RFTech

About a week ago I was invited to attend a forum organized by Malaysia Debt Ventures Bhd.

Towards the end of the forum, one of the speaker in the forum said that Malaysia technopreneurs are not pro-active enough because there were many grants available but not many of them took the effort to apply. Then, there were questions opened for discussion and so I gave it a shot. I told the speakers that perhaps the Venture Capitalists and Government do not understand the behavior of a technopreneur.

A technopreneur are normally very technical and of course, they are not born with that “pro-active” attitude. They are not good in writing papers, attending functions that are held in hotels or even business seminars. Most technopreneur quietly sits behind the computer, developed some prototype and believe that it is commercial viable (although in many cases it is not). I myself was one of them.

I asked the speaker, if it is reasonable for a technopreneur to spend 3 months attending business seminar so that he or she knows how to write a 3 year bullet proof business plan, spend another 3 months to go for interviews with the panel and wait another 3 months for approval (God knows when the fund will really come)? It comes a time after 2 years, the final product is ready for market. 2 years, don’t you think that is a “long time” in the world of IT?

His explaination is that it is important for the grant panelist to asses and guide the technopreneur so that he or she may be more prepared to face the business world, or the market. Hence, it is important to bullet proof the idea and the business model.

I simply disagree to that. I feel that it is important for Government to give away small grants, may be RM 10,00 to RM 20,000 to any individual who has an idea that is attractive. The money for them to take the first step, to take risk by quiting their day job and spend 100% of their time for the next 6 months in building the business. The money is for their basic needs, not for renting an office locating in the MSC designated area.

The panelist should only take 30 mins interview and asses them on the spot. Successful candidates should receive the money not more than 1 month.  After 6 months, if the entrepreneur makes it, then great, if he or she fails, Malaysia had produced an experience businessman.  What is better way to learn than to experience failure in life? I’m an entrepreneur and I fail countless times but each failure makes me a better businessman.

Perhaps, if government really want to encourage more individual to be entrepeneur, they should focus on developing the “character” side of the entrepeneur rather than spending tonnes of money in seminars or conferences that don’t really benefit the start-ups anyway. What are your thoughts?