3 Reasons I Love Entrepreneur Country events
Every year Entrepreneur Country puts on two fantastic forum events. While I am an insider (i.e. part of the Ariadne team of which Entrepreneur Country is a part) I really think these events are totally stand out – and this is why. Yes this is slightly sales oriented – full disclosure…
- They are charged – The Buzz is huge
- They showcase success stories by amazing people
- Deals get done
So after 5 years of these events, with the most recent attracting 400 people, keynotes from BBC Dragons and successful entrepreneurs – what makes Entrepreneur Country different? Read more…
3 Reasons why you need a chief technologist in a start-up
A common and increasingly asked question I find myself getting from start-up entrepreneurs is “Do I need a CTO or technologist as a co-founder, can I not just outsource the pure technical development and own the IP?” I have 3 key reasons, based on experience supporting start-ups through funding and commercial success, as to why I think the answer to be “Yes, absolutely”.
I can think of at least a dozen such conversations just from the last quarter of 2011. I can also point to an equal number of examples where early stage companies had made the decision to outsource only then later had to reverse the decision and to in-house their technology.
So in my experience, yes… you do need a technologist as a key part of your founding team – assuming of course you are in the digital/online/technology world. There are, of course, many advantages in having an outsourced development team (either on or off-shore) but the actual ownership and delivery of the product needs to be owned in-house. I am not alone… I had a chuckle when I read Charlie Crystle’s blog (a Founder/CEO/Hacker) where he posted: “Two posts ago I lamented the news that a local startup might outsource their core dev.” So to the why… Read more…
Technology for enablement
Been working on a presentation for Entrepreneur Country’s Profit with Technology seminar on the 26th October. The slides have just been uploaded to my slideshare account. The really interesting thing is the research – how many technologies and products have we forgotten about because they failed as quickly as they became known to us?
Sinclair, Betamax, Iomega Zip, Minidisc and the list goes on…
More comments in the blog to come post the event
Tribute to Steve Jobs – an unconventional legend
I woke this morning to the news that a man I’d never met and yet considered a role model, Steve Jobs, had died age 56 of pancreatic cancer. This day is, for me and many thousands of “Apple” people, grey. The world has lost an icon, legend and an unconventional leader.
I am a recent convert to Apple and having gone Mac, don’t intend to ‘go back’. A son of an architect and interior designer, I could whole heartedly relate to Steve designing a font for Apple as a key USP without selling it at such. I can understand why he focused so much on the combined experience of the aesthetic of the physical and the function of the software. He understood how ‘mere mortals’ want quality to look and feel.
Building the brand on core, unchanged principles and staying very loyal to his mission, Steve built not only Apple but an army of fans who watch every Apple Vodcast, buy every product and stick the Apple logo to their cars, wallets and bikes.
Crazy to the unconverted, these fans are just as much of the Apple success story as Steve. Without his fans, Steve would have been an odd eccentric with a misunderstood mission. Yet in his unconventional approach he realised his allies were his customers and he built his church.
Apple is not about technology. It is a technology company about enabling people to do things with technology. This is a fundamental difference and it is what sets Apple apart from its competitors. Steve Jobs understood consumer psychology and went on a mission to bring that understanding to a world of increasingly cool technology until finally his technology was the coolest around.
What happens now to Apple is only for time to tell, I question it’s ability to build the fan base but really hope they can maintain it. The release yesterday of the iPhone 4S and not the 5 just means now that the iPhone 5 will have to be flawless, Steve is not there to cover for them.
As Steve leaves behind his own family, Apple family and fans, I hope those who were close to him had their chances to say good bye and thank you. This is my way of thanking on of the men who has been a key inspiration to my own core belief… I believe that the most influential, interesting and effective people are those who take a different view on the world, do things differently. They are pushed by an inner need to put their own stamp on the world and in so doing create a strong pull for people to follow them. This applies to entrepreneurs who leave the ‘nine to five’ life to live in the sometimes lonely space of entrepreneurship, making their vision a reality. The people who look at their personal journey through spiritual eyes and bridge the ethereal and business worlds. The people who challenge the norms of personal identity through their own journey and inspire others to do the same… These are the people that inspire, challenge and excite the world around them. These people are my inspiration and role models.
In my work as a coach and support for entrepreneurs and business leaders, I strive to bring out a little of Steve Jobs. To shape their confidence around their beliefs, abilities and credibility so that they can attract and grow their own fan base.
CTV News has released a short time line of Steve’s milestones here and if you’ve not seen his very inspiring and moving 2005 Stanford University Commencement speech I’d highly recommend watching here and bookmarking it.
5 Start-up Mistakes Leading to Misaligned Propositions
Getting a proposition wrong can be expensive and damage a product brand and yet so regularly I see great companies with great ideas and products miss the mark in their proposition.
One of the most difficult things for start-ups is building, testing, sharpening and reinforcing their proposition. All too often the entrepreneurs get the concept, design the software and launch it without spending the time on the “Marketing”. This is most often because people believe marketing is for the reserves of the big corporates or the focus of the washy people who could not do the business or science degree at university. This could not be further from the truth however. Marketing, positioning and proposition is fundamental to being able to get a going concern to really go! Why is this?
Developing the proposition is about defining the success criteria, understanding what you are selling and shaping the pitch to the right audience. It is about taking a step back and thinking about what it is you would want someone to tell you about your own product. Come to think of it, how many brands, services or products do you think you could probably define better than their own adverts do? Probably quite a few. This is the focus of proposition shaping.
There are typically 5 things that start-ups get wrong when they start to go to market (for investors and/or commercial development) which mean that people scratch their heads before they reach for their wallet, we need to rectify those 5 problems and sharpen the proposition and align it to our buyers.
The 5 typical problems I keep seeing in misaligned propositions are:
1) Thinking big and forgetting the baby steps that get you there
- the real market opportunity is won one sale at a time are you constantly refining your sale or slapping it out there?
- go-to-market is about aligning your achievable market to your vision, are you building credibility?
2) Spread too broad and lack focus
- fix-all solutions are hard to buy or too good to be true, is your proposition tight?
- tight propositions mean new services can develop in parallel, are you giving too much away in solving too much?
3) Forget that your audience don’t know your product
- even high tech can be simplified beyond technology into enablement, can your mother understand the proposition?
- don’t assume your market knows the problem like you do, are you selling from a common starting point?
4) Defining the proposition as a nice to have not a solution
- too much emphasis is put on the extra benefits, are you selling lots of benefits or a solution to a specific problem?
- people feel the need to over validate with external information, are you forgetting the original “spark” that led to the solution and how you solve the problem?
5) Don’t align the message to the solution
- proposition pitches try to be catch all and complex people buy simple, are you selling a solution or a service?
- people are looking to solve a problem, does your product proposition enable champions and evangelists?
When one understands these 5 concepts you can work to counter them in a tight and refined proposition. This means you can task your sales team, enable your marketeers and impress your investors. A tight proposition is one that is about what you can do for your customers, how you can help them solve a problem they have and how they can rave about your amazingness.
I am running workshops with entrepreneurs to test their propositions and help sharpen them with a focused strategy. Over a 3 hour session we:
1) benchmark for common mistakes
2) rebuild the proposition to be solution-centric
3) define the simplified messaging for enablement and championing
Do you want to run through your proposition or have a benchmarking session? Do get in touch.
Why businesses need coaches or mentors
For the sports-focused society that we are, I am surprised that there are not more high-paced businesses that make use of business coaches and mentors. I have come across very few people who admit to seeing the benefit of leveraging an outsider as a confidante, advisor and coach but rather the opposite “We are doing okay, why would we need one?”. Is okay enough or do we want to be brilliant?
I get the very real sense that in British business culture a business coach or advisor is a sign of weakness or failure and yet we would not expect any budding sports person to pursue a sporting career without a coach – how are they different? Sports requires agility, fitness, clear mind, focus, determination, vision and passion. Business requires the same, doesn’t it?
When I was competing in martial arts I had three coaches, one for my mental preparation, one for perfecting the practice of forms (Kata) and the third to focus on my sparring. I really benefited from their ability to help me think about the problems and where to find the opportunity in my opponent’s flaws. I could lean on them when I needed to and I felt supported by their stability and their perspective. While I was psyching up for the match or competition, they stayed calm and kept my focus. They knew my strengths and weaknesses and could help me train on improving between matches.
In business there are no matches, the battle is by day, minute and second. There is always a competitor looking for the same client, wanting to provide a better or cheaper product. The requirement to stay on top of ones game is relentless. There is more information sharing and data available and we are making decisions at breakneck speed. Business is now 24/7 and any successful or aspiring business person is always connected. Just like when I was warming up for the next sparring match.
In this environment, the need for perspective is great and yet the environment is not conducive… this is why businesses need coaches.
Today I ran a proposition and position workshop with a client over a three-hour session. The benefit of working with an advisor is that my client could take the step back and look at their business from where I am standing… on the outside. They had tried to do the work internally but they had not prioritised it, didn’t have the external perspective and had taken a long time to get not very far. This is not uncommon, rather the opposite!
Today we were all really fired up, inspired and extremely productive. Net-net: we transformed the proposition into one which is exciting and strong, they felt inspired by their business and they have a tool-set with which to go sell their kick-ass product. This is something that otherwise would have taken months to get to.
Obviously I would think that businesses need coaches and mentors given my profession as a coach and psychologist but I fell into this through looking for investment worthy businesses and kept coming across high-growth businesses that had not stopped to take a breath and as such were putting their own fires out. The most rewarding thing for me in coaching is seeing the clients eyes light up, their inspiration is at full tilt and they realise they probably do have the answers to the problems, it is the space and perspective they don’t always have and that is what I bring – along with some humour and external insight for validation.
A great business is fit, self-aware and agile. A mentor is someone who challenges, encourages and validates before the market gets to do that. A coach is someone who prepares for the fight and for the challenge. They provide the stability and insight by not being in the same boat rocking to the same waves or standing on the same burning platform.
If you feel like you are running a 200mph marathon and want to up your game, and see business as a mental and economic sport, have you thought about a mentor or coach as an investment rather than a weakness?
Doing and Thinking about Local Business: My Four-Axis Approach
I have been preparing for the Google Think Local conference on the 4th October where I am hosting a panel of three who each have a specific and highly relevant experience of thinking about local business or leveraging online opportunities to make business possible local. Joining me are Brad Liebmann (founder of Geocast.com – local mobile advertising network), Peter Gandy (CCO of Rockpool Digital – a digital agency that build fully integrated mobile web and corp services with a local/mobile capability) and Hugh Chappell (former board NXD of Time Out, serial entrepreneur and a few locally oriented business investments currently). We will be discussing the 4 axes of local and how they help and hinder business in benefiting from being ‘digitally local’
Having advised some companies in the past which have been heavily focused on providing highly relevant localised information, services, advertising etc. it is an area I am rather fascinated about. I think that it is when one breaks the concept of local down into these axes one is able to make some decisions about how you want your business to be local. Too often I see ‘sexy’ location based applications that seem to fall short of the promise and usually it is because they lack the focus and rationale for my using them. I think this is really because the technologists making them get excited by the capabilities rather than the need and solving that need.
So the way I think, and advise my clients to think about local, it is on these four axes. How do they interact for your business? Which is the primary and which is the secondary? If your focus is on all of them, are you sure you can be relevant to your core user?
The four axes of Local:
1. Proximity
- Here
- There
- Somewhere
2. Time
- Past
- Present
- Future
3. Intention
- Information
- Commerce
- Share / Social
4. On & Off-line
- Online
- Offline
- Cross-over / hybrid / both
So what?
So what is interesting about the axes? Why are they interesting and important to consider?
Local bridges and combines these all in varied ways, bi-directionally. Local is a pure ecosystem play but it is a dynamic ecosystem, how does yours ebb and flow with location?
I think the convergence of two or more axes enables tighter targeting, greater detail information and stronger engagement – all key to ROI advertising and high value interactions. The real world is local, it is not only online or only offline, time and mind-set usually separate the two temporarily – local is a mindset that can enable businesses (big and small) to bridge these.
When looking at local I ask businesses:
- What does hyper-local mean to you in a commercial sense?
- Is local more a channel or a service for us?
- What are the challenges to big businesses in thinking / being / doing local?
- What services do you want to unlock with local that you cannot do generically?
- What is the single most important development in technology or online that enables local to become effective?
- What is the role of data and insight in hyper-local?
- Who is already doing what I want to do and what can I learn from them?
- What technology is available that I don’t have to build from scratch?
There is still a mentality about local being a potential cannibal to existing business models, I disagree, it is a channel not a threat. Local can be embraced, iterated and used very effectively. The great thing too is that it is young and undefined in that there are few people using it to its potential and big wins can be had with small step changes.
Are you thinking or doing Local? What is your view on the do’s and don’ts? I am always looking to know more about businesses that have embraced local or people who have a view. What is your take in the 4 axes of local and the questions to consider when going local?
The corporate dilemma according to John Maynard Keynes
5 Steps of Corporate Change to Adopting Digital
The corporate dilemma seems so well encapsulated by John Maynard Keynes’ quote: “The difficulty lies not in the new ideas, but in the letting go of old ones, which ramify, for those brought up as most of us have been, into every corner of our minds”
In the work I am doing, talking to corporates, the directors, CEO’s and heads of digital know this on one level and yet struggle to let go of the old ones. Talking to them about adopting digital as a ‘new born’ seems to get a similar reaction to suggesting we jump out of a plane with a parachute… fear despite knowing it is possible and probably safe… The reaction is something like
- “How can we cross the chasm?”
- “What is our parachute?”
- “How do we reconcile starting at 20,000ft and landing at ground level?”
To me, the answer is relatively straight forward in some respects, of course it’s not an easy migration – “the opposite of a bird in the hand” – let go and go after the two in the bush, they may, over time be worth more than the one… and if you execute well (read: iterate and learn quickly) one in the bush may be a goose that lays the golden egg!
Look at the ecommerce and mobile trends recently… who were the leading ecommerce players when that started being possible? It was the upstarts who could adopt new business models and methods to do the same thing in new ways. In mobile, the most succesful companies are the new ones who have no legacy of consumer adoption but an insight into how to grab attention…
For corporates today with strong consumer bases, a strong brand and a need to evolve the choices are clear, adapt or die…
Adoption can be done in so many ways I believe and some are low-risk, brand enhancing and can transport the business models along a travellator next to the walking competition. Commercial partnering and innovation incubation are to me the corporate bets that need to be made. At Yahoo we tried to embrace the ‘entrepreneur within’ with our Hack Days which enabled the developers to build test and show off their own ideas, some of which could be included in the Yahoo offering… quite a few companies do this as a means of satisfying the creative developers but why not programatise it, build it into a business model framework?
If you don’t get on the travellator now it will only accelerate and you will have to run faster alongside it to catch up. This means more cost, more risk, more time and a greater chasm.
I firmly believe that in consumer-led sectors especially (i.e. retail banking, media publishing, music, film etc) the corporates who adopt, adapt and test will be the winners in the next 5-10 years.
What are the steps then? I think there is a process to moving from analogue to digital, my 5 Steps of Corporate Change to Adopting Digital
- Recognise the need to shift into digital – don’t assume you can do it all
- Analyse the start-up trends for relevance and potential overlap – Think outside the box (analyse from outside not inside) & Look for the elements that are the dots you can connect
- Connect the dots for your customer offering (this is your IP)
- Define the success criteria for digital – it won’t be the same as traditional business as usual!
- Build a framework for partnering and internal innovation – test, measure, iterate, test – constant iteration
There are more than enough change management professionals and business coaches to help manage the internal backlash and resistance but there are not enough frameworks to lean on. I think now is the best time to look at Apple or Paddy Power and not Microsoft or William Hill as examples.
As both perfectly ‘normal’ and depressed people, they benefit from the relationship with a therapist to get perspective and support in evaluating their situations, the same exists for Corporates! Get an outside opinion, build the relationship with a trusted advisor – a business shrink & a partner who helps shine the light in the dark and helps you know what you know and shine the light to discover what you don’t know… this de-risking is invaluable.
Learn to start to let go of the old ideas, build the new ones and grow with them. The digital layer is ever-more social and ever-evolving. Now is the best time to ask the audience – get your customers to be part of your evolution.
Innovate with risk. Define new criteria of success and let go of the (dying) bird in the hand – there are plenty in the bush, waiting to be caught!
The corporate dilemma is one of perception and behaviour change – get the corporate shrink, adopt the 5 steps and evolve – resistance is futile.
Myspace gets a new life – but what is the strategy?
Seeing that Justin Timberlake is paying $35m for Myspace is interesting (http://reut.rs/mNLqAE) but what does it mean for Justin and for Myspace?
Clearly I think that as Justin is far closer to the people who made Myspace the success it previouisly was – the music fans and celebrities themselves – he has a plan and can probably make it happen. Is there however, space in the online social world for a niche / vertical OSN to compete with Facebook?
I actually think the aquisition is a very interesting one, Justin’s got gravitas with a large fan base and if he can recreate the engagement on the site – there could be a very interesting swing back to Myspace as more and more of the younger Facebook users seem to be losing interest in Facebook since their parents are on there… and that is where I think there is an interesting play to be had! Bring Myspace back to its core with better functionality.
Time will tell but now JT joins the tech investor world Ashton Kutcher has become so well known for.
