Why and The right way to construct a Group-first enterprise, not a VC-backed ‘unicorn’? | by Rudradeb Mitra | The Startup | Could, 2022


Let me get it straight. I’m fed up with the startup world. A world the place undue significance is given to elevating funding somewhat than constructing a sustainable enterprise. On the identical time I imagine, Enterprise Capital (VC) mannequin is essentially damaged, not good for the world, not good for majority of the startups, and we doesn’t want extra VC-backed ‘unicorns’. As an alternative we have to construct corporations pushed by empathy and look after the individuals and the world. Right here is my story of constructing such a startup.

I’ve been constructing a platform the place information science fans and specialists from all around the world collaborate to construct impactful AI options to resolve environmental, well being and social issues. By way of the platform, we ran over 165 initiatives, with 80 organizations from 42 international locations, and over 5000 information scientists from 103 international locations participated in these initiatives. We even have 65 native chapters around the globe. Since we began 3 years in the past, we grew 300–400% year-on-year. All of this we achieved by elevating virtually no funding (we solely took $35,000 funding within the very starting), and by spending Zero {dollars} on paid commercials.

I’m writing this text to share my ideas on why we didn’t elevate VC funding and the way one can construct a fast-growing international startup with out elevating cash from VCs.

There’s a norm amongst entrepreneurs that elevating cash = success. Founders begin speaking about funds raised from well-known VC funds as if they’re already tremendous profitable. But the reality is that the majority corporations elevate cash as a result of they aren’t financially sustainable, i.e. they burn far more money than they earn. The VC cash turns into vital for the survival of the corporate.

Nevertheless, the cash comes with baggage.

VCs are focused on making international behemoths which might be monopolies of their business — they need the corporate to kill their competitors, and return x10–20 of their preliminary funding. The best technique is: Pump some huge cash, burn money, get new customers (type of shopping for the customers), incentivize them to spend extra (even when they by no means deliberate to), kill all their competitions (purchase or bankrupt them), after which create a monopoly that customers are compelled to make use of. Such a mannequin isn’t good for the individuals, the economic system, or the world.

As well as, the VC mannequin isn’t even good for maybe 90% of the startups. It leads the startups to

  • Exploding on the unsustainable progress path by pumping extra money. Most startups that elevate cash haven’t found out earn cash and maintain the enterprise. The pumped-in VC cash doesn’t drive founders to construct a sustainable monetary mannequin both however as a substitute forces them to develop quick. In the long run, all of the VCs care is excessive progress that may assist elevate much more cash sooner or later.
  • Burning pointless cash on issues like fancy places of work, and hiring. This helps in making a ‘profitable’ picture however usually results in a downhill path as a result of cash is spent on issues that aren’t vital.
  • Stressing the group to develop at any price. This results in burnout and unimaginable stress for the founders. I’ve heard a number of circumstances of founders breaking down, or crying as a result of large stress from the buyers.
  • Not attaining modest success. The VCs mannequin do probably not care if this firm succeeds or fails, or if the staff hold their jobs or not. What they care about is that any one of many startups they invested amongst say 50 of their portfolio firm develop massively. If a startup doesn’t meet its large progress targets, they somewhat shut the corporate, even when the corporate can develop modestly and add a number of worth to its prospects and customers.

There are a lot of such examples, like Quick, a one-click checkout startup that raised $100M in 2021 at a valuation near $800M, whereas solely producing $600,000 in income through the interval. They employed 700 individuals, went on to burn money like something, and needed to shut inside a 12 months firing all the workers. Maybe if they’d not gone on this non-sensical progress path, Quick might have change into a useful firm for a lot of of its customers and prospects. And there are a lot of examples like WeWork, Robinhood, and so forth. Alternatively, corporations that did succeed via VC funds ended up changing into monopolies like Fb, Amazon, and so forth, with none competitors and thats isn’t good for the world both.

The query that each founder must ask: Is that this a mannequin I wish to observe?

In my case, the reply was easy No.

A group first enterprise is one which places group first. The group is the stakeholder — the group doesn’t should be solely prospects or customers however anybody who can profit from what the corporate is doing. What unites the group is the shared imaginative and prescient and mission of the enterprise. Everybody locally feels invested within the firm as if they’re shareholders. The members will not be purchased by giving reductions however are incentivized, each extrinsically and intrinsically, by assembly their expectations, aspirations, and wishes. In such a mannequin, the members are self-motivated to assist develop the corporate as a result of they really feel a part of it and wish to share with others. The expansion is totally natural via the assist of the group. The important thing to constructing such a startup is

  • Let the group communicate and the corporate hear. Construct a bottom-up surroundings the place key concepts come from the group and the corporate simply decides on executing the concepts. In our case, all the perfect concepts got here from the group. Whether or not it was opening the native chapters, the varsity, the profession companies, or the entrepreneurship program.
  • Present methods for the group to share and develop. Persons are extraordinarily motivated and glad while you do one thing for them, and add worth to them. They in flip need others to undergo the identical expertise and share their pleasure with the remainder of the world.
  • Consistently consider how are you going to add worth to the members of the group. This will even hold the founder in contact with its group as every part within the firm (gross sales, advertising and marketing, progress, product) is pushed by the group. The group after all additionally contains staff, customers, prospects, and shareholders. It’s attainable that every of the teams of the group could have a distinct incentive construction and expectations.
  • Construct a extra sustainable world. The corporate isn’t rising by pumping cash, however by always interested by what the group actually values. This can be sure that the corporate isn’t doing something unhealthy to the world because the group won’t assist/belief such corporations or initiatives. This explains why most individuals don’t belief firms.

The entire above creates a sustainable progress mannequin which is nice for the world in addition to for the individuals. The group members stay loyal to you whereas on the identical time, the corporate wants to stay loyal to the group and the world.

The query that each founder must ask.

What sort of world can we wish to construct and be a part of? Can we wish to construct a world with hyper-growth startups straining the pure sources pushed by consumerism? Or can we wish to construct a world the place the demand and provide are balanced, and the place we would not have to artificially create the demand? Can we wish to construct international monopolistic behemoths? or can we wish to construct sustainable progress corporations that are at all times in contact with their group, doing good for the group, always including worth for the group, and the world?

The selection is yours.

Nevertheless, I simply tried to point out that, for those who select to, there may be an alternate mannequin of progress to the one promoted by media and incubators/accelerators.

PS: I do perceive that there are specific sorts of startups,in sectors like deeptech, and pharma that wants a number of funding, a minimum of through the preliminary levels.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Share post:




More like this