Collider Listening Sessions Highlight Gaps and Assets in Rochester Entrepreneurial Ecosystem
The following is a report generated from 100 conversations in the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem. These conversations, or listening sessions, were performed by a Collider staff member between November 2019-March 2020. All individuals who contributed their thoughts to this report are anonymous. While this report is long, we encourage you to read it to better understand a view of current gaps and strengths of our ecosystem through the eyes of these 100 people.
This work was supported by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
A the report can also be viewed here. A PDF document of the report can also be emailed upon request.
You can also view this video summary of the report here. This video was sent to Entrepreneurial Service Organizations (ESOs) and other key stakeholders in Rochester along with this report last week. A total of twenty-six different ESOs and partners met with Collider staff on Monday to discuss the outcomes of this report and next steps to co-create solutions to support this community’s entrepreneurs.
Acknowledgments
We want to say a big thank you to the one hundred different Rochester, MN entrepreneurs, and entrepreneurial service organizations who took the time to share their story with us. Thank you for the trust you placed in us to listen. Thank you for being so open and honest about your experiences. Your time is greatly appreciated and your input is invaluable to make our community better for all of our entrepreneurs.
A very special thank you to the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation for providing financial support through their Inclusion Open Grant for this project.
Executive Summary
Between November 2019 and March 2020, Collider conducted 100 listening sessions in the ecosystem with Rochester entrepreneurs and people working in Rochester Entrepreneurial Service Organizations (ESOs). We had several goals with these listening sessions. The first was to validate Collider’s Ecosystem Navigator Program, a pilot initiative to empower three individuals in the Rochester ecosystem to serve as community connectors.
The second goal with these listening sessions was to understand the current snapshot of gaps and assets in the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem, especially in relation to diversity and inclusion. The final goal was to better understand how, when, and if entrepreneurs are using business development resources in the ecosystem.
We heard stories from 100 individuals in these listening sessions. Half of these participants were men and half were women. 59% of these individuals were entrepreneurs. 61% of entrepreneurs were people of Color. We were intentional to talk with entrepreneurs operating in a wide range of industries including medtech, tech, social entrepreneurship, retail, food and beverage, consulting and writing, manufacturing and construction, art and music, and childcare. These interviews were not meant to serve as an extensive gap and asset analysis of the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem. Instead, these stories were meant to provide insight into the current state of the ecosystem through the eyes of these 100 individuals.
From these listening sessions, five main themes emerged as to the state of the ecosystem according to these 100 individuals:
The ecosystem has multiple community connectors that entrepreneurs use to access business resources.
Multiple barriers are impeding a fully inclusive, diverse, and equitable entrepreneurial ecosystem.
Barriers exist in the ecosystem that slow its growth.
Mayo Clinic has a complicated relationship with the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem.
Entrepreneurs in the ecosystem have gaps in business knowledge and are asking for more educational resources.
These themes shed light on both assets, which can be further empowered, and gaps, which can serve as opportunities to build solutions toward a stronger ecosystem, together.
We believe that we all have a role to play in strengthening and accelerating Rochester’s entrepreneurs and innovators. We hope this information will help to open up lines of communication within the community and will foster new partnerships to co-create solutions to serve.
At Collider, we see a role for ourselves within two of these gaps: barriers to inclusivity, diversity, and equitable systems, and the demand for more business education. We look forward to piloting programs and building solutions with partners in the community to accelerate and empower entrepreneurs on their individual journeys.
Information from these 100 listening sessions also greatly supports the establishment of Collider’s Ecosystem Navigator Program. Observations that we heard during our time with these individuals indicates that people are already using community connectors, or Navigators, in the ecosystem to connect with many different kinds of business development resources and tools. However, data we heard also suggests that many people are not able to find that connector, providing an opportunity to activate and fuel the work of more community connectors to accelerate a larger number of entrepreneurs within the ecosystem.
These listening sessions also helped to inform the following activities for our organization.
We are in the process of putting together a full Advisory Board for our Ecosystem Navigator program. We aim for this board to be filled with people experienced in entrepreneurial ecosystem building and knowledgeable of the communities the Navigator program is meant to serve.
We also hope that our three Navigators, which will be activated by September of this year, can play a major role in breaking down inclusion barriers and can help entrepreneurs feel more connected and empowered.
Within our own programming, we aim to be intentional and recruit more women and People of Color as panelists and educators.
We also aim to increase the number of stories we tell on our Rochester Rising platform of women and Entrepreneurs of Color in the community.
And finally, by next August, we aim to co-create at least five programs with partners in the community to support underserved entrepreneurs within the ecosystem.
We are currently developing a roadmap of our educational offerings for the next year. This includes our very first program, “Basics of Entrepreneurship: From Idea to Customer” that launched this July.
We’re continuing to develop and foster relationships with our diverse populations in Rochester to ensure that everyone has a chance to participate in these programs and that their voice is heard in developing initiatives to best meet needs within the community.
We hope these actions will help entrepreneurs feel more connected into the ecosystem by enhancing systems of support and will increase their knowledge and access to business development resources in the community. We also hope these efforts help Rochester entrepreneurs have a better grasp of business concepts and feel more confident in growing and scaling their business in the community.
Overall, we see ourselves at Collider in a position to educate, activate, and communicate within the ecosystem. We can educate organizations about why entrepreneurship, especially inclusive entrepreneurship, is important. We can activate the next generation of entrepreneurial ecosystem builders, to ensure that both the entrepreneurial pipeline and their support is sustainable. We can communicate to entrepreneurs in a clear and accessible manner how to access and when to access inclusive business development resources in the ecosystem.
Methodology
Primary data was collected for this study from one hundred listening sessions conducted in the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem of entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial support organizations (ESOs) between November 2019 and March 2020. Entrepreneurs involved in these interviews ranged from those with early-stage business ideas to those who had been in operation for several years, if not decades.
All interviewees were asked a semi-scripted set of standardized questions.
The information from these listening sessions had several goals. The first was to confirm and validate our Ecosystem Navigator Program. We see Ecosystem Navigators as Rochester-based individuals with a deep passion for and connections in the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem. These Navigators would listen to the personal and professional needs of entrepreneurs and would rapidly connect entrepreneurs to the organization, person, or other resources they most need to further their businesses. Navigators are not business consultants, but would rather serve as “community connectors,” helping to rapidly connect entrepreneurs to what they need most at that point in time. Navigators would not provide business advice. Navigators would serve communities within the ecosystem in a culturally competent manner and have deep experience with and ties to that community.
Secondly, these listening sessions were intended to inform of major gaps and strengths in the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem, especially in terms of diversity and inclusion. As a new organization, this information is helpful for us at Collider to understand where we can play a role in the community and deficits that we are best suited to fill. It also helps to identify gaps that ESOs other than Collider are best positioned to solve. Gathering and disseminating this information to these community partners is key to better serving all of our entrepreneurs.
And lastly, these interviews were meant to better understand how and when entrepreneurs were using specific business development resources within the ecosystem.
This analysis was not intended to be a comprehensive overview of the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem. Instead, it was meant to give a snapshot of where the community is at this point in time through the lens of the community members interviewed for this study. This information is meant to help in decision making and educational prioritization for Collider and for the community as a whole to improve the local entrepreneurial climate.
While we made all efforts to keep this analysis as unbiased as possible, Collider staff performed the interviews. As Collider and its staff are also a part of the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem, we appreciate that this may have skewed some of the data that is specifically related to Collider. Interviews were selected intentionally, with 13% of the interviews performed with past or current Collider members, which included Collider staff.
68% of these listening sessions were recorded, with the consent of the interviewee, using the technology transcription tool Otter.ai. Not all listening sessions were recorded in order to perform these interviews in a method that was comfortable for each participant. Recorded transcripts were independently coded to document assets, barriers, and business resources that were noted in the session.
Detailed, written notes were also taken for all of the listening sessions.
This data was also a direct factor of the amount of trust placed between the interviewee and the Collider staff member who was conducting the interview. The same Collider staff member performed all the interviews for consistency.
A total of 100 individuals participated in these listening sessions. 59 were entrepreneurs and 51 worked in an ESO. Out of these 100 interviews, 50 were men, 50 were women, and 43 were a person of color.
Out of this 100 person total:
57 were White. 25 of these individuals were men. 32 were women.
10 were African American. 6 of these individuals were men. 4 were women.
10 were Asian. 5 of these individuals were men. 5 were women.
9 were Indian. 6 of these individuals were men. 3 were women.
7 were Hispanic. 4 of these individuals were men. 3 were women.
4 were African. 3 of these individuals were men. 1 was a woman.
3 were Middle Eastern. 1 of these individuals was a man. 2 were women.
For reference, the population of Rochester, MN, according to the U.S. Census Bureau's estimate as of July 1, 2019, is 118,935 people. This breaks down into an 80.3% White, 7.8% African American, 7.2% Asian, and 5.9% Hispanic population.
After performing these 100 listening sessions in the community, we first used a very manual, “hands-on” process to begin to categorize information heard in these sessions to start to uncover major themes. Phrases related to business strengths and gaps and cultural strengths and gaps were handwritten on large sheets of paper. A dot was added next to each phrase each time it was heard in the listening sessions to determine the frequency at which it was heard throughout these sessions.
We next explored connections between these key phrases to examine bigger trends and connections within these listening sessions.
To meet this goal, key phrases heard in these interviews were analyzed using an online platform called Optimal Workshop’s Reframer. Single line notes (called “observations” by Reframer) were inputted into this tool from the handwritten notes that were taken during each listening session. Each inputted observation was then tagged as a business strength, business weakness, cultural strength, or cultural weakness, similar to the analysis performed above.
Business strength tags included: accessible services, economic draw and opportunity, increased business diversification, local workforce, lots of local ideas and IP, networking opportunities, seed-stage funding, and space for early-stage growth.
Business weakness tags included: lack of awareness of my business, legal liability as a non-US citizen, broken chain of communication, crowded market, lack of access to resources, difficulty finding local resources, lack of business knowledge, lack of food business resources, lack of space for larger companies, limited connection to students, limited funding, limited high growth potential, limited local support, limited personal network, and limited workforce.
Cultural strength tags included: presence of community connectors, welcoming community, deep talent pool, emerging entrepreneurial ecosystem, entrepreneurial storytelling, improving community diversity, and supportive small business community.
Culture weakness tags included: anti-risk culture, inaccessible downtown, limited value in entrepreneurial support organizations, gender bias, lack of diversity, lack of four-year university system, lack of support of entrepreneurial service organizations, a large focus on only medical business, limited small business culture, neglected mental wellness, little storytelling, no equity, not inclusive, and poor workplace for parents.
The five most common tags from the Reframer analysis were further explored as themes 1-5. These tags were determined as the most common by ranking the number of times the tag was added to an observation heard throughout these sessions. Relationships were also further explored between these five most common observation tags and up to four tags to which they were most frequently associated.
Results
From information heard during these sessions, which we’re calling “observations,” we uncovered the following five themes in the entrepreneurial ecosystem as being the most commonly mentioned by these 100 individuals.
It’s important to note that these 100 conversations were not meant to serve as a comprehensive view of the state of Rochester’s entrepreneurial ecosystem. Instead, they were meant to allow us to see the ecosystem through the eyes of these individuals at this point in time. This information would allow Collider to better understand how we can best serve Rochester’s entrepreneurs with our skillset. It also would allow us to communicate gaps with other partners and ESOs in the community that are better able to meet these needs to work toward a stronger, fuller support system for Rochester entrepreneurs.
This analysis uncovered both assets and gaps in the ecosystem. This information presents a chance for the community to leverage these assets even further and to utilize these gaps as opportunities to work together, as a cohesive unit, to better support and fuel the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem.
To further understand the context behind these five themes, we wanted to take a deeper dive into the observations we heard in these sessions to gain more specific insight.
Theme 1: The ecosystem has multiple community connectors that entrepreneurs use to access business resources.
Community connectors were one of the most frequently mentioned resources throughout these interviews. Community connectors were mentioned 112 times within these sessions from 44 different people (see more information below). For this analysis, we’re considering a community connector to be an individual, an organization, or an informal network that links entrepreneurs to a resource that is useful for their business. These connectors link people to accessible services, networking opportunities, and resources, especially at the idea and minimal viable product stages of business development.
Community connectors were mentioned 22 times in these listening sessions as useful resources to connect entrepreneurs to tools they needed to grow their business.
These connectors were mentioned 14 times by 10 different individuals as being useful to link to resources for the idea stage of business development. Community connectors that link entrepreneurs to resources for the minimal viable product or service stage of their business were mentioned 8 times by 4 different people.
After this stage of business development, community connectors were not as frequently mentioned as being useful to gain access to business resources. In the two instances above, both a mix of individuals, informal networks, and organizations served as community connectors. See more information about these business resources in the “Resource Utilization” section at the end of this document.
As opposed to being connected into the ecosystem, there were 51 observations recorded from listening sessions with 30 individuals where the individual was being excluded from the community or had their business development progress slowed due to limitations in their personal network. These included explicit observations, where the person was aware of this limitation and stated it. This also included implicit observations where the individual may not have expressly stated that a limited personal network was impeding their progress, but was not able to take the next step in their business due to a lack of some sort of connection being made.
Beyond stating limitations in the number of people they know, these entrepreneurs mentioned difficulties in finding mentors and experts, challenges in locating business partners and teammates, and difficulties connecting to both a diverse workforce and workforce in general. We also heard challenges in locating and accessing funding. Entrepreneurs also had difficulty finding people operating in similar types of businesses. They also, in general, had some difficulties accessing other entrepreneurs within the ecosystem.
These listening sessions suggest that White women are, interestingly, both the most likely to use connectors within the community and are the most likely to be held back due to limitations in their personal network. In addition, this information suggests that all entrepreneurs of Color are more likely than their White colleagues to not be connected into the ecosystem.
This information greatly supports the establishment of Collider’s Ecosystem Navigator Program. It indicates that people are already using community connectors, or Navigators, in the ecosystem to connect with many different kinds of business development resources and tools. However, it also suggests that many people are not able to find that connector, providing an opportunity to activate and fuel the work of more community connectors to accelerate a larger number of entrepreneurs within the ecosystem.
Theme 2: Multiple barriers are impeding a fully inclusive, diverse, and equitable entrepreneurial ecosystem.
The second most common set of observations uncovered a feeling that the ecosystem is not fully inclusive or welcoming to everyone who wants to participate. Throughout these listening sessions, we heard 94 different instances of barriers impeding a fully inclusive, diverse, and equitable entrepreneurial ecosystem from 26 different individuals. These barriers included gaps in equitable systems development, lack of diversity, miscommunications, and gender discrimination.
For this the purposes of this report, the following definitions were used when referring to “diversity,” “inclusion,” and “equity.” All definitions are from the Ford Foundation.
Diversity is defined as “the representation of all our varied identities and differences (race, ethnicity, gender, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, tribe, caste, socio-economic status, thinking and communication styles, etc.), collectively and as individuals.”
Equity “seeks to ensure fair treatment, equality of opportunity, and fairness in access to information and resources for all.”
Inclusion “builds a culture of belonging by actively inviting the contribution and participation of all people.”
12 people mentioned gaps in equitable systems development in the ecosystem 22 different times in these listening sessions. A lack of diverse leadership, gaps in cultural competency in leadership, and a deficit of leaders that look like the community they are meant to serve were mentioned by 4 different individuals. 3 individuals noted that decisions are made in this community without diverse people at the discussion table. Gaps in racial equity were mentioned as well, with “Black and Brown people” receiving different treatment than White individuals in the ecosystem. One individual also stated that you have to be the right gender and color in Rochester to be taken seriously.
8 people mentioned gaps in diversity within the ecosystem 12 different times as contributing to a non-inclusive environment. These observations included mentions of limited diversity in terms of race and gender, and in terms of types of business operating in the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem. 5 of these people commented that diversity and inclusion efforts in the community are minimal. One of these individuals thought that the Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce's efforts at diversity and inclusion were not intentional. Another of these individuals felt that the percentage of diverse businesses that must be included in DMC development projects was too low. Two of these individuals commented that this year’s womens’ leadership event “Living and Leading with Purpose” was not designed to be inclusive or diverse and had few attendees of Color. In these sessions, we also heard thoughts that there is no diversification in the types of people recognized or asked to participate in entrepreneurial and business panels.
Miscommunication also contributes to these inclusivity barriers. Broken communication and misconceptions were mentioned 6 times in these listening sessions with 3 different people. Two of these individuals thought there was limited outreach between Mayo Clinic, the Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce, or the public school system to People of Color. In these sessions, we also heard the thought that 1 Million Cups Rochester and 1 Discovery Square are only for medical businesses.
Gender discrimination and biases also impede inclusion in the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem. During these sessions, we heard 13 mentions of gender biases from 7 different women. This included general statements around ceilings and barriers that only women face. We also heard mention of sexual harassment of women in executive positions and women’s status being downplayed by calling them “girls.” In these sessions, we also heard instances of gender discrimination when seeking funding. We also noted observations of businesswomen feeling patronized and talked down to, especially by White men.
Other less frequently mentioned instances of inclusivity barriers in the ecosystem include:
Several instances of racial discrimination. This included the observation that “Black and Brown people” have to “jump through different hoops” to get business loans and face more challenges, in general, with obtaining lines of credit, accessing capital, and working with lenders. We also heard instances of racially motivated harassment within businesses in the community. We also captured general thoughts that People of Color are undervalued and are “outpaced” before they can even start a business.
Additional items we heard less frequently that addressed barriers in the ecosystem include:
The community talks about being inclusive but does not back this up with action.
Latino culture is buried.
People of color are supported by their own networks, not the community in general.
Immigration status and language barriers block people from participating.
The “good old boys” club still exists, especially within Mayo Clinic.
Hiring practices in the City are not inclusive.
More work needs to be done to make welcoming environments for People of Color and immigrants in the ecosystem.
Not everyone has a network or is connected to a network.
Overall, data from these listening sessions suggests that White women, White men, Black men, and Hispanic women are the most likely to feel that the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem is not inclusive. All women and Black men were also the most likely to feel that limited equity, lack of diversity, and miscommunication contributes to a non-inclusive culture in the community.
While we at Collider feel that observations discussed in this theme are disheartening, it is not shocking that they are happening in the Rochester ecosystem. However, by continuing to bring these facts to light, we hope it can fuel a productive conversation in the community toward a more inclusive and equitable tomorrow. It is well past time to open up the future of this ecosystem to everyone who wants to participate. We all have a role to play in this process.
Theme 3: Barriers exist in the ecosystem that slow its growth.
The third most common set of observations we heard in these sessions uncovered several barriers and lack of resources in Rochester that are slowing down the ecosystem’s ability to grow. We heard mention of these barriers 86 times during these listening sessions from 28 different individuals. These barriers included the presence of Mayo Clinic in the ecosystem, a limited workforce, anti-risk culture, and limited connection to students at both the primary and university levels.
13 different observations from 8 different individuals were heard in these listening sessions describing Mayo Clinic as holding back the growth of the ecosystem. These observations included a need for more support of women entrepreneurs within Mayo, low risk-taking amongst Mayo staff, a gap in understanding of startup basics from Mayo innovators, and dissatisfaction with the Mayo Clinic Ventures process of building out an idea into a product.
Thoughts that a limited workforce in Rochester impedes the growth of the ecosystem was heard a total of 18 times from 6 different people. These individuals expressed thoughts that a lack of a youthful workforce, a limited ability to retain Rochester students in the area, a shortage of coding education in the public school system, and a lack of a traditional four-year university limit the workforce pool. They also felt that there were gaps in hardware, software, manufacturing, and engineering expertise, as well as gaps in specialized expertise in healthcare. We also heard thoughts that startups need to expend too much capital to attract talent to Rochester and that there is a limited pool of early-stage employees for a company.
In addition, we heard 8 instances of anti-risk culture impacting the growth of Rochester’s ecosystem from 5 different individuals. All instances of anti-risk culture were related to Mayo Clinic. This included a general lack of risk-taking amongst Mayo staff (which was heard in 4 of these instances), talent (especially developers) not wanting to leave the security of Mayo, and a “disappointing” process of getting technology out of Mayo Clinic.
Lastly, we heard 10 instances of a weak connection to students in these listening sessions that were also thought to contribute to the ecosystem not being able to reach its full potential. These thoughts were heard from 6 different individuals. Within these occurrences, we heard observations of schools teaching a limited skill set, especially lacking in education on technical skills, that would make students more attractive to local startups and help students be retained in the community. We also heard thoughts of a general lack of intersection between all students (from elementary school to the university level) with the local business scene. Some of these individuals also expressed ideas that the structure is too rigid within the public school system to foster innovation and expressed gaps in youth entrepreneurship opportunities, especially for those interested in biomedicine.
Other less frequently mentioned barriers included:
No local pool of CEOs.
Limited local funding beyond the seed stage.
Local mentors are experiencing burnout.
Limited low-cost startup space.
Limited entrepreneurial pipeline, especially with early-stage ideas.
No true landing place for people with ideas.
Lack of hubs or any physical concentration of the ecosystem.
Ecosystem has limited software jobs.
Ecosystem has no wet lab space.
No true accelerator program within the community.
No large mass of medical entrepreneurs, and a thin pool of entrepreneurs in general compared to other ecosystems.
According to these listening sessions, White men, White women, Asian men, and Black men are the most likely individuals to believe barriers exist in the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem that slow down its growth. White men are the most likely to think that Mayo Clinic, a limited workforce, and a weak connection to students hold back the community. Black men are among the most likely to believe the community is impeded by anti-risk culture.
Some of these barriers have deep roots in culture. Others, especially an improved connection with the Rochester student population, represent an immense opportunity to not only enhance the workforce in Rochester, but to cement the future of our startup and small business community.
Theme 4: Mayo Clinic has a complicated relationship with the entrepreneurial ecosystem.
Mayo Clinic, both in a positive and a negative context, was also frequently mentioned throughout these listening sessions.
In general, the relationship between Mayo Clinic and the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem was complicated amongst the individuals included in this analysis. Mayo Clinic was mentioned 75 times in these listening sessions with 27 different individuals. 11 of these people currently work at Mayo Clinic or in a Mayo Clinic associated company. 16 of these individuals do not currently work at Mayo Clinic. The consensus was pretty evenly split with individuals working within Mayo Clinic or in a Mayo startup generally thinking that Mayo Clinic benefited the ecosystem. Individuals in these listening sessions who did not work at Mayo Clinic were more likely to believe that Mayo hinders the ecosystem.
Throughout these listening sessions, we heard 13 different mentions of ways Mayo Clinic inhibits the growth of the ecosystem from 8 different individuals. We heard observations of a general risk averseness among Mayo Clinic staff, including a statement that not many Mayo physicians are willing to take the leap into entrepreneurship to pursue their ideas. We also heard several sentiments that Mayo staff do not fully understand startup methodology, including product translation, equity, valuation, and funding. We also heard frustration with the process of licensing technology from Mayo Clinic and a thought that talks with Mayo Clinic Ventures “go nowhere.”
However, we also heard 16 different mentions of Mayo positively impacting the entrepreneurial ecosystem from 6 different individuals. New Mayo Clinic policies that are more supportive of entrepreneurship was the most common thread we heard in these discussions. This included a new CEO that is supportive of startups, Mayo’s Entrepreneurial Leave of Absence Policy and Employee Entrepreneurship Program, and the organization being more inclined now than previously to license technology. We also heard mention of new programs internal to Mayo that are specifically for women leaders and female entrepreneurs.
Other less frequent observations heard from these sessions included:
There’s a need for more storytelling of Mayo Clinic innovators.
Mayo draws technical talent to the community.
Much of Rochester’s demographic diversity is within Mayo Clinic.
Small businesses cannot compete with Mayo’s salary and benefits packages.
It’s difficult to connect with potential mentors within Mayo Clinic.
Lots of Mayo physicians, nurses, and staff have entrepreneurial ideas.
Mayo is “impossible to crack” and is difficult to “find a way to work with.”
Small businesses and nonprofits have difficulty identifying and connecting with clients internal to Mayo Clinic.
Mayo is a resource to make connections and learn about the local job market.
Mayo staff are often disconnected from the external community.
It’s difficult to pull talent away from more stable job opportunities inside Mayo Clinic.
Mayo Clinic has blocked its employees from doing contract work with local small businesses.
Theme 5: Entrepreneurs in the ecosystem have gaps in business knowledge and are asking for more educational resources.
The fifth and final most common observation heard in these 100 listening sessions related to general gaps in business knowledge in the community. This barrier was mentioned 69 times in these listening sessions from 33 different people This included a mix of ESOs commenting on deficits in business concepts they observe in the community as well as entrepreneurs commenting on their own educational needs and information that would have accelerated their entrepreneurial journey.
In these sessions, we heard 20 different “asks” for specific types of business education from 11 different individuals. We also heard “asks” for actionable classes around how to get started as an entrepreneur, which could be offered in person, online, or as static documents. Several of these individuals were also seeking some sort of “directory,” “toolkit,” or “starter kit” explaining how to launch a business in Rochester. People also had very targeted educational needs, such as with fundraising, legal permitting, licensing, marketing, and pitch feedback.
Additionally, we heard 15 different instances of misunderstanding or lack of knowledge of how to access business resources in sessions with 11 different individuals. In this report, we’re considering a business resource to be any organization or individual that provides support for an entrepreneur beyond serving as a “community connector,” as noted in the first theme. These resources could include organizations or individuals that supply funding, education, or any other sort of service that supports business growth.
As in the previous instance, we again heard a mix of ESOs commenting on what they observe in the community. From ESOs, we heard mentions of how entrepreneurs in the ecosystem typically don’t know how or whom to reach out to for help with their ideas or businesses.
From entrepreneurs, we heard barriers in finding mentors and other experts. We also heard cases where entrepreneurs did not know how or when to access funding in the community. Other entrepreneurs were asking for help locating resources though some sort of “directory” or “roadmap” that could help them locate business services. This “roadmap” could also reduce their time in researching and seeking out these resources.
According to information gathered from these listening sessions, all genders and races felt there was a need for more business education in the community or was asking for more business knowledge. White women were the largest group asking for specific types of business education. White men, White women, and Indian men were the largest groups that had misunderstandings in how to access business resources.
For ourselves at Collider, this “gap” represents one of the most exciting opportunities for us, and other partners and ESOs, to serve the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem. Through development and launch of targeted business education and training programs, there’s an immense opportunity to build up entrepreneurial skill sets to provide our entrepreneurs the tools they need to succeed. In our opinion, this is key to ensuring the long term growth, stability, and success of entrepreneurial culture in Rochester.
Key Themes across Gender and Race
To ensure that we look at key themes and important issues within specific cross-sections of the ecosystem, we wanted to examine top observations among White men and women and men and women of Color. We felt that any further segmentation of the data beyond this breakdown would result in input from too few individuals, making it seem like a very small number of individuals share the same point of view and speak for their entire race and gender.
Similar to the data analysis done previously, we looked at top observations heard from individuals in these demographics. Some of these top observations clustered around the five themes we already discussed, while some were unique. Where the observations aligned with one of the themes already mentioned, we primarily reference information reported previously, as no new insights were really gained here. However, when observations clustered around a new theme, we went into more depth with the data to better understand the importance of the issue to these individuals.
Through information gathered in these listening sessions, these were the top themes, or clusters of observations gathered for White men, White women, men of Color, and women of Color.
Top Themes-> Men of Color (25 individuals)
Mayo Clinic was the single most mentioned organization by men of Color we listened to in these sessions. Thoughts from 8 of these individuals support Theme 4, that Mayo Clinic has a complicated relationship with the ecosystem. Similar to the 100 people we heard in these listening sessions, men of Color were also split, with 17 mentions of ways Mayo Clinic fuels the ecosystem and 11 mentions of ways Mayo holds back the ecosystem. Men of Color in these sessions also used multiple resources within Mayo Clinic to grow their business including the Office of Entrepreneurship, Walleye Tank, Mayo Clinic Ventures, and the Division of Engineering. They used business resources within Mayo from the idea stage through to the funding stage of business.
13 of these men made 32 mentions that supported Theme 1, that the ecosystem has community connectors that help link people to business services. They used a variety of individuals and organizations as connectors including:
1 Million Cups Rochester
Mayo Clinic
RAEDI
the Mayo Clinic Office of Entrepreneurship
Collider
SBDC
Diversity Council
Cube Coworking
United Way
Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce
Hispanic Advocacy and Community Advocacy through Research (HACER)
9 of these individuals made 19 mentions of business resources they were able to access in the community. This included a variety of individuals these men used as mentors. Some of these men also utilized Collider as a space to grow their early-stage company and as a network to connect with mentors. A handful of these individuals used 1 Million Cups Rochester to gain pitch feedback and exposure for their business. Several also used the Mayo Clinic’s Office of Entrepreneurship and Walleye Tank business pitch competition to refine their business idea and to connect with mentors and other entrepreneurs. A few of these men used Mayo Clinic’s Division of Engineering for prototyping their ideas. One man mentioned that the Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce was useful to connect with human resources for his business. Business resources mentioned by these men centered around tools for the idea through the minimal viable product or service stage of business growth.
6 of these men made 19 mentions of the presence of idea stage resources they used for the development of their business. Some of these resources they found in the community. Others they located external to Rochester. Resources these men used at the idea stage of the business included:
Their personal network
Self-taught business education
SCORE
SBDC
Startup Factory Austin
Walleye Tank
1 Million Cups Rochester
Cube Coworking
Mayo Clinic Office of Entrepreneurship
Top Themes-> Women of Color (18 individuals)
11 of these women contributed 37 “observations” to support Theme 1, that community connectors exist in the Rochester ecosystem. These women mentioned several different individuals that were great connectors that made them aware of and linked them to business resources in the ecosystem. They also mentioned the following resources to be useful to connect to other business services:
Cottage Food MN group
Food Innovation Team Facebook group
NAACP Rochester chapter
WE Forums
Farmers Market
Diversity Council
DMC
SCORE
Mayo Clinic Ventures
Mayo Clinic
Alliance of Chicanos, Hispano, Latino Americans (ACHLA)
7 of these women made 25 mentions of business services they were able to access in the community, especially at the idea and minimal viable product stage of business growth. Organizations these women mentioned as being useful, and relatively accessible, tools for business growth included:
Farmers Market
Forager
Figue
Diversity Council
Marrow
Olmsted County Health
SCORE
Cottage Food MN group
17 different observations from 6 of these women supported Theme 4, that Mayo Clinic has a complicated relationship with the entrepreneurial ecosystem. However, these women tended to have stronger feelings of Mayo supporting growth of the ecosystem, with 11 mentions of ways Mayo Clinic fuels the ecosystem and 5 mentions of ways that it holds back or does not contribute to the ecosystem’s growth.
5 of these women contributed 31 observations supporting Theme 2, that barriers to inclusivity exist in the ecosystem. 4 of these women made statements supporting limited equity as fueling these barriers. 3 of these women mentioned a lack of diversity in the community as a major barrier. One of these women mentioned gender discrimination she faced. Another of these women felt that miscommunications in the ecosystem also contribute to this lack of inclusivity.
Top Themes-> White Men (25 individuals)
7 of these men made 46 statements that agreed with Theme 3, multiple barriers exist in the ecosystem that slow down its growth. These clustered primarily around gaps in education amongst Mayo innovators and limited support for Mayo entrepreneurs (heard from 3 of these men), a limited workforce (heard from 4 of these men), and a weak connection to Rochester students (heard from 3 of these men).
8 of these men made 18 statements that agreed with Theme 1, the ecosystem has multiple community connectors. They’ve used these connectors mainly to link to business resources supporting their business at the idea stage of growth, while one of these men used connectors to access resources for the minimal viable product stage of their business. These men used a variety of both individuals and organizations as connectors to link to business resources in the ecosystem. Organizations these men used as community connectors include:
BioAM
Collider
Mayo Clinic
Mayo Clinic Business Accelerator
Mayo Clinic Ventures
Rochester Area Economic Development Inc. (RAEDI)
Southern Minnesota Initiative Foundation (SMIF)
3 of these men used RAEDI (which they mentioned 13 times) as a business development resource in the community. Some of these men found the space offered by the Mayo Clinic Business Accelerator very useful at the early stage of their businesses. They also used this space, and RAEDI in general, for networking connections. These individuals, collectively, utilized RAEDI from the idea stage through the funding stages of their businesses.
7 of these men mentioned Mayo Clinic in their listening sessions. Similar to the general consensus with the 100 people included in all of these interviews, these men supported Theme 4 that Mayo Clinic has a complicated relationship with the entrepreneurial ecosystem. 8 mentions were heard of ways that Mayo Clinic held back the ecosystem, while 5 ways in which Mayo accelerates the ecosystem’s growth were heard in listening sessions with these men. Some of these individuals also used Mayo Clinic as a resource from the idea through to the scaling stages of their business.
Top Themes-> White Women (32 individuals)
11 of these women made 32 observations agreeing with Theme 2, that barriers to inclusivity exist in the community. 5 of these women believed that limited equity or gender discriminations contribute to gaps in inclusivity. 3 believed that limited diversity also contributed to barriers in the ecosystem. 1 woman also mentioned miscommunications in the ecosystem as contributing to it being non-inclusive.
12 of these women made 25 observations agreeing with Theme 1, that community connectors exist in the ecosystem. They used these connectors primarily to link up with idea stage resources. These women used a variety of individuals and organizations as connectors to link them to business tools. Organizations they used as connectors include:
City of Rochester
Collider
DMC
Realty Growth Inc
SBDC
10 of these women made 15 mentions of miscommunications, broken communications, or misconceptions in the ecosystem. Two of these women mentioned difficulties in accessing internal Mayo Clinic personnel. Two of these women also cannot develop lines of communication to find a more diverse workforce in the community. There were two instances of women reaching out to either SCORE or RAEDI and not receiving a response back. There were also 3 observations that either Mayo Clinic or the City of Rochester does not support small businesses with their actions. These include high taxes, construction with no assistance from the City, and a general feeling that Mayo Clinic is not inclusive of the local small business culture in their process, including for use as vendors.
7 of these women also noted 11 observations of a growing entrepreneurial ecosystem in Rochester. 3 of these women noted the importance of new women’s programming taking place with the WE Forums in the community. 2 also noted the importance of Collider for providing early-stage space. Another mentioned the value of the IBM campus to support scaling-stage companies.
While this breakdown of the data sheds light on key issues in different cross-sections of Rochester’s entrepreneurial ecosystem, especially between White entrepreneurs and entrepreneurs of Color, we need to be careful not to allow the voice of a few speak for an entire race or gender. However, this information does provide some insight on issues that are more “top of mind” in some demographics compared to others.
Across every sector we examined here, each group mentioned the presence of community connectors in the ecosystem. But in these sessions, we also heard how people are still left behind. Not everyone is connected into a network or to a Navigator or Connector. This suggests that these individuals will remain unsupported and their ideas not come to fruition with the status quo. In total, this information, again, provides validation of our Ecosystem Navigator program. It suggests that people are already performing this type of service, but more intentional work is required to include more entrepreneurs.
The complicated relationship between Mayo Clinic and the ecosystem was also mentioned by all of these groups, except for White women. This may speak more to the White women that were included in this sample set and does not necessarily imply that White women, in general, do not also have a complicated relationship with Mayo.
Data from these sessions also suggests that all women are more likely to see and experience barriers to inclusivity in the ecosystem.
It is also not surprising that business resources were mentioned by men of Color in two different contexts. A major outcome and focus of these sessions were to better understand what business resources people were using and how they were using them. However, this information suggests that people are able to find some resources to grow their business in the community. But again, they find these largely through community connectors. So if someone is not connected into the system, they likely will not be able to grow their business to the same extent and as rapidly as someone who is more linked in.
Resource Utilization
Lastly, we wished to examine business development resources in the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem that were used by entrepreneurs included in these listening sessions at various stages of business development. These stages were broken down into: idea, minimal viable product or service (MVP), scaling, fundraising, and mature.
Idea stage businesses were defined as being at very early stages of growth and do not yet have a functional product or service. MVP stage was defined as the phase where the business has a functional product/service and may have some sales. Scaling was defined as the stage of business development where the business has an identified mission, product, and sales. Fundraising was defined as the stage where the business is actively seeking outside funding. Mature stage was defined as the phase where the business has successfully operated for more than five years at a steady-state with some growth over time.
While we recognize there are many other business development resources in the ecosystem, these were resources the entrepreneurs (not the ESOs) mentioned they utilized during these stages of business development.
Overall, community connectors were key for many entrepreneurs to access business development resources during the idea and MVP stages of business growth. Entrepreneurs started to rely more on their personal network at the scaling stage.
Idea Stage Business Development Resources:
C4 Building
Cube Coworking
DMC
Entrepreneurial storytelling
Farmer's Market
Kauffman FastTrac
Mayo Clinic
Mayo Clinic Business Accelerator
Mayo Clinic Network
Mayo Clinic Office of Entrepreneurship
Networking opportunities
Office or coworking space
Online learning
People's Food Coop
Personal network
RAEDI
Rochester Rising
Rochester Public Schools
SBDC
SCORE
Self-learning
Startup Factory Austin
Walleye Tank
Minimal Viable Product or Service Stage Business Development Resources:
Collider
Cube Coworking
Mayo Clinic
Farmers Market
Figue
Forager
Marrow
Mayo Clinic
Mayo Clinic Business Accelerator
Mayo Clinic Division of Engineering
Mayo Clinic Employee Entrepreneurship Program
Mayo Clinic Entrepreneurial Leave of Absence Program
Mayo Clinic network
Mayo Clinic Ventures
Minnesota Cup
Office or coworking space
Olmsted County Health
Personal network
RAEDI
RCTC
RGI (Realty Growth, Inc)
Rochester Area Foundation
SBDC
Scaling Stage Business Development Resources:
City of Rochester
Collider
Cradle2Career
Cube Coworking
Figue
IBM
Local banks
Marrow
Mayo Clinic
Mayo Clinic Business Accelerator
Mayo Clinic Entrepreneurial Leave of Absence
Mayo Clinic network
Minnesota Cup
Office or coworking space
Personal network
RAEDI
RGI (Realty Growth Inc.)
Funding Stage Business Development Resources:
City of Rochester
FSA loans
IBM campus
Indie GoGo
Local banks
Mayo Clinic
Mayo Clinic Entrepreneurial Leave of Absence
Mayo Clinic network
MN DEED (Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development)
NIH (National Institutes of Health)
Office or coworking space
Personal network
RAEDI
SBA loans
Self-funding
SMIF (Southern Minnesota Initiative Foundation)
Personal network
Mature Stage Business Development Resources:
IBM campus
Mayo Clinic
Mayo Clinic network
Office or coworking space
Next Steps
We understand that we at Collider cannot overcome all of these barriers, especially alone. But we do have a part to play. We see ourselves serving as a convener. We can help to bring different ESOs and entrepreneurs together, in one space, to listen and learn. This is the biggest role we see Collider playing in this ecosystem.
We see ourselves serving to educate, activate, and communicate within the ecosystem. We can educate organizations about why entrepreneurship, especially inclusive entrepreneurship, is important. We can activate the next generation of entrepreneurial ecosystem builders to ensure that both the entrepreneurial pipeline and their support is sustainable. We can communicate to entrepreneurs in a clear and accessible manner how to access and when to access inclusive business development resources in the ecosystem.
We hope these findings serve as a place to start the discussion with our entrepreneurs and with other ESOs and partners to foster the co-creation of programs and structure to propel the entire ecosystem forward.
While many of these steps involve collaboration with those best positioned to lead and serve, we see Collider playing a key role to help foster solutions in two the these gaps.
The first is the observation that the Rochester entrepreneurial ecosystem has barriers to inclusivity. We believe that everyone in this ecosystem has a role to play to help dismantle systems in place that contribute to this issue.
Currently, Collider is in the process of putting together a full Advisory Board for our Ecosystem Navigator program. We aim for this board to be 80% women or People of Color and filled with people experienced within the communities the Navigator program is meant to serve. We also hope that our three Navigators, which will be activated by September of this year, can play a major role in breaking down some of these inclusion barriers and can help entrepreneurs feel more connected and empowered. Within our own programming, we aim to be intentional and recruit more women and People of Color as panelists and educators within our programming. We also aim to increase the number of stories we tell on our Rochester Rising platform of women and Entrepreneurs of Color in the community. And finally, by next August, we aim to co-create at least five programs with partners in the community to support underserved entrepreneurs within the ecosystem.
We hope these actions will help entrepreneurs feel more connected into the ecosystem by enhancing systems of support and will increase their knowledge and access to business development resources in the community.
Along with partners, we also see Collider playing a major role to bridge educational gaps in the ecosystem. Through these listening sessions, we heard several very specific gaps in business understanding that we are well-positioned to fill. We are currently developing a roadmap of our educational offerings for the next year to help fill this need. This includes our very first educational program, “Basics of Entrepreneurship: From Idea to Customer” that’s launching this July. We’re also continuing to develop and foster relationships with our diverse populations in Rochester to ensure that everyone has a chance to participate in these programs and that their voice is heard in developing initiatives to best meet needs within the community.
We hope this effort helps Rochester entrepreneurs have a better grasp of business concepts and can feel more confident in growing and scaling their business in the community.
