Superfly Blog

My $0.02 for a Founder who just closed a big round

noreply@blogger.com (bluesnow10) — Sat, 03 Aug 2013 04:48:00 +0000

I've never been in this exact position myself, but I have been the right-hand man (leading marketing, bd, product) several times in the past. So these tidbits are based on what I've seen as an active supporting participant in the process, and from leading roles in driving the company forward thereafter.

1) Plate management. The founders/CEO have a huge expanse of time and even more mindspace that was once filled by fundraising. The blank space fills up so fast, and I think one should be very vigilant about how that time is reallocated, and very conscious of the allocation percentages. I think it's wise to maximize the time you spend in areas where you personally drive the most leverage, and delegate and minimize where you don't. And fast, because so much stuff seems to scream for time after the focus comes off raising capital. This doesn't mean ignoring low-leverage functions altogether, but make sure someone else is handling those so you can optimize your time.

2) Next 3 hires. Should be like a double-espresso shot for the company. Plug the most critical skill gaps and try to raise the overall talent level in doing so. Pay at or above market rate to get the right A players, and make sure they arrive excited. Give them a kickers for KPIs and key company milestones, and poke them quickly if they don't get after it right away. This will have a big positive impact on the metabolism of the company, so to speak. Your incumbent team will be jubilant after a good raise but may feel somewhat entitled, perhaps understandably if they feel they've been taking less than market salary or even deferring salary. Post-funding hires #4, 5, 6 and onward will really throttle the monthly burn and you might feel (understandably) gun-shy about spending big bucks on them. But if those next 3 don't bring palpably bring the energy/horsepower up a notch or three, it's a big missed opportunity.

3) Board meetings. I think it's wise for the founder to take all of the drama out of the board meetings. Talk with the board members often and share a lot with them. I think the best engagement with a board member comes outside the formal board meetings, and not via email. When the board meetings become effectively a formality, used to affirm recent decisions for the record, showcase other leaders on the team, and socialize, then you can avoid some lame stuff: preening between board members, random grenade ideas that are "just something to think about", impromptu "strategy sessions" that take off like unguided missiles, or painful indirect second-guessing of the plans you've worked to rally your team around. All less likely to happen when board members know they've been heard, considered properly, and often.

4) The end of cowboy bookkeeping. Obvious, but bears repeating infinitely. For god's sakes, prepare monthly statements. Know the burn like you know your passwords. Or it will bite you in the arse.

How to have a meeting

noreply@blogger.com (bluesnow10) — Sat, 03 Aug 2013 04:01:00 +0000

I have a simple formula:

1) before mtgs, estimate internally how much I need to talk

2) because I know my personality, I need to adjust intensity of input down, and clarity of input up

3) be kind and make an offering in any event

Good things happen.

Pre-emptive collection of personal data

noreply@blogger.com (bluesnow10) — Wed, 12 Jun 2013 14:29:00 +0000

“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
-Ben Franklin

Turns out that Congress has known how much data was being collected, and the manner in which it is used. Clapper lied to Wyden and knew it, and others in the NSA have denied the existence of these programs or intentionally misconstrued the manner in which they operate.

All of these people are paid to serve us. And in my opinion, the pre-emptive collection of personally identifiable data that the NSA *may* query and analyze if they see fit is in direct conflict with my right to privacy.

The 4th Amendment to the US Constitution:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

I don't want the Patriot Act to be used as an standing warrant served on the whole of our citizenry. If the government needs personal data, they should present sound rationale to a judge *before* they attain it.

I understand the benefits of mining large datasets to determine which individuals warrant more scrutiny, and how that could make us safer. But it also creates a slippery slopes with regard to government access to our personal lives, and that's not a culture or an expectation that I want to live with.

I don't want to remain complicit about this issue.

I plan to contact my elected officials to petition for a more narrow definition of the Patriot Act, and support candidates who advocate for the same. (For what it's worth, the same goes for background checks as a requirement for gun purchases.) I will attend public protests. I care about the issue, and I think our fallen vets and founding fathers would expect this of me.