Why Early-Stage Software Startups Fail: A Behavioral Framework

  • Carmine Giardino
  • Xiaofeng Wang
  • Pekka Abrahamsson
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 182)

Abstract

Software startups are newly created companies with little operating history and oriented towards producing cutting-edge products. As their time and resources are extremely scarce, and one failed project can put them out of business, startups need effective practices to face with those unique challenges. However, only few scientific studies attempt to address characteristics of failure, especially during the early-stage. With this study we aim to raise our understanding of the failure of early-stage software startup companies. This state-of-practice investigation was performed using a literature review followed by a multiple-case study approach. The results present how inconsistency between managerial strategies and execution can lead to failure by means of a behavioral framework. Despite strategies reveal the first need to understand the problem/solution fit, actual executions prioritize the development of the product to launch on the market as quickly as possible to verify product/market fit, neglecting the necessary learning process.

Keywords

Software startups customer development lean startup 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Smagalla, D.: The truth about software startups. MIT Sloan Manage. Rev. (USA) 45(2), 7 (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blank, S.: The four steps to the epiphany, 1st edn. CafePress (February 2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Crowne, M.: Why software product startups fail and what to do about it. In: Proceedings International Engineering Management Conference (IEMC), pp. 338–343 (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sutton, S.M.: The role of process in software start-up. IEEE Software 17(4), 33–39 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Paternoster, N., Giardino, C., Unterkalmsteiner, M., Gorschek, T., Abrahamsson, P.: Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study. Information and Software Technology (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marmer, M., Herrmann, B.L., Dogrultan, E., Berman, R., Eesley, C., Blank, S.: The startup ecosystem report 2012. Technical report, Startup Genome (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Coleman, G., O’Connor, R.: Investigating software process in practice: A grounded theory perspective. Journal of Systems and Software 81(5), 772–784 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Christensen, C.M.: The Innovator’s Dilemma. Harvard Business School Press (1997)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Storey, D.: Entrepreneurship and the New Firm. Croom Helm (1982)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Perkins, A.B., Perkins, M.C.: The Internet Bubble: Inside the Overvalued World of High-Tech Stocks – And What You Need to Know to Avoid the Coming Catastrophe. HarperInformation (1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Marmer, M., Herrmann, B.L., Dogrultan, E., Berman, R., Eesley, C., Blank, S.: Startup Genome Report Extra: Premature Scaling. Technical report, Startup Genome (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ruokolainen, J., Igel, B.: The factors of making the first successful customer reference to leverage the business of start-up software company - multiple case study in thai software industry. Technovation 24(9), 673–681 (2004); Cited By (since 1996): 4Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ruokolainen, J.: Gear-up your software start-up company by the first reference customer - nomothetic research study in the thai software industry. Technovation 25(2), 135–144 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Macmillan, I.C., Zemann, L., Subbanarasimha, P.: Criteria distinguishing successful from unsuccessful ventures in the venture screening process. Journal of Business Venturing 2(2), 123–137 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yu, Y.W., Chang, Y.S., Chen, Y.F., Chu, L.S.: Entrepreneurial success for high-tech start-ups - case study of taiwan high-tech companies, Palermo, Italy, pp. 933–937 (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Petersen, K., Feldt, R., Mujtaba, S., Mattsson, M.: Systematic Mapping Studies in Software Engineering. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE), pp. 1–10 (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yin, R.K.: Case study research: design and methods. Sage Publications (1994)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kitchenham, B., Charters, S.: Guidelines for performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering. Technical Report EBSE 2007-001, Keele University and Durham University Joint Report (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Miles, M., Huberman, A.: Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1994)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kitchenham, B., Dyba, T., Jorgensen, M.: Evidence-based software engineering. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2004, pp. 273–281 (May 2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dyba, T., Kitchenham, B., Jorgensen, M.: Evidence-based software engineering for practitioners. IEEE Software 22(1), 58–65 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Davis, A.: Operational prototyping: a new development approach. IEEE Software 9(5), 70–78 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ries, E.: The Lean Startup: How Today’s Entrepreneurs Use Continuous Innovation to Create Radically Successful Businesses. Crown Business (2011)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hui, A.: Lean change: Enabling agile transformation through lean startup, kotter and kanban: An experience report, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, pp. 169–174 (2013)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Carmel, E.: Time-to-completion in software package startups. In: Proceedings of the System Sciences, pp. 498–507 (1994)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Midler, C., Silberzahn, P.: Managing robust development process for high-tech startups through multi-project learning: The case of two European start-ups. International Journal of Project Management 26(5), 479–486 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hilmola, O.P., Helo, P., Ojala, L.: The value of product development lead time in software startup. System Dynamics Review 19(1), 75–82 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Park, J.S.: Opportunity recognition and product innovation in entrepreneurial hi-tech start-ups: A new perspective and supporting case study. Technovation 25(7), 739–752 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Preston, J.T.: Building success into a high-tech start-up. Industrial Physicist 9(3), 16–18 (2003)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kakati, M.: Success criteria in high-tech new ventures. Technovation 23(5), 447–457 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hunt, F., Probert, D., Wong, J., Phaal, R.: Valuation of technology: Exploring a practical hybrid model, pp. 47–53 (2003); Cash flow analysis; Product life cyclesGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    McAdam, M., McAdam, R.: High tech start-ups in university science park incubators: The relationship between the start-up’s lifecycle progression and use of the incubator’s resources. Technovation 28(5), 277–290 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yogendra, S.: Aligning business and technology strategies: a comparison of established and start-up business contexts. In: Proceedings of the Internal Engineering Management Conference (IEMC), pp. 2–7 (2002)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Cope, J.: Entrepreneurial learning from failure: An interpretative phenomenological analysis. Journal of Business Venturing 26(6), 604–623 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Basili, V.R., Heidrich, J., Lindvall, M., Münch, J., Regardie, M., Rombach, D., Seaman, C., Trendowicz, A.: Linking software development and business strategy through measurement. arXiv preprint arXiv:1311.6224 (2013)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.R.: The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance. (cover story). Harvard Business Review 83(7/8), 172–180 (2005)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Klein, H.K., Myers, M.D.: A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 67–93 (1999)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Corbin, J., Strauss, A.: Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology 13(1), 3–21 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carmine Giardino
    • 1
  • Xiaofeng Wang
    • 1
  • Pekka Abrahamsson
    • 1
  1. 1.Free University of BolzanoBolzanoItalia

Personalised recommendations