Morra Aarons-Mele in her HBR Blog The Dangerous Rise of “Entrepreneurship Porn” talks about the hype that the media creates around entrepreneurs, highlighting things that makes entrepreneurs look glamorous and those who work for others look dumb.
I agree, media needs to have a balanced view of the start-ups / entrepreneurs as well as big established organizations. While as an entrepreneur you are your own boss and you can take some liberties for the same, what happens in reality is that you are accountable for everything in your work place – be it a tap not working in your wash room or a client demanding an action on the day you planned to take your family out for dinner. There are enough stories that say that entrepreneurs are married to their enterprises and not their spouses, that is if they have one. The work life balance – precisely the bait that people in large organizations want to fall for can be totally absent in the early days of most companies.
Morra’s blog focuses on the impact that such media coverage has on big organizations. I would like to add that not many of us have the talent, perseverance and passion to put everything aside in life for the company. Many of us work for making a living, by doing things that others want us to do and lead a decent life as long as we do what is expected of us. We can succeed and thrive in a ‘work for someone else’ environment as well. Just like there are many examples of successful entrepreneurs, there are many examples of success stories within corporate walls. With a balanced view one can always make a more informed decision of where one wants to be.
Ultimately, it is also about what drives you from inside. Do you really have an idea or a concept that does not let you sleep at night? Do you want an easy life where you do not have to worry if your next month’s bills will be paid? Do you have appetite for risk? Can you take calculated risk by working in the space you love but may be working for someone else?
Sanjay Dalal applauds President Obama’s drive to make more fuel efficient cars and tells us about a program that would help American’s save $2 Trillion.
My question to Sanjay and if possible to Mr. Obama is : Do you think you can take care of the ecological problems and hence lot of financial problems by pumping more money into discovering new consumer objects while not knowing what to do with the ones that already exist?
Can you work on reducing consumption – by way of providing better public transport or encouraging car pools or encouraging local consumption, rather than encouraging consumption and then within it looking ways to reduce the usage of one particular item?
Can you invest in technology that helps us reduce the overall consumption and not just the consumption of depleting resources, because today it is one item that we know is depleting, tomorrow it will be another? Then, would you change the whole paradigm and create programs centered on those products. Think holistically and beyond just your career shelf life or your generation.
Strategy + Business in its latest paper coins the new term Generation C
for people born after 1990 and lived their adolescent years after 2000. Reason they call them C is because they would be :
- Content centric
- Community Oriented
- Clicking Always
They also predict that this generation by 2020 would form the 40% of the population in US, Europe and BRIC countries and about 10% on the rest of the world. I think this 10% needs some clarification though. They also indicate that they would be the group that marketers would run after.
My only fear after reading this detailed report is that this generation would loose the human touch altogether it seems. They would be living literally in a digital world, something like the characters of sci-fi movies. Will they miss the human touch or it is something that they would not know anything about?