创业圣地之所以存在:密度、文化与意外邂逅
Paul Graham 在这篇 2011 年的经典文章中,用“毒药与解药”的隐喻解析了创业生态的本质。他认为初创公司天然倾向于失败(毒药),而硅谷等创业中心之所以成功,不是因为没有毒药,而是提供了两种解药:一是让创业成为一件酷事的社会环境,二是与关键帮助者的偶然相遇。这两种力量的根源都是创业者的密度:足够多的人才能催生必需的意外邂逅,并为不同类型公司提供所需的不同天赋;当人数聚集到临界点,社会规范会被重塑,氛围从怀疑转为鼓励。Graham 还指出,Y Combinator 在角色上是“谷中之谷”,人为放大这种密度与互助意愿。对任何想理解早期创业生态的工程师、投资者、地区政策制定者,这篇文章提供了简洁、可验证的洞察。
If you look at a list of US cities sorted by population, the number of successful startups per capita varies by orders of magnitude. Somehow it's as if most places were sprayed with startupicide.
I wondered about this for years. I could see the average town was like a roach motel for startup ambitions: smart, ambitious people went in, but no startups came out. But I was never able to figure out exactly what happened inside the motel—exactly what was killing all the potential startups.
如果你翻看按人口排序的美国城市列表,会发现人均成功创业数量呈数量级差异。不知为何,大多数地方就像被喷洒了创业灭杀剂。
多年来我对此百思不解。我能看到普通城镇就像创业野心的蟑螂旅馆:聪明有抱负的人进去了,却没有初创公司走出来。但我始终无法弄清楚旅馆内部究竟发生了什么——到底是什么扼杀了所有潜在的创业机会。
A couple weeks ago I finally figured it out. I was framing the question wrong. The problem is not that most towns kill startups. It's that death is the default for startups, and most towns don't save them. Instead of thinking of most places as being sprayed with startupicide, it's more accurate to think of startups as all being poisoned, and a few places being sprayed with the antidote.
Startups in other places are just doing what startups naturally do: fail. The real question is, what's saving startups in places like Silicon Valley?
几周前我终于想通了。我一直问错了问题。问题不在于大多数城镇扼杀了创业公司,而在于死亡是创业公司的默认状态,大多数城镇并没有拯救它们。与其认为大多数地方被喷洒了创业灭杀剂,更准确的看法是:所有创业公司都中了毒,只有少数地方喷洒了解药。
其他地方的创业公司只是做它们自然该做的事:失败。真正的问题是,是什么在拯救硅谷这类地方的创业公司?
[1]
I'm not saying it's impossible to succeed in a city with few other startups, just harder. If you're sufficiently good at generating your own morale, you can survive without external encouragement. Wufoo was based in Tampa and they succeeded. But the Wufoos are exceptionally disciplined.
[1]
我并不是说在一个创业公司稀少的城市就不可能成功,只是更难而已。如果你非常善于自我激励,那么没有外部鼓励也能存活。Wufoo 总部设在坦帕,他们就成功了。但 Wufoo 团队自律得惊人。
[2]
Incidentally, this phenomenon is not limited to startups. Most unusual ambitions fail, unless the person who has them manages to find the right sort of community.
[2]
顺便说一句,这种现象并不限于创业。大多数不同寻常的抱负最终都会失败,除非拥有抱负的人设法找到了合适的社群。
Environment
I think there are two components to the antidote: being in a place where startups are the cool thing to do, and chance meetings with people who can help you. And what drives them both is the number of startup people around you.
The first component is particularly helpful in the first stage of a startup's life, when you go from merely having an interest in starting a company to actually doing it. It's quite a leap to start a startup. It's an unusual thing to do. But in Silicon Valley it seems normal.
In most places, if you start a startup, people treat you as if you're unemployed. People in the Valley aren't automatically impressed with you just because you're starting a company, but they pay attention. Anyone who's been here any amount of time knows not to default to skepticism, no matter how inexperienced you seem or how unpromising your idea sounds at first, because they've all seen inexperienced founders with unpromising sounding ideas who a few years later were billionaires.
Having people around you care about what you're doing is an extraordinarily powerful force. Even the most willful people are susceptible to it. About a year after we started Y Combinator I said something to a partner at a well known VC firm that gave him the (mistaken) impression I was considering starting another startup. He responded so eagerly that for about half a second I found myself considering doing it.
In most other cities, the prospect of starting a startup just doesn't seem real. In the Valley it's not only real but fashionable. That no doubt causes a lot of people to start startups who shouldn't. But I think that's ok. Few people are suited to running a startup, and it's very hard to predict beforehand which are (as I know all too well from being in the business of trying to predict beforehand), so lots of people starting startups who shouldn't is probably the optimal state of affairs. As long as you're at a point in your life when you can bear the risk of failure, the best way to find out if you're suited to running a startup is to try it.
环境
我认为解药包含两个成分:身处一个创业公司被视为酷事的地方,以及能偶遇能帮助你的人。而驱动这两个成分的,是你周围创业者的数量。
第一个成分在创业公司的早期阶段特别有帮助,即当你从仅仅对创业感兴趣跨越到真正开始创业的时候。创业是一个巨大的跳跃,是一件异乎寻常的事。但在硅谷,这看起来很正常。
在大多数地方,如果你开始创业,别人会把你当成失业者。而硅谷的人不会仅仅因为你创办公司就对你刮目相看,但他们会关注你。任何在硅谷待过一段时间的人都知道,不要习惯性地持怀疑态度,无论你看起来多么缺乏经验,或者你的想法一开始听起来多么没有希望,因为他们都见过缺乏经验的创始人、听起来毫无希望的想法,几年后却成了亿万富翁。
身边有人关心你在做什么,这是非常强大的力量。即使意志最坚定的人也难以抗拒。我们在创立 Y Combinator 大约一年后,我跟一家著名风投公司的合伙人说了句话,让他(错误地)以为我在考虑再创办一家公司。他反应如此热切,以至于大约半秒钟内我发现自己竟然在认真考虑这件事。
在大多数其他城市,创业的前景看起来根本不真实。在硅谷,它不仅是真实的,而且是时尚的。这无疑导致很多不应该创业的人也去创业了。但我认为这没关系。很少有人适合经营创业公司,而且事前很难预测谁适合(作为整天在做预测生意的人,我对此深有体会),所以大量不应该创业的人去创业,可能反而是最优状态。只要你还处于能承受失败风险的人生阶段,找出自己是否适合经营创业公司的最佳方法就是去尝试。
[3]
Starting a company is common, but starting a startup is rare. I've talked about the distinction between the two elsewhere, but essentially a startup is a new business designed for scale. Most new businesses are service businesses and except in rare cases those don't scale.
[3]
创办一家公司很常见,但创办一家创业公司则很罕见。我曾在别处讨论过两者的区别,但本质上创业公司是一种为规模化而设计的新业务。大多数新业务是服务业,除了极少数例外,它们无法规模化。
Chance
The second component of the antidote is chance meetings with people who can help you. This force works in both phases: both in the transition from the desire to start a startup to starting one, and the transition from starting a company to succeeding. The power of chance meetings is more variable than people around you caring about startups, which is like a sort of background radiation that affects everyone equally, but at its strongest it is far stronger.
Chance meetings produce miracles to compensate for the disasters that characteristically befall startups. In the Valley, terrible things happen to startups all the time, just like they do to startups everywhere. The reason startups are more likely to make it here is that great things happen to them too. In the Valley, lightning has a sign bit.
For example, you start a site for college students and you decide to move to the Valley for the summer to work on it. And then on a random suburban street in Palo Alto you happen to run into Sean Parker, who understands the domain really well because he started a similar startup himself, and also knows all the investors. And moreover has advanced views, for 2004, on founders retaining control of their companies.
You can't say precisely what the miracle will be, or even for sure that one will happen. The best one can say is: if you're in a startup hub, unexpected good things will probably happen to you, especially if you deserve them.
I bet this is true even for startups we fund. Even with us working to make things happen for them on purpose rather than by accident, the frequency of helpful chance meetings in the Valley is so high that it's still a significant increment on what we can deliver.
Chance meetings play a role like the role relaxation plays in having ideas. Most people have had the experience of working hard on some problem, not being able to solve it, giving up and going to bed, and then thinking of the answer in the shower in the morning. What makes the answer appear is letting your thoughts drift a bit—and thus drift off the wrong path you'd been pursuing last night and onto the right one adjacent to it.
Chance meetings let your acquaintance drift in the same way taking a shower lets your thoughts drift. The critical thing in both cases is that they drift just the right amount. The meeting between Larry Page and Sergey Brin was a good example. They let their acquaintance drift, but only a little; they were both meeting someone they had a lot in common with.
For Larry Page the most important component of the antidote was Sergey Brin, and vice versa. The antidote is people. It's not the physical infrastructure of Silicon Valley that makes it work, or the weather, or anything like that. Those helped get it started, but now that the reaction is self-sustaining what drives it is the people.
Many observers have noticed that one of the most distinctive things about startup hubs is the degree to which people help one another out, with no expectation of getting anything in return. I'm not sure why this is so. Perhaps it's because startups are less of a zero sum game than most types of business; they are rarely killed by competitors. Or perhaps it's because so many startup founders have backgrounds in the sciences, where collaboration is encouraged.
A large part of YC's function is to accelerate that process. We're a sort of Valley within the Valley, where the density of people working on startups and their willingness to help one another are both artificially amplified.
偶遇
解药的第二个成分是偶然遇到能够帮助你的人。这种力量在两个阶段都起作用:从创业愿望到实际创业的过渡,以及从创办公司到成功的过渡。偶遇的力量比“身边人关心创业”更可变——后者像是一种背景辐射,平等地影响每个人——但偶遇在最强大时,影响力远胜于此。
偶遇创造了奇迹,以补偿创业公司注定会遭遇的灾难。在硅谷,糟糕的事情随时发生在创业公司身上,就像发生在其他任何地方的创业公司一样。这里的创业公司生存概率更高的原因在于,好事也同样降临在它们身上。在硅谷,闪电是有符号位的。
例如,你为大学生创办了一个网站,决定夏天搬到硅谷做这个项目。然后,在帕洛阿尔托一条随机郊区的街道上,你恰好遇到了肖恩·帕克(Sean Parker),他非常了解这个领域,因为他自己创办过类似的创业公司,而且认识所有的投资者。更有甚者,在2004年,他就对创始人保持公司控制权有先进的看法。
你无法精确预言奇迹会是什么,甚至不能保证奇迹一定会发生。最好的说法是:如果你在创业中心,意想不到的好事可能会发生在你身上,尤其是当你配得上它们时。
我敢打赌,即使是我们资助的创业公司也是如此。即使我们有意识地为他们创造机会,而不是依靠偶然,硅谷中有帮助的偶遇频率依然如此之高,以至于在我们能提供的帮助之上,这也是一个显著的增量。
偶遇的作用类似于放松在产生想法时的作用。大多数人都有过这样的经历:为某个问题努力工作,无法解决,放弃并上床睡觉,然后第二天早上在淋浴时想到答案。答案出现的原因是让你的思绪稍微漂移一下——从而脱离昨晚错误的研究路径,漂移到邻近的正确路径上。
偶遇让你的熟人圈漂移,就像淋浴让你的思绪漂移一样。两种情况下,关键都在于漂移的程度恰到好处。拉里·佩奇(Larry Page)和谢尔盖·布林(Sergey Brin)的会面就是一个好例子。他们让熟人圈漂移,但仅仅是一点点;他们都会见了与自己有很多共同点的人。
对拉里·佩奇来说,解药最重要的成分是谢尔盖·布林,反之亦然。解药就是人。硅谷成功的原因不是它的物理基础设施、天气或诸如此类的东西。这些在开始时有所帮助,但现在这个反应是自我维持的,驱动它的是人。
许多观察者注意到,创业中心最显著的特征之一是人们互相帮助的程度,且不期望任何回报。我不确定为什么会这样。也许是因为创业公司比大多数商业类型更少零和博弈;它们很少被竞争对手杀死。或者也许是因为如此多的创业创始人都有科学背景,而在科学中合作是受到鼓励的。
YC 的很大一部分功能就是加速这一过程。我们算是硅谷中的硅谷,在这里,从事创业的人密度以及他们互相帮助的意愿都被人为放大了。
[4]
As I was writing this, I had a demonstration of the density of startup people in the Valley. Jessica and I bicycled to University Ave in Palo Alto to have lunch at the fabulous Oren's Hummus. As we walked in, we met Charlie Cheever sitting near the door. Selina Tobaccowala stopped to say hello on her way out. Then Josh Wilson came in to pick up a take out order. After lunch we went to get frozen yogurt. On the way we met Rajat Suri. When we got to the yogurt place, we found Dave Shen there, and as we walked out we ran into Yuri Sagalov. We walked with him for a block or so and we ran into Muzzammil Zaveri, and then a block later we met Aydin Senkut. This is everyday life in Palo Alto. I wasn't trying to meet people; I was just having lunch. And I'm sure for every startup founder or investor I saw that I knew, there were 5 more I didn't. If Ron Conway had been with us he would have met 30 people he knew.
[4]
就在我写这篇文章的时候,我亲身体验了一下硅谷创业者的密度。杰西卡和我骑自行车到帕洛阿尔托的大学大道,在好吃的 Oren's Hummus 吃午饭。我们一进门,就遇到了坐在门边的查理·奇弗(Charlie Cheever)。塞琳娜·托巴科瓦拉(Selina Tobaccowala)正往外走,停下来打了个招呼。然后乔什·威尔逊(Josh Wilson)进来取外卖。午饭后我们去吃冻酸奶。路上遇到了拉贾特·苏里(Rajat Suri)。到了酸奶店,我们发现了戴夫·申(Dave Shen),出来时又碰见了尤里·萨加洛夫(Yuri Sagalov)。和他走了一个街区左右,遇到了穆扎米尔·扎维里(Muzzammil Zaveri),再过一个街区又遇到了艾丁·森库特(Aydin Senkut)。这就是帕洛阿尔托的日常生活。我并没有刻意去结识人,我只是在吃午饭。而且我敢肯定,每见到一个我认识的创业者或投资人,就有五个我不认识的。如果罗恩·康威(Ron Conway)和我们一起,他会遇到30个他认识的人。
Numbers
Both components of the antidote—an environment that encourages startups, and chance meetings with people who help you—are driven by the same underlying cause: the number of startup people around you. To make a startup hub, you need a lot of people interested in startups.
There are three reasons. The first, obviously, is that if you don't have enough density, the chance meetings don't happen.
The second is that different startups need such different things, so you need a lot of people to supply each startup with what they need most. Sean Parker was exactly what Facebook needed in 2004. Another startup might have needed a database guy, or someone with connections in the movie business.
This is one of the reasons we fund such a large number of companies, incidentally. The bigger the community, the greater the chance it will contain the person who has that one thing you need most.
The third reason you need a lot of people to make a startup hub is that once you have enough people interested in the same problem, they start to set the social norms. And it is a particularly valuable thing when the atmosphere around you encourages you to do something that would otherwise seem too ambitious. In most places the atmosphere pulls you back toward the mean.
数字
解药的两个成分——鼓励创业的环境和偶遇能帮助你的人——都是由同一个根本原因驱动的:你周围创业者的数量。要打造一个创业中心,你需要大量对创业感兴趣的人。
原因有三。第一个显而易见:如果没有足够的密度,偶遇就不会发生。
第二个原因是:不同的创业公司需要截然不同的东西,所以你需要很多人才能为每个创业公司提供最需要的东西。肖恩·帕克正是 Facebook 在 2004 年需要的人。另一家创业公司可能需要一个数据库专家,或者一个在电影业有关系的人。
顺便说一句,这也是我们资助大量公司的原因之一。社区越大,其中包含能提供你最需要的东西的人的概率就越大。
第三个原因是:一旦有足够多的人对同一个问题感兴趣,他们就开始设定社会规范。当周围氛围鼓励你去做那些原本显得过于雄心勃勃的事情时,这尤其宝贵。在大多数地方,氛围会把你拉回平均值。
I flew into the Bay Area a few days ago. I notice this every time I fly over the Valley: somehow you can sense something is going on. Obviously you can sense prosperity in how well kept a place looks. But there are different kinds of prosperity. Silicon Valley doesn't look like Boston, or New York, or LA, or DC. I tried asking myself what word I'd use to describe the feeling the Valley radiated, and the word that came to mind was optimism.
几天前我飞抵湾区。每次飞越硅谷时我都会注意到这一点:不知何故你能感觉到有事在发生。显然,你可以从一个地方保养得有多好来感知繁荣。但繁荣有不同的类型。硅谷看起来不像波士顿、纽约、洛杉矶或华盛顿特区。我试着问自己,用什么词来形容硅谷散发的感觉,想到的词是乐观。