“The only time for action is now. It’s never too late to do something.”
—Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
As a scientist entrepreneur, you may find yourself pondering the question, “When is the right time to start a company?” The answer, irrespective of the intricacies of your situation, is simple and quite straightforward: the time is now. Delay often can be the most costly mistake in the realm of science-driven business, especially when we talk about companies that operate in this ecosystem characterized by fierce competition and rapid evolution. If you do not begin your run toward the future with the utmost immediacy, you risk being outpaced by other keen minds working tirelessly on the same problem. It is a race against time, and the first to cross the finish line with a viable solution will claim the spoils.
For example, consider the macroeconomic environment as a factor, but not as a deterrent. Traditional wisdom often cautions against starting ventures during times of economic crisis. However, this view lacks the nuanced understanding of the potential opportunities that crises present.
Although the economy might seem as if it’s in a downturn, it could be an opportune moment to introduce an innovative product or service. It is during these periods that good management shines through, turning economic challenges into profitable outcomes. Crises shake up the status quo, creating room for new players to emerge and capture the market.
Crisis as a Catalyst
There exists a common misconception that economic downturns or crises present unfavorable conditions for starting a business. This line of thinking, however, is more of an oversimplification than an absolute truth. Crises invariably disrupt existing market structures, unsettle established players, and create voids in the supply and demand equilibrium. They challenge the status quo, and, in doing so, they often unveil previously unseen opportunities or untapped markets. For instance, a decline in a particular industry could lead to the availability of skilled scientific PhDs, lower costs of resources, or a reduction in competition.
Thus, during these periods, effective and agile management comes to the fore, where it can navigate through the uncertainties, seize these unique opportunities, and create a niche for the organization. An economic crisis can be transformed through the lens of an adept entrepreneur from a potential hazard into a tool for carving out unique market positions, innovating new products, or simply challenging and surpassing competition.
In other words, a crisis can be seen as a litmus test for entrepreneurial acumen, sorting out the merely competent from the truly innovative. The key lies not in avoiding crises, but in leveraging them as catalysts for growth and opportunity.
One of the chief apprehensions that potential entrepreneurs grapple with during periods of economic instability is the perceived scarcity of funding. It is certainly true that during such times, investors may become more cautious, and the overall availability of funds may appear to dwindle. However, this should not deter determined entrepreneurs. Why? Because good companies — those with robust models and competent leadership that address pressing problems — always have avenues for financing. Every time somebody tells me there’s no money in the market, I answer, “Not for the bad companies, certainly.”
Indeed, although the financial landscape may be more challenging, it does not become barren. The crucial factor lies in demonstrating the merit of your venture to potential investors. A company that solves a significant problem, that exhibits a sustainable business model, and is helmed by a capable and visionary leader, will always be viewed as an attractive investment proposition.
The Imperative of Authenticity
In many entrepreneurial arenas, the mantra “Fake it till you make it” is often thrown around, suggesting that portraying an image of success, even if premature, can lead to actual success. Although this approach might hold some water in certain sectors, when it comes to science-driven ventures, particularly biotech, it falls dangerously short. In these sectors, the stakes are extremely high. Often, it’s not merely about business success or failure, but about the health and lives of individuals.
Pretending to have a solution or claiming efficacy without solid evidence can lead to disastrous outcomes. This is why the mantra needs to be modified to “Make it till you break it.” In essence, strive to make your project a success, but be prepared to break it off if it becomes clear it isn’t viable.
One key strategy to adopt here is the concept of “killer experiments.” These are early-stage tests designed to challenge your project’s core assumptions. The purpose is not to prove that your project will succeed, but rather to determine as early as possible whether it will fail.
I have a very Darwinian bias here, I must admit. Sometimes keeping companies alive through private capital or grants is just delaying their end a few months down the line. The sooner a nonviable project is identified, the sooner resources can be redirected toward more promising ventures. In a sense, it’s a mechanism for minimizing wasted time, effort, and resources on doomed projects, thus allowing for a leaner, more efficient approach to innovation.
The field of biotechnology is unique and sobering in its purpose and implications. Although other industries also impact people’s lives in various ways, the immediacy and directness of biotech’s impact is of a different magnitude altogether. We are dealing with the predicament of life itself. It’s a field where our work could mean the difference between life and death, health and sickness, hope and despair for the individuals we aim to serve.
Working within the biotech industry imbues us with an extraordinary responsibility. The powerful technologies we develop, the drugs we create, and the therapies we pioneer can certainly do a world of good. They can alleviate suffering, extend lives, and bring hope where once there was none. However, these same technologies, if misused or misdirected, could also do a great deal of harm. This weighty responsibility must shape our approach to biotech entrepreneurship. There’s no room for cutting corners, for irresponsible risk-taking, or for misleading stakeholders about progress or potential. Every decision we make, every project we undertake, every experiment we run, is bound up with real-world stakes, with actual lives hanging in the balance.
The gravity of this predicament should not deter us from this important work, but, rather, inspire us to carry it out with the utmost integrity, diligence, and care. This is the essential ethic of the biotech entrepreneur.
Openness and Confidentiality: Talking About Your Idea
Entrepreneurship is an art that thrives on collaboration, feedback, and intellectual exchange. Therefore, the question of how open one initially should be about their business idea is an important consideration. A common instinct is to guard one’s idea zealously, keeping it confidential for fear of being scooped or copied. However, I argue that this mindset often is counterproductive and can limit the potential of the idea.
Openly discussing your business concept reaps many benefits. Primarily, it invites valuable feedback and critique, allowing you to refine and strengthen your narrative. Every conversation provides an opportunity to see your idea from a new perspective, uncover overlooked aspects, and preempt potential challenges. Moreover, it enables you to gauge the market’s response, test your idea’s viability, and build relationships with potential collaborators, investors, or customers.
This openness, however, should not come at the cost of ignoring the importance of execution. Ideas are a dime a dozen. It’s the execution of these ideas that distinguishes successful entrepreneurs from the rest.
If your idea is easily replicable just by mentioning it, it suggests that its value proposition may not be strong enough, it lacks adequate intellectual property protection, or that it does not carry a sufficient level of novelty or complexity. In essence, your idea should be such that it requires a specific team, with a specific set of skills and knowledge, to execute it effectively.
People Over Ideas: Investment Priorities
In the world of venture capital, there’s a simple truth that is often overlooked: we invest in people, not in ideas. The allure of a brilliant idea can be intoxicating. It’s often the first thing that captures the interest of an investor or stakeholder. However, an idea, no matter how novel or promising, remains intangible and dormant without the right people to breathe life into it. This is why seasoned investors often place a greater emphasis on the team behind an idea rather than the idea itself.
Execution is the process by which an idea is transformed from an abstract concept into a tangible product or service. It’s the grueling journey that involves overcoming hurdles, navigating uncertainties, making critical decisions, and persistently moving forward despite setbacks.
A stellar team, characterized by their skills, tenacity, adaptability, and drive, can execute effectively, pivot when necessary, and turn even a mediocre idea into a successful venture. Conversely, a weak team could falter in the face of challenges, causing even the most promising ideas to fail.
At the end of the day, an idea is just the starting point. It’s the team’s execution of that idea that navigates the path to success. Thus, when considering investment priorities, it’s essential to look beyond the spark of the idea and evaluate the people holding the torch — their experience, their strategy, their commitment, and their ability to execute. In the world of disruptive innovation, it’s the people who make the difference, and that’s where the smart money goes.
Excerpted from Fast Forward Thinking: 40 Rules for Entrepreneurs and Investors in Medical, Science, and Biotech by Luis Pareras, MD, PhD (American Association for Physician Leadership, 2024).