Commentary on an HBR article about Start-ups & Entrepreneurship

Posted on July 15, 2019 Updated on November 29, 2023

A friend posted this article on LinkedIn.com. Due to character limitations for comments, I decided to post my response here. Below is a link to the article referenced: https://hbr.org/2019/07/building-a-startup-that-will-last

The article is interesting, but emphasizing “second and third acts” assumes that the start-up will successfully navigate the first act. Even with addressing what the author views as key points this is still a very big assumption. The reasons for Longevity and Success are far more complex and multi-dimensional, but it highlights some of the more important areas of focus.

Long-term success requires several things: The right combination of having a unique goal that has the potential to make a big impact (think “No software” from Salesforce.com); Innovative ideas to achieve that goal; A diverse team to build the product (a mix of visionaries, insightful “translators,” technical experts, designers, planners, adept doers, etc.); Very good sales / business development / marketing to describe a better way of doing things and converting that to new business; and ultimately a management team focused on sustainable and scalable growth.

The point about the need to “Articulate a value framework oriented toward societal impact, not just financial achievement” seems superficial and too tactical.

First, there are unintended consequences to most new technologies. Social Media is a recent example, but Genetic Editing and AI are two areas that are likely to provide more examples over the next decade. Not every societal impact will be positive, and having a negative impact could very well lead to the untimely demise of that company.

Second, the two ideas (societal impact and financial achievement) are not mutually exclusive. When I owned my consulting company, we aimed to fund $1M of medical research to find a cure for Arthritis. We allocated half of our net profits to this goal. Every employee was on board with this because there was a tangible example of why it mattered (my daughter). We invested $500K and helped launch a few careers for some brilliant MD/Ph. Ds and at least one national protocol came out of their research.

Mission and Vision are important to a company, yet many fail to view this as anything more than a marketing effort. Those companies fail to realize that this is as much to motivate and inspire their employees as it is to grab a prospective customer’s attention. These should be inspirational and aspirational, such as the “BHAG” (Big Hairy Audacious Goals) Collins and Porras wrote about 25 years ago.

Regarding Endurance and the assertion that “…the best businesses are intrinsically aligned with the long-term interests of society,” my take is slightly different. The best businesses are always looking for trends and opportunities in an ever-changing global competitive landscape instead of looking to their competitors and trying to ride on their coattails. Companies with a culture of fostering innovation as a way to learn and grow (Amazon and Google are two great examples) are able to find that intersection of “good business” and “positive societal impact.” It is much more complex than a simple one-dimensional outlook.

But it was a good article to help reframe ideas and assumptions around growth.