One of my previous employers went and acquired a startup that had three employees and each had a C title. One was chief Organization Officer. What exactly are you organizing?!
I am going to guess this is a silicon valley hang up because of people being funded. He kind of makes that point towards the end of the article. If you are someone who starts a business the traditional way, win or fail, I think you earned the right to be called an entrepreneur. You are taking a big risk which is scary and invigorating at the same time.
"I think you earned the right to be called an entrepreneur."
The problem is that most of the people who have "earned the right" wouldn't be caught dead calling themselves "entrepreneurs". My plumber is an entrepreneur, my doctor is an entrepreneur, and my accountant is an entrepreneur. They all call themselves "plumbers", "doctors", or "accountants". "Entrepreneur", in fact, doesn't seem to convey any actual information, at least in a what-do-you-do sense.
On the other hand, a person calling themselves an "entrepreneur" does tell me one thing: How they want me to view them. As far as I can tell, they want to be seen as someone who takes Big Risks in search of Big Rewards (even if they don't, or even if their idea of a business doesn't make any sense whatsoever).
I agree with you. Most people who own a business wouldn't call themselves an entrepreneur as a label. But they are entrepreneurs and would consider themselves one. I could be wrong but what I got from the article is that he wouldn't call these people entrepreneurs at all.
Damned, I will change my LinkedIn profile; I didn't know it was sounding pompous :-)
For me, an "entrepreneur" (french word) is someone who undertake an "entreprise". An "entreprise" is not necessarily a company or a business. It is a kind of project. You could say that preparing a party or a wedding is an "entreprise".
FWIW, here is the definition of "entrepreneur" from Etmology Online.
<<< 1828, "manager or promoter of a theatrical production," reborrowing of French entrepreneur "one who undertakes or manages," agent noun from Old French entreprendre "undertake" (see enterprise). The word first crossed the Channel late 15c. (Middle English entreprenour) but did not stay. Meaning "business manager" is from 1852. Related: Entrepreneurship. >>>
http://etymonline.com/index.php?search=entrepreneur
"Undertake"? "Theatrical"? Heh. Uncharacteristically, etymonline doesn't mention the two French component words, which more literally translate to "between-taker". A middleman, in other words.
In more common parlance, anyone who starts their own business of any kind is an entrepreneur. Food-truck operator? She's an entrepreneur. Hair-salon owner? He's an entrepreneur too. If we wanted to make finer distinctions about degrees of entrepreneurship, those distinctions might be based on risk. Buying your own equipment and materials to sell stuff at the local art fair? Very entrepreneurial. Taking other people's money to sell to an enterprise where you have inside contacts? Barely entrepreneurial at all.
And that's where I think anger like that in the OP comes from. People resent the way that founders of VC-backed high-tech companies seem to act like they're the vanguard or elite of entrepreneurship, when there's often very little entrepreneurial risk involved. For example:
* Person A goes to work for AmaGooBook directly.
* Person B starts a company that fails, then goes to work for AmaGooBook.
* Person C starts a company that's acquired by AmaGooBook.
What's the difference? Why are B and C entrepreneurs but A isn't? Because investors paid their salaries for a couple of years? Not all startups are like this, of course, but the question is whether those that are should claim the same "entrepreneur" mantle that others truly deserve. When a startup founder orders pizza, it's highly likely that the guy who owns the pizza shop is the real entrepreneur.
After years of reading hundreds of essays from people complaining about how others use words ("hacker", "professional", "engineer", "artist", "freedom", and hundreds of other words, etc), I've come to the conclusion that the complaint says more about the rigidity of the complainer rather than anything insightful about language evolution.
It's ironic that the blog's name has the word "consulting" in it. When I was in my early 20s, I hated that word. Whenever I told friends I was a consultant, I'd immediately follow up with a self-deprecation: "that's just a fancy label for white-collar prostitute." At the time, "consulting" to me meant McKinsey or Bain and not your bodyshop of Visual Basic programmers. I preferred "contractor" or "freelancer" to the title "consultant". However, the years have gone by and I no longer care. Anyone can call themselves "consultant" and it doesn't bother me at all. It's just bikeshedding now.
Anyone remember the 1990s complaints about the title "webmaster" because (gasp!) it had the word "master" as a suffix? How pompous of those html authors! We should be thankful that "web-jedi" didn't gain any currency and webmaster has already fallen out of favor.
The author suggests "business owner" instead of "entrepreneur". I used to not like that label either. "Business Owner" had connotations of being some monopolist crushing the protesters on Occupy Wall Street or the slavedriver paying his workers minimum wage while drinking their babies blood. Maybe I can call myself "unemployed speculator" or some other circumlocution so as to not offend anyone. Personally, I think "entrepreneur" does not convey any false pretenses about prestige or bootstrapping. It's fascinating that some find a word neutral while others perceive it as putting on airs. You can't win.
If the author doesn't like "entrepreneur" and I have mixed feelings about "business owner", what's a good compromise?
How about other candidate labels such as "wantrepreneur"[1] which is what some of non-HN folks call HN'ers.
Or how about "wannabe philanthropist"? If high-profile charity is the apotheosis of the journey from student->businessman->philanthropist, is "wannabe philanthropist" self-deprecating enough while simultaneously conveying bold aspirations? If family & friends have that puzzled look and ask, "what the heck is a wannabe philanthropist?", you explain the transformation of Bill Gates from Harvard dropout -> CEO -> Gates Foundation. As a bonus, you can throw in words like "camel" and "eye of the needle". And after all that, they'll say "oh for fock's sake, just call yourself an entrepreneur!"
Agreed. I'm reminded of this: http://xkcd.com/1314/ -- I feel that there is some elitist phenomenon here that I can't quite articulate. It's related to the way calling out people as hipsters somewhat protects you from that label yourself.
And I sound sillier with any alternative, like when I start with "Well, it’s complicated, see.." and fumble around at explaining what an entrepreneur does, then get asked "So you run businesses that you start? Isn't that an entrepreneur?"
That too, although mistress tends to imply a lack of exclusivity, which is often a critical aspect of the business-employee relationship. I don't know if there's a polygamist-specific term for spouse? One that doesn't have the implication of being "the other woman" that mistress has?
This article seems to do everything but suggest an alternative – what should I use instead?
If I have a small, bootstrapped company doing a few deals and with more in the pipeline, I think it should be fine to have the title "Entrepreneur". If this sounds pompous, what is a good alternative?
Amen. We need a word to distinguish someone who founds a startup with a brand new product nobody's ever seen before and aims for high growth from the person who opened a bakery on the corner. That word happens to be "entrepreneur" and I don't have a problem with someone making that distinction in conversation if used correctly.
Ironically, I have a problem with geeks using the word "silly" and "it's" when they mean "its", as OP did.
Complaining about the word "entrepreneur" is itself a bit tacky, since for posers to annoy you that much, you must be spending too much time around them. In the US, it also seems to be a complaint exclusive to the software industry. I don't see anyone complaining about people who open storefronts using the word to describe themselves. And if someone starts businesses in multiple fields, what are they then?
Also, what about anyone who grew up in poverty, worked hard, and was the first person in their family to create a new business, like a bakery or a hair salon. Are they now also running the risk of getting ridiculed and having their accomplishments diminished if they use the word?
This really gets annoying to me too. I think the media is largely to blame for it. Every city with a kid who started a website is referred to as "Silicon <insert word that describes the local terrain>".
Likewise, they call every person with a blog an "entrepreneur". I think the reason it annoys me is because it gives people a false impression of what it means to start a real business at a time when we need more people to start businesses. They have unrealistic expectations, and end up getting turned off to the whole concept when it doesn't work out like in "The Social Network".
Note: trying to impress your peers doesn't send invoices. Trying to perfect your linkedin page will not send invoices. Having an awesome title, awesome business cards, and an awesome email signature will not send invoices.
That being said, if sounding silly is what's stopping you from doing anything that has you sending invoices, take a printout of this article and light it on fire.
Funny, I had this discussion with a friend a few days ago. I see the term entrepreneur as a description of a persons character. I don't think you have to be a millionaire or even need big succes (yet).
If you're starting a few companies or projects, spend all your time, money and energy in those and try to generate money in creative ways; you're an entrepreneur.
It's one of those words that somehow become a status symbol and lose their meaning.
Like, well, hacker: I cringe every time someone writes "hacker" in his/her bio without stuff to show for it. Usually it's UI developers, I don't know why.
All around, I started to discard every word that comes with this burden. Words should convey information, not a self blowjob.
Yeah, not impressed. I think it sounds far more pretentious to refer to yourself as a CEO when you run a company of 5 people - that's always made me a bit uncomfortable. Entrepreneur denotes startup founder. Fair enough. It's more about tone, etc. than anything else. This reads a bit like hater rant.
I sort of get the point of the article, but I don't undestand why what you call yourself is this important. It honestly doesn't matter what you refer to yourself in your career or otherwise. And you shouldn't be getting this upset about it either.
For me it's always a huge red flag when somebody calls themselves an entrepreneur (or CEO of... themselves and their 1-person company). It indicates they care about the prestige and position rather than making things.
It does sound a little silly, I'm using the word "founder" or "startup founder" now, it can replace the word "entrepreneur" around 7 out of 10 times and people get it.
"Entre" means between and "Preneur" means parts. A indirect english synonym would be middleman. Traditionally, it was referring to people in the building industry that set up building site with plumber, electrician, workers... So, a freelancer is not an entrepreneur. Strictly speaking if you don't have any employees you are not an entrepreneur.
Preneur comes from "prendre" which means to take. So a more literal translation would be an undertaker, not as someone who manages burials, but undertakes something.
(By the way an undertaker, would be translated as an "Entrepreneur de pompes funèbres" in French)
Don't stand corrected. The german word is Unternehmer which literally means "under-taker". This is probably not a coincidence and the french meaning is probably the same.
As a point of linguistic curiousity, would a more accurate literal translation be "one who undertakes", or perhaps "one who engages in", given the fairly specific meaning of "undertaker" in English?
That's interesting. So, it the U.S., we would call such a person a General Contractor. The person in the building industry who coordinates all the various building trades to get the building built.
I'd love a proper English term for this. "Business builder" "Satisfier of consumer wants", "Employer", "Creator of value", I dunno. Answers on a postcard
Honest question: what should someone call themselves when they've started, for example, a restaurant, two software companies, and a property management firm?
I'd call them a douche bag. Seriously this isn't something you want to advertise even if it's true. Stay down to earth and play down your successes especially if the person you're talking to is less successful then you.
Did Steve Jobs call himself a serial entrepreneur? True success advertises itself.
A business owner? If you've found success, you own a lot of businesses. If you haven't, you own one even though you have started more than you currently have. You're still just a business owner.
"Business owner" implies they currently have sole or majority ownership in a business, but with many companies both big and small, multiple people have ownership stakes. Founders also often don't retain an ownership stake forever, since many businesses change ownership during their lifetimes, and others shut down.
So, in my example above, what if the person only retains a minority ownership stake in the restaurant, sold the two software companies, the property management company failed, and they are now working on a new company of any kind? Does "business owner" really accurately describe what they do?
Note that if you think this kind of example is unusual, in my experience it's relatively common for people who build companies to do so in different domains, either simultaneously or at different stages in their careers.
> Entrepreneur is the pinnacle of this to me, because it's very pronunciation makes it sound so... bourgeois... pompous.
Perhaps you spend too much time around those people who still pronounce "entrepreneur" with the "-pre-" sound in the middle, instead of the more Anglocized "entreneur". Not dropping that 5th syllable in the middle is what makes it sound so pompous.
