For Startups, How Much Process Is Too Much? (for Harvard Business Review)

In the latest article for my series in HBR, I discuss the problem of how to figure out how much process startups should have. I often hear that what makes startups effective is their complete lack of process, but I don't think this is correct. Process is not the same as bureaucracy. In fact, I believe process is a form of discipline. When done right, it can help startups accelerate even as they scale.

You can view previous entries:

• Is Entrepreneurship a Management Science?
• Two Ways to Hold Entrepreneurs Accountable
• Beware of Vanity Metrics

I'm a little late on the cross-post, but hope you'll enjoy it nonetheless.

For Startups, How Much Process Is Too Much? - The Conversation - Harvard Business Review:

Still, startups develop some kind of process — whether it's disciplined, haphazard, bureaucratic or empowering — because building a great product depends on it.

They just need to balance process with innovation. Companies that insist on building a world-class infrastructure before shipping a product are doomed to 'achieve failure,' because they're starved of feedback for too long. I learned this lesson first hand in a previous company (read the sad story here). On the other hand, companies that take a 'just do it' attitude without any process at all are also taking a major gamble. High-profile startup Friendster had first-mover advantage in the social networking space, but created openings for competitors when it could not scale to meet demand.

Finding the right balance requires an understanding of the fundamental feedback loop that powers all startups.

Read the rest: For Startups, How Much Process Is Too Much? - The Conversation - Harvard Business Review