A Lost Generation of Entrepreneurs?
I’ve been worrying lately that we are suffering from a lost generation of entrepreneurs.
That was my first reaction when I read what Sequoia’s Doug Leone said a few weeks ago about innovation and age at a recent talk with MIT Sloan students visiting Silicon Valley, where Leone claimed that only people under the age of 30 are truly innovative. Over 30 folks can manage innovation, Leone observed, but you need to be under 30 to create it. Examples cited included Jack Dorsey, Twitter’s founder who was 30 at the time that he started the service.
Now you can argue whether this is right or whether it’s a hyperbolic statement for effect, but let’s put that aside for now. Here’s my worry: when I was under 30, I had the opportunity to be a part of a rocket ship start-up (Open Market), that promoted me into an executive team position of a public company in my 20s. The lessons and skills from that experience inspired me to delude myself into thinking I could be the founding president of another start-up, Upromise, when I was 30. At the time, when I looked around at my peers and friends, they were all doing the same thing at a similar age. Folks like Jeff Glass, who started m-Qube at around the same time and age, Scott Friend, who became president of ProfitLogic, Russ Wilcox at e-Ink and many more). These companies all eventually became substantial companies that each resulted in exits north of $100 million.
Now fast-forward to today. During the period of 2001-2009, there have been very few substantial start-ups built to allow that generation’s 20-somethings to learn and develop company-building skills. As a result, we have a lost generation of entrepreneurs. Not enough 20-somethings, or let’s even say under 35, have had the opportunity to see success at a young age and learn the important lessons of start-up leadership. I think once you’ve seen some success in your 20s, you are that much more likely to be a strong entrepreneurial advocate, mentor and serial starter in your 30s.
When my partners and I tried to develop a list of today’s under 35 entrepreneurs who had started companies and seen meaningful success with them, it was a depressingly short list. In addition to Twitter’s Jack Dorsey, Mark Zuckerburg is an obvious one, as are the YouTube founders, Chad Hurley and Steve Chen. Less well-known standouts include the Great Point Energy team (Andrew Pearlman and Avi Goldberg), who saw some success at Coatue (sold to AMD) which led them to starting what looks to be a fascinating and potentially game-changing clean energy company. And there’s Ric Fulop, who co-founded A123 in his late 20s, last year’s IPO darling.
So what do we do about it? I suppose one thing we can do is celebrate the heck out of the under 35 entrepreneurs we know who have seen success because we need their peers to know that it’s possible and encourage them to serve as role models to today’s students so that we don’t suffer from yet another lost generation in the years ahead. So who else should be on our list?
Jeff is a partner with Boston-based VC firm Flybridge Capital Partners. Read his past peHUB posts, or follow him on Twitter at www.twitter.com/bussgang.
Related posts:



Georges van Hoegaerden said on January 27, 2010
Jeff,
Of course it is absolute nonsense to surmise that only people below 30s can innovate,just look at Steve Jobs. I saw a similar naive comment from Sequoia a while ago.
The key here is that VC has become subprime, and that only attracts the young (and foolish). They are (with few exceptions) the kids that work on a cruise ship to gain international experience in life (or so they think).
Really smart people do not need to submit to subprime venture deals and go somewhere else to innovate. So, to fix that we need to lift VC out of subprime and attract the prime innovation that has the propensity to create trust in public markets. We need to create a VC model that can create more than 3% public value (of all dollars invested) for the last 10 years.
So, the problem is not with entrepreneurs or the suggested lack thereof, it is the flies VCs attract with with a subprime funding model. VCs are responsible for their own volatility, no one else.
Best,
Georges
Sean Murphy said on January 27, 2010
I think it’s the 1995-2000 period that’s probably an aberration. You left OpenMarket in 2000 and were able to raise 34 million to start Upromise without having a single customer, ultimately raising 118 million before Sallie Mae acquired Upromise in 2006. It may be a while before those days return. On the other hand if you look at YCombinator, Techstars and many similar early stage incubators, a lot of entrepreneurs in their 20′s are still able to find seed capital to get started. So I would be less concerned about a “lost generation.”
Vin Turk said on January 27, 2010
“2001-2009, there have been very few substantial start-ups built to allow that generation’s 20-somethings to learn and develop company-building skills.”
Im sorry, but where have you been? There have been tons of startups created within this period. And to think that only lessons are learned or skills are gained when a startup has a “successful” exit is ridiculous. Plenty of lessons are learned during a flame-out or failure.
You make it seem like one cannot learn valuable lessons to prepare themselves to run a company if they have not previously succeeded (if they are over 30).
Im 30 now…thanks for the motivation.
Dina Routhier said on January 27, 2010
We should support local, networking groups focused on the under 30 entreprenuers – like DARTBoston.
Mark Beadles said on January 27, 2010
Jeff,
“Not enough 20-somethings, or let’s even say under 35, have had the opportunity to see success at a young age and learn the important lessons of start-up leadership.”
Frankly, I think that seeing some failure at a young age is a much better way to learn important lessons of leadership.
Cheers,
mark
Mark Hoffman said on January 27, 2010
Your list is short because you seem to be focused solely on high-flying, high-profile VC funded operations. There are countless entrepreneurs out there that aren’t named Jack Dorsey that are making piles of money, employing thousands of people and doing great things. Success isn’t defined by how many rounds of VC money you take in. (I’d argue it’s a better measure of failure, but that’s another topic…)
Kevin McCarthy said on January 27, 2010
Jeff – The data don’t support your impression of entrepreneurship being the rightful domain of the young. I’ll give you (and link) to some food for thought from the Kauffman Foundation’s research on Entrepreneurship.
From the Exec Summary….”Contrary to popularly held assumptions, it turns out that over the past decade or so, the highest rate of entrepreneurial activity belongs to the 55-64 age group. The 20-34 age bracket, meanwhile, which we usually identify with swashbuckling and risk-taking youth (think Facebook and Google), has the lowest rate.”
http://www.kauffman.org/uploadedFiles/the-coming-entrepreneurial-boom.pdf
At first read, that appears to support your position that younger folks aren’t starting new ventures but you seem to think that this is a problem when in fact it may be that the natural order of things is what we’re seeing in the data…older, wiser businesspeople innovating and starting new ventures.
Anyway, Jeff, what we think doesn’t matter since entrepreneurs of any age never listen to people who tell them “No”, “you’ll never be able…”, or “your’re too old[young]”
KM
mark jackson said on January 30, 2010
the problem is that sequoia and all venture firms are not investing in innovation at all…no matter what the age… they all want to invest in rocket ships that don’t need their capital… truly innovative ideas are not invested in since they are higher risk
prove me wrong sequoia…i dare you
Jeff Bussgang said on January 31, 2010
Thanks to all for the comments. To be clear, I was not saying that only young people are innovative. Many folks over the age of 35 are very innovative – as Kevin McCarthy’s helpful link points out. Rather, I was pointing out that because there haven’t been many substantial companies (you are right, Vin Turk, there have been many companies started, but I wanted to focus on those 20-something entrepreneurs that had built up to be substantial ones – say more than 100 employees and/or $20 million in revenue) that have seen success during the last 10 years, the 20-something generation isn’t getting enough chances to run good-sized operations. That’s a loss, and therefore we need to collectively do more to help mentor them and provide them with the support they need to start and build a new wave of substantial, innovative companies. Keep the debate going!
Michael Downing said on February 2, 2010
Simply put, silly.
Allow me to jar people’s memory
Jim Clark….(Silicon Graphics, Netscape, WebMD)….
Marc Benioff…..(salesforce.com)
Russ Fradin……(Adify)
Reid Hoffman….(Linkedin)
Kevin O’connor….(DoubleClick)
The list goes on and on
Social Media Cleveland said on February 2, 2010
Well, I am 30 so I guess it’s all over…
But then I think about all of the affiliate marketers I know that are knocking down $x,xxx,xxx a year, consistently and running a one man show. To me, that is an Entrepreneur, signing both sides of your check. Forget VC, forget spotlight, forget glamour.
To me entrepreneurs are seeking:
1. A way to express themselves as individuals.
2. Freedom from routine.
If you can work for yourself and make an honest living then you are an Entrepreneur to me.
I also look at guys like Gary Vaynerchuk, Yanik Silver and Shoemoney who silently build empires…well maybe not silently.
Good post tho, I’ll share.
Michael said on February 3, 2010
Does Doug also say that white people don’t have rhythm and women can’t manage? What an ageist thing to say. I’m sure Doug will keep a low profile though, because someone over 30 can still punch him in the face because some dumb-ass investor just dropped a start-up based on his comments. What a tool, but then again, to be expected from a VC.