[gmaster1440]

I have not read the entire underlying study behind the article but I feel the headline may be a bit misleading.

From the article:

"But founders’ poor success rate as CEOs also has to do with the kind of personality that’s compelled to start a company in the first place. People often start companies precisely because they want the freedom to run things as they wish—which sometimes includes poor managerial decisions."

This may be true for some founders but I'm struggling to see whether this represents a substantial sample size. My impression is that people often start companies because they want to go through the experience of starting a business and seeing it grow and succeed. Freedom may be a part of it, but this article seems to suggest it's a dominating variable that ultimately leads to the demise of the founder(s) which I'm struggling to see.

[andrewingram]

Some people want to run a business, some people see a big financial opportunity, some people have a vision of something they want to exist in the world. All 3 of these could lead to someone deciding to start a business, but for the more visionary types, the fact that it's a business might just be considered a necessary evil, rather than the goal.

[gmaster1440]

Gotcha, I misread it then, seems like they're not implying any substantial sample size as much as recognizing the flaws of a particular motivating force behind starting a company.

[gwbas1c]

I question if the kinds of businesses they discuss are really relevant to the hacker news crowd. You can start a restaurant chain because you want the restaurant chain to operate a particular way.