Perhaps, but I would be careful to apply 'older execute better' as a general explanation for the study result.
It's possible but selection bias could also be playing a huge role here.
I can't imagine a more risky period to step out of a 'career' and become a founder than 45. So it's possible people making the leap at this age are a lot more certain about their chances of success before taking the plunge than younger (and much older) people who have less to lose.
> I can't imagine a more risky period to step out of a 'career' and become a founder than 45.
Why? What makes age 45 more risky than 40 or 50, or 35 or 60? Or are you just comparing "age bracket where people probably have a family" vs. "people probably too young to have a family"?
Oh yes that's true. My Aussie Super (retirement scheme) was started in my 30s (that's when I migrated down under) and now I need to pay voluntary contributions besides the standard 9.5% or I won't get a decent retirement.
I'm not sure that becoming a founder at 45 is likely to be successful. It is surely because successful founders have many failures under their belt that the average successful founder is 45. This implies that stepping out at 45 is not the way to be successful.
It's possible but selection bias could also be playing a huge role here.
I can't imagine a more risky period to step out of a 'career' and become a founder than 45. So it's possible people making the leap at this age are a lot more certain about their chances of success before taking the plunge than younger (and much older) people who have less to lose.