News
A new entrepreneurial climate, in dollars and sense
`Lifestyle entrepreneur” is one of those rare terms that have been defined, and adopted, by two diametrically opposed camps.
In the late 1980s, William Wetzel, then director of the Center for Venture Research at the University of New Hampshire, coined the phrase to describe ventures that were unlikely to generate enough money to reward anyone other than the entrepreneur and maybe a few close associates.
By D.C. Denison Boston Globe
In other words, if you were an investor, ”lifestyle entrepreneurs” were not worth dealing with. They were in it for themselves. Either the idea was not big enough or they were not willing to work hard enough to push the nascent company to the point where investors could share in the success.
Recently, the term has surfaced again, with a different spin. The idea this time, promoted by idealistic business/career gurus, is that lifestyle entrepreneurship is a new way to think about work and start-up culture. Lifestyle entrepreneurs are those independent individuals with the vision to create companies that are designed to deliver a lifestyle rather than simply revenue or growth.
Recently no less than three books have arrived in bookstores advocating a ”lifestyle” approach to entrepreneurship (the titles say it all): ”Not Just a Living: The Complete Guide to Creating a Business that Gives You a Life,” by Mark Henricks; ”Soul Proprietor: 100 Lessons From a Lifestyle Entrepreneur,” by Jane Pollak; and ”Big Vision, Small Business: 4 Keys to Success Without Growing Big,” by Jaime S. Walters.
Doesn’t it say something about our current economic climate that the very term once used to scoff at entrepreneurial ideas that were too dinky to care about is now celebrated as a ”small is beautiful” strategy for a down market?
”The ’90s was a time for the grand ambitions of the dot-com entrepreneur, but now people realize the opportunity is just not there anymore,” said Mark Henricks, author of ”Not Just a Living.”
Although lifestyle entrepreneurship does seem in tune with the times, it is not a concept that gets a lot of attention. Henricks thinks he knows why.
”It’s always going to be outside the mainstream because no one’s going to command big consulting fees advising people on creating a `lifestyle’ business,”’ he said. ”Also it’s not a source of job growth.”
Certainly, the examples of ”lifestyle businesses” that Henricks offers up in his book are tiny and homespun: Michele Paster, a ”frustrated Boston-area public school teacher” who quit her job and opened an academic tutoring company; Ron Kipp, who ”chucked his six-figure salary and IBM career” to run a dive shop in the Cayman Islands 20 years ago. You get the idea.
These are not the dramatic entrepreneurial tales that end up on the cover of Forbes.
Still, when Henricks was in Boston recently, he was invited to address professor Andrew Zacharakis’s entrepreneurship class at the Arthur M. Blank Center for Entrepreneurship at Babson College in Wellesley.
”The students were definitely interested in hearing from him,” Zacharakis said. ”Part of it may be post-September 11th mentality, part of it may also be the recession, but there’s definitely more interest in creating companies that deliver more of what students want out of life. Students are thinking about that more.”
Zacharakis takes a relatively neutral stance on lifestyle entrepreneurship.
”Naturally we want to spend most of our time on high-potential ventures,” he said, ”but I tell students that the framework you create and the tools you use don’t vary that much whether you’re launching a lifestyle or a high-potential venture.”
”If you’re going to investors, or just to friends and family, you need to be able to present a very professional, consistent vision of what you want to do,” he added.
Which is probably where the two versions of ”lifestyle entrepreneur” come together: the unavoidable challenges that surround the launching of any venture, whether it’s designed to deliver a return for investors or a lifestyle for the founder.
The oft-repeated figures – close to 100,000 businesses fail; a third of new businesses close their doors within the first three years – level the playing field.
”That’s the danger in talking about `lifestyle entrepreneurs,”’ said William Wetzel, now director emeritus at the Center for Venture Research. ”It sounds like it’s easier because you’ve reined in your ambition. Unfortunately that’s not the case. It’s always difficult to start a business.”
D.C. Denison can be reached at [email protected].
This story ran on page E2 of the Boston Globe on 10/13/2001.
© Copyright 2002 Globe Newspaper Company.
MATR Supporters (view all)
Sorry, we couldn't find any posts. Please try a different search.