How to Become an Entrepreneur

editorMay 21, 2020 1:08 Am

Are you bored with your work or have just been furloughed? Do you wish to control your own time? Do you have a dream to start a business, employ people, deliver services, and make a positive impact on society, particularly in these unprecedented times?

But do you also feel intimidated and your thoughts shrouded by these fears:

• The fear of rejection: “Your idea is too small, leave business for the geniuses.”

• The fear of inadequacy: “Who are you; you can’t do it; business is not for people with low capital and limited connections.”

• The fear of being judged: “Business is not in your family blood, don’t even start dreaming.”

• The fear of failure: “What if I run out of capital and fail?”

Well, let me assure you that entrepreneurship is a skill that can be acquired by anyone. You don’t have to be a superstar to become a businessperson.

The Journey to Becoming an Entrepreneur

The journey to entrepreneurship starts with YOU. No one is going to fight your fears for you. You must confidently confront them and be decisive as you declare: Now is the time to start my business journey. If you can, I will advise that you save up a year’s worth of your living expense and set aside some investment. This would come handy on the proverbial rainy day. Waste no time anymore. Wake up, stand up, and let your business ideas start taking a practical, tangible form. This article gives you five factors you must consider if you want to become an entrepreneur and succeed at it.

The Idea

Have you ever wondered whether the ideas that you are passionate about are too small and can’t be developed into a thriving business? Based on my personal experience, please allow me to mention that there is nothing in entrepreneurship or politics or any other field for that matter called “small idea”. Former Prime Minister of Britain, Winston Churchill, once said: “No idea is so outlandish that it should not be considered with a searching but at the same time, a steady eye.” You need a steady eye to get your evolving idea on the path to a successful business. For example, one of the world’s renowned businessman, Richard Branson started Virgin Airlines after he was stuck at an airport in Puerto Rico on his way to the Virgin Islands. With fewer passengers going to that destination, the flight was cancelled. This inconvenience birthed a business idea in Richard Branson’s mind. He saw an opportunity to start an airline that would also fly to the Virgin Islands. Thus the birth of Virgin Airlines. So, never underestimate the power of your ideas, especially when inspired by life experiences/problems. Any well-thought-out business idea that addresses societal issues, fine-tuned value proposition, clearly stated unique selling points and spiced up with focus and determination could produce impressive results.

The Starting Point

Just imagine: after she gives birth, a new mother has no parenting manual. How does she begin taking care of her child? She starts by trying, fumbling, and learning along the way. The same goes for starting a business. The best way is not to shun the emerging idea but to start, fall, rise, and from the lessons learned, become better. Your aim should be to establish a venture even when you don’t have all the components at a go. The best way to start is by selling your idea to people that you trust to support you. Steve Jobs, the founder of Apple, had no cash and no clients when he established Apple. What he did next is a beautiful example you can learn from:

a) He persuaded a local computer shop with payment on delivery to order his non-existent Apple computers.

b) Using the order he just got as evidence that he could pay, Steve jobs persuaded a dealer in computer parts to sell him the components he required to start his work.

c) Jobs and a small team worked on building the first Apple PCs in their garage, delivering them on time and making a smooth profit.

d) Apple had been born out of nothing.

One could contend that the complex, volatile, and ambiguous socioeconomic environment in Nigeria may make it almost impossible for a Steve Job to succeed in Nigeria. Nevertheless, there are still many Femis, Ngozis and Razaqs today who are doing well in their business in the nation.

Scale the Heights

Keep in mind that no business can develop on an indefinite basis. Most companies are more effective in different sizes and stages of the firm. For example, if you desire to establish a big food business, you may realize that starting a four-person restaurant is relatively easier. However, building a large-scale catering business may be more difficult. If your long-term goal is to be big, your strategy could be to start small, then expand later.

Seek help

Build a team even if it means having freelance accountant, human resource advisors, sales personnel and IT consultants, some of whom may come free from peers, friends and family. Get an advisory board-This would be a group of experienced non-competing professionals who can help with; ideas, challenging assumptions and make you accountable, shape strategy, motivate and share contacts.

… And Finally

Skill and tenacity are significant factors that will help you drive safely on the journey of entrepreneurship. To build the requisite skills, you need to come up with a continuous personal development plan. This personal development plan would entail an honest assessment of your strengths and weaknesses as well as how to leverage your strengths to address your limitations. A development plan of how to improve, for example, your conceptual, digital, communication or networking skills should have a timeline, say six months, and a to-do list. For instance, in the next six months, you may need to read more, watch more relevant videos, attend some training and look for a mentor. Here are eleven areas that you could consider setting up a business: 1. Telemedicine 2. IT 3. Health care, 4. Education 5. Renewable energy 6. Supply chain 7. Arts & Entertainment 8. Security 9. Fashion 10. Agricultural value chain 11.Fin Tech. Good luck!

Abubakre (PhD) is a British-based entrepreneur with an unparalleled passion for Africa, Academic, and Director with active links and engagement with Africa. He is on the advisory board of the London Business School Africa Society, lectures in a top 15 UK university and founded TEXEM, UK a consultancy firm ten years ago which has trained over 4,000 executives in the UK and Africa. In 2010, Alim was selected as one of the top 100 Virgin Media emerging entrepreneurs in the UK and accompanied London’s Lord Mayor on his entourage to Nigeria in 2015.

Professional Surveyors Can’t Abdicate Their Responsibilities

January 1, 2020

Kristopher M. Kline PLS

KEYWORDS Conveyance of land / Deed research / Rules of construction

Reprints

Limiting liability is a legitimate concern for surveyors and for professionals across the spectrum. However, the privilege of professional recognition brings with it a heightened level of responsibility that cannot be avoided by quick disclaimers or clever denials. Thorough research, careful analysis, and professional results are mandatory rather than optional.

A mere disclaimer on the map is not sufficient justification to ignore legitimate requirements put in the place by a Board of Examiners. Where state standards clearly require specific information on all survey maps, a disclaimer does not excuse the intentional neglect of that data on the survey map.

In the recent Tennessee decision Whitelaw v. Brooks: 138 S.W.3d 890 (2003), a surveyor was found guilty of negligence for failure to conform to existing standards of practice. The surveyor: “…in derogation of the rules promulgated by the Tennessee State Board of Examiners for Land Surveyors, failed to create his survey using the latest recorded deed to the property and instead utilized a tax map provided by the Tax Assessor’s office. Hall’s survey resulted in an encroachment on Whitelaw’s remaining parcel of land.”

This case is a valuable lesson to licensees who prefer quick and easy solutions to professional-level performance.

Responsible Research

When considering the necessary time and effort to invest in research and analysis, surveyors tend to focus on standards of practice set by their Board of Examiners. This is certainly a legitimate concern, particularly because willful failure to follow state standards may be the basis for a charge of negligence. 

However, courts and judges have their own expectations that often exceed those set by licensing boards. Courts generally require complete research that includes all relevant deeds and maps as well as other significant data. Those land use professionals who argue that research challenges justify their failure will find no sympathy from the judge. In short, the court requires research sufficient to get the right answer.

Consider this quote from the Texas decision Scheller v. Groesbeck, 231 S.W. 1092 (1921): “That in the construction of written instruments the cardinal rule to be followed is to arrive at the intention of the parties and that all parts of a deed shall be given effect if possible, and where there is a particular description followed by general description the latter shall yield, though where it is possible the real intent must be gathered from the whole description, including the general, as well as the special, and that all instruments in a chain of title when referred to in a deed will be read into it, are all rules of law so familiar that citation of authorities is unnecessary.”

Implicit in this passage is recognition that, in order to properly interpret an ambiguous description, prior conveyances in the chain of title also must be reviewed. In order to properly retrace boundaries, surveyors must understand and conform to this important common law principle. It is sad but true that the courts’ assumption that these principles are widely recognized is probably inaccurate.

In Roll v. Bacon: 160 Ohio Misc. 2d 23 (2010), the Ohio court condemned the work of three separate surveyors who had researched deeds back to 1906. Their work was rejected as incorrect because they should have pursued the chains of conveyance for the relevant tracts back to the ultimate source descriptions circa 1860: “The court finds that the surveys conducted by Jasontek, Byrnside, and Hewett do not reflect the intent of the grantor, as evidenced by the chains of title. In the original deed from Sims to Brown, dated April 30, 1860, the grantor states that the property is conveyed “Reserving the right of way along Smith’s line to the Williamsburg road.” From this, the court finds that Sims intended to convey the property with a reservation of a right of way along Smith’s line, which became the Old Schoolhouse Lot.”

The Ohio court also observes that attempted reliance on the Marketable Title Act is misplaced. In determining original intent, standards set by the act have no relevance. In this case, the only surveyor who correctly interpreted the deeds was the one who traced the relevant tracts back to the source descriptions circa 1860.

Research in State Statutes—Railroads

In a forceful recognition of constructive notice and its relevance to the land surveyor, the Tennessee court concludes that individuals attempting to determine the limits and nature of railroad rights-of-way have constructive notice of all language in the original state railroad charter, as seen in Railroad v. French: 100 Tenn. 209 (1897): “A person who builds upon the right of way of a railroad does so at his peril, no matter what paper title he may have from a third person.  And all persons are affected with notice of the extent of the right of way when it depends upon the charter provisions.” [Emphasis added]

This quotation refers to the numerous legislative acts that are generally critical for determining property rights associated with railroad corridors. It applies to anyone attempting to determine the limits and nature of railroad rights—including surveyors, attorneys and landowners.

Responsibility to Know & Understand the Law

Research alone is insufficient if the professional misinterprets the documents recovered. Professional land surveyors cannot abdicate their responsibility to know, understand and apply appropriate rules of construction. One common misconception is that the surveyor is only required to understand basic rules of construction and that all else is the province of the legal profession. In fact, any and all statutory and common law associated with the location of deeds should be applied by the surveyor. This includes—but is not limited to—relevant state statutes, practical location, variants of the centerline presumption and significance of parol evidence.

This standard was highlighted by the California court in Iacovitti v. Fardin: 273 P.2d 926 (1954). In this instance, the surveyor asserts that reading deeds and surveying are two separate disciplines—with predictable results: “The surveyor testified that, according to his survey and calculations, the precise frontage actually conveyed was 25.81 feet or 25 feet 9 3/4 inches, which is some 9 inches more than 25.03 feet “more or less” mentioned in the deed. The surveyor also testified that appellants’ lot with the claimed encroachment still has a frontage available for building of 25.10 feet, which is .07 of a foot in excess of the 25.03 feet mentioned in the deed. The surveyor admitted that his calculations were predicated on the metes and bounds descriptions in the appellants’ and respondents’ deeds and disregarded the Southern Pacific deeds and the intent on the part of that company as disclosed by those deeds to divide the original area into two equal grants to Steele and Schafer; that if such intent were considered a different result might follow; that it was not a matter of surveying but of interpreting the deeds; that, according to his interpretation, there was an 8-inch overlap, but that according to the interpretation of respondents’ surveyor there was no overlap.” [Emphasis added]

This case is remarkable for the casual assumption by the surveyor that rejects any responsibility for knowing and applying appropriate rules of construction. The maps and conclusions of the surveyor quoted above were dismissed as being contrary to established legal principles. The work of the respondents’ surveyor—who correctly determined the significance of all relevant deeds—was upheld.

There is no substitute for complete and reasoned opinions. Surveyors should be prepared to justify their position on every iron pin observed on any project—whether it is held or rejected. Gut reactions by professionals seldom convince judges and are more likely to result in derogatory comments from the court. Insufficient analysis generally causes more problems than it resolves.
 

---

Neither the author nor POB intend this column to be a source of legal advice for surveyors or their clients. The law changes and differs in important respects for different jurisdictions. If you have a specific legal problem, the best source of advice is an attorney admitted to the bar in your jurisdiction.