admin_bnb admin_bnb

Recent Posts

Tech Geek + Biz Geek = Match Made In Startup Heaven

By admin_bnb admin_bnb on June 19, 2006

In my prior article, I wrote about the concept of the business geek.  This article was pretty well received and I got a lot of responses from Business Geeks but hadn’t really thought of it that way.  So, as a follow-up to that article, I’d like to now talk about why it is critical for most startups to have at least one of each (a tech geek and a business geek), and why it’s so hard for these people to come together.

First, by way of quick context-setting for purposes of this discussion:

Tech Geek:  Someone with relatively deep technology experience that understands the inherent tradeoffs and subtleties inherent in building a working software product.  Capable of single-handedly creating something that works out of nothing (with just the three Cs:  a computer, a compiler and conviction).  [Note:  Yes, yes, I know, not all development languages require a compiler anymore, so feel free to replace with “runtime environment”, if that makes you feel better].  Key requirement:  The ability to actually ship something to customers within our lifetime and respond to customer feedback.

Business Geek:  Someone with experience and talent in all of the non-tech issues that startups have to deal with, including, but not limited to:  capital needs, finance, sales and marketing, etc.  Basically, this is the “everything else” person in the early-stages of a startup.  Done correctly, the biz geek should be just as busy as the tech geek in the early days.  Capable of single handedly taking a product that sort-of works and figure out how to make money with it while simultaneously keeping the “machinery” running (i.e. power and Internet connectivity).

Summary:  A tech geek is someone who is fundamentally capable of building software that customers are willing to pay for.  A business geek is someone who is fundamentally capable of actually getting customers to pay for it.

Interestingly, but not surprisingly, one of the biggest causes for startups going sideways is that the above two people cannot come together.  Here’s a quick (and hypothetical) summary of the situation:

Tech Geek:  I’m a rock-star programmer and have a really, really cool idea that’s going to change the world.  For the life of me, I can’t figure out why the idiot investors didn’t bang down my door offering me money for a piece of the action.  That’s OK, but because I didn’t really need investors anyway, because I could build my product while living on red beans and rice and put it out on the web.  Now, I’m dealing with the issue that prospects that fail to see how my product can change their world.  I think I know how to fix it – there are just these three to four more features that the product needs, that I can crank out in the next version…  [Eventually, said technology geek rock-star runs out of money or interest or both]

Business Geek:  I’ve identified an exceptionally compelling market opportunity.  It’s large and growing at a compounded annual rate in the double-digits.  Within this market, I’ve identified a go-to-market strategy that is focused on a discrete group of customers that have a common need.   Now, if I could only find a tech. geek that can build the friggin’ product, I’d be all set.  Not sure why all of these tech morons are out building yet another social book-marking or photo-sharing site.  If I could only convince one of them to get a clue and focus on a real problem that will make real money, I’d be set.  But screw that, I’ll just outsource the thing to a contracting firm working for $12/hour in India.  I have in my head exactly what I need, so it shouldn’t be that hard.  I can the use this prototype to attract investor capital and then hire a real (no adult supervision required) tech geek.  [Eventually, said business geek discovers that he spent about $15-$25k and hast little to show for it].

Clearly, the above are somewhat extreme situations – but not that extreme.  The part that frustrates me is that in most situations, both of these people would have been much better off if they could simply have come together and attacked a meaningful opportunity together.  Based on my experience, the business geeks feel the brunt of the frustration, because they generally have a slightly better appreciation for the situation and have at least made attempts at attracting technology geeks to their cause.

One of the primary issues is that each side is overly dismissive and discounts the value of the other.  Technology Geeks might think that biz geeks just wear suits and peddle software once it’s ready.  Biz Geeks might think that technology geeks are now commoditized and products can just as easily be developed elsewhere.  Both would be wrong.   
Summary of My Point:  The probability of startup success goes up dramatically if you have both a technology geek and a business geek in the founding team.  They generally have critically important and complementary skills.  Even “uber-founders” (with both technology and business skills) are better served by attracting additional co-founders.
Continue Reading

Bootstrap Startups: Spending Money In The Right Places

By admin_bnb admin_bnb on June 15, 2006

For those not familiar with the term “bootstrapped startups”, it generally refers to companies that are started with minimal capital.  One of the great things about software startups is that they lend themselves well to bootstrapping because not a whole lot of money is needed to get started.  This can be contrasted to starting a traditional manufacturing firm which may take a fair amount of capital for infrastructure,  equipment and other “hard” assets.  In the software business, all you really need is a computer, a compiler and conviction.  

A lot has been written about bootstrapping, and I don’t want to repeat that here.  Instead, I’d like to first dispel a common myth in regards to bootstrapping: 

Bootstrapping does not mean being a cheapskate!
Even in a bootstrap startup, it is important to spend some money – just in the right places and at the right times.  Bootstrapping is not about being a cheapskate about everything, squeezing every last penny out of your vendors and partners and otherwise being the nightmare customer for every company you deal with.  At some level, you will begin to realize that markets are somewhat “efficient” and unless you have some special connections or characteristics that cause you to convince people to give up their goods and services at a price well below market rates, you’re essentially going to get what you pay for (in a macro sense).  Of course, there are definitely ways to find the best deal (in terms of value), but this can usually only be taken so far.    And, of course, there are places that you should find the least expensive option, because it doesn’t matter all that much.  More on that later.

Further, I’d like to emphasize something that too many founders forget.  Your Time Has Value!  In fact, one of the scarcest resources (next to cash) in a startup is founder time.  Don’t spend 2 hours to find the cheapest place to buy your computer monitor that costs $400.  

One of the most important skills for a bootstrap startup founder is deciding where to spend the limited resources she has.

In general, there are four things I look at when deciding where to spend money in a bootstrap:
  1. Does It Provide Direct Customer Value?  This measures how much the investment directly impacts what a customer experiences in areas that they care about.  For example, when you improve your product by adding a feature that most of your customers have asked for, this is about as direct a value as you can get.  On the other hand, when you invest in nice office space, this is indirect customer value (the argument being that the nice office space leads to productive teams, which then leads to better products, which then creates customer value).  When choosing between two areas to spend money, choose the one with the most direct value to the customer.

  1. When Will You Get The Payoff?  There are certain things that create value now and others that create value over time.  For example, when you spend money to fix a bug in your product, it creates value now.  When you attend a technical conference, it improves your education, you meet some people, keep up with trends and then someday you reap the value.  When choosing between two areas to spend money, choose the one that gives you the most immediate benefit.

  1. Is It A One Time Expense?  This one is simple.  There are certain expenses that you only incur one time, and others that you incur month after month (like rent).  When comparing two things, make sure you take this into account.  For example, when you invest $250 in getting a professional logo done, this is a one-time cost.  If you spend $100/month more in office rent, this is a recurring cost.  (Looks like my MBA is paying off, because I can now understand complicated concepts like these).  

  1. How Long Will The Payoff Last?  There are certain investments that continue to “pay off” long after you incur them, and others that pay-off only during a short period of time.  In the logo example above, you are deriving value from the logo long after the money is spent (presumably, for the life of the company or until you decide to redesign it).  On the other hand, if you invest in a tradeshow or advertising, you’re likely getting value for a shorter duration of time.

The first item will likely not generate a whole lot of controversy, but the second one, which favors short-term investments over long-term ones likely will.  What about training, and education, and software quality and all those things that we know we should invest in for the long-term health of the company?  If you follow my advice, won’t you be short-changing all of these things and overly focused on the short-term?  Doesn’t this road eventually lead to failure?  Yes, it does.  But, you’re not going to stay on that road forever.

In order to live to see the long-term you have to survive the short-term.  
Put simply, bootstrap startups rarely have the luxury to make long-term investments in the early stages.  The long term investments you do make (such as making sure your product is well designed, your code is maintainable, etc.) will likely not require a cash investment anyways.  These are all fine, and hopefully they’re second nature.  But, things like hiring junior employees and mentoring them, investing in employee training, investing in experimental technologies and playing around with cool stuff that might wind up in your product some day is usually not a good idea.  Of course, all this changes once you actually start making money and get to cash-flow positive.  That is the time to start being more thoughtful about long-term investments.  That’s when you start balancing your decisions, because then, you can afford to.  Until then, it’s a race to the finish line (break-even) with minimal cash.

Summary of my point:  Be a good customer.  Invest your limited resources wisely.  It’s hard to go wrong investing in things that bring immediate value to your customers in areas they care about.  It’s easy to go wrong committing to recurring expenses with long-term payoffs (like fancy office space).
Continue Reading


Let's Connect

And, you can find me on Google+, Twitter, and Linkedin.

Recent Posts

Chat with GrowthBot

It's a bot to help you with your marketing and grow. You can research your competitors, improve your SEO and a lot more. http:/