Correlation vs causation in startups: what survives.

The objection, stated first.

You could say the whole finding is circular. People with a business had naturally done more of the acts that put one in front of others. Renting a place, getting money in and hiring someone are, in large part, the business itself. So the study might only say that people who have a business have a business.

Also, in your own case, you may not need premises or staff yet. On that reading, asking for visible acts first is asking for smoke before a fire.

What survives correlation vs causation in startups.

That objection is a good one, and the text admits it cannot fully answer it. But if the finding were only circular, those still trying would have been doing less. Instead, the paper describes them working steadily at a different kind of act. They saved money and wrote plans, where only they could answer. As a result, they were busy but not productive startup builders, short of replies rather than evenings.

A smaller claim worth your time.

So the dividing line is not effort, hours or how badly anybody wanted it. It is effort direction vs effort amount, and direction is what counts. Still, the 1996 research never compares months of private preparation against months where answers were possible. As far as the author can find, nobody has run that comparison directly. In short, keep correlation vs causation in startups in mind, and hold the narrow claim lightly.