Operating Principle
2–4 min read
A well-known study surveyed entrepreneurs about their odds of success and found wildly optimistic self-assessments, far out of line with actual survival rates for new ventures. Entrepreneurs weren't uninformed about the general odds. They simply believed those odds didn't apply to them personally.
Part of this comes from a founder's own history. A founder who succeeded once naturally credits their own judgment and risk tolerance for that success, without fully accounting for the much larger, mostly invisible group of equally talented, equally confident founders who took similar risks and simply didn't get the same result. Success feels like proof of skill. Often it's a mix of skill and circumstances a founder never has full visibility into.
Operating Question
Why It Matters
A founder who over-attributes past success to personal risk-taking skill, rather than partly to circumstance, is likely to take the next big risk with less caution than the odds actually warrant. Deliberately seeking out stories of equally capable founders who took similar risks and failed is an uncomfortable but useful corrective.
Supporting Evidence
Arnold Cooper, Carolyn Woo, and William Dunkelberg, entrepreneurial overoptimism research
Research Notes
The bias is well-documented in the entrepreneurship literature specifically, distinct from general overconfidence research, since it's tied to a founder's own lived success history.
Some genuine skill does carry over between ventures; the discipline is not over-crediting skill relative to the role circumstance actually played.
Practical Actions
Seek out failure stories from founders who took similar risks with similar preparation, not just success stories.
Attribute past success partly to circumstance and timing, not entirely to personal skill.
Apply extra scrutiny to a decision specifically when it's backed mainly by “it worked last time.”
Continue Reading