Non-Linear VC

A glimpse around the next corner; mind the curves.

What we have here is a failure to plan

Well, it’s that time of year; the end of the year that is. Time for holiday cheer, budgets and for a rare few, strategic planning. I say for a few because I’m frequently surprised at how little I hear from the VC community and VC-backed CEOs about strategic planning. When I do hear about planning, it is usually an entrepreneur or VC trying to explain to me why it is not necessary. The rationalizations go something like this:

Planning is for big companies.

Our space moves too fast to plan; if we define a strategy we’ll just have to change it in a couple of months.

We’re small, nimble and well-coordinated so we don’t need to plan.

Everyone in my company already knows what they should be working on.

Sorry to be Scroogy, but to those rationalizations I say hogwash! Go ask five of your employees to define the single most important thing the company needs to accomplish next year. Better yet, go ask your executive team; they should know, right? If you get more than one flavor of answer, you need a strategic plan.

Lets be honest, when you cut to the chase, the real reason entrepreneurs and VC’s object to planning is that it takes time, effort and concerted thought. Planning also implies goal setting and goal-setting implies there are objectives you can measure results against, and that implies accountability. Time, effort, concerted thought and accountability; who wants that hassle?

Planning doesn’t have to be complicated or burdensome. For me, planning is like creating a mental map.

Where am I, where am I going and how to I get there?

The process starts with an honest assessment of where you are. Unfortunately, in our reality-bound world, you don’t get to navigate from where you want to be; you can only navigate from where you are. When you are climbing a mountain, you don’t get to start 100 feet from the summit (that is unless you’ve driven to the top of Mt. Evans, in which case you are cheating in my opinion). Planning forces you to come to grips with where you are on a strategy map.

Planning also forces you to define your destination. If you can’t define where you are going, you are wandering aimlessly in the woods.  The rationalization that your space moves too fast to define the destination is not acceptable. At minimum, you should be able to create a directionally correct picture of the future that you are striving to create (ie. Our destination is to the west). The destination you articulate should be worthwhile and aspirational, yet realistic. Don’t worry if the destination changes in a future planning session; that is natural in an emerging market space. But the notion that the destination may change is a lame excuse for not planning at all.

Finally, planning forces you to create an execution path that closes the gap between where you are and where you want to be. If you can’t define the execution focus that will help you to close the gap between where you are and where you want to be, how can you expect your employees know how to close the gap? Tactically focused, execution oriented people you find in most companies need to know how to get from point A to point B in oder to be effective. It is your job to give them the map and show them how their job fits in.

Planning 101: Keep it simple

Planning doesn’t have to be complicated. To really boil it down, we can dispense with the “soft fuzzy stuff”; mission, vision, strategic intent, etc; although I’m a believer that those pieces of strategy have merit. For an emerging growth company, planning should be about two categories of issues:

  1. The things that you can accomplish that will make you wildly successful and;
  2. The things that you can do to yourself or that can happen to you that will kill your business if you do not prevent them from happening.

My Partners and I at Meritage call these the “Critical Issues”. There should be no more than five to seven of them. If you have ten or more critical issues, you probably don’t have the time, knowledge, resources or capital to execute your plan. Embedded in the critical issues is where you are, and where you need to go (point A and point B on a map). With those points in mind, the next step is to determine the route you are going to take.

For our companies, we like a set of three to five initiatives lined up against each of the critical issues. The initiatives provide tactical guidance regarding what you can to get from point A to B. Initiatives must be within your control; saying that your market must grow 50% next year is not an initiative. Initiatives must also not be prescriptive. “Sell better” is not an initiative, whereas “implement sales training program” clearly is.

Finally, now that you’ve defined the initiatives you are going to execute against, we have our companies establish measurements that define their success against the initiatives. Measurements must be, well, measurable. In other words, use numbers and dates; 10 enterprise customers by year-end, 8.5+ on customer satisfaction survey, version x.x of the product released by June 30, 2009 and on budget. Again, keep it simple; three to five measurements per critical issue is sufficient in our experience.

Putting critical issues, initiatives and measurements into a three column table gets your entire strategy map on one piece of paper. That is remarkable because it provides a simple communication tool to use with employees, Boards and shareholders. Some of our companies use the three columns as the first page of their Board reports and add a red-yellow-green light next to each critical issue to reflect the CEO’s overall assessment of progress against the critical issues. This format makes for an effective visual representative of progress.

This may sound old school, but its my experience that management teams that are honest about where they are, who know where they are going and are able to outline the key steps to get there perform better than management teams that can’t commit these things to paper. If you don’t have the vision to anticipate where you should be by the end of next year, shorten the time-frame; do quarterly or semi-annual planning.

Choosing not plan at all is a massive failure of leadership. So get your management team in a room and hash it out; you will all be better off for it and so will your company’s performance.

Filed under: Venture Capital , , ,

The math of SaaS revenue growth

A conversation with the CEO of a SaaS company today reminded me of the importance of the rule of 78s. What is this “rule”, you ask. If you run a recurring revenue business, it is the most important number you have never heard of.

Back to my conversation with the CEO. We were talking about the use of proceeds for the financing she is trying to raise. In her case, the business is break-even, but has the opportunity to grow into some oncoming market demand. So I asked a classic VC question; “Assuming you close the financing in Q4, 2009, what will your 2010 revenues be?” Simple question right?

Lets say that this company ended 2009 with $3 million in run-rate revenue and that the Company has two sales reps. Each sales rep. has a quota of $10,000 of incremental monthly recurring revenue (“MRR”) bookings per month. Sales reps. historically produce at 75% of quota in this company, so the incremental new bookings per month, per rep is $7,500. At its current level of sales and marketing resource and productivity, this business can expect to generate $1.17 million more in revenue in 2010 than it generated in ‘09. To get there, just multiple the $15k per month of incremental revenue the two sales reps. will generate by 78. Why 78? Because 78 is the ”sum of the digits” for revenue producing months in a year. Incremental revenue added in January will produce revenue for 12 months; incremental revenue added in February will produce revenue for 11 months; …; incremental revenue added in December will produce revenue for 1 month. The sum of digits for 12 is: 12 + 11 + 10 + … + 2 + 1 = 78. So the baseline revenue projection for 2010 should be about $4.17 million.

Now lets talk about the enhanced growth opportunity. The Company wants to hire two additional sales reps. who can be expected to produce at the same $7,500 of MRR as the two existing reps. For purposes of the example it will take a quarter to recruit and hire the two new reps and another quarter for them to build a sales pipeline given the sales cycle. Conservatively, these two new reps. won’t begin generating MRR bookings until June. Lets say there is a one-month install cycle so that June bookings convert to revenue in July. So what kind of incremental growth will these reps. generate in 2010? We don’t get to use the rule of 78 this time; no, because these reps. will produce for only six months during 2010, we use the sum of digits of 6, which is 21. That is a lot less than 78; that six month delay between making the decision to hire two new reps and getting them on board and productive really hurts. In 2010, the two new reps. will generate only $315k of incremental revenue. The business can be expected to generate $4.485 million of revenue in 2010; not meaningfully more than the base scenario without additional investment.

While this looks like meager growth, it doesn’t tell the whole story. Remember, this business came into the year with a $3 million run-rate. Without hiring the two new reps, the business should end 2010 with a run-rate of $5.16 million. By hiring the two new reps. that can be increased to $6.24 million, even though the two new reps. are productive for only six months. That incremental run-rate of over $1 million makes a huge difference and sure makes hiring the two new reps. look a whole lot more attractive than the meager incremental revenue they will generate in 2010.

Here are the key takeaways:

1) Get the Base Right: Recurring-revenue businesses are great because they are highly predictable. Applying the rule of 78s and with a little understanding of your sales resources and their productivity, you should be able to estimate your baseline next year revenue with a high degree of confidence.

2) Scaling Takes Time: The most common mistake I see recurring-revenue entrepreneurs make it to underestimate the time it takes for increased sales and marketing resource to impact the top-line. Hiring new sales people today probably won’t move the needle on your next twelve month revenue. More likely, an investment in sales and marketing won’t have meaningful impact until the following fiscal year.

3) Run-Rate Matters: You will see the impact of an investment in sales and marketing in run-rate much faster than in top-line GAAP revenues. If you are asked about what your revenues will be next year, answer the question directly, but also include a description of the difference in the run-rate you expect to end the year with under the no-growth and growth scenarios. The run-rate difference will impress much more than the top-line difference.

By the way, the CEO of the SaaS company I was speaking with got this analysis dead-right. Well done!

Filed under: Economics, Lessons Learned, SaaS, Venture Capital , ,

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