Valley Virtues?
It’s 2022, and while the valley is filled with amazing entrepreneurs, I do come across a few of the founders who pitch galactic tech platforms, over-promises and big talks. You chat with them for a few minutes and quickly realize that there is no substance. It scarily reminds me of Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos or Billy McFarland of Fyre Festival.
Somehow, ‘fake it, till you make it’ seems like a flavor that is trickling back in some remote quarters? I have heard people talk about this as a necessity to get funded, or build a personal brand or a few other excuses. While this is still a few, it’s concerning.
Some of the traits I have observed in the conversations reminds me of traits that are common to a Holmes or a McFarland, which are as follows:
- It’s mostly the founders who do not have the domain expertise who talk a big game of what they will build which is a bit far from reality. Holmes was not a scientist and ignored all warnings. Mcfarland had never put together an event or festival before. In my observations, amongst such people, non-tech founders seem to have an exaggerated appetite to talk about an exponential tech they believe they will build.
- They are mostly zealots and always include a mega impact in their narrative on how their inventions will change society as we know it.
- You are always second-guessing about their past.
- They are absolutely always charming and persuasive. Their ability to tell a story blindsides you from truth or data.
- They name-drop a lot of awesome people they are associated with who are backing them. Funnily enough, this attracts some big names their way. Stone-souping the connections.
- Team profiles get exaggerated where they start believing in their own made-up achievements to a point where it gets diabolical.
- The tech or the event will be a super-secret without access to anyone till the last minute. Edison? Fyre?
- They lack the ability to take any feedback or are not willing to get mentored. Even if they name-drop amazing mentors, it is to the benefit of showing who they know.
- They do get trapped in their own made-up reality even when their teams are hurting and providing them feedback that something is not possible. The teams will be challenged to think out of the box, or leaders get replaced. The teams will be told that they are not good enough to change the world. Virtue quotes about great leaders and their struggles will be shoved down the team's throat.
- A good portion of time is spent in cover-ups, asking the teams to not speak much. Most demos are managed with a lot of smoke and mirrors.
Dan Ariely, the behavioral scientist, says that none of these people start with a large amount of evil in their heads. They just cut small corners in morality or principles one decision at a time. Before you know it, this snowballs.
More than anything, it’s the lack of substance that bothers me and not the showmanship.
I am not against storytelling. I am not against thinking outside the box. I am not against quoting great leaders. All of this is much needed. When you use this as a veneer for your mess with willful negligence and coercion, that’s when it's in the realms of evil.
A voice inside me wants to say do not ‘fake it till you make it!’, it is not the valley mantra. Please ‘show and tell’ and bring back the virtues of humility and authentic perseverance that moved the valley this far.
But then again, you stay quiet as you do not want to be perceived as self-righteous, virtue-signaling, or anti-social. It’s almost always a double-edged sword to speak up. (including this post.)
I know many authentic founders with their heads down building groundbreaking things, bootstrapping, and quietly changing the horizon. I am so blessed to learn from them and hope the virtues of the many will rub off on the ecosystem than the intensity of the few.
I am genuinely curious. What is needed to make authentic, morally grounded, ethical leaders? What is the best approach to influence humans? What are some of your observations?
