What struck me about this article is how well it describes proactive students in the classroom. These students work together until they understand the material. Upon understanding the material, they do something original and exciting beyond what was presented in class. And throughout the whole process they always seem to be willing to talk about what they're working on with other people, simply because they find it cool. There's always a group of students in every class like this. For my software engineering class, it was the students that used Lisp, but I'm sure YMMV.
It raises an interesting question: why don't more students become entrepreneurs? It's either (A) these skills don't transfer well in practice or (B) a question of motivation and confidence. I'm inclined to believe (B), and I think PG has addressed this in "A Students Guide to Startups".
I think some cultures might not appreciate entrepreneurs as much as other cultures. This may lead to family pressure which may in turn lead to students seeing big companies like Google and Microsoft as the ceiling of success. In contrast they might see entrepreneurs as risk takers, who aren't thinking about their family. I'm saying all this because I've observed that the ratio of races in computer science is extremely difference from the ratio among entrepreneurs.
So the model for people within organizations is that Success = Ability * Motivation * Opportunity.
For entrepreneurs, I would argue that Success = Ability * Motivation * Opportunity * 'Normal'
What do I mean?
'Normal' is the most powerful human emotion. We just don't notice it because it's usually invisible. Let me give you an example. I only like being in romantic relationships where both people have equal power. If I have more power than the other person then it's cognitively draining because I always have to plan everything and make sure I'm not accidentally taking advantage of the other person or something, whereas if I have less power then I hate being dicked around. The reason I have this preference is probably because that's how my parents are, so that's what feels 'normal' to me. Any deviation from this and it's extremely uncomfortable, so the relationship quickly falls apart. For people who come from families with an abusive parent, they often prefer relationships where one person has vastly more power than the other, because that's what 'normal' is to them.
What feels normal to someone is an extremely important predictor of success, because any time we deviate from normal in any area of life we get very uncomfortable very quickly.
Examples of situations where there's a 'normal': balance of power in any relationship (business, mentoring, romantic), how you spend your day, how many people are in your network, your body language, how many books you read, etc.
To be an entrepreneur your level of 'normal' has to be just right for dozens of different variables, but most people come from families and backgrounds where their needle is just in the wrong place in at least some areas. And the problem is that it's extremely difficult to move someone's needle. Even for someone who comes from a great background, it can still take going through a program like YC or even one much more intensive in order to get a person's needles set in the positions they need to be in to achieve greatness. And for someone from a less good background, it can take literally years.
So the thing is, you can be really great at school just by memorizing stuff in books. But to get to that next level there is usually at some additional inner work that needs to be done, which most people don't even realize. Just look at how Steve Jobs spent his youth. That's kind of an extreme example, but after talking with a lot of entrepreneurs I've noticed this general pattern running across a lot of the success stories.
Depends what you mean by entrepreneurs. I know a vast flock of people who all formed bands in high school, recorded albums, toured. Some of our classical musicians were playing at local concert halls while in high school. Artists looked for exhibitions and writers looked for magazine publications.
You can separate people into three groups: People creating things, people who don't want to create things, and people who are content to go where they're taken. I have some friends who are really just happier preparing for work in business or in politics, rising ranks, living outside their work. I myself fall into neither category: I'm satisfied to drift. Thus far I haven't been prompted to pick a side, and I see merits for each.
Today's world is more entrepreneurial than the world of a decade ago was, but I think you'll find it becomes less and less overt and more a part of natural life. I launched two web sites yesterday, for instance, and both will be seeking an audience; ten years ago that might have been a sign of entrepreneurialism, but now the cost of launching a web site is so nonexistent that it's just part of a day's work.
The second "Successful entrepreneurs move in packs" might be a product of the YC experience. It is a known fact that tech entrepreneurship is a lonely endeavour - not many people understand or care about what you're doing. Having a whole bunch of people with the same passion that are roughly at the same stage as you will inevitably tend to create a "wolfpack" trying to conquer the world.
But whether this is a trait of a successful entrepreneur is not so clear. I'm not saying it isn't so, just that the poster could be biased by the YC wolfpack experience. Janus Friis and Niklas Zennstrom, for instance, weren't wellconnected when they started out with Kazaa and in the early days of Skype. I have several friends that are lone wolf entrepreneurs, and don't have many close friends or business associates in the strartup world. And some of them are very succesful.
this is also a case of correlation does not imply causation. People who fall out of touch may have done so because things are not going well as opposed to being the cause of things not going so well.
It's not news, or hacking, but something that's as important to the success of a startup - the startup life. It's an acknowledgment, or maybe an admission that doing this is hard, that there are definite commonalities among those who pull it off, that it's easier to go it with a community around you.
Running a startup, creating a startup, living a startup is freakin hard. I've done it multiple times before my trip through TechStars, and man, now that I've experienced (and continue to experience it, as not a day goes by that I don't talk to at least one other founder, a mentor, or an advisor) this way, I'm sold and happy I'll never have to go it alone again.
He sees it too. I hope for your benefit that if you're doing this, if you're trying to really start something (not just read YC) that you seek out others who are doing the same. It could mean the difference between your success or failure.
The startups that are still alive are the ones who remained in touch.
Causation runs both ways on this one. It's a lot more fun to hang out with other entrepreneurs when your own startup is kicking ass---and a lot less fun when it's dying. When your startup is struggling, hearing other entrepreneurs talk about how great things are going is like being in a dead-end marriage and hearing other couples talk about how madly in love they are.
I don't know about that. I've got a small network of friends still in school doing two different startups, and I enjoy talking to him about how its going, even though they are currently much more successful than I am (I wimped out and took a 9-5 to pay off the student loans).
[+] [-] tsally|16 years ago|reply
It raises an interesting question: why don't more students become entrepreneurs? It's either (A) these skills don't transfer well in practice or (B) a question of motivation and confidence. I'm inclined to believe (B), and I think PG has addressed this in "A Students Guide to Startups".
http://paulgraham.com/mit.html
[+] [-] liamk|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Alex3917|16 years ago|reply
For entrepreneurs, I would argue that Success = Ability * Motivation * Opportunity * 'Normal'
What do I mean?
'Normal' is the most powerful human emotion. We just don't notice it because it's usually invisible. Let me give you an example. I only like being in romantic relationships where both people have equal power. If I have more power than the other person then it's cognitively draining because I always have to plan everything and make sure I'm not accidentally taking advantage of the other person or something, whereas if I have less power then I hate being dicked around. The reason I have this preference is probably because that's how my parents are, so that's what feels 'normal' to me. Any deviation from this and it's extremely uncomfortable, so the relationship quickly falls apart. For people who come from families with an abusive parent, they often prefer relationships where one person has vastly more power than the other, because that's what 'normal' is to them.
What feels normal to someone is an extremely important predictor of success, because any time we deviate from normal in any area of life we get very uncomfortable very quickly.
Examples of situations where there's a 'normal': balance of power in any relationship (business, mentoring, romantic), how you spend your day, how many people are in your network, your body language, how many books you read, etc.
To be an entrepreneur your level of 'normal' has to be just right for dozens of different variables, but most people come from families and backgrounds where their needle is just in the wrong place in at least some areas. And the problem is that it's extremely difficult to move someone's needle. Even for someone who comes from a great background, it can still take going through a program like YC or even one much more intensive in order to get a person's needles set in the positions they need to be in to achieve greatness. And for someone from a less good background, it can take literally years.
So the thing is, you can be really great at school just by memorizing stuff in books. But to get to that next level there is usually at some additional inner work that needs to be done, which most people don't even realize. Just look at how Steve Jobs spent his youth. That's kind of an extreme example, but after talking with a lot of entrepreneurs I've noticed this general pattern running across a lot of the success stories.
[+] [-] unalone|16 years ago|reply
You can separate people into three groups: People creating things, people who don't want to create things, and people who are content to go where they're taken. I have some friends who are really just happier preparing for work in business or in politics, rising ranks, living outside their work. I myself fall into neither category: I'm satisfied to drift. Thus far I haven't been prompted to pick a side, and I see merits for each.
Today's world is more entrepreneurial than the world of a decade ago was, but I think you'll find it becomes less and less overt and more a part of natural life. I launched two web sites yesterday, for instance, and both will be seeking an audience; ten years ago that might have been a sign of entrepreneurialism, but now the cost of launching a web site is so nonexistent that it's just part of a day's work.
[+] [-] mixmax|16 years ago|reply
But whether this is a trait of a successful entrepreneur is not so clear. I'm not saying it isn't so, just that the poster could be biased by the YC wolfpack experience. Janus Friis and Niklas Zennstrom, for instance, weren't wellconnected when they started out with Kazaa and in the early days of Skype. I have several friends that are lone wolf entrepreneurs, and don't have many close friends or business associates in the strartup world. And some of them are very succesful.
[+] [-] rantfoil|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thaumaturgy|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kalendae|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] japherwocky|16 years ago|reply
"Successful people (like me) try real hard."
"Successful people (like me) hang out in my elite San Francisco pack of friends."
"Successful people (like me) have sparks in their eyes, but not stars."
this is not news or hacking, it's ego stroking. /flameoff
[+] [-] tom|16 years ago|reply
Running a startup, creating a startup, living a startup is freakin hard. I've done it multiple times before my trip through TechStars, and man, now that I've experienced (and continue to experience it, as not a day goes by that I don't talk to at least one other founder, a mentor, or an advisor) this way, I'm sold and happy I'll never have to go it alone again.
He sees it too. I hope for your benefit that if you're doing this, if you're trying to really start something (not just read YC) that you seek out others who are doing the same. It could mean the difference between your success or failure.
[+] [-] Mongoose|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mhartl|16 years ago|reply
Causation runs both ways on this one. It's a lot more fun to hang out with other entrepreneurs when your own startup is kicking ass---and a lot less fun when it's dying. When your startup is struggling, hearing other entrepreneurs talk about how great things are going is like being in a dead-end marriage and hearing other couples talk about how madly in love they are.
[+] [-] holdenk|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bbsabelli|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ccarpenterg|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hristov|16 years ago|reply