In my mind there are two kinds of risk: 1) personal 2) business. I think the assumption from the post and general feedback is a focus on personal however I'm more interested in people with risky businesses such as exploring unproven business models and creating products and user shifts that have never existed before.

Some examples include personal publishing and 140 character constraints on twitter, check-ins on foursquare and new payments platforms that leverage social and mobile.

Personal risks in my mind are almost always exaggerated and there are number of things that can be done to mitigate them. Overall I think personal risks are foolish however that might be what the prairie needs and something that I just can't grok given my own background.

Per the Brad story, I say congrats to him! Given the skills he is developing by growing his business and by what he can say he has accomplished the experience will outmatch any degree. It was a smart, calculated move which I don't consider risky at all and truly should open up many more opportunities down the road.

Hi, great post, and it was great meeting you yesterday Geoff.

There were two groups of risk takers who pioneered the west (including our area). There was a homestead rush and then the gold rush.

Homesteaders gradually moved out, "inching" their way across the mid-west. They didn't shy away from risk but they did take their family and all they valued with them and invested their resources into something that had a very high likelihood of producing a return (the land).

The gold rush in California was different. These were people who were very opportunistic and many of them went alone. The chances of failure were immense.

I think these cultural heritages have a strong influence today. It's not that the mid-west is afraid to take a risk. However, our culture has instilled in us a sense of caution. We are willing to accept a slower rate of progress if that means a higher chance of success.

So, if we want to see greater progress around here then infrastructure that helps people understand the risks, teaches the factors that lead to success, and a safety net are likely to be well received.

Also, I'd like to point out that the world needs both types of risk takers (and also those who are too cautious to take risks). I don't feel the slightest bit guilty about cautious optimism.

Something I have heard plenty recently is: "There are no rules." Take that seriously.

It seems as though many of the people I have heard talk or have spoken with about taking risks in their lives will come back with their list of responsibilities. These responsibilities are real, but also have a price tag. If you can't find the right reasons or the right idea to give up your 9am-5pm and start working towards developing something you love then maybe you need to hash it out in the time you have.

There is a lot of time between 5pm-9am, to jot down a workflow, a UML flow, or just going to some events(TechBrew, BarCamp, Various User Groups) talking with people about it and use them to visualize your market. If you can't (or won't) leave your job because of the risks involved, then develop your application in the time you are not at you job. Get your application, product, or service to a point to do an initial market release to see where you stand. There are plenty of resources in the area to get a feel for what your product could accomplish, and many more to come soon.

It is time to determine how much worth your free time has. Is relaxing, gaming, or socializing worth more than creating your own start-up? Maybe it is, and maybe creating a start-up is not for you. Find the desire.

There are definitely situations in which an idea needs full blown support and can't be a 5pm-9am sideshow. These situations are much more brittle, but again finding value is the main excuse in not taking risks. Are my ideas worth more than my current job?

These are many questions beginning innovators struggle with. CUE Incubator. It is hard initially to wrap you head around the entire idea of the incubator and what it can bring to the table. Giving and getting support will nurture people into finding the right amount of risk for themselves. If a group of seasoned innovators sits down with you and tells you, your idea can make much more than you imagined and they are willing to help map our your success. You will be much more willing to take those risks.

Maybe the problem in the Prairie is the Support Line(Eco-System) itself and not the innovators?

@Rob Yes, I agree there are both types of risk. I think both are at play when looking at an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem's culture. I think that people who are willing to take personal risk are likely also people who are willing to pursue riskier business models but that's just a thought off the top of my head.

@Matthew Thanks and it was nice to meet you yesterday, too. Great points on the historical foundations of the reason. I thought about including the agricultural influence throughout Iowa, Nebraska, and South Dakota, too, which is established, can be innovative and is always extremely risky on a year-to-year basis due to weather implications (my father-in-law farms in NE Iowa so it's something my family is well aware of). One thing to keep in mind with this Annual Report is that we're looking at Entrepreneurial Ecosystem in this area as it relates to tech startups.

Thank you both for your thoughts. Don't forget to nominate someone for the Innov8 Awards who you think is pushing our communities forward.

@James Thanks for chiming in! Good thoughts and I actually had this post planned prior to yesterday's incubator conversation in Des Moines but it obviously fits. I/we are not saying that entrepreneurship is for everyone; it's not for many people and that's a good thing for our society (and economy).

The support system/infrastructure/path-to-launch conversations are a great start. I think the would-be entrepreneurs' perception of risk will go down as examples of success (and the steps to get their with your own idea) increase in the region. Telling those stories is part of our mission at SPN.

@Geoff Exactly! If you have the desire and passion to make your idea real, then what is missing? I/we feel that many of those missing pieces are questions that ultimately have answers.

I do think the process should(and will) happen without a dependence on an eco-system, but I think getting a more defined one will help jump-start and help "organize". "Public" knowledge of start-ups seems fairly low in the Silicon Prairie. "Who buys-in to your service without knowing more about it?"

Baby Steps. :)

A key step in cultivating a community's appetite for entrepreneurial risk in is to raise the level of intellectual innovation in the area. We in the academic sector (tenet #5) actively pursue extramural research funding, which often yields technology innovation in partnership with regional start-ups. In so doing, we collectively increase the number of opportunities for creating new businesses and for being exposed to high-risk research ventures. We also create post-graduation employment opportunities for young MBAs, PMPs, PhDs, and many other advanced degree/certificate holders.

Perhaps more importantly, vibrant non-profit research organizations, such as often exists at university-affiliated R&D centers, can greatly increase the attraction of top-notch scientists, engineers, program managers, and business developers with advanced degrees.This growth of research and business acumen has generated significant growth in areas that once were very similar in many respects to Omaha, Lincoln, or Des Moines or similar Silicon Prairie cities.

Exemplar areas include Research Triangle, Sante Fe, Dayton, and my favorite exemplar, Austin, TX. These communities collectively increased across-the-board incentives for folks to learn, train, work, & live in the region, while providing multiple innovation opportunities. Such funding was often provided by "old establishment" leaders who recognized value in cultivating future innovation. Investments in exemplar areas range from multi-year infrastructure investments to launching non-profit research centers. These collective investments greatly differentiated Austin-Round Rock from Omaha-Lincoln, which climate notwithstanding, are otherwise quite similar.

@Chris Thanks for your input. I agree wholeheartedly in the value of academia in an entrepreneurial ecosystem. As you mentioned, that will be the focus of our post on tenet #5.

It will be interesting to measure the amount and impact of the technology innovation coming out of those University-affiliated research centers. I did my undergraduate degree at Iowa State which has a large research park south of campus and I find it interesting that some of the "coolest" stories we've covered about entrepreneurs at ISU are from dorm-room startups like Hatchlings (mentioned in the post) or Chegg.com. Those examples are anecdotal but we're excited to look into it further.

The Research Triangle and Austin are stellar examples of Universities impacting the entrepreneurial culture of the community and how the world views those cities. A lesser example is Indiana University's campus in Indianapolis (IUPUI) which holds both the IU Med School and a branch of the Kelley School of Business (where I did my MBA work). They have a dedicated center to connect business students and faculty with medical researchers. It's a neat model but I'm not sure it's impacting the greater community of Indianapolis, yet.

@Geoff,

Concur on IUPUI, having visited Indianapolis a couple of times, and almost considered going there for reasons you cited. Yes, there's a lot of dorm room start-up ideas we could cultivate more across the silicon prairie. I'd love to see a model that better connects our young idea generators with our non-profit R&D folks and our business community. Such an eco-system would merge education with innovation & application, and is precisely the model of success used in many of the exemplar locales we've cited.

Building transition pathways to some of the existing large businesses would also help expand the exit strategy base. In the defense sector, people think getting bought out by large primes, such as Lockheed, Rockwell, and SAIC. We may be able to build just as vibrant a community for folks to be purchased by firms such as FDR, UP, Conagra, or many others.

Returning to tenet #1, risk taking -- favorite approach is to couple best visionary / technologist with best PMP &/or MBA available on a given effort. They'll talk, and out of it will come something beautiful and implementable. Back to my regularly scheduled activities...

Increases the likelihood of death - High Risk / Doesn't increase the likelihood of death - Low Risk

@Luke - Increased chances of massive results - High Risk / Moderate-Low chances for massive results - Low Risk (AKA Stocks)

It all depends on how you look at it. No one is saying "Go out there with a horrible idea and try and make it work regardless of the risks." The Silicon Prairie needs to have entrepreneurs willing to invest in a risky venture to produce excellent results.

It is all about how you view "High Risk"? Is the idea you are trying to cultivate worthy of the Risk you need to invest to get it off the ground?

@Luke / @ James -- there's a similar debate afoot in cyber warfare philosophies / doctrine. If we focus on defense (low risk) our networks are at best are no worse off than before. If we focus on offense (high risk) we may have a chance against unfriendly actors. However, we may take out networks of friends or ourselves (think a boomerang virus attack). I reckon our choice on nothing ventured / gained is modulated by how much risk we are willing to accept.

@Chris - Exactly! Currently the culture is pushing back against the risk because it seems so far out there from what the area is use to. Hopefully, with the new start-ups popping up, the help of SPN, and Incubators (http://www.startupcitydsm.com) that culture will start to change and increase the tolerance for risk.

Awesome discussion!

@James - yes, risk is like spicy food - have to develop an appetite for it. Having good technical program managers, along with clear goals & metrics, greatly facilitate managing risk. DARPA, perhaps the most risk-tolerant of government R&D agencies, applies the Heilmeier catechism to aid risk analysis on new efforts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_H._Heilmeier#Heilmeie...).