Why you need to prevent 'expert syndrome' and find a market need for your startup to succeed

Guest column

The biggest reason startups fail is because of no market need. Emilija Manevska/Getty Images

It's a brave new world. It's an era of hot IPO's, next-generation technological disruptions, Silicon Valley tech-storms, and many startups that eventually nosedive. Many startups believe that they are creating the next best thing, but in reality, more than 80 percent of the startups fail on a global scale.

These are staggering numbers as the world is evolving, and the job market is saturating exponentially, giving to the rise of startups and entrepreneurial ventures. Nowadays, it's easy to get caught up in the endless stories of startup successes, but in actuality, startup failures are way more common that startup successes in accord with data from CB Insights.

According to the surveys by CB Insights analysts and researchers, more than 70 percent of upstart tech companies fail, and their counterparts the 'consumer hardware startups' are prone to failure with 97 percent ultimately dying or becoming "zombies." Let's talk about why startups and businesses fail. One of the significant factors that cause startups to fail miserably is that there's no market need.

Preventing 'expert syndrome'

Startups can run into the problem of their being little or no market need for the product or service they are providing. Startup founders tend to overrate and overestimate themselves and underrate the more experienced people around them. This is known as 'expert syndrome,' and it is one of the contributing reasons why many startups tend to fail and nosedive.

Ignorant individuals are often bursting with escapism, unrealistic expectations and grandeur emotions, which may cause their businesses to fall out. The actual feeling that you are in control combined with an idealistic inevitability that there is market need for the creator's product or service can lead to inevitable failure.

Expert syndrome is recognized in the field of psychology as the Dunning-Kruger effect; cognitive bias of superiority in the mind of an individual that believes their knowledge is greater than it is. This can also result in unrealistic expectations for otherwise relatively small impact incremental innovations.

As an MBA, I have seen this in myself over the years (admittedly often in hindsight) and in waves of fresh MBAs trying to turn their class project business plan into a real business. However, it is not exclusive to MBAs as any domain experts' true knowledge could be limited by their perspective and experience of a given situation. On the contrary, the secondary issue of the nature of innovation is more complicated as it presents a cause and effect relationship with the market scenario.

For a startup's success, it is essential for the product or service to be more 'disruptive' in nature rather than being merely incremental. The startup needs to solve an unsolved problem rather than assisting the problem.

Lessons learned

Now, the million-dollar question is how to learn from 'No Market Need' as the leading startup reason for failure. My advice is to get out and speak early and often with those with a different perspective on the innovation, certainly outside of the area of the innovator. From my experience this is better done in waves in that the questions are asked to the relevant persons, first reaching out to those most proximate to but outside the invention and inception space. After that moving further out from the center to find reason, logic, and ideas for validation of the disruption that can support the startup momentously.

For example, the technology for Solenic Medical addresses infections on medical implants, which was invented by a pair of university researchers at UT Southwestern. The first is an expert in infectious diseases and the second is a thermal medicine engineer.

In my due diligence research, I first reached out to orthopedic surgeons who perform the implant surgeries and deal with the first challenges of infections that arise. Receiving great feedback, almost too good to be true at first pass, I moved on to a next wave of doctors a little further out. I spoke to an ER doctor, a neurosurgeon, an interventional radiologist, and so forth, which didn't result in the same level of enthusiasm but raised good questions that drove further investigation in the due diligence effort.

From there I moved on to contacts in surgical centers and medical billing experts, further removed from the problem and again less enthusiastic. Less enthusiastic for sure, but none of them raised significant barriers, and some helped refine our understanding of what it would take to get the product to market within facility budgets and medical reimbursement requirements.

The crux here was not in any way to disrespect or discredit the inventor of the invention, but to get a perspective that complements the inventor(s) and validate the technology in multiple dimensions: the customer perspective, the product enabled by the technology, team requirements, funding challenges, all leading to valuable insights on the value of the innovation itself.


Obviously in the case of Solenic Medical, we chose to license that technology and form a company around it because we became confident that there was significant market need worth the challenges of bringing the medical device to market. This is what 'Market Need' is all about. It's about finding the right need at the right time and in the right manner.

------

James Y. Lancaster is the Texas branch manager for Arkansas-based VIC Technology Venture Development. Lancaster, who lives in College Station, oversees business there, in Dallas, and in Houston.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

Houston founder on shaping the future of medicine through biotechnology and resilience

Guest Column

Living with chronic disease has shaped my life in profound ways. My journey began in 5th grade when I was diagnosed with Scheuermann’s disease, a degenerative disc condition that kept me sidelined for an entire year. Later, I was diagnosed with hereditary neuropathy with liability to pressure palsies (HNPP), a condition that significantly impacts nerve recovery. These experiences didn’t just challenge me physically, they reshaped my perspective on healthcare — and ultimately set me on my path to entrepreneurship. What started as personal health struggles evolved into a mission to transform patient care through innovative biotechnology.

A defining part of living with these conditions was the diagnostic process. I underwent nerve tests that involved electrical shocks to my hands and arms — without anesthesia — to measure nerve activity. The pain was intense, and each test left me thinking: There has to be a better way. Even in those difficult moments, I found myself thinking about how to improve the tools and processes used in healthcare.

HNPP, in particular, has been a frustrating condition. For most people, sleeping on an arm might cause temporary numbness that disappears in an hour. For me, that same numbness can last six months. Even more debilitating is the loss of strength and fine motor skills. Living with this reality forced me to take an active role in understanding my health and seeking solutions, a mindset that would later shape my approach to leadership.

Growing up in Houston, I was surrounded by innovation. My grandfather, a pioneering urologist, was among the first to introduce kidney dialysis in the city in the 1950s. His dedication to advancing patient care initially inspired me to pursue medicine. Though my path eventually led me to healthcare administration and eventually biotech, his influence instilled in me a lifelong commitment to medicine and making a difference.

Houston’s thriving medical and entrepreneurial ecosystems played a critical role in my journey. The city’s culture of innovation and collaboration provided opportunities to explore solutions to unmet medical needs. When I transitioned from healthcare administration to founding biotech companies, I drew on the same resilience I had developed while managing my own health challenges.

My experience with chronic disease also shaped my leadership philosophy. Rather than accepting diagnoses passively, I took a proactive approach questioning assumptions, collaborating with experts, and seeking new solutions. These same principles now guide decision-making at FibroBiologics, where we are committed to developing groundbreaking therapies that go beyond symptom management to address the root causes of disease.

The resilience I built through my health struggles has been invaluable in navigating business challenges. While my early career in healthcare administration provided industry insights, launching and leading companies required the same determination I had relied on in my personal health journey.

I believe the future of healthcare lies in curative treatments, not just symptom management. Fibroblast cells hold the promise of engaging the body’s own healing processes — the most powerful cure for chronic diseases. Cell therapy represents both a scientific breakthrough and a significant business opportunity, one that has the potential to improve patient outcomes while reducing long-term healthcare costs.

Innovation in medicine isn’t just about technology; it’s about reimagining what’s possible. The future of healthcare is being written today. At FibroBiologics, our mission is driven by more than just financial success. We are focused on making a meaningful impact on patients’ lives, and this purpose-driven approach helps attract talent, engage stakeholders, and differentiate in the marketplace. Aligning business goals with patient needs isn’t just the right thing to do, it’s a powerful model for sustainable growth and lasting innovation in biotech.

---

Pete O’Heeron is the CEO and founder of FibroBiologics, a Houston-based regenerative medicine company.


Houston researchers make headway on affordable, sustainable sodium-ion battery

Energy Solutions

A new study by researchers from Rice University’s Department of Materials Science and NanoEngineering, Baylor University and the Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Thiruvananthapuram has introduced a solution that could help develop more affordable and sustainable sodium-ion batteries.

The findings were recently published in the journal Advanced Functional Materials.

The team worked with tiny cone- and disc-shaped carbon materials from oil and gas industry byproducts with a pure graphitic structure. The forms allow for more efficient energy storage with larger sodium and potassium ions, which is a challenge for anodes in battery research. Sodium and potassium are more widely available and cheaper than lithium.

“For years, we’ve known that sodium and potassium are attractive alternatives to lithium,” Pulickel Ajayan, the Benjamin M. and Mary Greenwood Anderson Professor of Engineering at Rice, said in a news release. “But the challenge has always been finding carbon-based anode materials that can store these larger ions efficiently.”

Lithium-ion batteries traditionally rely on graphite as an anode material. However, traditional graphite structures cannot efficiently store sodium or potassium energy, since the atoms are too big and interactions become too complex to slide in and out of graphite’s layers. The cone and disc structures “offer curvature and spacing that welcome sodium and potassium ions without the need for chemical doping (the process of intentionally adding small amounts of specific atoms or molecules to change its properties) or other artificial modifications,” according to the study.

“This is one of the first clear demonstrations of sodium-ion intercalation in pure graphitic materials with such stability,” Atin Pramanik, first author of the study and a postdoctoral associate in Ajayan’s lab, said in the release. “It challenges the belief that pure graphite can’t work with sodium.”

In lab tests, the carbon cones and discs stored about 230 milliamp-hours of charge per gram (mAh/g) by using sodium ions. They still held 151 mAh/g even after 2,000 fast charging cycles. They also worked with potassium-ion batteries.

“We believe this discovery opens up a new design space for battery anodes,” Ajayan added in the release. “Instead of changing the chemistry, we’re changing the shape, and that’s proving to be just as interesting.”

---

This story originally appeared on EnergyCapitalHTX.com.

FAA demands investigation into SpaceX's out-of-control Starship flight

Out of this world

The Federal Aviation Administration is demanding an accident investigation into the out-of-control Starship flight by SpaceX on May 27.

Tuesday's test flight from Texas lasted longer than the previous two failed demos of the world's biggest and most powerful rocket, which ended in flames over the Atlantic. The latest spacecraft made it halfway around the world to the Indian Ocean, but not before going into a spin and breaking apart.

The FAA said Friday that no injuries or public damage were reported.

The first-stage booster — recycled from an earlier flight — also burst apart while descending over the Gulf of Mexico. But that was the result of deliberately extreme testing approved by the FAA in advance.

All wreckage from both sections of the 403-foot (123-meter) rocket came down within the designated hazard zones, according to the FAA.

The FAA will oversee SpaceX's investigation, which is required before another Starship can launch.

CEO Elon Musk said he wants to pick up the pace of Starship test flights, with the ultimate goal of launching them to Mars. NASA needs Starship as the means of landing astronauts on the moon in the next few years.

View All Listings