4 ms·
From the great book "Founders at Work", I had the impression that a common point of success is to persue an idea to a very end, to fully understand its potentia
by mattjung 18y ago
From the great book "Founders at Work", I had the impression that a common point of success is to persue an idea to a very end, to fully understand its potential, to not accept failure too early, but to accept to modify and even transform it. The model that suggests "Restart with another idea until one works" may therefore lead to abandon projects as failures that are on the way to success.
- mixmax 18y agoThe people that were so wildly successful that they were featured in founders at work are the ones that made it through the funnel that starts with an guy in a garage and an idea. If you look at the funnel from the other side you have maybe 10.000 people with a project they think will become the next Apple, yet there's only one Steve Wozniack. Founders at work is a great book, but it's not a direct recipe for success. The funnel is a one-way street: If you read the book and do exactly like Joe Kraus you won't necessarily end up like Joe Kraus. Besides a lot of rich and famous people have had many failures before they succeeded. Did you know that Seth Godin did Internet White pages (as a book no less...), the first fax board for the mac, A nationwide game show using 900 numbers, a fundraising company that offered lightbulbs for sale to high school bands among others. According to himself he has had at least 20 serious career-ending failures. (http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2008/10/failure-as-an-e.html http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2008/10/failure-as-a...) But it's a fine line...
- mattjung 18y agoI agree with your argument that only looking at successful examples without taking into account the failed examples might lead to distorted information and wrong conclusions. But I critize the simplicity of your model that ignores crucial yet tricky questions like: How long does it take to detect a failure? How can I detect it, which criteria should I use? How to avoid "false positives"? A simple "try and repeat every year"-scheme will most probably lead to 10 failures in 10 years...
- mixmax 18y agoI agree with your criticism - it is a simplified model, and models only give a simpified view of the world. As you point out, ideally there are lots and lots of criteria that should be considered, and that probably have a measurable effect. The big problem is getting the data to do so: You'd have to take some statistically significant amount of projects from the very start (which is where the most interesting part happens in relation to living or dying) and follow them closely until they either die or become successful. It would be an extremely interesting project though.
- timr 18y agoKeep in mind that most of the stories that FOW relates involve a lot of re-starts. Flickr was originally a game, PayPal was originally a Palm app, etc. The key to persistence is to keep trying for the big-picture goal (becoming a successful entrepreneur); you don't want to keep flogging on an idea that isn't working out. Of course, knowing when to quit is a skill that takes time and experience (with failure) to cultivate. In some ways, then, it's intriguing that setting an expiration date on your project might be the best strategy for overall success. Try everything for a year, and if it isn't working, try something else.