Over the course of the last few weeks I’ve been writing for a variety of outlets – just not my own blog.
I’ll try to get back here and post things from time to time, but for the foreseeable future I’m focusing my writing energy on Medium, the Makers Academy blog and some other top secret projects.
As usual, feel free to drop me an email or hit me up on Twitter.
There are a lot of time management and GTD systems out there.
I’ve tried most of them with varying degrees of success and failure.
One that has stuck pretty well is the Eisenhower matrix that I currently use to manage my business – Makers Academy.
The idea behind the system is that instead of using one giant To-Do list to keep track of what needs to get done, you prioritize them based on priority and urgency.
Running a startup means that no matter how on top of things one is, stuff will always fall off the table. There simply isn’t enough time to do everything, so prioritization becomes key.
The problem with prioritization is that it can quickly become blurred with urgency. No matter how important we know it is to have that big picture strategy meeting, it takes discipline to do it with the constant hustle and noise from partners, customers, meetings, bills and cash flow distractions that are more urgent.
The Eisenhower matrix breaks up tasks into four categories:
Tasks should be placed in one of those four buckets and completed in the order the categories are shown.
By doing this, we combat the natural tendency to let unimportant and urgent tasks overrrule important and not urgent tasks.
I don’t think there is a system out there that works for everybody, but this system has worked fairly well for me.
“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it’s time to pause and reflect.”
– Mark Twain
I love this quote.
It seems strange if you really think about it. Many people are inspired by such phrases that try to instill the spirit of individuality, while trying to do everything they can to fit in.
Over the last few weeks I’ve noticed how much I really admire the ability to go against the grain for an extended period of time. In startups, the ability to see what others don’t see is invaluable. Paul Graham says that all you have to do to avoid a failed startup is just to not die. It’s that simple.
How many startups have been rejected by partners, investors or mainstream customers for years to eventually become “overnight” successes?
Did Airbnb think that they were going with the flow?
I doubt it.
This ability to have vision, conviction and belief so strongly that one can sustain headwinds of negative feedback is undoubtably valuable.
But at what point does this “vision persistence” cross the line into just being cynical?
It’s obviously not a black-or-white issue as an infinite number of independent variables can act as an input into the equation, but it’s important to realize that cynicism for cynicism’s-sake is likely a recipe for disaster.
Right now I’m flying back to London from San Francisco after a week-long trip with the LDN2SFO group, a collection of entrepreneurs and VCs from London. We toured places like Sequoia Capital, Singluarity University, YCombinator and Pivotal Labs with the purpose of building relationships and strengthening the ties between the London and San Francisco tech startup ecosystems.
I thought it valuable to document my experiences and observations while they’re fresh in my mind. I make no value judgements, simply objective and personal perceptions.
Reinforcement
The first two observations are nothing new and will likely just reinforce what London entrepreneurs already know:
1) London has far less investment activity than San Francisco
Many people make seemingly plausible explanations for why this is, such as the fact that London hasn’t had any runaway successes or IPOs that mint hundreds of millionaires overnight thereby fueling the angel investor community. In addition and for whatever reason, the UK seems to be more risk averse than the US.
Some people have speculated that this risk aversion partly comes from the fact that the UK still attaches a bit of a stigma to a founder that fails, but if this is the case, I haven’t noticed it.
Lastly, the investment process requirements are starkly different. I spoke with several entrepreneurs this week who said they raised up to $150,000 without even showing a pitch deck. One guy said that he raised $1.5 million with 10 slides. The attitude seems as if providing five-year financial projections are laughable and could actually prove detrimental.1
All of this being said, I do know that the advent of crowd-funded equity solutions such as Seedrs in London are making the process significantly easier. I spoke with one UK-resident who raised a nice pre-seed round in the matter of a couple of weeks by using the Seedrs platform and said the process was painless.
2) London has fewer acquisitions
This is connected with the first point but does play a critical role in the investment market dynamics between the two locations. When we spoke with organizations that work with startups in both London and San Francisco, they mentioned the increase in the number of London-based startups that are placing small teams (usually marketing and/or sales) in San Francisco not merely for the access to the larger market the US provides, but because it increases their visibility to potential acquiring companies.
These two points don’t illuminate anything new as they are already highly discussed among London entrepreneurs.
New Discoveries
While those things were expected, the following subtle points were new to me:
1) Extreme Optimism
By definition, an entrepreneur needs to be optimistic. They need to be able to see what doesn’t already exist and believe that the future can become a reality.
Silicon Valley entrepreneurs however, really take this to the extreme. When presented with a problem, they tried to reason possible solutions as to how they could overcome it. They actively searched for ways that things could be done, regardless of the obstacle.
It’s fair to say that extreme blind optimism is just as bad as extreme pessimism, but it makes for a very different community dynamic. It’s a small difference, but seems to have a cumulative and exponential impact on the ability of that ecosystem to think big.
2) Pay it Forward
This was mentioned by nearly everyone I talked to who had experienced both the Silicon Valley and London startup ecosystems.
Silicon Valley entrepreneurs really want to help those around them. At each event we attended, I noticed that people weren’t just networking with the end-intent of gaining something specific for themselves out of it, but were legitemately interested in helping those around them.
Chris McCann (Startup Digest) put it to me best by saying that a Silicon Valley entrepreneur’s reputation was truly the most important currency available, so it fosters a system of really wanting to help those around you. Once a system like this is put in place, it’s self-perpetuating.
While I’m not saying that there aren’t those individuals in the London startup scene who actively look for ways to help (Here’s looking at you Matthew Stafford), that mindset doesn’t seem to be as prevalent.
Because I think that these two discoveries could potentially prove valuable, I’ve decided to run an experiment. I’ve set up a Meetup group called Startup Karma and I’m going to hold an event later this month with the underlying premise of “Think Big” and “Pay it Forward.” I’m requesting that each individual who attends, shows up with the intent of helping at least one other person. It could be something as simple as providing 20 minutes of specialty-role consulting or making a key introduction.
It’s obviously unenforceable, but I’m hoping that the underlying premise proves beneficial for people and eventually, the ecosystem as a whole.
You can sign up for the group at http://www.meetup.com/StartupKarma/ and I hope to see you there.
Persistence is a common theme that continues to reveal itself in my thought processes.
I’m an entrepreneur so I’m naturally competitive and I want to win. This is precisely why I’ve spent so much time trying to figure out how to work efficiently, productively and effectively.
But as I explored in my essay on Persistence, it is not a sufficient condition of success. I can’t remember where exactly I read about it, but there was a science fiction writer who wrote something like forty novels without a hit. He consulted with everyone he knew because he was determined to be a successful writer.
The problem was the this writer used the same formula for creating each novel. He didn’t test different strategies or explore creative ways of doing things. He had persistence and was determined.
The missing ingredient in this equation is experimentation.
Most successful people will tell you that a large portion of their ability comes from stickability. (i.e. persistence)
But keep in mind that if something doesn’t work – you need to experiment. It will drastically increase the probability of finding your secret formula.
It probably seems obvious if you sit down and think about it, but for some reason I see more and more entrepreneurs with ideas that are far extrapolated from contributing value.
You’ll notice that several of these options are contacting others to help connect with you with the people you need. While some people may be magnanimous enough to do this out of sheer goodwill, make it easier for them to say yes by putting it in their best interest. Tell them that you’re looking for a way to solve the problems of this customer segment and if they do help, keep them updated as your idea takes form.
I’ve been hesitant to start blogging.
At the beginning of 2012 I decided to start publishing more on the web than just the occasional social media update, but instead of the prototypical “blogging” format, I took direction from Paul Graham and decided to write essays.
I am continuously surprised by the value that writing and interacting with my readers have added to my life, but the self-imposed quality restrictions that I put on myself for publishing an essay were hindering my ability to contribute at the frequency I would have liked.
So in 2013 I’m going to write more. I’m hesitant to say that I’ll be “blogging” because I don’t know what shape the content will take. I will likely still post the occasional essay, but I’d like to do more in 2013 – in every sense of the word.