6 ms·

The reason execution is stressed over ideas is that non-businesspersons frequently think, "I've got this idea that's going to make me rich!" It's actually incr

The reason execution is stressed over ideas is that non-businesspersons frequently think, "I've got this idea that's going to make me rich!" It's actually incredibly common. Anyone that's been on the business side of a business doesn't think that way, and most engineering people don't think that way, but people that don't work hands-on with the grimy, mucky, slogging reality of business believe in the myth of a great idea. Ideas without execution = nothing. Execution of even a mildly valuable idea = quite valuable. Most of the people I know who built large fortunes didn't invent something new or crazy. Lots of real estate and development, turning one space in the world into a more valuable space. One gentleman I know buys properties in high rent areas that are normally not profitable, and converts them into vacation/short term rental properties for businessmen staying in town who want a more "homey" place. So he's able to turn traditionally cashflow-neutral or negative properties into profitable ones with a just a bit of added active management and marketing. Brilliant idea? Meh, not so much. Great execution. There's lots more. I have one acquaintance who is investing and working on various technologies for spaceflight, so maybe he'll do some breakthrough crazy stuff later, but most of the wealthy people I know don't do anything so flashy or remarkable. It's just all execution of ages old ideas, like buy a space and renovate it into a nicer, more valuable space. Provide a service lots of people use for cheaper. Provide a higher quality service that is currently well used that people are dissatisfied with. Make people's lives more convenient, happy, or healthy. These aren't such new ideas. If I had to guess the ratio of a person that goes self made to holding more than $5 million in assets, I'd guess 95 to 98% old ideas with great execution, 2 to 5% new ideas. We lose sight of that in technology because we keep hearing about the new cool hotness, but most fortunes are built by fixing something in the world that you're using and aren't happy about the quality of. Hence, almost all execution, not so much having great ideas.

tjogin 17y ago
Yeah, ideas are mostly worthless. Facebook's success certainly cannot be attributed to their "idea": the online community thing had been done thousands of times before. Just never executed well enough. Google's success cannot be attributed to their idea, as there were numerous search engines before them. Execution is what propelled them to the forefront. Their search engine actually showed good results. Amazon. They sell books. Not the most novel idea out there. They just did it better than anyone else. Zappos. They sell shoes. For all the time people spend comparing their startups to the biggest players, it's quite odd that so few realize that it's not about the idea. It's about the execution.
- cojadate 17y ago
  An idea can be completely unoriginal and still be a good idea – an idea is still good even after it's been copied. So the article's contention that there can be no success without both good execution and a good idea is completely accurate. Selling books is a good idea, selling dead leaves isn't. Also, I think you oversimplify the ideas of Amazon, Google, Zappo and Facebook. I would argue that Amazon's idea was more "selling a massive range of books online via a simple interface" not just "selling books". And there are many variations of the "online community thing". The idea for Facebook wasn't the same as the idea for Friends Reunited and it's easy to see how that helped one to prosper and the other to fail.
  - tjogin 17y ago
    Sure, but even with your definitions of their ideas, they're not super-unique, certainly their ideas aren't the most valuable thing in the mix. To illustrate my point; there was no need for either of the mentioned successful startups to keep their "idea" a secret until launch, in fear of someone "stealing" it. What I mean is that had someone heard of their "idea" before launch, it would have changed nothing. It's all about the execution. Conversely, many would-be startup founders I've talked to seem to think that their idea is the most valuable thing they have. That they need to keep their super-unique idea under wraps, for fear of it getting out and someone else doing it instead.
    - InclinedPlane 17y ago
      Good ideas can often be subtle. Boiled down to utter simplicity the difference between facebook and myspace may seem to be tiny. But that's not the case. Another term for subtlety may be "precision". The difference between facebook and some other seemingly similar site may seem subtle but by the same token it may actually be a difference in precision, with facebook hitting a tiny target (a correct mix of complexly interacting features and design) that others missed. You see this sort of importance of precision/subtlety everywhere. The difference between the best selling automobile and the 20th best selling automobile in the same class is often a long list of subtle, yet important differences. Also, what may seem like subtle, some might say inconsequential, differences on casual inspection may in fact be jarring, fundamentally important distinctions. The addition of 1 tablespoon of salt to a bowl of soup instead of merely a pinch changes the flavor dramatically, even though in either case the salt is only just a tiny, tiny fraction of the ingredients.
spamalot 17y ago
you seem to be contradicting yourself here fella. Just because the ideas are old ideas, it doesn't make them any less idea-like. Nirvana is great idea and great execution surely?

tjogin 17y ago

Yeah, ideas are mostly worthless. Facebook's success certainly cannot be attributed to their "idea": the online community thing had been done thousands of times before. Just never executed well enough. Google's success cannot be attributed to their idea, as there were numerous search engines before them. Execution is what propelled them to the forefront. Their search engine actually showed good results. Amazon. They sell books. Not the most novel idea out there. They just did it better than anyone else. Zappos. They sell shoes. For all the time people spend comparing their startups to the biggest players, it's quite odd that so few realize that it's not about the idea. It's about the execution.

cojadate 17y ago
An idea can be completely unoriginal and still be a good idea – an idea is still good even after it's been copied. So the article's contention that there can be no success without both good execution and a good idea is completely accurate. Selling books is a good idea, selling dead leaves isn't. Also, I think you oversimplify the ideas of Amazon, Google, Zappo and Facebook. I would argue that Amazon's idea was more "selling a massive range of books online via a simple interface" not just "selling books". And there are many variations of the "online community thing". The idea for Facebook wasn't the same as the idea for Friends Reunited and it's easy to see how that helped one to prosper and the other to fail.
- tjogin 17y ago
  Sure, but even with your definitions of their ideas, they're not super-unique, certainly their ideas aren't the most valuable thing in the mix. To illustrate my point; there was no need for either of the mentioned successful startups to keep their "idea" a secret until launch, in fear of someone "stealing" it. What I mean is that had someone heard of their "idea" before launch, it would have changed nothing. It's all about the execution. Conversely, many would-be startup founders I've talked to seem to think that their idea is the most valuable thing they have. That they need to keep their super-unique idea under wraps, for fear of it getting out and someone else doing it instead.
  - InclinedPlane 17y ago
    Good ideas can often be subtle. Boiled down to utter simplicity the difference between facebook and myspace may seem to be tiny. But that's not the case. Another term for subtlety may be "precision". The difference between facebook and some other seemingly similar site may seem subtle but by the same token it may actually be a difference in precision, with facebook hitting a tiny target (a correct mix of complexly interacting features and design) that others missed. You see this sort of importance of precision/subtlety everywhere. The difference between the best selling automobile and the 20th best selling automobile in the same class is often a long list of subtle, yet important differences. Also, what may seem like subtle, some might say inconsequential, differences on casual inspection may in fact be jarring, fundamentally important distinctions. The addition of 1 tablespoon of salt to a bowl of soup instead of merely a pinch changes the flavor dramatically, even though in either case the salt is only just a tiny, tiny fraction of the ingredients.

spamalot 17y ago

you seem to be contradicting yourself here fella. Just because the ideas are old ideas, it doesn't make them any less idea-like. Nirvana is great idea and great execution surely?