I am no student of Existentialism though I do have a copy of the seminal lecture (now available in form a small book) Jean Paul Sartre gave on the topic. But the topic of raison d’être is often repeated in modern societal discourse and if I may say – not uncommonly torments individual souls. Heck, even Venture Capitalist (VCs) even seek it out when seeking to fund a start up.

This post is in that specific context of raison d’être when applied to an intrapreneurial (take within an enterprise) or entrepreneurial (taken outside, facing all the elements!) is a curious one for each entrepreneur. The VC will inevitably ask why does this venture need to exist? Which is a eminently sensible place to start – why does the venture need to exist, when there are others doing same/similar things perhaps, or when the customer does not have any explicit need for the offer, or when the market conditions (e.g., regulation) may not allow or be entirely favourable. It seems like a very sensible first order question in a deductive exploration of the venture’s viability and strength. But is it?

Ventures are founder-led and only capital-backed. Capital cannot lead. Without a founder, a venture cannot exist. This not about finding a hero but exploring what goes on before the moment of creation? Before a venture has surfaced and been positioned in market place. A lot of action would be in the mind of founder and his/her experiments with ideas. Ideas behind which there is belief and there is resolute will to put the full force of own conviction and the extraordinary effort that inevitably follows it. The founder knows – they are making choices – around the right idea, one that will give energy as much if not more than it would consume. They are making choices on their time and commitments to family, society and again disproportionately favouring customers and a small team – for longer time durations, in more intense and high stakes discussions. And why does a founder want to do that? What personal beliefs, aspiration, vision propel him/her?

As such, the first order question to the founder may not be “Why does your venture exist” but more precisely “Why do you exist?” Not so much in a backward looking way (though that might be instructive on patterns of behaviour) but in a forward looking manner. What are the founder’s beliefs? Where does he/she get their energy from? What does he / she aspire to – in 5, 10, 15 or eternity time but from something they would start here on now? What commitment and sacrifices are the unspoken contract that the founder has already signed up to – with family, friends? To live and toil like a Sisyphus but actually reach the summit.

In starting from that true ‘first order’ set of question centred on the individual, the prime mover, one may then proceed to the (necessary but not sufficient) question of why the venture must exist and subsequent wider probing (not least of which, having previously focused on the founder, will be construct of the team rallying around the founder captain?

Viva la venture!