I used to say, "Maybe I am old-fashioned." But now I just admit it: I AM old-fashioned.

I know I'm old-fashioned when I need to ask my BYU business students what they are talking about when they mention things like Bluetooth, BlackBerry, Wi-Fi and EarthLink. At the same time, when they ask me about my references to Norman Rockwell or Mark Twain, I know that there is a growing generational gap between us.

Well, call me old-fashioned, but there is one concept I am feeling stronger about as it relates to both entrepreneurs and angel investors - and with good reason, since I'm both. The older I get, the more I resent startup entrepreneurs who want to get sweat equity before they put in the sweat. I am tired of giving people with ideas huge blocks of ownership in a startup venture that has no value, no customers and no sales and is merely a "bright" idea.

I believe I have a better but - here's that phrase again - old-fashioned approach: Sweat needs to happen BEFORE the equity. Just coming up with a good idea without a team, a business plan or a marketing idea doesn't cut it. That bubble has long ago burst for me.

This is especially true in the kind of work that now occupies much of my time and attention: helping the poor lift themselves out of poverty through microenterprise development and - my latest and greatest approach - microequity financing.

If we as do-gooders in Third World countries really want to impact individual families, instead of giving things away that only build feelings of entitlement, we need to provide models of success for those we are trying to help. And the best way that I know how to do that is by providing them with a developed business model and operations blueprint for them to follow.

In fact, establishing some of these folks as founder and operator of a microfranchise is a great idea. But do we just "give" them 100 percent ownership in a small business and let them try to keep the thing afloat? Nope, that would be equity before the sweat.

Try this for fit. The funder/investor keeps 100 percent of ownership - and therefore is highly invested both financially and emotionally - until the operator of the business proves the concept through sales revenue, bottom line performance and team building. As the operator reaches milestones, he receives a growing percentage of the ownership.

If there are never any revenues and the enterprise eventually fails, the funder or investors receive either the remains of the company or the total loss for income tax purposes.

Or in the case of enterprise development work, if the operator doesn't cut it, he gets moved out after an appropriate amount of time, and another ambitious poor person moves into his place. It might sound a little Darwinian - you know, "survival of the fittest" stuff - but isn't that what market forces are about, anyway?

That way, we are in the enterprise building/people building business, but not the continuation of the dole, or handing out money, willy-nilly (another old term), without some sweat to earn the desired equity.

Is that fair? To my way of thinking, it is not only fair but will probably keep the attention of the operator more on the things that really count, like profitable exchanges with customers instead of counting stock certificates. Or, in the case of Third World development, padding the payroll with family members and purchasing unneeded vehicles - all prevalent actions of novices.

First the sweat, then the equity. That's my new mantra.

And isn't that just making money the old-fashioned way anyway - by earning it?