In the face of uncertainty, many companies will default to asking their innovators to study and analyze, which can't actually ever provide a definitive answer.

Data about an innovative idea is rarely crystal clear.

In the strengthening the core job, a leader can draw on their past experiences. After all, in most cases they did the job of the people that are reporting to them! So they know when something is screwed up, they know the risks worth taking, and they know the corners to cut. But when they are creating the new, no one knows what the right answer is.

The reality is sometimes markets don't exist for very good reasons. It might be that there isn't a deep customer need. Or the economic model is just hard to pull off. Or maybe there is a regulatory barrier.

Document, evaluate, focus, test.

Most startup companies have two people, and they figure out creative ways to swarm problems. They move faster and have more impact.

I think it is only in hindsight that you can determine whether something is a mistake or not.