It’s a really really liberating question. The main differences for scale of thought are:

• the ability to actually *make* something that might involved demos and multiple iterations and expensive materials
• and the freedom to hire a crack team

At the moment I’m working on a start-up that’s ridiculously lean (I have about $1000 potential budget) and have a really carefully drawn-up set of stages that will develop a product for training creativity skills from something simple and physical through various apps to a VR system and it will take a year and more at each of 5 stages, moving on only when there’s either sufficient revenue or sufficient proof of concept to attract the next level of investment.

I think for *this* idea this is the right way to do it though. But no financial constrain would mean I could choose a different idea. It seems to me that the biggest challenge we have that not enough people are working on precisely because of the huge financial costs involved in even the proof of concept stage is cleaning our oceans of plastic waste. As a society we have to make that work well enough for people to invest sufficiently for such a massive undertaking. If I had unlimited pockets I’d want to seed a bunch of schemes to look at how that could happen.