Over the last two decades of building and running businesses, and the last couple of years working full time with dozens of startup founders and CEOs on their strategies and funding plans in my consultancy business, I have observed that there are a common set of reasons that startups struggle and fail, and a consistent set of factors that make startup companies successful.
I wondered if my observations were supported by hard data, and my curiosity around startup success and failure eventually got the best of me. I decided to do some in-depth investigation around this topic. I wondered if there were any research studies that showed why startups succeed and fail? I found several articles that were filled with unsubstantiated opinions and a few sources that had really great hard research around the topic.
Why do companies fail?
According to an article in FastCompany, "Why Most Venture Backed Companies Fail," 75 percent of venture-backed startups fail. This statistic is based on a Harvard Business School study by Shikhar Ghosh. In a study by Statistic Brain, Startup Business Failure Rate by Industry, the failure rate of all U.S. companies after five years was over 50 percent, and over 70 percent after 10 years.
This study also asked company leadership the reason for business failure, giving a list of four main reasons for failure with sub-categories below those. They also gave a list of 12 leading management mistakes. It is worth checking out the details. This research-based analysis confirmed some of my observations. I bracket the Statistic Brain finding into seven key reasons for that entrepreneurs experienced business failure:
- Lack of focus
- Lack of motivation, commitment and passion
- Too much pride, resulting in an unwillingness to see or listen
- Taking advice from the wrong people
- Lacking good mentorship
- Lack of general and domain-specific business knowledge: finance, operations, and marketing
- Raising too much money too soon
All of these focus on the decision-making of the entrepreneur and general business knowledge.
In another study, CB Insights looked at the post-mortems of 101 startups to compile a list of the Top 20 Reasons Startups Fail. The focus was on company level reasons for failure. I think this list is instructive, but each of these reasons for failure is due to a failure in leadership at some level. The top nine most significant from this study are:
- No market need
- Ran out of cash
- Not the right team
- Got outcompeted
- Pricing/cost issue
- Poor product
- Need/lack business model
- Poor marketing
- Ignore customers
Notice that all of these are business- and team-related issues, even the ones that relate to the product. Issues like there are always tied to leadership and the leader’s ability to build a strong team and drive a business model and business thought process and discipline. Also, keep in mind, if running out of money is the ultimate reason for failure, there are always other factors that cause this result.
Why do startups succeed?
Next, I looked for sources of information of why businesses were successful. I found some good research from Harvard Business School, Performance Persistence in Entrepreneurship, which suggest that serial entrepreneurs that have prior success are more likely to have success, and that the best VCs are good at picking serial entrepreneurs. However, that really didn’t answer my question about the qualities of the entrepreneur.
The best comprehensive research that helped to answer the “reasons for success” question that I could find was from The Ecommerce Genome by Compass in their Startup Genome report, which looked at 650 internet startups. Although this research is tech industry specific, I still think it is very instructive. The report stated 14 indicators of success. Some of the 14 were a bit redundant, but you should review the report yourself. This analysis also confirmed some of my observations. I bracketed these 14 indicators into nine key factors for success:
- Founders are driven by impact, resulting in passion and commitment
- Commitment to stay the course and stick with a chosen path
- Willingness to adjust, but not constantly adjusting
- Patience and persistence due to the timing mismatch of expectations and reality
- Willingness to observe, listen and learn
- Develop the right mentoring relationships
- Leadership with general and domain specific business knowledge
- Implementing “Lean Startup” principles: Raising just enough money in a funding round to hit the next set of key milestones
- Balance of technical and business knowledge, with necessary technical expertise in product development
Are the reasons for success the opposite of those for failure?
There are things that you must possess to be a successful entrepreneur, but they won't guarantee success. That said, it stands to reason that if you fixed the reasons for business failure, you would at least improve your chances of success. So, I decided to look at the side-by-side comparison of the reasons for failure and the factors for success.
If you look at both the reasons for failure and the factors for success, it is clear that commitment to a plan is key. This, of course, implies having a plan. This does not mean that you are completely inflexible, but you can stay the course. This is why the most successful companies have one or two pivots. I do not think that every little business adjustment or fine-tuning as a pivot.
A true pivot is a change in course of direction that results in a material change in the product-market strategy. It could be along the product axis or the market axis, but it has to be enough of a change that it really requires an adjustment in strategy and a corresponding adjustment in resource allocation. At least, that’s my definition. Passion and motivation are the obvious factors. Every entrepreneur, business coach, consultant, advisor, newscaster, investor and industry analyst talks about passion. Steve Jobs is quoted all the time about this. It’s probably become too cliché and overused at this point.
What I like about this analysis is that it goes to the root of the passion. People that are successful believe in what they are doing. The successful entrepreneur feels that they can make an impact and a difference in the world. There is so much inertia and negativity around getting a startup off the ground, much less getting it to “escape velocity,” that if you don’t have this deep-seated commitment to making an impact, you will surely give up. Successful entrepreneurs are competitive. They play to win, and they hate to lose. This trait may show-up differently with different personality types, but I have never met a successful entrepreneur that doesn’t have a competitive spirit and a will to win.
The next two things go hand-in-hand. I kept them separate since I think mentorship is so important, and it has played such a huge role in my career success. Just because you are willing to learn does not mean that you are willing to seek a mentor and listen to their guidance. By the way, I’m not advocating that you take every piece of advice and guidance from your mentors, but if you have selected strong mentors that have significant domain, technical or business expertise, you should at least consider thoughtfully consider what they have to say. Otherwise, why have them around as a mentor? It gets to humility. It’s one of those things when you think you have it, you don’t.
Successful startups are businesses. It therefore stands to reason that you need to establish and implement solid fundamental business principles and practices to improve your chances of success. Many technical founders fall in love with their product idea and consciously or unconsciously believe that if they build a better mousetrap, the world will beat a path to their door. However, both the success and failure studies show that you need leadership in the company with general and domain-specific business knowledge to be successful. Of course, you also need to have strong technical expertise in your chosen product development area.
Does this mean that a technical founder cannot be successful as a CEO? No, it doesn't. Look at Dr. Irwin Jacobs, the co-founder and founding CEO of Qualcomm, as a classic example. Dr. Jacobs is a brilliant engineer and former professor at MIT. However, he also has a brilliant business mind and a lot of business knowledge. Prior to Qualcomm, Dr. Jacobs ran another company, MA-Com, so he had experience running a company. He also surrounded himself with a strong management team. There are many other examples of this success formula, but there are far more where there is a seasoned businessperson who has domain expertise leading the company, and a strong technical team driving product development. Steve Jobs (Apple, NeXT, and Pixar) is the classic example as a business-oriented founder. Meg Whitman (eBay) and Eric Schmidt (Google) are great examples of CEOs who were brought into companies at an early stage to complement an exceptional team of technical founders.
Finally, having a clear and realistic idea of how long things take, setting intermediate milestones for every 12 to 18 months, and raising just enough money it to get to the next set of key milestones, is not only important to capital efficiency, it is also important for success.
How do I become a member of the $100 million club?
Interestingly, according to the Kauffman Institute, in its article The Constant: Companies that Matter, the pace at which the United States produces $100-million companies has been stable over the last 20 years despite changes in the economy. The study sates, “Anywhere from 125 to 250 companies per year (out of roughly 552,000 new employer firms) are founded in the United States that reach $100 million in revenues.” My former company, Entropic, achieved this status. How do you become part of that club? You need some luck and a good sense of timing. However, as said by the Roman philosopher Seneca, “Luck is what happens when preparedness meets opportunity.”
Beyond that, you need a plan, persistence, perseverance, a willingness to be flexible, and a world-class team. You also need to be frugal, bright, and cultivate strong mentors. The best way know to do all these things well and efficiently is to follow a systematic process where you plan, commit, track results, promote accomplishments and raise the necessary capital, or "fuel in the tank," to drive the growth of your startup.
Plan. Commit. Win.
COMMENTARY: As a consultant it always pains me when a startup client launches successfully and gains traction, but never seems to quite "cross the chasm" that all startups encounter, and must cross in order to "get to the next level." Crossing the chasm simply means helping a product, service or technology move from "early adopters" to a larger market segment, sometimes called the "early majority," in the Product Adoption Curve (see below).
Product Adoption Curve
The product adoption curve is a standard model that reflects who buys your products and when.
Think of it as the big picture view of your product adoption. It takes the product lifecycle and considers what happens at different points.
In most product adoption models, there are five distinct stages. Each stage represents an arbitrary amount of time, so what’s most important here is the process as a whole.
Now let’s break this down step by step, stage by stage.
Stage 1. Innovators
The innovators are the first group of people to invest in your product.
This is a unique group. People who buy super early are usually obsessed with technology and want to keep up with the cutting edge of technology. When the first Apple iPhone was first launched on July 29, 2007, the innovators were the very first to buy the iPhone.
What’s most important about the innovators group is its size. You might have noticed that it’s small. That’s completely normal.
This is why you might only get a few sales immediately after you launch. You’ll typically get about 2.5% of your total sales from innovators.
The Innovators
Stage 2. Early Adopters
At some point, you’ll see a swell in sales, and you’ll start to get a steadier conversion rate.
This is probably because the early adopters have arrived.
Like innovators, early adopters tend to be ahead of everyone else, willing to test the waters.
Early Adopters
Although early adopters are similar to innovators, there are some important differences.
It could be the case that early adopters have purposely waited to buy your product.
Whereas innovators are fine with rushing in and testing out something new, early adopters are a bit more hesitant. They still want to try something new, but they want a few reviews to consult.
Then again, it could be the case that they just found out about your product.
Expect your percentage of adoption to go up to about 13.5% or so.
Stage 3. Early Majority
Here’s when your product really gets some momentum going.
You’ve got a good amount of sales from innovators and early adopters. At this point, usually an even larger group sweeps in and gives you a heck of a lot more sales. Specifically, about 34%.
The people in the early majority are usually pragmatic and will only buy something once it’s been road-tested (at least a little bit) and has proven its value.
Early Majority
This is the beginning of your product’s peak. Maybe it’s gained traction with more marketing or word of mouth.
Stage 4. Late Majority
At stage 4, your product has been out for a while, and there’s widespread use.
However, there are still some people who are a bit skeptical of your product. Once they’ve put their worries to rest, they buy your product, and these people are usually in the late majority or laggards.
Late Majority
At some point during the early or late majority phase, you’ll have your peak where you get more sales than ever, and your product is at the height of its popularity.
Interestingly, in terms of adoption rates, the early and late majorities are usually roughly equal, around 34%.
Stage 5. Laggards
These are the people who buy your product after all the hype has died down. Sometimes, laggards purchase a product years after it’s been released.
Laggards might be extreme skeptics or people who have only heard about your product a long time after you launched it. Whatever the reason, these people don’t buy until much later in the product lifecycle.
The Laggards
Surprisingly, this is a pretty big group. 16% of your product adoption will come from laggards.
Try to wrap your head around the fact that laggards have a higher adoption rate than early adopters.
Change Your Marketing as Your Product Ages
At each stage of the product adoption curve, it’s likely there’s going to be certain demographics buying your product.
For example, innovators are more likely to buy on impulse, while buyers in the late majority will do lots of research before purchasing.
Each group has its own traits:
Characteristics: Innovators-to-Laggards
And as your product gets older, it will become more well-known. So you might start out with a product no one knows but end up with a product everyone and their brother has heard of.
Given these facts, consider changing your marketing messages as your product ages.
The Apple iPhone Marketing Messages Over Time
The marketing of each successive version of the Apple iPhone illustrates how Apple changed its marketing message to appeal to innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority and laggards.
A commercial for iPhone 2 showed off a lot of the hip new features: music, email, and Internet browsing, to name a few.
iPhone 2 TV Commercial
This obviously appealed to a younger, more tech-savvy audience.
Then in 2010, three years after the first iPhone launched in 2007, the iPhone 4 came out with a commercial that featured two grandparents celebrating their granddaughter’s graduation:
iPhone 4 TV Commercial
Apple wanted to show that even grandparents (who may not have understood smartphones back in 2010) could benefit from the iPhone. This is important because older consumers are typically late adopters.
Apple’s strategy was clear: Begin by showcasing all the bells and whistles, then open up the audience to include more types of customers.
In the same way, you should think about what your marketing should look like at each stage of the product adoption curve.
For example, when the innovators and early adopters come rolling in, your marketing should clearly describe the value and benefits of your product.
Later on, perhaps in the late majority stage, you can utilize customer testimonials and reviews. This can help address the skepticism that later adopters typically have.
Think about addressing the common questions that each group has, innovators will ask themselves what’s so unique about your product, while the early majority wants to know what other people think about your product and why it’s useful.
Thinking like this can completely change your marketing. By sending a customized message every step of the way, you’ll battle objections and questions head-on.
Know How to Overcome The Chasm
In most product adoption curves, there’s a point that can make or break the success of the product.
It’s called the chasm. It’s the point between the early adopter stage and the early majority stage.
The Chasm
As the chart above represents, crossing the chasm means breaking into the mainstream market. It’s one of the most difficult aspects of product adoption, but it’s one of the most important aspects to get right. There’s even a bestselling book on the topic––Crossing the Chasm.
Crossing the chasm is particularly tough to do for a few reasons. One reason is that as your product ages and grows, your audience will have higher expectations. Specifically, your potential customers will want increasingly better reasons to buy your product. You have to be ready to meet these demands throughout your product’s lifecycle, but it’s especially important in getting past the chasm.
As impulse buyers, the innovators and early adopters didn’t need huge reasons to buy your product. But to get the early majority to convert, that’s exactly what you’ll need. You have to think about your branding and not just your product. You have to offer value and not just features.
Another reason for the difficulty is the possible necessity of pivoting. In other words, to cross the chasm you may need to take a new angle for your campaign. Early on, you may be hedging on the idea behind your product. Early adopters are cool with that, but the early majority wants consistency. In other words, to cross the chasm you may need to take a new angle for your campaign. Early on, you may be hedging on the idea behind your product. Early adopters are cool with that, but the early majority wants consistency.
The Chasm
If you’re at the chasm right now, you might need to pivot yourself or even improve your product.
Don’t Forget The Laggards
You can’t stop after your product has hit its pinnacle and is riding the waves of success. It's important to remember, the second largest adoption group is laggards, coming in at 16%. A lot of people will be buying your product well after the hype dies down, and you can’t forget or alienate this audience.
Laggards are often skeptics, so at the end of your product lifecycle, your marketing should be laser-focused on overcoming objections. Think about it––you’re marketing to people who resist change and may not even want to be a customer. They’re going to need awesome reasons to invest in your brand. (A slew of positive testimonials, reviews, and press mentions will come in handy for this.)
Time also plays an important role. Think back to the iPhone example; sure, older folks are commonly seen with iPhones, but it’s been a decade since the device’s initial release. It might take a lot of time and exposure to your brand for laggards to adopt your brand.
Finally, you’ll also need to brace for the declining sales that inevitably occur at the end of the product life cycle. If your brand is experiencing one or more of these symptoms (see below) listed in the Product Life Cycle chart, its time to evaluate whether you can extend its life by introducing an improved version, replace the product with an entirely new product or dump the brand or line entirely.
Product Life Cycle
Courtesy of an article appearing in September 2014 issue of Entrepreneur and an article dated October 23, 2017 appearing in The Daily Egg and an article dated October 23, 2017 appearing in The Daily Egg
Comments