This post is not for everyone.
If through hard work and/or sheer luck, you’re so good at one thing that you don’t need a backup income stream, you don’t need to read this.
However, if you’re slightly paranoid, like to hedge your bets, or were just born into a shitty economy, then you—yes, you—are my friend and target audience for this piece.
The analogy in the title isn’t perfect, but it’s apt enough to be uncomfortable: squirrels create multiple burrows, not only because they’re paranoid little creatures with trust issues (because they really are), but also because survival demands redundancy.
That squirrel? He’s basically running a better diversification strategy than you probably are.
To me, putting all your acorns in one hole is a recipe for winter starvation (or rainy season rot?), and winter always comes—it’s the law of entropy.
In a closed system, entropy (disorder) tends to increase over time, and when that happens, you need to have enough ammo to shoot things back to order. As an entrepreneur, or even as a human, I believe betting everything on a single revenue stream is simply gambling.
After years of building, failing, pivoting, and occasionally succeeding across multiple ventures, I’ve realized that creating resilient, multi-stream revenue systems that don’t collapse when one thing goes sideways is the way to go, and that’s what I’m working towards.
Here’s what I’ve learned from my own burrow-building journey. It’s messy, uncomfortable, and has overstretched me, but I’m working towards making sure it adds order for when things try to go wrong.
Why One Nest Isn’t Enough
If you succeeded in your first business venture. You’re the exception.
On the other hand, if you tried multiple times, and then succeeded, why did you stop trying?
The other day, I stumbled on Pieter Levels’s account on Twitter. He wrote that only 4 of 70+ projects he did made money and grew. That’s a success rate of 5%.
Now, I’m not anywhere near that level of launch. But I’ve been on the other end of the spectrum, focusing solely on one thing, and got burnt, twice.
From 2018, I used to work on academic projects mainly, but when COVID came and everything dried up, I had no burrow. Then I pivoted to content writing. I saw the writing on the wall when GPT-2 came out, and I started using it with Jarvis (now Jasper), so having learned my lesson, I started learning SEO.
However, I was over-leveraged on Upwork, and when the account got blocked, there were burrows, but not profitable ones. So I started building again, and with AI now more prevalent, we pivoted Contentika away from content writing to SEO.
Now, apart from Contentika, we’re working on Spinah (a web development company), Solevant (a software discovery startup), and a couple of other burrows too.
Obviously, not all bets have gone well. Giftvant, an informational blog, got hit when Google’s update crushed blog traffic. But it’ll be back, bigger and better as a startup. I’ve tried faceless YouTube channels too, but the revenue from those is negligible—not even close to 1% of expenditures. Only $5 made so far, but it’ll get better.
I’ve made some revenue from Amazon too, a little over $50, and a few dollars from AdSense that I can’t withdraw.
I’ve invested in a solar company too – that didn’t end well. It’s made me more circumspect and more vetting of possible partners.
I have many more burrows in my journal that’ll be executed in due time.
With vibe coding, I’m also looking to ship more open source apps too – and possibly charge users to host it plus some other features. N8n and baserow are doing a great job of it.
The next bet is to have more burrows offline, off the internet. You know, like farms, properties, manufacturing companies, etc. There are always lots of opportunities, one just won’t know which will succeed, but certainly will the one’s darndest to make sure it succeeds.
Long story short, just like me, most entrepreneurs start with the “one big idea” mentality. We pour everything into a single venture, convinced it’s going to be the one. But here’s what I discovered after watching several of my “sure thing” projects crash and burn: betting everything on one outcome isn’t strategy—it’s gambling.
Squirrels don’t do this. They create multiple burrows, stash food in different locations, and always have backup plans. Many times, they forget where their acorns are stashed, lose some, and some are destroyed, or stolen, but in the end, they always have enough.
They understand something we often miss: diversification isn’t about lack of focus, it’s about intelligent risk management.
Now, that’s not to say you need to chase every idea that comes to you, but pursuing intelligent stretch goals is where the difference is.
Oftentimes, when I started building another business while the first was still finding its footing, people called it unfocused. There’s some element of truth to it, but if I were to do the same thing everyone else is doing, when lambo?
I’ll also be the first to admit that they don’t all succeed, but enough succeed, or show the potential such that I keep at it.
When Failure Becomes Your Best Teacher
Let’s talk about something nobody wants to discuss but everyone experiences: the crushing weight of business failure.
There’s this poem “If”, by Rudyard Kipling, which has a verse that says
“If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;”
I’ve come to remind myself that failure is part of the journey. Sometimes, it’s friends and family that remind me. I can count many ventures I was so sure would be a runaway success, but didn’t. I launched 360 virtual tours, and even one did of the Nike Art Gallery and other places for free to drum up leads. I was sure it’d be a good business, but alas, 0 kobo made.
I’ve spent thousands of dollars on testing sales processes that didn’t work out. I’ve done programming, forex, coding, and even selling electronics – not much of a smashing success.
For some of them. I’ve been left saddled with debt which I serviced for months after, and voices of niggling doubts, asking when I’ll make it, whether I’m cut out for this, and if I’ll achieve my goals. To be fair, I don’t think I’ll ever achieve all my goals; as I achieve them, I keep setting more stretch goals.
It’s a process, and I won’t say I’ve made considerable progress, but I’m learning to make failure an always-present traveling buddy. You know, the annoying kind of friend that takes a bit out of everything you’re eating.
I’m not yet at the level of failure that Dyson or Edison had, but I’ll surpass it, and fast.
I’ll fail more than I’ll succeed, but that’s fine. I’ll just need to fail better and take the lessons learnt to heart.
Failure is the opposite of success, by definition, but it’s also a grundnorm for better systems.
That failed virtual tour project taught me more about customer development, market validation, and the importance of solving real problems than any successful venture could have.
It also forced me to confront a crucial question: At what point do you know a business won’t succeed, and when do you pivot versus completely dropping it?
The answer isn’t found in spreadsheets or growth metrics. It lives in that uncomfortable space between stubborn persistence and rational assessment.
The decision often comes down to a brutal assessment: Can this problem be solved with more research, customer development, or funding?
If the answer is genuinely “no,” and you can’t envision a realistic path to profitability, then clinging to the venture becomes a very expensive form of therapy.
Your Brain is the Worst Business Advisor
Maybe the heading is a clickbait, but the brain’s helpful suggestions like “Maybe you should get a real job” or “Everyone else seems to have it figured out” makes it a very shitty advisor.
It’s in your head every time, and you need a lot of willpower to tune it out. Lack enough willpower, and it’ll repeat the advice so much that you’ll believe it, and accept this self-hypnosis as the new reality.
Running multiple ventures simultaneously creates a unique form of imposter syndrome. You’re simultaneously the expert consultant, the visionary product founder, the savvy marketer, and the educational authority. Some days you feel like a Renaissance entrepreneur; other days you feel like a fraud with good marketing.
You either develop a god complex, or you crumble under the crushing weight of self‑doubt, convinced that one misstep will expose you as the fraud your brain insists you are. Or you find healthy outlets to prevent your brain from overheating.
When my Upwork account got blocked and I had to scramble to replace that income stream, the voices got louder. “Maybe you’re spreading yourself too thin.” “Maybe you should just focus on one thing like everyone says.” “Maybe this multi-stream thing is just a fancy way of being unable to commit.”
When I was starting out, I used to think successful entrepreneurs were just naturally confident people who didn’t experience doubt. That’s complete nonsense. The difference isn’t the absence of self-doubt, it’s how you respond to it.
During my lowest moments, I discovered something counterintuitive: self-doubt often signals you’re pushing into uncharted territory. It’s uncomfortable because you’re growing. The key is distinguishing between productive doubt (which makes you ask better questions) and destructive doubt (which paralyzes decision-making).
The self-doubt compounds when you realize you’re competing against specialists who dedicate 100% of their focus to their single domain. Your consulting practice is competing against consultants who live and breathe nothing but consulting. Your SaaS product is up against teams who’ve made product development their sole obsession. You’re the generalist in a world that rewards specialists, and when you can’t seem to make headwinds in your ventures, the voices gain more credibility.
Ironically, building multiple revenue streams actually helped with this psychological challenge. When one project hit turbulence, I had other burrows to retreat to while I figured things out. The psychological safety net was invaluable.
But here’s what the specialists don’t have: adaptability. When market conditions shift, when customer preferences evolve, and when entire industries get disrupted, the multi-stream entrepreneur has options. Your consulting practice might dry up, but your digital products can pivot to serve new markets. Your affiliate income might collapse, but your SaaS tool can expand into adjacent verticals.
The self-doubt never fully disappears, but you can transform it from a paralyzing force into a useful signal. When you doubt whether you’re spreading yourself too thin, that’s often your subconscious telling you to audit your resource allocation
The Anti-Mentor Manifesto
I’ll be honest. I’ve never been a fan of “mentors,” “mentorship”, “discipleship” or whatever form it’s packaged in. Humans are not perfect, and mentorship often devolves into hero-worship, blindly following everything the guru says, even when it’s horseshit.
When such mentors make mistakes, which is only natural, the high pedestals they are on make the fall harder, and they may try to go to a great extent to launder their reputation.
Besides, why this is not always true, I believe many mentees limit themselves and are unwilling to challenge the ceiling of achievement their mentors have had.
I could go on and on, but it’s clear that I think guru worship is overrated. So is reading too many business books, but that’s for another day.
The conventional wisdom is to find mentors (hey Nemo), as if they are mythical creatures who’ll solve all your problems. Here’s my unpopular opinion (again): the traditional mentorship model is overrated and often limiting for multi-stream entrepreneurs.
Most business mentorship assumes you’re building one company with a laser focus. The mentor shares their journey from startup to scale, their pivotal moments and key decisions, and their playbook for success. It’s valuable wisdom—if you’re following their path exactly.
But when you’re building multiple streams, traditional mentorship often creates artificial constraints. The mentor who built a $10M consulting practice might not understand why you’re “distracted” by launching a course. The SaaS founder who scaled to 10,000 users might question your decision to maintain client services. Their expertise is real, but their context is, often, too narrow.
When I was juggling Contentika, Spinah, and Solevant simultaneously (still am), well-meaning advisors kept telling me to “pick one and focus.” Their concern was genuine, but their advice assumed I was indecisive rather than strategic. They couldn’t see how the SEO knowledge from Contentika informed the web development positioning for Spinah, or how both businesses generated insights for Solevant’s software discovery platform.
The problem with seeking a mentor is that it creates a dependency mindset. You start looking for someone else to validate your decisions instead of developing your own judgment. It also assumes there’s one “right” way to build a business, which is rarely true.
Instead of mentors, I’m focusing on building networks of business relationships, and connections with other entrepreneurs, customers, suppliers, and industry experts who bring value to specific challenges. These relationships are reciprocal rather than hierarchical.
Too many squirrel metaphors, but really, the squirrel doesn’t have a mentor squirrel telling it where to hide nuts. It observes, experiments, learns from other squirrels’ successes and failures and adapts its strategy accordingly.
It’s very possible I’m wrong, but mentorship has never been my cup of tea in the first place.
People Management Lessons from the Trenches
Managing people is hard. Motivating them is harder.
Hiring and firing? That’s where many entrepreneurs discover they’re not as naturally gifted as they thought.
If managing people in one business is challenging, managing teams across multiple revenue streams is more like conducting an orchestra while learning to play each instrument simultaneously.
Each business will have different cultures, different success metrics, different team dynamics, and different leadership requirements, no matter how much you actively try to homogenize things. You as the founder can’t set the culture; you can guide it for sure, but culture is an amalgamation of the way of working (?life??) of everyone in the business.
I could talk at length about people management lessons, but here are some of the things I’ve learned from the trenches:
- You need great employees to scale. When you find them, pay them well. Be talent-hungry and never complacent. Great talent builds great businesses.
- When starting out, skip the “experts.” They’re often too rigid and less adaptable. Instead, find people eager to learn. Train them thoroughly, give them a healthy environment to grow, define expectations clearly, and then give them space to thrive.
- Letting go early helps everyone. You’re doing yourself—and the underperforming employee—a favor by cutting ties quickly. You’re not a therapist. You can’t fix their attitude, mindset, or pace. The business gains clarity, the former employee finds a better fit, and a more suitable replacement brings fresh energy. Win – Maybe Win – Win.
- You’ll likely fire more people before you find the right ones—and that’s okay. Don’t guilt yourself. But if you’re constantly firing or clashing with people, self-reflection is necessary. It might not always be them.
- Don’t tolerate mediocrity. It’s a slippery slope to stagnation and, eventually, irrelevance. Either hold your standards or be prepared to end up on the street.
- Care for your people, but don’t forget to care for yourself. Most employees will move on quickly if your business fails. You’ll be left picking up the pieces. Value those who check in on you after they leave; those are people to keep close to.
- Create a tight reporting structure. You don’t need to micromanage—but you do need micro-reporting. Trust is earned, not assumed. Even your best people need structure and check-ins.
- Always start with a probation period. Make it at least three months. This gives both sides time to assess fit without emotional attachment clouding decisions.
- Hire for mindset, not just skillset. Skills can be trained, but values, attitude, and work ethic are much harder to teach.
- Train your team like you’re building replacements. Whether they stay or go, this mindset ensures you don’t become the bottleneck.
- Set clear KPIs and define what success looks like. Don’t assume your team knows what “doing well” means. Measure what matters and make it visible.
- You don’t need to hire for every role. Sometimes it’s smarter to use contractors or agencies. As you gain more operational bandwidth, you can vertically integrate where necessary.
- Have solid, trustworthy operators running day-to-day. Your job is not to be stuck in daily firefighting, it’s to think ahead, steer the ship, and build systems that outlive you.
- Praise publicly, correct privately. Public shaming breeds resentment and fear. Quiet correction builds respect and improvement. If quiet correction doesn’t work, then make it public, and be prepared to let them go.
- Avoid creating too many emotional dependencies. You must be kind, and empathetic, and still maintain boundaries.
- Celebrate milestones. People are more loyal to places where they feel seen, appreciated, and included in the wins.
- Don’t just train people what to do, teach them why it matters. A team that understands the mission makes better decisions in your absence.
- Don’t romanticize loyalty. It’s okay if great people leave. Your best employees have their own dreams. That doesn’t make them disloyal, and it definitely doesn’t make them the enemy. Celebrate their growth, stay in touch, and leave the door open for future collaboration.
- Create a structure for career growth. Ambitious team members want to know where they’re heading. Show them what the next 2–3 years could look like within the company. No one wants to climb a ladder that disappears after the first few steps.
- Build anonymous feedback loops. Set up a form or dedicated email where people can voice concerns, report issues, or suggest improvements without fear. Then actually act on the feedback. Trust grows when people feel heard.
- Be accessible. You don’t need to micromanage, but people should feel they can reach you when it matters.
- If someone constantly drains your energy or morale, don’t keep them around. One toxic hire can undo the work of five good ones. Team performance often sinks to the level of the weakest link, not the strongest.
I’ve made poor hiring and management decisions, but the thing I’ve learnt is that building systems that help good people succeed, help people that struggle adapt faster, and weed out bad hires faster. Well-designed processes take time to build, and need to be improved and fine-tuned constantly, but they empower great people to succeed.
Furthermore, firing, or more diplomatically, “parting ways,” becomes even more complex when you’re managing multiple ventures. The underperforming team member in Business A might be incredibly valuable if transferred to Business B, and I’ve seen this play out a few times.
The most successful multi-stream entrepreneurs I’ve observed treat team building like portfolio construction. They identify core skills that translate across ventures (communication, reliability, strategic thinking) and hire for those competencies, then provide venture-specific training.
Building Systems That Survive You
Time for another squirrel metaphor: the best squirrel burrow systems persist even when they’re not around to maintain them. Similarly, the best businesses operate independently of their founders’ constant intervention.
Extended side note: one of the challenges I’ve seen with a lot of Nigerian businesses is the lack of structure. Do you have SOPs for how you handle client complaints or how to achieve consistent results across the board? Do you have a succession plan? Do you have a will? Do you have a document listing all your passwords, subscriptions, and what to do when you’re no longer here?
This extends to succession too, a lot of good businesses are no longer in existence because of lack of structure, such that all family members make a mockery of your hard work, and collapse the business.
Where’s Abiola’s Concord Group (Concord Press, Concorde Airlines, Abiola Bookshops, Summit Oil, Wonder Loaf Bakery, Abiola Farms, and Radio Communications of Nigeria), Okada Air, Ikeja Hotel Plc, Ekene Dili Chukwu, Agota Fleet, and many more today?
They were businesses with good fundamentals but the absence of succession planning led to their demise.
As I write, there’s a business using the flat beside mine that’s been locked down since December 2024 because the lady who owned it died. The woman’s family and the lady’s husband are in an ownership tussle.
It’s somewhat easy to fix, if you don’t want to see your life’s work destroyed by knaves and fools, then build with continuity in mind from day one. Document everything. Create systems that make your presence optional. Develop people who can lead without you. Draft legal safeguards, define your succession plan clearly, and make your operational playbook idiot-proof.
More importantly, build an administrative system where leadership is appointed based on merit, not bloodlines. Trustees, not family members, should be empowered to select qualified professionals to run the business.
Your wealth should flow through a trustee-managed corporation, where family members benefit from a fixed percentage of annual profits, not direct control. This way, you protect both the integrity of your business and the dignity of your family, ensuring they enjoy the fruits without being burdened by roles they may not be equipped to handle.
This structure not only prevents internal power struggles but also reinforces long-term stability. It keeps the business mission-focused, ensures continuity of vision, and allows talented leadership to thrive without interference. The goal isn’t just to build wealth, it’s to preserve it across generations.
And for good measure, add copious amounts of curses for any family member that goes against your wishes, or take any case to court. They are making a mockery of you, and yes, empower your trustees to prevent their lazy ass from getting a kobo of your money.
This extends to family too, and the issue of black tax. You’re responsible to your family, yes, especially your parents, yes. However, for any other person, it’s a terrible idea to let them mooch off you. It’ll breed resentment in you, and in them too. Create structures, and help them get skills to get a job. Remember, don’t give them money to start a business, that’s usually the same thing as burning money to cook beans.
Only skills worked hard for are appreciated. Enroll them in courses, help them find jobs, help out in real emergencies, but don’t make the mistake of subsidizing their lifestyle.
Same thing for your spouse and kids. Marry for love, as much as for brains too. If you’re gone, are you sure your significant other can hold down the fort, and make sure your kids and business succeed? Do they have the means to cater to your kids as a one-parent household?
Growing up, I saw this play out in two neighbouring families that had their patriarchs die around the same time. Father A and Father B both had business, A selling paints, and B, wood logs.
When Father A died, the mother, a state primary school teacher, held down the fort, maintained the business (which still exists in Ibadan till today), and sent all the kids to Uni. Today, all the kids are successful by the middle-class definition of success. She has all my respect because it definitely wasn’t easy caring for 5 kids, with the eldest only in year 1 of Uni then.
Before Father B died, Mother B was always starting a new business every few months, and was mostly interested in parties and looking good. When he died, she couldn’t hold down the fort, business went bust, withdrew all 5 kids from private schools, and left them mostly uncared for. Today, all four girls got impregnated out of wedlock before they were even 18, and the last boy child does yahoo (internet fraud) and weed.
End of the extended side note.
Systems thinking isn’t just about workflows and automation tools (though those are important). It’s about designing processes that can operate predictably when you’re not personally managing every detail.
It’s about creating feedback loops that alert you to problems before they become crises. It’s about building decision-making frameworks that your team can apply consistently across different contexts.
Building systems takes time, often much longer than you want to spend. There’s always pressure to move fast, cut corners, or handle things yourself “just this once.” However sustainable multi-stream revenue requires processes that function without constant babysitting.
I’ve started documenting everything: decision-making frameworks, standard operating procedures, customer communication templates, and even the seemingly obvious stuff that “everyone should know.”
There’s a constant tension between the immediate revenue needs of your current ventures and the long-term infrastructure requirements for sustainable growth. The temptation is always to prioritize short-term revenue over system building, but that’s a trap that will eventually collapse under its own complexity.
“What if you were gone for six months? Would this business survive and thrive?”
Build systems. Empower your people.
Don’t be Father B.
Make Your Burrows Talk to Each Other
The magic of multi-stream revenue should be synergy, not necessarily diversification. Don’t make multiple separate burrows but interconnected systems where each location serves multiple purposes.
For me, we have a web development team in Contentika, so it makes sense to offer it as a separate service under Spinah, and then upsell these new clients’ SEO services via Contentika. For Solevant, what better way to meet new companies and build communities, which can trackback work to Contentika & Spinah? Or, even for the youtube channels, video marketing is increasingly important, and what better way to have more skin in the game than by actively creating content and learning new ropes that can then be used by the other brands?
These connections aren’t automatic—they require intentional design and ongoing cultivation. But when they work, they create competitive advantages that single-stream entrepreneurs probably can’t replicate.
Your multiple experience base will allow you to spot market opportunities and solutions that specialists might miss. Similarly, the varied customer relationships will provide market research and validation across multiple segments simultaneously.
Each revenue stream strengthened the others. Customer acquisition costs dropped because existing clients became referral sources across projects. Market research became more efficient because insights from one venture informed strategies for others.
The compound effect also applies to skill development. Each venture forces you to develop capabilities that enhance your effectiveness across all streams. You become a more well-rounded entrepreneur because you’re solving multiple challenges rather than repeatedly solving similar problems.
The Portfolio Mindset
Many investing experts swear by the S&P 500 which spreads risk between many stocks.
Why not do the same for yourself by adopting what venture capitalists call a portfolio mindset? Instead of betting everything on one “sure thing,” you’re making calculated bets across multiple opportunities, expecting some to fail while others exceed expectations.
This mindset changes everything about how you evaluate opportunities, allocate resources, and measure success.
A traditional entrepreneur might see a 50% failure rate as devastatingly poor performance.
A portfolio entrepreneur understands that if half their ventures break even and half produce strong returns, the overall portfolio can be incredibly successful.
When I look at my track record in this light, I don’t see failure. I see a portfolio in development, with some assets performing better than others, which is exactly what you’d expect.
The portfolio approach also changes how you think about timing and sequencing. You’re not just asking “Is this a good business idea?” but “Is this the right business idea for this stage of my portfolio development?”
The academic gigs that got wiped out by COVID weren’t inherently bad, they were just too concentrated and vulnerable to external shocks.
Risk management becomes more sophisticated when you’re thinking in portfolio terms. You balance high-risk, high-reward ventures with stable, predictable income streams.
You ensure that your ventures aren’t all susceptible to the same market risks or economic cycles.
You think about correlation—how likely are your different revenue streams to succeed or fail simultaneously?
Practical Burrow Building 101: Where to Start
If you’re convinced that multi-stream revenue makes sense but don’t know where to begin, start small and interconnected.
Look at your current business or skills and ask:
- What adjacent value could you provide to the same customers?
- What complementary problems could you solve for similar markets?
- What expertise have you developed that others might pay for?
Don’t launch three unrelated businesses simultaneously. Build one solid foundation, then add connected streams that use existing assets, relationships, or knowledge.
Plant seeds early. Start with one solid stream, but keep your eyes peeled for complementary opportunities. Can your service spin off into a product? Can your brand target a new niche?
Test the soil. Launch small pilots—think MVPs (Minimum Viable Products)—to see what sticks before committing big resources.
Mix it up. Balance stable, low-risk streams with bolder bets. Bury some nuts close to home and others further afield (more squirrel metaphors hehe).
The goal isn’t to be busy—it’s to be resilient. Each new stream should make the others stronger, not compete for your attention and resources.
Some of your revenue streams might never be “sellable” in the traditional sense—your consulting practice, for example, might be too dependent on your personal brand and relationships. But others might develop into valuable assets that can be sold, licensed, or franchised. Your SaaS tool might attract acquisition interest. Your course business might be licensed to other educators.
The Long Game: Burrows Take Time
Building sustainable multi-stream revenue isn’t a get-rich-quick scheme. It’s a get-resilient-slowly strategy that pays dividends over years, not months.
Traditional entrepreneurship advice often focuses on building one valuable business that you can eventually sell for a significant multiple. The multi-stream approach suggests a different wealth-building strategy: creating a portfolio of assets that provide ongoing cash flow, occasional liquidity events, and long-term asset appreciation.
Start with one good burrow, learn what worked, expand strategically, and continuously adapt based on changing conditions.
Your business ecosystem deserves this patient, systematic approach. Focus on building systems that compound over time rather than tactics that provide immediate gratification.
The long game also recognizes that entrepreneurship is a career that can span decades. Your interests, skills, and market opportunities will evolve over time.
The revenue streams that work in your 30s might not align with your priorities in your 50s.
Building multiple streams allows you to shift focus and resources as your personal circumstances change while maintaining overall portfolio stability.
Last Lessons from the Burrow
To recap, creating multi-stream income shouldn’t mean one is indecisive or lacks focus, but more like strategic thinking and risk management. It’s because life is unpredictable, predators are real, and survival requires redundancy.
This diversification strategy isn’t only a hedge against failure, it’s also an acknowledgment that the environment is inherently uncertain and that adaptability is more valuable than efficiency.
Markets change, opportunities shift, and sustainable success requires options.
The most successful multi-stream entrepreneurs I’ve studied share certain characteristics with successful squirrels: they’re opportunistic but selective, building multiple capabilities while maintaining focus on what works.
They’re prepared for seasonal changes, understanding that different revenue streams will perform differently in different market conditions.
They’re patient builders, understanding that developing multiple income sources takes time and can’t be rushed.
Most importantly, they understand that the goal isn’t to optimize any single revenue stream to perfection but to build a portfolio that’s resilient, adaptable, and capable of generating sustainable returns across varying conditions.
They think like investors in their own capabilities rather than employees of their own ideas.
