Non-Linear VC

A glimpse around the next corner; mind the curves.

All “Free” is NOT created equal

I’m still mired in reading Chris Anderson’s latest book; “Free”. I doubt I’ll finish it. 130+ pages in, I havn’t discovered anything illuminating. In fact, I’d argue that by combining a number of very different applications of free under one umbrella, Anderson does not clarify free, but rather makes it more confusing. For example, a business model that includes giving media access away for free to a consumer so that an advertiser can pay to reach an audience is very different than giving away a product to capture sales of a related product. The first is a classic two-sided business model. The latter is a classic complements business model; razor/razor blade. These two business models are fundamentally different as is the appliation and effect of free. Perhaps the only thing they have in common is that someone gets something for free.

Neither is an obscure business model that the Internet has managed to invent. And both are well studied by economists. As David Evans, a scholar and consultant I admire, and co-author of The Catalyst Code – one of the finest books on two-sided business models – highlights in a recent blog post:

Most of the kinds of business models that Anderson talks about have been around for centuries if not longer. Google’s search business model isn’t fundamentally different than yellow pages. The yellow page companies charged the advertisers and give the search mechanism away for free. The only business model that Anderson points to that is really new is open source.

Evans and his colleagues at Market Platform Dynamics get free, particularly its application in two-sided businesses better than anyone I’ve met. Not surprisingly, they work in sectors like payments and media where free is a prominently used tool. Evans goes on to say:

The two-sided literature and other economic theories emphasize that free is a special case and that it doesn’t necessarily or always lead to a profitable business.

Yes, frictionless distribution enables more companies to give something away for free in the hopes of getting someone to pay for something else. But getting someone to pay for something is the hard part and is largely ignored in “Free”. This is all too “if you build it someone will pay” for me. For my part, I’d like to know what and when someone is going to pay for before I start giving a component of my offering away for free. Anything short of that is gambling.

Some smart entrepreneurs are fighting the urge to “go free” as well. For a humorous look at making money on-line without giving something away for free, check out this video of David Heinemeier-Hanson presenting at Startup School ‘08. His conclusion; don’t give what you do away for free; have a price!

While all free is not equal, free as a price has its place. But it is not an elixir for all.

Filed under: Books , , , ,

The most undervalued discipline in venture capital

PSYCHOLOGY! But very few even recognize it as a discipline.

As the cliche goes, every night, the most valuable assets in my investments walk out the door; the people. And the group that is responsible for managing all those people, the management team; they are not just “executives”, they are people too. Those executives need to be nurtured and developed if they are to perform. And from my perspective, psychology and “mindset” play a key role in executive development.

So how does a VC help put the entrepreneur/executive in the right mindset? Well, it starts with the VC having the right mindset to begin with. So what is the “right” mindset? Carol Dweck, a Professor of Psychology at Stanford, wrote a book on two basic mindsets she has observed and analyzed over many years, creatively called “Mindset”. It is a simple, but remarkably powerful construct for understanding how people frame their worldview and their place in the world.

According to Dweck, there are two basic mindsets that people adopt; the fixed mindset or the growth mindset. In the fixed mindset, people see their abilities and those of others as based on fundamental talent. This inherent talent is perceived to be unchangeable; fixed. A fixed mindset person would think “I am talented at math”, “I am not a good artist”, “I am a naturally gifted athlete”. In contrast, people in the growth mindset believe that talent is “developed” through hard work and that everyone has the ability to improve. They are interested in the journey, and view the result as an outcome based on many factors, including effort. Both success and failure are considered opportunities to learn and improve.

In my opinion, a venture investor with a fixed mindset is doomed and potentially dangerous. Every failure is taken as a personal affront to their talent. Rather than learning from failure, those in the fixed mindset look to blame others; the market, the management team, the “irrational” competition. They view investments that are behind plan as failing them and therefore a waste of additional time and effort. If the Company is behind its sales target, the VP of Sales and Marketing must not be talented enough. Fire him. There is no consideration given to helping the CEO, and executive team develop their skills, because they can’t be developed, their talents are fixed. Success is even more dangerous for the fixed mindset VC, because success validates the belief in their raw talent. They don’t have to work hard, their inherent “deal-sense” will carry them. In fact, working hard might cause others to question their raw talent. Those who are inherently gifted don’ t need to work hard.

More importantly, a VC with a fixed mindset can’t help a management team get into a growth mindset. They don’t view the team as people to be developed, but rather as people to be judged and kept or terminated. They take credit for others successes and blame others for their falures. This risks putting the entire company in the fixed mindset, stifling team development, creativity and the risk taking that emerging companies thrive on.

If the fixed mindset is dangerous, the growth mindset is powerful and empowering. Every challenge  is an opportunity to learn or to help someone else learn. Success is seen as the result of hard work; effort is rewarded as well as results. There is no blame, no finger pointing, only accountability. The only way to fail is to not try.

I look for growth mindset entrepreneurs. If you are an entrepreneur, look for a growth mindset VC. And if you are in a fixed mindset, fret not. Read the book; you’ll learn something. And with some hard work, you can change your mindset!

Filed under: Books, Lessons Learned, Venture Capital , , , ,

Success has a thousand fathers, failure none

I just finished reading Jim Collins’ latest book; a short one titled How the Mighty Fall and Why Some Companies Never Give In. I’m a big fan of Collins’ writings, including his prior works, Built to Last and Good to Great. Both of the prior works focused on the light side of business; assessing the factors that contribute to a company’s success. As Collins’ points out, in How the Mighty Fall, he’s turned to the dark side; analyzing failure.

Analyzing failure is unfortunately prone to post-hoc analysis and revisionist history. As a result, Collins takes an empirical and analytical approach to the process. The companies Collins analyzes are necessarily large, public companies. Despite this, there are many key takeways from the book that are applicable to emerging growth companies; two of which I wanted to capture.

Takeaway 1: Pride Cometh Before the Fall

There is a great synergy between How the Mighty Fall and Collins’ prior works, in that failure is to some degree the mirror image of success. In Good to Great, Collins’ concludes that a single personality trait separates leaders of good companies from leaders of great companies; humility. It is no surprise then that the first “marker” of the impending decline of a great company is the replacement of “humility” with “hubris”. If your Company is growing and looks as if it will be successful, the right response is utter paranoia; of competition, of a shift in your market, of anything that can take your business off track. But most of all, you must be paranoid that hubris sets in and your team starts believing its own press. It is a surefire sign; perhaps the first sign; that your company is at risk.

Takeaway 2: The Fatal Wounds are Self-Inflicted

Decline can be reversed if caught early. Hubris can be re-replaced with the humility required for an organization to question assumptions, to come to grip with the harsh reality and with the persevering drive necessary to harness great market opportunities. But if caught, “hubris” leads to a series of bad decisions that are disconnected with the core mission of the organization. It is like an airline crash; rarely caused by a cataclysmic damage, but rather by a series of bad decisions (none of which is fatal in isolation) that compound on one another. This quote from Collins on the back cover of Why the Mighty Fall pretty much sums it up.

“Whether you prevail or fail, endure or die, depends more on what you do to yourself than on what the world does to you.”

There is no shortage of ways to fail. But to summarize Collins’ findings, the things companies do to themselves that cause them to fail include pursing growth that is undisciplined or that can’t be digested by the organization, increasing the risk profile of the business by pursuing non-core ventures, incessant restructuring and choosing to blame outside factors for failures rather than looking in the mirror. The nature of these items is noteworthy; as Collins points out, it is not complacency that kills most companies, but rather, doing too much. The good news is that the process of decline is not irreversible. So if you see hubris seeping into your emerging growth business and see your organization making decisions that are inconsistent with the organizations core, abiding values, return to your roots, look internally, assess the situation without panic and make sure you have the right people in the right seats to work your way out of it, slowly, methodically, surely. There will be no magic bullets.

Success has 1,000 fathers and failure none. But we can learn a lot from the mistakes of others. Better to learn that way than to learn by repeating others’ mistakes and wasting a lot of capital in the process.

Filed under: Books , , , ,

My Twitter Feed

  • RT @JumpTap: #mobileupfront John Hadl favors mobile browser over apps and thinks it will win > I agree; eventually. 15 hours ago
  • RT @kcbigring: wsj and npr building custom ipad websites ... yeh that's just great #twostepsback -do smart people not see the absurdity here 15 hours ago
  • @bfeld Hard being a captive audience. Wears you down. 1 day ago
  • @jbminn Best to avoid it. Floyd Hill and tired, testosterone induced, 4k lbs. SUV drivers a bad combo. 1 day ago
  • I've finally "come down" from trip down the mountain last night. Reckeless drivers infuriate me; particularly when my kids are in the car. 1 day ago