Finland’s strained public finances leave little room for error. For Youssef Zad, that makes one thing clear. Growth funding needs to be far more deliberate.

“We are operating within very tight constraints,” says Zad, who recently moved from the startup world into politics. “That means we have to be extremely deliberate about where we allocate resources for growth.”

Earlier this month, Zad moved from chief economist at the Finnish Startup Community to a one-year economist position within the Social Democratic Parliamentary Group. The shift brings him closer to policymaking, even if indirectly. “I don’t hold decision-making power myself,” he notes, “but I now have a more direct channel to contribute ideas that shape policy.”

Capital is more pressing than talent in scaling phase

If one constraint stands out in his thinking, it is capital, though not at the expense of talent. “Talent is a challenge, but it is manageable through policy,” he explains, pointing to immigration and tax incentives. “The more pressing issue is access to capital.”

He notes that the United States has built much of its innovation capacity on the back of highly skilled immigration, a model Europe could draw from. In that sense, the talent question is solvable. Capital, however, becomes decisive as companies scale. “Competing with the scale of investment in the United States is difficult, and Europe needs stronger local funding mechanisms.”

Before his latest appointment, Zad served the Finnish Startup Community first as an economist and later as chief economist for four years. Photo provided by Zad.

That perspective reflects his background in the startup ecosystem, where access to funding often determines whether ideas scale. The move into politics, however, has changed the pace of decision-making. “The biggest change is the pace of work,” he says. In the startup world, there is time to analyze and reflect. In politics, decisions move quickly. “You have to respond in real time, often without the luxury of deep background work.”

The shift itself is less ideological than it might appear. “Founders tend to be pragmatic. They are willing to work with any party that brings forward good ideas.” His own path followed a similar logic. “This wasn’t a predetermined choice. It evolved over time through collaboration and dialogue.”