It can fair to observe that many big, established organizations tend not to think or act in a very entrepreneurial way.

Of course, those of you who manage large organizations (or hold their stock in your portfolio) like Rand Robison are probably thinking, "Yes, and it's a good thing that executives don't react constantly entrepreneurs. "

Following all, managers of proven enterprises are accountable to their shareholders, customers and employees first and first to successfully maintain and operate the going concern--and only secondarily to develop it and improve on it.

Indeed, Hippocrates' famous dictum to physicians seems to apply equally well to big-company executives: "First, do no harm. inch

Ski with the joints bent

Those of you who enjoy downhill snowboarding know the particular one of the first principles of endurance is to take care of knees twisted and flexible along with your centre of gravity low. This kind of style permits one to modify to change - on the slope, in surface conditions or with obstacles or other snowboarders - and still achieve your goal of beautifully traversing the hill. Alternatively, skiing with locked legs, a rigid posture and a fixed gaze is a formula for tragedy.

It's too easy, when working in an proven organization, to produce a certain rigidity in how one approaches decision-making and daily operations. Usually, you can get away with it, standing upright, knees locked, eyes trained frontally,. For what reason? Because established businesses automatically develop standard operating methods, and oftentimes little changes day-to-day. The rigidity can creep up on you. Sameness and predictability are comforting, and it's human being nature to embrace and standardize behavior that been successful in the past.

By comparison, entrepreneurship is, metaphorically, a little bit like skiing moguls (big, scary, unpredictable bumps)... blindfolded. If you're an businessman, you have to utilize your joints bent. You have to stay loose. You know full well that things will change, probably drastically, and that you'll experience dramatic shocks; you just don't know just what those shocks will be, where they'll come from or when they'll occur.

Keeping loose and with a minimal center of gravity helps business managers absorb change and keep the business on its feet. Business owners have always operated this way as an concern of course. And this type of overall flexibility and flexibleness can be an essential advantage for corporate management as well, whether in accommodating change in existing markets or tackling start up business initiatives.

Meanwhile, successful entrepreneurship - or corporate venturing out and new-business-development - requires operating in a highly uncertain, ambiguous environment. It can a lttle bit like trying to solve an algebraic picture with seven variables and six unknowns. Technically, it can't be done, hence the "correct" answer is, "We can't do it. inch The equation can't be solved without taking brilliant guesses aiming out different combinations based upon inadequate information, approximations and instinct.

Yet the perfect is often the enemy of the great. Remember, in entrepreneurship: The very best decision is the perfect decision (which you'll never have sufficient information or a chance to divine). The next best decision is "close enough" and get moving - you can always adapt course as you go (i. e., ski with your knees bent). And the worst decision coming from all is to continue to study, or form a committee (which so often translates to the "safe no, inch and therefore doing nothing).

The entrepreneurial approach allows "close enough": Roll-up your sleeves and assist customers from the start. Obtain something in customers' hands, even if it is not completed. Experiment, , nor be worried to adjust, occasionally slip and get back up. Undertake it, try it, fix it... and repeat.

End up being happy with a "conditional yes. "

The propensity in big organizations is to seek budget endorsement for an entire multiyear project upfront. After all, nobody wants to release into building, say, a $275-million plant when they only have corporate money approved for the first $30 million for planning and site prep.

Believe small.

An executive in a tech startup, just lately hired away from a lot 500 company, sadly helped bring his big-company thinking with him. Inheriting management responsibility for a professional services procedure of about 60 people growing at over 50 percent annually, this individual saw a crying requirement for more coherent project management. His solution? Call in the seller who'd provided similar software and services to his last workplace, and get an offer. The result? A half-million-dollar expense where cloud- or PC-based project software and rigorous management communication would have sufficed nicely; even worse, the expensive "solution" never worked. The supervisor was fired and the system scrapped for a simpler approach.

Many times, we see established organizations looking to innovate and getting trapped in this big-company, go-big-or-go-home mentality. I observed one internal corporate venture of a multinational tech company spend millions on PAGE RANK - because "That's how we do things at XYZ Corp. " - before they'd even totally defined their product, value proposition, positioning and go-to-market strategy. Bizarre. Entrepreneurship, even if it's taking place under the organization umbrella, calls for small, inexpensive, rapid-turnaround experiments and tests. "Thinking small" doesn't imply that you don't have big aspirations for your new venture. (Indeed, I usually tend not to think of startup ventures as small businesses; we believe of them as global businesses that happen to be young. ) But by iteratively discovering what works and what doesn't, you needed be surprised how significantly you can get how little capital.

Strive to understand and mitigate risk.

Contrary to popular opinion, entrepreneurs and venture shareholders are certainly not risk-seeking nuts, the business equivalent of helmet-free bungee jumpers. In truth, the best ones are remarkably risk-averse, skilled at identifying and mitigating endeavor risk. Whether they take action intuitively or explicitly, A-list venture folks are constantly trying to wring risk - many people product risk or likelihood of a market, financial or management mother nature - out with their startups. There's a method to their madness that corporate startups need to apply.

Originally posted at