Touch of Madness
Thanks to Greg Galant over at Venture Voice, I just read an interesting entrepreneurship-related article in The Economist titled Searching for the Invisible Man: Economics Rediscovers the Entrepreneur . The point of the article, I believe, is to suggest that from a macro economics perspective, economic theory has very little to say in terms of the size, scope, and value of the contributions entrepreneurs make in terms of economic implications on GDP. Huh? Are you kidding me?
Since I’m such a firm believer in the notion that everyone who starts a company is an entrepreneur, I fail to see why it’s so difficult for economists–or anyone for that matter–to benchmark our economic contributions. Every single Fortune 500 company was started by an entrepreneur (except of course those that were spun off by another company). Microsoft, Cargill, Wal-Mart, Kohler, Nike, Home Depot, Enterprise Rent-A-Car, Johnson & Johnson, along with most other private and publicly-held companies were all started by somebody, weren’t they? Indeed; they were all started by an entrepreneur–someone who saw a revolutionary gap in a market and had determination and guts to risk everything in order to realize a dream.
So, for me at least, I think economists and The Economist magazine need to get out of the ivory tower and take a look at what’s happening here on the ground. Entrepreneurs are almost everywhere you look, except of course in most well established companies.
You see, the real point of Gallant’s post was to point out–in his own words–the “… distinction in innovation between incremental improvements (making a slightly better version of what’s already out there) and “discontinuous breakthroughs”… such as the incandescent lamp, alternating electric current, or the jet engine, and how entrepreneurs are more adept at doing the latter.
As Galant so astutely notes, simplicity defies established companies; entrepreneurs are irrational; and, entrepreneurs are more likely to develop breakthrough innovations that are disruptive to traditional business models. He also writes:
Why would a profitable corporation want to make a disruptive breakthrough? And if they did make such a discovery, fear would likely keep them from bringing it to market. In fact, Xerox PARC made many breakthroughs such as the mouse and advanced graphical user interfaces. It didn’t have an incentive to cannibalize its dominant paper copy business, so it didn’t put much effort into spreading those innovations. Steve Jobs had nothing to lose from building products on those innovations (except for the long-term health of one of his investors, Xerox, but that didn’t matter to him), and ultimately computers progressed to the point that fewer paper copies were needed.
My point exactly. These days, it seems like so much of what drives corporate America (as opposed to entrepreneurial America) is fear… fear of operating outside of organizational norms or of pissing off someone you’ve never even met who works up on the top floor of corporate headquarters. Everyone’s so afraid of losing their job that just they play it safe. ‘Don’t Rock The Boat‘ is the mantra played in corporate hallways, when in reality, rockin’ the boat is exactly how successful companies got to be where they are in the first place.
So, what does all of this have to do with my company and me? Well, if I’m still here in five or ten years running Doba, I’d hope that I would be the type of CEO who fosters an entrepreneurial spirit among everyone roaming our hallways. Rock the boat, I say. Innovate, get disruptive, and bring a touch of madness to the workplace each and every day. Without it, Doba will surely fail to meet its customer’s needs.
Go ahead… don’t worry about pissing me off!
Popularity: 4% [?]
Subscribe by [RSS] or [Email] to enjoy regular updates from my blog.
-
http://anavidesign.com/ Wade Preston Shearer
-
http://anavidesign.com Wade Preston Shearer
-
http://www.split-bamboo.com/ David
-
http://www.split-bamboo.com David
-
http://jeremyhanks.com/ Jeremy
-
http://jeremyhanks.com Jeremy