nPost Blog

Reflections on Defrag 2011

Defrag 2011 wrapped on Thursday.

As in other years, I was happy to be engaged by interesting thinkers, both on stage and in the audience.  Interesting conversations are easily found at Defrag.

Reflecting on the speakers though, here are a few of my personal highlights from the two day affair:

  • I loved James Altucher’s irreverent approach and contrarian thinking.  He laid out how we’ve been giving corporations tacit permission to lie to us via marketing, as long as it entertains us.  They lie to us, and we expect them to lie to us.  However, he’s found great success by simply being honest and direct and implored us to do the same.  Check out his blog, you’ll enjoy it.
  • Opening by playing Zork live on stage to show us the “This space intentionally left blank” message from an inside wall of the house, Paul Kedrosky, really Ctrl-Alt-Deleted our brains by illuminating the fact that we are awash in data – from twitter, emails, etc. and by being constantly connected.  That we always have this background noise of happenings, and that we get comfort from knowing that we aren’t missing something.  Noise is proof that we are alive.  Silence and blankness remind us of death.  Our fear drives us out of our way not to have blankness (e.g.  “This page has been intentionally left blank.”)  He noted that blankness is nothing to fear, and in today’s age perhaps should be embraced more than ever.
  • Sam Arbesman of the Kauffman foundation brought the word mesofact into my vocabulary:  A mesofact is a fact that is slowly evolving over time.  This could be because knowledge about it grows or because previous knowledge has been overturned.  Or, is that really the same thing?  Hmm.
  • Duncan Watts of the Yahoo! Research Group explained how rocket science is in fact pretty easy when compared to trying to understand human behavior problems.  He’s done some fascinating research about how we often shouldn’t rely on our common sense and why.  But without intuition working for us, what do we do?  He outlines several solutions in his new book “Everything Is Obvious: *Once You Know the Answer
  • Adrian Cockcroft provided fantastic insight into how Netflix created and maintains a high performance culture.  I’ve heard Reed Hastings speak before at the Liberty Media NetLeaders Forum and was struck by several out of the ordinary ways that Netflix is operated, and Adrian backed this up.  He spent most of his time telling us what Netflix doesn’t do – policies that stifle innovation:  don’t acquire other companies, don’t high junior staff, don’t impose coding standards, don’t have a monolithic IT department, don’t hire brilliant jerks, etc.  As even he pointed out, it’s probably not possible for large companies to morph themselves into an innovative culture, but start-up companies can take these lessens and not lose their innovation edge.
  • T.A. McCann walked us through the interesting tale of Gist from its beginning to the eventual sale to RIM.  I loved hearing how they found their way to success.  Their story is inspiring.
  • In Brad Feld’s keynote “Resistance is Futile:  The Rise of the Machines” he scares the bejesus out of you by showing how machines will ultimately win.  They don’t have to kill you, just be patient and let you die.  He describes how dual developments are racing toward the same end:  humans being transformed by machines, and machines being anthropomorphized.  Ultimately we will become one.  Relax though.  He doesn’t foresee a post apocalyptic man vs. machine war, but instead a symbiotic and positive future.  Showing these exponential trajectories, he challenged us to think 20 years out to a time within our lifespans that will be markedly different than today.
  • Lastly, Jordan Kretchmer bucks the common wisdom of pivoting early and often, describing many scenarios where it simply doesn’t make sense and why.  Vision is everything.  Don’t compromise it in the face of obstacles.  “Saddle up and fix it!”

These eight speakers weren’t the only ones to challenge our thinking.  Most all provided new insights to the audience.

Year in and year out, Defrag can be relied upon to impart to you a new idea, a new way of thinking, a serendipitous professional contact, and just plain fun.

I literally took over 15 pages of notes because I didn’t want to miss something that will be vital to my professional career or the development of my new start-up.

Kim and Eric, congrats on 5 years of success.  I’m already looking forward to Glue and Defrag next year.

 

Defrag is Different

I was sitting next to a first time Defrag attendee for most of yesterday.  About midway through I asked him how he was liking the conference.

He works with a Fortune 100 company and admitted that he was struggling to figure out what he was going to “bring back to work with him after the conference.”  Having previously worked in large firms, I envisioned that he was going to have to report back his learnings via a conference report.  Ugh.

My sense was that he was expecting more tactical, how-to information.   We’ve all been to these conferences.  I remember going to one of the first XML conferences when that topic was big.  There you would have seen lots of code on the big screen, received free code samples, and learned some really neat techniques to get your work done.

My new friend would have felt very comfortable in this environment.  That conference report would have been a slam dunk.

Yet, this is not what Defrag is all about.  Defrag is about inspiration more than perspiration.  Defrag is about challenging the way you think.  Defrag is about making you uncomfortable.

Defrag was doing it’s job with my new friend, he just hadn’t realized it yet.

You can get tactical and day-to-day at any old conference.  In contrast, Defrag is a TED with a tech and entrepreneurial bias.

It provides you new ideas on corporate strategy, how to avoid mistakes from “common sense”, how to create a corporate culture of innovation, how to become comfortable with blankness and overcome it as a stumbling block.

You will be different for having experienced Defrag because your thinking will be more informed and simply better.

Sort of a lowercase “d” defrag for you brain.

 

 

Let’s Defrag

Layin’ it down for the 5th year now, Defrag 2011 starts off in Monsters of Rock style.

Eric Norlin’s opening remarks are kick started by pumpin’ Ratt, Motely Crue, and other rockers.  Less than 30 minutes later, a key note speaker is writing Android code on the big screen.

Defrag ain’t your father’s conference.

Moving away from a central theme for the show, Defrag instead is focused on bringing in the most interesting speakers with the utmost in left-field ideas.

Tim Bray awakens us to all that we don’t understand about the internet.  Roger Ehrenberg talks to us about the transition of tech company defensibility from algorithms to the creative use of big data.  James Altucher makes us laugh as he reminds us about the power of honesty on the internet.

You’re left thinking about fresh ideas and wondering about these dynamic speakers.

Thinking and wondering… a great start to Defrag 2011.

Gluecon 2011 – Day Two

Day two of Gluecon felt more oriented to the developers attending.  They were a happy lot.

It’s been a long time since I’ve written code, so I spent more time talking with the demo companies than attending breakout sessions, but I did want to note at least one presentation.

Marten Mickos of Eucalyptus gave the morning keynote challenging us to think about macro development trends over the decades.  He posits that we are only at the beginning of the cloud movement, which he predicts will play itself out over the next 10 or more years.  As we transition from the predominant development theme of LAMP to Cloud, our thinking needs to change too.

Where we once though of:

  • code, we now think of APIs
  • scaling, we now think of elasticity,
  • stacks, we now think of ensembles (the group of cloud APIs and services we pull together to make an application)

Marten is a clear thinker and compelling speaker – reason enough to ignore my laptop and listen.  That said, maybe it was the lighting, but seeing his Finnish good looks on stage and hearing the slight accent had me thinking of the Terminator.  Anyone sent from Skynet gets my immediate attention.

On to the demo companies.  Here are some of my favorites:

  • Standing Cloud offers an innovative Platform as a Service (PaaS) solution.  They allow you to quickly create a new image, install many commonly used applications, easily back up the instance, monitor availability, automatically move your images from one cloud platform to another, and more.  Remember the recent AWS failure?  Had you been a Standing Cloud customer, you could have quickly moved your images to a completely different cloud provider.  Yeah, pretty impressive.  Check them out.
  • StatsMix is greasing the skids on collecting, analyzing and presenting internal corporate data.  Think dashboards on the quick.  If you are an internal IT developer and a business manager asks you to start tracking a metric for analysis and reporting, don’t groan.  Instead give StatsMix a try.  In minutes you’ll have solved the problem and look like a hero.
  • BigDoor has made layering game mechanics on your existing site very easy.  At a past company I led, before BigDoor existed, we rolled our own game mechanics and watched a significant improvement in engagement.  BigDoor provides a cloud service that you can expose on your website via a minibar at the bottom of your browser.  They promise to offer widgets soon.  Or, if you have the time and budget you can use their API and customize the game layer on your site.  I wish BigDoor had existed back in 2008.

Glue’s Demo Pavillion of start-up companies was new this year and was a big hit.  15 companies were selected to demo completely free.  What a great benefit to the start-up community.  Thanks to Alcatel-Lucent for sponsoring this welcome addition.

Gluecon was another outstanding Eric Norlin conference.  Didn’t make it?  Take a look at Defrag coming up on November 9th & 10th.

I’ll see you there.

Gluecon 2011 – Day One

If you’ve never been to an Eric Norlin created conference, do yourself a favor and go.

I’ve been fortunate enough to attend several Defrag conferences and decided to check out his Glue conference this year.  What keeps me coming back is that they are so well designed.  They aren’t the huge conferences where you lose yourself and anyone you’re trying to meet.  They aren’t on topics that have been done dozens of times before.  They don’t have speakers who leave you uninspired.

With Glue, Eric has created a community around the white-hot topic of cloud computing and the burgeoning API economy.  Glue introduces you to relevant start-ups, reacquaints you with established companies, and surrounds you with the best thinkers in the space.

Most technologists are familiar with cloud computing and the use of APIs, but what becomes clear at Glue is the vibrant and growing ecosystem that will affect nearly every company out there.  Not having a strategic vision is to your peril.

A few highlights from the first day:

  • Chris Hoff of Cisco gave a rousing opening keynote regarding the weaknesses and disconnects of typical security practices as they relate to cloud computing.  He illuminated why they exist and suggested how they might be solved.  Somehow he managed to use the history of toiletry as an analogy to make his point, which was entertaining and informative in and of itself.
  • Paul Guth of Cloudscaling discussed the complexities of monitoring performance in the cloud, and championed using telemetry that truly reflects the services your users expect.  If a server’s utilization is pegged at 100%, but your user facing metrics are in good shape, you don’t really have a problem.  To those paying attention, he also slyly revealed that he’s a car nut and Formula 1 fan – both good qualities in my book.
  • Dave Asprey of TrendMicro gave a fascinating look at the potential for ambient cloud computing – the use of a volunteer/paid consumer computing devices to create a secure, scalable and very powerful enterprise quality computing resource.  It’s not just for botnets anymore.

Interesting new start-ups demoing their product:

  • ReportGrid offers a cloud-based plugin that gives other SaaS application providers a ready-made analytics and visualization platform.  Instead of an application provider rolling their own, they just use ReportGrid and instantly have Wired Magazine quality infographics. Very cool.
  • LocVox has created a cloud API intended for mobile applications that need military-grade voice authentication.  If you need on-the-fly mobile voice authentication, check them out.
  • Rainmaker has crafted an identity Rosetta stone via cloud API that allows customers to provide a single unique chunk of information about a person and be able to get back a full profile of information about them: phone numbers, email addresses, physical addresses, Twitter IDs, etc.  A bit scary.  I’m glad these guys aren’t evil.

Day two is tomorrow and I’ll report back on other interesting happenings.

Wishing you were here?

 

5 Ways to Avoid Going on Tilt in Startups

From Inspired Startup

tilt

In poker and in business, it’s much easier than you think to go on tilt.  The most dangerous thing about being on tilt is when you don’t realize you are on tilt.  For those of you who don’t even know what tilt is – going on tilt in poker is an emotional state whereby you can no longer make good decisions.  Most often than not, this occurs in poker when you are expected to win a hand and someone gets lucky to beat you for a big payday.  It can also occur if you start winning quite a bit and you start thinking that you are unbeatable (not too dissimilar from Wall Street the past few years).  If you can’t recognize when you are on tilt, you are bound to lose everything you have and seriously regret your decisions when you get your normal state of mind back.  Recognizing when you are on tilt in poker and in business will not only save you dollars in the long-run, it will also keep you positive and sane when things aren’t working in your favor and keep you hungry and humble when things are working really well.

I don’t think I’m a strong enough to avoid going on tilt.  I’ve found the best way to address the issue is to realize when you are in it and have a game plan for addressing it before it happens.  Here are five things that I keep in mind:

1.  Have a spotter.  Someone who will call you out when you make poor or irrational decisions.  For me, just having someone appeal to my sensibilities at the poker table or in business is good enough for me to quickly react and get back on track.  Perhaps, that is your advisory board, a board member, or even a trusted friend.  Who is your spotter?  If you’re in Seattle, go to events like Twiistup and meet like-minded entrepreneurs (full disclosure: I’m an investor and big fan of Twiistup).  Be connected, be in community, be a spotter for others.

2.  When things are going badly and it seems the business can only get worse, get perspective quickly.  Things tend to work in cycles and getting through the negative cycles gets you closer to the positive cycles.  Things are never as bad as they seem, and you need to stay positive.  Be confident, make adjustments if necessary.

3.  Maintain a healthy dose of humility and hunger.  You should always celebrate successes, but don’t get comfortable with success.  There is always reason to be conscious of competitors you haven’t heard of, employees that are looking to leave, customers that are pushing for lower prices, etc.  Having humility and hunger forces you to always be learning, innovating, striving for excellence.

4.  Taking a break.  When you recognize that you are on tilt, walking away will help you make better decisions.  I’ve been in some long, arduous negotiations and sometimes it can make me go nuts and make poor decisions.  Taking some time to re-evaluate and catch my breath have helped me see things more clearly.

5.  Have fun.  I don’t mean to be flippant, but poker is a game, and business in certain respects should be looked at as a game as well.  I’ve seen it too many times that when things get tough, you stress out trying to get even only to dig yourself a bigger hole.  In business, things get tough, you get reclusive, spend more time on the business, and get further into the weeds and not having fun.  Even when things are tough and mentally draining, what are you doing today to get back into the game?  How are you having fun each day?  How are you turning it into a game rather than work?

Generally, I tend to err on the side of being more steady – not getting too high nor too low.  I think it helps me stay sane and positive.  I know of quite a few successful entrepreneurs that are not very steady and get very high and very low.  No matter which personality you are, I think everyone has the propensity to go on tilt – how do you recognize it and how do you address it?  Let me know in the comments below.

Accounting for Startups: Cash-basis or Accrual-basis?

From A Smart Bear: Startups and Marketing for Geeks

You didn’t start a business so that you could learn accounting, but learn you must! Here’s a little help.

QuickBooks lets you switch between two radically different methods of accounting with a click of a button. It’s nice to have accommodating software, but which one should you pick?

quickbooks-accrual-cash-dialog

Never heard of either of these? Time to learn:

“Cash-Basis” accounting means you only count revenue and expenses that you actually have. Things that count: Receiving a check or credit card payment, writing a check to the telephone company, paying your credit card bill. Things that don’t count: Receiving a purchase order, receiving the bill from the telephone company, charging something on a credit card. So it counts only if real, hard cash comes in or goes out. Stuff that hits a bank account.

“Accural-Basis” accounting means you count pledged revenue and expenses. It’s the opposite of cash-basis — what counts are purchase orders (customers pledging to pay you), bills arriving (vendors you’re pledging to pay), and credit card purchases (debt you’re incurring). It doesn’t matter when you pay the bill or when the customer actually sends you a check.

So which should you use?

Which is better for paying taxes?

The IRS allows you to pay taxes with either style of accounting, but you want to use cash-basis.

You have to pay taxes with cash. With cash-basis accounting, you show a profit only if you have excess cash actually in your possession. If it’s in the bank, you can set it aside for taxes. It’s like a dagger through the heart, but you can afford it.

Not so with accrual-basis. If you get a huge purchase order from a new customer, that would show as income; then the IRS wants their 30%, but since the customer hasn’t paid (and you, silly silly, paid your bills on time), you don’t have the cash to pay. Oops!

Cash is king, much of the time.

You’ve probably heard “cash is king:” Real cash (not purchase orders) pays your mortgage, keeps the internet up, and pays employees. Bills can be paid late, but they don’t take “accounts receivable” at the grocery store.

Thus for daily operations, cash-basis wins again. When you’re deciding whether you can afford a new advertisement, whether your payroll check is going to bounce, or whether you can actually take some cash out for yourself this quarter, you have to use cash-basis.

Which is better for understanding how the business is doing?

So far cash-basis has won every time, but when you shift your attention from daily operations to business analysis, cash is not king.

Here are questions best answered using accrual-basis accounting:

  • Am I taking in more money than I spend?  (How close?  How is it changing?)
  • Am I staying inside my own budget?
  • Which expenses are eating my lunch?
  • Are there unexpected expenses?
  • How do I build a budget for the next six months?

Let’s take the first question as an example. Revenue-versus-expenses is important for every business at every stage of its life; no duh. What you’re really comparing is “revenue won” versus “expenses incurred.”

The trouble with cash-basis accounting is that it has nothing to do with when you incurred the expense, but rather when you paid the bill. You might have paid late (on purpose or otherwise). You might have paid early for a discount. The bill might have appeared on weird days so it just so happens that you paid a monthly bill twice in March and skipped April. Same with revenue — at Smart Bear it was common for a purchase order to be paid 5, 30, or even 90 days late. We won the order — the marketing worked, the sale was approved, tech support satisfied the end users — but who knows what in month the revenue would actually hit the bank account.

With the bulleted questions above, these cash-basis variances hide the important story. You need to measure intent, not the chaotic reality of money moving around.

Jason’s Scaredy-Cat Method:
Cash-basis revenue + Accrual-basis expenses

I’m conservative and pessimistic by nature. Yeah, I know, not adjectives you’d normally associate with someone who starts companies instead of holding down a job, but that’s not news.

So at Smart Bear I combined the worst of both worlds to build a safe model of how much money I could afford to lose on experiments. Why this peculiar cash/accrual split?

  • Revenue only counts when the cash is in the bank (cash-basis). I’m uncomfortable incurring expenses when I don’t know when or whether a customer will pay. Collections are uncertain; I won’t depend on a dollar until they can’t take it away from me.
  • Expenses count immediately (accural-basis). I’ve incurred the cost, so for planning purposes I have to pretend that cash is gone. Sure some cash-revenue might appear before the bill is paid, but it might go the other way, causing a temporary cash-poor condition.

This isn’t always an appropriate method. It’s bad for budgeting or forecasting because you’ll underestimate what you can afford, so for example you’ll unnecessarily limit marketing efforts. It’s bad when you’re getting your arms around the “revenue versus expenses” example because you’re not comparing the same kinds of money.

But this method is perfect when pondering an experiment. It’s perfect when you’re wondering if you can afford $5000 in graphic design work, a new $6500 marketing campaign, or whether you can hire someone and have 3 months of runway to discover that was a massive mistake.

It’s right for experiments because with this method you know for certain that even if the new effort is a colossal failure, you really can afford to lose that money.

More advice, more methods

What other methods or advice do you have for the intrepid entrepreneur who just realized she has to know something about accounting? Leave a comment and join the conversation.

Minimum Desirable Product and Lean Startups (slides included!)

From Futuristic Play by @Andrew_Chen

(if you don’t see the slides, go here to Slideshare)


Recent slides for a talk in Steve Blank / Eric Ries’s class on High-Tech Entrepreneurship

Yesterday I had the pleasure of giving a talk at Steve and Eric’s class at Haas on the topic of Minimum Desirable Product – if you haven’t read the original article, it provides some useful context. I included an set of slides above on the topic, updated from my talk yesterday, which you can peruse at your convenience.

After you’re done, you can read my extended remarks below on some stuff I learned along the way. Frankly, any of these could probably be its own blog post but I’ve been feeling lazy lately so you get a couple sentences apiece instead :-)

“Viable” means different things to different people – my usage is meant to be pretty specific
Eric noted during my talk that I use a very narrow definition of “viable” within Minimum Viable Product, which is true. I believe in his usage of it, the focus on viability is actually a conglomeration of IDEO’s concept of desirability, feasibility, and viability. It’s frankly a coincidence that IDEO and the Lean Startup use a common term, though I believe they mostly overlap. I prefer IDEO’s framework because it allows a bit more precision in describing the class of issues you’re concerned about, but frankly there’s a ton of gray area. (Is a low-priced X a desirability thing or a viability thing? Honestly, both.)

Viability-first strategies do work, and may be the right thing for you
Many companies have come and gone that make products that aren’t that great, don’t generate a lot of consumer value, and yet still pull in a lot of money. It’s a strategy that can work, and I’m not arguing the opposite. However, I’m convinced that if your goal is to make a mainstream web property that has daily engagement, starting with the goal of creating lots of user value is probably the way to go. Similarly, if you have a highly transactional business like ecommerce, designing for daily engagement is probably overkill – in that case, reducing your cost of customer acquisition might be the right way to go. So it’s all very situational, and frankly, very personal based on how you want to run your product.

Minimum Desirable Product is just a starting point – you still need to figure everything else out
I also want to note that my message isn’t just to build for any random group of users and then the rest will take care of itself. That’s far too idealistic. Instead, it’s just a starting point for how you think of the problem. Ultimately, all your product ideas still need to be filtered through the lens of whether you can market them, that the market is big enough, and that the technology issues aren’t insurmountable. There was a recent Times interview with Steve Jobs on the iPad that illustrates this perspective:

… surely Apple stands at the intersection of liberal arts, technology and commerce? “Sure, what we do has to make commercial sense,” Jobs concedes, “but it’s never the starting point. We start with the product and the user experience.”

Metrics can be oriented towards user value
I’ve written before on some of the short-comings of using metrics-driven product strategies, such as here and here. An analytics dashboard is ultimately just one tool out of many that help you optimize whatever goal you want to set. If you are very focused on validating your business model and spend all your time tracking metrics such as viral factor, ARPU and conversation rates, then you will make those go higher. If you use your metrics to define user benefits and optimize those (I’ve begun calling this “Metrics of Love”) then you’ll make your value proposition go higher. So depending on your perspective and where you want to start, you’ll end up in different places.

Highly desirable consumer products also have minimalist featuresets
In consumer products, unlike some enterprise products, there’s a big focus on simplicity and immediate value. In some ways, the idea of a “minimum desirable product” is kind of misleading because highly desirable products may also have minimum featuresets also, perhaps even more minimal than an MDP. The important part is that they are the right features, and in fact, it often takes a longer time to simplify your product and boil it down to the core value. I think that’s an interesting paradox that exists in consumer products, and one that I didn’t grasp for a long time.

Learning about your business and learning about your product desirability are different things
One of the interesting points that came up yesterday was that if you view your company as a learning machine to validate your business before you run out of money, then you may see that worldview clash with wanting to deliver maximum product desirability. In many cases, shipping a 50% done feature may teach you a ton about the market, and very quickly you will learn what you need and want to move on. The problem is, it may turn out that going from 50% to 100% in user experience actually continues to increase value to the user, by making things more refined and more compelling, even if you stop learning about your business. This is a hard thing to trade off, and requires situational judgement. As Steve noted during yesterday’s discussion, deciding when you stop and just consolidate and refine what you have, versus packing in new features – well that’s the place where entrepreneurship is an art and not a science :-)

OK! Back to blogging vacation ;-) See you guys later.

Permission Follow-Up

From A Smart Bear: Startups and Marketing for Geeks


This is a guest post by Jarie Bolander, author of Frustration Free Technical Management and a moderator at Answers OnStartups.


the_deal_puzzleIt’d be wonderful if you could run a business without interacting with anyone else — never relying on others to deliver quality work on time and never having to “be salesy” on the phone.

Yeah, but unfortunately you do have to rely on others to respond to emails and phone calls. This reliance can be a constant source of heartburn. So you can either take some Tagamet or learn how to get permission to follow-up with people.

Or both.

You Are Not Alone

Most people dread following up with customers, vendors and even employees. It sounds weird to extroverts, but many of us have performance anxiety that prevents us from following-up even when it’s in our own best interest. You would think that, as social creatures, we would love to interact with our fellow humans, but alas no.

[Editor's Note: I have an irrational fear of the phone. When it rings I'm overcome with a sense of dread. I have to work myself up to placing an out-bound call. It's not anti-social — I love personal and electronic interactions equally — it's something specific and bizarre and, I've since learned, fairly common.]

Our irrational dread stems from the following fears:

  • Fear of rejection: The real reason people don’t follow-up. It’s hard to get rejected by a customer or partner, or even a stranger. If you get permission to follow-up, this rejection is less likely.
  • Don’t want to be annoying: This is the most common excuse people give for not following up. This is why it’s important to set natural follow-up points so you can get permission to call, email or meet.
  • Conflict avoidance: A reason that people don’t call you back. If you set up the interactions so that any potential conflict is reduced, then they will want to talk to you.
  • Awkwardness in asking for something: Asking for the sale or clarification produces a lot of anxiety. The trick to asking for something is to make it the natural next step to your series of follow-ups. That way, it builds up gradually.
  • Trust that what you say will happen: A common problem when someone works with you. No matter who you interact with, you need to follow-up with them if they committed to get something done for you. They might have forgotten or gotten busy.
  • Too busy to worry about it: This is common for the overworked entrepreneur. You should never be too busy to follow-up on things you want done. Think about it. If it’s important, then you need to ensure it gets done. Otherwise why did you start it?

Permission Follow-Up

The most powerful technique to get others to help you achieve your objectives is to create natural follow-up points that make it easy for you to contact someone. Think of this as permission marketing applied to following-up. Permission Follow-up allows you to contact your customer, vendor or employee because you have a pre-established agreement on when it’s appropriate for you to communicate with them. The power of this technique is that you make them want to receive your email, call or meeting.

Or at least expect it. When the other person expects you to contact them, and you do, none of the excuses above are applicable.

Natural Ways to Follow-Up

Okay, I am sure most of you are feeling that Italian veggie sub you had for lunch starting to bubble up in your throat. Relax. There are tons of ways to create natural follow-up points that will make getting that customer meeting, dealing with that difficult vendor or making sure your team releases it’s products on time.

Here’s a bunch of specific methods. Next we’ll apply them in a scenario.

  • Take responsibility to do the follow-up: This is most direct way to get permission to follow-up since you actively took responsibility to contact them. When they agree, then you are set. It’s on your calendar, not theirs.
  • Set mutual deadlines: Deadlines are a great way to set expectations and points of reengagement. This will make whomever you are interacting with expect your next communications especially if the deadline is to give them something.
  • Additional information: Committing to and delivering additional information will setup a natural way for you to interact. When you do follow-up, your contact will expect your call.
  • Specific actions you are responsible for: When you take and complete actions it shows that you value follow-up and that makes others expect this from you.
  • Status updates: Anytime your situation changes or you release a new revision, is a perfect time to give a quick reminder or update.
  • Relevant books and articles: A good way to reengage with people is to send them relevant posts or articles. When you do this, it reminds people who you are and allows you to dialog about other opportunities.
  • In town: Face to face meetings are the most effective ways to follow-up on cold leads or to accelerate a deal. Just being in town makes it easier for your contact to meet you and that might be the one thing that pushes your interactions to the next level.

    [Editor's Note: I have found this to be an especially effective tool. My technique: Whenever you're going to be in a city, call everyone and say "I'm going to be in town anyway, could I just swing by for 15 minutes? Or longer if you want to go over something?" Almost everyone will agree, and there is nothing like real face-to-face interactions, especially in the age of digital arms-length relationships.]
  • Mutual friends: An introduction (or reintroduction) by a mutual friend can be a powerful follow-up method if your interactions have stalled. Your mutual friend can also be an excuse to reconnect.
  • Ask for clarification: When you ask for clarification, it shows that you are striving for understanding and if done after an interaction, reminds your contact of what you talked about.
  • Time has passed: Sometimes the passage of time can be used to your advantage as long as you have another entry point (like a status update or a mutual friend). In some cases, just sending a “checking in” email or note, can be all that is needed to follow up with other interactions.

These natural follow-up points must be injected into an interaction at the appropriate time — when the interaction needs an inflection point or as a way to tie up some loose ends. Sometimes, it may take several different methods since people respond differently to following-up. (Most have the same anxieties as you do!)

Scenario: A Customer Interaction

Let’s put this into action.

Perhaps the most important customer interaction is your first meeting. It sets the tone for everything to come and is ripe for planting those follow-up seeds. Here’s how it might go:

You: Beth, thanks for meeting with us. We were introduced to you via Matt over at KoolTech. Matt uses our Wizbang SaaS client and thought you guys might find it useful too.

Beth: Yeah, Matt told me about you guys. It sounds like you might have something that will work for us.

You: Excellent. Matt’s a great guy and we were excited to have Matt recommend we get together. Did you get the information I sent you about Wizbang?

Beth: Actually, no I didn’t. However, I did read you site and think I have a good idea what you do.

You: Why don’t I reconfirm your email and send it on to you?

Beth: Sure, it’s ….

You: I will send this out when I get back to the office. Does that work for you?

Beth: Yeah.

You: Excellent. How about we show you our demo?

Beth: Thought you’d never ask.

Demo Ensues. Ooo’s, ahh’s

Beth: Great demo. It looks like just what we need. Can you send me a quote? Budgets are tight.

You: Sure. We can also set up a guest account for you and your team to try it out.

Beth: That will work.

You: Why don’t you give me their contact info and I will set them up

You: Beth, thanks for your time. We really enjoyed meeting you.

Beth: As did I.

You: I captured a couple of next-actions for me. They are …. Do you agree?

Beth: That’s great, just so long as I don’t have to do anything else.

You: Wonderful. I will get back to you in a week with that quote. Will that work for you?

Beth: Yeah, that works.

You: In the mean time, I will setup some guest accounts and follow-up with you to see how it’s going.

Beth: Sounds good. Talk to you soon.

The above interaction had several follow-up seeds planted (in bold) that are ready to be harvested. All of the responsibilities are on your shoulders, and your customer gave you permission to follow-up. This means that they will be expecting your call or email.

So what happens when they don’t return your calls or email? Permission follow-up handles this as well. Not only are you planting follow-up actions with your direct contact, but with others they work with, like what happened above (setting up a guest account for other team members). Doing this allows you to have several entry points. Taken in combination, these entry points give you a better shot at getting your call or email returned.

Go Ahead, Give it a Shot

Practicing permission follow-up does feel awkward. Just stick with it. Over time, permission follow-up will produce results and you will get more comfortable with it. The simple fact is that other people usually don’t place as high a priority on these things as you do, and you have to lean on them to get things done.

It’s not about leaning hard or being an asshole. It’s just about getting permission to follow up.

What tips do you have for following up with customers or vendors? Would any of the techniques here bother you? Leave a comment and join the conversation.

Twitter and third-party Twitter developers

From cdixon.org

I can’t remember the last time the tech world was so interesting. First, innovation is at an all time high.  Apple, Google, Facebook, Twitter and even Microsoft (in the non-monopoly divisions) are making truly exciting products. Second, since the battles are between platforms, the strategic issues are complex, involving complementary network effects.

Twitter’s moves this week were particular interesting.  A lot of third-party developers were unhappy. I think this is mainly a result of Twitter having sent mixed signals over the past few years. Twitter’s move into complementary areas was entirely predictable – it happens with every platform provider. The real problem is that somehow Twitter had convinced the world they were going to “let a thousand flowers bloom” – as if they were a non-profit out to save the world, or that they would invent some fantastic new business model that didn’t encroach on third-party developers. This week Twitter finally started acting like what it is: a well-financed company run by smart capitalists.

This mixed signaling has been exacerbated by the fact that Twitter has yet to figure out a business model (they sold data to Microsoft & Google but this is likely just one-time R&D purchases). Maybe Twitter thinks they know what their business model is and maybe they’ll even announce it soon. But whatever they think or announce will only truly be their business model when and if it delivers on their multi-billion dollar aspirations. It will likely be at least a year or two before that happens.

Normally, when third parties try to predict whether their products will be subsumed by a platform, the question boils down to whether their products will be strategic to the platform. When the platform has an established business model, this analysis is fairly straightforward (for example, here is my strategic analysis of Google’s platform).  If you make games for the iPhone, you are pretty certain Apple will take their 30% cut and leave you alone. Similarly, if you are a content website relying on SEO and Google Adsense you can be pretty confident Google will leave you alone. Until Twitter has a successful business model, they can’t have a consistent strategy and third parties should expect erratic behavior and even complete and sudden shifts in strategy.

So what might Twitter’s business model eventually be?  I expect that Twitter search will monetize poorly because most searches on Twitter don’t have purchasing intent.  Twitter’s move into mobile clients and hints about a more engaging website suggest they may be trying to mimic Facebook’s display ad model. (Facebook’s ad growth is being driven largely by companies like Zynga who are in turn monetizing users with social games and virtual goods.  Hence it’s no surprise that a Twitter investor is suggesting that developers create social games instead of “filling holes” with URL shorteners etc.) Facebook’s model depends on owning “eyeballs,” which is entirely contradictory to the pure API model Twitter has promoted thus far.  So if Twitter continues in this direction expect a lot of angst among third-party developers.

Hopefully Twitter “fills holes” through acquisitions instead of internal development. Twitter was a hugely clever invention and has grown its user base at a staggering rate, but on the product development front has been underwhelming.  Buying Tweetie seemed to be a tacit acknowledgement of this weakness and an attempt to rectify it. Acquisitions also have the benefit of sending a positive signal to developers since least some of them are embraced and not just replaced.

What’s Facebook doing during all of this?  Last year, Facebook seemed to be frantically copying Twitter – defaulting a lot of information to public, creating a canonical namespace, etc. Now that Twitter seems to be mimicing Facebook, Facebook’s best move is probably just to sit back and watch the Twitter ecosystem fight amongst itself.  As Facebooker Ivan Kirigin tweeted yesterday: “I suppose when your competition is making huge mistakes, you should just stfu.”

Disclosure: As with everything I write, I have a ton of conflicts of interest, some of which are listed here.

hosting