Startup company

"Startup" redirects here. For other uses, see Startup (disambiguation).

A startup or start-up is a company or project undertaken by an entrepreneur to seek, develop, and validate a scalable business model.^[1][2] While entrepreneurship includes all new businesses including self-employment and businesses that do not intend to go public, startups are new businesses that intend to grow large beyond the solo-founder.^[3] During the beginning, startups face high uncertainty^[4] and have high rates of failure, but a minority of them do go on to become successful and influential.^[5]

Actions

Startups typically begin by a founder (solo-founder) or co-founders who have a way to solve a problem. The founder of a startup will do the market validation by problem interview, solution interview, and building a minimum viable product (MVP), i.e. a prototype, to develop and validate their business models. The startup process can take a long period of time; hence, sustaining effort is required. Over the long term, sustaining effort is especially challenging because of the high failure rates and uncertain outcomes.^[6] Having a business plan in place outlines what to do and how to plan and achieve an idea in the future. Typically, these plans outline the first three to five years of your business strategy.^[7]

Design principles

Models behind startups presenting as ventures are usually associated with design science. Design science uses design principles considered to be a coherent set of normative ideas and propositions to design and construct the company's backbone.^[8] For example, one of the initial design principles is affordable loss.^[9]

Heuristics and biases in startup actions

Because of the lack of information, high uncertainty, and the need to make decisions quickly, founders usually use many heuristics and exhibit biases in their leadership decisions.^[10]

Entrepreneurs often become overconfident about their startups and their influence on an outcome (case of the illusion of control). Below are some of the most critical decision biases of entrepreneurs to start up a new business.^[10]

1. Overconfidence: Perceive a subjective certainty higher than the objective accuracy.
2. Illusion of control: Overemphasize how much skills, instead of chance, improve performance.
3. The law of small numbers: Reach conclusions about a larger population using a limited sample.
4. Availability bias: Make judgments about the probability of events based on how easy it is to think of examples.
5. Escalation of commitment: Persist unduly with unsuccessful initiatives or courses of action.

Startups use several action principles to generate evidence as quickly as possible to reduce the downside effect of decision biases such as an escalation of commitment, overconfidence, and the illusion of control.

Mentoring

Many entrepreneurs seek feedback from mentors in creating their startups. Mentors guide founders and impart entrepreneurial skills and may increase the self-efficacy of nascent entrepreneurs.^[11] Mentoring offers direction for entrepreneurs to enhance their knowledge of how to sustain their assets relating to their status and identity and strengthen their real-time skills.^[12]

Principles

There are many principles in creating a startup. Some of the principles needed are listed below:

Lean startup

Lean startup is a clear set of principles to create and design startups under limited resources and tremendous uncertainty to build their ventures more flexibly and at a lower cost. It is based on the idea that entrepreneurs can make their implicit assumptions about how their venture works explicit and empirically testing it.^[13] The empirical test is to de/validate these assumptions and to get an engaged understanding of the business model of the new ventures, and in doing so, the new ventures are created iteratively in a build–measure–learn loop. Hence, lean startup is a set of principles for entrepreneurial learning and business model design. More precisely, it is a set of design principles aimed for iteratively experiential learning under uncertainty in an engaged empirical manner. Typically, a lean startup focuses on a few lean principles:

• find a problem worth solving, then define a solution
• engage early adopters for market validation
• continually test with smaller, faster iterations
• build a function, measure customer response, and verify/refute the idea
• evidence-based decisions on when to pivot by changing your plan's course
• maximize the efforts for speed, learning, and focus

Market validation

A key principle of startup is to validate the market need before providing a customer-centric product or service to avoid business ideas with weak demand.^[14] Market validation can be done in a number of ways, including surveys, cold calling, email responses, word of mouth or through sample research.^[15]

Design thinking

Design thinking is used to understand the customers' need in an engaged manner. Design thinking and customer development can be biased because they do not remove the risk of bias because the same biases manifest in the sources of information, the type of information sought, and the interpretation of that information.^[16] Encouraging people to consider the opposite of whatever decision they are about to make tends to reduce biases such as overconfidence, the hindsight bias, and anchoring (Larrick, 2004; Mussweiler, Strack, & Pfeiffer, 2000).

Decision-making under uncertainty

In startups, many decisions are made under uncertainty,^[4] and hence a key principle for startups is to be agile and flexible. Founders can embed options to design startups in flexible manners, so that the startups can change easily in future.

Uncertainty can vary within-person (I feel more uncertain this year than last year) and between-person (he feels more uncertain than she does). A study found that when entrepreneurs feel more uncertain, they identify more opportunities (within-person difference), but entrepreneurs who perceive more uncertainties than others do not identify more opportunities than others do (no between-person difference).^[4]

Partnering

Startups may form partnerships with other firms to enable their business model to operate.^[17] To become attractive to other businesses, startups need to align their internal features, such as management style and products with the market situation. In their 2013 study, Kask and Linton develop two ideal profiles, or also known as configurations or archetypes, for startups that are commercializing inventions. The inheritor profile calls for a management style that is not too entrepreneurial (more conservative) and the startup should have an incremental invention (building on a previous standard). This profile is set out to be more successful (in finding a business partner) in a market with a dominant design (a clear standard is applied in this market). In contrast to this, profile is the originator which has a management style that is highly entrepreneurial and in which a radical invention or a disruptive innovation (totally new standard) is being developed. This profile is set out to be more successful (in finding a business partner) in a market that does not have a dominant design (established standard). New startups should align themselves to one of the profiles when commercializing an invention to be able to find and be attractive to a business partner. By finding a business partner, a startup has greater chances of success.^[18]

Startups usually need many different partners to realize their business idea. The commercialization process is often a bumpy road with iterations and new insights during the process. Hasche and Linton (2018)^[19] argue that startups can learn from their relationships with other firms, and even if the relationship ends, the startup will have gained valuable knowledge about how it should move on going forward. When a relationship is failing for a startup it needs to make changes. Three types of changes can be identified according to Hasche and Linton (2018):^[19]

• Change of business concept for the start up
• Change of collaboration constellation (change several relationships)
• Change of characteristic of business relationship (with the partner, e.g. from a transactional relationship to more of a collaborative type of relationship)

Entrepreneurial learning

See also: Validated learning

Startups need to learn at a huge speed before running out of resources. Proactive actions (experimentation, searching, etc.) enhance a founder's learning to start a company.^[20] To learn effectively, founders often formulate falsifiable hypotheses, build a minimum viable product (MVP), and conduct A/B testing.

Business Model Design

With the key learnings from market validation, design thinking, and lean startup, founders can design a business model. However it's important not to dive into business models too early before there is sufficient learning on market validation. Paul Graham said: "What I tell founders is not to sweat the business model too much at first. The most important task at first is to build something people want. If you don't do that, it won't matter how clever your business model is."^[21]

Founders/entrepreneurs

Main article: Organizational founder

Founders or co-founders are people involved in the initial launch of startup companies. Three people are mainly required as co-founders to create a powerful team: the product person (e.g. an engineer), a marketing person (for market research, customer interaction, vision) and a finance or operation's person (to handle operations or raise funds).

The founder that is responsible for the overall strategy of the startup plays the role of founder-CEOs, much like CEOs in established firms. Startup studios provide an opportunity for founders and team members to grow along with the business they help to build. In order to create forward momentum, founders must ensure that they provide opportunities for their team members to grow and evolve within the company.^[22]

The language of securities regulation in the United States considers co-founders to be promoters under Regulation D. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission definition of promoter includes: (i) Any person who, acting alone or in conjunction with one or more other persons, directly or indirectly takes initiative in founding and organizing the business or enterprise of an issuer;^[23] However, not every promoter is a co-founder. In fact, there is no formal, legal definition of what makes somebody a co-founder.^[24][25][26] The right to call oneself a co-founder can be established through an agreement with one's fellow co-founders or with permission of the board of directors, investors, or shareholders of a startup company. When there is no definitive agreement (like shareholders' agreement), disputes about who the co-founders are, can arise.

Self-efficacy

Self-efficacy refers to the confidence an individual has to create a new business or startup. It has a strong relation with startup actions.^[27] Entrepreneurs' sense of self-efficacy can play a major role in how they approach goals, tasks, and challenges. Entrepreneurs with high self-efficacy—that is, those who believe they can perform well—are more likely to view difficult tasks as something to be mastered rather than something to be avoided.

Stress

Startups are pressure cookers. Don't let the casual dress and playful office environment fool you. New enterprises operate under do-or-die conditions. If you do not roll out a useable product or service in a timely fashion, the company will fail. Bye-bye paycheck, hello eviction.

Iman Jalali, chief of staff at ContextMedia^{[28][unreliable source?]}

Entrepreneurs often feel stressed. They have internal and external pressures. Internally, they need to meet deadlines to develop the prototypes and get the product or service ready for market. Externally they are expected to meet milestones of investors and other stakeholders to ensure continued resources from them on the startups.^[29] Coping with stress is critical to entrepreneurs because of the stressful nature of starting up a new firm under uncertainty. Coping with stress unsuccessfully could lead to emotional exhaustion, and the founders may close or exit the startups.

Emotional exhaustion

Sustaining effort is required as the startup process can take a long period of time, by one estimate, three years or longer (Carter et al., 1996; Reynolds & Miller, 1992). Sustaining effort over the long term is especially challenging because of the high failure rates and uncertain outcomes.^[29]

Founder identity and culture

Some startup founders have a more casual or offbeat attitude in their dress, office space and marketing, as compared to executives in established corporations. For example, startup founders in the 2010s wore hoodies, sneakers and other casual clothes to business meetings. Their offices may have recreational facilities in them, such as pool tables, ping pong tables, football tables and pinball machines, which are used to create a fun work environment, stimulate team development and team spirit, and encourage creativity. Some of the casual approaches, such as the use of "flat" organizational structures, in which regular employees can talk with the founders and chief executive officers informally, are done to promote efficiency in the workplace, which is needed to get their business off the ground.^[30]

In a 1960 study, Douglas McGregor stressed that punishments and rewards for uniformity in the workplace are not necessary because some people are born with the motivation to work without incentives.^[31] Some startups do not use a strict command and control hierarchical structure, with executives, managers, supervisors and employees. Some startups offer employees incentives such as stock options, to increase their "buy in" from the start up (as these employees stand to gain if the company does well). This removal of stressors allows the workers and researchers in the startup to focus less on the work environment around them, and more on achieving the task at hand, giving them the potential to achieve something great for both themselves and their company.

Failure

The failure rate of startup companies is very high. A 2014 article in Fortune estimated that 90% of startups ultimately fail. In a sample of 101 unsuccessful startups, companies reported that experiencing one or more of five common factors were the reason for failure; the lack of consumer interest in the product or service (42% of failures), funding or cash problems (29%), personnel or staffing problems (23%), competition from rival companies (19%) and problems with pricing of the product or service (18%).^[5] In cases of funding problems, it can leave employees without paychecks. Sometimes, these companies are purchased by other companies if they are deemed to be viable, but oftentimes, they leave employees with very little recourse to recoup lost income for worked time.^[32] More than one-third of founders believe that running out of money led to failure. Second to that, founders attribute their failure to a lack of financing or investor interest. These common mistakes and missteps that happen early in the startup journey can result in failure, but there are precautions entrepreneurs can take to help mitigate risk. For example, startup studios offer a buffer against many of the obstacles that solo entrepreneurs face, such as funding and insufficient team structure, making them a good resource for startups in their earliest phases.^[33] Another large study of 160.000 failed companies, identified key factors such as a dysfunctional founding team, a poor business plan, or just a flawed product-market fit as examples of the primary sources of failure.^[34]

The lack of human and financial resources or even dedicated patent attorneys in the early stages of a startup makes it difficult to compete with larger companies, and likewise increases the time and reduces the probability of patent applications.^[35]

Re-starters

Failed entrepreneurs, or restarters, who after some time restart in the same sector with more or less the same activities, have an increased chance ^[36] of becoming a better entrepreneur.^[37] However, some studies indicate that restarters are more heavily discouraged in Europe than in the US.^[38]

Training

See also: Entrepreneurship education

Many institutions and universities provide training on startups. In the context of universities, some of the courses are entrepreneurship courses that also deal with the topic of startups, while other courses are specifically dedicated to startups. Startup courses are found both in traditional economic or business disciplines as well as the side of information technology disciplines. As startups are often focused on software, they are also occasionally taught while focusing on software development alongside the business aspects of a startup.^[39]

Founders go through a lot to set up a startup. A startup requires patience and resilience, and training programs need to have both the business components and the psychological components.^[40] Entrepreneurship education is effective in increasing the entrepreneurial attitudes and perceived behavioral control,^[41] helping people and their businesses grow.^[40] Most of startup training falls into the mode of experiential learning (Cooper et al., 2004; Pittaway and Cope, 2007), in which students are exposed to a large extent to a real-life entrepreneurship context as new venture teams (Wu et al., 2009).^[13] An example of group-based experiential startup training is the Lean LaunchPad initiative that applies the principles of customer development (Blank and Dorf, 2012) and Lean Startup (Ries, 2011) to technology-based startup projects.

As startups are typically thought to operate under a notable lack of resources,^[42] have little or no operating history,^[43] and to consist of individuals with little practical experience,^[44][45] it is possible to simulate startups in a classroom setting with reasonable accuracy. In fact, it is not uncommon for students to actually participate in real startups during and after their studies. Similarly, university courses teaching software startup themes often have students found mock-up startups during the courses and encourage them to make them into real startups should they wish to do so.^[39] Such mock-up startups, however, may not be enough to accurately simulate real-world startup practice if the challenges typically faced by startups (e.g. lack of funding to keep operating) are not present in the course setting.^[46]

To date, much of the entrepreneurship training is yet to be personalized to match the participants and the training.

Ecosystem

 

A startup ecosystem can contribute to local entrepreneurial culture.

The size and maturity of the startup ecosystem is where a startup is launched and where it grows to have an effect on the volume and success of the startups. The startup ecosystem consists of the individuals (entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, angel investors, mentors, advisors); institutions and organizations (top research universities and institutes, business schools and entrepreneurship programs and centres operated by universities and colleges, non-profit entrepreneurship support organizations, government entrepreneurship programs and services, Chambers of commerce) business incubators and business accelerators and top-performing entrepreneurial firms and startups. A region with all of these elements is considered to be a "strong" startup ecosystem.

One of the most famous startup ecosystems is Silicon Valley in California, where major computer and internet firms and top universities such as Stanford University create a stimulating startup environment. Boston (where Massachusetts Institute of Technology is located) and Berlin, home of WISTA (a top research area), also have numerous creative industries, leading entrepreneurs and startup firms. Basically, attempts are being made worldwide, for example in Israel with its Silicon Wadi, in France with the Inovallée or in Italy in Trieste with the AREA Science Park, to network basic research, universities and technology parks in order to create a startup-friendly ecosystem.

Although there are startups created in all types of businesses, and all over the world, some locations and business sectors are particularly associated with startup companies. The internet bubble of the late 1990s was associated with huge numbers of internet startup companies, some selling the technology to provide internet access, others using the internet to provide services. Most of this startup activity was located in the most well-known startup ecosystem - Silicon Valley, an area of northern California renowned for the high level of startup company activity:

The spark that set off the explosive boom of "Silicon startups" in Stanford Industrial Park was a personal dispute in 1957 between employees of Shockley Semiconductor and the company's namesake and founder, Nobel laureate and co-inventor of the transistor William Shockley... (His employees) formed Fairchild Semiconductor immediately following their departure... After several years, Fairchild gained its footing, becoming a formidable presence in this sector. Its founders began leaving to start companies based on their own latest ideas and were followed on this path by their own former leading employees... The process gained momentum and what had once begun in a Stanford's research park became a veritable startup avalanche... Thus, over the course of just 20 years, a mere eight of Shockley's former employees gave forth 65 new enterprises, which then went on to do the same...^[47]

Startup advocates are also trying to build a community of tech startups in New York City with organizations like NY Tech Meet Up^[48] and Built in NYC.^[49] In the early 2000s, the patent assets of failed startup companies were being purchased by people known as patent trolls, who assert those patents against companies that might be infringing the technology covered by the patents.^[50]

Investing

 

Diagram of the typical financing cycle for a startup company

Startup investing is the action of making an investment in an early-stage company. Beyond founders' own contributions, some startups raise additional investment at some or several stages of their growth. Not all startups trying to raise investments are successful in their fundraising.^{[citation needed]}Venture Capital is a subdivision of Private Equity wherein external investors fund small-scale startups that have high growth potential in the long run. Venture capital is the money of invention that is invested into young businesses which hold no historic background. Usually, the business of venture capital is highly risky but one can at the same time expect high returns as well.^[51]

In the United States, the solicitation of funds became easier for startups as result of the JOBS Act.^{[52][53][54][55]} Prior to the advent of equity crowdfunding, a form of online investing that has been legalized in several nations, startups did not advertise themselves to the general public as investment opportunities until and unless they first obtained approval from regulators for an initial public offering (IPO) that typically involved a listing of the startup's securities on a stock exchange. Today, there are many alternative forms of IPO commonly employed by startups and startup promoters that do not include an exchange listing, so they may avoid certain regulatory compliance obligations, including mandatory periodic disclosures of financial information and factual discussion of business conditions by management that investors and potential investors routinely receive from registered public companies.^[56]

Over the last decade, Europe has developed a rapid start-up scene that has given birth to global players, including more than 70 unicorns, and has created more than two million jobs. Investment in European start-ups increased sixfold between 2010 and 2020, reaching approximately €40 billion.^[57][58] Europe does a poorer job of nurturing young companies because of a failure to support their development into industry leaders. Promising European start-ups then struggle to raise the necessary capital to expand and mature. They are forced to either relocate to the US's deep capital markets or sell themselves to larger rivals with more financial availability. As a result, start-ups in the United States can typically raise far more money—up to five times as much as in Europe.^[57][59]

Investors are generally most attracted to those new companies distinguished by their strong co-founding team, a balanced "risk/reward" profile (in which high risk due to the untested, disruptive innovations is balanced out by high potential returns) and "scalability" (the likelihood that a startup can expand its operations by serving more markets or more customers).^{[citation needed]} Attractive startups generally have lower "bootstrapping" (self-funding of startups by the founders) costs, higher risk, and higher potential return on investment. Successful startups are typically more scalable than an established business, in the sense that the startup has the potential to grow rapidly with a limited investment of capital, labor or land.^{[60][failed verification]} Timing has often been the single most important factor for biggest startup successes,^[61] while at the same time it's identified to be one of the hardest things to master by many serial entrepreneurs and investors.^[62]

Startups have several options for funding. Revenue-based financing lenders can help startup companies by providing non-dilutive growth capital in exchange for a percentage of monthly revenue.^[63] Venture capital firms and angel investors may help startup companies begin operations, exchanging seed money for an equity stake in the firm. Venture capitalists and angel investors provide financing to a range of startups (a portfolio), with the expectation that a very small number of the startups will become viable and make money. In practice though, many startups are initially funded by the founders themselves using "bootstrapping", in which loans or monetary gifts from friends and family are combined with savings and credit card debt to finance the venture. Factoring is another option, though it is not unique to startups. Other funding opportunities include various forms of crowdfunding, for example equity crowdfunding,^[64] in which the startup seeks funding from a large number of individuals, typically by pitching their idea on the Internet.

Startups can receive funding via more involved stakeholders, such as startup studios. Startup studios provide funding to support the business through a successful launch, but they also provide extensive operational support, such as HR, finance and accounting, marketing, and product development, to increase the probability of success and propel growth.^[65]

Startups are funded through preset rounds, depending on their funding requirement and the stage of growth of the company. Startup investing is generally divided into six stage, namely

1. Angel funding
2. Seed Funding
3. Pre-Series A
4. Series B
5. Series C,D
6. Series E, F and Beyond ^[66]

Necessity of funding

While some (would-be) entrepreneurs believe that they can't start a company without funding from VC, Angel, etc. that is not the case.^[67] In fact, many entrepreneurs have founded successful businesses for almost no capital, including the founders of MailChimp, Shopify, and ShutterStock.^[68]

Valuations

If a company's value is based on its technology, it is often equally important for the business owners to obtain intellectual property protection for their idea. The newsmagazine The Economist estimated that up to 75% of the value of US public companies is now based on their intellectual property (up from 40% in 1980).^[69] Often, 100% of a small startup company's value is based on its intellectual property. As such, it is important for technology-oriented startup companies to develop a sound strategy for protecting their intellectual capital as early as possible.^[70] Startup companies, particularly those associated with new technology, sometimes produce huge returns to their creators and investors—a recent example of such is Google, whose creators became billionaires through their stock ownership and options.

Investing rounds

When investing in a startup, there are different types of stages in which the investor can participate. The first round is called seed round. The seed round generally is when the startup is still in the very early phase of execution when their product is still in the prototype phase. There is likely no performance data or positive financials as of yet. Therefore, investors rely on strength of the idea and the team in place. At this level, family friends and angel investors will be the ones participating. At this stage the level of risk and payoff are at their greatest. The next round is called Series A. At this point the company already has traction and may be making revenue. In Series A rounds venture capital firms will be participating alongside angels or super angel investors. The next rounds are Series B, C, and D. These three rounds are the ones leading towards the Initial Public Offering (IPO). Venture capital firms and private equity firms will be participating.^[71] Series B: Companies are generating consistent revenue but must scale to meet growing demand. Series C & D: Companies with strong financial performance looking to expand to new markets, develop new products, make an acquisition, and/or preparing for IPO.

History of startup investing

After the Great Depression, which was blamed in part on a rise in speculative investments in unregulated small companies, startup investing was primarily a word of mouth activity reserved for the friends and family of a startup's co-founders, business angels, and Venture Capital funds. In the United States, this has been the case ever since the implementation of the Securities Act of 1933. Many nations implemented similar legislation to prohibit general solicitation and general advertising of unregistered securities, including shares offered by startup companies. In 2005, a new Accelerator investment model was introduced by Y Combinator that combined fixed terms investment model with fixed period intense bootcamp style training program, to streamline the seed/early-stage investment process with training to be more systematic.

Following Y Combinator, many accelerators with similar models have emerged around the world. The accelerator model has since become very common and widely spread and they are key organizations of any Startup ecosystem. Title II of the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (JOBS Act), first implemented on 23 September 2013, granted startups in and startup co-founders or promoters in US. the right to generally solicit and advertise publicly using any method of communication on the condition that only accredited investors are allowed to purchase the securities.^[72][73][74] However the regulations affecting equity crowdfunding in different countries vary a lot with different levels and models of freedom and restrictions. In many countries there are no limitations restricting general public from investing to startups, while there can still be other types of restrictions in place, like limiting the amount that companies can seek from investors. Due to positive development and growth of crowdfunding,^[75] many countries are actively updating their regulation in regards to crowdfunding.

Investing online

The first known investment-based crowdfunding platform for startups was launched in February 2010 by Grow VC,^[76] followed by the first US. based company ProFounder launching model for startups to raise investments directly on the site,^[77] but ProFounder later decided to shut down its business due regulatory reasons preventing them from continuing,^[78] having launched their model for US. markets prior to JOBS Act. With the positive progress of the JOBS Act for crowd investing in US., equity crowdfunding platforms like SeedInvest and CircleUp started to emerge in 2011 and platforms such as investiere, Companisto and Seedrs in Europe and OurCrowd in Israel. The idea of these platforms is to streamline the process and resolve the two main points that were taking place in the market. The first problem was for startups to be able to access capital and to decrease the amount of time that it takes to close a round of financing. The second problem was intended to increase the amount of deal flow for the investor and to also centralize the process.^[79][80]

Internal startups

Internal startups are a form of corporate entrepreneurship.^[81] Large or well-established companies often try to promote innovation by setting up "internal startups", new business divisions that operate at arm's length from the rest of the company. Examples include Bell Labs, a research unit within the Bell System and Target Corporation (which began as an internal startup of the Dayton's department store chain) and threedegrees, a product developed by an internal startup of Microsoft.^[82]

Unicorns

See also: List of unicorn startup companies

Some startups become big and they become unicorns, i.e. privately held startup companies valued at over US$1 billion. The term was coined in 2013 by venture capitalist Aileen Lee, choosing the mythical animal to represent the statistical rarity of such successful ventures. According to TechCrunch, there were 452 unicorns as of May 2019, and most of the unicorns are in the US, followed by China. The unicorns are concentrated in a few countries. The unicorn leaders are the U.S. with 196 companies, China with 165, India with 107^[83] and the U.K. with 16.^[84] The largest unicorns included Ant Financial, ByteDance, DiDi, Uber, Xiaomi, and Airbnb. When the value of a company is over US$10 billion, the company will be called as a Decacorn. When the company is valued over US$100 billion, Hectocorn will be used.

Critiques of the start-up mode

According to Nikos Smyrnaios, Silicon Valley's start-ups are emblematic of the post-Fordist enterprise,^[85] reflecting a move toward values of liberty, autonomy and authenticity, and away from the Fordist emphasis on solidarity, economic security and equality.

For some researchers, such as Antoine Gouritin, the start-up model, like many digital-related objects, is underpinned by a "solutionist" logic, as Evgeny Morozov describes it. Technological solutionism corresponds to the belief that thanks to digital tools such as those created by start-ups, simple and technical solutions can be found to all kinds of problems. Therefore, what is expected of start-ups is not that they address the root causes of problems, but that they find effective technical solutions quickly.^[86]

The organizational model of start-ups is also questioned by former employees. For example, Mathilde Ramadier, a former start-up employee, brings the debate to the fore in France with her book Bienvenue dans le nouveau monde. Comment j'ai survécu à la coolitude des start-ups [Welcome to the new world. How I survived start-up coolness] in 2017.^[87] Since then, awareness^{[clarification needed]} has been growing.^[88] The non-hierarchical organization of start-ups means that all employees bear equal responsibility for their running smoothly. They are based on voluntary commitment and internalized behavioral norms rather than formal hierarchical constraints.^[85] Employees, encouraged to meet targets, often exceed overtime limits. Professional and personal life often blend in this highly connected environment. Employees are expected, without discussion, to give of themselves without counting the cost, to be always reachable and available, without asking for compensation commensurate with their professional commitment (in terms of time and activities), and to place the general interest of the organization before their personal interest. Finally, the employment contracts of start-up employees are often precarious since the company itself is not completely stable.^[89]

Economist Scott A. Shane has used data on start-ups published in many countries to draw conclusions in terms of public policy. He is critical of public policy that encourages start-ups, pointing to evidence that these policies lead people to create marginal businesses that are more likely to fail, have little economic impact, and generate a very limited number of jobs.^[90]

See also

• Brand management
• Business incubator
• Business plan
• Deep tech
• Innovation
• Liquidity event
• Platform cooperative
• Small business
• Vesting § Ownership in startup companies
• Unicorn bubble

References

 

Wikiversity has learning resources about Start-up finance

1. Robehmed, Natalie (16 December 2013). "What Is A Startup?". Forbes. from the original on 3 January 2020. Retrieved 30 April 2016.
2. Riitta Katila, Eric L. Chen, and Henning Piezunka (7 June 2012). "All the right moves: How entrepreneurial firms compete effectively" (PDF). Strategic Entrepreneurship JNL. 6 (2): 116–132. doi:10.1002/sej.1130. (PDF) from the original on 19 March 2023. Retrieved 18 May 2017.
3. "The Differences between Entrepreneurs and Startup Founders". www.linkedin.com. from the original on 20 May 2020. Retrieved 30 May 2019.
4. Schmitt, A. (2018). "A Dynamic Model of Entrepreneurial Uncertainty and Business Opportunity Identification: Exploration as a Mediator and Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy as a Moderator". Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 42 (6): 835–859. doi:10.1177/1042258717721482. S2CID 148840401.
5. Erin Griffith (2014). Why startups fail, according to their founders 2021-02-17 at the Wayback Machine, Fortune.com, 25 September 2014; accessed 27 October 2017
6. Uy, Marilyn A.; Foo, Maw-Der; Ilies, Remus (1 May 2015). "Perceived progress variability and entrepreneurial effort intensity: The moderating role of venture goal commitment". Journal of Business Venturing. 30 (3): 375–389. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2014.02.001. hdl:10220/19076. ISSN 0883-9026. S2CID 145206425.
7. Kronenberger, Craig (2021-02-23). "How the Startup Studio Business Model Is Changing the Startup Economy as We Know It". Medium. from the original on 2021-04-28. Retrieved 2021-06-08.
8. van Burg, Elco; Romme, A. Georges L.; Gilsing, Victor A.; Reymen, Isabelle M. M. J. (March 2008). "Creating University Spin-Offs: A Science-Based Design Perspective". Journal of Product Innovation Management. 25 (2): 114–128. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2008.00291.x. hdl:1871/23732. ISSN 0737-6782. S2CID 19769095.
9. Sarasvathy, Saras D.; Dew, Nicholas; Read, Stuart; Wiltbank, Robert (1 March 2008). "Designing Organizations that Design Environments: Lessons from Entrepreneurial Expertise". Organization Studies. 29 (3): 331–350. doi:10.1177/0170840607088017. hdl:10945/41241. ISSN 0170-8406. S2CID 145726834.
10. Zhang, Stephen X.; Cueto, Javier (9 November 2015). "The Study of Bias in Entrepreneurship". Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 41 (3): 419–454. doi:10.1111/etap.12212. ISSN 1042-2587. S2CID 146617323. from the original on 17 November 2021. Retrieved 21 November 2020.
11. Ho, Moon-Ho Ringo; Uy, Marilyn A.; Kang, Bianca N. Y.; Chan, Kim-Yin (2018). "Impact of Entrepreneurship Training on Entrepreneurial Efficacy and Alertness among Adolescent Youth". Frontiers in Education. 3. doi:10.3389/feduc.2018.00013. hdl:10356/144934. ISSN 2504-284X.
12. Jaško, Ondrej; Marinković, Sanja (3 June 2016). Symposium proceedings - XV International symposium Symorg 2016: Reshaping ... University of Belgrade, Faculty of Organizational Sciences. p. 1462. ISBN 9788676803262.
13. Harms, Rainer (1 November 2015). "Self-regulated learning, team learning and project performance in entrepreneurship education: Learning in a lean startup environment". Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 100: 21–28. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2015.02.007. ISSN 0040-1625.
14. "5 STEPS TO VALIDATE YOUR BUSINESS IDEA". Harvard Business School online. 18 August 2020. from the original on 6 June 2021. Retrieved 6 June 2021.
15. "Homepage". www.startupindia.gov.in. from the original on 2022-03-01. Retrieved 2022-03-01.
16. York, Jonathan L.; Danes, Jeffrey E. (22 May 2014). "Customer Development, Innovation, and Decision-Making Biases in the Lean Startup". Journal of Small Business Strategy. 24 (2): 21–40. ISSN 2380-1751. from the original on 7 October 2018. Retrieved 7 October 2018.
17. Teece, David J. (2010). "Business Models, Business Strategy and Innovation". Long Range Planning. 43 (2–3): 172–194. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.003. S2CID 154362245.
18. Kask, Johan; Linton, Gabriel (2013). "Business mating: When start ups get it right". Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship. 26 (5): 511. doi:10.1080/08276331.2013.876765. S2CID 168158914. from the original on 2017-11-09. Retrieved 2017-11-01.
19. Hasche, Nina; Linton, Gabriel (December 2017). "The value of failed relationships for the development of a Medtech start up". Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship. 30 (1): 97–119. doi:10.1080/08276331.2017.1388953. ISSN 0827-6331. S2CID 168885012.
20. Castrogiovanni, Gary J. (1 December 1996). "Pre-Startup Planning and the Survival of New Small Businesses: Theoretical Linkages". Journal of Management. 22 (6): 801–822. doi:10.1177/014920639602200601. ISSN 0149-2063. S2CID 220594531.
21. "An interview with investor Paul Graham of Y Combinator". TechCrunch. from the original on 2 February 2019. Retrieved 1 October 2018.
22. Kronenberger, Craig (2021-04-15). "The Top 8 Qualities of a Startup Founder". Medium. from the original on 2021-05-14. Retrieved 2021-05-14.
23. Securities and Exchange Commission (12 September 2008), "Guide to Definitions of Terms Used in Form D", SEC.GOV, from the original on 22 February 2022, retrieved 1 July 2014
24. Lora Kolodny (30 April 2013). "The Other Credit Crisis: Naming Co-Founders". The Wall Street Journal. from the original on 14 July 2014. Retrieved 1 July 2014.
25. Katie Fehrenbacher (14 June 2009). . Giga Om. Archived from the original on 5 July 2014. Retrieved 1 July 2014.
26. "Matchmaking Checklist: Crafting the Perfect Co-Founder Relationship". www.2nd.vc. Retrieved 2023-12-23.
27. Stevenson, Regan M.; Ciuchta, Michael P.; Letwin, Chaim; Dinger, Jenni M.; Vancouver, Jeffrey B. (21 June 2018). "Out of control or right on the money? Funder self-efficacy and crowd bias in equity crowdfunding". Journal of Business Venturing. 34 (2): 348–367. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2018.05.006. ISSN 0883-9026. S2CID 169707110.
28. "Tech in Asia - Connecting Asia's startup ecosystem". www.techinasia.com. from the original on 2018-03-03. Retrieved 2018-03-02.
29. Uy, Marilyn A.; Foo, Maw-Der; Song, Zhaoli (1 September 2013). "Joint effects of prior start up experience and coping strategies on entrepreneurs' psychological well-being". Journal of Business Venturing. 28 (5): 583–597. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.04.003. hdl:10356/97999. ISSN 0883-9026.
30. "Benefits in a Flat Organizational Structure". smallbusiness.chron.com. from the original on 4 September 2019. Retrieved 30 May 2019.
31. Douglas McGregor. Theory X Theory Y employee motivation theory. Accel-team.com. Retrieved on 21 July 2013.
32. "Zirtual Crashed But Can Its Brand Still Fly?". Forbes. from the original on 6 June 2020. Retrieved 16 October 2015.
33. "Why Startups Fail | Lessons From 150 Founders". wilburlabs.com. Retrieved 2021-02-24.
34. "Why Startups Focus Too Much on Solutions". inc.com. from the original on 2022-04-21. Retrieved 2022-03-30.
35. E., Campbell, Patricia (2013-01-01). Coping with the America Invents Act: Patent Challenges for Startup Companies. DigitalCommons@UM Carey Law. OCLC 910815089.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
36. Gompers, Paul (July 2006). "Skill vs. Luck in Entrepreneurship and Venture Capital: Evidence from Serial Entrepreneurs". SSRN. doi:10.2139/ssrn.933932.
37. Alexandros Kakouris Proceedings of the 4th European Conference on Innovation 2010 p95 "In other words, failed entrepreneurs will set up a new business with more and better know-how. Especially if they choose to restart in the same sector with more or less the same activities, there is a big chance that the restarter becomes the better entrepreneur (Schror, 2006). Restarters in this study are defined as entrepreneurs, whose company went bankrupt, but who, after some time, have the courage to start a new company (i.e. 'pure' restarters)."
38. Adam Jolly The European Business Handbook 2003 0749439750 2003 p5 "Our interviews with entrepreneurial restarters underscore the fact that failure is still severely stigmatised in Europe. In marked contrast to the United States, there is no general public perception in Europe that failure is a necessary precondition for success."
39. Chanin, R., Sales, A., Pompermaier, L., and Prikladnicki, R. (2018). Startup software development education: a systematic mapping study. In proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE ’18), pp. 143-144.
40. Campos, Francisco; Frese, Michael; Goldstein, Markus; Iacovone, Leonardo; Johnson, Hillary C.; McKenzie, David; Mensmann, Mona (22 September 2017). "Teaching personal initiative beats traditional training in boosting small business in West Africa". Science. 357 (6357): 1287–1290. Bibcode:2017Sci...357.1287C. doi:10.1126/science.aan5329. hdl:10986/28386. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 28935805.
41. Rauch, Andreas; Hulsink, Willem (June 2015). "Putting Entrepreneurship Education Where the Intention to Act Lies: An Investigation Into the Impact of Entrepreneurship Education on Entrepreneurial Behavior". Academy of Management Learning & Education. 14 (2): 187–204. doi:10.5465/amle.2012.0293. ISSN 1537-260X. S2CID 145751737.
42. Paternoster, N., Giardino, C., Unterkalmsteiner, M., Gorschek, T., Abrahamsson, P. (2014). Software Development in Startup Companies: A Systematic Mapping Study. Information and Software Technology 56(10), 1200–1218.
43. Blank, S.: The Four Steps to the Epiphany: Successful Strategies for Products That Win. K&S Ranch, Incorporated (2013).
44. Sutton, S.M. (2000). "The role of process in software start-up". IEEE Software. 17 (4): 33–39. doi:10.1109/52.854066. ISSN 1937-4194.
45. Kon, F., Cukier, D., Melo, C., Hazzan, O., Yuklea, H. (2014). A panorama of the Israeli software startup ecosystem. Available at SSRN 2441157
46. Buffardi, K., Robb, C., Rahn, D. (2017) Tech startups: realistic software engineering projects with interdisciplinary collaboration. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges 32(4), 93–98.
47. A Legal Bridge Spanning 100 Years: From the Gold Mines of El Dorado to the 'Golden' Startups of Silicon Valley 2013-06-01 at the Wayback Machine by Gregory Gromov 2010.
48. "NY Tech Alliance". nytm.org. from the original on 2017-03-24. Retrieved 2016-06-09.
49. Majewski, Taylor. " NYC tech's 35 people to watch in 2016" 2016-06-16 at the Wayback Machine, builtinnyc, New York, 26 May 2016. Retrieved on 1 June 2016.
50. "The Myth of the Patent Troll: An Alternative View of the Function of Patent Dealers in an Idea Economy". SSRN 959945. Retrieved 2023-08-02.
51. Raza, M. Tanzeem; Natarajan, P. (January 2023). "Factors Driving Venture Capital Investments in India". Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies. 9 (1): 62–79. doi:10.1177/23939575221139944. ISSN 2393-9575. S2CID 256504532. from the original on 2023-04-18. Retrieved 2023-05-02.
52. "Startups, VCs Now Free To Advertise Their Fundraising Status". The Wall Street Journal. 23 September 2013. from the original on 7 June 2020. Retrieved 23 September 2013.
53. "All-comers join web party for a punt on best start ups". Financial Times. from the original on 21 August 2016. Retrieved 26 September 2013.
54. . Bloomberg Businessweek. 20 September 2013. Archived from the original on September 21, 2013. Retrieved 20 September 2013.
55. "The ban has lifted: Here's what these 6 companies think about general solicitation". Venturebeat. 23 September 2013. from the original on 7 June 2020. Retrieved 23 September 2013.
56. "Investor.gov". Securities and Exchange Commission. from the original on 31 May 2020. Retrieved 1 July 2014.
57. "ETCI venture capital fund to boost EU start-ups, plug funding gap". European Investment Bank. from the original on 2023-03-02. Retrieved 2023-03-02.
58. "Lessons from the best start-ups in Europe | McKinsey". www.mckinsey.com. from the original on 2023-03-02. Retrieved 2023-03-02.
59. "Hard choices: How Europe's fastest-growing start-ups become unicorns | McKinsey". www.mckinsey.com. from the original on 2023-03-02. Retrieved 2023-03-02.
60. Amit Ghosh (14 December 2014). "How To Choose The Best Business Structure To Choose For A Start up?". The Startup Journal. from the original on 2 June 2016. Retrieved 30 April 2016.
61. Bill Gross (June 2015). "Bill Gross: The single biggest reason why startups succeed - TED Talk - TED.com". from the original on 2015-06-26. Retrieved 2015-06-25.
62. "Timing your startup". from the original on 2015-06-26. Retrieved 2015-06-25.
63. Goodman, Michelle (18 March 2015). "4 Tips for Landing Revenue-Based Financing". Entrepreneur. from the original on 8 June 2020. Retrieved 8 February 2019.
64. Prentice, Claire (12 May 2010). "Cash-strapped entrepreneurs get creative". BBC News. from the original on 21 May 2010. Retrieved 25 May 2010.
65. Kronenberger, Craig (2021-02-23). "How the Startup Studio Business Model Is Changing the Startup Economy as We Know It". Medium. from the original on 2021-03-01. Retrieved 2021-02-25.
66. David, Dharish; Gopalan, Sasidaran; Ramachandran, Suma (2020), "The Startup Environment and Funding Activity in India", Investment in Startups and Small Business Financing, World Scientific Series in Finance, vol. 17, World Scientific, pp. 193–232, doi:10.1142/9789811235825_0007, ISBN 978-981-12-3581-8, S2CID 229544331, from the original on 2023-04-07, retrieved 2023-04-29
67. "Revisiting the myths about entrepreneurship and innovation - Vivek Wadhwa". Vivek Wadhwa. 30 August 2018. from the original on 8 June 2020. Retrieved 6 October 2018.
68. "Invisible unicorns: 35 big companies that started with little or no money". TechCrunch. July 2017. Retrieved 2020-10-27.
69. See generally A Market for Ideas, ECONOMIST, 22 October 2005, at 3, 3 (special insert)
70. Weinberg, Stuart (2008-08-12). "What Business Owners Should Know About Patenting". The Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Retrieved 2023-08-02.
71. "With the new JOBS Act a new era of investment banking?". Nasdaq. from the original on 4 October 2013. Retrieved 24 September 2013.
72. "Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act Spotlight". SEC.GOV. from the original on 27 May 2020. Retrieved 1 July 2014.
73. "Newly Legal: Buying Stock in Start Ups Via Crowdsourcing". ABC News. 24 September 2013. from the original on 9 June 2020. Retrieved 24 September 2013.
74. "Levine on Wall Street: Chrysler's Unwanted IPO". Bloomberg. 24 September 2013. from the original on 22 October 2013. Retrieved 24 September 2013.
75. . www.crowdsourcing.org. Archived from the original on 6 March 2016.
76. "Grow VC launches, aiming to become the Kiva for tech startups". TechCrunch. AOL. 15 February 2010. from the original on 20 February 2012. Retrieved 25 June 2017.
77. "Crowdsourced Fundraising Platform ProFounder Now Offers Equity-Based Investment Tools". TechCrunch. AOL. 3 May 2011. from the original on 2 April 2019. Retrieved 25 June 2017.
78. "Fundraising Platform For Startups ProFounder Shuts Its Doors". TechCrunch. AOL. 17 February 2012. from the original on 2 April 2019. Retrieved 25 June 2017.
79. "General Solicitation Ban Lifted Today - Three Things You Must Know About It". Forbes. from the original on 9 June 2020. Retrieved 23 September 2013.
80. "For broker/dealers, crowdfunding presents new opportunity". The Washington Post. from the original on 31 March 2013. Retrieved 28 March 2013.
81. Chen, Jianhong; Nadkarni, Sucheta (1 March 2017). "It's about Time! CEOs' Temporal Dispositions, Temporal Leadership, and Corporate Entrepreneurship". Administrative Science Quarterly. 62 (1): 31–66. doi:10.1177/0001839216663504. ISSN 0001-8392. S2CID 151696066.
82. "Hong Kong in Honduras", The Economist, 10 December 2011.
83. "Indian Unicorn Landscape - Startups, Growth, FDI, Investors". from the original on 2022-10-22. Retrieved 2022-10-14.
84. "The Crunchbase Unicorn Leaderboard is back, now with a record herd of 452 unicorns". TechCrunch. 29 May 2019. from the original on 30 September 2020. Retrieved 19 July 2020.
85. Smyrnaios, Nikos (2022-04-28). "La nouvelle bourgeoisie issue de la Silicon Valley". La Pensée. 409 (1): 31–42. doi:10.3917/lp.409.0031. ISSN 0031-4773. S2CID 248612428.
86. Gouritin, Antoine (2020). "Légitimité de la critique et critique de la légitimité entrepreneuriale". Savoir/Agir. 51 (1): 33. doi:10.3917/sava.051.0033. ISSN 1958-7856. S2CID 219024846.
87. Maugeri, Salvatore (2017-10-31). "Mathilde Ramadier, Bienvenue dans le nouveau monde. Comment j'ai survécu à la coolitude des startups, Premier Parallèle, 2017; Patrick Rozenblatt, Razzia sur le travail. Critique de l'invalorisation du travail au 21e". La Nouvelle Revue du Travail (11). doi:10.4000/nrt.3390. ISSN 2495-7593.
88. "Pour en savoir plus – bibliographie sélective", Le défi de changer les choses, Presses de l'Université du Québec, pp. 503–506, 2018-08-22, doi:10.2307/j.ctvq4bxrv.14, S2CID 240330338, retrieved 2023-04-20
89. Abou El Khair, Catherine (September 15, 2016). "Le côté obscur des start-up". Le Monde. from the original on April 20, 2023. Retrieved April 20, 2023.
90. Shane, Scott (2008). The illusions of entrepreneurship : the costly myths that entrepreneurs, investors, and policy makers live by. New Haven: Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-11331-0. OCLC 153598345. from the original on 2010-01-27. Retrieved 2023-04-20.