In today’s world, “crisis” is no longer a temporary disruption along the path of growth; it has become embedded in the structural fabric of both the global and regional economy. The convergence of persistent inflation, political uncertainty, geopolitical tensions, supply‑chain disruptions, and the lingering shadow of war has confronted the venture capital industry and accelerators with a fundamental challenge. Yet if we look beyond the surface symptoms, these repeated pressures are not merely threats. They function as a kind of historical filter—testing the robustness of business models, the quality of investor decision‑making, and, perhaps most importantly, the psychological and managerial maturity of the people involved.
Under such conditions, many of the classical assumptions of the innovation ecosystem come into question. Paradigms such as rapid growth, successive fundraising rounds, aggressive market expansion, and prioritizing scale over profitability are no longer self‑evidently reliable during times of crisis. When turbulence dominates the environment, the investment value chain undergoes a meaningful shift: the focus moves from “growth at all costs” toward positive unit economics, capital efficiency, operational discipline, and financial sustainability. Competitive advantage in this context is no longer defined solely by bold expansion or fundraising capability; it increasingly depends on the ability to survive, recalibrate, and make decisions amid ambiguity.
For this reason, accelerators and early ecosystem players must also be redefined. In periods of stability, an accelerator can serve primarily as a launchpad—a platform for networking, credibility building, and faster market entry. But in times of crisis, this role is insufficient. Accelerators, and even venture capital firms, must partially transform into what might be called a strategic shelter: environments that provide not only capital but also analytical clarity, intellectual frameworks, and decision‑making support for startup teams. A startup caught in the storm needs investors who do more than inject money. It needs partners who can help identify priorities, reassess revenue models, control cash burn, and reconstruct survival scenarios.
In such an environment, the strategy for adaptation lies neither in complete retreat nor in naïve optimism. The focus must shift toward startups whose products or services are not merely “vitamins,” but genuine “painkillers”—solutions addressing real and urgent problems. In times of turbulence, the market becomes far more selective. Customers, companies, and even governments reconfigure their spending priorities, paying only for solutions whose absence would create immediate pain. A startup solving a critical problem therefore stands a far greater chance of survival than one offering merely a marginally better experience or a luxury improvement.
Yet beyond numbers and models, the most valuable asset in times of crisis is resilient human capital. In ecosystems such as Iran’s—where startups contend with compounded challenges ranging from macroeconomic uncertainty to structural constraints and social pressures—venture capital must increasingly bet on founders with a high degree of adaptive intelligence. This concept extends beyond mental flexibility. It encompasses realism, prioritization skills, tolerance for ambiguity, emotional maturity, rapid learning ability, and the capacity to maintain cohesion when the ground beneath a team constantly shifts. Ultimately, crises test people long before they test balance sheets.
At this point, the founder’s role evolves from that of a growth manager into a carrier of stability and a guardian of meaning. One of the greatest risks for startups during crises is not merely declining sales or limited access to funding, but the psychological erosion of the team and the fragmentation of internal cohesion. Teams under crisis conditions face multiple simultaneous pressures: financial anxiety, fear of layoffs, uncertainty about the future, fatigue from constant decision‑making, and sometimes personal crises driven by broader economic and social conditions. If founders cannot manage these pressures, even the best product and the most rational strategy may fall victim to internal collapse.
In turbulent times, founders must first and foremost become sources of trust rather than sources of anxiety. This does not mean hiding reality or projecting artificial optimism. On the contrary, one of the most meaningful ways to support a team is through honest, transparent, and continuous communication. Teams are often harmed less by the crisis itself than by ambiguity, silence, and conflicting narratives. When employees do not understand the company’s real situation, how decisions are made, or what criteria guide the path forward, their minds naturally construct worst‑case scenarios. Founders must be able to explain clearly where the company stands, what the major risks are, what remains under control, what does not, and what the concrete plan for navigating the current phase looks like. Transparency—even when the news is not entirely positive—prevents rumor, fragmentation, and distrust.
The second step involves redefining priorities and reducing the psychological burden caused by fragmentation. In times of crisis, teams need clarity about what matters most right now. A common mistake founders make is responding to crisis by expanding, rather than simplifying, the list of initiatives and projects. The result is chronic exhaustion and a collective sense of inadequacy. Supporting a team in crisis means ruthlessly eliminating nonessential work, concentrating on a few critical objectives, and clearly defining what success looks like in the current phase. A team that knows its energy must focus on retaining key customers, improving cash flow, or delivering a crucial product feature will operate with far greater cohesion than one expected to pursue ten uncertain paths simultaneously.
A founder’s third responsibility is protecting the dignity of people while making difficult decisions. Crises may make layoffs, benefit reductions, role changes, or structural reorganization unavoidable. The difference between mature and immature organizations lies not in whether they make difficult decisions, but in how those decisions are made and communicated. If teams feel they are treated instrumentally, suddenly, or disrespectfully, the organization’s trust capital can evaporate rapidly. Even in the harshest circumstances, founders must design processes that remain human, transparent, and responsible—explaining the rationale behind decisions, listening to concerns, avoiding surprise announcements, and preserving individuals’ professional dignity. In times of crisis, a team’s emotional memory is far stronger than its numerical memory.
Another crucial aspect is attention to the mental health and collective energy of the team. In many startups, particularly under pressure, a form of exhausting heroism emerges—the belief that everyone must work harder, speak less, and simply endure. But a team kept permanently in survival mode eventually loses creativity, loyalty, and precision. Supporting teams during crises means creating sustainable work rhythms, providing space for dialogue, recognizing burnout, and legitimizing the experience of psychological strain. Founders do not need to become therapists, but they must be mature enough to understand that organizational anxiety, if left unaddressed, will eventually manifest as operational errors, interpersonal conflict, and the loss of human capital.
Equally important is the founder’s ability to create meaning for the team. In good times, motivation often emerges from growth, excitement, funding rounds, and ambitious horizons. In difficult times, however, people primarily want to understand why they should stay and endure the pressure. The answer cannot rely solely on compensation or equity incentives. Founders must translate the company’s mission from a slogan into a lived experience—demonstrating what real problem the team’s work solves, why it matters, and why navigating the crisis is worthwhile. Teams remain resilient when they feel part of something more meaningful than a list of KPIs.
Within this context, the role of venture capital investors also becomes more deeply connected to the founding team and human capital. If investors focus solely on financial reporting, cost reduction, and short‑term performance pressure during crises, they may inadvertently intensify team burnout. A thoughtful investor must ask different questions: Is the founder losing the team? Has internal cohesion weakened? Are middle managers still aligned? Does the team psychologically have the capacity to execute a pivot or restructuring? Sometimes the most valuable support a VC can offer is not introducing the next investor, but helping the founder prioritize, recruit or retain a few key individuals, and provide intellectual partnership when confronting the human pressures of crisis.
This perspective also suggests a necessary revision in how startups are evaluated during turbulent periods. Team quality should not be assessed solely through résumés, technical expertise, or execution history. Cohesion, communication maturity, the ability to navigate conflict through dialogue, and collective resilience must also be seen as strategic assets. A team that disintegrates under pressure—even if it appeared brilliant during times of prosperity—lacks the institutional robustness required to justify long‑term investment. Conversely, a team capable of maintaining dialogue, clarifying priorities, and recalibrating direction with mutual respect under pressure possesses a value that transcends conventional metrics.
To navigate this storm, venture capital firms must evolve from passive capital providers into active strategic partners. This transformation is more than semantic; it requires a fundamental shift in how investors engage with their portfolios. Survival in the new environment depends on a combination of optimizing cash burn, designing multi‑layered survival scenarios, focusing on more resilient markets and customer segments, and—where possible—exploring regional markets to mitigate geopolitical risk. Yet alongside all these measures, one truth remains: the ultimate determinant of survival is the quality of the people who make decisions during moments of crisis, who hold one another together, and who prevent organizations from hollowing out from within.
Crises ultimately arrive to eliminate inefficiencies, strip away illusions, and reveal the gap between seemingly attractive models and genuinely resilient organizations. In the end, it is adaptable, flexible, and meaning‑driven individuals who will become the architects of the post‑crisis economy. Perhaps the most important question facing the venture capital ecosystem today is no longer which startup will grow the fastest, but which team—under what kind of leadership—can endure chaos, preserve its cohesion, and emerge from crisis with a more mature and durable form of value creation.
’
Fa’ezeh Sajadian
Investment Director, Technotejarat
No comment