I’ve seen way too many people come out of the corporate world, decide to start a company, and be completely unprepared for what it takes. If they’ve never been on a small team starting from scratch, they’re often a fish out of water. They spend too much money too fast. Hire too many people. Don’t put in the time, don’t have the startup mentality, can’t make hard decisions, are buried by consensus thinking. They end up making mediocre products or

nothing at all.

Don’t let that be your story. If you want to start a company, if you want to start anything, to create something new, then you need to be ready to push for greatness. And greatness doesn’t come from nothing. You have to prepare. You have to know where you’re headed and remember where you came from. You have to make hard decisions and be the mission-driven “asshole.” [See also: Chapter 2.3: Assholes: Mission-driven “assholes.”]

So do the work. Know what you’re getting into. Trust your gut.

And when the time comes, you’ll be ready.

4.3. Marrying for Money

“Once you understand that, you can think through whether you have a business that investors will want to invest in. It’s not a given that your company is right for venture capital. Most big VCs are surprisingly risk averse—they won’t invest in startups that can’t prove they’re already on a clear growth trajectory. VCs have been trained by the internet age to expect numbers before they invest: growth rates, sign-up rates, click-through rates, unsubscribe rates, run rates, all the rates. And VCs have bosses to report to—their LPs, the people and organizations who give them money. They need to show that they’re making wise, highly profitable investments with the right management teams.

Our Stanford colleagues Perry Klebahn and Jeremy Utley made the “add nothing unnecessary” philosophy a cornerstone of their ten-week LaunchPad class. As we said in chapter 3, more than a hundred companies have been founded by LaunchPad students since 2010, and more than 50 percent are still alive in some form. Perry says each founding team is taught to experiment with one or a few narrow prototypes at a time and to assume they won’t be able to predict which offerings customers will want. That means most teams will need to keep abandoning and changing offerings before creating an offering that customers want and will pay for—and will generate enough revenue over the long haul to build a company. As a result, Perry and Jeremy teach students not to take or to delay, many steps that other entrepreneurial classes and investors preach as essential for starting a company. For example, many start-up experts recommend writing a detailed business plan to help founders flesh out and explain their product or service, financial model, target market, and backgrounds. Perry and Jeremy do teach students to keep iterating a three-to-five-minute pitch, because potential investors, employees, and customers will want to know what your company does. Perry and Jeremy also coach strategic inaction, because they believe that writing a detailed business plan is useless or worse. That’s because the company’s offering (and target customers) will almost certainly keep changing. Founders who work hard on writing a perfect plan, Perry and Jeremy argue, waste time that is better spent prototyping, iterating, and learning. And—since labor leads to love—all that effort can cause founders to become irrationally attached to bad early ideas. Perry and Jeremy aren’t alone in their dim view of business plans. A study of seven hundred start-ups led by David Kirsch of the University of Maryland found no relationship between the quality of business plans and whether start-ups received venture-capital funding. Carl Schramm, economist and author of Burn the Business Plan, argues that Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft never had business plans, and “empirically, it appears as if you don’t need a business plan.” In short, before you heap some burden on people and eventually figure out that it wastes their time (or worse), slow down and ask, “Suppose we did nothing?

My Harvard colleague Thomas “Tom” Eisenmann, an entrepreneurship expert, finds that many start-up failures are caused by the skipping of basic homework. For example, Triangulate, an online dating start-up, rushed to launch fully functional offerings that didn’t fit any market needs. Eager to launch fast, founders skipped the research— customer interviews to probe for unmet needs. Giving short shrift to that crucial preparation, the company paid the price. Tom attributes this common failure, in part, to “the ‘fail fast’ mantra,” which overemphasizes action, shortchanging preparation. Moreover, while this might seem self-evident, once you’ve done the homework, you must heed what it’s telling you.

And because they’re ready, their confidence doesn’t crack. The venture capitalist Josh Wolfe likes to say, “Failure comes from a failure to imagine failure.”

The bottom line: people who think about what is likely to go wrong and determine the actions they can take are more likely to succeed when things don’t go according to plan.

A smart way to assess your options is by using the following principle.

The Second-Level Thinking Principle: Ask yourself, “And then what?