The Common Pitfalls of Entrepreneurship
When many entrepreneurs first start their journey, they face the same dilemma: no money. The seemingly easy solution is to take on outsourcing projects to generate cash flow. On the surface, it feels like a practical way to survive, but beneath that surface lies a dangerous trap. Outsourcing is not about selling technology; it is about selling time. The painful truth is that time can only be sold once. Unlike building a product that scales, outsourcing leaves you with nothing more than hours traded for dollars.
In outsourcing, the client’s perception is stacked against you. Deliver 100 points of output, and the client sees 60. Go above and beyond with 120 points, and it is perceived as 80. But if you fall short with 60 or 80 points, they might see it as 20. The game is unwinnable. Then there is seasonality. During peak periods, the company may look profitable, but slow seasons eat away at everything. Employees only see the boom, not the bust. And when billing hours become transparent, they wonder why the boss profits while they get little share.
Employees in outsourcing firms often feel disconnected as well. They are constantly building new projects without ever seeing growth or evolution in a single product. As a result, once they have gained enough skills to stand on their own, they leave. Turnover soars, and the company is left spinning in circles. At its core, outsourcing builds no long-term assets. You are essentially training engineers for someone else’s company while your own remains hollow. That is why I eventually realized: if the choice is between this treadmill and a stable job, a job is the better option. There is an old industry rule: unless your startup is earning at least three times your previous salary, you are losing money. The real moment to step into entrepreneurship is when you are confident you can create a product with true value, not when you are just scrambling to survive.
Another misconception among founders, especially those with engineering backgrounds, is believing that technology alone can solve business challenges. Agile development, for example, emerged as a reaction against the inefficiencies of the waterfall model. Instead of writing exhaustive specifications, agile uses lightweight user stories to speed up development. But deciding feature priorities based on story points is misguided. Market needs, not estimation games with poker cards, should drive feature decisions. Early in my career, I thought SCRUM was brilliant. But after real-world startup experience, I saw it for what it often is: a greenhouse experiment, disconnected from the brutal realities of the market.
The same applies to growth hacking. Instrumenting apps with tracking points and running endless experiments might help identify trends, but no amount of data can replace listening to real users. Conversion metrics may highlight where things drop off, but they do not tell you why. Engineers often avoid facing users directly, preferring the comfort of dashboards over uncomfortable conversations. But building a product in isolation, guided only by numbers, is irresponsible. In my experience, I insisted every engineer understand both the business and the technnology world itself. Only by living the same experience as our users could we build features that truly resonated.
Technology is a powerful tool, but it is not a magic bullet. Growth does not come from clever frameworks or endless tracking points. It comes from solving the right problem for the right market. The truth is simple: outsourcing may keep the lights on, but it builds no lasting foundation. Agile methods may improve efficiency, but they must be grounded in business reality. Data can inform decisions, but it cannot replace direct user feedback. Entrepreneurship is not about selling time or chasing methodologies. It is about building value, something that outlives the hours you put in, and something that connects deeply with the people you serve.
