The fundraising process remains notoriously brutal, but a growing conversation suggests a shift in tone could ease the pain. An essay published on SaaStr highlights what it calls the 'kindness gap' in venture capital, where both sides use language like 'we passed' or 'we chose not to allocate' to mask rejection. The piece argues that this framing, while protective of dignity, ultimately sours relationships and adds unnecessary friction.
The core observation is straightforward: venture capitalists often say 'we passed on that one,' while founders counter with 'we chose not to give them an allocation.' Both phrases serve as defense mechanisms in a high-stakes rejection dance. The author suggests that replacing such language with a little grace—simply acknowledging the other side's effort or being direct without blame—could transform the experience.
This critique arrives amid a broader reset in startup financing. After years of frothy markets, fundraising cycles now stretch longer, and rejections come faster. The essay taps into a sentiment that the process has grown more transactional and less humane, particularly for early-stage founders who face dozens of nos before a single yes.
The implications extend beyond manners. A kinder approach could foster better long-term networks, as founders remember how they were treated even after an offer falls through. VCs, too, benefit: a reputation for decency attracts repeat deal flow and warmer introductions.
No specific data or founder anecdotes accompany the piece, limiting its concrete evidence. Yet the argument resonates with a widely shared pain point in the startup ecosystem, where efficiency often trumps empathy.