Why Are Entrepreneurs That Way?

How does an entrepreneur think and what is that unscratchable itch that drives them? From time to time I ask myself these very questions and when I need a little perspective, I turn to the wisdom of Thoreau. These two paragraphs come from the final chapter of his book Walden:

I left the woods for as good a reason as I went there. Perhaps it seemed to me that I had several more lives to live, and could not spare any more time for that one. It is remarkable how easily and insensibly we fall into a particular route, and make a beaten track for ourselves. I had not lived there a week before my feet wore a path from my door to the pond-side; and though it is five or six years since I trod it, it is still quite distinct. It is true, I fear, that others may have fallen into it, and so helped to keep it open. The surface of the earth is soft and impressible by the feet of men; and so with the paths which the mind travels. How worn and dusty, then, must be the highways of the world, how deep the ruts of tradition and conformity! I did not wish to take a cabin passage, but rather to go before the mast and on the deck of the world, for there I could best see the moonlight amid the mountains. I do not wish to go below now.

I learned this, at least, by my experiment: that if one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours. He will put some things behind, will pass an invisible boundary; new, universal, and more liberal laws will begin to establish themselves around and within him; or the old laws be expanded, and interpreted in his favor in a more liberal sense, and he will live with the license of a higher order of beings. In proportion as he simplifies his life, the laws of the universe will appear less complex, and solitude will not be solitude, nor poverty poverty, nor weakness weakness. If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost; that is where they should be. Now put the foundations under them.

Why Start a Company When You Could...

There's a lot of opportunity out there and I've been hearing some interesting insights from several entrepreneurs recently who've been very much against the idea of someone starting their own company. The argument is that there is so much risk in a pre-revenue venture (after all, creating something from nothing is the hardest part). So then, they ask, why wouldn't you:

1. Join a revenue generating start-up? A huge part of the risk has been taken away and the question isn't as much 'whether this will ever work ' but how we can now tweak the business to grow revenues. You won't get anywhere near the same amount of stock but a lot of people have made good money this way (and built their networks through venture backed companies).
   
2. Buy an existing business that's stagnant. Again, the hard part has been done. There are businesses out there that are profitable but stagnant making between $100k-5mm a year. So rather than trying to start a business why not raise some private money and flip the company around?
   

The moral is that there are a lot of undervalued assets out there that can use an individual's talents just as well as any bright new business idea.

Viral Marketing & Design on FaceBook

A very interesting area I'm working on right now is Viral Marketing and Viral Design. As progress on Triip continues to move forward (predicting Launch in early December!) the team has been asking a lot of questions on how to launch our FaceBook app & how to add features that will optimize virality.

The presentation below is a stripped down (sorry!) version of a deck I created to show our engineering team how Marketing and Viral Design are essentially the same thing on a social media platform. The objective is to logically break down the question of 'how to do we get 100000 users?' into simpler parts and see what actionable steps we can take to reach success.


FB App Virality Drivers

A framework for success

What is success? If you can't set the vision, you'll never reach it. that's why i came up with three criteria based against which the success of all current/future passion projects that I participate in will be based:

1. it should challenge an existing paradigm and make people think
2. it should empower people to do something they otherwise wouldn't be able to do
3. it should engage and inspire people to act
   

Release Early & Release Often

"Release Early, Release Often" is a principle that is now adopted by some of the most successful companies in internet. I've known of it, incorporated it in the develop strategy of KnolSoft's internet product but I never actually knew how amazing it was until I started my little mashup experiment Googview.

GoogView Started off with a simple question: if people like Google search yet they keep going to Bing for the daily image, what would happen if we combined the two? The first iteration was simply the current Google Search with a background that I selected from Wikipedia picture of the day. People who I gave the simple pitch to loved it but other people didn't quite get it. After this I kept tweaking the site based on user suggestions daily. The rapid changes kept even the people who weren't that into it at first interested and I was able to keep the communication going. The result was a significantly better website design, users participation and a lot of fun. So, what were the lesson I got out of this?

1. Iterative development is an extremely powerful tool and it must be incorporated into your product strategy.
2. You have to iterate fast and work hard to keep dialogue going and maintain user interest.
3. If you don't have the infrastructure in place to go through this cycle rapidly, you're not ready to launch. If it means more manpower, get it.
   

Evolutionary Economics & How Small Business Can Survive Among Giants

Building my company has made me think a lot on how a potential entrant to a market dominated by giants should position itself. After a couple weeks of pounding my head against the wall, I thought of a Discovery special that I saw on the rain forest, where the canopy created by 300 ft trees stifled the growth of life on the ground. This seemed to be a perfect analog to my conundrum, and two questions came to mind: 1) How did certain species evolve to position themselves for growth when no sunlight was available and 2) In such a stifling environment, how did the Amazon become one of the most diverse ecological systems in the world?

Here were some of my findings (I came across a U.Michigan website that summarized some fascinating studies on competition in the evolutionary biology context):

1. In answering the first question, it seems natural selection offers two answers. Some plants did not compete with the big guys, simply adapting to living on the forest's floor with less sunlight. Other plants actually used the gargantuan trees, and climbed up them towards the bright sun over the canopy. These very elegant solutions reminded me of small business either positioning in a niche market or partnering with larger firms to leverage their distribution channels.
   
2. The answer to the second question proved much more interesting, as it went to the heart of the studies summarized in the aforementioned website. Findings showed that whenever competition over limited resources existed within any system, all interactions were destructive (ie: no two species could co-exist). The dominant species always exterminated the subordinate one. The key to survival in competition was always adapting to position a species in a way that minimized overlap in resource consumption with the dominant ones. This suggests that adaptation is not a way of survival but the only way to survive, and that diversity is an inevitable state in any perfectly competitive environment.
   

The lesson from this analog, in my opinion, seems to be that going after Microsoft P&G or any competing giant is suicide (no kidding!). Yet evolution does seem to offer one glimmer of hope for small businesses that cannot afford an outright war with the big guys: the vine. Nature's solution to our problem was to adapt in a way that made partnership with the dominant player possible, and this should be a key option for any small business entering a multibillion dollar market should consider before taking the niche approach.

The Consulting Question or the Entrepreneurial Question?

Over the past few weeks I'd been working on a business problem with someone who had decades of experience in the consulting industry. Our approaches towards solving the problem seemed to be notably different for the first part of the discussion, but at the end of the day the data uncovered by each ended up being the ying to each other's yang. From this experience came two conclusions: 1) That the consulting and entrepreneurial mindset were different and that 2) neither necessarily proved superior to the other. This made me wonder what it was that made our approaches so different, how our experiences played into it and whether a start-up or consulting practice could possibly survive without having both mindsets in the game. These were some observations:

1. Consultants are problem driven while entrepreneurs are opportunity driven. Consultants are ready to delve into mountains of data until they start finding some kind of pattern and go from there. It's guaranteed to work every time but risks missing out on the big picture. Think tuning an engine (figuring out the fuel to air mix, timing of each stroke, etc) instead of asking whether it's the right engine for the car, whether it's the right car for the user and what an alternate engine might be. The entrepreneur is much more opportunity and customer driven and is eager to go out and start talking to customers, understanding the potential of the product and then looking at the numbers to see if their findings make sense. Think of a multi-function product like compressed air; sales to existing clients may be stagnant due to a price point issue but what else can you do with it?! The downside: it can be hit or miss and might fail to consider small changes that can have big impacts (ie: changing the price would be so much easier/cheaper than chasing a new market.)
2. At the end of the day a winning solution is an innovative idea that is supported by evidence (or perhaps evidence that is supported by innovative ideas). It is unclear to me which way of thinking is more likely to succeed but I did learn something very useful last week: That the creative tension that results from having both on a team can not only be highly productive but essential.
   

A Decision Rule To Live By

Over the past year I've found my decision-making to have become much more sharp and it's really really been based on one decision rule. It has been so powerful in my personal and professional life (ranging from R&D decisions, to managing employees and to maintaining relationships with my business partner.)

I always ask myself the following:

"What is the worst possible case that could happen if I make this decision? If it happened, would I be kicking myself or could I live with it?"

If the answer is the former, can I do anything to mitigate the risk and make the worst state more acceptable? If it's the latter, accept the decision because no matter what you're taking a calculated risk and the negative outcome will be out of your control.

A New Day, A New Blog

I've been gone from the blogosphere for a very long time. Why? To be frank, nothing good to say. Over the past few months I've found that in the start-up world all people do is talk about the theoretical when the field is purely about execution and results. Therefore, I've decided to move the blog in a new direction and will now make the following pledge to my readers:

Anything read on this blog from here on will be original and a reflection of my personal experiences in the start-up world. I will not regurgitate anything that's well documented elsewhere and all discussion will be result-oriented instead of theoretical.