One of the minor quibbles on the road to Entrepreneurship Ecosystem Building is, well, the B-word.
When I first joined the Startup Champions Network (SCN), those words seemed to make sense. The group at the time was mostly focused on their Startup Communities, several of us had been part of the Startup America Partnership and Startup Weekend (Go Up Global!), and at least a few leaders had exited successful ventures themselves. It made sense.
And the “Champions” word worked, perhaps because it’s non-specific and we’d all been in positions where part of our brief was to advocate for startup entrepreneurs and their needs.
Over the course of my active time with the group I - and many of us - began to take issue with the “Startup” name. Not that startup communities are wrong, but at least in my case and region, the need was for a broader focus on all potential entrepreneurs; to go upstream and look at the obstacles to entrepreneurship in general, with startups a part of that portfolio. I think the push and pull of that within SCN and many communities continues to this day.
But I’m writing about the B-word.
Somewhere in here as we grappled with questions of audience and message, (I think) we adopted the word “Builder” as characterizing our role. There’s some real strength to the word. It’s hands on. Gets things done. The work is hard! And founders *build* companies. But I’ve been increasingly troubled by that choice.
As we seek to define and build (?) the field, I have to recognize that “Economic Development,” “Community Development,” and “Business Development” exist and some are even professions - and we can see parallels, useful practices, and ways of thinking in each. In software and industrial property development too. There may even be a federal agency with that in their name.
But what of the Builders?
Again, it’s a sort of muscular term, attractive to some of us. But while we know that most successful ventures need a team, we usually think of one or two people who ‘built’ the company. And I wonder if those of us who perform the often thankless servant leadership tasks feel a little jealous of these venture founders we work with; whose names might be synonymous with ‘their’ companies.
But that’s not really our role, is it? Sure, sometimes we might be - to mix metaphors a bit - the quarterback, leading our team downfield. But we’re just as often the analysts, looking at teams’ strengths and weaknesses, the coaches, calling in plays, or the coordinators, making sure we keep gaining ground. We are all these things.
So the ego thing - we decry “ego-system builders - may not be our best choice.
To my way of thinking, we may not have found the ideal word yet, but maybe developer is the way to go?
###
Speaking to the "ego" thing in business building is critically important. Thanks for bringing the word into the collective conversation. And a thought on an alternative label, albeit somewhat cliché, "servant-leader."