Sorry for the delayed absence guys (yes, I'm still alive). I've been working like a maniac on my latest startup (which is going to be released soon), but I'll be posting regularly again from now on.

With startups there's an endemic barrier to entry that can deter just about anyone, and it's important to fight it off. The most depressing (and yet natural) of them all is as follows:

Your idea seems perfect, but you eventually realize that nobody wants to buy it

Before you throw the idea/work in the trash compactor, try to refine it first. I could throw out a lot of different examples to illustrate how, but the easiest one is Play-Doh. If you're a cinefile, you'll note that this story was recently told in the movie 'How do you know' (which was a waste of time by the way).

The short version of Play-Doh: It was created as a wallpaper cleaner. It wasn't doing so hot. They realized that people were using it as pliable clay instead. So they marketed it as such, and it all worked out.

Interestingly, this cyclical repositioning/refining technique appears in almost every successful business to some degree.

There's an important book that most entrepreneurs I've met have all read called Founders At Work: Stories of Startups' Early Days (You can get it by clicking here). The book details how so many businesses have had to shift their focus, and this is what ultimately made them successful.

One of the many examples in the book is PayPal. PayPal basically started as a method of transferring money between two wireless devices. This was their 'idea'. While the idea was cute, it wasn't especially profitable. Thus, the idea was refined, and it ended up taking the form of third party company that assists with transfers online. It's now a titan of the online world.

There are countless other examples in the book of companies that have followed the same cyclical repositioning path. The book is basically a collection of case studies from successful businesses.

This technique of:

1. Release the product
2. Collect feedback
3. Refine (make changes)
4. Repeat

is at the heart of being an entrepreneur. This is the framework you must follow. You need to fail in order to succeed. Here's a variation of the cycle, which is employed by the vast majority of entrepreneurs who fail:

1. Release the product
2. Ignore feedback
3. Wait out the storm (do nothing)
4. Try to advertise more
5. Go down with the ship

The goal of your startup should be continuous refinement/improvement of the product. This technique has become so important, that there's actually a second book that is dedicated entirely to this concept. It's called Getting to Plan B: Breaking Through to a better business model (Get it by clicking here). The book is written by John Mullins, and Randy Komisar (who most know from Stanford University's Entrepreneurial Thought Leader podcasts). The book basically ascertains that your business is almost definitely going to fail in its early stages, and that's fine. In fact, that's natural. Only once you've failed can you start to refine the product and reposition it accordingly.

If you follow this type of framework, you'll find yourself much less stressed by early signs of failure in your business. If you go in with the mindset that you're going to need to adjust on the fly, you won't panic when the initial reaction to your business sucks. You'll automatically only worry when you need to; in this case, you only need to worry if you can't reposition the product for success. Only at this point should you be looking to dispose of the idea like it was last week's leftovers.

So don't be afraid of failing. In fact, embrace the need; The Need to Fail.

Just make sure you build off it and come back with a better product.

Please press Tweet if you enjoyed this!  Tweet

Prefer Facebook? Click to Like this!        

Ask a group of women the question: "Does size matter?" and you'll get varying responses. Ask any Venture Capitalist, and you'll get a definitive answer every time: "Yes"

But why do Venture Capitalists believe new businesses are more likely to succeed in larger markets? And why do they believe it so much, that most of the big firms won't even consider funding new ventures that target tiny markets?

In fact, VC's love to key in on a special type of market. They believe that this particular type of market offers the highest chances of success; and statistically, it does. Knowing that, wouldn't it make sense to pursue a startup that fits into the market that makes VC's drool?

High Growth, Large-Size Markets
This is the optimal breeding ground for business success. You might have heard this before, but have you actually considered why this particular market is the best choice? It's not as obvious as it seems

There are 4 big advantages to launching a business in a high growth large-size market:

1. High-growth markets lack dominant companies
2. It's cheaper to get into a high growth market than an established one
3. The knowledge needed to partake in the industry is less than an established one
4. You can earn more sales from the same amount of work (when compared to a smaller industry)

How these 4 factors apply to you (Yes, you personally)
Let's look at how these factors can benefit your business. In the first point above, we note that there are few (if any) dominant companies in new markets. This is a huge benefit to you as an entrepreneur. Just try to get into the laptop product market right now. Immediately, you'll find yourself up against Dell and HP. They have massive advertising budgets, and huge factories. Good luck. But if you went after an emerging market (such as cloud computing), you'll find far fewer companies. It's a much fairer playing field

The second point notes that it's cheaper to enter an emerging market than it is to get into an established one. Why? Because in a new market, you aren't being forced to match up with established players. Let's go back to the previous example of manufacturing laptops. If you want to enter the laptop product market, you'll need to advertise. Unfortunately, you're up against brands that have been advertising for years. Customers already know the dominant players, and therefore those companies can actually spend less and get a better return on their advertising budget than you can

Being a late entrant into an established industry is a lot like switching schools halfway through the school year. It's harder to make friends because the other students have already established relationships. You'll have to work a lot harder to get invited to a party (or acquire customers)

The third point above deals with knowledge. It's easier to get into an industry that is new, because you'll be starting at more or less the same level as everyone else. Take aerospace design as an example. If you want to get in on that industry now, it will be very tough. The companies that are already there have been building up their knowledge for decades; that's a serious barrier to entry. But what about clean-tech? It's easier to enter clean-tech because you'll be up against companies that are either new, or only a few years old. Therefore, the knowledge gap is smaller

The last point above deals with sales. Simply put, if you're going to do the work, why not have more people waiting to buy it? It takes the same amount of work to be a massage therapist in a downtown office, as it does to be a massage therapist in a rural area of the suburbs. The difference though, is that you'll have a lot more clients in the downtown office. Markets are the same. It's usually not much harder to create a product for a large market than it is to create for a small one. Go after the big markets, and you'll have a greater chance of succeeding

Please press Tweet if you enjoyed this!  Tweet

Prefer Facebook? Click to Like this!