Showing posts tagged entrepreneurship

Staying Sharp

When I first started working for myself, the most common question people would ask me was something along the lines of “how do you stay motivated?”. If put in my position, it seemed that most people expected they would be lounging in PJ’s until noon. In their minds, once you remove yourself from a position of being managed to becoming your own boss, there’s no reason to work hard. I mean, there aren’t consequences for under-performing without a manager or performance review waiting for you, right?

This couldn’t be further from the truth. That is, for me it’s quite the opposite of reality, and I imagine the same is true for anyone who expects to be working for themselves for more than say, five minutes. But I can understand where the expectation is coming from. The real question, I think, is “how do you stay sharp without someone else managing and shaping your career”? If you are your own boss, who pushes you to become better and better? The answer is, well, you!

From where I’m sitting there are two basic motivations for those of us who are self-managed. First, the consequences of failure actually become greater when you begin working for yourself. In a traditional job you work hard, you hope someone notices, if you’re doing well you move up. That’s the expected path. If you screw up or get lazy, well then maybe you don’t get a promotion this time around, or someone scolds you in a performance review. But there’s always someone there to pick up the slack. Your manager is the one who’s ultimately responsible for your team’s performance and no one can hold you individually accountable for the successes or failures of the company.

When working for yourself, the failure falls to you, and you alone. That pressure in itself becomes a major motivator. Particularly, if you are the type of person who has pride in your work ethic and reputation, which is true for many self-managed people. If you don’t set the example, push yourself, do your best work, your team will fail. That’s a near certainty. For me, I just couldn’t let that happen. Not after risking so much and coming so far. I’d say the majority of start up founders are probably workaholics for exactly that reason (although I don’t condone overworking, but that’s another topic). If you get lazy, you’re only letting yourself down. You’re risking your own job and lively hood. If you’re bootstrapped (like my company), you’re throwing away all the equity you worked to build. But mostly, there’s just that fear of being seen as a failure. Without anyone else to blame, your company’s failure becomes very obviously yours. And everyone would see that.

The second motivational component comes not from fear, but from passion. A lot of people end up in a self-managed position as a direct result of pursuing their passions. That’s true for me. So I have this deep protective instinct toward my job. I want to preserve the ability to be my own boss, and do what I love every single day. I want it to last. I want to keep loving my job for years to come. That’s what motivates me to stay sharp. I never want to stop getting better, because I never want to wake up and have the fun job carpet suddenly pulled out from under me. You can’t achieve greatness by lounging in your PJ’s and hardly working. That just isn’t going to happen. For me, that desire to preserve the job I love is motivation in itself.

Certainly there are other factors at play like competitiveness and financial security, etc. I don’t mean to say those are the only two motivations. And what’s really fascinating to me now, is thinking about how much more the larger, more traditional companies might achieve if even half of their workforce approached their jobs the way self-managed entrepreneurs do. We all need to stay sharp and keep pushing forward, but the results are so much more powerful when that push comes from within.

Nobody Has It All Figured Out

I wish I had known this when trying to make the difficult decision of going “indie” three years ago. I knew that no one was perfect, but I went through patches of insecurity where I imagined that every other entrepreneur out there in the world knew more about what it takes to be successful than I did, and that as a result I was not ready. Now I can tell you with confidence that this is completely false.

Nobody has it all figured out. Sure, some people have a lot more experience and wisdom to guide them. They’ve already been at the start of their first business or two, and learned what not to do. But, that doesn’t mean that they know all the answers and know precisely what to do in any situation. I encounter people all the time who have been in this a lot longer than I have, and let me tell you, they still have questions. They still stay up at night wondering about things, obsessing over things. They still ask questions about accounting, legal matters, hiring, which hardware to purchase, etc.

Once I started to realize this, I was actually shocked. I had all this time seen these entrepreneurs walking around so confident, with years of success under their belts, and thought “what is it going to take to be like that?”. I had no idea that they could feel just as clueless as I do sometimes.

What it Takes

I’ve noticed that great entrepreneurs, and I would argue all people who are seen as leaders in the workplace, have a few things in common.

First, they’re confident enough to face a problem that they’ve never seen before and potentially aren’t equipped to handle head on. Why? Well, because they have to be! This happens on an almost daily basis. (I’ve written about this essential confidence before.)

Secondly, they realize that you’re never actually done learning. There are always areas for improvement, new skills to pick up, and tricks that you can learn from others. They understand that standing still is a recipe for disaster. They handle criticism well and learn from it, always maintaining a positive attitude.

Finally, they possess an amazing work ethic. People tend to equate entrepreneurship with crazy hours and working weekends, and that has always frustrated me. It’s some start ups’ culture, sure, but it’s really not about the amount of time. It’s about the discipline, the dedication, the passion, and the giving it your all attitude that really defines it for me.

I guess what I’m trying to say is this: If you’re smart, confident, and possess a strong work ethic, you can be an entrepreneur. There’s no magic potion. There’s no state of knowing it all and having all the answers. You just have to dive in head first.

Work/Life Balance is a Joke

Not the actual concept of achieving a balance of work and life, of course, that you can do. But the phrase “work/life balance” has been thrown around so much by companies that don’t have a clue what it means, touting their excellent work/life balance and benefits, that it has become virtually meaningless.

A company at which employees must fit their sick days and personal time into a set number of days in a year does not have a work/life balance. A company at which employees must request time off and hope that they are permitted to go on vacation during the time they have selected, does not have a work/life balance. A company where employees cannot easily rearrange their work schedule when something comes up at home, without feeling pressure from their manager or team, does not have a work/life balance. A company at which employees feel guilty about taking time away does not have a work/life balance. A company at which employees who wake up ill still consider toughing it out to go into the office, say it with me, does not have a work/life balance! The definition of achieving balance implies that there is equality and in all of these situations, work clearly has the upper hand. The scale is tipped in favor of the job, and the personal life must always accommodate the job.

I think we have been entering a new era, with tech leading the way, where the question is no longer how good is the work/life balance at a company, but rather how people-centric is it there. At a company that is people-centric, managers recognize that their people are all they really have, and thus treat them very well. Vacation days are available when desired, and possibly not even tracked (this is something we do at our company). The benefits are actually beneficial, with good health coverage, retirement, profit-sharing, and more. The dress code (or lack thereof) is relaxed. People-centric companies are extremely flexible because they understand that in order to attract the best people, you have to be willing to treat them like human beings, not tools.

Personal mentality also comes into play here for sure. We as a society are workaholics which can be a very unhealthy approach to life. I love my work, sometimes it’s hard to stop working at the end of the day, but we all need a line in the sand. There has to be a point at which you say “I can get to this another day, I’m going to make time for my friends and family now.” Those of use who set the example by making time for our personal lives frequently will encourage others around us to do the same. Then perhaps people-centric philosophies will become the norm.

Is your company people-centric? If not, perhaps it’s time for a change!

What Business School Wouldn’t Have Taught Me…

Before I begin, I would just like to say, I don’t in any way think that business school is useless for everyone. I certainly don’t think I know everything there is to know about business either. I simply don’t believe that business school is a pre-requisite, or even a useful background, for running a successful technology company.

There was a great article published in Business Insider back in July, written by an MBA no less, that had a few excellent points on this topic:

  • The knowledge you need to run an innovative tech company does not come from an old case study, as fascinating as they may be.

MBA programs are focused on case studies. They teach people to follow frameworks, use known approaches, and walk down the career paths of those before them. The best innovators, however, are the ones that do not follow the rules of the past and have the spark to develop their own ideas.

  • MBA programs are about strategizing, building a technology business is about executing.

In the real world of running a startup, the strategy and “analysis” is 10% of the work (some will argue that it’s 1%) and execution takes up the other 90% or more. It’s the action that counts at the end of the day. MBA programs have real business experiences tossed throughout them, but each class is ultimately a case in analysis. You look at business problems, think about how to solve them, identify key factors, and present your thoughts. You put together a presentation, a document, or a spreadsheet. But you never actually solve the issue.

These two points sum up a lot of my thoughts on why an MBA is not necessary. If you want to analyze business case studies and you are in technology, just take a look at the companies around you. Analyze what they did that worked and didn’t work. Or read the book Founders at Work, an excellent compilation of interviews with the most successful tech entrepreneurs of our time. But read the cases, pay attention, and then come up with your own ideas. Ultimately, you might borrow one or two ideas here and there from the community of smart people around you, but a lot of what makes technology companies a success comes from breaking the rules.

Case studies are interesting, especially if you like history, but I can’t remember the last time I solved a problem that I could have read about. Let me give you a few examples of issues or questions that have been posed to me in the last week:

  • Where to purchase a Fidelity Bond for the company’s 401(k)
  • How to fix a software crash that no one could re-produce
  • The best way to prioritize a list of upcoming software features for development
  • How to handle a specific customer issue
  • A good name for a new company blog

None of theses issues required strategizing, theories, or referring to history. In fact, the majority of them involved on the spot problem solving and analytical thinking, something I learned in engineering school. Every situation is different and there’s simply no way that even if you found someone who had written about the exact issue you are experiencing at that moment, it would be guaranteed to work in your case. It might work, or it might be the wrong solution.

In my company we use a lot of team brainstorming on the spot to solve tricky problems and it works every time. Together, we come up with a better solution that is more in line with our company’s values and goals than any case or book could have provided us. So I guess what I’m trying to say is, technology is about constant problem solving. I’ve recently started describing software development as creative problem solving, because that’s really what it boils down to. I truly believe that the best way to solve a hard problem is to put a bunch of smart people together and brainstorm. Furthermore, the best way to build a successful technology product or services company, is to execute. Not to theorize.

Business school could never predict the crazy things that go on in the world of technology. However, it’s the backward seeking and theoretical/strategy focus that makes it in a lot of ways irrelevant. Innovation is all about new, original ideas and hard core creative problem solving. That’s what we’ve always done in technology, and it’s not something that they teach you in school.

Honestly, I don’t think any academic program can really keep up with this industry, and that includes the computer science and engineering programs. Academia is great, but to be successful in this technology world, you need to get your hands dirty to learn.