I think the thing about starting your own start-up without experience seeing what works elsewhere is you're highly unlikely to avoid making some big mistakes.
If you've spent time in a growing company and at least seen how things evolve over the years, you have an idea of what does work that you can base your first attempts against.
Trying to come up with novel solutions for everything from hiring to org structure is a recipe for pain, and I'd invest my money with a team of people who've experienced good versions of these things over those with none any day.
I don't doubt that. But you don't have to come up with 'novel solutions' for everything because you can read books, watch conference talks, listen to podcasts, read blog posts, by people who have done it before. Working somewhere will give you a very close and detailed, but n=1 experience of one company.
But I'm biased, as I started my first startup at 16 and failed, and proceeded to re-try at 18, and succeeded. I'm not doubting that someone with years of experience in high-growth startups would have been a better founder than me at 16, but I do think that starting a startup was a choice that lead me to startup success faster than trying to get a job and then attempting.
> and I'd invest my money with a team of people who've experienced good versions of these things over those with none any day.
This is an absolutely valid (and imo likely correct) assessment, but it's a different question than "What should I, as the potential founder or employee, do?".
If you've spent time in a growing company and at least seen how things evolve over the years, you have an idea of what does work that you can base your first attempts against.
Trying to come up with novel solutions for everything from hiring to org structure is a recipe for pain, and I'd invest my money with a team of people who've experienced good versions of these things over those with none any day.