Comments on: Is a soloist or small business owner really an entrepreneur?

By: TheRunwayScoop

TheRunwayScoop — Tue, 04 Jul 2006 04:25:20 +0000

Are You A Small Business Person Or An Entrepreneur?

A small business person in the fashion world would probably be somebody like me who is simply happy just doing what she loves

By: Hom

Hom — Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:30:35 +0000

Kiosaki himself achieved financial independence by starting an S quadrant business (his financial seminars) and using the income to buy distressed real estate. He build his first successful big business (B quadrant) only after he was financially free. Does this mean he wasn’t a successful entrepreneur until after he retired?

I love Kiyosaki’s books, but I also agree with his own admission that he’s not a very disciplined writer. If he uses the word “entrepreneur” in more than one way, I don’t really mind as long as I can still generally understand what he’s saying. If you’ve listed to his tape series Choose to Be Rich, you’ve probably noticed that he equivocates his definitions quite often, but the tapes are still entertaining and informative.

His 500-employee requirement for a big business was probably true in the beginning of the Industrial Age. This is how Henry Ford and Thomas Edison obtained leverage, for example. In the Information Age, however, computers have automated many of the tasks people used to do, making it possible to generate passive income simply by hiring someone from India to write a few lines of code for you. The efforts of the “S” in India can be used to generate “B” or “I” types of income as long as someone knows how to leverage that effort strategically.

Thanks for continuing to blog. Your posts make for very enjoyable reading!

By: Dave Young

Dave Young — Wed, 14 Jun 2006 18:54:37 +0000

The best topological equivalent is that you have a “practice”. A dentist or chiropractor is not an entrepreneur. She is getting paid for her knowledge, skill and time.
Right now I have a Persuasion Architecture and advertising consulting practice.
It’s the word that works best for me!

By: Nikki McCullough

Nikki McCullough — Fri, 09 Jun 2006 19:54:06 +0000

I’m new to Cubicle Nation, but I read this blog pretty religiously. This is the first time I’ve had the balls to comment on anything. Speaking as the employee of a small business owner, I would have to agree that, first off, an entreprenuer should be interpreted as anyone that has busted their hump to get their business off the ground, and keep it running. It’s not like its an easy task. It’s not like having 2 employees vs 500 employees makes a business any less valid. Yet my boss runs into these self important, almost elitist ideals on a regular basis, as I assume many others do as well.
Secondly, who cares? The reason a person becomes self employed, or a business owner or WHATEVER is so that they can do things as they wish. So why be bothered with a title from elsewhere for something that YOU’VE created. I agree with Glenda Watson Hyatt….”these are simply labels that others can then use to pigeon-hole and stereotype us. These labels aren’t who we are”. That is the bottom line.

By: Ben Yoskovitz

Ben Yoskovitz — Wed, 07 Jun 2006 17:59:59 +0000

I’m with Jack Hayhow in terms of asking the right question.

Does it matter what label we put on ourselves: entrepreneurs or small business owners or something else.

When I think of entrepreneur I do think about words such as creative, dynamic, risk-taking, but I think you can also have an entrepreneur that has a very comfortable business, that runs smoothly, with little risk.

I also think about a certain lifestyle when I think entrepreneur (at least in terms of small business owners).

I don’t think you need to have Fortune 500 on your mind or as a goal.

And I disagree with the point made by Little Ram: “Being able to have the business run without you personally (to some extent).”

I think it’s the complete opposite. Being an entrepreneur is about you; you’re critical, you’ve got your hands in everything and you dictate what’s going on. I don’t mean that in a totalitarian sense though. And there’s definitely merit to having a business that can run without you, but I don’t see that as a criteria for being an entrepreneur.

By: Jack Hayhow

Jack Hayhow — Wed, 07 Jun 2006 15:21:27 +0000

This is a question I’ve enjoyed toying with over the years. Peter Drucker suggested in Innovation and Entreprenuership that to qualify as entrepreneurial, a business must creat new satisfaction or new consumer demand. I think that’s an interesting qualification, and probably correct.

But after a good deal of thought, I’m not sure the question itself – am I or am I not an entrepreneur? – is a particularly productive question. Perhaps a better question is: Does this business serve my purpose? Which, of course, begs the question: Why am I really doing this? Those questions have profound impact on a business and a business owner’s life.

By: Little Ram

Little Ram — Wed, 07 Jun 2006 05:43:08 +0000

Pam,

I think Murali has a point. Being a soloist means independence and sure, all of us have a right to live life the way we feel most fulfilled. For some, running an organization is not what they want to do and I think we should respect that. I myself am an independent consultant and I am still contemplatng the move to bulidng a smallish organization.

However, 2 criteria that I think are essential to being classifed as an entreprenur are-

a. Being able to have the business run without you personally (to some extent)

b. Risking a certain amount in the business venture.

Those that leave the comfort of a paycheck might point out to the risk in forgoing the steady income. However, if the business stops when they do, it is not true entrepreneurship I guess, at least IMHO. I am not too sure about he 500+ criterion though, it seems way to huge and quite arbitrary. India’s largest law firm wouldn’t qualify for instance.

By: Murali

Murali — Wed, 07 Jun 2006 04:36:14 +0000

Going by the dictionary meaning ‘Entrepreneur’ is a person who set up a business. Sole proprietorship is a legal business entity. So one can call a soloist an entrepreneur.

But my understanding and belief goes little beyond the terminology. Even if the most remote goal of ‘escaping the cube’ is to achieve some level of financial freedom, then ‘soloism’ or ‘a business with one person’ does not pay off, unless you derive hefty royalties or passive income of your work. (Like a a rockstar or Oprah or a scientist with lots of patents for example). Otherwise, no matter how great you are, your income cease to exist once you stop working, just like your job.

Even if your goal is realization of your ideals or great ideas, to have your ideals live longer than your younger and healthier breath and nurture your family and possibly generations, an organization that can survive without you would be a defintive answer. I mean an organization that is started and propelled by you but can run without you. That is the whole idea behind building a business. It does not necessarily mean a billion dollar company with thousands of employees.

Solo business is a great starting point. Because it gives all needed self-confidence and self-reliance to achieve your goals. But it is just that.

I am software consultant by profession. I can quit my job and start as an independent consultant. I prefer to call myself an Independent Consultant rather than a Entreprenuer. When I partner with a few like minded folks and start a firm and recruit some more like minded folks and build a structure and organization around it then I would call my self an Entrepreneur. Because, now I built a business that can run without me. More over, now it gives me more freedom and more power to venture out on my new dreams.

By: Jean Moniatte

Jean Moniatte — Wed, 07 Jun 2006 04:30:49 +0000

What’s in a name? Small business owner, self employed, entrepreneur? I do not really care, as long as I wake up every morning looking forward to my day. I just know it will not happen in a 500 employee business. I will change my business card title from nothing to “happy like a self employed Californian cow small business owner”.

By: John Cleary

John Cleary — Wed, 07 Jun 2006 02:51:10 +0000

For me the ‘self employeed’ thing is a part time gig to fund an entrepreneurial lifestyle.

I found working full time I was just too tired to be efficient in my spare time for my entrepreneurial pursuits.

Now I have time for both. The single employee (me) business does consulting to pay the bills, and that leaves time for other pursuits.

John