Although IndianaEntrepreneur.tv is still in its infancy, it has already spurred some lively debates among the IEtv staff and others at Cantaloupe.tv. In particular, opposing factions have formed in support of two different types of entrepreneurship, what I have best heard referred to as high-potential ventures and lifestyle companies. Before I even give my general definitions of what these two phrases mean, I want to note that they are not mutually exclusive categories (and perhaps that is why the debates have been so lively). Like most things in reality, companies can’t always easily be identified as a high-potential venture or a lifestyle company; however, in general, an organization’s direction at any one time can usually be labeled as one or the other.

The extreme examples of high-potential ventures are the Google’s, the Amazon.com’s, and the Home Depots of the world. The market opportunities of these firms represented by revenues and profits are huge – enough to justify millions of dollars worth of investment from institutional investors like venture capital and private equity firms who expect every investment to be a home-run and generate returns of 10x’s the investment.

Lifestyle companies on the other hand, don’t operate in such large markets. They are the two person consulting firms, the three location restaurants, and the local boutiques. These types of organizations never plan to take things big – and not necessarily because they can’t. Sometimes the business model just may not have a huge market potential, but sometimes entrepreneurs simply keep things small so they can maintain a certain lifestyle. Constantly trying to grow a company means accepting the high-level of stress and time commitment that one experiences when first getting started, and for some, a stable state provides the fulfillment and just the right amount of income they desire. Growing a high-potential venture doesn’t always produce more money and happiness for an entrepreneur than a lifestyle company.

The debate at IEtv has been over which type of entrepreneurship we should direct our video stories to. Is our audience more interested in watching the profile of an Indiana bio-tech company that just received $15 million in venture funding, or would our audience rather watch a story about an innovative restaurant that is promising to take over Indianapolis? Even more critical is answering whether our audience has more to gain by learning about how to structure a company so it’s best suited for a buyout or an IPO, or whether its more practical for them to learn how to grow from one location to three.

Not surprisingly, when these questions were posed to the team someone asked, “Why can’t we serve both?” – which I’m sure she intended to be a statement more than a question. And in a way she’s right, we can serve both. Both types of entrepreneurship face common challenges such as finding the money and the people to take an organization to its next level, however large that may be. But the truth is, we could undoubtedly better serve one or the other if we just chose a favorite child. Both types of entrepreneurship are extremely important to Indiana, and both probably could use a dedicated Video Magazine (am I really already talking about expansion plans?), but operating within the constraints facing IEtv with regards to our own available human and money capital, we could tell deeper stories and provide more valuable, comprehensive knowledge if we picked a more narrow audience.

If you’re reading this then you are IEtv’s audience, so tell us what you think. What types of stories and information would you rather see?