The Rebel Entrepreneur Works Inside Your Company. You Just Have to Let Them.

Picture this: You're sitting in a conference room at a Fortune 500 company. You have a good job. Decent salary. Benefits. Job security. And you're slowly losing your mind because you know there's something the company should be doing—something that could change everything—and it's not being done.

You have two options. Leave and start a company (and risk everything), or stay and try to push the idea internally (and risk your career).

Most people don't take either option. They just sit with the frustration. And the company never gets the innovation they had in them to contribute.

This is the space where Jan Kennedy found an insight that changes everything about how companies should think about innovation. He was running an accelerator program—the kind that helps startups succeed by teaching founders what they need to know. And he kept seeing the same pattern: Talented people from middle management positions at huge corporations, frustrated and furious that they couldn't exercise their entrepreneurial ideas inside their organizations.

They were considering leaving. Betting on themselves. Taking their ideas with them. And the companies were getting screwed because they created an environment where this was the only reasonable option.

So Jan started asking: What if we created a space inside corporations where people could be entrepreneurs? What if we said: "You get to stay at your company. You keep your paycheck. But you also get permission to act like an entrepreneur. To take risks. To fail. To learn. To build."

And what if that space wasn't some HR initiative nobody took seriously, but an actual innovation strategy that the company was betting on?

Entrepreneurship Is Not for Everyone (And That's Okay)

Here's the uncomfortable truth that most companies don't want to admit: Not everyone should be an entrepreneur. Most people shouldn't be.

In most companies, when they talk about "building an innovation culture," they really mean: "We want everyone to have ideas." And that's fine. Ideas can come from anywhere. You can crowdsource them. You can have platforms where anyone can submit an idea and get feedback.

But actually executing on those ideas? Pushing them through the resistance of the organization? Dealing with uncertainty? Building something that doesn't exist yet? That's different. That's not for everyone.

Jan figured this out after training over a thousand entrepreneurs in corporate environments. His data showed something clear: About 15% of a typical workforce has what he calls "intrapreneurial DNA." Meaning they're the kind of people who thrive in ambiguity. Who don't need someone else's permission to try things. Who are willing to fail publicly. Who are willing to work nights and weekends on something because they believe in it.

That's not a weakness in the other 85%. That's just how people are. Not everyone is built to charge into uncertainty. And that's fine. You need people who execute. People who follow processes. People who maintain what's working.

What you also need are the 15%. And most companies have no idea how to identify them or how to keep them from leaving.

Permission Is Not a Handcuff. It's a Playground.

The biggest myth about intrapreneurship is that successful entrepreneurs don't ask for permission. They just do shit and ask for forgiveness later. And that's true if you're starting a company on your own. You have no choice.

But inside a corporation? Permission actually matters. Not the permission to take risks—that's usually fine. The permission to be different. The permission to fail. The permission to operate under different rules than the rest of the organization.

Most corporate environments are optimized for execution. They're optimized for predictability. They're optimized for knowing what's going to happen next week and next quarter. And that's great if you're running a business. It's terrible if you're trying to innovate.

So what Jan figured out is that you need to actually grant permission. You need to create a space where people understand: "In this program, the rules are different. You're allowed to fail. You're allowed to move fast. You're allowed to be uncertain about where you're going. That's the entire point."

And here's the important part: That permission has to come from the top. Not from HR. Not from some mid-level innovation guy. From the people who actually run the company.

Because if you don't have that top-level permission, the organization's immune system will kill the idea. The corporate bureaucracy will slow it down. The risk management people will find a reason to kill it. And people will learn very quickly that "we want innovation" is a lie. What we actually want is people to come up with ideas that fit within our existing framework.

The Economics of Intrapreneurship

Here's where Jan's work gets really interesting. He's trained people at Bayer, one of the biggest pharmaceutical companies in the world. And they've actually put numbers on this.

Over the last three years, Bayer's intrapreneurship programs—the ones where they created space for people to act like entrepreneurs inside the company—have created over a billion euros of annual revenue potential.

A billion euros. That's not some soft number about "increased engagement" or "better morale." That's actual revenue potential. That's the kind of thing that makes a CFO pay attention.

And it's spread across a portfolio. Most of the projects fail. Some of them fail fast. Some of them fail slow. But the ones that work pay for all the failures.

This is the part that companies don't understand. They want 100% success rate. They want to know before they start which projects are going to work. And that's not how innovation works. Innovation is a portfolio game. You make a bunch of bets. Most of them don't work. The ones that do pay for everything.

The question isn't "which of these projects will succeed?" The question is "if I make enough bets, and I let people operate entrepreneurially, will the ones that work be worth more than the failure costs?"

For Bayer, the answer was absolutely yes. A billion euros worth of yes.

Why Your Company's Innovation Isn't Actually Innovation

Most companies claim they want innovation. They say they want people to take risks. And then they do everything possible to prevent both.

They require approval before projects start. They demand detailed business plans before anyone can explore. They tie project leaders to specific outcomes. They make it clear: If your project fails, you're the one who fails. Your career takes a hit.

And then they're confused when people don't innovate.

Here's what Jan realized: You cannot ask people to take risks while making it clear that if they fail, they pay the price. That's not a risk. That's a setup.

Real innovation requires a different deal. The company says: "We're going to make these bets. We know most will fail. But you won't fail. You'll learn. You might not get to run a big division. But you won't lose your job. You won't get punished for taking a bet that doesn't work out."

Some companies are starting to figure this out. Most aren't. Most are still playing the same game they've always played—pretending they want innovation while structuring everything to prevent it.

The Rebel Needs Support, Not Control

Here's where Jan's experience gets philosophical. There's a personality type that becomes an entrepreneur: People who don't like being told what to do. People who question authority. People who see the gap between how things are and how they could be.

These are the exact people who will drive your organization insane. They'll question decisions. They'll suggest crazy ideas. They'll do things that don't fit the normal process. They'll be the ones who argue in meetings and make people uncomfortable.

They're also the ones who are going to build the future of your company.

The mistake most organizations make is trying to manage these people out of their rebel instincts. They hire them because they want innovation. Then they try to make them fit the system. And what happens? Either the person conforms and becomes just another middle manager, or they leave and start a company that puts you out of business.

What Jan figured out is that you don't manage intrapreneurs. You sponsor them. You give them air cover. You protect them from the bureaucracy. You let them operate under different rules. And then you get out of their way.

This requires a different kind of leader. Someone who isn't threatened by people who don't think like them. Someone who can sponsor something they might not fully understand. Someone who is comfortable with uncertainty as long as the person leading the bet is competent and committed.

Most managers aren't built that way. Most leaders want control. They want visibility. They want to know what's happening. And that's exactly what kills intrapreneurship.

The Real Question

If you're inside a corporation and you have intrapreneurial DNA, the real question isn't "Should I stay or leave?" It's "Is there anyone in my organization who believes in what I believe in? Is there someone at the top who would sponsor something like this? Someone willing to protect me from the system?"

If the answer is yes, you might be able to build something inside your company that's as satisfying and exciting as starting something on your own. If the answer is no, then probably you should leave.

But too many intrapreneurs leave because they never asked. They never found the person willing to sponsor them. They never created the program that would have given them permission.

Jan's insight is this: Every company has a few people with intrapreneurial DNA. The question is whether those people are going to do their innovating inside your company or inside your competitor's company.

The Full Strategy

If you want to understand how to actually implement intrapreneurship as an innovation strategy—not just talk about it, but build the programs, create the culture, structure the incentives, and protect the rebels—listen to Jan Kennedy's full conversation on The School of Innovation podcast.

Because here's the truth about corporate innovation: The difference between companies that actually innovate and companies that just talk about it is whether they're willing to let people act like entrepreneurs. Everything else is secondary.

The question isn't whether intrapreneurship works. The question is whether you're willing to do what it actually takes to make it work.