Taylor Made for this Blog
I haven’t done a book review yet on this blog because I haven’t found a very relevant one. I will do more as I go here — I’ve actually read a few pretty useful business books lately — but there’s no better book to kick off a new category of postings here than the one I just finished: The MouseDriver Chronicles: The True-Life Adventures of Two First-Time Entrepreneurs.
The book details how two freshly-minted Wharton MBAs skipped the dot com and investment banking job offers to start a two-person company that produced the MouseDriver (a computer mouse shaped like a the head of a golf club) back in 1999-2000. It’s a great, quick read and really captures the spirit of much of what I’m trying to do with this blog, which is talk about first-time CEO issues, or company leadership/management issues in general.
Although it’s not about an internet business, the book also has an interesting side story, which is the powerful impact that email had on the MouseDriver business, with an email newsletter the entrepreneurs started that developed great readership and ultimately some viral marketing. Sort of like a blog, circa 1999.
Thanks to Stephanie Miller at Return Path for giving me the book!
You Don’t Know How to Drive a Car Because You Know How to Read a Map
I was having breakfast with the CEO of another SaaS company the other day, as I often do to network. He was telling me about his experience working with his company’s new Private Equity owner.
There are always a mix of pros and cons that come with any particular shareholder, Board member, or owners, of course. In his case, my fellow CEO was bemoaning the 29-year old associate who acted like a know-it-all in every Board meeting. Lots of CEOs have been there. There’s a lot of value you can get from an associate or VP-level person at an investor who is the Master of the Spreadsheet and who has access to a lot of data about your company. And there is certainly a lot of value to be gained from investors with large portfolios of similar companies who can identify learnings from experience you haven’t had as a CEO and help you apply that experience thoughtfully to your company in any given situation.  In The Value and Limitations of Pattern Matching, I quoted my father-in-law, who noted once that When you hear hoof beats, it’s probably horses. But you never know when it might be a zebra. I am still a firm believer that it’s the “thoughtful application” that matters as much as recognizing the pattern.
But this breakfast conversation led me to another conclusion, which is less about pattern matching and more about the pattern matcher. And that is:
You don’t know how to drive a car because you know how to read a map
Being a Master of the Spreadsheet is a great starting point to coming up with ideas and insights for a business. Quantitative analysis can tell you a lot of things, including a lot of things that you wouldn’t be able to get on instinct or experience alone, like slow, subtle changes in customer behavior, customer-level profitability, the impact of pricing changes, or compound effects of salary or benefit changes on a cost structure over time. Think of quantitative analysis a bit like a road map. It can show you the shortest distance and combination of roads and turns to get from Point A to Point B.
But quantitative analysis stops there. It is not the same as actually getting yourself from Point A to Point B. Driving a car in and of itself is a skill that requires a lot of learning and practice. And it certainly doesn’t forecast traffic or road hazards that require a last minute detour. Being right about what roads to take is a lot less important than actually getting yourself to the destination safely and in a timely manner. The value of having experienced executives operating a business is those things – the actual driving of the car. The knowing of the customers or the employees. The skill of managing change and emotions.
At the end of the day, there’s value in both ends of the spectrum – the reading of the map and the driving of the car. As long as the two sides agree that there’s value to both tasks and that the two sides bring different expertise to the table, there’s a great partnership to be struck. But too often these days I hear about investors who think that reading the map is all that needs to happen for a company to be successful. Until someone comes up with the self-driving car of management, this metaphor should hold!
Should CEOs wade into Politics, Part III (From Tim Porthouse)
I’ve gotten to know a number of Bolster members over the last few years, and one who I have come to appreciate quite a bit is Tim Porthouse. I’m on Tim’s email list, and with his permission, I’m reprinting something he wrote in his newsletter this month on the topic of CEO engagement in politics and current events. As you may know, I’ve written a bunch on this topic lately, with two posts with the same title as this one, Should CEOs wade into Politics (part I here, part II here). Thanks to Tim for having such an articulate framework on this important subject.
Your Leadership Game: “No Comment.”
Should you speak up about news events/ politics?
Most of the time, I say, no!
Startup CEOs feel pressure to speak up on news events: Black Lives Matter, Abortion, LBGTQ+ rights, the conflict in Israel/Palestine, Trump vs. Biden. Many tell me they feel pressured to say something, but are deeply conflicted.
Like you, I am deeply distressed by wars, murder, restrictions on human rights, bias, and hate. But if we feel something, should we say something?
Before you speak up, ask the following questions:
1. Mission relevance. Is your startup’s success or mission on the line? Are customers or employees directly impacted? Example: It makes sense for Airbnb to advocate when a city tries to ban short-term rentals. It makes sense to advocate for your LBGTQ+ employees when a state tries to restrict their rights.
2. Moving the needle. Will speaking out change anything? If you “denounce” something or “take a stand,” what really happens? Example: If you have employees in a state banning abortion and you tell them your startup will support them as much as the law allows, this could create great peace of mind for employees. But if your startup does not operate in Ukraine or Russia, then denouncing Russia does little (and Russia does not care!)
3. Expertise. Do you have a deep understanding of the situation? It’s usually more complicated than it appears, especially at first. Once you speak out, you have painted yourself into a corner you will be forced to defend.
4. Precedence and equivalence. If you issue a statement about today’s news event, will you react to tomorrow’s event? Why not? Where do you draw the line?Someone will be offended that you spoke up about X but not Y.
5. Backlash. Are you ready to spend significant time engaging with those who disagree with you?It can get ugly quickly, and mistakes can be costly. Plus, the American public is tiring of business leaders commenting on the news.
6. Vicarious liability. Who are you speaking for? When you say, “Our startup denounces X”?Does the whole company denounce it? You don’t know, and probably not. Does the Leadership Team? They may feel pressured to support you. What you are really saying is, “I denounce X!” OK, great, then say it to your friends and family. Leave your startup to talk about business.
If your answers are “yes,” – then speak out.
If not, I recommend keeping quiet.
In my opinion, our job is to build great companies, not debate current events.
By not speaking out, you can say, “We don’t talk politics here.” You can shut down any two-sided arguments at work and say, “Let’s get back to work,”removing a big distraction. Remember when employees protested because Google was bidding for Pentagon contracts?
I realize that you will be challenged to make a statement, that, “Saying nothing is unacceptable/ complicit.” But whoever challenges you will only be satisfied if you support their view.
If you still want to speak out, I respect your choice. Some of you will be angry with me for writing this, and I accept that. I’m asking you to think carefully before you make a statement.
Come Fly With Me
Come Fly With Me
I do a lot of travel for work. That means I spend a lot of time on planes, some of which is “wasted” – or at least time that can’t be productive for work in the traditional sense of being connected, or in a lot of cases, of even reading. One thing I’ve always appreciated in my career but have grown even more attached to of late is traveling with colleagues. Any time I have an opportunity to do so, I jump on it.
First, I find that I get solid work time in with a colleague in transit. A check-in meeting that isn’t rushed with a hard stop, interrupted by the phone or visitors, and in-person.
Second, I find that I get more “creative” work time in with a colleague on a flight, especially a long one. Some of the time that isn’t in a structured meeting invariably turns to brainstorming or more idle work chatter. Some great ideas have come out of flights I’ve taken in the past 11 years!
Finally, my colleague and I get more social time in than usual on a plane. Social time is an incredibly important part of managing and developing personal connections with employees. Time spent next to each other in the air, in an airport security line or lounge, in a rental car, “off hours” always lends itself to learning more about what’s going on in someone’s life.
Don’t get me wrong – even when I travel with someone from Return Path, we each have some “quiet time” to read, work, sleep, and contemplate life. But the work and work-related aspects of the experience are not to be ignored.
Self-Discipline: Broken Windows Applied to You
Self-Discipline: Broken Windows Applied to You
Just as my last post about New Shoes was touching a bit of a nerve around, as one friend put it, "mental housecleaning," my colleague Angela pointed me to a great post on a blog I've never seen before ("advice at the intersection of work and life" — I just subscribed), called How to Have More Self-Discipline. Man, is that article targeted at me, especially about working out.
I think the author is right — more discipline around the edges does impact happiness. But it also impacts productivity. Not just because working out gives you more energy. Because having your act together in small ways makes you feel like you have your act together in all ways. As the author notes (without this specific analogy), it's a little like the "broken windows" theory of policing. You crack down on graffiti and broken windows, you stop more violent crime, in part because the same people commit small and large crimes, in part because you create a more orderly society in visible, if sometimes a bit small and symbolic, ways.
I agree that the best example in the "non work" world is fitness. But what about the "work world"? What's relevant around self-discipline for professionals? Consider these examples:
– A clean inbox at the end of the day. Yes, it's the David Allen theory of workplace productivity which I espouse, but it does actually work. A clean mind is free to think, dream, solve problems. The quickest path to keeping it clean is not having a pile of little things to deal with in front of it, taking up space
– Showing up on time. It may sound dumb, but people who are chronically late to meetings are constantly behind. The day is spent rushing around, cutting conversations short — in other words, unhappy and not as productive. The discipline of ending meetings on time with enough buffer to travel or even just prepare for the next meeting so you can start it on time (and not waste the time of the other people in the meeting) is important. Have too many meetings that you can't be at all of them on time? Say no to some — or make them shorter to force efficiency. There's nothing wrong with a 10-minute meeting
– Dressing for success. We live in a casual world, especially in our industry. I admit, once in a while I wear jeans or a Hawaiian shirt to work — even shorts if it's a particularly hot and humid day. (And even in New York, not just in Boulder.) But no matter what you wear, you can make sure you look neat and professional, not sloppy. Skip the ripped jeans or faded/frayed/rock concert t-shirt. Tuck in the shirt if it's that kind of shirt, and wear a belt. The discipline of "dressing up" carries productivity a long way. Want to really test this out at the edges? Try wearing a suit or tie one day to work. You feel different, and you sound different
– Doing your expenses. Honestly, I've never seen an area where more smart and conscientious people fall apart than producing a simple expense report. Come up with a system for it — do one every week, every trip on the plane home, every time you have an expense — and just take the 5 minutes and finish it off. Sure, expenses are a pain, but they only really become a pain and a millstone around your brain when you let them sit for months because you "don't have time" to fill them out, then you get accounting all pissed off at you, and the project's size, complexity, and distance from the actual event all mount
– Follow rules of grammar and punctuation. Writing, whether for external or internal consumption, is still writing. I'm not sure when everyone became ee cummings and decided that it's ok to forget the basic rules of English grammar and punctuation. Make sure your emails and even your IMs, at least when they're for business, follow the rules. You look smarter when you do. Maybe — maybe — with Twitter or SMS you can excuse some of this and go with abbreviations. But I wouldn't normally consider a lot of those formal business communications
I could go on and on, but I think you get the idea. A little self-discipline goes a long way at work (and in life)!
The Best Place to Work, Part 5: Be the ultimate enabler
Fifth in my series on creating the best place to work – Being the best enabler. As any management guru will tell you, as you have a larger and larger team, your job is much less about getting good work done than it is enabling others to get good work done. What does that mean?
First, don’t be a bottleneck. You don’t have to be an Inbox-Zero nut (but feel free if you’d like), but you do need to make sure you don’t have people in the company chronically waiting on you before they can take their next actions on projects. Otherwise, you lose all the leverage you have in hiring a team.  Don’t let approvals or requests pile up!
Second, run great meetings. Meetings are a company’s most expensive endeavor. Sometime in a senior staff meeting, calculate the cost in salary of everyone sitting there for an hour or two! Run good meetings yourself and don’t enable bad behavior…and in the course of doing that, role model the same for your senior staff members who do their own staff or team meetings. Make sure your meetings are as short as possible, as actionable as possible, and as interesting as possible. Don’t hold a meeting when an email or 5-minute recorded message will suffice. Don’t hold a weekly standing meeting when it can be biweekly. Cancel meetings if there’s nothing to cover. End them early if you can’t fill the time productively. Vary the tempo of your meetings to match their purpose – the same staff group can have a weekly with one agenda, a monthly with a different agenda, and a quarterly with a different agenda.
Finally, don’t run a hub-and-spoke system of communications. Some managers who are a bit command-and-control like hoarding information or forcing all communication to go through them or surface in staff meetings. No need for that! Almost everyone on your team, if you are a senior manager, should have individual bilateral relationships and regular 1:1 meetings without you there. The same goes for your Board and your staff, if you are the CEO. They should have individual relationships that don’t go through you. if you are a choke point for communication, it’s just as bad as being a bottleneck for approvals.
Enabling your team to give it their all is a gift to yourself and your organization as much as it is a gift to your team – give that gift early and often.
New Media Deal, Part II – the We Media Deal
New Media Deal, Part II – the We Media Deal
My original New Medial Deal posting from August, 2004, is my favorite posting of all 220 or so that I’ve done to date. It has the most clicks of any posting I’ve done. People mention it to me all the time. I even used it as the foundation for the preface to our book at Return Path, Sign Me Up!
The general thesis (although the original posting is short and worth reading) is simple. Old Media was one-way communication – they produce it, you consume it, and Old Media had a deal with us: they give us free or cheap content, we tolerate their advertising. Think about your favorite radio station or an episode of The Office on TV. The New Media deal is an Internet derivative of that, that is founded on some degree of two-way communication: they give us free services and more targeted advertising in exchange for some of our personal data — just like the Old Media deal, we are willing make a small sacrifice, in this case, some pieces of our anonymity, in a heartbeat if the value exchange is there. This is true of everything from personalized stock quotes on My Yahoo! to the New York Times on the Web. The New Media Deal doesn’t replace the Old Media Deal, it just adapts it to the new environment.
But what about the new generation of services that have popped up on the web around peer production? The ones that aren’t one-way communication or two-way communication, but community-oriented communciation. (Note I am resisting hard calling them Web 2.0, but you know it’s there somewhere.) Does the New Media Deal still apply, or are we on to something else? I think the rules are morphing once again, and now there’s a new deal — let’s call it the We Media Deal — that builds on the “data as part of the value exchange” moniker of the New Media Deal. Like its predecessor deals, the We Media Deal doesn’t replace the New Media Deal or the Old Media Deal, it just adapts it for new types of services.
The We Media Deal has two components to it:Â (1) the value of the service to you increases in lock-step as you contribute more data to it, and (2) the more transparent the value exchange, the more willing you are to share your data.
Ok – that sounds very academic – what do I mean in plain English? Let’s break it down.
1. The value to you increases in lock-step as you contribute more data. This is something that probably wasn’t obvious with the original New Media Deal, since it wasn’t clear that if you gave My Yahoo! incrementally more data (one more stock quote, for example), you’d get more relevant ads or services. It’s a pretty static value exchange. But think about the new generation of web services around peer production.
– The more you use Delicious to bookmark web pages, the more relevant it becomes to you, and the more dependent you become on it as your own “Internet within an Internet.”
– The more you wite a blog or post photos to Flickr, the more engrained the act of blogging becomes in your daily existence — you start looking at the world, ever so slightly, through the lens of “that would make an interesting posting” (trust me).
– The more you use Wikipedia (or wikis in general), the more committed you become to Wikipedia as your first go-to source for information, and the more you get infected with the desire to contribute to it.
The bottom line with the first part of the We Media Deal is that the more you give to the system, the more you want and need out of the system. A big part of peer production is that most people fundamentally, if quietly, want to belong to any bit of community they can find. All these new web services of late have transformed the mass Internet from a read platform to a read/write platform, so now everyone can have a say in things. The same reason eBay is cooler and bigger than the New York Times on the Web will drive this new generation of services, and new spins on old services, forward.
2. Next up — the more transparent the value exchange, the more willing you are to share your data. Transparecy rules. When you contribute to the web, you’re exposed, so why is trasparency a help and not a hindrance? Let’s look at the same 3 examples.
– Delicious let’s you delete your account and all your personal data. They’re blatant about it during the sign-up process. The result? It increases your trust in the network since you can easily exit at any time.
– Blogging and Flickr couldn’t be more transparent. They’re personal printing presses. If you’re good at it, you really have to think before you write. It’s you – you’re really hanging out there transparent for all the world to see – therefore you’re even more invested in what you write and derive even more value from the activity.
– Similarly, Wikipedia tracks who changes what, and if you make an error, the community will correct it in an astonishingly short time frame, keeping you honest.
The good news is that, while the We Media Deal is coming of age, our New Media Deal is alive and well and growing stronger as the web evolves as well. Free services and more targeted advertising in exchange for some of your personal data makes a ton of sense when the right balance of service and data is there. Transparency and control make the We Media Deal an even stronger stronger bond between company and individual, mostly because the bond is between company and community — the deal gets more solid the more we as individuals invest in it.
Wanted! Comp Benchmark Participants, Part II
Wanted! Comp Benchmark Participants, Part II
So far, the responses to my earlier posting on organizing a comp benchmarking project are going well. We still don’t have as many as I’d hoped, but it’s only been a couple of days.
However, I did receive a comment and link that led to an email exchange with Mike DiPierro, who pointed me to another collaborate effort that’s worth looking at on the web. Although it may not be quite as customized as the one I’m hoping we can build, this group does an annual report for private company comp, one in IT and the other in Life Sciences. You can see more about it here if you’re interested in participating in their 2006 survey (but participate in ours as well!).
Innovating in New York City
Innovating in New York City
Last week I wrote about speaking at the NYC Lean Startup Meetup. One of my other key takeaways from this, which I’ve known for a while and have been meaning to blog about, is just how vibrant the tech startup community is here in New York. I know others have been blogging about this like mad – Fred has some thoughts here, here, and here, and Charlie has some here and here. Chris Dixon’s seminal post on this is here. (I even blogged a bit about why NYC is a good place to start a business back in 2006 here.)
I’ve had a little more time for networking and speaking in the past year than the prior year, and I’ve been blown away by how many startups there are here. Like most things, New York City is such a massive and diverse place that it’s easy to “get lost in the crowd,” and there’s a lot going on. So startups don’t tend to get the same level of social buzz that they do in Silicon Valley. But Fred’s stat in one of those links above that over 150 startups were founded in NYC this year compared to over 300 in the Valley is interesting when you consider the geographic density here. There are many more per square mile in New York.
Despite the geographic density to the startups, the New York startup scene is a long way from being a community. There are some encouraging signs of late. Charlie’s establishing a physical presence for First Round Capital is one. NextNY, with over 2500 members, is another, along with various Meetups. I am learning more and more every day about local incubator-type organizations as well (take that term with a grain of salt). I thought John Borthwick’s Betaworks was the only one until Charlie told me about Sunshine Suites, TechSpace, and the NYU/Poly program. But something is still missing. Some glue to hold it all together.
In the Valley, the startup community is  a cultural thing — plus, startups are part and parcel of a larger tech community. Most of the big acquirers of internet companies are out there, so the ecosystem keeps cycling through companies and talent and investors. In smaller cities like Denver/Boulder and Boston (and soon to be Seattle), TechStars fills a good void by providing a high profile “lure the talent here” combined with “meet the money” program. Seedcamp does that nicely in London, which, while it’s a big city, has a much smaller and more dispersed startup community than New York.
Since we’re unlikely to suddenly sprout a bunch of Fortune 500 tech companies in NYC, where’s our version of one of those programs in NYC? Or is there some other “glue” lurking out there to tie it all together?
A Good Laugh at Microsoft’s Expense
A Good Laugh at Microsoft’s Expense
Anyone who has ever had a frustrating moment with any Microsoft product (um, that probably means everyone) must watch this 4 minute video. Thanks to my colleague Carly Brantz for turning me on to this gem.
Update:Â new link for this video as of June 18, 2006 here.
Fig Wasp #879
Fig Wasp #879
I have 7 categories of books in my somewhat regular reading rotation: Business (the only one I usually blog about), American History with a focus on the founding period, Humor, Fiction with a focus on trash, Classics I’ve Missed, Architecture and Urban Planning (my major), and Evolutionary Biology. I’m sure that statement says a lot about me, though I am happy to not figure it out until later in life. Anyway, I just finished another fascinating Richard Dawkins book about evolution, and while I usually don’t blog about non-business books, this one had an incredibly rich metaphor with several business lessons stemming from it, plus, evolution is running rampant in our household this week, so I figured, what the heck?
The Dawkins books I’ve read are The Selfish Gene (the shortest, most succinct, and best one to start with), The Blind Watchmaker (more detail than the first), Climbing Mount Improbable (more detail than the second, including a fascinating explanation of how the eye evolved “in an evolutionary instant”), The Ancestor’s Tale (very different style – and a great journey back in time to see each fork in the evolutionary road on the journey from bacteria to humanity), and The God Delusion (a very different book expounding on Dawkins’ theory of atheism). All are great and fairly easy to read, given the topic. I’d start with either The Selfish Gene or maybe The Ancestor’s Tale if you’re interested in taking him for a spin.
So on to the tale of Fig Wasp #879, from this week’s read, Climbing Mount Improbable. Here’s the thing. There are over 900 kinds of fig trees in the world. Who knew? I was dimly aware there was such a thing as a fig tree, although quite frankly I’m most familiar with the fig in its Newton format. Some species reproduce wildly inefficiently — like wild grasses, whose pollen get spread through the air, and with a lot of luck, 1 in 1 billion (with a “b”) land in the right place at the right time to propagate. At the opposite end of the spectrum stands the fig tree. Not only do fig trees reproduce by relying on the collaboration of fig wasps to transport their pollen from one to the next, but it turns out that not only are there over 900 different kinds of fig trees on earth, there are over 900 different kinds of fig wasps — one per tree species. The two have evolved together over thousands of millenia, and while we humans might take the callous and uninformed view that a fig tree is a fig tree, clearly the fig wasps have figured out how to swiftly and instinctively differentiate one speices from another.
So what the heck does this have to do with business? Three quick lessons come mind. I’m sure there are scores more.
1. Collboration only works when each party benefits selfishly from it. Fig wasps don’t cross-pollenate fig trees bcause the fig trees ask nicely or will fire them if they don’t. They do their job because their job is independently fulfilling. If they don’t — they probably die of starvation. They’re just programmed with a very specific type of fig pollen as their primary input and output. We should all think about collaboration this way at work. I wrote a series of posts a couple years back on the topic of Collboration Being Hard, and while all the points I make in those posts are valid, I think this one trumps all. Quite frankly, it calls on the core principle from the Harvard Project on Negotiation, which is that collaboration requires a rethinking of the pie, so that you can expand the pie. That’s what the fig trees and fig wasps have done, unwittingly. Each one gets what it needs far more so than if it had ever consulted directly with the other. The lesson: Be selfish, but do it in a way that benefits your company.
2. Incredibly similar companies can have incredibly distinct cultures. 900+ types of fig tree, each one attracting one and only one type of fig wasp. Could there be anything less obvious to the untrained human eye? I assume that not only would most of us not be able to discern one tree or wasp type from another, but that we wouldn’t be able to disdcern discern any of the 900+ types of trees or wasps from thousands or hundreds of thousands or millions (in the case or urbanites) types of trees or bugs in general! But here’s the thing. I know hundreds of internet companies. Heck, I know dozens of email companies. And I can tell you within 5 minutes of walking around the place or meeting an executive which ones I’d be able to work for, and which ones I wouldn’t. And the older/bigger the company, the more distinct and deeply rooted its culture becomes. The lessons: don’t go to work for a company where you’d even remotely uncomfortable in the interview environment; cultivate your company’s culture with same level of care and attention to detail that you would your family — regardless of your role or level in the company!
3. Leadership is irrelevant when the operating system is tight. You think fig wasps have a CEO? Or a division president who reports into the CEO that oversees both fig wasps and fig trees, making sure they all cross-pollenate before the end of the quarter? Bah. While as a CEO, you may be the most important person in the organization sometimes, or in some ways, I can easily construct the argument that you’re the least important person in the shop as well. If you do your job and create an organization where everyone knows the mission, the agenda, the goal, the values, the BHAG, whatever you want to call it — withoutit needing to be spelled out every day — you’ve done your job, because you’ve made a company where people rock ‘n’ roll all night and every day without you needing to be in the middle of what they’re doing.Â
I’m sure there are other business lessons from evolutionary biology…send them along if you have good thoughts to share!