@dkhare of Lightspeed India Venture Partners has an interesting article about the problems with the Indian startup ecosystem that makes it difficult to start and grow a startup in India, title The Silent Killers of Startup Growth.
While some of it is the usual whining about the usual problems, there are parts that I liked, especially section about lack of trust across the board in India, the problems it causes, and how to deal with it:
Lack of trust is endemic in India, whether you are driving through the streets (and perhaps Delhi is an extreme example of lack of trust!) or negotiating with corporate partners. Examples include:
- (some) people misrepresent themselves materially without any consequences (eg overselling).
- (some) founders focus on control at the expense of value creation.
- potential buyers have a hard time parting with payment details or paying for off-the-shelf software.
- (some) people negotiate all the corner cases in extreme detail, to the point where the law of diminishing returns kicks in pretty strongly.
- trust gap between regulators, law enforcement and business.
- trust gap between promoters (aka founders) and investors and potential misalignment on timelines and strategy.
- (some) government and companies focus on protecting themselves from the 1% of customers who are gaming the system at the expense of the 99% remaining customers.
Relationships, not contracts, govern deals. Many brands in India are created from execution reliability at scale rather than product differentiation. Brands in India are disproportionately more valuable as they represent a trusted provider of products or services – think about the enduring value of the Tata brand in multiple unrelated categories. As one consequence, I believe more startups should think about brand-building here in India relative to if they were in the US.
I think the takeaway message is important: in India, build relationships and reputation and the contracts will take care of themselves. Read the full article here
A validation of this same idea comes to me from an entirely different source. My father-in-law, Badri Baldawa, a self-made successful entrepreneur has this blog post on Trust vs Written Agreements which says pretty much the same thing.
@ShridharShukla points us to an interesting Chicago Tribune, with example of how large companies in Illinois, USA are connecting with local startups to tap the “innovation pipeline”, and at the same time improve the chances of the startup succeeding.
This news item should be especially interesting to the Pune tech and startup ecosystem because PuneConnect, a local initiative of Software Exporters Association of Pune (SEAP), PuneTech, Pune Open Coffee Club, and a bunch of other organizations has been trying to do something similar in Pune for the last 3 years.
The folks in Illinois have slightly different methods, which we should study and implement locally.
When Cheryl Harris sought to bring fresh ideas in analytics, data crunching and cyber security to top brass at Allstate Corp., she tapped a startup pipeline engineered to save Illinois companies time and money.
Harris and others at Allstate, who were accustomed to an eight-step procurement process that resulted in months of waiting, were skeptical they could learn most of what they needed in a 10-minute pitch from people they’d never met in the Illinois Corporate/Startup Challenge.
Equal parts shark tank pitch competition, Match.com and “American Idol,” the program solicits the interests of big companies, gathers suggestions for prospective matches from the portfolios of local incubators and venture firms, and allows the companies to select which will present their solutions to corporate brass.
By pairing scale-up companies with corporate mentors, however, the odds of success improve. At the same time, firms eager to stay abreast of fast-paced innovation outside corporate walls can engage with firms earlier, experts say.
Read the full article
I routinely get asked advice on good names for websites and/or startups, and after having seen a bunch of good and bad names, and many websites/startups having to spend time and money to change their name after a few years, here is my suggested algorithm:
- The name should be short (e.g. NOT WithoutGivingTheMovieAway.com)
- It should be easy to pronounce, and should not be prone to misspellings (e.g. NOT pluggd.in)
- You must own the .com domain name (e.g. NOT ShopSocial.ly)
- Don’t pick a name that is too foreign-sounding for English audiences (e.g. NOT dealtadka.com) – ignore this rule only if you are sure that your audience is limited to your home country.
(Note: all of the above examples are real websites started by real people who did not heed this advice and then a few years later had to go through a costly and confusing name change process. Click on the website to find out what they’re called now.)
That was what you should NOT do.
So what about what you SHOULD do?
- Write down a bunch of words that mean something to your domain/product
- Go to panabee.com and use that to generate a bunch of candidate names (for which the .com domain name is available)
- Get 5 of your friends/potential customers to suggest feedback on the candidate names.
- Pick the one you like most after having heard the feedback.
Please do NOT do step 3 before step 2. That’s just a waste of everybody’s time.