normality is seriously underrated and the best way to have a happy life is to pursue normality.
The danger of the mediocre success when testing startup hypotheses (2023)
41–50 of 88 posts
Re: The danger of the mediocre success when testing startup hypotheses (2023)
#42Having a corporate job is usually a 'mediocre success'. If you strike out on your own with something that involves your passion and you earn a comparable income, you are a stellar success. Don't let a nepo baby tell you otherwise.
> Having a corporate job is usually a 'mediocre success'.
Eh, that is doing OK to me, which is better than some nebulous "mediocre success". If you are at least saving for retirement, and able to support a family, that's actual success in my book.
The typical startup outcome, where you try for a couple years, it fails, and then you move on to a corporate job is not terrible.
What's really bad is when you make enough to just barely get by, paying yourself a sub-market-rate salary, and keep limping along for a long while. Waiting for that "success", that big breakthrough, "just around the corner". You can be stuck doing this for years, out of a misguided sense of loyalty, determination or whatever. And then you are not saving for retirement, and letting the best family-creation years (if that is a life goal) pass you by.
That, to me is "mediocre success".
Ask me how I know. On second though, no, don't ask me how I know.
Re: The danger of the mediocre success when testing startup hypotheses (2023)
#43The difference between scalable wins and one-offs is knowing why it worked and being able to repeat it. Can you be a human being and connect with other human beings and their needs, and help them move forward?
The author is right; you want clear signals, not noisey ones. If you're looking for the light but keep seeing shadows you need to turn around.
The same is true for people who launch on product hunt, and get 50 signups. Success? If you're selling $1K deals, yes. But if it's just for $4, or free... do you have PMF?
but to be fair, if you can get a small group of people engaged, and you can tease out why/how, it usually stands that others will respond too. But not everyone will need it, and those that may need it may not be in market for it.
Re: The danger of the mediocre success when testing startup hypotheses (2023)
#44Don't fall in the messy middle.
There's a book for that https://www.themessymiddle.com
Re: The danger of the mediocre success when testing startup hypotheses (2023)
#45Having a corporate job is usually a 'mediocre success'. If you strike out on your own with something that involves your passion and you earn a comparable income, you are a stellar success. Don't let a nepo baby tell you otherwise.
Yes if you earn an income comparable to a corporate job, yeah that’s a big win. “Mediocre success” unfortunately isn’t well defined here, but I assumed the author wasn’t suggesting a corporate salary. It seemed like he was talking about a few early sales but not enough to sustain the business. Imagine starting a company with two other people and grossing $12k the first year and $22k the second year, and then running low on funding. Should you keep going? Should you seek investment, assuming you can even get it? What if the growth remains linear, and it will take at least 10 years to reach sustainability?
Re: The danger of the mediocre success when testing startup hypotheses (2023)
#46His point is that when it's only halfway working you're not sure how much more effort to put in because you're not sure how it's going to pay off.
With a clear definition of success, halfway working is, by definition, failing.
You can always clearly define your way to anything you want to think
Re: The danger of the mediocre success when testing startup hypotheses (2023)
#47Having a corporate job is usually a 'mediocre success'. If you strike out on your own with something that involves your passion and you earn a comparable income, you are a stellar success. Don't let a nepo baby tell you otherwise.
Yes if you earn an income comparable to a corporate job, yeah that’s a big win. “Mediocre success” unfortunately isn’t well defined here, but I assumed the author wasn’t suggesting a corporate salary. It seemed like he was talking about a few early sales but not enough to sustain the business. Imagine starting a company with two other people and grossing $12k the first year and $22k the second year, and then running…
Wouldn’t “not enough to sustain the business” be failing? I’d think “mediocre success” would be doing well enough that you can’t just throw in the towel, but not well enough that you can escape the grind.
Re: The danger of the mediocre success when testing startup hypotheses (2023)
#48A better phrasing could be 'unclear outcomes are the worst outcomes', which when stated like that seems self defining. If its not clear its a success or failure, or its marginally a success or failure, then it can be hard (or dangerous) to draw firm conclusions.
Re: The danger of the mediocre success when testing startup hypotheses (2023)
#49The thoughts in this article apply equally well to launching products inside a corporate as well.
Sometimes a product team will "buy the business", eg offer credits or funding to a prospect in order to get their logo. This muddies up the entire experiment. Is the product worth X, or not? Does it solve a problem for customers that is worth X, or not?
For b2b sales, selling 1 or 2 can also be exceptionally costly because you are on the hook for long term support: and if you bought the business, you are now underwater from day 1 with a customer who has you over a barrel. Worse, your sales force now think that every deal can be won on cost, and will start to show signs of deal fever.
Re: The danger of the mediocre success when testing startup hypotheses (2023)
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree, but this blogpost is NOT about professional trajectory. It's about sales and GTM success criteria for startups > That’s the danger of the mediocre success. The point of startup experimentation isn't the success itself; it’s the learning that comes with clear-cut success or failure. You don't really care about the sales revenue generated by your first two reps; you care about whether this is a strategy you ca…
[flagged]
Especially reading the guidelines of the site you're on [0].
> In Comments
> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.
> Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.