See that playground over there? The one with all the kids? They look like they are all playing together. Upon closer inspection you may see the outlier. She is the one who, with the right type of support, is the entrepreneur, or the one who is willing to take a risk and start a business, making jewelry or hosting a lemonade stand. These types of businesses, and the children entrepreneurs involved, are easy for their community to support. They are kids, after all, and are usually sincere in their efforts, and an extra bonus for being young and cute.
Fast forward past childhood and it is not as easy. The personal risks may seem riskier and support needed is bigger than close family and friends. Who, then, is the entrepreneur? Also, why do some get noticed while others are barely acknowledged, if at all? I have thought about these questions because I have observed and participated in the startup community of Kalamazoo (Michigan) for the last two years as a supporter and (I believe) as an entrepreneur and startup founder.
In an article from Forbes magazine titled "Two Ways to become an Entrepreneur" by Panos Mourdoukoutas, the discussion is about buying a franchise compared to starting your own business. Would you consider both types to be entrepreneurial? Both examples would mean that there are business owners who took the financial risk, which would satisfy the dictionary definition of entrepreneur. However, when someone starts a franchise and is guaranteed a customer base because it is a franchise and has name recognition, does that make it less risky, and therefore not qualify the owners as entrepreneurs? I was in discussions about both these viewpoints with people who I would consider experts, which makes me wonder how that translates in general. What, for example, makes some efforts advertised more, even within a startup community, compared to others? What criteria is used?
When deciding on the criteria, one question is if the business is product or service based. Although older data, this article from Entrepreneur magazine shows that about 10% of all small businesses are product based. A point to go along with that fact is how popular product based companies seem to be in the Silicon Valley area since nearly 100% would fall in this category, and Silicon Valley seems to be highly regarded in the startup world, at the least . Also, what does that mean for investing and general persuasion of ideas? While involved in the Western Michigan University (WMU) student business accelerator, Starting Gate, I was the first founder of a service company. Everyone else in my cohort had a product, and when we presented to audiences, the products seemed to be of more interest because the audience could see them. The products were physical and at least available as a prototype. Even a software application could have a prototype of what the different screens would look like and give an example of the user experience.
What does a service company show for a demonstration? To explain Hacker Gals, especially in the very beginnings, I would discuss what the participants would or could do. It really made more sense, especially for the participants, when they actually attended. In the beginning, especially, most of the participants were connected directly to me, and trusted me enough to check out an event and decide from there if they wanted to continue or not. Since attending an event wouldn't interest or even apply to everyone, how do I get momentum to work? If there is more momentum, does that mean the organization would be more acknowledged? Or do we have to show what we "make," as one of the participants has stated multiple times, for the idea to be adopted?
I decided to revisit what I learned about movements and the categories known as early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards. A visual of a movement can be seen in this video: "Leadership Lessons from Dancing Guy." What determines the movement from one category to the next, especially if the movement isn't dependent on a dancing guy? Although close to three years ago, this was a topic in an innovation class I took as an elective while in the MBA program at WMU. What I learned from the professor, John Mueller, was that it was about the numbers. When I asked more recently, and used what Erika Block stated during a Startup Grind Kalamazoo fireside chat as an example, John said "The who is the trigger for getting more people to use it or is the proxy for determining if there has been a change in mindset that confirms the move from early adapter to majority."
One of the reasons I have thought about and researched this is because as an entrepreneur I have felt that I am not on that playground visualized in the beginning, even as the outlier. I have felt that I am playing on a separate playground and do not connect with anyone on that original one, other than mutual respect as people. I'm not sure if it is only my perception, the culture of the community, or the startup world in general, and have tried to look at the situation from different perspectives. In the end, as in the video, the movement of my startup will depend on the participants, since it is not supposed to be about me. Who do you count as an entrepreneur?
Click here to become a writer and reach 170,000 readers.