LOL
"Psychological Factors: No plan B + Unlimited self-belief + History of feeling like an imposter"
Analysis of unicorn startup founders
11–20 of 56 posts
Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders
#12> Unlimited self-belief > History of feeling like an imposter How is this not contradictory?
I know that I can achieve anything I put my mind to. I feel like I can shoot lightning from my hands and I wield 2 lightsabres.
However, as a primarily computational and business-oriented founder, I am trying to disrupt an industry that is dominated by scientific PhDs and institute spinouts. So even if my science is really novel, I'm still an outsider.
I'd imagine that most founders are, to an extent, outsiders. You kind of have to be in order to develop a radically new thing. You have to be dissimilar to the status quo.
Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders
#13LOL "Psychological Factors: No plan B + Unlimited self-belief + History of feeling like an imposter"
no sane person would start a company ;)
Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders
#141. Went to a top school
Prestigious people are essentially handed capital. This drives most of the funding at the very early stage. A random founder with no connections or background needs an MVP product with real traction, and even then may raise on worse terms than a stanford/harvard grad.
Raising venture funding can be thought of as a career path. Its not entrepreneurship. VC backed founders are more similar to hedge fund managers, they essentially get paid out a percentage of the capital they manage, assuming they manage it well. Raise 20M, you are bound to build a business with some revenue.
The bet is that if they fund 20 Harvard grads, one of them might be like Gates. Even if the rest are duds. The math still kind of works out, they need an outlier.
Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders
#15Would have been interesting to see the following factors considered:
• Presence of one or more mentors in their life
• Exposure to successful adult role models in childhood
• Financial ability to survive for extended period of time without income
• Access to talent in their personal network
Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders
#161. Went to a top school Prestigious people are essentially handed capital. This drives most of the funding at the very early stage. A random founder with no connections or background needs an MVP product with real traction, and even then may raise on worse terms than a stanford/harvard grad. Raising venture funding can be thought of as a career path. Its not entrepreneurship. VC backed founders are more similar to he…
In biotech, this is an understatement. PhD's get to develop stuff for years using university funds while on a salary.
Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders
#171. Went to a top school Prestigious people are essentially handed capital. This drives most of the funding at the very early stage. A random founder with no connections or background needs an MVP product with real traction, and even then may raise on worse terms than a stanford/harvard grad. Raising venture funding can be thought of as a career path. Its not entrepreneurship. VC backed founders are more similar to he…
In biotech, this is an understatement. PhD's get to develop stuff for years using university funds while on a salary.
That feels like a slightly different can of worms, though.
Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders
#18Well I got the impostor syndrome thing down 100%. The top university factor is probably bias. I mean those schools are good and lots of good people come from them, but people from those schools are also more likely to get funding and other things like top tier employees and co-founders. That's going to create an outsized effect. Solo founders being older makes a lot of sense because to be successful as a solo founder…
As someone from a mid tier state school, I've definitely found that people from elite schools work harder and produce more consistently good work. I think this is just anti-elitism cope.
Do they work harder because they attended elite schools or did they attend elite schools because they worked harder?
It’s all multipliers: a bias existing doesn’t mean that there isn’t also a factor that relates to the quality of the education. You’re more likely to attend a top university if you have good contacts, good finances, and good test scoring already — those are also probable significant factors to whether you’ll successfully start a company. Location also matters–and at least in Europe–VCs, engineering staff, and top-tier universities are often in the same area.
None of that is dismissive of the schools’ qualities, but all those factors contribute to a bias that likely exaggerates the reader’s perception thereof.
Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders
#19> Unlimited self-belief > History of feeling like an imposter How is this not contradictory?
I don't see a contradiction. Self belief means you believe that you can accomplish what you set out to so are willing to bet on yourself and take risks. Feeling like an imposter is a motivational drive from the other end of the spectrum pushing you to continuously improve, holding yourself to a progressively higher standards, and never resting on your laurels.
Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders
#201. Went to a top school Prestigious people are essentially handed capital. This drives most of the funding at the very early stage. A random founder with no connections or background needs an MVP product with real traction, and even then may raise on worse terms than a stanford/harvard grad. Raising venture funding can be thought of as a career path. Its not entrepreneurship. VC backed founders are more similar to he…
In biotech, this is an understatement. PhD's get to develop stuff for years using university funds while on a salary.
And they work slavery hours,6 am to 1am