3 ms·
I'm a bit skeptical. I'm not sure that a creative enterprise like entrepreneurship is amenable to any sort of factory model. While theoretically it could be a
by api 12y ago
I'm a bit skeptical.
I'm not sure that a creative enterprise like entrepreneurship is amenable to any sort of factory model. While theoretically it could be a bit like drug discovery -- make lots of permutations, test them, iterate, goal seek -- the problem is with the human factors. Companies aren't organic molecules that can be reliably produced and then re-produced. They're made out of people.
I suspect that these entities would become echo chambers dominated by cronyism. The term "stars" already gives me that feel. The incentive structure gets all wacked out... it ends up being more about status within the startup ecosystem than shipping stuff that works and that the market likes. The SV ecosystem in particular already has this problem, and concentrating it more into a more institutional model might make it worse.
I think the same problem haunts modern-day academic "factory science," where people who specialize in getting grants are very good at getting grants and churning out very mundane, plodding science.
The best accelerators escape some of this problem by accepting open applications from anyone, anywhere.
- fapjacks 12y agoThis is the most coherent and observant comment I've seen on HN in a very long time.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- sixdimensional 12y agoI think you're right to be skeptical. I'm in one such "startup factory" (which does not accept outside proposals), as an employee in one of the startups. I can confirm that your comments are spot on.
- dj-wonk 12y agoCalling these entities "factories" is silly. Factories, as traditionally understood, stamp out identical copies of a product. That is not the purpose of these organizations. Yes, they intend to generate other businesses, but these business will not be copies. Update: I'm not criticizing the thread here; the article used the term.