The Powers to Combine

Who would have thought that one of the best ways to start a company was at a conference?

Startup Weekend has proven its worth. With 381 completed events that have launched 4,272 enterprises, this young organization now receives millions in funding from Google, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Kauffman Foundation, and support from Startup America. Startup Weekend’s themes are also venturing further away from its comfort zone of starting mobile app companies, and into education and other sectors.

Startup Weekend is just one example. Other novel ways to combine people and ideas include DemoCamp, ChangeCamp, open-space techniques, Village Capital, Accelerators, and Seedhack. Underlying their success and popularity is new thinking in how diverse individuals combine to learn and create things (from companies to better public services and personal development). Many organizations are integrating these insights into programming with positive results. For example, last week’s Economist had an article on Harvard Business School's new experiential leadership curriculum, FIELD.

We’re in a fascinating period where the ways individuals combine has undergone a revolution from 1.0 (broadcasting) to 2.0 (engagement), just like the web. These new experiences are part conference, part classroom and part action leaning, wrapped together with facilitation, technology and purpose.

The forefront of these efforts is where people gather in spaces specifically designed and carefully curated to support innovation. Spaces like the Center for Social Innovation in Toronto, The Hub (especially in San Francisco) and the Box Office in Providence are leading the way.

It's interesting that while there remains excitement for online only communities, these events gain ascendance. It's recognition that learning is social. And when some of best ideas are at the intersection of fields, ideas and sectors, face to face is still needed to push limits and create magic.

Entrepreneurship, Act I

In some corners entrepreneurship has reached cult status.

A couple years ago I was attending a fancy gala, having a drink in the hotel bar with some colleagues, most of whom owned a business. Another friend came over wanting to introduce someone to us. She did so according to whether or not we were an entrepreneur.

“This is Chris, he’s an entrepreneur. This is Dave, he’s an entrepreneur…”

For her, the act of owning a business and being an entrepreneur were synonymous. And being an entrepreneur/business owner brought undeniable status. The fact that I had co-founded and led a social enterprise only got me halfway; I was introduced as a “sort-of entrepreneur.” Another friend who was finishing her PhD on participatory policy development was disparagingly introduced as an “activist,” clearly a lower human form than entrepreneur.

The economic slowdown, stagnant growth rates, and economic shifts has rightly moved the spotlight to entrepreneurs and startups. 100% of net job growth comes from new companies. (There’s plenty of important nuance to this statistic if you want it.)

I’m on the entrepreneurship bandwagon, cheerleading the need for more. But we don’t do ourselves any favors by limiting entrepreneurship to business owners and then claiming the entrepreneur is an advanced human form. We need a broader definition. Fortunately, research backs up this case.

The first person to coin the term entrepreneur, the French economist J. B. Say, didn't constrain his definition. Around 1800 he noted that “the entrepreneur shifts economic resources out of an area of lower and into an area of higher productivity and greater yield.” More recently, Duke University’s J. Gregory Dees defined an entrepreneur as someone who “mobilizes resources beyond their control to create value.” 

The act of entrepreneurship - creating value - isn't an indelible character trait. Moreover, with this definition every business person isn't an entrepreneur if resources are not shifted to higher output activities. (Did the new pizza place down the road reinvent takeout? Probably not.) This definition of entrepreneurship can be applied to all sectors of society. It focuses on specific actions and behaviors. And behavior is something that can be taught and practiced. 

Maybe then it's better to think of entrepreneurship as existing along a spectrum. On one end are what New York University Professor Paul Light calls the 24/7 type A entrepreneurs. In the middle are entrepreneurial teams, and on the other end are large and bureaucratic institutions. Entrepreneurial people are found alone, in teams or mired deep inside institutions. What they all have in common, in the words of Peter Drucker, is that they are “always searching for change, responding to it, and exploiting it as an opportunity.” 

Promoting all kinds of entrepreneurship (social, economic, civic, team, organizational) wherever it arises is our urgent priority. It will create jobs, fight poverty, and improve our quality of life. 

Lets keep the cult but open up membership.