Absofrickinlutely!

What does it take

… for someone to take the entrepreneurial plunge and start a company, but more specifically, for that company to survive, grow and prosper? Let us move beyond the obvious requisites of idea/concept, product, customer development, drive, perseverance, balls, etc etc… Feel free to use google to research what it takes to be an “entrepreneur.” Let us also abstain from delving into anomalies and crazy good luck stories.

I assert that what it takes for such a thing to be realized time and again for a perpetual stream of entrepreneurs is a cohesive, supportive, easily discoverable ecosystem.

Said ecosystem does not fully exist in Chicago.

What we do have here is not cohesive, it’s not on its way to being supportive, and but it’s definitely not easily discoverable. Heck, as co-organizer of the Chicago Tech Meetup and founder of Chicago Tech Scene, it still took me 3-5 months of actively speaking to everyone I could get a moment with to find out that the Chicagoland Entrepreneurial Center or TechNexus even existed.

We have heard all the talk

…about the best and worst places to start a startup, and why. There are numerous articles and debates over the years about this topic. For example, NYC Vs. Silicon Valley, Starting up outside the Valley can be an advantage, How to create a local high tech hub etc. Everyone has their opinion about what it takes and what is missing. But really, I feel much of it is ultimately finger pointing.

I’ve, on my own, spent almost a year now talking to everyone I could get a hold of (Brandon Copple, Nik Rokop, Raman Chadha, Genevieve Thiers, Dan Ratner, Brian Fitzpatrick, Harper Reed, etc etc), and I have accumulated a laundry list of what people feel is wrong with what has and is going on in the Chicago startup/tech community, but that will be covered in a subsequent series of posts, and is not wholly relevant to the point here.

I think what best summarizes

…the true needs of a startup/tech hub can be stated as follows:

I think you only need two kinds of people to create a technology hub: rich people and nerds. They’re the limiting reagents in the reaction that produces startups… - Paul Graham

You know what, we have both! Can I get a hell yeah?

What’s stopping us

…is the absence of, or lack of exposure for, all the other stuff that fills in the gaps.

What we need in our ecosystem is:

1. Exposure for startups
   • Events/Demo Days/etc, i.e. Chicago Tech Meetup, Midventures25, TechCocktail, etc
   • Blog articles, i.e. May Report, Chicago Tech Scene, EnterpriseCity, etc
   • Journalism, i.e. Brandon Copple, Leena Rao, etc
2. Easy resource (re)discovery
   • Local Events, i.e. Chicago Tech Scene, Tech Venue, etc
   • Venues, i.e. Chicago Tech Scene, ITA Directory, etc
   • Co-Founders
   • Service providers, i.e. Chicago Tech Scene, ITA Directory, etc
   • Investors/angels, i.e. Chicago Tech Scene, Ord Companies, etc
3. Business Education
   • Business development, i.e. Mentor Mastermind, etc
   • Investor Pitch, i.e. Big Idea Forum, BNC Venture Capital Group, etc
4. Nuturing
   • Co-working, i.e. OfficePort Chicago, etc
   • Incubator, i.e. Sandbox Industries, Excelerate Labs, etc
   • Youth programs i.e. Tech Gyrls, etc
5. Collaboration
   • i.e. 50 For The Future

That’s it, seriously. It’s not that complicated. To top it off, half the stuff already exists!

We just need to

…work together!

Let’s for a moment consider the list of Chicago startups that Seth Kravitz and John Fairley have put together. That’s 70 companies at last count. That’s right, 70!!

What’s stopping these 70 companies from collectively saying “Hey, let’s all get together and take charge of the Chicago tech community.” I mean seriously? What’s stopping you?

What I’m striving to (help) create

…is a non-government, unbiased, grass roots organization that proactively works to develop and maintain this ecosystem. I refuse to believe that such a mythical assembly of genius and wealthy folks working for the greater good is impossible!

I propose there should be collective ownership of this organization by all participants, and that this “board of members” should appoint a single person to be the “acting executive” who should be responsible for daily operations, and held responsible/replaced if things are not up to standard. Hey wait, this sounds familiar.

What this collective would do

… is pretty straightforward:

1. Serve as a portal and create easy access to all existing resources
2. Help facilitate creation of necessary resources that are deemed lacking
3. Foster collaboration amongst existing endeavours

As a point of clarification, the organization should serve only to organize and facilitate, not “own” any of the resources. This ensures impartiality.

Please, someone

…step up and get these guys working together. I will continue the good fight as long as I can continue doing so, but there’s only so much an evangelist can do.

But, what’s in it

…for me? Isn’t that really the underlying question on every potential collaborator’s mind? I think this is what is holding many people back.  The lack of clarity on “benefit.”

Pay it forward, my friends. You will find success in helping others succeed. Trust me.

Let’s get it started.