Opportunity Knocks

When our friends at Habeas announced that they were exploring a sale of the company a few months back, we were intrigued.  While fiercely competing in the marketplace does create some degree of tension or even mistrust between two companies, that activity also creates a lot of common ground for discussion about the market and the future.

So we are very excited today to announce that we are acquiring Habeas in a deal that is signed and should close within a couple weeks.  Cutting through all the PR platitudes, here’s what this deal really means for our stakeholders:

For everyone we work with, this deal means we have even more scale.  More scale is a good thing.  It means we can invest more in our future in everything from technical infrastructure, to product innovation, to globalization, to employee development.  It’s easy to be great when you’re a 25 person company.  It’s actually quite challenging when you’re a 50-100 person company.  It becomes easier again, though in different ways, when you are a 200 person company with more resources.

For ISPs and filters, more scale means more and better data products to help fine tune filtering algorithms and improve member experience.  It also means an even more streamlined way to reach masses of marketers and publishers. 

For sender clients, we can now offer expanded service levels and access to a broader “footprint” of ISPs and filters who subscribe to our services.  The consolidated company will be one step closer to providing a universal set of standards for measuring sender-focused email quality and reputation.  Some of the details still need to be worked out here, so look for more specific communication from your account representative in the coming weeks.  The one thing we do know at this point is that we will be maintaining both Sender Score Certified and the Habeas SafeList as separate and distinct whitelist programs indefinitely.  So for now, it’s business as usual.

For employees, combining the resources of the two companies means we will be in a better position to wow our clients.  A bigger employee base and a larger company also means more career opportunities for all. 

We have always been mindful that, even as the market leader, we have to earn “every dollar, every day” from our clients, and we have to constantly demonstrate to ISPs and filters that we are not just advocating for our sender clients but for them and their subscribers as well.  None of that changes with this deal.  We still have plenty of competition and are redoubling our efforts to lead the market with innovation and service levels, not just with size and scale.

Our friend Ken Magill wrote some unkind remarks about Habeas a while back.  At the time, as fierce competitors with Habeas, we probably agreed with him.  But as we’ve gotten to know Habeas better over the past few weeks, we realized what a great business the Habeas team has built in the last five years  — including: a strong customer base and partner network, innovative reputation technologies, complementary receiver and data partnerships and most importantly, an incredible team of people as fanatical about saving email as Return Path. For Return Path employees and clients, we get access to these new assets that now makes us an even stronger leader in this space.  And Habeas employees and clients now have expanded access to great resources and talent from Return Path.  But the big winners are the ISPs, filters, and email senders – they will l now have access to a more universal solution to deliverability and filtering accuracy.

So, to  Habeas’ employees, we say “Welcome to the Return Path family!”  We are delighted to have you and look forward to many years of success together.  As I said to my wife when we were in the middle of all the due diligence on the deal, “learning more about Habeas is a little bit like looking in one of those Fun House mirrors at a carnival – you see yourself, just looking slightly different.”  We will all have to work together to move to the common ground from the prior world of competing against each other, but the exciting future of the business and the industry will propel us there. 

Onward!

If this madness all ended tomorrow, I would do…almost nothing

(This post originally appeared on FindYourNerve on October 21)

I don’t know what you call the last 12 months of global macroeconomic meltdown.  I’ve taken to calling it the Great Repression.  In part because it’s somewhere in between a Recession and a Depression, in part because it’s certainly repressed the wants and needs of startups and growth companies the world over.  And it makes for good cocktail party chatter.

Someone asked me a question the other day, which started off with “Now that the recession is over…”  I can’t even remember the end of the question.  I got lost in the framing of it, mostly because I’m not convinced it’s over yet.  Fine, fine, Bernanke says it’s over.  But he couldn’t possibly have used more caveats or more cautious language to couch his statement.  I haven’t seem great signs of a recovery, in any case.  But the question got me thinking.  What would I do if the recession really was over, or if I knew that, say, tomorrow, the heavens would open up and swallow our inflation fears, deflation fears, and collective global deficits whole?

You know what?  I wouldn’t do a thing.  That’s not entirely true.  I’d probably sleep better that night.  But I wouldn’t do a lot of other things out of the gate.  This last year has tested nerves.  My nerve as a CEO, my Board’s nerve, and the collective nerve of our organization.  And we’ve pulled off a great year.  We will still grow close to 50%, we greatly expanded our operating margins and are generating nice cash flow, and we preserved all jobs, salaries, and core benefits (all five of our objectives that I laid out 12 months ago when the &*%$ started to hit the fan). 

So, why wouldn’t I do anything different if I knew the world would be a different place tomorrow?  Because holding our nerve this past year has changed a lot of things about our organization for the better, and I don’t want to see us reverse course on those things just because we can.  Here’s one example, one of many we have – when we cut our travel budget by 50% this year, everyone on the team looked at us like we were crazy and said there was no way we’d be able to make budget.  Guess what – we BEAT the slashed budget by almost a third, without complaint!  Why should we triple it going forward to get back to where we were? 

Anyway, other companies can lose their nerve when they aren’t forced to have it.  As for me and Return Path, while we will certainly move some things back to normal over time as the world improves, it won’t be a wholesale reversion to yesteryear.

Winds of Change at the DMA

I’ve been an active member of the Direct Marketing Association (DMA) for almost seven years now.  It’s kind of the Mac Daddy of trade associations in and around our business.  The DMA has taken its lumps of late, mostly deservedly so, and I think made some terrible moves, misjudgments, and decisions a few years back.

But I’ve continued to be an active member, mostly convinced by new DMA CEO John Greco and COO Ramesh Ratan that there was a new sheriff in town who was going to restore peace and order to the village.  John and Ramesh have a deep understanding and deeply held convictions about consumer experience and permission — and about the centrality of interactive marketing to direct marketing, and to marketing departments in general.

And they’re starting to make lots of changes at the DMA, from who is on the staff, to the staff’s mindset, to their goals, budgets, and plans — all to the benefit of interactive marketers.

One thing they’ve done is revitalized the Interactive Marketing Advisory Board (IMAB), which we created after AIM was dissolved last year, of which I’m the Chairman.  The IMAB has a star-studded list of member companies and individuals (see coverage in DMNews here) and is working diligently and in great partnership with the senior staff of the DMA to really bring interactive marketing principles to the core of the DMA’s offerings and ethos.  We still have a long way to go, as you probably noticed at this week’s DMA 06 show in San Francisco (great interactive programming, very weak interactive trade show floor and critical mass of key attendees), but I think the IMAB initiative has us off to a great start.

Stay tuned for more developments on this front over the coming weeks.

Does size matter?

It is the age-old question — are you a more important person at your company if you have more people reporting into you?  Most people, unfortunately, say yes.

I’m going to assume the origins of this are political and military. The kingdom with more subjects takes over the smaller kingdom. The general has more stars on his lapel than the colonel. And it may be true for some of those same reasons in more traditional companies. If you have a large team or department, you have control over more of the business and potentially more of the opportunities. The CEO will want to hear from you, maybe even the Board.

In smaller organizations, and in more contemporary organization structures that are flatter (either structurally or culturally) or more dynamic/fluid, I’m not sure this rule holds any more. Yes, sure, a 50-person team is going to get some attention, and the ability to lead that team effectively is incredibly important and not easy to come by. But that doesn’t mean that in order to be important, or get recognized, or be well-compensated, you must lead that large team.

Consider the superstar enterprise sales rep or BD person. This person is likely an individual contributor. But this person might well be the most highly paid person in the company. And becoming a sales manager might be a mistake — the qualities that make for a great rep are quite different from those that make a great sales manager. We have lost a few great sales reps over the years for this very reason. They begged for the promotion to manager, we couldn’t say no (or we would lose them), then they bombed as sales managers and refused as a matter of pride to go back to being a sales rep.

Or consider a superstar engineer, also often an individual contributor. This person may be able to write code at 10x the rate and quality of the rest of the engineering organization and can create a massive amount of value that way. But everything I wrote above about sales reps moving into management holds for engineers as well.  The main difference we’ve seen over the years is that on average, successful engineers don’t want to move into management roles at the same rate as successful sales reps.

It’s certainly true that you can’t build a company consisting of only individual contributors. But that isn’t my point. My point is that you can add as much value to your organization, and have as much financial or psychic reward, by being a rock star individual contributor as you can by being the leader of a large team.

Big Apple, Little Company

Ed Daciuk, on of my blog subscribers, questions:  What is your view on the benefits of being in NYC as a startup?

Fred wrote a good posting several months ago and a related one this week on early stage investing in the NYC market from the perspective of a venture capitalist.  His main points:  (1) NYC is a great place to invest in early stage tech-related businesses as long as they’re not "core technology" businesses like semiconductor or hardware, because (2) core technology companies are more exciting to investors, and therefore the investors have clustered around those companies in places like Silicon Valley or Boston.  He also thinks this dynamic is changing as more and more successful companies are started as technology-enabled service businesses as opposed to pure tech companies.

As someone who’s been in tech-enabled services businesses in NYC for 10 years now, I couldn’t agree more with this last point.  But I thought I’d address Ed’s question from the entrepreneur’s perspective as well.

First, why is New York a great place for a startup?

1. Access to customers.  There is far greater concentration of major corporations and agencies headquartered in and around the NYC area, making it much easier to see and talk to prospects and customers in this market.

2. Lots of talent.  There are lots of people, meaning there are lots of people to hire.  Some disciplines are easier than others to find talent, but the labor pool is just huge.

3. Convenience.  This is always one of NYC’s main selling points, and it applies here as well.  It’s mainly a collection of little things like being able to see a customer or investor in minutes by foot or mass transit and late night food delivery, but all those extra minutes you save here and there add up!

4. Idea generation.  The density and complexity of the city’s business landscape make it a natural for stimulating great ideas, especially in the service and media sectors.

5. Work ethic.  New Yorkers are accustomed to working startup hours in many professions — banking, consulting, law, etc., so it’s much more natural to have a team pounding away at the office early and late than it is in other geographies.

But it’s not all that easy.  New York can also be a difficult place for a startup because:

1. It’s expensive.  Very expensive.  People cost more, benefits cost more, T&E costs more, rent costs more.

2. Space is limited.  There’s no such thing as starting out in someone’s garage, because there are no garages — only teeny tiny apartments.  And no one takes a lease with room to grow because that extra space comes at such a premium.

3. Good money is harder to find.  As Fred says, it’s getting better, but the environment still isn’t as rich with high quality VCs as places like Silicon Valley or Boston.

4. Even when you do find good money, valuations are tougher.  For whatever reason, I’ve always found that "west coast" valuations are more generous than "east coast" valuations.

On balance, I’d say it’s probably a wash — there are plusses and minuses of NYC as a place for startups.  But it’s definitely not, as conventional wisdom would have it, an inhospitable environment for startups.

A Better Way to Fly (to London)

Eos Airlines is a new airline that has a single route, and but one flight per day (each direction) — London-New York.  And boy, did it do the trick.  I was able to get a complimentary ticket, but let me tell you, even at $3,250 (about their normal fare), it’s worth the price if you have the money for it.  And a spot check of BA and American’s sites shows that a first class or even business class ticket on those carriers can run as much as $5,000-$7,000 if you’re not using miles to purchase or upgrade.

It’s a new concept in airlines.  Their marketing materials call it “what Starbucks did for the coffee experience, we’re doing the airline experience” (or something like that).  But the reality is that it’s more properly expressed as “what a massage did for a sharp poke in the ribs, we did for the airline experience.”

All seats are SERIOUSLY first class.  48 passengers per plane in a plane that normally has 220 seats.  21 square feet per passenger (think about that one for a minute).  Private pods.  Full reclining beds everywhere.

The rest of the experience is MORE THAN first class.  People who whisk you through security and to the plane at the last minute, without that “please show up at Kennedy four hours before your flight” warning.  Great airport lounges.  Airplane personnel who aren’t airplane personnel but more like customer service representatives.  Fantastic food and drink.  Bose noise-cancellation headsets and comparable personal entertainment centers.  Regular power outlets at each seat.  Fancy pillows with good lumbar support.  Landing at Stansted in England instead of the beastly Heathrow is great — we were, no lie, 10 minutes from touchdown to car, including taxi, immigration, customs, baggage and walking time.

The one element of the experience that cuts both ways is Stansted.  Countering the benefits above — it’s further away from London than Heathrow or Gatwick.  I’d say at a busy time, take the Stansted Express train instead of fighting traffic with the admittedly great Brooklands limo service unless you have LOADS of time to spare.

I hope the folks at Eos open more routes (and of course, that they lower their prices for my next paid fare!).

Debunking the Myth of Hiring for Domain Expertise vs. Functional Expertise

As a CEO scaling your business, you’ll invariably want to hire in new senior people from the outside.  Even if you promote aggressively from within, if you’re growing quickly enough, you’ll just need more bodies.  And if you’re growing really fast, you will be missing experience from your employee base that you’ll need to augment.

For years, I’ve thought and heard that there’s a basic tradeoff in hiring senior people — you can hire someone with great domain expertise, or you can hire someone with great functional expertise, but it’s almost impossible to find both in the same person, so you need to figure out which is more important to you.  Would I rather hire someone who knows the X business, or someone who is a great Head of X?  Over the course of the last year, I’ve added four new senior executives to the team at Return Path, and to some extent, I’ve hired people with deep functional expertise but limited domain expertise.  Part of that has been driven by the fact that we are now one of the larger companies in the email space, so finding people who have “been there, done that” in email is challenging.

But the amount of senior hiring I’ve done recently has mostly shown me that the “domain vs. functional” framework, while probably accurate, is misleading if you think of it as the most important thing you have to consider when hiring in senior people from the outside.

What’s more important is finding people who have experience working at multiple growth stages in their prior jobs, ideally the scaling stage that you’re at as a business.  It makes sense if you stop and think about it.  If your challenge is SCALING YOUR BUSINESS, then find someone who has DONE THAT before, or at least find someone who has worked at both small companies and larger companies before.  I suppose that means you care more about functional expertise than domain expertise, but it’s an important distinction.

Looking for a new industrial-strength CFO for your suddenly large business?  Sure, you can hire someone from a Fortune 500 company.  But if that person has never worked in a startup or growth stage company, you may get someone fluent in Greek when you speak Latin.  He or she will show up on the first day expecting certain processes to be in place, certain spreadsheets to be perfect, certain roles to be filled.  And some of them won’t be.  The big company executive may freeze like a deer caught in the headlights, whereas the stage-versatile executive will invariably roll up his or her sleeves and fix the spreadsheet, rewrite the process, hire the new person.  That’s what scaling needs to feel like.

Return Path Core Values, Part III

Last year, I wrote a series of 13 posts documenting and illustrating Return Path’s core values.  This year, we just went through a comprehensive all-company process of updating our values.  We didn’t change our values – you can’t do that! – but we did revise the way we present our values to ourselves and the world.  It had been four years since we wrote the original values up, and the business has evolved in many ways.  Quite frankly, the process of writing up all these blog posts for OnlyOnce last year was what led me to think it was time for a bit of a refresh.

The result of the process was that we combined a few values statements, change the wording of a few others, added a few new ones, and organized and labeled them better.  We may not have a catchy acronym like Rand Fishkin’s TAGFEE, but these are now much easier for us to articulate internally.  So now we have 14 values statements, but they don’t exactly map to the prior ones one for one.  The new presentation and statements are:

People First

• Job 1:  We are responsible for championing and extending our unique culture as a competitive advantage.
• People Power:  We trust and believe in our people as the foundation of success with our clients and shareholders.
• Think Like an Owner:  We are a community of A Players who are all owners in the business.  We provide freedom and flexibility in exchange for consistently high performance.
• Seriously Fun:  We are serious about our job and lighthearted about our day.  We are obsessively kind to and respectful of each other, and appreciate each other’s quirks.

Do the Right Thing 

• No Secrets:  We are transparent and direct so that people know where the company stands and where they stand, so that they can make great decisions.
• Spirit of the Law:  We do the right thing, even if it means going beyond what’s written on paper.
• Raise the Bar:  We lead our industry to set standards that inboxes should only contain messages that are relevant, trusted, and safe.
• Think Global, Act Local:  We commit our time and energy to support our local communities.

Succeed Together

• Results-Focused:  We focus on building a great business and a great company in an open, accessible environment.
• Aim High and Be Bold:  We learn from others, then we write our own rules to be a pioneer in our industry and create a model workplace.  We take risks and challenge complacency, mediocrity, and decisions that don’t make sense.
• Two Ears, One Mouth:  We ask, listen, learn, and collect data.  We engage in constructive debate to reach conclusions and move forward together.
• Collaboration is King:   We solve problems together and help each other out along the way. We keep our commitments and communicate diligently when we can’t.
• Learning Loops: We are a learning organization.  We aren’t embarrassed by our mistakes – we communicate and learn from them so we can grow in our jobs.
• Not Just About Us:  We know we’re successful when our clients are successful and our users are happy.

For the 4 values which are “new,” I will write a post each, just as I did the old ones and run them over the next couple months.  RPers, I will go back and combine/revise my prior posts for us to use internally, but I won’t bother editing old blog posts.

Everyone’s a Marketer, Part II

In Part I of this posting, I talked about how everyone’s job function is increasingly touching customers and therefore, in our networked world, everyone needs to think like a marketer.  This posting has the same theme but a different spin.  From the perspective of the individual person (in a company, and in life), marketing is central to success, although the definition of your target market needs to change with the circumstances.

Interviewing for a job?  How good a job have you done building the brand of you (your list of accomplishments)?  How good is your collateral (resume)?

Want to get an increase in your department’s budget or buy a new piece of hardware?  Have you adequately defined the return on the incremental investment you’re proposing?

Need to get that project done?  What’s your universal selling proposition to get others to help you out (“here’s why it’s good for you to cooperate”)?  Are there any incentives involved (“I’ll buy dinner if you stay late and help with this”)?

Working hard to get a promotion?  Identify a new customer segment, or a new problem to solve for your customers, or a solution to that problem, and your marketing skills will get you there.

Want to go somewhere off the beaten path on vacation?  Better come up with some great selling points that resonate with specific members of your family (it’s beautiful, it’s inexpensive, the food is great, no one else has ever been there) to convince them all to go along with you!

I suppose this posting (and maybe the other one as well) could be entitled “Everyone’s in Sales,” and that would also be fitting.  Anyone who’s not in marketing or sales but who’s interested in learning a few of the basics should consider some outside reading.  I’d recommend Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, SPIN Selling, and Getting To Yes, but there are many, many other great books that would also do the job.

(Post 1 of 4 in the series on Scaling CROs)

In most startups, the founder is the first salesperson and while it may be difficult to let that go you’ll eventually scale, add sales reps, or maybe some form of a Sales Manager once there are more than a couple of reps.  In Startup CXO our Return Path CRO, Anita Absey, wrote about the journey of startup sales, from “selling on whiteboard” to “selling with PowerPoint” to “selling with PDF.” I encourage you to read that section if you’re wondering about hiring a CRO, but all of the hiring of sales reps and (possibly) a sales manager happens during what Anita calls the “White Board” stage as you’re beginning to transition to “Selling with PowerPoint.” 

Selling from a White Board means that you are essentially working with an interested potential customer on a custom and conceptual sale; selling from PowerPoint means that you are selling tailored solutions—you’re no longer at the discovery stage. Selling from either the White Board or Powerpoint stage is fine for an early-stage company, but eventually you’ll want to scale and hire your first CRO. Here are some of the telltale signs that will help you figure out if you should bring in a CRO.

First, you’ll know it’s time to hire a CRO when you’re nervous about HOW you’re going to make this quarter’s number — not just that WHETHER or not you’ll make it (since you should know that as much as anyone). Another sign that it’s time to hire a CRO is when you aren’t clear what the levers are, or what the pipeline/forecast details are, to hit those quarterly numbers. 

If you are spending too much of your own time managing individual deals and pricing, or teaching individual reps how to get jobs done, that’s a clear indicator that a CRO is needed. If your board asks you if you’re ready to step on the gas and scale your revenue engine (e.g., move from Powerpoint to PDF), and you don’t have a great answer and aren’t sure how to get to one then you need to hire a CRO.

A fractional CRO can add a lot of value, especially at a small volume where a full-time CRO would be overkill. Or, if your sale is very complex or to a very senior buyer, and a more junior sales team needs a fair amount of deal support from above, a fractional CRO makes a lot of sense. Sometimes a fractional CRO can help you enter a new adjacent segment (e.g., mid-market going to enterprise), and then you’ll need a seasoned professional to help translate sales processes from one segment to the other while keeping the initial segment running smoothly. 

If you’re not sure what kind of sales leader you’ll need long-term and full time because you’re not at enough scale yet, a fractional CRO can help you “try before you buy.” You can try out a specific type of revenue leader to see if that type works, for example, sales only, sales + customer success, manager of hunters, or builder of a high velocity sales engine, to name a few different options.

Hiring a CRO will definitely free up time for founders and allow them to work on other things that drive the business, without worrying about sales.

(You can find this post on the Bolster blog here)

I think Facebook is starting to get out of control from a usability perspective.  This doesn’t mean it’s not a great platform and that it doesn’t have utility.  But if the platform continues on its current path, the core system runs the risk of going sideways like its various predecessors:  GeoCities, MySpace, etc.  Maybe I’ll go in there to look for something or someone, but it won’t be a place I scroll through as part of a daily or semi-daily routine.

I wrote about this a year ago now, and while the site has some better tools to assign friends to groups, it doesn’t do any better job than it did a year ago about segregating information flow, either by group or by some kind of intelligence.

I don’t know why my home page, news feed, RSS feed, and iPhone app can’t easily show me posts from people I care about, but if it can’t do that soon enough, I will almost entirely stop using it.  Can’t Facebook measure the strength of my connections?  Can’t it at least put my wife’s posts at the top?  My usage is already way down, and the trend is clear.

And I won’t really comment on Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg’s inane remark last week that “email is dead because young people don’t use it” other than to paraphrase two things I read on a discussion list I’m on:  “Just checked, and you still need an email address to sign-up for a Facebook account,” and “Most teens don’t buy stocks so Wall Street has no future.”  More entertaining analogies from Loren McDonald of Silverpop are listed here.