The Origin of (the Nanocorp) Species

BTW Mark, you might be interested to know that the word we coined, nanocorp, appeared in the New York Times in 1999, and was later selected as one of nineteen words that make up the vocabulary of (Dan Pink’s) Free Agent Nation (2001).

We chose the word nanocorp rather than the already established term microenterprise for some very specific reasons. First, micro-, as used in microenterprise and microfinance, had/has some widely accepted connotations with which we were not comfortable. First, microenterprises were all about very small, but traditional, mostly local business, what is often called a ‘Mom and Pop Shop’. And microfinance, so many years ago, was all about tiny loans to these microenterprises, mostly in locations of extreme poverty and especially in remote so-called developing countries.

But what we were and remain interested in — what we generally refer to in a Big Picture sense as Small Is Good World — is both smaller and larger than traditional microenterprise. The nanocorp idea is ’smaller’ in the sense that the smallest possible business is the solo entrepreneur, the solo free agent, the ‘business of me’ or the ‘business of us’ being the working family (as in bonds that go deeper and persist longer than business relations). The nanocorp idea is ‘larger’ in the sense that we are working on decentralized and distributed networks of these elementary building blocks, networks of nanocorps. Today, we call these networks entrepreneurial community ecosystems.

Ecosystem Patterns

For those who might be interested in digging deeper into the insights that Mark has raised in his excellent post, we encourage you to read an installment of The Nanocorp Primer first published in May of 2000: Role/Actor Scenario Patterns: The A-Team and the Sandbox, subtitled A Pattern to Enable Nanocorp Replication (AKA New Economy Job Creation). (That ‘New Economy’ phrase sure dates this piece doesn’t it!)

What Doesn’t Kill You Makes You Strong

A few final comments, Mark, on the value and impact of failure. First, you are absolutely correct that standardized infrastructure and an effective peer community can help reduce the number and severity of failures.

Another failure mitigating factor is that a nanocorp (the networked solo or family-based entrepreneur) is very likely to be a concurrent rather than a serial entrepreneur, that is, to live what Charles Handy calls a Portfolio Life. In this way, the Portfolio Life nanocorp avoids the catastrophic meltdown of having ‘all your eggs in one basket’ or business.

There is also an 80/20 Rule that comes into play when there is a standardized infrastructure (AKA Internet-based software platform) among the growing marketplace of decentralized and distributed small business networks. Once you know how to participate in one, you know most (80%) of what you need to know to cross-train for participation in another such business network. You either bring certifiable general skills to the new business. What you don’t know you learn by negotiating an apprentice relationship within the new network thereby expanding the skills in your entrepreneurial toolkit as well as expanding the network of your portfolio of socioeconomic interpersonal relations.

Great post, Mark, and welcome to the NEDversation!
–Sohodojo Jim and Timlynn–

The Origin of (the Nanocorp) Species

BTW Mark, you might be interested to know that the word we coined, nanocorp, appeared in the New York Times in 1999, and was later selected as one of nineteen words that make up the vocabulary of (Dan Pink’s) Free Agent Nation (2001).

We chose the word nanocorp rather than the already established term microenterprise for some very specific reasons. First, micro-, as used in microenterprise and microfinance, had/has some widely accepted connotations with which we were not comfortable. First, microenterprises were all about very small, but traditional, mostly local business, what is often called a ‘Mom and Pop Shop’. And microfinance, so many years ago, was all about tiny loans to these microenterprises, mostly in locations of extreme poverty and especially in remote so-called developing countries.

But what we were and remain interested in — what we generally refer to in a Big Picture sense as Small Is Good World — is both smaller and larger than traditional microenterprise. The nanocorp idea is ’smaller’ in the sense that the smallest possible business is the solo entrepreneur, the solo free agent, the ‘business of me’ or the ‘business of us’ being the working family (as in bonds that go deeper and persist longer than business relations). The nanocorp idea is ‘larger’ in the sense that we are working on decentralized and distributed networks of these elementary building blocks, networks of nanocorps. Today, we call these networks entrepreneurial community ecosystems.

Ecosystem Patterns

For those who might be interested in digging deeper into the insights that Mark has raised in his excellent post, we encourage you to read an installment of The Nanocorp Primer first published in May of 2000: Role/Actor Scenario Patterns: The A-Team and the Sandbox, subtitled A Pattern to Enable Nanocorp Replication (AKA New Economy Job Creation). (That ‘New Economy’ phrase sure dates this piece doesn’t it!)

What Doesn’t Kill You Makes You Strong

A few final comments, Mark, on the value and impact of failure. First, you are absolutely correct that standardized infrastructure and an effective peer community can help reduce the number and severity of failures.

Another failure mitigating factor is that a nanocorp (the networked solo or family-based entrepreneur) is very likely to be a concurrent rather than a serial entrepreneur, that is, to live what Charles Handy calls a Portfolio Life. In this way, the Portfolio Life nanocorp avoids the catastrophic meltdown of having ‘all your eggs in one basket’ or business.

There is also an 80/20 Rule that comes into play when there is a standardized infrastructure (AKA Internet-based software platform) among the growing marketplace of decentralized and distributed small business networks. Once you know how to participate in one, you know most (80%) of what you need to know to cross-train for participation in another such business network. You either bring certifiable general skills to the new business. What you don’t know you learn by negotiating an apprentice relationship within the new network thereby expanding the skills in your entrepreneurial toolkit as well as expanding the network of your portfolio of socioeconomic interpersonal relations.

Great post, Mark, and welcome to the NEDversation!
–Sohodojo Jim and Timlynn–