Conclusion
Unlike large corporations, startup companies are still searching for an appropriate business model. Thus, the performance measures used by startups vary and depend on a startup’s stage and type. The findings show that some startup types (media site, usergenerated content, and two-sided marketplace) demonstrate performance that is inconsistent with the importance of a measure, implying that the some startups perform well in less important areas, but poorly in areas that are more important. It can be argued that startups can face four situations based on the importance and performance of each metric. First, when a metric is considered important and performance is excellent, it implies that startups are doing well in the important areas, and thus the startup’s strategy should be to maintain this status. Second, if a metric is considered less important, but the startup is doing very well in this area, this is not a good sign, as many might believe. Rather, this shows that the startup is wasting its limited resources in an unimportant area. Resources should be reallocated to more important areas instead. Third, when the performance of a startup is not very good in an unimportant area, the startup should not become anxious, as that area has low priority. Finally, if the startup is performing poorly in the most important areas, this is a red flag. It is of highest priority for a startup to improve its performance in this area. Thus, the results from this study can help startups allocate resources properly.
