Home Leadership Turn Archives Me RampUp Solutions  
 

  • Categories

  • Archives
 

Entrepreneurs: Who to Interview

Thursday, May 19th, 2016

https://www.flickr.com/photos/jonphillips/3540693888/

I try to be polite, but sometimes it’s difficult.

Sometimes I just need to shut up in order to avoid telling my host that I think he is the stupidest person I’ve been around lately.

“Clay” was talking to a group of new entrepreneurs; going on at length about how brilliant he is at hiring talent for his company.

He said that knew when he should interview someone just by hearing a few basic facts, like education and general experience; no need for detailed specifics.

When he finally stopped bragging and patting himself on the back just one guy had the temerity to disagree, saying that wasn’t enough information to make such company success-critical decisions.

Clay turned and asked me to do four thumbnail sketches of candidates I knew and he would prove it was enough.

Here are the four profiles I provided.

  1. BSBA, some programming in college; started in customer service and worked his way up through the executive ranks.
  2. Some college; 12 years of programming and management experience.
  3. Harvard MBA w/ 25 years progressively more responsible positions in consulting, sales and management.
  4. MIT BS; more than 40 years programming experience in a broad array of technologies. Strong entrepreneurial bent; excellent manager.

Clay laughed and said he wasn’t surprised I included mostly “oldies,” since I was one of them.

He went on to say that he would pass on 1,3 and 4, because they probably wouldn’t fit into the fast pace of a startup. The second was a possibility, although he didn’t sound particularly aggressive.

Poor Clay, his investors won’t be pleased; he just passed on

  1. Marc Benioff (52)
  2. Sheryl Sandberg (47), and
  3. Ray Kurzweil (68)

He did think number 2 was a possibility, although not a strong one.

But Mark Zukerberg (32) probably wouldn’t fit in.

Flickr image credit: Jon Phillips

If the Shoe Fits: Parker Conrad and Zenefits

Friday, February 19th, 2016

A Friday series exploring Startups and the people who make them go. Read all If the Shoe Fits posts here

5726760809_bf0bf0f558_mZenefits founder Parker Conrad traded over-the-top growth predictions for the kind of excessive funding that gooses valuation and earns the company unicorn status.

In doing so he did exactly what Sam Altman warns against, “If a company is profitable, the founder is in control. If it’s not, investors are in control.”

Investors brought pressure (it’s what they do), so corners were cut.

Zenefits never was and still isn’t profitable and, worse still, was cutting corners when those corners are highly regulated.

Now Conrad is out and new management will pick up the pieces.

Conrad could have learned from serial entrepreneur Xenios Thrasyvoulou, who warns, “sanity is more important than vanity” when it comes to fundraising and Andrew Wilkinson’s belief that revenue-based horses have it all over funding-based unicorns.

Instead, once again, the emperor has no clothes.

Image credit: HikingArtist

If the Shoe Fits: the Worst Idea Ever

Friday, August 7th, 2015

A Friday series exploring Startups and the people who make them go. Read all If the Shoe Fits posts here

5726760809_bf0bf0f558_mI admit to a long-time and deep fascination with innovation, startups and the people who drive them

Although many of the new apps and services provide no value to me personally, in most case I can understand their allure to those of a different mindset.

But now and then I read/hear about an idea I consider the height of stupidity, but that doesn’t mean it won’t succeed.

Right now, co-living spaces are at the top of my stupid list.

Live-work spaces aren’t new.  HP started in a garage. Two decades ago they were a major force in the creation of what became SOMA in San Francisco. And home offices are everywhere.

But co-working spaces as envisioned by startups like WeWork are not only stupid, they are dangerous.

Crystal City WeLive location [Washington DC], the company will ultimately be renting out 360-square-foot “micro apartments,” which sit on top of WeWork’s co-working spaces. WeWork will offer more than 250 micro-apartments at that location, along with amenities like bike parking, an herb garden, and a library.

The idea is to eliminate the need to go outside your immediate environment.

It’s Silicon Valley efficiency taken to the extreme: you give up a normal work-life balance to eliminate your commute and live with all the amenities you need nearby. If you already hire people to take care of your other chores for you — you use Uber to drive you around and Wash.io to do your laundry — why not take it a step further and take care of your living arrangements through a startup too?

Residents not only give up any kind of work-life balance, they give up much of their connection to the real world and, more importantly, to their customers.
They will work/live/relax/socialize with people like themselves.

While losing contact with the extended world is bad, the potential for personal damage is catastrophic.

Shrinking the already tiny startup world will exacerbate the damage done by its ultra-competitiveness and worsen the rates of anxiety, depression and suicide already prevalent within it.

Image credit: HikingArtist

Before You Tweet…

Wednesday, May 20th, 2015

https://www.flickr.com/photos/topgold/3341034811/in/photolist-66eFft-oeFjnx-estP63-98Spsn-ru5yJv-free6U-7gCYKZ-dUtnoh-87FzcL-6bGRnQ-8UftWG-5ZTi6A-cHM9aY-7HyzfJ-69pMgP-8BmjRj-hqybdq-8vAtRc-62KiZQ-836Ttv-77r3c2-7graYC-6PeUJ5-7Tteqf-pxBYFB-mqJuuw-6nLBhu-57iHze-8WhEXp-6cfUZr-8hLZzr-6eTk17-btdg1c-9kttrt-61gnsk-5HoFdL-eePN4H-5UuWwg-agYDbQ-6rdmKH-cNL2w5-8MX6kS-c5CURy-8hVWKZ-5QqSYP-91471X-9pT4Ni-jLKyc6-5Fgqh1-6PaSaT

You know that old saying, ‘do not run mouth unless brain is engaged’?

These days there should be a rule about not posting to social media unless brain is engaged.

Better yet, some kind of hardware similar to the gadget that prevents a car from starting if the driver can’t pass a breathalyzer test.

Media is full of stories about people who were fired for what they tweeted.

The rationalization I hear from various people is that it won’t happen to them because “I’m different.” They say that “they (those fired) were nobodies, i.e., low-level workers or unemployed, while they are “professionals,” i.e., they have clout.

Once I stop laughing I remind them of all those with clout who sent stupid tweet that cost them their jobs.

Now I just send them a link listing 13 Twitter-savvy somebodys fired for their tweets.

Whether you’re a somebody or a nobody, read the list.

Then be sure your brain is engaged before you post a tweet — every time.

Flickr image credit: Bernard Goldbach

Entrepreneurs: the Weight of Your Words

Thursday, March 26th, 2015

https://www.flickr.com/photos/benbeltran/184388654

“I sometimes say things — just stupid, little remarks — and expect people to just ignore them. They will not. They will not. Every little thing you say is something that will stick in people’s heads.” –Amazon CTO Werner Vogels 

Livefyre CEO Jordan Kretchmer, said that he’s made a “benign comment that pissed off the whole sales team.”

Chief product officer of Interaxon, Trevor Coleman, said that once at a happy hour he joked about taking the company in a completely new direction. The following day, an employee asked him — quite seriously — what the next steps for that change would be.

LinkedIn CEO Jeff Weiner said that every offhand comment he made would turn into a “massively disruptive fire drill…”

There is no such thing as a benign or casual comment, throwaway thought or product/strategy-related joke when you are a senior manager.

This is nothing new. I wrote about the same thing in 2006 and the event I described happened 20 years before that.

The question isn’t how to mitigate the damage; the real question is how do we change the thinking that fosters it in every new generation of leaders.

Image credit: Ben Beltran

Ducks in a Row: Success Requires Everyone

Tuesday, June 17th, 2014

https://www.flickr.com/photos/monikahw/14074546688

You can learn a lot from the Chrysler turnaround and here’s one of the most important points.

Fixing the product isn’t enough.

Developing recruiting and retention of knowledge workers isn’t enough.

Fixing basic problems that affect lower-level workers is imperative.

It took five years, starting in 2009 and when Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne finally owned Chrysler (free registration required) the situation in the manufacturing areas was worse than expected.

Marchionne is a smart guy; he knew that no matter how many billions were spent on design and other high-level needs Chrysler wouldn’t turn around without the full support of the blue-collar workforce.

Marchionne said the company also made sure to spend money on the parts of the plant that touched employees more personally — bathrooms, lunchrooms, parking lots and reception areas. Why?

“The state of disrepair, of neglect of the work environment that these people were offered to make a high-quality product that was supposed to compete internationally with the best of the best, right?” You can’t do that when you can’t walk into the bathroom at one of the plants because they’re just not presentable.” Along with retooling and good leadership decisions, he said, the success of Chrysler “was due to the unwavering commitment of a group of people who make up the blue-collar force of Chrysler.”

A lot of people believe that union employees don’t care. Therefore, because it’s hard to get rid of them it doesn’t matter how you treat them.

And it’s not just in unionized areas.

Wall Street is famous for treating its pink-collar and back room employees, including IT, poorly.

Tech companies do everything for so-called stars, while treating the rest as replaceable ciphers.

The bottom line is that bosses who treat any part of their team as replaceable is, at best, short-sighted and, at worst, plain stupid.
Flickr image credit: Monikah Wiseman

Being Stupid

Monday, February 17th, 2014

stupid-stuff

People who find stupid actions a source of amusement usually focus on celebrities, real or faux, and politicians.

Not me; I focus on the business world.

The first of two standouts this week is AOL, which decided to change the 401K matching plan to save money.

Moreover, CEO Tim Armstrong moved his foot from his mouth to deep in his throat by blaming the needed cost savings on Obamacare and supporting unusual cases like two women with complicated pregnancies.

When the employees screamed and the poop hit the media fan Armstrong and AOL swiftly backpedaled and reinstated the old policy.

A few years ago occasional contributor Matt Weeks wrote about the “startup social contract” and the repercussions when it’s broken.

If the workers and/or the exec team come to disrespect, disbelieve or ignore this social contract, the company is lost.

Although Matt wrote about the contract in terms of startups, it applies to enterprises of all sizes and ages.

While AOL’s actions were ill-advised, Goldman Sachs was just plain stupid, although they were encouraged by the sponsoring student group.

The conference, Women Engineers Code, or WECode, which was organized by an undergraduate student group at Harvard, featured stacks of cosmetic mirrors with the Goldman Sachs logo, a photograph posted to Instagram shows. The Instagram user also said that the bank brought nail files to the event.

One of the attendees wondered if the swag represented “sexyfeminism or gender stereotyping”

I can assure her it didn’t.

To quote a senior manager I’ve known for years, “given the choice between stupidity and malice aforethought the cause is almost always stupidity.”

Flickr image credit: The Columbian

Then and Now

Monday, July 15th, 2013

Have you ever noticed how the strangest law suites keep recurring, but updated for the times and technology?

Here’s a great example.

San Francisco 1964

“…a woman who had been involved in a minor cable car mishap sued the City. The only injury she suffered was a purely psychological one: She claimed that the accident had turned her into a nymphomaniac, for which she wanted half a million dollars in compensation. (…) The jury heard the case, kept a straight face, and awarded the nymphomaniac $50,000.”

Fast forward to Nashville, Tennessee 2013, specifically Chris Sevier, a lawyer (naturally) who, through a typo, logged onto f***kbook.com, instead of Facebook.

Poor Chris was so affected by the images that dire consequences followed.

“His failed marriage caused the Plaintiff to experience emotional distress to the point of hospitalization. The Plaintiff could no longer tell the difference between Internet pornography and tangible intercourse due to the content he accessed through the Apple products, which failed to provide him with warnings of the dangers of online pornography whatsoever.”

Seems to me that he must have spent considerable time viewing those images, but, as he explains in his law suite against Apple, it’s not his fault.

“Apple employees know that a man is born full of harmonies and attacked to by women engaging in sexual acts with the intent to cause vicarious arousal.”

He believes that it’s Apple’s responsibility to “sell all its devices in ‘safe mode,’ with software preset to filter out pornographic content,” as well as warn people regarding “the damage pornography causes.”

Ain’t it grand to live in a world where there’s always someone else (with deep pockets) to hold responsible and, best of all, sue?

I just wish Steve was still around; his response would have moved this to a whole new level.

Image credit: Chris Sevier Apple Complaint by Joe Patrice

Stupid Is as Stupid Does

Wednesday, March 20th, 2013

http://www.flickr.com/photos/opensourceway/5392982007/Remember the old saying “pretty is as pretty does,” meaning the action dictates the label?

Well, “stupid is as stupid does,” which is especially accurate when applied to management.

It’s hard to know which is most offensive when it comes to management—stupidity or ego, but when they join together the result is…wow; I’m not sure what adjective to use.

You decide.

I received a call from a distraught president. He said the company had been hit with a rash of resignations from some of their best development and marketing people and he had no idea why, since productivity had been running at an all-time high. Would I do some fast debriefing in an effort to turn things around?

It only took a few calls to identify the problem—actually the persons—responsible.

It turned out that the director of engineering and her counterpart in marketing had come up with a unique motivational technique.

They identified comparable projects both inter and intra-department and allowed the teams responsible to make steak and beans dinner bets with each other.

(For those unfamiliar the losing team buys steak dinners for the winning team, while they eat beans and are subject to good natured heckling by the winners.)

The contests had boosted productivity in both departments with most projects finishing early, even under budget, and morale was at an all time high.

The problem came from the fact that the engineering vp and the marketing vp were political enemies and didn’t want their two groups on good terms. Furthermore, the engineering vp felt work was serious business and games undermined his mission.

When they found out what was going on both were furious and agreed to fire the instigators.

That didn’t go over well with the staff, which had no hesitation of protesting with their feet, hence the flurry of resignations.

I reported back to the prez and, smart guy that he is, he didn’t hesitate.

After verifying what I told him he fired the two vice presidents and promoted the two directors.

Because his solution was not only swift, but highly visible, the resignations were withdrawn, the contest reinstated and the approach encouraged across the entire company.

Stupidity and ego; what adjective would you use?

Flickr image credit: opensourceway

Lean for All

Wednesday, March 6th, 2013

http://www.flickr.com/photos/betsyweber/6719452305/

Are you familiar with Eric Ries’ 2008 conception of lean strategy? Its focus was/is startups, but Scott Cook, Intuit cofounder and current chairman of its Executive Committee, believes it applies to any company looking to innovate, large/old as well as small/young.

A major hallmark of lean is the idea of talking to the target market early to get customer feedback in order to create what the market truly wants,

Lean can be applied to anything—product, service, branding strategy, etc.

Why isn’t it? Why do companies, from Fortune 50 to startups still insist on developing [whatever] and being shocked when customers don’t clamor for it?

Scott’s insight, based on his own experience, provides a telling answer.

“Success is a powerful thing, it tends to make companies stupid, and they become less and less innovative.”

Case in point: Ron Johnson, J. C. Penney’s CEO and the ex head of Apple’s retail ops, who was hired to turn Penney’s around.

Based on his success at Apple, part of Johnson’s strategy was to eliminate sales, coupons and promotions in favor of a steady three-tiered pricing approach.

However, Penney’s isn’t Apple and apparently Johnson didn’t check to see if its customers liked that approach.

They didn’t.

(Even the TV ads didn’t makes sense to me. Remember the kid with the hoop and the dog jumping through it? Hmm, maybe customers don’t identify themselves with trained dogs.)

It’s one thing to stick to your brilliant idea in the face of disagreement from experts, but it’s quite another to do so while ignoring customer input.

As Scott said, “For me it was seeing my brilliant ideas—which I just knew were right—not work.”

The take-away here is to get customer feedback, listen to it and tweak [whatever] accordingly.

And before you say you have no customers and walk away, remember that customers aren’t just the folks who buy a product or service; they are also your people, peers, kids, parents, etc.

Flickr image credit: Betsy Weber

RSS2 Subscribe to
MAPping Company Success

Enter your Email
Powered by FeedBlitz
About Miki View Miki Saxon's profile on LinkedIn

Clarify your exec summary, website, etc.

Have a quick question or just want to chat? Feel free to write or call me at 360.335.8054

The 12 Ingredients of a Fillable Req

CheatSheet for InterviewERS

CheatSheet for InterviewEEs

Give your mind a rest. Here are 4 quick ways to get rid of kinks, break a logjam or juice your creativity!

Creative mousing

Bubblewrap!

Animal innovation

Brain teaser

The latest disaster is here at home; donate to the East Coast recovery efforts now!

Text REDCROSS to 90999 to make a $10 donation or call 00.733.2767. $10 really really does make a difference and you'll never miss it.

And always donate what you can whenever you can

The following accept cash and in-kind donations: Doctors Without Borders, UNICEF, Red Cross, World Food Program, Save the Children

*/ ?>

About Miki

About KG

Clarify your exec summary, website, marketing collateral, etc.

Have a question or just want to chat @ no cost? Feel free to write 

Download useful assistance now.

Entrepreneurs face difficulties that are hard for most people to imagine, let alone understand. You can find anonymous help and connections that do understand at 7 cups of tea.

Crises never end.
$10 really does make a difference and you’ll never miss it,
while $10 a month has exponential power.
Always donate what you can whenever you can.

The following accept cash and in-kind donations:

Web site development: NTR Lab
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 2.5 License.