (thought I heard it attributed to Edison as well)
dfranke 19y ago
Conjecture: the fields with late peaks are those where success requires insightful planning and consideration, whereas the fields with early peaks are those which require discrete strokes of inspiration. The distinction between the two skills is similar to PG's description of the distinction between intelligence and wisdom.
- nostrademons 19y ago
  Another conjecture: fields with late peaks define success in terms of "convincing people of what they already know", while fields with early peaks define success in terms of "convincing people that everything they know is wrong." I'm thinking in terms of authors vs. physicists: you absolutely cannot write a novel until you have the life experience needed to write a story that resonates with readers. However, performing an experiment that resonates with other physicists isn't a paradigm shift; it's normal science. Valuable, but not world-changing. It seems like it applies to many other fields though. CEOs peak in their 60s; their job consists of internalizing the culture of their organization and making wise decisions based on that experience. Lawyers peak in their 40s and 50s; their job consists of internalizing court precedents so they can predict how a judge or jury will rule. Musicians peak in their late 20s and early 30s; their job consists of internalizing the conventions of existing musical forms and turning that into something new and fresh. Entrepreneurs peak in their 20s; their job consists of recognizing ideas that others have overlooked and convincing the world that those are good ideas.
nostrademons 19y ago
I read an absolutely fascinating paper that suggested a further connection with crime: http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/MES/pdf/JRP2003.pdf http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/MES/pdf/JRP2003.pdf. Basically, the paper's thesis was that males are biologically driven to do extraordinary things when young in order to impress females. For people who have the ability, this can take the form of scientific achievement, or entrepreneurship, or arts or music. For people who don't have the ability to succeed in "socially acceptable" fields, it usually takes the form of crime. The age curves themselves look very similar, and they don't see similar distributions with females. After a man has children, the odds are significantly lower that he'll contribute some world-changing discovery. This is not because his ability level has decreased - Marc's article suggests that quality of work remains constant. Rather, it's because he has no reason to. He's already reproduced, and likely found a lifetime mate. His children's genetic legacy is set in stone. There's no reason for him to expend the extra energy needed to perform at the top of his game. Curiously, men that continue to produce at top-of-the-field levels also seem to have multiple successive wives/lovers. Look at Rudy Giuliani, Richard Feynman, Albert Einstein, Benjamin Graham, etc. Perhaps they remain geniuses because they see the reproductive game as not over yet, and hope to continue to impress younger, more beautiful women.
- portLAN 19y ago
  That's the thing about being young -- you can fool yourself into thinking that whatever form of scientific, artistic, programming, mathematical, or entrepreneurial achievement you're working on is "really cool" and going to get you some action. Only one thing on that list actually works, and that's why so many guys are in bands... and why the Rolling Stones are still touring.
- pg 19y ago
  I think the reason men do less dramatic stuff after they have kids is not just that they don't need to impress women anymore. After all, women also get less done after they have kids. The kids themselves are a big part of the reason both parents get less done. Maybe the main reason. And not just because they take up all their parents' time. Once people have kids, they often think of their kids as the most important thing in the world. And that means whatever project they were working on before is now at best number 2.
nomoresnow_c 19y ago
How about the premise that younger people are less tied down by "spouse and kids" and mortgage, etc... I think that younger people have an advantage with this regard, but then again, those who are more "tied down" may take more time to analyze a market opportunity because there is more at risk.
deleted 19y ago
[deleted]
bootload 19y ago
Is "enthusiasm" the same as "determined"?
nandan 19y ago
"The odds of a hit versus a miss do not increase over time. The periods of one's career with the most hits will also have the most misses. So maximizing quantity -- taking more swings at the bat -- is much higher payoff than trying to improve one's batting average." Of all the conclusions, this one threw me off quite a bit. I realize Marc is going to be following this article up with a part 2, but I d be interested to see just how a "swing at the bat" is defined in the start-up context. If a swing is defined as one iteration, then seeing no "systematic developmental trends" in the "quality ratio" goes very much against the grain. I would argue that every iteration teaches us something that is quite applicable in the "general" sense to future iterations (for different products/services and across markets). In any case, even if this conclusion is considered in a non-startup context, its still very bothersome. For example, if a "swing at the bat" is defined as one complete work, such as a Book or a Musical Piece, why arent there developmental trends in the quality ratio?

40 points by terpua 19y ago

I remember a Forbes article on a new small airplane business, featuring profiles of the 5 founders. The youngest, if I remember correctly, was in his 40s, and he was an accountant. The engineers were all old. There is very, very little innovation to be had in the airplane business (the US military is, remember, still flying planes designed in the 70s) and success is dependent upon age--which brings a tendency to 1) Not make fool mistakes 2) Understand horrendously complicated, but mature, technology, 3) Have critical contacts, 4) Have personal wealth to risk. Something like...say...Twitter. What 50-year-old would even consider doing something like that? And if a kid does it, and botches it, no one gets hurt. Clearly the trade-offs between enthusiasm and experience are at work. Dr. Simonton points out that the periods of Beethoven's career that had the most hits also had the most misses I can't find that in the article. If by "hits" he means contemporary hits, perhaps. But Beethoven's late stage was both sparse, and choked with his greatest works. Compare that to rock music...the rolling stones' past 30 years can't compare with any 3 consecutive months in the 1960s.

dpapathanasiou 19y ago
There is very, very little innovation to be had in the airplane business Have you heard about the Boeing 787 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6282820.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6282820.stm)?
- mynameishere 19y ago
  For all intents and purposes, that's a 737 with an efficiency tweak. It's like going from merge sort to quick sort. Have you heard about the concorde? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concorde http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concorde (maiden flight: 1969, when the Rolling Stones were peaking.)
  - dpapathanasiou 19y ago
    For all intents and purposes, that's a 737 with an efficiency tweak. It's like going from merge sort to quick sort. Is it? It's an all-new design, using a new material for the first time, etc. I didn't mean to be so blunt in my first reply, but there are tons of improvements that can be made in that industry, especially if you look at old problems with new eyes.
    - sanj 19y ago
      Bizjets have been using those materials and avionics for years. If you want to talk about all new designs and brilliance in aerospace, look at Burt Rutan.
      - dpapathanasiou 19y ago
        You're right, there is innovation in that industry. And the point is: if a generalization about an industry is incorrect, it's not a good idea to use that as a logical foundation for predicting the age of entrepreneurs in that industry.
run4yourlives 19y ago
There's a huge amount of innovation in the airplane business. If it isn't the plane itself, it's the business model (westjet/southwest?). The problem with the industry - like others such as insurance, banking etc. - is the huge startup costs. When you have larger start-up barriers, you get less incentive to innovate. If you're being bankrolled, you'll innovate, which is why the USAF had a new fighter every ten years when the cold war was on.

epi0Bauqu 19y ago

This reminds me of "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by Thomas S. Kuhn (http://www.amazon.com/Structure-Scientific-Revolutions-Thomas-Kuhn/dp/0226458083/ http://www.amazon.com/Structure-Scientific-Revolutions-Thoma...). Kuhn dissects the idea of the "paradigm shift" in scientific thinking in the context of classical physics. It is basically argued that it takes people who aren't indoctrinated with the "old thinking" to come up with the "new thinking." In physics, this usually turns out to be people younger than 26, often through seminal PhD theses. But not always. Sometimes people dabble in secondary fields at older ages and come up with significant breakthroughs, like Linus Pauling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling). I'm not sure what I think about this regarding entrepreneurship. It seems that very successful entrepreneurs are not always coming up with revolutionary thinking, but instead executing well and paying attention to small details that make things work where they haven't before. As such, the age indoctrination barrier may not be as present as it is in physics. But of course there are the risk and drive barriers--people get settled and less willing to take risks and go through the arduous process of starting something new later in life.

iamyoohoo 19y ago

This is a classic case of making a really simple analysis complicated. The reason for age was simple - as you grow up there are more dependencies which demand a share of your time and more responsibilities to live up to - which is what pulls you down. The age question was not about productivity. Given equal circumstances and responsibilities, there is no question that this thesis would hold true - however that is not the case !! Sorry Marc - this time it was thought through a little tooooo much and the original reasons that started this debate were largely ignored. I hope you read this comment.

run4yourlives 19y ago
You can't overemphasize the age issue though to the point that business success becomes a matter of how much you're not distracted by other commitments.
- portLAN 19y ago
  Hmm... actually you can probably do precisely that.
  - run4yourlives 19y ago
    heh, well, you can, but you'd be missing a huge part of the puzzle.

terpua 19y ago

I think it comes down to passion, no matter the age.

portLAN 19y ago
Passion is emotional/hormonal and therefore age is a major factor. People do crazy, irrational things when they're younger, just to entertain their buddies.

sbraford 19y ago

"If you want to increase your success rate, double your rate of failure." - Thomas Watson (thought I heard it attributed to Edison as well)

dfranke 19y ago

Conjecture: the fields with late peaks are those where success requires insightful planning and consideration, whereas the fields with early peaks are those which require discrete strokes of inspiration. The distinction between the two skills is similar to PG's description of the distinction between intelligence and wisdom.

nostrademons 19y ago
Another conjecture: fields with late peaks define success in terms of "convincing people of what they already know", while fields with early peaks define success in terms of "convincing people that everything they know is wrong." I'm thinking in terms of authors vs. physicists: you absolutely cannot write a novel until you have the life experience needed to write a story that resonates with readers. However, performing an experiment that resonates with other physicists isn't a paradigm shift; it's normal science. Valuable, but not world-changing. It seems like it applies to many other fields though. CEOs peak in their 60s; their job consists of internalizing the culture of their organization and making wise decisions based on that experience. Lawyers peak in their 40s and 50s; their job consists of internalizing court precedents so they can predict how a judge or jury will rule. Musicians peak in their late 20s and early 30s; their job consists of internalizing the conventions of existing musical forms and turning that into something new and fresh. Entrepreneurs peak in their 20s; their job consists of recognizing ideas that others have overlooked and convincing the world that those are good ideas.

nostrademons 19y ago

I read an absolutely fascinating paper that suggested a further connection with crime: http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/MES/pdf/JRP2003.pdf http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/MES/pdf/JRP2003.pdf. Basically, the paper's thesis was that males are biologically driven to do extraordinary things when young in order to impress females. For people who have the ability, this can take the form of scientific achievement, or entrepreneurship, or arts or music. For people who don't have the ability to succeed in "socially acceptable" fields, it usually takes the form of crime. The age curves themselves look very similar, and they don't see similar distributions with females. After a man has children, the odds are significantly lower that he'll contribute some world-changing discovery. This is not because his ability level has decreased - Marc's article suggests that quality of work remains constant. Rather, it's because he has no reason to. He's already reproduced, and likely found a lifetime mate. His children's genetic legacy is set in stone. There's no reason for him to expend the extra energy needed to perform at the top of his game. Curiously, men that continue to produce at top-of-the-field levels also seem to have multiple successive wives/lovers. Look at Rudy Giuliani, Richard Feynman, Albert Einstein, Benjamin Graham, etc. Perhaps they remain geniuses because they see the reproductive game as not over yet, and hope to continue to impress younger, more beautiful women.

portLAN 19y ago
That's the thing about being young -- you can fool yourself into thinking that whatever form of scientific, artistic, programming, mathematical, or entrepreneurial achievement you're working on is "really cool" and going to get you some action. Only one thing on that list actually works, and that's why so many guys are in bands... and why the Rolling Stones are still touring.
pg 19y ago
I think the reason men do less dramatic stuff after they have kids is not just that they don't need to impress women anymore. After all, women also get less done after they have kids. The kids themselves are a big part of the reason both parents get less done. Maybe the main reason. And not just because they take up all their parents' time. Once people have kids, they often think of their kids as the most important thing in the world. And that means whatever project they were working on before is now at best number 2.

nomoresnow_c 19y ago

How about the premise that younger people are less tied down by "spouse and kids" and mortgage, etc... I think that younger people have an advantage with this regard, but then again, those who are more "tied down" may take more time to analyze a market opportunity because there is more at risk.

deleted 19y ago

[deleted]

bootload 19y ago

Is "enthusiasm" the same as "determined"?

nandan 19y ago

"The odds of a hit versus a miss do not increase over time. The periods of one's career with the most hits will also have the most misses. So maximizing quantity -- taking more swings at the bat -- is much higher payoff than trying to improve one's batting average." Of all the conclusions, this one threw me off quite a bit. I realize Marc is going to be following this article up with a part 2, but I d be interested to see just how a "swing at the bat" is defined in the start-up context. If a swing is defined as one iteration, then seeing no "systematic developmental trends" in the "quality ratio" goes very much against the grain. I would argue that every iteration teaches us something that is quite applicable in the "general" sense to future iterations (for different products/services and across markets). In any case, even if this conclusion is considered in a non-startup context, its still very bothersome. For example, if a "swing at the bat" is defined as one complete work, such as a Book or a Musical Piece, why arent there developmental trends in the quality ratio?