I see a bunch of indie hackers doing a "12 projects a year" kind of challenge. While an interesting exercise on its own, it looks counter-intuitive.
I would rather find one project that works and double down on it.
What's your take on this?
12 projects a year sounds insane, would be curious to know the nature of the projects. It seems to be something that successful entrepreneurs would engage in, since they may have the data and resources to enroll in that many projects within only 12 months. They throw stuff and see what sticks on the wall. For somebody who is starting from the bottom, one project is already a luxury, I don't think that's recommended to split the time, energy, and money within 12 different ones, except if they require little to no resources to try. But still, based on my experience, a good concept requires some serious dedication to even get to validate the idea. It's not a bad idea to look at different options but it shouldn't take you away from what you are best at. It has to stay within your field of expertise. I could think of 3 different ways I could come across mine, 12 sounds outlandish!
@jack95 it does sound like a waste of time. This is a good exercise, build fast, ship fast, fail fast but I cannot see how you can build a sustainable business this way. Find something that works and double down on it.
I can think of a business'ish jargon: Risk minimization.
In theory: Bunch of small bets, odds of failure is lesser.
In real life - pieter levels has proved it's efficacy.
Perhaps that's the reason.