Good Venture Developer / Bad Venture Developer


Project A’s Venture Development team shares their view of what differentiates a good venture developer from a bad one

By Rainer Berak

At Project A, we support our companies in key areas such as marketing, IT/product, BI, organizational building and others.

Beyond that, to get the maximum possible benefit out of our efforts and to ensure a high probability of success for our ventures in general, we also add a sufficient portion of “Venture Development”.

This is achieved by a team which is responsible for a variety of tasks ranging from project management to interim management, from providing the necessary structure all the way to the operational coverage of work functions.

Project A's Venture Development team: Rainer Berak, Philipp Werner, Tobias Ilgner, Christoph Rösler und Mark Hartmann (f.l.t.r.) © Picture: Ania Korcz
Our Venture Development team: Rainer Berak, Philipp Werner, Tobias Ilgner, Christoph Rösler und Mark Hartmann (f.l.t.r.) © Picture: Ania Korcz

Taking our inspiration from Ben Horowitz’s description of good and bad product managers, in the following we have laid out our view on what differentiates a good venture developer from a bad one.

Bad: Mostly concerned with the valuation and the investment in the last round.
Good: Knows which KPIs drive the success of a venture and knows where they stand.

Bad: Does his/her job in the best interest of the founder.
Good: Does his/her job in partnership with the founder and in the best interest of the venture.

Bad: Blindly follows the strategy and vision of the founder.
Good: Adds value by bringing in a fresh external view and challenges the status quo.

Bad: Treats every venture as a project for itself.
Good: Draws parallels to previous projects and establishes contact to other ventures.

Bad: Ends the support when the official assignment is over.
Good: Stays in touch with the venture’s team and cares about its current development.

Bad: Only focuses on his/her operational function.
Good: Is aware of key value drivers in all departments and encourages collaboration between teams.

Bad: Tolerates confusion and unstructured reality.
Good: Sorts out confusion and builds structures.

Bad: Does whatever the founder sees as a priority.
Good: Balances timeliness, risk and cost.

Bad: Manages against “as good as possible”.
Good: Decides objectives for timeliness, risk and cost, keeping in mind which one has priority and limits.

Bad: Has all planning in his/her head (or worse: trusts that the founder does).
Good: Guides the founder and the team in structuring their efforts and helps them to keep on track.

Bad: Changes the applied planning tool often and uses multiple plans in parallel.
Good: Anticipates complexity and finds a pragmatic way to use tools in the required way.

Bad: Is frustrated by things not going well.
Good: Expects that things won’t necessarily go well and changes them.

Bad: Draws a clear line concerning the limits of the role.
Good: Does whatever it takes, whether it be management tasks or operational legwork.

Bad: Puts full focus only on maximizing revenue tasks.
Good: Supports maximizing revenue, but keeps an eye on soft factors such as team development and satisfaction.

Bad: Develops the venture striving for exit. 
Good: Develops the venture striving for value.