A Kauffman Foundation site

Policy Forum Blog

The Policy Dialogue on Entrepreneurship Informs and connects thought leaders looking to understand policies that help entrepreneurs start companies, create jobs and re-start the economy.
Sign up to receive our weekly update!

RSS Feed Link

Learning from Startup Ecosystems

Posted by: Jonathan Ortmans on October 03, 2011 Source: Policy Dialogue on Entrepreneurship

It is true that governments cannot be ignored by entrepreneurs—they set the rules and incentives. But it should not be surprising that vibrant entrepreneurs typically show, at best, nonchalance toward government. Most government agencies across the globe remain inefficient and cumbersome—especially when you compare even a well-funded government program to a collection of bootstrapping startups.

My favorite news last week was the announcement about Startup Foundation just launching in various places like Boston, Los Angeles, New York City, Des Moines, and Sao Paulo to grow ecosystems for startup creation and growth. With funding from the Kauffman Foundation, Startup Foundation co-founders in each city are mapping their local entrepreneurial ecosystems. They are doing this by identifying influential leaders, programs and gaps in community resources, and supporting local initiatives that drive the creation of more entrepreneurs, startups, and jobs. They will also raise funds for local entrepreneurship support initiatives, amplifying effective efforts.

With this initiative, as with Startup Weekend who created it, there lies a learning moment. I have commented a great deal in this blog about the need for policies that make room for “messy capitalism.” Innovative entrepreneurship is indeed an untidy business where entrepreneurs birth ventures through a series of iterative experiments. You can measure results, but you cannot predict the outcomes. The challenge for our governments is that government employees, on the other hand, must predict outcomes to secure support and manage “programs” on a linear basis—keeping them tidy, organized and accountable through a few wins within a defined political timeframe. Startup Foundation, unlike the typical convening and coordinating role government is encouraged to play, commences with mapping and research—and best of all, while looking at the ecosystem as a whole, will keep it local, viral and grassroots-powered.

It is no new lesson that entrepreneurship and innovation are not fields where top-down programming or economic recipes often work. In fact, such an approach if anything misguides policymakers. Entrepreneurs already “undertake” with initiative – they are of course risk-takers who respond better to incentives in building healthy economies. Policymakers have many of the policy tools in their hands around taxes, intellectual property rights and regulatory burdens. But, entrepreneurs can lead government in finding smarter ways to unlock innovative entrepreneurship on the ground in local communities and then set it free. Entrepreneurs can adapt quickly to changing circumstances that are not in the plan. They can identify opportunities and gaps, instead of duplicating efforts. A bottom-up initiative like this keeps “politics local” and most importantly efforts like this can help track the size and growth of the ecosystems—something government and entrepreneurs can agree upon as vital in efforts to find tomorrow’s employers and iconic brands.

2 Comments

RE: Learning from Startup Ecosystems
October 03, 2011 @ 02:55 PM
1 Life Fully Lived said...
This is spot on. We need to have US create new businesses and be the models for what can be. I would like to see you guys do (maybe you have already) a program where you show what others are doing as examples of small businesses that can be duplicated in our local area with out much capital outlay. You could show what they do, How they do it and step by step how it can be done. E-mail me at tim@1lifefullylived with ideas on this please.
RE: Learning from Startup Ecosystems
October 06, 2011 @ 12:36 AM
Norris Krueger said...
Jonathan - I'm in town for the ICSB public policy research conference at GWU - hope to drop by! In meantime, here are some thoughts re ecosystems (I've got a draft of a white paper on this, as we're wrestling with this out West. )

Cheers, Norris

Mapping the ecosystem - great idea but don't do it badly.

...and most communities do it badly.

At NCIIA, the StartupAmerica Partnership was really, really pushing this [even saying there was money to support mapping, but it needed to be done right] Now we have the Startup Weekend Foundation adding his voice.
In the NCIIA discussion we heard of a city of ~500K that had EIGHT formal ecosystem maps. The only thing in common? Guess who was at the center of each?. Yup, the people who drew that map. LOL but... it illustrates one of the key hazards. You need a fair broker to do the mapping.

Granted, even a crappy map may feel better than none, but don't miss the golden opportunity to do it right. It can be incredibly powerful. Healthy ecosystems are known for having:
1) a reasonably thorough, ACCURATE map
2) that is useful to current & future entrepreneurs
3) that members within the ecosystem are reasonably familair with
[it's not quite 'everyone a connector' but definitely avoid people being misinformed]

OK, so what do good maps look like?
First and foremost, tt really IS an ecosystem - if you don't understand all that means, then your map is going to fail you. And fail your entrepreneurs.
Big firms are in there (not just small); older firms too (not just newer ventures); for-profit & non-profit (even public & quasi-public)... and of course, ventures and service providers... and prospective/potential entrepreneurs. The entrepreneurial potential of a community is very clearly a function of its potential entrepreneurs (quantiy and quality).
To quote Theirry Volery, a healthy entrepreneurial ecosystem is a "framework for opportunity emergence" - take a look at Flora's entrepreneurial social infrastructure model or Krueger's cognitive infrastructure model [he says immodestly, LOL] Think social networks, neither hierarchy nor scattered.

What does THAT mean for mapping?
It means you really need a bottom-up, functionalist approach. It's relatively easy to develop a "counting coup" model where you create a laundry list of everyone possibly involved & what they claim to provide. At best, you are unable to discriminate between the more-effective & the less-effective, between the truly helpful & the selfish. [See Montana Business Connections for a solid approach - they add some serious vetting that's done diplomatically. It's obvious they have clever ways to both populate the matrix & keep it updated.]
Key Roles (not job titles): It also means that you need to focus on the roles, especially the key roles in the network. I particularly love Karen Stephenson's work [insert link] - she simply treats the map as a very complex set of social networks that are characterized by severla key roles. The two most important ones here are: 1) Gatekeepers/Resource-Controllers and 2) Connectors/Bridging Assets: Those who control access to key resources and those who connect people & ideas. If you can accurately map those, you are a looong way toward that great ecosystem map. And you don't have the problem of populating the map and keeping it current - both are arduous taks. (Karen S charges a ton, but her methodology can be adapted more, um, cost-effectively if you have mappers who 'get it' about ecosystems, are solid at researching such things and are already immersed in the ecosystem.
Remember the 8 maps from above? All 8 were done by Resource-Controllers, none by true Connectors. (Note that research shows that most of those who label themselves as Connectors do NOT show up in the analysis as connectors, they are far more likely to be Gatekeepers, as it is very hard for Connectors to monetize.)

Liaison-Animateur. Remember that term. These are the "Connectors" that Karen S talks about. As the name suggests, they're not just brokers but also agitators. Every healthy ecosystem has sparkplugs, "Energizer Bunnies", proactive connectors. Perhaps oddly, they are rarely those officially tasked with that role. Find them, support them.

So how do we do an ecosystem map & do it well?

1) Make the effort to analyze the 'players' on a functional basis. Of course, everyone wants the laundry list.. and everyone wants to be ON it (& in an important position) so....

2) Use what we know about what characterizes a healthy entrepreneurial ecosystem [Paul Reynolds' recent great work - insert link* : To be brief, it grows entrepreneurial human capital and entrepreneurial social capital. Who are the BEST at providing each component of those?** Don't worry about getting everyone, just make sure you get the very best at each critical task for growing a more entrepreneurial economy. That will let you do the "laundry list" approach more effectively. And it is easily integrated with the Stephenson-type map.

3) Another trick for mapping the ecosystem is to do a broadly-based survey of what inidividuals perceive as the #1 thing that would facilitate turning their intent into action. (Not a barrier but a facilitator... keep the language positive!)

4) An additional tool that is also invaluable to the process: Visioning. Use appreciate inquiry with elements of ABCD*** to figure out where the hell we want to be in 10 years. That will yield a reasonable "to do" list to get there - which almost always maps nicely onto the key components from the mapping.

then.....

Iterate. (And iterate. Don't let it get stale.)
Communicate. (To everyone. The wider range of people who 'get it', the better.)

But first... you gotta do the right things the right way (and for the right reasons...)

NK

* also Zoltan Acs' new GEDI; Dave Audretsch's underrated "Entrepreneurial Society" and various great studies out of SBA's Office of Advocacy.
** In a healthy ecosystem, people/entities contribute based on distinctive competence not core competence - that is, not what they are best at (or especially what they *want* to do) but where they add the most value. Where I contribute the most might be my 5th best thing to do & not really what I want but... I do it. Bureaucracies has serious trouble with this, LOL.
*** Asset-Based Community Development: Focus on what you've got, NOT what you don't got.

Add a Comment

Search PDE

Policy Dialogue on Entrepreneurship Get Your Weekly Digest

Register today to receive news and updates from Entrepreneurship.org.

Email Newsletter Signup