How Startups Can Outmaneuver Big Companies and Carve Their Own Market

Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

Key Takeaways

- Systems, approvals, and market rules may feel restrictive, but understanding them early lets your startup move faster and avoid surprises.

- The smartest founders treat established players as gateways, not obstacles, building optionality and aligned partnerships to protect growth.

Many startups aren’t held back by weak ideas or small markets. They’re operating in systems that were never designed with new entrants in mind.

In regulated and infrastructure-heavy industries, incumbents control the rails — licenses, custody, payments, compliance and distribution. At first glance, that can seem restrictive. In reality, it’s simply the landscape. The successful startups recognize early on that to operate legally and scale, you need to understand how to work within — and around — those frameworks.

When I founded my first startup, a fintech company helping families build college savings for their children, this dynamic was clear from day one. We were making it easier for parents to open and manage tax-advantaged education savings accounts, even starting with small amounts. But to deliver that product, we needed to partner with large financial institutions that controlled the underlying infrastructure.

Those partnerships weren’t a limitation — they were an entry point. They provided access, credibility and a way into a highly regulated market. At the same time, they revealed an important reality: dependency on incumbents introduces a different kind of risk — one that most founders don’t fully anticipate at the outset.

As we gained traction, the environment shifted. Processes slowed, reviews expanded and timelines stretched. What initially felt like friction was often a signal — we were no longer just participating in the system, we were starting to matter within it.

That experience reshaped how I think about incumbents. They’re not just barriers; they’re part of the terrain. Founders who recognize this early can design smarter strategies, build more resilient companies, and carve their own path — even inside systems they don’t control.

How incumbents slow startups down

In regulated markets, incumbents don’t need to block a startup outright to create pressure. More often, progress slows as internal priorities, risk considerations and competing workflows need to align.

Some of that friction is intentional. Much of it is simply the reality of operating inside large, complex organizations. Either way, the effect on a startup — time, cost and momentum — is the same.

Here are three common patterns to recognize:

- Delay: Partnership discussions move forward, but decisions take longer than expected. Each step introduces additional stakeholders, reviews or dependencies. In many cases, this isn’t about avoidance — it’s about alignment across legal, compliance, product and operations teams. For a startup with limited runway, however, extended timelines still create real pressure.

- Increased compliance scrutiny: In industries like fintech, compliance is non-negotiable. As you grow, it’s natural for oversight to increase as well. In our case, documentation requests expanded even though we were licensed, audited, and operating within regulatory requirements. This wasn’t always about obstruction — it was often a reflection of internal risk management — but it still introduced constraints that required us to adapt.

- Operational friction in distribution: As we onboarded more young families as customers, back-end processes became more complex. Additional checks, manual reviews or capacity limitations slowed throughput. Again, this is often the result of systems designed for stability rather than speed — but for a growing startup, it can directly impact scalability.

The key for founders is not to assume intent, but to recognize patterns early. Progress in these environments depends on securing strong internal buy-in, aligning with key stakeholders and making sure that execution is a top priority with an institutional partner — not a side process.

Founders who do this well don’t just navigate friction more effectively — they reduce it. And over time, that becomes a meaningful competitive advantage.

The founder’s blind spot: Trusting the wrong partners

One mistake I made early on was underestimating how quickly partnership dynamics can change as a company scales.

At our fintech company, we assumed that participation in the same financial system meant aligned incentives. Our mission was to expand access to college savings for families who had historically been underserved. That mission mattered to us. It did not necessarily align with how incumbents managed margins, risk or operational complexity.

Today, I evaluate partners based on structure rather than intent. I look at whether incentives remain aligned as the company grows and whether the partner