VC Backed Firms Are Better Managed?
from the oh-really? dept
A new study from Stanford suggests that companies backed by venture capitalists are better run than those that aren’t. In some instances I’m sure that’s very true. However, I think the metrics used to determine this are a bit questionable. It was based on how soon the company hires a VP of marketing and ousts a founder in favor of a CEO. I’ll admit that in many cases, those are necessary parts of running a business, but that says nothing about how good these new people are, or how bad the original founder was.
Comments on “VC Backed Firms Are Better Managed?”
I’m not convinced that ‘ousting the founder’ is such a useful metric for success. I’ll ask Michael and Larry for you though.
What a Joke of a Study
I seriously hope that the study is more substantial than the article describes, because the methodology is ridiculous. Why use very questionable indirect measures of a company’s success when they should use a direct measure, like profits?
It also seems that all they’re showing is that VC-funded companies tend to be run the way VCs want them to run, particularly when it comes to ousting the founder. That’s what VCs want to do; they’ll install a CEO of their choosing who has closer ties to them than the founder.