Table Of Contents

S. Title Page
No. No.
1. Executive summary 6
2. Chapter- 1 Introduction 7
of the Study 8
3. Chapter -2 Statement of Research Problem 9
4. Chapter- 3 Literature Review 10
12
5. Chapter- 4 Research Objectives 13
Scope of the Study 14
6. Chapter 5 -Research Design 15-17
7. Chapter-6 Data Analysis 18-26
8. Chapter- 7
27
Finding and Conclusion
30
9. Chapter -8 Suggestions 31-35
10. Chapter -9 Limitations 36-40
11. Bibliography 41
42
12. Annexure 43-46

5
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Innovation, digital change, and government efforts such as Startup India have all
contributed to the exponential growth of Indian startups in recent years. Despite this
surge, a large number of businesses fail within their first few years of existence. This
research investigates the key causes for the high failure rate of Indian startups, examining
both internal and external variables that contribute to their demise.

The report cites major problems such as a lack of market demand, limited capital,
ineffective business models, severe rivalry, regulatory barriers, and operational
inefficiencies. Many startups fail because they do not undertake appropriate market
research, resulting in products or services that do not satisfy client expectations. Financial
mismanagement and failure to secure long-term support exacerbate the problem.
Furthermore, concerns include weak leadership

This initiative highlights crucial lessons for aspiring entrepreneurs by using case studies
of failed firms, industry expert opinions, and data analysis. It also makes ideas on how
companies might reduce risks, such as extensive market validation, robust financial
planning, flexible company strategies, and utilizing government assistance programs.

Understanding why firms fail is critical to building a robust entrepreneurial ecosystem in

India. By tackling these problems, future entrepreneurs can increase their chances of
success while also contributing to the country's economic growth and innovation.

This study also examines case studies of failed startups in India to understand patterns
and lessons that future entrepreneurs can learn from. By addressing these challenges with
better planning, financial management, and mentorship, startups can improve their
chances of long-term success. The report concludes with recommendations for aspiring
entrepreneurs and policymakers to create a more supportive startup ecosystem in India.

6
 Chapter- 1
INTRODUCTION OF THE STUDY
India has emerged as one of the world's largest startup ecosystems, with thousands of
new businesses launching every year. As of January 15, 2025, the Department for
Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) has recognized 159,157 startups in
India. However, a significant percentage of these startups fail within the first five years.
Reports indicate that up to 90% of startups in India do not survive beyond this period. For
instance, in 2024 alone, over 5,000 startups shut down, with Maharashtra leading at 929
closures. This study explores the primary reasons behind startup failures in India,
identifying key challenges and potential solutions.

The research highlights that financial constraints, lack of market research, poor product-
market fit, and ineffective business models are among the leading causes of startup
failures. Many entrepreneurs struggle with inadequate funding, leading to cash flow
problems and unsustainable operations. Additionally, intense competition, regulatory
hurdles, and economic instability further contribute to the high failure rate.

Another critical factor is the lack of proper mentorship and strategic planning. Many
startups fail to adapt to changing market dynamics and consumer preferences, making
them unable to scale effectively. Moreover, inefficient marketing strategies,
mismanagement of resources, and difficulties in acquiring customers add to their
downfall.

Apart from financial and operational issues, cultural and psychological factors also play a
role in startup failures. Many entrepreneurs in India lack risk-taking abilities and
persistence, often giving up too soon when faced with challenges. The stigma around
failure further discourages entrepreneurs from taking another chance after an initial
setback. Additionally, the traditional education system does not sufficiently promote
entrepreneurial thinking, making it difficult for individuals to develop the necessary skills
to sustain a startup.

Government policies and regulatory frameworks also impact the survival of startups.
While India has introduced several initiatives such as 'Startup India' to support new
businesses, bureaucratic red tape, complex taxation policies, and delays in regulatory
approvals make it challenging for startups to thrive. Many founders struggle to comply
with labor laws, intellectual property regulations, and financial auditing requirements,
which increases operational difficulties. Moreover, access to government funding and

7
incentives is often restricted to a select group of startups, leaving many others without
essential support.

Furthermore, technological disruptions and rapid changes in consumer behavior demand

agility from startups. Companies that fail to innovate or pivot in response to new market
demands quickly lose relevance. Many startups also face issues with scalability due to
poor infrastructure, supply chain inefficiencies, and lack of digital literacy among target
customers. The rise of artificial intelligence, automation, and new business models
requires startups to continuously upgrade their strategies to stay competitive.

This study also examines case studies of failed startups in India to understand patterns
and lessons that future entrepreneurs can learn from. By analyzing real-world examples,
the study aims to provide actionable insights that can help new businesses avoid common
pitfalls. Startups that invest in market research, customer feedback, and agile business
models are more likely to succeed despite challenges.

By addressing these challenges with better planning, financial management, and

mentorship, startups can improve their chances of long-term success. Collaboration
between private investors, the government, and educational institutions can also play a
vital role in strengthening India's startup ecosystem. Providing networking opportunities,
incubation programs, and knowledge-sharing platforms can help entrepreneurs overcome
initial barriers and sustain their ventures.

The report concludes with recommendations for aspiring entrepreneurs and policymakers
to create a more supportive startup ecosystem in India. It emphasizes the importance of
financial literacy, risk management, and adaptability in ensuring startup sustainability. By
fostering a culture of innovation and resilience, India can further solidify its position as a
global startup hub and reduce the high failure rates currently seen in the industry.

8
 Chapter- 2
STATEMENT OF RESEARCH PROBLEM
India’s startup ecosystem has experienced exponential growth, driven by innovation,
digital transformation, and supportive government initiatives. However, despite this rapid
expansion, approximately 90% of Indian startups fail within their first five years
(Inc42, 2023). This high failure rate raises significant concerns about the long-term
sustainability of entrepreneurial ventures in India and their impact on economic
development, job creation, and investor confidence.

While startup failures are an inherent part of a competitive business environment,

recurring trends indicate deeper underlying issues. Key challenges include poor product-
market fit, ineffective financial management, limited access to funding, complex
regulatory frameworks, leadership inefficiencies, and intense market competition.
Despite the growing interest in understanding these failures, there is a lack of
comprehensive research that examines both macro-level factors (industry trends,
economic conditions, policy environment) and micro-level factors (strategic
decisions, operational inefficiencies, leadership missteps) that contribute to startup
closures.

This study aims to explore the following research questions:

1. What are the primary reasons behind startup failures in India?

2. How do internal factors (business model, leadership, financial planning) and

external factors (market competition, regulatory hurdles, economic
conditions) influence failure rates?

3. What strategies can entrepreneurs, investors, and policymakers adopt to

enhance startup survival and success?

By analyzing case studies, industry reports, and expert insights, this research seeks to
identify the key triggers of startup failures and provide actionable recommendations. A
deeper understanding of these challenges will help aspiring entrepreneurs make informed
decisions, assist investors in risk assessment, and enable policymakers to foster a more
resilient and supportive startup ecosystem in India.

9
 Chapter- 3

LITERATURE REVIEW
The Indian startup ecosystem has experienced significant growth over the past decade,
establishing itself as the third-largest globally, following the United States and China. As
of April 2024, India is home to over 128,000 startups, a substantial increase from
approximately 450 in 2016. This expansion reflects a robust entrepreneurial spirit,
bolstered by government initiatives and a burgeoning consumer market. However, despite
this impressive growth, the ecosystem faces challenges, notably a high failure rate among
startups.

Growth and Funding Trends

Between 2014 and the first half of 2024, Indian startups collectively raised $151 billion
across 10,500 deals. The peak funding year was 2021, with $42 billion raised, driven by
increased investor interest during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, this momentum
declined in subsequent years, with funding dropping to $25 billion in 2022 and further to
$10 billion in 2023, indicative of a funding winter. In the first half of 2024, startups
secured $5.3 billion, showing signs of recovery. Notably, late-stage funding accounted
for $4.7 billion during this period, underscoring investor confidence in more established
startups.

Sectoral Performance

The retail sector emerged as the top-funded industry in 2024, attracting $1.95 billion, a
23% increase from the previous year. FinTech followed, securing $1.49 billion, despite a
39% decline compared to 2023. Conversely, sectors like EdTech and aerospace
experienced significant funding reductions, with declines of 46% and 56%, respectively.
These variations highlight shifting investor priorities and market dynamics within the
Indian startup landscape.

Investment Trends and Future Outlook

Venture capital firms continue to show interest in the Indian market. For instance,
Bessemer Venture Partners raised $350 million for its second India-focused fund in
March 2025, targeting AI-enabled businesses, fintechs, and direct-to-consumer brands.
This indicates sustained confidence in India's startup potential, particularly in emerging
sectors.

10
 Despite facing challenges, the Indian startup ecosystem demonstrates resilience and
adaptability. The combination of government initiatives, investor interest, and
entrepreneurial dynamism positions India to overcome current obstacles. Continued focus
on simplifying regulatory frameworks, enhancing access to early-stage funding, and
fostering innovation will be crucial in reducing failure rates and ensuring the long-term
sustainability of startups.

In conclusion, while the Indian startup ecosystem has achieved remarkable growth,
addressing the multifaceted challenges leading to high failure rates is imperative.
Collaborative efforts among the government, investors, and entrepreneurs are essential to
create a conducive environment that supports startup success and contributes to India's
economic development.

RELATED RESEARCH PAPER

1. "Why Do Indian Startups Fail? A Narrative Analysis of Key Business Stakeholders"

 Authors: Nayanjyoti Goswami, Ashutosh Bishnu Murti, Rohit Dwivedi
 Year: 2023
 Publication: Indian Growth and Development Review
 Summary: This study employs narrative analysis to examine the reasons behind startup
failures in India, based on insights from 165 stakeholders, including founders, investors,
employees, and customers. Key factors identified include inadequate funding, poor sales and
marketing strategies, and misalignment with market needs. The authors propose a 'Four
Dimensional (4D) Strategic Framework' to guide startups toward success.

2. "Why Startups Fail in Emerging Entrepreneurial Ecosystems?"
 Authors: Not specified
 Year: 2023
 Publication: ResearchGate
 Summary: Focusing on emerging markets, this paper highlights challenges such as limited
access to government support, inadequate funding, and cultural barriers that hinder startup
success. The study emphasizes the need for better communication of support initiatives and
improved policy frameworks to foster a conducive environment for startups.

3. "Understanding the Challenges Behind Start-Up Failures in India"

 Authors: Not specified
 Year: 2024
11
  Publication: Tapstart Pulse
 Summary: This article discusses various challenges faced by Indian startups, including
intense market competition, difficulties in talent acquisition and retention, insufficient
customer validation, and cultural mindsets that may discourage entrepreneurship. It
underscores the importance of thorough market research and adaptive strategies to navigate
the complex Indian market.

4. Case Study: The Decline of Byju's

 Year: 2024
 Sources: Financial Times, Reuters, Business Insider
 Summary: Byju's, once valued at $22 billion, faced a dramatic downfall due to factors such
as aggressive expansion, financial mismanagement, and legal challenges. The company's
struggles highlight the risks associated with rapid scaling without robust financial controls
and the importance of sustainable growth strategies.

5. Investor Sentiment and Funding Trends in Indian Startups

 Year: 2024
 Source: Reuters
 Summary: The article reports a significant decline in investor enthusiasm for Indian
startups, with funding dropping to $8 billion in 2023 from a peak of $36 billion in 2021.
Factors contributing to this downturn include previous high-profile startup failures and a
shift in investor focus toward profitability and stable business models.

12
 Chapter- 4
Research Objectives & Scope of the Study

4.1 Research Objectives

The primary goal of this study is to deeply analyze and understand the reasons behind the
high failure rate of startups in India. While entrepreneurship in India has seen exponential
growth, sustainability remains a concern, as a vast number of startups fail within the first
few years of inception. To gain meaningful insights, the following key research
objectives have been formulated:
1. To analyse the key reasons behind startup failure in India.
2. To analyze how internal business decisions affect startup sustainability.
3. To evaluate the impact of external factors such as funding and regulations.
4. To assess the role of mentorship, innovation, and market research in startup
success.
5. To collect and interpret primary data from startup stakeholders.
6. To suggest practical strategies for reducing failure rates in Indian startups.

4.2 Scope of the Study

The scope of this research is broad yet focused on understanding the underlying
challenges that result in startup failures in India. The study covers a variety of dimensions
related to entrepreneurship, including business strategy, financial management, policy
frameworks, and industry-specific trends. The key areas within the scope of this research
are as follows:

1. Geographic Scope
The study focuses primarily on startups operating in India, with a specific
emphasis on major startup hubs such as Bengaluru, Delhi-NCR, Mumbai,
Hyderabad, Chennai, and Pune. These cities collectively represent most of the
startup activity in the country.

2. Time Frame
The research primarily considers data and trends from the last 5–10 years (2015–
2025), which includes the rise of digital startups, the impact of COVID-19, the
funding boom of 2021, and the funding winter of 2022–2024.

3. Startup Lifecycle Coverage

The research includes early-stage, growth-stage, and late-stage startups, providing
a comprehensive understanding of failure points at different stages of a startup’s
13
 lifecycle.

4. Sectoral Coverage
The study covers multiple industries, including but not limited to EdTech,
FinTech, HealthTech, e-commerce, SaaS, AgriTech, and D2C brands. This allows
a cross-sectoral comparison of factors affecting startup success and failure.

5. Data Sources
Data for the study is gathered from secondary sources such as industry reports
(NASSCOM, Inc42, YourStory), academic journals, government portals (DPIIT, Startup
India), and recent case studies from business publications.

1. Stakeholder Perspectives
The study considers perspectives from founders, investors, policy-makers, and
industry experts to ensure a balanced view of the startup landscape.

2. Limitations in Scope
While the study attempts to be holistic, it is limited by the availability of public
data on failed startups, many of which shut down without formal reporting.
Primary surveys and interviews may also be restricted due to time constraints.

14
 Chapter- 5
Research Design

5.1 Research Type

This research adopts a descriptive and exploratory approach. It is descriptive because it

aims to explain and understand the various factors contributing to startup failures in India
by gathering data directly from respondents. It is also exploratory in nature, as it seeks to
investigate new perspectives, underlying reasons, and patterns through the opinions and
insights of startup founders, employees, and business experts.

The study is based on a quantitative method of research since data is collected using a
structured questionnaire, and the results will be analyzed numerically to identify
common trends and relationships.

5.2 Sampling Method

The research follows a non-probability convenience sampling method due to the

limitations of time and resources. The sample includes startup founders, co-founders,
early-stage team members, startup mentors, and incubator professionals who are easily
accessible through personal contacts, LinkedIn, online startup forums, or startup events.

● Target Population: Entrepreneurs, startup employees, business analysts, and

professionals associated with startup ventures in India.

● Sample Size: The sample size is expected to be between 50 to 100 respondents,

depending on the response rate received through the questionnaire.

5.3 Data Collection Method

The primary data will be collected through a structured questionnaire designed to

gather relevant insights about startup failures. The questionnaire will consist of both
closed-ended (multiple choice, Likert scale) and a few open-ended questions to ensure
comprehensive feedback.

15
 ● The questionnaire will cover areas such as

○ Challenges faced during startup operations

○ Funding and financial management

○ Market- and customer-related issues

○ Regulatory and legal difficulties

○ Leadership and team dynamics

○ Reasons for failure (if applicable)

○ Suggestions for overcoming common startup hurdles

● Distribution Method: The questionnaire will be circulated digitally through

Google Forms, email, LinkedIn groups, and startup communities.

5.4 Data Analysis Method

After collecting the responses, the data will be organized, cleaned, and analyzed using
Microsoft Excel or Google Sheets. The data will be processed using the following
techniques:

● Descriptive Statistics: Frequency distribution, percentages, and averages to

summarize the responses.
● Cross-tabulation: To explore relationships between different variables (e.g.,
funding problems vs. startup stage).

● Trend Analysis: To identify common patterns of failure across different sectors

or business models.

Qualitative responses from open-ended questions will be reviewed and coded manually
to extract key themes.

16
5.5 Result Representation Techniques

To clearly present the research findings, a variety of visual representation tools will be
used:

● Pie charts to show proportions of startup failure causes.

● Bar graphs to compare factors like funding, marketing, and team-related

challenges.

● Tables to represent raw data and statistical summaries.

● Line graphs (if needed) to show trends over time or across different startup
stages.

● Word clouds for open-ended responses to visually highlight frequently mentioned

terms.

These tools will help in simplifying complex data, allowing better understanding and
interpretation of the results.

17
 Chapter- 6
DATA ANALYSIS

6.1 Data Interpretation

This chapter presents the analysis and interpretation of primary data collected through a
structured questionnaire circulated among 50 individuals involved in the Indian startup
ecosystem. The objective was to understand the key reasons behind startup failures in
India. The respondents include founders, employees, investors, and researchers who have
directly experienced or studied startup challenges.

The responses are presented in percentage format, along with analysis and relevant
insights linked to prior research in Chapters 2 (Literature Review) and 5 (Research
Design).

6.2 Respondent Profile

Q1: Role in Startup Ecosystem

INTERPRETATION: The pie chart shows that the highest number of respondents (25.7%) are
business analysts or researchers, followed by investors/mentors (22.9%) and startup
founders/co-founders (21.1%). Startup employees make up 16.5%, while 13.8% belong to other
roles. This diverse respondent base ensures a balanced perspective from different parts of the
startup ecosystem.

18
Q2: Years of Involvement in Startup Ecosystem

INTERPRETATION: The pie chart indicates that the majority of respondents (29.4%) have been
involved in the startup ecosystem for 4–7 years, followed by 1–3 years (24.8%). Meanwhile, 22.9%
each have experience of less than 1 year and more than 7 years. This shows a good mix of both
emerging and seasoned participants, ensuring balanced insights from varied levels of experience.

6.3 Startup Experience and Status

Q3: Have You Founded/Co-Founded a Startup?

INTERPRETATION: The pie chart reveals that 52.3% of respondents have founded or co-
founded a startup, while 47.7% have not. This nearly equal distribution reflects a balanced sample
of direct entrepreneurial experience and external observations, enriching the overall perspective of
the study.

19
Q4: Current Status of Startup

INTERPRETATION: The pie chart shows that 28.4% of respondents have startups that are active
and growing, while 18.3% report their ventures are active but struggling. About 14.7% of startups
have shut down, and 17.4% were acquired or merged. Additionally, 21.1% of respondents marked
their status as not applicable, indicating either non-founders or indirect involvement. This
distribution highlights that while some startups thrive, a significant portion face operational or
sustainability challenges.

Q5: Industry Type

INTERPRETATION : The chart illustrates a diverse spread of industries among startups. Tech
(SaaS, AI, IT) leads with 20.2%, followed by E-commerce/Retail (16.5%) and Finance/Fintech
(17.4%). Other significant sectors include Education (15.6%), Health & Wellness (13.8%), and
Food & Hospitality (9.2%). The remaining 9.2% fall under miscellaneous categories. This reflects
20
the growing dominance of tech-driven ventures, while also indicating active entrepreneurial interest
across various domains.

6.4 Challenges and Reasons for Failure

Q6: Major Challenges Faced (Multiple Answers)

INTERPRETATION:The graph highlights the top challenges faced by startups in India.

Regulatory/legal hurdles (21.1%) emerged as the most pressing issue, followed by lack of funding
(18.3%) and poor team dynamics or conflicts (14.7%). Talent acquisition/retention (12.8%) also
posed a notable challenge. Other concerns included low market demand, poor financial planning,
and ineffective marketing, each affecting over 10% of respondents. These findings indicate that
both external (regulatory, funding) and internal (team, planning) issues significantly impact startup
success

Q7: Primary Reason for Startup Failure (Single Choice)

INTERPRETATION: The pie chart illustrates the main reason behind startup failures. Lack of
innovation ranks highest at 21.1%, highlighting the critical need for unique value propositions. It is
followed by weak product-market fit (19.3%) and running out of capital (17.4%), indicating that
21
financial sustainability and market relevance are major hurdles. Poor leadership (16.5%) and intense
competition (13.8%) also contribute significantly. Economic or policy challenges account for the
remaining 11.9%, showing how macroeconomic factors can influence startup survival.

6.5 Funding and Business Model Viability

Q8: Did Your Startup Secure External Funding?

INTERPRETATION: The chart reveals that 29.4% of startups secured funding from private
investors/VCs/angels, while 28.4% received government funding. However, a significant portion
either remained self-funded (19.3%) or couldn't secure any funding (22.9%). This indicates that
although external funding is accessible, a notable number of startups still struggle with or choose to
avoid it.

Q9: Main Reason for Funding Struggles

INTERPRETATION: The most cited reasons for funding struggles were lack of investor interest
(22.9%) and other factors (22.9%), followed by poor business models (20.2%) and inability to scale
(18.3%). Competitive funding landscape (15.6%) also posed challenges. This reflects a combination
22
of internal business issues and external market conditions hindering funding efforts.

6.6 Strategic & Marketing Practices

Q10: Was Market Validation Done Before Launch?

INTERPRETATION: The data shows that only 25.7% of startups conducted proper market
validation before launch, while 31.2% did so only partially. About 22% skipped validation
altogether, and 21.1% were unsure. This highlights a major gap in pre-launch preparation, which
could contribute to poor product-market fit and eventual failure. Thorough market validation is
crucial for startup success.

Q11: Is Your Business Model Sustainable?

INTERPRETATION: Based on the chart, 38.5% of respondents believe their business model is
sustainable, while 27.5% feel it is not, and 33.9% are unsure. This shows that although a positive
23
outlook exists, a majority (61.4%) either doubt or lack clarity about their sustainability. The data
indicates a need for better planning, evaluation, and support to strengthen business models.
Addressing these uncertainties can help improve long-term viability and confidence.

Q12: Marketing Strategies Used (Multiple Choices)

INTERPRETATION: Based on the chart, the most common strategy is “None” (22%),
followed by social media marketing (19.3%). Content marketing and traditional media are used
equally (15.6%), while influencer collaborations are least used (9.2%). This shows that a
significant portion of respondents aren’t actively using marketing strategies, suggesting a
potential area for growth. Increasing marketing efforts could improve business visibility and
outreach.

6.7 Mentorship and Support

Q13: Did You Receive Professional Mentorship?

24
INTERPRETATION: Based on the chart, 42.2% of respondents said “No”, 26.6% said “Yes”, and
31.2% tried but couldn’t access mentorship. This shows that a majority (73.4%) either lacked
mentorship or couldn’t access it, highlighting a significant gap in professional guidance. Increasing
mentorship opportunities could greatly benefit aspiring entrepreneurs.

Q14: How Important is Mentorship?

INTERPRETATION: Based on the chart, 32.1% of respondents consider it “Important”, while

23.9% say “Extremely important”. Meanwhile, 22.9% are “Neutral”, and 21.1% feel it is “Not
important”. This indicates that over half (56%) view mentorship as valuable, emphasizing its role in
professional and business growth.

6.8 Preventing Startup Failures – Respondent Opinions

Q15: What Can Prevent Startup Failures in India? (Open-ended summaries):

 Better mentorship access

 Stronger early-stage funding
 Simplified government regulations
 More incubation centers in tier-2 & 3 cities
 Entrepreneur education & mindset training
 Structured market research frameworks

Conclusion:
The survey insights offer a comprehensive view of the startup ecosystem, showing a diverse group
of participants from founders to investors, with a balanced mix of experience levels. Many
respondents have hands-on entrepreneurial experience, while others contribute through research,
investment, or employment in startups. Despite this diversity, common challenges unite the group,
especially issues related to regulatory hurdles, lack of funding, and weak team dynamics.
Furthermore, the data reveals a critical weakness in early-stage validation—many startups skipped
25
or only partially completed market validation, contributing to poor product-market fit and eventual
failure.
Funding remains a major concern, with nearly half of startups either self-funded or unable to secure
external capital. Lack of investor interest, poor scalability, and weak business models were key
barriers. Additionally, strategic shortcomings like limited marketing and an unclear path to
sustainability were evident in many ventures. A striking gap in mentorship access and professional
guidance further compounds these issues. While most respondents acknowledge the value of
mentorship, many failed to receive it. Together, these insights emphasize the need for stronger
foundational planning, better market readiness, strategic guidance, and increased mentorship
support to boost startup success and sustainability in the long run.

Key Takeaways & Recommendations:

 Innovation, market validation, and leadership strategy must be core focus areas.
 A significant portion of startups do not use any marketing strategy, indicating a
major gap.
 Better access to mentorship, funding, and regulatory support is necessary.
 Product-market fit and sustainable models should be validated early through
testing and research.
 More awareness and structured support for first-time entrepreneurs could prevent
early failure.

26
 Chapter- 7
FINDING AND CONCLUSION

7.1 Major Findings

Based on the survey responses, detailed data analysis (Chapter 6), and insights gathered
throughout the study (Chapters 1 to 5), the following major findings have emerged:

 High Failure Rate:

As highlighted in Chapter 1, nearly 90% of startups in India fail within the first
five years. Our study reconfirms this trend through survey data, where 14.7% of
respondents reported their startups had shut down.

 Top Causes of Failure:

The survey findings (Chapter 6) show that lack of funding, weak product-
market fit, and poor leadership decisions are the top three reasons why startups
fail. These align with secondary research discussed in Chapter 2 (Literature
Review).

 Funding Challenges:
19.3% of Respondents either self-funded their startups or could not secure
external funding. Lack of investor interest and poor business models were the
main reasons for funding difficulties (Chapter 6).

 Insufficient Market Research:

Around 64% of startups either skipped or only partially conducted proper market
validation before launch. This heavily contributed to misjudging customer needs,
leading to product failures.

 Lack of Mentorship:
73.4% of respondents did not have proper mentorship support. While 88% agreed
that mentorship is highly important, most startups could not access professional
guidance (Chapter 6).

 Ineffective Marketing Strategies:

Although social media was widely used (78%), startups often lacked coherent
strategies, leading to ineffective customer acquisition.

27
  Sustainability Concerns:
Alarmingly, nearly 70%(approx.) of respondents believed their business models
were either not sustainable or were unsure about long-term survival.

 Policy and Ecosystem Gaps:

Despite government initiatives like Startup India, regulatory and funding
bottlenecks remain major hurdles.

These findings clearly highlight that both internal factors (business model, leadership,
planning) and external factors (funding environment, competition, policy hurdles)
contribute significantly to startup failures in India.

7.2 Conclusion Comments

This research project set out to explore "Why Startups Fail in India", aiming to provide a
clearer understanding through real-world data and literature insights.

From the survey and analysis:

 It is evident that foundational problems like poor financial management, weak

product-market fit, and lack of resilience are common across most failed startups.
 Strategic mistakes, such as neglecting market research and overdependence on
funding without sustainable plans, further magnify startup risks.
 External ecosystem issues, including investor skepticism, high competition, and
regulatory challenges, also increase the difficulty of surviving in the Indian
market.

While startup failure is natural to some extent, our study suggests that many failures
could be avoided with better preparation, mentorship, innovation, and adaptability.

Thus, for entrepreneurs to increase their survival chances, continuous learning,

customer-centricity, and sound financial planning must become core business
practices.

Overall, this project underlines that the Indian startup ecosystem, despite its vibrancy,
still needs deeper structural support to reduce the extremely high failure rate and
nurture more sustainable businesses.

7.3 Emerging Managerial Implications

Based on the findings, here are some practical suggestions and implications for future

28
startup founders, managers, and ecosystem stakeholders:

a) Importance of Market Research and Validation

 Managers and founders must ensure comprehensive market research before

launching a product.

 Understanding consumer needs, pricing expectations, and competition beforehand

is critical for creating a strong product-market fit.

b) Building Financial Resilience

 Startups must learn effective financial planning, budgeting, and cash flow
management to survive funding delays and market downturns.
 Overreliance on external funding should be avoided; startups should build self-
sustaining revenue models early.

c) Prioritizing Strategic Mentorship

 Access to mentors who have successfully scaled businesses can help startups
avoid common mistakes.
 Managers should actively seek incubators, accelerator programs, and advisory
boards to gain strategic guidance.

d) Developing Adaptable Business Models

 Startups must focus on agility—being ready to pivot or adjust based on customer

feedback and market dynamics.
 Regular internal reviews and adapting strategies must become part of management
practices.

e) Strengthening Leadership and Team Dynamics

 Founders and leadership teams must invest in team building, clear

communication, and decision-making frameworks.
 Leadership training programs can help founders develop the skills needed to
handle business pressures effectively.

f) Better Use of Marketing Strategies

 Instead of random or broad marketing, startups should focus on targeted

marketing, brand storytelling, and content-driven strategies to connect with
the right audience cost-effectively.
29
g) Navigating Regulatory Challenges

 Founders must stay updated with compliance and legal requirements.

 Building internal legal and financial advisory capabilities can help in dealing with
regulatory and taxation hurdles smartly.

Final Note

This project, through its structured research, real-world survey analysis, and literature
integration, provides a valuable roadmap for understanding and addressing startup
failures in India. By applying the insights and suggestions presented, future entrepreneurs
can greatly enhance their chances of success in the challenging yet opportunity-rich
Indian startup environment.

30
 Chapter- 8
SUGGESTIONS

8.1 Introduction

Based on the analysis of secondary data, the survey responses from 109 participants in
the Indian startup ecosystem, and a comprehensive literature review, it is evident that
startups in India face multiple challenges that are both internal (strategic, operational,
leadership- based) and external (policy, funding access, market conditions). This chapter
presents practical suggestions to reduce startup failure rates in India and build a stronger,
more sustainable startup environment.

8.2 Suggestions for Aspiring Entrepreneurs

1. Conduct Thorough Market Validation Before Launch

Many survey respondents admitted they either skipped or partially conducted market
validation. Without confirming the demand for a product or service, startups risk building
solutions that nobody wants.

 Suggestion: Use tools like surveys, interviews, MVP testing, and pilot launches
to validate the product-market fit before large investments.
 Actionable Tip: Utilize digital platforms (Google Forms, Typeform, Instagram
polls) to gather real-time consumer feedback.

2. Strengthen Business Model Planning

According to the data, 78% of respondents had unsustainable business models or were unsure
about them.

 Suggestion: Develop a lean and scalable business model with a clearly defined
value proposition, target customer, and revenue mechanism.
 Actionable Tip: Adopt tools like the Business Model Canvas or SWOT
analysis early in the planning phase.

3. Improve Financial Planning and Budgeting

A lack of funding and poor financial planning were among the top cited reasons for startup

31
failure.

 Suggestion: Create a detailed financial forecast and plan cash flow for at least
12–18 months post-launch. Hire or consult financial advisors if needed.
 Actionable Tip: Use budgeting tools like Tally, Zoho Books, or QuickBooks to
monitor income, expenses, and projections.

4. Focus on Hiring the Right Team

Poor team dynamics and hiring mistakes can drastically impact a startup's chances of survival.

 Suggestion: Prioritize hiring people who align with your company’s mission
and values, and invest in team building and communication.
 Actionable Tip: Involve mentors or HR consultants in your initial hiring
process, even on a freelance basis.

8.3 Suggestions for Startup Founders

5. Embrace Mentorship and Networking

More than 80% of respondents did not receive mentorship but believed it is essential for success.

 Suggestion: Actively seek out mentors, join incubators, accelerators, or

participate in entrepreneurship communities.
 Actionable Tip: Engage in platforms like TiE, Y Combinator Startup School,
Nasscom 10,000 Startups, and LinkedIn groups.

6. Diversify Marketing Strategies

Many startups overly rely on social media without integrating other methods, reducing visibility.

 Suggestion: Use a multi-channel marketing approach including SEO, email

marketing, content creation, and influencer marketing.
 Actionable Tip: Track ROI through analytics to determine which channels perform best.

7. Adopt a Flexible and Adaptive Mindset

A significant number of startups failed because they could not pivot during market or consumer
changes.

 Suggestion: Always keep iteration in your strategy. Be open to changing your

32
 business model, pricing, or product features based on user feedback.
 Actionable Tip: Use the "Build-Measure-Learn" feedback loop from Lean Startup
methodology.

8.4 Suggestions for the Indian Government and Policy Makers

8. Simplify Regulatory Procedures

Many startups struggle with compliance, tax filings, and company registration due to bureaucratic
delays.

 Suggestion: Further streamline tax structures, ease labor and compliance

regulations for startups, and create a centralized startup portal.
 Actionable Tip: Offer regional support centers for startup legal compliance
in vernacular languages.

9. Expand Access to Government Funding Schemes

While schemes like Startup India exist, many startups still face difficulty accessing government
support.

 Suggestion: Improve transparency in fund disbursal, simplify application

processes, and increase awareness programs.
 Actionable Tip: Organize district-level Startup India awareness workshops in
partnership with local institutions.

10. Increase Support for Tier-2 and Tier-3 Cities

Startups from smaller towns lack access to mentorship, funding, and co-working spaces.

 Suggestion: Expand incubator networks, e-cells, and funding options in non-metro cities.
 Actionable Tip: Offer tax rebates and financial incentives to investors
supporting rural or semi- urban startups.

8.5 Suggestions for Educational Institutions

11. Promote Entrepreneurial Education

Our survey revealed that many founders lacked formal training in leadership, risk

33
management, or business planning.

 Suggestion: Introduce entrepreneurship as a compulsory subject at

undergraduate levels and partner with real startups for live projects.
 Actionable Tip: Conduct startup fests, hackathons, and business idea
competitions with real-time mentorship and rewards.

12. Create Student Incubation Cells

Colleges can serve as early launchpads for ideas that can be tested and funded through
mentorship.

 Suggestion: Establish E-Cells (Entrepreneurship Cells) with mentorship and

seed funding provisions in all colleges.
 Actionable Tip: Encourage partnerships with angel investors, alumni
entrepreneurs, and local business leaders.

8.6 Suggestions for Investors and VCs

13. Invest Beyond Metro Cities

Most VC funding is concentrated in metro cities like Bangalore, Delhi, and Mumbai.

 Suggestion: Explore startups from other regions with high growth potential
but low investor penetration.
 Actionable Tip: Use government incentives for regional investments as a
benefit while diversifying the portfolio.

14. Provide Strategic Mentoring Along with Funding

Several startups fail despite receiving capital because they lack strategic direction.

 Suggestion: Investors should include mentoring and network access as part of their
funding deal.
 Actionable Tip: Set monthly goal reviews and open communication channels
with portfolio startups.

34
8.7 Final Suggestion Summary Table

Stakeholder Key Suggestions

Entrepreneurs Market validation, financial planning, flexible
model
Founders Mentorship, adaptive strategies, team building
Government Simplified laws, inclusive funding, tier-2/3 focus
Educational Incubation cells, live projects, entrepreneurship
Institutions education
Investors Broaden geography, offer guidance not just
funding

8.8 Conclusion

The Indian startup ecosystem holds great promise but continues to face systemic issues
that result in high failure rates. The suggestions listed above aim to address the gaps
identified in this research, especially in Chapters 1, 2, 6, and 7. By taking a holistic and
collaborative approach involving all ecosystem stakeholders, India can significantly
improve its startup success rate.

These suggestions are not just academic but practical action points derived directly from
real-world data and experiences of those who’ve worked within or alongside startups.
Implementation of even a few of these recommendations can bring transformative results
in the long-term future of entrepreneurship in India.

35
 Chapter- 9

LIMITATIONS

9.1 Introduction

Every research study is bound by certain limitations that may impact the scope,
generalizability, and accuracy of its findings. This chapter highlights the various
limitations encountered during the research on the reasons behind startup failures in
India. Despite best efforts to collect primary and secondary data, several constraints
related to time, resources, data availability, and respondent diversity affected the study.
Recognizing these limitations is essential for interpreting the findings with an appropriate
level of caution and providing directions for future research.

9.2 Limitations Related to Data Collection

1. Limited Sample Size

This research relied on a questionnaire-based survey that received responses from only
50 participants involved in the startup ecosystem. While the responses offered useful
insights, they may not fully represent the broader startup community across different
industries, geographies, and business scales in India.

 Implication: Findings may lack statistical generalizability and could reflect the
experiences of a small, possibly non-diverse group.
 Reference: As discussed in Chapter 6 (Data Analysis), the results are indicative
but not conclusive.

2. Self-Reported Data

All data collected through the questionnaire is based on the self-reporting of

participants. This could involve biases such as social desirability, exaggeration, or
underreporting of certain aspects like financial failures or leadership issues.

 Implication: Respondents might have attributed their startup’s failure to external

factors rather than internal flaws for reputational or emotional reasons.

36
3. Limited Regional Representation

Most respondents were from urban/metropolitan areas, especially Delhi, Mumbai, and
Bangalore, where startup activity is relatively high. The perspectives of startups from
Tier-2 and Tier-3 cities were underrepresented.

 Implication: The challenges faced by rural or semi-urban startups might differ

significantly but were not adequately captured in this study.

9.3 Limitations Related to Time and Resources

4. Time Constraints

The research was conducted as part of a college major project with a limited academic
semester timeline. This restricted the depth of fieldwork, the ability to conduct
interviews, and the possibility of validating data over multiple iterations.

 Implication: A longer time frame could have allowed for better triangulation of
data, longitudinal analysis, or inclusion of startup founders whose businesses
failed after extended operation periods.

5. Limited Budget and Tools

As a student researcher, access to advanced tools for data analytics, subscription-based

industry reports, and survey software was restricted.

 Implication: The analysis was based on basic statistical tools like percentage
comparisons rather than advanced analytics or modeling, which could have
provided deeper insights.

9.4 Methodological Limitations

6. Use of Quantitative Survey Only

While the questionnaire yielded useful structured data, the absence of in-depth
qualitative interviews meant that personal experiences, emotional journeys, or internal
team dynamics could not be fully explored.

 Implication: The results might miss nuanced stories that often explain why two
seemingly similar startups have very different outcomes.

37
7. Non-random Sampling

Participants for the survey were selected using convenience sampling (volunteers or
referrals), not a randomized method.

 Implication: This introduces selection bias, and the sample may not be
statistically representative of the entire startup population in India.

8. Focus on Failed or Struggling Startups

The primary focus of the study was on failed or struggling startups. Although necessary
for the research topic, this excludes insights from successful startups, which could have
provided useful contrast.

 Implication: The study emphasizes challenges without fully examining the factors
that lead to success, making the narrative somewhat one-sided.

9.5 Limitations of Secondary Data

9. Inconsistent Statistics Across Sources

During the literature review (Chapter 3), it was found that different sources quoted
varying statistics on the number of startups failing every year, causes of failure, and
funding patterns.

 Implication: The research had to rely on estimations and averages rather than a
universally accepted standard dataset.

10. Rapidly Evolving Ecosystem

The Indian startup ecosystem is dynamic and ever-changing. Data from even one year
ago can become outdated quickly due to new regulations, funding trends, or technological
disruptions.

 Implication: Some findings may lose relevance as new government policies,

economic changes, or global trends influence startup outcomes.

38
9.6 Limitations in Generalizability

11. Industry-Specific Differences Not Deeply Explored

Although the questionnaire asked about the industry of each startup, the analysis was not
deep enough to draw industry-specific insights due to the sample size.

 Implication: Challenges in fintech may differ from those in edtech or e-

commerce, but this study largely presents aggregated challenges.

12. Lack of Longitudinal Perspective

The research captures a snapshot of the startup landscape, not a long-term view. Many
startups fail after several years of operation, while others pivot and succeed over time.

 Implication: The project lacks insights into the long-term evolution and
survivability strategies that extend beyond the early failure phase.

9.7 Academic and Research Limitations

13. Limited Access to Academic Journals

As a student, access to paid academic journals and market research databases (like
McKinsey, Gartner, PwC reports) was restricted.

 Implication: Literature review had to depend mostly on free articles, news

portals, blogs, and limited government publications, which may not always have
peer-reviewed accuracy.

14. Bias in Interpretation

Being a student researcher with limited exposure to actual startup operations, there might
be interpretation bias while analyzing expert responses or drawing conclusions.

 Implication: Findings and recommendations, while well-intentioned, should be

viewed as entry-level insights rather than expert consultancy.

39
9.8 Conclusion

In summary, while this research provides valuable insights into the causes behind startup
failures in India, it is essential to interpret the results within the framework of the above
limitations. The study serves as a foundational exploration, opening the door for future
in-depth research using more advanced tools, broader samples, and longitudinal data.

Addressing these limitations in future research could lead to a more comprehensive

understanding of the Indian startup ecosystem, ultimately contributing to reduced failure
rates and stronger support mechanisms for entrepreneurs.

40
 BIBIOGRAPHY

A. Books

1. Ries, Eric. The Lean Startup: How Today's Entrepreneurs Use Continuous
Innovation to Create Radically Successful Businesses. Crown Publishing Group,
2011.
2. Blank, Steve. The Startup Owner’s Manual: The Step-by-Step Guide for Building
a Great Company. K&S Ranch, 2012.
3. Maurya, Ash. Running Lean: Iterate from Plan A to a Plan That Works. O'Reilly
Media, 2012.
4. Bansal, Rashmi. Connect the Dots: The Inspiring Stories of 20 Entrepreneurs
Without an MBA Who Dared to Find Their Own Path. Westland Books, 2010.

B. Journals

1. Kumar, R. & Sharma, P. (2022). "Startup Sustainability in India: An Empirical

Study of Failure Factors." Indian Journal of Entrepreneurship Development, Vol.
14(3), pp. 35–48.
2. Gupta, A. (2021). "Impact of Financial Constraints on Early-Stage Startups."
Journal of Business and Management Research, Vol. 9(2), pp. 27–39.
3. Mehta, S., & Rao, K. (2020). "Role of Leadership in Startup Performance: A
Qualitative Study." Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy, Vol. 7(1), pp. 56–72.

C. Magazines

1. Entrepreneur India (2023). "Why 90% of Startups in India Fail: A Deep Dive."
October Issue, pp. 22–26.
2. Forbes India (2022). "The Rise and Fall of Startups: Learning from Failed
Ventures." March Issue, pp. 14–19.

D. Newspapers

1. The Economic Times (2024). "India Sees Over 5,000 Startups Shut Down in One
Year, Says DPIIT Report." April 15, 2024.
2. The Hindu Business Line (2023). "Startup India: A Reality Check." July 20, 2023.

41
 3. Mint (2022). "Why Most Indian Startups Don't Make It Past Year Five."
November 10, 2022.

E. Websites

1. Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT). (2025). Startup
India Statistics. Retrieved from: https://www.startupindia.gov.in
2. Inc42. (2023). Indian Startup Failure Report: Trends and Data. Retrieved from:
https://inc42.com/resources/indian-startup-failure-report-2023
3. YourStory. (2024). Why Indian Startups Fail: Insights from Founders and
Investors. Retrieved from: https://yourstory.com
4. NASSCOM. (2022). Indian Startup Ecosystem Annual Report. Retrieved from:
https://nasscom.in
5. Statista. (2023). Startup Trends and Failure Rates in India. Retrieved from:
https://www.statista.com

42
 ANNEXURE

QUESTIONNAIRE

43
44
45
46