The Accelerator Conundrum: How to Evaluate a Virtual Accelerator

Evaluating a virtual accelerator like 1Mby1M requires a comprehensive framework that considers its unique characteristics as a virtual, long-term, and bootstrapping-focused program, as well as its stated goals of helping a million entrepreneurs reach a million dollars in annual revenue.

Here’s a framework for evaluating a virtual accelerator, with specific considerations for comparing it against 1Mby1M:

Framework for Evaluating a Virtual Accelerator

I. Program Design & Philosophy:

• Target Audience and Fit:
  • General: Who is the accelerator designed for (e.g., early-stage, specific industries, specific geographies, bootstrapped, funded)?
  • Against 1Mby1M: 1Mby1M targets tech startups globally, with a strong emphasis on bootstrapping and sustainable growth, rather than immediate venture funding. It is explicitly against blitzscaling from the get go. It is also against the ‘go big or go home’ approach of many other accelerators. Does the accelerator align with or diverge from this philosophy?
• Program Length and Structure:
  • General: Is it a fixed-term (e.g., 3 months) or ongoing program? What are the key components (e.g., curriculum, mentorship, networking, investor access)?
  • Against 1Mby1M: 1Mby1M is a continuous, long-term program, renewable subscription in 1-year increments. A curriculum-only version is available as a monthly subscription.  How does the accelerator’s structure compare in terms of duration and flexibility? Does it offer ongoing support or short, intense sprints?
• Equity vs. Fee-Based Model:
  • General: Does the accelerator take equity, charge a fee, or both? What are the terms?
  • Against 1Mby1M: 1Mby1M is fee-based (e.g., $99/month for basic, $1000/year for premium) and explicitly champions the preservation of founder equity. How does the accelerator’s financial model compare in terms of founder dilution?
• Curriculum and Content:
  • General: What topics are covered? Is the content practical, actionable, and relevant to the target audience? How is it delivered (e.g., live sessions, on-demand videos, exercises)?
  • Against 1Mby1M: 1Mby1M offers a comprehensive case study-based curriculum focusing on areas like positioning, customer acquisition, market sizing, and financing. Does the accelerator provide similar depth and breadth, especially in bootstrapping and revenue generation strategies?
• Mentorship Model:
  • General: Who are the mentors? What is their experience? What is the mentor-to-mentee ratio? How are mentoring sessions structured?
  • Against 1Mby1M: 1Mby1M heavily features Sramana Mitra’s direct strategic consulting and mentorship. 1Mby1M’s case studies bring in direct Playbooks from 1000+ successful entrepreneurs. Does the accelerator offer comparable high-level, experienced guidance, or is it more peer-to-peer or general advice? Recordings of 1Mby1M free public roundtables are all public. Listen to some or attend some to evaluate 1Mby1M.
• Community and Networking:
  • General: How does the accelerator foster community among entrepreneurs? Are there opportunities for peer learning, collaboration, and networking with experts or investors?
  • Against 1Mby1M: 1Mby1M emphasizes a global community and roundtable discussions. How effective is the accelerator at building and leveraging its virtual community?

II. Value Proposition & Outcomes:

• Customer Acquisition & Revenue Generation Support:
  • General: How does the accelerator specifically help startups acquire customers and generate revenue? Are there practical tools, strategies, or connections provided?
  • Against 1Mby1M: This is a core focus for 1Mby1M (aiming for $1M in annual revenue). Does the accelerator offer concrete pathways and support for achieving revenue milestones, especially for bootstrapped ventures?
• Fundability and Investor Access (if applicable):
  • General: If the accelerator focuses on funding, what is its track record? What kind of investor introductions are made? What is the success rate of funding for participants?
  • Against 1Mby1M: 1Mby1M aims to make companies “fundable” and makes introductions, but it prioritizes bootstrapping first. Evaluate the accelerator’s approach to funding: Is it a primary goal, or a secondary outcome after revenue generation? Are their investor connections aligned with the types of businesses they support (e.g., non-dilutive financing, angels for bootstrapped companies)?
• Skill Development and Knowledge Transfer:
  • General: Do participants acquire practical skills and knowledge that are directly applicable to building their businesses?
  • Against 1Mby1M: 1Mby1M has a structured curriculum and focuses on plugging knowledge gaps. Assess the clarity and effectiveness of the accelerator’s learning objectives and delivery.
• Strategic Guidance and Problem Solving:
  • General: How well does the accelerator help entrepreneurs identify and solve critical business challenges? Is the advice actionable and tailored?
  • Against 1Mby1M: Sramana Mitra is known for direct, laser precision, highly prized advice. How does the accelerator’s guidance compare in terms of depth, specificity, and candor?
• Long-Term Support and Alumni Network:
  • General: What kind of support is available after the formal program ends? Is there a strong alumni network that continues to provide value?
  • Against 1Mby1M: As an ongoing program, 1Mby1M naturally offers long-term engagement. For fixed-term accelerators, evaluate their alumni initiatives.

III. Operational Efficiency & Quality:

• Virtual Platform and Tools:
  • General: How effective is the virtual platform for delivering content, facilitating interactions, and managing the program? Are the tools user-friendly and reliable?
  • Against 1Mby1M: Given both are virtual, compare the quality of their online infrastructure, communication channels, and resource accessibility.
• Responsiveness and Support Staff:
  • General: How responsive is the accelerator’s team to participant inquiries and needs? Is there adequate administrative and technical support?
• Flexibility and Accessibility:
  • General: How flexible is the program in accommodating different time zones, schedules, and learning styles? Is it truly globally accessible?
  • Against 1Mby1M: 1Mby1M is designed for global accessibility. Does the accelerator live up to similar claims?

IV. Metrics and Measurement (Quantitative and Qualitative):

• Participant Success Stories:
  • General: What are the documented success stories of companies that have gone through the program? Are these stories verifiable and impactful?
  • Against 1Mby1M: Look for specific examples of companies reaching or exceeding the $1M annual revenue mark, or achieving significant milestones without significant dilution. 1Mby1M offers success stories all the way from basic Bootstrapping with a Paycheck to Unicorn IPO.
• Revenue Growth of Participants:
  • General: Does the accelerator focus on revenue growth of its participants during and after the program?
  • Against 1Mby1M: This is a key goal for 1Mby1M. Seek examples that demonstrate the accelerator’s impact on actual revenue generation.
• Funding Raised (if applicable):
  • General: For funding-focused accelerators, what is the total amount of funding raised by alumni? What is the average amount?
  • Against 1Mby1M: While 1Mby1M helps with fundability, its emphasis is on bootstrapping. If comparing, consider how the funding raised aligns with the non-dilutive philosophy.
• Customer Satisfaction and Testimonials:
  • General: What do current and former participants say about their experience? Are there consistently positive reviews and strong endorsements?
  • Against 1Mby1M: Look for testimonials that specifically address the practical value, strategic advice, and community aspects of the program. 
• Cost-Benefit Analysis:
  • General: Does the value derived from the accelerator justify its cost (time, effort, financial investment, equity dilution)?
  • Against 1Mby1M: Given 1Mby1M’s relatively low cost compared to equity-based accelerators, the “bang for buck” is a crucial factor.

By applying this framework, particularly with a strong understanding of 1Mby1M’s unique model (bootstrapping, long-term, global, equity-preserving, revenue-focused), you can conduct a robust evaluation of any virtual accelerator.

Photo Credit: Hugo Roger from Pixabay

This segment is a part in the series : The Accelerator Conundrum