It really shouldn’t, so let’s not make that the reason, especially since we’re not the only ones. (Peter Thiel recently spoke at MIT about how far too many ventures don’t happen for this reason)

In terms of the Prof. Saravasthy effectuation model: Being relatively young, with a background at diverse startups and with no major geographic/personal commitments, here’s how I currently see the function for my work-in-progress plunge decision & ‘affordable loss’:
- until I find equivalent of my monthly loan installment of ~$1500: relatively risk-averse
- beyond that: not so risk-averse
(Highly stylistic, but the point is that risk aversion is bounded and manageable)

Anecdotally, I’ve found a critical discontinuity at the point of graduation; alumni who pursue a traditional track “only for couple of months” often stay on for much longer — and arguably don’t find themselves more competitive when they start ventures much later.

Next steps: Take a safe job till I eventually pay off debt. Build a great company, and use entrepreneurial thought and action, starting with connections/resources at hard to find certain ways to cover monthly installments. Not to mention the much higher happiness and drive from being able to shape my experience!

As a mentor and serial entrepreneur recently told me, “My job is to make sure you don’t take a job”

[Note: (1) Being wired for several years now to the chaos of startups, I’m firm on early stage ventures and am being much more academic / granular only for the purpose of this discussion. Thankfully, I don’t dissect each decision this way! (2) I like a work-in-progress approach, and tend to keep editing this and other posts]