There is an old parable about commitment when it comes to breakfast. The story goes that when looking at a plate of ham and eggs, it's obvious that the chicken is an interested party, but the pig is truly committed.
Lately I've been thinking about the parable of the pig and the chicken in the context of characteristics that make a great entrepreneur -- and the kind of entrepreneur that we VCs in general, and my firm in particular, like to back. In short, we like to back pigs: Entrepreneurs who are truly and completely committed to the outcome of their venture, have a lot of stake, and no fallback.
How do we discern the difference between the two entrepreneurial archetypes? It's usually relatively easy, but sometimes subtle. Here are a few of the top characteristics we see in entrepreneurs who appear to be exhibiting behavior that suggests they're more like "chickens" when it comes to their start-up:
1) Prefer to wait to start their venture only after they receive funding ("We are ready to go, as soon as you give us your money." ...um, does that mean you won't start the company if I don't give you my money?).
2) Don't quit their day jobs before receiving funding. ("This has been a side project for a year, and I can't wait to focus on it full-time" ... um, if you can't wait - why are you waiting?)
3) Don't physically move themselves or their teammates to be in the same geography when starting their venture (think Eduardo Severin in The Social Network spending his summer in NYC).
4) Prefer to play a hands-off chairman role or look to quickly hire a COO/president in the early days rather than operate as the hands-on CEO/president. (I'll leave out the numerous examples to protect the innocent but, as a rule of thumb, companies with fewer than 40 employees don't typically need a COO).
5) Are unwilling to fully leverage their own personal and professional networks to drive recruiting, fundraising and business development.
On the other hand, the top five characteristics we see in "pig" entrepreneurs:
