too removed from the impact of change. Finally, our education system recognizes the need to produce a different graduate who can embrace change, but at this stage our efforts are running behind the rate of societal change. We are engaged in a continuous process of rebirth, meaning we need to educate new-age renaissance men and women — people who can master a wide range of changing circumstances.
“There are lots of implications from our changing world. First let’s consider the micro world of the individual. Globalization had brought millions of people into the world work force, increasing the supply of labour. At the same time technology, through robotics, mechanization, and artificial intelligence, has reduced the demand for labour. Together these trends are putting downward pressure on real wage rates. The rewards are accruing to capital at the expense of labour, helping create a small class of super-rich while the middle class is under siege, reverting back to historic norms, which is not good for the majority of us. We have a serious structural unemployment issue in the west for unskilled and semi-skilled labour and no governments are addressing it. Job stability is disappearing. There are barriers for young people trying to get their careers started, while older people are being forced out of the labour force at a time when they need to extend their careers. As survivors of the Depression my parents’ generation developed a thirst for stability, which they passed on down the line. We’ve reached an era where we have to trade in stability for agility. As the first fades the other becomes essential.
“For all of these reasons each of us has to become our own brand. There is no upside to sitting on the sidelines and following the crowd. Most people will change jobs several times in their career. To do this well and maintain some upward mobility we have to make good strategic decisions: take those jobs for the right reasons, develop the skills to create and manage your own career. These choices are the essence of being entrepreneurial. If you feel you can’t do this, try anyway and make yourself link up with people who can. Big business will not tackle the structural unemployment issue. Multi-nationals invest for profit maximization, but entrepreneurs tend to invest locally and will see opportunity there when people who are structurally unemployed are willing to work for less. We are a key part of the transition to a true global economy and we will create jobs when and where neither big government nor big business can.”
Sam was twenty minutes into his presentation but no one in the room appeared restless. His slides were effective. He had told me that pictures constituted more than 50 percent of the impact of a PowerPoint, but his approach of talking to the slides magnified the impact of both his words and the images. I hadn’t expected his insight to impact me quite this way.
“So let’s look at the big picture — the macro world of large organizations and big government. We had a revelation in 2008. We were all scared … scared enough to support bailing out revered institutions like GM and AIG. For God’s sakes, it was not so long before that GM had been the nineteenth biggest economy in the world. Only eighteen countries generated more economic activity than GM. They were living in an insulated world but those in the ivory towers could not hide. Decisions made to maximize short-term profits came back to haunt them. So they invented a convenient new term. Perhaps ‘Too Big to Fail’ really just means ‘Too Big!’ These behemoths we’ve created work to a ten-year plan in a world that is moving beyond them. Why, I bet you can name a dozen different jobs that didn’t exist ten years ago, most of them related to the Internet or senior health. Big companies can’t adapt fast enough. Right now they are relying on outsourcing and acquisition for flexibility. Corporate culture has to change. Instead of suppressing individualism managers now need to nurture and encourage it. Mavericks should be welcomed not shunned. There is a pressing need for disruptors, or ‘intrapreneurs,’ people willing to challenge the status quo, to bring entrepreneurial thinking into both large firms and government. This will not come easily to organizations that rely on systems and rigid structure as agents of control. But it will happen. It will come from the top down, and it will gain momentum from the new graduates coming out of college and university who have embraced the need for and the mindset of entrepreneurship. One can only hope.”
At this point there were several hands in the air begging to ask questions, so Jim Hammond interrupted to confirm there would be time for questions when Sam finished before indicating that Sam should continue. Sam was revved, seemingly oblivious to the interruption.
“Incidentally, the good news for individuals is that both outsourcing and acquisition create opportunities for entrepreneurs to either provide services or to build an innovative startup and sell it at a major premium. Overall, the net result of our dynamic world is that we now see an expanding spectrum of entrepreneurship. Traditionally, startups stem from opportunities like those I just mentioned, but increasingly we are seeing new and different forms of entrepreneurship arising out of necessity. I salute and support every type of these new entrepreneurs. You don’t have to be a superstar to be an entrepreneur. That’s just one more misconception we need to get past. The image of entrepreneurs that the public perceives today is much too centred on the tech world.
“There is a difference between innovation and entrepreneurship. They are far from one and the same, which confuses many. Some great innovations never make it to market. The iPad was a great innovation, and it has led to hundreds of thousands of applications designed by individuals to solve problems at many different levels. Some of these apps have turned into meaningful businesses. For every major tech innovation there will always be thousands of entrepreneurs out there solving real problems by applying that technology. The tech world is fast and furious — a constant race to get to market before anyone else, highlighted by terms like ‘accelerator,’ ‘incubator,’ and my personal favourite, ‘burn rate.’ I love that one. It tells potential investors when you will run out of money, not exactly highlighting your strengths, just prior to negotiating a terms sheet. I equate it to doing a bungee jump without securing the top end while shouting out ‘I’m going to hit the ground in thirty seconds,’ hoping that someone will be listening and care enough to grab the bungee cord and save you. Tech is not the real world, but it gets most of the attention and it creates venture capital expectations that make it harder for the rest of us to raise capital. I prefer terms like ‘bootstrapping’ and ‘the lean startup,’ which are far more applicable in the mainstream economy where living within your means and getting feedback from real customers is essential. Generating revenue maintains independence. Raising capital sustains bad habits, reduces a sense of urgency, and dilutes equity, which is probably worthwhile in a world where the race to market is a critical element. For the rest of us focusing on sales and the market is much more essential for survival and success.
“Going back to entrepreneurs of necessity as opposed to opportunity, there is a lot of pressure on various groups to find their own way. Need is the problem that must be solved. The solution still depends on recognizing whatever opportunity you might have. Young people are finding serious barriers to entering the work force. Older people are being hit with downsizing and pressure to leave the labour force before they can afford to retire. Mothers are finding that the rate of change makes it hard to get back into the mix. Necessity is the mother of invention and problems are the source of opportunity. So now we have ‘mompreneurs’ starting home businesses grounded in social networking. We have ‘solopreneurs’ working alone focused on self-determination with no desire to build a company or employ people. Let’s face it, for a modest investment with a laptop, mobile phone, and a website, a resourceful individual can provide meaningful services and/or products on a very competitive, low overhead basis while looking very professional in the process. We also have social entrepreneurs applying an entrepreneurial approach to the problems of society. We expect too much from our governments and look to them for solutions that aren’t forthcoming. Social entrepreneurs are result oriented problem solvers who are not seeking re-election — quite a different focus. All of these groups are solving problems and making things happen in the process.
“So welcome
