Comments on: Dilbert on Experience

By: Paul Ritchie

Paul Ritchie — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 13:06:01 +0000

I can buy that youth is responsible for most “hit songs, hot startups, and new inventions” — but are these really “great achievements in history?”

Just ask yourself a few questions:
* Will Jobs be known for the Apple II or the iPod?
* Will Gates be known for DOS or for innovation in philanthropy?
* Aren’t Kroc and Edison two obvious exceptions w/r/t entrepreneurship?

Even science isn’t so clear cut: Galileo and Newton produced fundamental work in their 40s. Even Einstein needed 10 years after his initial burst of productivity to suss out the General Theory of Relativity.

I have no doubt that the young are willing to risk it all: When you ain’t got nothin’, you’ve got nothin’ to lose. However, most of these achievements are transient (and we don’t see the failures as noted above). There aren’t that many Mozarts.

By: Chris Echelmeier

Chris Echelmeier — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:15:15 +0000

Heard an interesting discussion about this WRT the presidential race going on now. Talking about how some presidents had little experience in public service (Abraham Lincoln) who went on to become great presidents. And some very experienced statesmen (Herbert Hoover) were duds — I forget the word they used. Anyhow they used some of the same arguments above, but in a political context.

By: Joshua Feinberg

Joshua Feinberg — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 15:59:53 +0000

I’m a huge Dilbert/Scott Adams fan too. And most of his cartoons are hysterical… very similar in style to the NBC hit TV show The Office. However sometimes the satire gets so exaggerated that it no longer resembles reality. In this particular case, I think he’s more on the money than not.

It’s the teens and those in their 20′s that are willing to sacrifice years of sleep to chase their entrepreneurial dreams.

When a retired executive in his/her 50′s decides to start a business, they often take the “safer” more conservative route and invest in a franchise, or start a simpler, service-based business that basically just trades time for money.

By: Peter Davis

Peter Davis — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 14:22:22 +0000

Well, if that’s right then it’s really about risk taking, and risk avoidance. The younger people are more likely to take risks, and the VCs like serial entrepreneurs because they think it helps them avoid risk. And, more poor people win the lottery because more poor people buy lottery tickets, same as more young people do startups or start their own rock band.

By: Paul Freet

Paul Freet — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 13:06:39 +0000

Jeff, I think I know the fallacy of this argument. Young entrepreneurs, who have little experience, shoot for the moon. The vast majaority of those efforts fail spectacularly. But, statistics demand that a few, slip through the cracks and succeed in a big way. Seasoned entrepreneurs, with their experience, make safer bets, and have a much higher success rate, but do not create world-changing products. It is he naivete of youth that does change the world. We just don’t hear about the hordes of abject failures that accompanies the few that make a difference.