6 ms·

I think this article has it backwards. I think that the default state for a startup is to fail. That even if you do almost everything right, you still have a hi

I think this article has it backwards. I think that the default state for a startup is to fail. That even if you do almost everything right, you still have a high probability of failing. And that there should be a list of all the things that need to be done right in order to succeed, rather than listing all the reasons for failure. For example: 1) make a product that people want (vs. no market need) 2) attract investors (vs. ran out of cash) 3) media virality (vs. poor marketing) 4) perfect timing (vs. product mis-timed) 5) have clear distribution to market 6) lots of luck #6 is not mentioned at all in the article and is probably one of the biggest factors.

bjelkeman-again 12y ago
I agree, but I think 7) a great team, is missing from that list. It really helps avoid problems with 1, 2, 4 and 5. For some markets, 3 media vitality, isn't required and if you get the other things right you need less luck.
- softdev12 12y ago
  right. 7) a great team is probably even more important than luck.
  - tjradcliffe 12y ago
    I've managed great teams in companies that have failed because they built a product for a market that turned out to mature at about 1% of the level it had been predicted to grow to. It was a great product, delivered on time. It fulfilled a genuine need and it did it better than anything the competition had to offer. But the market wasn't there to sustain the company, and there was no reasonable way to know that far enough in advance to do anything difference. This is the essence of luck. People hate that, but it's the truth.
    - semerda 12y ago
      Cash rich companies can afford these experiments. A startup cannot. A poorly planned investment with great execution is a disaster waiting to happen. So basically to your point. Market fit is pivotal to the health of a startup.
- LiweiZ 12y ago
  Great team is one's multi-entry ticket. Just like the non-zero digit before a number of zeros. Unfortunately, it's not easy to have a great team.
- dushonok 12y ago
  How would a great team help you to make money out of a product nobody wants? Market fit (#1) is the most important thing
  - epa 12y ago
    They have the knowledge, collaboration, and commitment to change the concept and push on.
    - semerda 12y ago
      That's assuming the cofounder/s are not dictators. More common issue than you think. Ego issue of Power. Hence why I dislike titles (labels) when one is a small team. Market fit should be worked out ahead of the team by the cofounders. The great team will contribute to it and over time everything evolves. Should the market shift fruit when you have the team, team transparency will help everyone steer the ship in a different direction. Otherwise the company will run out of cash chasing the founders fixed mindset.
tjradcliffe 12y ago
This is an essentially perfect list. I take "have a great team" as implicit as you won't be able to do all those things without one. Luck is a huge factor in success, and it plays into all those things in very direct ways. I've been involved in three failed startups (and one successful consultancy) and seen all those factors play out. Timing and making a product enough people want (and are willing to pay for) are the two areas where luck plays the biggest role. Market validation is a huge issue for new technology, and it's surprisingly easy--with the best market intelligence you've got--to build something that not enough people want (yet) to make money. And not all markets allow fast pivots or particularly small MVPs. Sometimes you don't know it isn't going to get picked up until it's too late to change course. In other cases there is simply no way to know if you should take a fairly good offer today and cash out, or not. It's easy to point to cases where founders turned down good offers and went on to make large multiples of them, and cases where founders turned down good offers and went broke. It would be a very valuable exercise to gather up cases like that and present them in a business school context. My bet is that no one would be able to consistently make the right decision based on the information available at the time, which would make the role of luck unequivocal.

bjelkeman-again 12y ago

I agree, but I think 7) a great team, is missing from that list. It really helps avoid problems with 1, 2, 4 and 5. For some markets, 3 media vitality, isn't required and if you get the other things right you need less luck.

softdev12 12y ago
right. 7) a great team is probably even more important than luck.
- tjradcliffe 12y ago
  I've managed great teams in companies that have failed because they built a product for a market that turned out to mature at about 1% of the level it had been predicted to grow to. It was a great product, delivered on time. It fulfilled a genuine need and it did it better than anything the competition had to offer. But the market wasn't there to sustain the company, and there was no reasonable way to know that far enough in advance to do anything difference. This is the essence of luck. People hate that, but it's the truth.
  - semerda 12y ago
    Cash rich companies can afford these experiments. A startup cannot. A poorly planned investment with great execution is a disaster waiting to happen. So basically to your point. Market fit is pivotal to the health of a startup.
LiweiZ 12y ago
Great team is one's multi-entry ticket. Just like the non-zero digit before a number of zeros. Unfortunately, it's not easy to have a great team.
dushonok 12y ago
How would a great team help you to make money out of a product nobody wants? Market fit (#1) is the most important thing
- epa 12y ago
  They have the knowledge, collaboration, and commitment to change the concept and push on.
  - semerda 12y ago
    That's assuming the cofounder/s are not dictators. More common issue than you think. Ego issue of Power. Hence why I dislike titles (labels) when one is a small team. Market fit should be worked out ahead of the team by the cofounders. The great team will contribute to it and over time everything evolves. Should the market shift fruit when you have the team, team transparency will help everyone steer the ship in a different direction. Otherwise the company will run out of cash chasing the founders fixed mindset.

tjradcliffe 12y ago

This is an essentially perfect list. I take "have a great team" as implicit as you won't be able to do all those things without one. Luck is a huge factor in success, and it plays into all those things in very direct ways. I've been involved in three failed startups (and one successful consultancy) and seen all those factors play out. Timing and making a product enough people want (and are willing to pay for) are the two areas where luck plays the biggest role. Market validation is a huge issue for new technology, and it's surprisingly easy--with the best market intelligence you've got--to build something that not enough people want (yet) to make money. And not all markets allow fast pivots or particularly small MVPs. Sometimes you don't know it isn't going to get picked up until it's too late to change course. In other cases there is simply no way to know if you should take a fairly good offer today and cash out, or not. It's easy to point to cases where founders turned down good offers and went on to make large multiples of them, and cases where founders turned down good offers and went broke. It would be a very valuable exercise to gather up cases like that and present them in a business school context. My bet is that no one would be able to consistently make the right decision based on the information available at the time, which would make the role of luck unequivocal.