Are you REALLY ready yet to do what it takes?

A 'new' mentor (whom I met 30 years ago), described my biggest startup problem directly. "Are you REALLY ready yet to do what it takes?

I sat down recently with Neville Christie, to gain some clarity & perspective about my journey. 

What he discussed with me was perhaps the most difficult and painful conversation I've had in a long time (excluding those with my lawyers).

After listening to me for 15 minutes, what he summed up was devastating. I was exactly where I was now, because I had chosen to be. That's right, in simple terms, all my challenges, and also my opportunities were as a result of my decisions. 

At that moment I realised something profound. No longer was it the fault of the economy, the government, my choice of co-founder, competition, funding, the team, the backers who didnt 'get' it. No of them. 

I was where I was because of the decisions & subsequent actions (or lack of) by just one person. "Great", I though, "now I've got some-one to blame".

And then the kicker; "That person is you." 

"What? No! That can't be right. What about - insert reasons A,B & C here- and -also insert factors 1,2 &3 here?"

"Wrong question" was the reply.

What he told me next was perhaps the most profound thing I had ever heard.

"The only reason you aren't yet wherevyou want to be, is that you haven't employed every resource at your disposal."

So profound was that statement, that I was blown way by the simplicity of it. "Surely, that could be it? I can't possibly be that simple?"

I thought for a second about countering. Surely I had operated (most of the time) at my peak capacity, turned over every stone, chased down every lead? Whilst that was true, when I thought it through, there is a major difference between doing "everything you know", and "whatever it takes".

Do you know the difference?

Can you identify every resource available to you?

Are you prepared to bring them all into play, without hesitation or reservation?

A new source of startup funding coming soon?

The opportunities for funding in the startup ecosystem have progressed rapidly in the last few years, with sources of funds going through multiple iterations, with the advent of new models, such as incubators, co-working spaces, accelerators, seed-funders, bank-backed capital funds and crowd sourcing to longer-standing angel investor groups & venture capital funds.

Each group has their defined space, but something still appears to be missing.

From my exposure to other 'ideas' people, I believe that only around 1 in 5 ideas every go on to get formally pitched as a fully-formed startup.

As a well known VC recently told me, in his 25 year career of listening to pitches (around 5000 fully formed proposals), only around 1% of those ever got backed. And from other sources, we know that only 8-10% of those ever go on to become significant businesses.

So if you follow the math (hazy as it is) for every idea that works, there is potentially 4999 others that didn't.

That's a hell of a lot of value/job creation/ GDP growth etc left on the table.

There are many talked-about reasons for this, including product/market fit, access to resources, funding, temperament, resilience and a plethora of other startup buzz-words that I've left off.

As governments around the world (including Australia) start to review existing legislation around equity ownership, investing & crowd-sourcing, that space is likely see a variety of new hybrid models also coming to the fore.

But I'm not sure that even these measures are necessarily the answers to the problem, in comparison to the pre-existing resources available right now, today.

What seems to have lagged to date is the ability of the corporate world to invest its considerable resources.

I believe that new wave of change is coming, but not in the way that you might expect.

In the distance, I see a new wave of change coming from the foresight of existing & upcoming leaders, which will revolutionise the startup landscape.

Can you see it too?

Be bold, be brave & be cause.

Startups a good place to lose yourself.

Here, the commitment to a purpose, to something that has value, is worthwhile.

So few entreprenuers will ever succeed; fewer still will see anything like the rewards so written about daily in TechCrunch or a dozen other places.

Yet the promise of peer recognition, fame, glory & success simply spurs more of us to strive, to stretch, to reach, often again & again. Why?

If we are honest, could it be that the feeling of risk & adventure can be intoxicating, even addictive?

Or is it that the mission, or perhaps the calling is stronger here than in an occupation, where we show up, perform our tasks, complete our objectives, and then go home?

Startups are perhaps also a great place to find yourself.

What do you think?

What does your audience see?

My dad was a clever man; he 'figured out' life (in his time) long before I even knew there were rules. But he taught me one of the most important rules early.

"Always play the ball, not the man" -this came from him coaching me in soccer, when I was 10 --and he applied it to everything else that he did in life.

But apart from the obvious behavioural implications, it also was about accepting responsibility for your outcomes & not blaming others. Therein lies the greatest of learning.

You see, in the game of soccer,as it is in startups, our ability to improve our ball handling skills is in our control, not some-one else's.

The better I get at controlling the ball, the more chance I have of directing it where I want it to go, ideally toward the goal.

And in the game of soccer, like startups, whether you win or lose the game, (even if it is just the coach & the players), there is always an audience. 

The Journey

After you've done a couple of startups (whether successful or otherwise), you quickly learn whether this is in your blood.

I'm not sure for me whether its thrill, risk, challenge, opportunity, or belonging that is the strongest motivator. After speaking with many other 'tribesmen', its pretty clear that all of these play a part in the decision of those of us that stay 'in the game'. For most of us, its something we were born to do.

But let me make distinction :- I think startup entrepreneurs are made, not born. I believe we are the product of our environments, and are a breed apart from the freedom seeking (but structure requiring) traditional entreprenuers, like a typical small business person or franchisee.

There are similarities, yes. But substantial differences too. The franchisee seeks a brightly-lit highway to follow, whereas for us, a dim, hardly-trod path is enough.

For them, the pre-existing tools, the certainty of outcomes, and the mechanics of the process.

For us, like the explorers of the new world, a glimmer of opportunity, a faint light of hope, and the stories of the path ahead from our fellow travellers, is often enough.

Small wonder that many of us never quite make it to journey's end. And yet, that is part of the promise - that we could succeed where others before us have failed.

"Everything we enjoy in society is a direct result of the accumulated learning derived from millions of mistakes. No mistakes, no progress. Yet we still look at making a mistake as embarrassing, wrong, an act bordering on sin. If you're making mistakes, it means you're doing new things, taking risks, stretching yourself. You're growing, learning. And isn't the journey, the experience, not the destination, what life is all about?." -Robert White

Mentor required, enquire within.

Because that is exactly what is required....

Not opinion, nor learned behaviour nor methods. Rather, the ability to look inside yourself, and impart the best of you; your wisdom, compassion, experience.

Requirements are maturity, experience (both life & business), a track record of success & failure, a lifelong willingness to learn & to share, and a journey that 'marks the trail' for those that follow.

Renumeration will be absolutely defineable, via multiple streams (in addition to the usual options), such as self-actualisation, a requirement to 'pay it forward', recognition, accolades and personal & professional satisfaction.

Do you meet these criteria?

Do I?

How do you turn an idea into a business?

Are you awash with ideas? Is your mind litterally swimming in a soup of opportunities & possibilities? Of apps & products & businesses & services & solutions to problems not yet solved?

Then you aren't alone. There are literally thousands of people just like you -they imagine a bigger, brighter, better world after they fix this 'thing' that needs to be fixed. If only someone would.

And yet the problem is still there -staring at you -waiting to be fixed. So why don't you fix it?

What is stopping you? Get out your pen & paper -right now. Put the problem down on paper. Write it out - who does this problem hinder? How could it be solved? Who has tried before? Why did they fail? How could it be done better? How could you reach them?

Don't write code or a business plan - describe the problem, the customer & how your solution helps them. Then find 10 people like the customer, (on the phone or over coffee) and ask them about this problem. Don't tell them about the solution- just discuss the problem. If it's a real problem that is solvable with your solution, you'll know soon enough.

What's stopping you?

Desperately Seeking .....a Co-Founder?

As an experienced ideas guy, finding a technical co-founder has been an interesting two year challenge, much more difficult than I would've expected, given my level of experience in past startups.

I've had these discussion with fellow startup exponents, guys like Troy Westley of CareMonkey, and its surprising how many of them have faced similar (though not the same) challenges.

I had started 8 projects in the past, usually with co-founders from within my networks. These were trusted people, with similar backgrounds, skills, or experiences to myself. But in each of these past projects, something was lacking within the partnerships. Something I couldn't quite put my finger on.

Each had been successful within their chosen field, all were 'hungry' success-orientated people, all had great presence and drive, and none was a stranger to hard work or taking a risk.

At the end of my last venture, I decided that I needed something more in a co-founder. At the beginning of my search (without a venture in mind), I wasn't sure quite what my criteria were, so I decided that the best path forward was to immerse myself within the startup community and allow the universe to bring the next venture to me (which didn't take long, by the way). I decided that the venture would determine the right person.

To say that the last few unsuccessful ventures had knocked me around, was an understatement. To add to that, life had dealt me quite a few personal 'hits' along the way; those that know me, also know the journey has been difficult. Not for one minute do I imagine that yours hasn't been also difficult; when you take a beating in one area of your life, that can also spill over into other areas of your life.

I had lost my edge, my mojo, the very thing which had kept me in the game, and kept me driving forward. If you've been' swinging for the fence' more than a couple of times, you'll understand what I mean. 

So my first challenge was to get into motion, even without a clear plan. Inertia is a force of nature that takes time to overcome, but once you are in motion, course correcting is much easier, due to the benefit of momentum.

During my search for 'the venture', I recognised that it wasn't the right venture, nor the right co-founder, that I was really looking for. I was in fact searching for the right 'me' that would naturally attract the sort of person that would be an obvious and natural fit for the 'me' that I needed to be; I was first looking for the right founder - the right 'me'.

Once I realised what I needed to change, and started putting those things into place, the search became far easier. I was more willing to be honest about my skills and my deficiencies, which made it easier to determine what skills and core strengths my counterpart would need to possess. Because it is the founders of a business that decide and set the culture.


It became evident that, as well as having the a required level of technical expertise, he had to be of a similar age, have been exposed to lots of life experience, have a great passion for life, and very keen sense of humour. On the technical side, I wanted some-one who was across many different types of technologies and methodologies, and was platform agnostic. And it wouldn't hurt if he enjoyed a sherbet when the time to down tools came along (all work & no play makes for a dull company).

The story has a happy ending - it turns out that the right person was some-one I had known for almost 5 years, over a regular social game of poker, who had previously lived about a mile from me, and had some deep & similar experiences in terms of life changes.

I'll introduce him to you shortly - he's a real fun guy too.

Winning isnt really winning- it's failing to fail.

When most people think of winning, they think of the skill of the sportsman, or team, in competition against their peers.
That level of skill is often physically matched, so the difference is shown in the mental preparation, or determination, a willingness to beat the other team, by doing those '1%-ers' required to gain an edge.
So often the success, or failure is measured in centimeters, or milliseconds, or some other very small margin of difference between the combatants.
However, in the startup game, it's something else entirely.

Here, your competition isn't really your competition. Your ability to do things 1% better may not be ever be recognised, valued or even make a difference. A coder who is 1% better than his peers, may not be as politically savvy, or as good at extolling his virtues. I'm not suggesting that the aggregate results of doing things better isn't required -it's just that it not the difference between failure and success in our world.
For example, from my experience in startups so far, a brilliant idea, a 'perfect pitch', a well-oiled team, a valid proof of concept, early market traction, or even that successful elusive 'series A' funding round, are no guarantees to ultimate market success.
Here, its something much less well defined; its more akin to the solo yatchsmen that circumnavigate the globe; they keep trying, again & again, despite weather, equipment failure, adversity, fatigue, capsizing etc., until they acheive their goal. You often hear hear of them succeeding after many attempts.

This type of winning could be more aptly described as 'failing to fail', and is much closer to what you & I do perhaps every day.
Leni Mayo (of 99 Designs fame) described it best when he recently floated the concept to me that that the normal entrepreneur (I avoid the word average here) has attempted 8 startups before they get something to fly. (He also joked to me that he lucked out on his 2nd.)
Unfortunately, too many give up before that stage.

So if the game isn't you against the world, what is it really? I believe that the real game is 'you against yourself'.

• How big is your vision?
• What lengths are you prepared to go to, in order to make it a reality? 
• How many stones are you prepared to turn over? 
• How uncomfortable are you willing to get? 
• How much more are prepared to stretch, to strive, to reach? 
• How hard will you push yourself? 
• What pain are you willing to endure in the pursuit of your vision?
• How many times will you get up after you get knocked-down?

Did you notice that none of these mention or even consider competition? No, the real game is 'you'.  If you doubt me still, let me ask you three final questions.

If not 'this', then what? 
If not 'now', then when? 
If not 'you', then who? 
So stay in the game, keep striving, keep reaching, keep failing, and most importantly, keep getting back up, until you fail at failing.  
Then everyone can call you an 'overnight success'.

What did you learn from your last startup?

If you want to work out what you have learned from each of your startups, you should first review in summary what you did & didn't do, so that you can extract the lessons from each of them. By the way, if you don't yet have a journal, get one.
Let's assume that for every project of yours that didn't work, it is automatically assumed that you didn't know enough. The same is equally true of all my projects. But that in itself isn't enough.

You can start to determine what you experienced, and therefore what you learned, by outlining the external factors & events around each of your startups, such as

• What stage did it get to?
• Who was involved and in what roles?
• What were their skills? their motivations?
• Who did you engage to support the project?
• What research did you undertake?
• Did you have a plan? If so, did it guide you or confine you?
• How flexible were you in deviating from the plan?

These will lead you to the important factors, like:

• Why it didn't work,
• What you still have to learn,
• What you did learn, and
• What can you do differently next time.

Next, just as I have done, list in any order you like, every 'startup' that you've worked on. For the sake of the exercise, you can include those projects 'owned' by others.
We'll come back to the learning in part 2.