
The One Lesson Every Entrepreneur Should Learn - knighthacker
http://dsog.info/blog/Entrepreneurship/Hacking/Technology/2013/04/17/the-one-lesson-every-entrepreneur-should-learn/
======
edw519
_If you are an entrepreneur starting a business, you should already know that
the odds are against you. This is simply a statistical fact._

Then the best way to succeed is not to understand that the odds are against
you, it's to change those odds. If investors won't invest, find out why and
change those odds. If no one wants to join you, find out why and change those
odds. If customers don't buy, find out why and change those odds. If things
don't work, find out why and change those odds.

 _Not only that, but most successes rely on countless variables, and most of
these variables are out of your control._

Then find a way to work in a world defined by less-than-countless variables,
most of which _are_ within your control. You can't control what others will
think or do, but there are things you _can_ determine that will affect you
plan of action.

 _By deduction, most successes are lucky ones._

Remove the words "By deduction" and your sentence is generally true. Keep
those words and get a chuckle from those who know how to alter their landscape
to remove luck from the equation.

~~~
avenger123
Thanks Ed. This really great. I'm in my mid 30's and looking to start a
company.

There is a lot that can be done to mitigate risk. My biggest issue is that my
time is limited and I don't have the luxury of taking a couple years off to
make a go at it (not yet at least).

So I am trying to find a potential business (software related) that I can
build on the side that gains enough traction that I need to devote full time
to it.

I feel like under my circumstances, I shouldn't even try but I think its worth
an effort.

~~~
ryanhuff
Why do you think you shouldn't try? As long as you approach it as a side
project unless things take off (don't bet the farm, don't sacrifice family),
all you are left with risking is your time.

------
interactually
While I agree with this article's primary point - that fear of failure alone
should not stop or paralyze you, I disagree with most of the rest.

To me, articles like this are the same as the rich guy telling the poor guy
"C'mon, just buy the car. What's the worst that can happen?" The fact of the
matter is that a lot can happen that can have long-term consequences that
should be weighed and considered.

I admire entrepreneurs that can make incredible leaps of faith, but we
typically only hear about the ones who succeed. There's also ones who took the
leap with nothing to land on and came up short. There's also ones who
carefully planned and took a "controlled leap."

Also, what does every action sports star, race car driver or soldier say? They
say it would be more dangerous if they weren't at least _a little_ scared of
failing, and that elements of fear keep you attentive and energized. The same
applies in entrepreneurship.

"Failure" carries different consequences depending on the person and the
situation. To some, failing means they lost some investor's money and are on
to the next project, or for some could mean having to find a job. While it
could mean bankruptcy to others. Depending on circumstances, not everyone can
afford to be so cavalier and needs to be a little more analytical.

Fear of failure is part of entrepreneurship and its historically the hurdle
that separates entrepreneurs from everyone else. It certainly shouldn't be
taken lightly.

------
neilk
Just commenting to say I will not read any article with a hook like "The one
thing you should X or you are a bad Y."

I'm pretty sure there is more than one lesson to learn about, well, anything.

------
cnbuff410
I think we should start to seriously challenge the overhype of "fail fast,
failure is fine".

Ever since the adoption of "Lean startup" methodology, "failure" suddenly
becomes a no big deal to entrepreneur. Making decision is like throwing a Hail
Mary that you don't really care too much about the outcome. Yeah I failed. So
what? Let's try it again. Let's try 100 more times and we may hit a home run.

If you can put a A-class work in front of people, why do you even want to
settle on B/C/D-class stuff? The world doesn't, and shouldn't, work in this
way. Failure is bad for your reputation, at anytime, anywhere, in front of
anyone. There is a reason why nowadays, acq-hire is more and more popular,
because it give others impression that, hey, I didn't fail, I sold my business
because it's a good deal. Sure, 1 out of 10 cases is like this. But for the
other 9? it just helps to cover your ass and avoid putting the tag "failure"
on you in your future career.

Is failure end of world? Of course not. Does it mean you shouldn't set a high
bar, think carefully, plan comprehensively, put as much effort as possible to
maximize the outcome? Hell no. Remember, you can only control what you can
control. So, whenever you do something you can control, you better do it
right.

Sometimes you just don't get second chance.

~~~
GFischer
They way I understand it, most people aren't advocating that.

"fail fast" I think embraces:

\- finding if your idea works FAST. Stuff like Pretotyping.

Yes, that part suggests showing something half-baked ("B/C/D class stuff"), to
see if it works - example: mocking up something the size of a Palm and seeing
if you would carry it around all the time, to validate that hypothesis. Or the
modern-day landing page.

<http://www.pretotyping.org/>

However, once you validated the first part, the MVP does not have to be half-
baked... on the contrary, it has to be crafted as well as you can !!!

[http://differential.io/blog/misconceptions-about-lean-
startu...](http://differential.io/blog/misconceptions-about-lean-startup)

But with only the minimal set of stuff the user needs. The original iPhone
didn't have cut&paste - do you think it was a failure? Most succesful early-
runners do one thing and do it well, and then build on it.

"Some people equate the word lean with cheap, and cheap with low quality. They
are using the wrong definition of the word lean.

"Lean" in Lean Startup is derived from the Toyota Production System, which is
decades old. The definition of Toyota's lean is "to design out waste and
overburden.""

The point is, find out what the customer needs first and fast ("fail fast"),
then deliver, but deliver something of quality. With code it's tricky because
you're iterating and it might be tempting to keep in low-quality stuff, but
even the iPhone iterated :)

------
dj-wonk
"But most entrepreneurs, seeking validation, ask me whether or not they should
pursue their ideas. There is only one way to find out — to go do it."

That is hardly a strong argument! I tend to put up the red flag when I hear
"there is only one way" about anything.

Of course, one cannot tell with certainty if a business idea will work or not.
No one really expects that, do they? Don't ask one person and expect their
opinion to be any more than it is -- one piece of information, often anecdotal
and biased in some way. Talk to many people. Select them based both on your
target market and diversity. Construct a mosaic of information. Think about
what you learn.

If you think probabilistically, I would suggest that an entrepreneur's
'startup' decision is better framed by two questions:

1\. Given your nature and interests, what business ideas are more likely to
work well?

2\. What are some effective ways to test (figure out) if a business idea will
work?

Some good options include: get out and talk to people; sell before build;
learn about your industry; surround yourself with passionate, smart, informed
people; experiment; test; measure; create.

------
aviswanathan
I do think there's a fine line between being resilient and becoming unfazed by
failure (the latter of which is bad). As the article points out, failure is
important as a learning tool, but by the same token, trying to avoid failure
isn't necessarily a bad thing. In fact, startups that consciously navigate
uncertainty efficiently and mitigate risk as much as possible tend to be much
more sustainable.

Sometimes I think entrepreneurs err a bit too much on the side of being too
'okay' with failing and pivoting (buzz word), but I'm a big believer in
planning, executing, reflecting, and repeating. Sure, for some things you just
have to jump straight in, but I think caution, thought, and preparation all go
a long way.

------
Disruptorsbook
Thanks for this great post. After speaking with some really successful
entrepreneurs, I noticed they are extremely stubborn (in a good way) even
after failing several times. The odds are stacked against them but they still
allow themselves several years to find a semblance of success which they can
develop further. I appreciate your article. I am working on similar topics for
my book Disruptors so posts like this help.

------
marek12886
A great side effect of this is that lots of young entrepreneurs take on
challenges where they are totally oblivious to all the hurdles and challenges
ahead of them. And continuing the mindset of just pushing on, they tackle them
one step at a time.

Not being afraid to fail (fast) along the way, is just as important as not
being afraid to start.

------
michaelochurch
I'm going to agree and disagree. Good-faith business failure really shouldn't
be stigmatized, but it is. As with record labels (which is what VCs are) you
get a first shot if you can get an introduction, a second shot if you grovel,
and then you're done. That's why even the most ill-conceived startups get
"acq-hired" these days instead of actually failing. The career damage
associated with failing is too much for anyone to stomach at this point.

The culture of fear actually makes sense because, in a feudalistic reputation
economy where you can spend months dealing with the fallout of a bad reference
or a business failure, there is a lot to be feared.

I feel like a lot of people put these manic "I quit my job to do a startup"
posts and put them on HN and get lots of kudos. No one writes, "I'm 33 and
answer to a 26-year-old 'tech lead' and I have no savings; that's how much my
three startup failures have fucked up my life and career." People talk a good
game about their successes, but failures are embarrassing, messy and
complicated and almost no one is willing to share a full story over one of
those, especially if they involve other people. (That's understandable, but
it's still biased reporting.)

The unfortunate truth is that we really don't live in a world where that kind
of cavalier attitude toward failure can be afforded. That's especially true
given how rapidly age discrimination becomes a problem for us.

~~~
digitalsushi
I've gotten to where I am by being honest about my shortcomings and sharing my
most embarrassing stories. Unimportant people are always shocked and the quiet
people that make decisions have always seemed to appreciate it... even if it
made them upset at first.

I believe it is the eve of being well-known that we are all our own
spokespersons and that our branding and image is just as much a puff piece as
a coke commercial.

I do agree this falls apart when the stories involve other people, at least
non-anonymous people. No one likes a snitch.

~~~
michaelochurch
_I've gotten to where I am by being honest about my shortcomings and sharing
my most embarrassing stories._

I live in New York. Most people expect perfect career histories, even in
startups. Even minor blemishes put you out forever. It's that competitive.

When I was at Google, I put together a strategy that would have saved Google+
Games (there was a G+ Games, you ask? My point exactly) and no one took it
seriously because my previous startup (at which I was an engineer, not CEO)
had failed. Had that startup become a success, people would have taken the
suggestion seriously and Google would be worth at least tens of millions more.

I'm 29 and already deal with age discrimination and the "job hopper" stigma
from having made a couple bad calls and having a story that looks more like
freelancing than the "company man" fantasy (which is dead, and people who
still believe in it and hold "job hopping" against people should be evaluated
for dementia).

I also get an unbelievable amount of shit about leaving Google and, on a job
interview, you can't exactly say, "Oh, their reputation as a great place to
work is completely fraudulent because in 2009 they hired a bunch of transplant
execs who turned the company into Enron, and now it's impossible to move to a
better project." It's the truth, but I can't _say_ it.

Maybe it's magically different in the Valley. I don't live there; I don't
know.

~~~
digitalsushi
You're basing an entire alternate reality off one outcome; what about the one
where your startup succeeded and ended up costing google tens of millions?

Argh - I am so glad I don't live in an elitist nyc/valley area where people
compete through job cannibalism. My life is simple, my home is cozy and my
nights are mine. I write code in a small shop on its 11th year, my 5th. I am
so glad that software is not all about life in the fastlane. I admire your
life style, but I do not envy it.

~~~
michaelochurch
_You're basing an entire alternate reality off one outcome; what about the one
where your startup succeeded and ended up costing google tens of millions?_

The startup where I worked was completely unrelated to the idea that would
have saved G+.

I'm saying that, had that startup succeeded and had I ended up at Google
around the same time, I would have had the credibility to actually roll up my
sleeves, push a few idiots out of the way, and save those tens of millions of
dollars. But I didn't have that credibility, at least not then, so I had to
sit back and watch as enormous amounts of value were incinerated before my
eyes.

~~~
zalew
I follow your comments and your skeptic bubblebursting approach is refreshing.
You should write a blog or something.

~~~
dr_doom
He has a blog[1] that he's linked a couple of times. I'm just amazed by how
long the entries are, I can never force myself to write that much.

<http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/>

