Is the age of a founder an important determinant to start-up success? This is a question that a lot of people have sought to answer in recent years. The proliferation of start-ups has brought about a new age of successful billion-dollar companies that 5-10 years prior were not in existence. However, with every new entry into the unicorn league, there are other start-ups that are unable to achieve lift-off, and as a result, fail. Success in the start-up universe is not a given.
Numerous attempts have been made to unravel the science behind start-up success. These led to various studies that sought to link founders/entrepreneurs’ personalities or traits to start-up success. In recent years, there has been growing interest to examine whether a relationship exists between the age of founders when they first got started and the success of their start-up.
Studies between age and start-up success
There is a commonly held view that most start-ups are created by founders that are as young as age 35 and below when they first established their start-ups. According to existing research, reasons for this can range from the high risk-taking behavior of many young people to the numerous famous stories about young successful founders such as Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, and Peter Thiel are just amongst the examples of those who were quite young when they founded their start-ups.
These reasons notwithstanding, a review of empirical studies has shown that there is no consensus on the connection between a founder’s age and the success of a start-up. Rather, existing research on the relationship between the age of founders and start-up success revealed findings that pose more questions than provide answers. An early study by Frick (2014), which sampled 35 Venture Capital-backed firms from Wall Street Journal’s Billion Dollar start-up cluster list, found out that the mean age of founders of successful start-ups was 31 years.
This finding is in contrast with the widely cited study by Azoulay, Jones, Kim, and Miranda (2020) which studied 1,700 fastest-growing start-ups in the USA that were in the top 0.1% in terms of employment growth and found that the average age of founders was higher at 45 years. The authors cited the prior working experience of the founders as being a key reason for why they were successful. A more recent study by Tamaseb (2021) revealed findings that further highlighted the ambiguity in this argument by concluding that, although the average age of founders of successful start-ups was around 34 years, most of them had a minimum of about 10 years of work experience which may have played a role.
Ultimately, the arguments made in these studies do not point to any consistency towards the existence of a direct relationship between the age of founders and the success of their start-ups. There are other factors to be considered too, such as the work experience of founders, the location of the start-ups, the type of industries targeted by most start-ups in an environment. These factors come into play when these arguments are being made but are not the key determinants of start-up success.
The process towards success
So, the question remains. What determines the success of start-ups? The answers to this question may lie in the concept of entrepreneurial actions. Looking at start-up success through this lens allows us to ask the question “What are successful start-up founders doing so well that others have not been able to emulate?”
A point to be made is the realization that the start-up activity is steeped in uncertainty; like any scientist will tell you, the process of scientific discovery happens after numerous rounds of experimentation, testing, and learning. Start-ups that have been able to achieve success have maintained this ethos of continuous experimentation, testing, and learning. This process ensures that they can properly identify problems that customers deem to be important, provide a solution that addresses such problems, study a market size that makes the solution economically viable, and create a culture that allows them to pivot in the event of poor problem-solution or solution-market fit.
We just may have been looking at the whole thing all wrong from the beginning, and not asking the right question. When looked at broadly, the age or other personality traits of founders when they establish their start-ups is irrelevant and does not determine start-up success. Rather, the focus should shift to finding how to create a blueprint of actions that founders can implement towards improving their chances of success.
Organizational processes should be designed in such a way that they effectively enable the strategic implementation of corporate objectives. Successful execution of strategy demands well execution of processes from all perspectives.
Processes that are properly understood and deeply rooted in the organizational realities will produce results that are reliable, easily controlled, and effectively managed. The documentation of processes allows for meticulous work to be conducted in relation to a company’s effort of architecting process frameworks and solutions.
Moreover, process documentation is intended to accurately describe the landscape of a process, the activities included within that landscape, the standardized workflow associated with a particular process, and its current state by comparison with a desired one. Process templates generally reflect on the degree of process documentation within an organization.
“Process templates are created to describe some aspect of a process, a process landscape, process flow, process solution or state. […] Process templates enable the capture and relation of process-centric objects within the same template or across multiple templates, each of which promotes its own view of a process.” (Von Rosing, Von Scheel, & Scheer, 2014, pp. 175-180)
With decomposing processes into KPIs, proper documentation that involves process description and the internal procedures should be in place. Meanwhile, process management tools such as process maps are consulted for a better perspective on the process itself.
The basic process management tools and templates that can be used for an effective process design are the following:
1. Process description: The process description is a template that supports the organization in understanding the functionality of each process in turn. It is vital that the process description concentrates on the purpose of the process as a constituent part of operational activity rather than the steps in the process.
The purpose of the process becomes a focal point around which processes are defined. This is especially important due to the fact that processes around which the company is currently organized may not be the most suitable for strategy. It is not excluded that the process description includes more than one purpose for a process in place.
Purposes can be main or secondary. The main purpose refers to the strategic purpose that the process serves for the organization. Secondary purposes are the ones that are directly tied to the main purpose of the process; however, they have a more functional or operational focus that generally derives from the process steps or activities.
Such a way of working with the process description not only helps to validate the linkage to organizational objectives but also leads to a more accurate distribution of KPIs. This will be measured by levels of organizational performance.
2. Process map:The process map is a process management tool “that shows input-output relationships among process dependent operations and departments and that documents in a step-by-step process sequence the activities that are required to convert inputs to outputs for the specific process.” (Hunt, 1996, pp. 8-10)
A process map provides an illustration of organizational processes as well as the interactions between the main process steps. A process map is especially important as it helps identify the main inputs stepping into the process and the main outputs stepping out of the process, while reflecting on the “as is” or” current state” of the process itself.
One of the most important roles of the process map is it helps identify bottlenecks in the process or waste that needs to be eliminated in order for the company to achieve process optimization.
3. Internal procedures:Internal procedures are a necessary tool in breaking down processes into KPIs and process optimization thereon forward. They also deliver a standardized template for capturing specific process information.
Internal procedures provide a more detailed view of how processes are conducted for the organization as well as the Service Level Agreements instituted as part of the interactions with other processes in the organization.
Internal procedures also provide a set of detailed steps on how to perform process tasks, which significantly aid process performance measurement through KPIs.
Those basic process management tools and templates provide a simple and cost-effective solution to breaking down processes into KPIs. If used effectively, they can deliver tremendous benefits, such as preservation of process knowledge, documentary evidence of process understanding, a framework for process performance measurement, and overall improvement of business processes over time.
Technology has made it possible to reach out to people, regardless of geographical distances. People today use their smartphones not only to simply work, shop, and play, but also to manage their personal life. This includes the way people conduct their interactions in building romantic and non-romantic relationships.
When the Pew Research Center polled Americans in 2005 about online dating, only 44% believed it was a good way to meet people, and the majority said it was a poor substitute for forming connections in the “real” world. Since then, the way people interact, meet, and show affection has evolved tremendously.In fact, when Pew Research Center conducted a follow-up surveyten years later, the proportion of people who thought internet dating was a decent method to meet others had increased to 59%.
The approach of online dating is similar to that of other social media platforms, but it also gives users the opportunity to meet others who share their interests, dislikes, and qualities. This makes online dating applications distinctiveas these criteria also increase the likelihood that a user will like the person they meet on a date. Due to this, online dating services saw a rising percentage of people who are forming lasting and meaningful relationships online.
Experiences in online dating
Online dating can be a hit-or-miss proposition. Some people have had great success with online dating, resulting in long-term partnerships. Others have tales of befuddlement and frustration.
According to a poll conducted in 2019 by Pew Research Center, three out of 10 Americans have ever used an online dating site or app, with 11% having done so in the previous year. Some claim these platforms have helped them create meaningful relationships.The study saw that 12% of participants have experienced being married or in a committed relationship with someone they met on a dating site or app.
While most online daters think their experience has been favorableoverall, they do point out some of the disadvantages of online dating. Americans who have used a dating site or app in the last year report feeling more frustrated (45%) than hopeful as a result of their previous encounter (28%). Out of those who are active users, 29% think that online dating has made them feel more hopeful, while 35% say it has made them feel pessimistic. Similarly, 32% believe online dating sites or apps have made them feel more confident, while 25% say they have made them feel uneasy.
Advantages of online dating
As with any other method of dating, meeting someone online has both advantages and disadvantages.Finkel et al. (2012), considers three major services that online dating sites offer to understand how online dating varies from traditional offline dating in essential ways. This also considered the circumstances in which online dating produces better romantic consequences than traditional offline dating:
Access: This refers to the users’ exposure and opportunity to identify potential romantic partners whom they would not otherwise meet. The use of an online dating program is convenient, and the effort of searching matches may be done from any location. It provides users with unprecedented levels of access to potential companions, which is especially beneficial for those who might otherwise lack such access.
Communication: Online dating applications allow users to use computer-mediated communication (CMC). This helps users interact and garner an initial sense of compatibility with specific potential partners through the dating site before meeting face-to-face. People are more susceptible to sincerely answer questions regarding their purpose of dating to find relationships that will fully correspond to their preferences.
Matching: Many websites feature an easy-to-use search engine that lets you find matches based on gender, age, hobbies, and aspirations. In an online dating survey, 72% of women said it was extremely essential that the profiles they looked at included information regarding the type of relationship the other party was seeking, compared to around half of males (53%). Women are also more likely to give more significance in finding partners that fit their criteria on religious beliefs (32% vs. 18%), occupation (27% vs. 8%), or height (27% vs. 8%) than men. Other gender disparities are more subtle, such as the relevance of users’ hobbies and interests, their racial or cultural heritage, or political involvement.
Disadvantages of online dating
While there are definite advantages to online dating, there are also some cautions to take. Users should be vigilant in creating relationships with people online as some may have malicious intent. Some of these disadvantagesinclude the following:
Idealization of the image: An idealistic image of your interlocutor with merits that aren’t inherent in them may appear. If the face-to-face meeting is postponed for a long time, it will be much more difficult to match the created image to a real person later. According to a Pew Research Center survey, women who have used a dating site or app are more likely to find it difficult to find individuals they were physically attracted to (36% vs. 21%) or who liked someone they would like to meet in person (36% vs. 21%). Male users, on the other hand, are more likely than female users to claim that finding people who shared their hobbies and interests was at least somewhat challenging (41% vs. 30%).
Harassment. While online dating apps or sites provide users with greater convenience in communicating and expressing themselves with potential matches, this is also their drawback – in terms of social communication morale. Based on a survey by Pew Research Center in 2019 of 4,860 U.S. adults, about 37% of online dating users say someone continued to contact them on a dating site or app after they said they were not interested. Out of those, 35% reported that someone sent them an unsolicited sexually explicit message or image, and 28% reported that the other party called them an abusive term after being rejected. These percentages are even greater among younger females; six out of 10 female users aged 18 to 34 said that someone contacted them after they stated they weren’t interested, and 57% say another user sent them unsolicited sexually explicit messages or photographs. At the same time, 44% of respondents stated they’ve been called offensive names on a dating site or app.
Short-term gratification: Offline encounters appear to be facilitated by location-based structural characteristics of online dating applications (Miles 2017), allowing for a quick fulfillment of users’ requirements (e.g. users seeking sexual encounters or one-night stands are able to find other users within a walking distance). In fact, according to the I-PACE (interaction of person-affect-cognition-execution) model (Brand et al. 2016), short-term gratification on dating apps can cultivate dysfunctional coping styles to deal with unpleasant emotions (e.g. frustration and anger). This also included dysfunctional affective and cognitive responses in relation to dating apps (e.g. craving, urge for mood regulation, and addiction).
Increased self-objectification:As some people use online dating platforms to fulfill their short-term sexual needs, this objectification of other users has become a concern that may also increase self-objectification (Koval et al. 2019). This has been linked to mental health issues such as clinical symptoms of depression and eating disorders in the past. As a result, more research is needed to look into users’ emotional experiences and how prolonged periods of use may affect wellbeing metrics and clinical mental health symptoms through self-objectification.
When it comes to online dating apps and the separation of dating from the rest of social life, there’s a bit of a causality dilemma. It’s likely that dating apps have built barriers between the search for potential spouses and typical work and community routines. However, it’s also plausible that dating apps are thriving at this point in history because people have stopped looking for potential companions while going about their daily lives at work and in their communities.
Do some managers avoid giving employee feedback because of employees’ reactions or are there any other reasons?
In a 2009 Gallup survey, more than 1,000 US-based employees were sought to qualify the impact of feedback on employees. The results show that managers who focus on the strengths of employees when giving feedback create a solid level of employee engagement.
Accordingly, a manager who gives little or no feedback is not able to engage 98% of the employees. Therefore, to make employees engaged in your future vision, they need to know that their contribution is valued and that they are helping the organization to reach its goals. On the other hand, when managers avoid giving feedback, they make employees feel ignored and unimportant.
Reactions to feedback
Sometimes managers feel uncomfortable providing feedback, especially when it is negative. They often worry that the employee receiving the feedback may react defensively, ignore the message behind the feedback, or blame the manager. Some managers are not skilled to constructively provide feedback, lack confidence, or fear confrontation. They may not have enough experience to give feedback or were never trained to do so.
An employee’s reaction depends on how feedback is presented, one’s readiness, and the ability to adapt to changes. Some employees are not always sure why they are receiving a particular feedback and what the managers want them to do.
An employee may become defensive when feedback sounds like criticism, fault-finding or disciplinary, especially when it is the first time the employee is hearing the information. When employees are confronted about their poor performance, the discussion may trigger feelings of self-doubt, mistrust, and insecurity. A more effective approach is to focus on the desired positive performance rather than highlighting shortcomings.
Feedback is stressful
When managers give feedback, employees are often confused about the manager’s purpose. Sometimes, feedback receivers don’t know how to react because they are not ready to change their behavior. In fact, managers don’t always understand the inability of the subordinate to change so they avoid giving feedback rather than understanding the change process.
In general, managers believe that giving feedback is stressful or difficult because they either don’t have the time to give feedback or they have too many subordinates to be evaluated. On the other hand, managers avoid demotivating employees or want to prevent conflicts. Additionally, managers sometimes believe that employees are responsible for their own development.
Remember that performance and evaluation data are not completely helpful when they are not communicated and interpreted properly between managers and employees. What managers can do to overcome the discomfort of giving feedback is to schedule a feedback routine so that employees will be prepared. Managers can also break the ice with detailed constructive feedback.
Feedback is a gift
Whether you are receiving it or giving it, feedback can be considered as a gift. Feedback should be presented properly and should have something unique and meaningful inside that beautiful package. Here are some things to keep in mind for managers when providing feedback for their employees.
First, employees need feedback to grow and develop. Have short, frequent, and regular one-on-one meetings to find out what is important to your subordinates. Discuss progress and barriers and build trusting relationships.
Finally, consider your employee’s success as your own success. Employees who receive feedback are more likely to be successful. It is true that employees are responsible for their own development, but managers can help their subordinates focus on meaningful opportunities based on their needs.
When formalizing and implementing a performance management system (PMS) based on key performance indicators (KPIs), there are multiple activities to be considered and many stakeholders to be engaged in the process. Therefore, you’ll need a project plan to make performance management an ongoing process within your organization.
What matters most is not to have an extra process in place, but to do it right by connecting strategy formulation with strategy implementation and KPI across the organizational levels. The way you will design and implement the PMS based on KPIs will play a huge role in the way it will be perceived by the employees. This is exactly why our approach is based on a combination of analysis and research, workshops and feedback activities.
Zooming out, the proposed project plan includes 14 stages:
5 Stages: System Design
5 Stages: System Activation
4 Stages: Project Management
Zooming in, all 14 stages include major sub activities that indicate how granular this puzzle can be. A real image of efforts and resources engaged.
What are the key elements to ensure that a KPI implementation project plan will be a success story?
The differentiator in creating successful conditions is represented by the employees’ trust in the project. Why? Because change brings fear, and fear must be managed in connection to the implementation of KPIs.
Fear of becoming replaceable or unnecessary
Fear of unrealistic (too high) targets
Fear of extra work
As what I wrote in a previous article, if fears exist, then managers should consider looking for a course, training, or coaching session on how to guide their employees in managing their fears. Another step is to have an organizational message with a system that reinforces the organizational culture and the real intentions and effects of such a project, reassuring everyone that they will not be swept away by it.
Could this project be considered for departmental level only?
The KPI implementation project plan can be applied to the departmental level only. It has advantages and disadvantages Since this KPIs system is not a stand alone, the departmental level will ultimately get connected to the strategic (superior) and individual level (lower).
One advantage of this approach is the system will be founded on a strong understanding of operations and specific processes and developed at departmental (mid) level. Another advantage is increased involvement of employees in developing the system. This can generate a high sense of commitment and engagement based on their contribution.
Meanwhile, the disadvantage of this approach is that starting with the lowest level may not ensure a strategic orientation, and it may be predominantly narrow instead, given the limited understanding of the overall organization’s mid- and long-term commitments.
If you would like to learn more about KPI measurement and KPI implementation, sign up for The KPI Institute’s Certified Professional and Practitioner training course.
3. Internal procedures: 
