A podcast about the design, development, and business of great software. Each week thoughtbot's Chad Pytel is joined by the people who build and nurture the products we love.
Sean O'Connor is the Director of Engineering at Datadog. Datadog is the essential monitoring and security platform for cloud applications. Sean discusses his transition from an individual contributor to management and shares why he chose Datadog, emphasizing the appeal of high-scale problems and the real business nature of the company. They delve into the importance of performance management and observability and cover the cultural and technical challenges Sean faces in managing a diverse, geographically spread team, and discuss the transition at Datadog from a decentralized model to more centralized platforms, the corresponding changes in both technical strategies and people management, and what excites him about Datadog's future, including the integration of security offerings into developers' daily experiences, and the evolution of Kubernetes and internal build and release tooling. __ Datadog (https://www.datadoghq.com/) Follow Datadog on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/datadog/), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/datadoghq/), Youtube (https://www.youtube.com/user/DatadogHQ), or Twitter (https://twitter.com/datadoghq). Follow Sean O'Connor on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/seanoc/) or Twitter (https://twitter.com/theSeanOC). Visit his website at seanoc.com (https://seanoc.com/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. WILL: And I'm your other host, Will Larry. And with us today is Sean O'Connor. He is the Director of Engineering at Datadog. Datadog is the essential monitoring and security platform for cloud applications. Sean, thank you for joining us. SEAN: Hi, thanks for having me on. VICTORIA: Yeah, I'm super excited to get to talking with you about everything cloud, and DevOps, and engineering. But why don't we first start with just a conversation about what's going on in your life? Is there any exciting personal moment coming up for you soon? SEAN: Yeah, my wife and I are expecting our first kiddo in the next few weeks, so getting us prepared for that as we can and trying to get as much sleep as we can. [laughs] WILL: Get as much sleep as you can now, so...[laughs] I have a question around that. When you first found out that you're going to be a dad, what was your feeling? Because I remember the feeling that I had; it was a mixed reaction of just everything. So, I just wanted to see what was your reaction whenever you found out that you're going to be a dad for the first time. SEAN: Yeah, I was pretty excited. My wife and I had been kind of trying for this for a little while. We're both kind of at the older end for new parents in our late 30s. So, yeah, excited but definitely, I don't know, maybe a certain amount of, I don't know about fear but, you know, maybe just concerned with change and how different life will be, but mostly excitement and happiness. [laughs] WILL: Yeah, I remember the excitement and happiness. But I also remember, like, wait, I don't know exactly what to do in this situation. And what about the situations that I have no idea about and things like that? So, I will tell you, kids are resilient. You're going to do great as a dad. [laughter] SEAN: Yep. Yeah, definitely; I think I feel much more comfortable about the idea of being a parent now than I may have been in my 20s. But yeah, definitely, the idea of being responsible for and raising a whole other human is intimidating. [laughs] VICTORIA: I think the fact that you're worried about it is a good sign [laughs], right? SEAN: I hope so. [laughs] VICTORIA: Like, you understand that it's difficult. You're going to be a great parent just by the fact that you understand it's difficult and there's a lot of work ahead. So, I think I'm really excited for you. And I'm glad we get to talk to you at this point because probably when the episode comes out, you'll be able to listen to it with your new baby in hand. So... WILL: Good. Excited for it. [laughs] VICTORIA: Yeah, love that. Well, great. Well, why don't you tell me a little bit more about your other background, your professional background? What brought you to the role you're into today? SEAN: Yeah. Well, like we mentioned in the beginning; currently, I'm a Director of Engineering at Datadog. I run our computing cloud team. It's responsible for all of our Kubernetes infrastructure, as well as kind of all the tooling for dealing with the cloud providers that we run on and as well as kind of [inaudible 02:54] crypto infrastructure. Within Datadog, I've always been in management roles though I've kind of bounced around. I've been here for about five and a half years. So, before this, I was running a data store infrastructure team. Before that, when I first came in, I was running the APM product team, kind of bounced around between product and infra. And that's kind of, I guess, been a lot of the story of much of my career is wearing lots of different hats and kind of bouncing around between kind of infrastructure-focused roles and product-focused roles. So, before this, I was running the back-end engineering and DevOps teams at Bitly. So, I was there for about five and a half years, started there originally as a software engineer. And before that, a lot of early-stage startups and consulting doing whatever needed doing, and getting to learn about lots of different kind of industries and domains, which is always fun. [laughs] VICTORIA: That's great. So, you had that broad range of experience coming from all different areas of operations in my mind, which is, like, security and infrastructure, and now working your way into a management position. What was the challenge for you in making that switch from being such a strong individual contributor into an effective manager? SEAN: Sure. You know, I think certainly there is a lot of kind of the classic challenges of learning to let go but still staying involved, right? You know, as a manager, if you're working on critical path tasks hands-on yourself, that's probably not a good sign. [laughs] On the other hand, if you come, like, completely divorced from what your team is doing, especially as, like, a team lead level kind of manager, you know, that's not great either. So, figuring that balancing act definitely was a bit tricky for me. Similarly, I think time management and learning to accept that, especially as you get into, like, further steps along in your career that, like, you know, it's not even a question of keeping all the balls in the air, but more figuring out, like, what balls are made out of rubber and which ones are made out of glass, and maybe keeping those ones in the air. [laughs] So, just a lot of those kind of, like, you know, prioritization and figuring out, like, what the right level of involvement and context is, is definitely the eternal learning, I think, for me. [laughs] WILL: I remember whenever I was looking to change jobs, kind of my mindset was I wanted to work at thoughtbot more because of the values. And I wanted to learn and challenge myself and things like that. And it was so much more, but those were some of the main items that I wanted to experience in my next job. So, when you changed, and you went from Bitly to Datadog, what was that thing that made you say, I want to join Datadog? SEAN: Yeah, that was definitely an interesting job search and transition. So, at that point in time, I was living in New York. I was looking to stay in New York. So, I was kind of talking to a bunch of different companies. Both from personal experience and from talking to some friends, I wasn't super interested in looking at, like, working at mostly, like, the super big, you know, Google, Amazon, Meta type of companies. But also, having done, like, super early stage, you know, like, seed, series A type of companies, having played that game, I wasn't in a place in my life to do that either. [laughs] So, I was looking kind of in between that space. So, this would have been in 2018. So, I was talking to a lot of, like, series A and series B-type companies. And most of them were, like, real businesses. [laughs] Like, they may not be profitable yet, but, like, they had a very clear idea of how they would get there and, like, what that would look like. And so, that was pleasant compared to some past points in my career. But a lot of them, you know, I was effectively doing, like, automation of human processes, which is important. It has value. But it means that, like, realistically, this company will never have more than 50 servers. And when I worked at Bitly, I did have a taste for kind of working in those high-scale, high-availability type environments. So, Datadog initially was appealing because it kind of checked all those boxes of, you know, very high-scale problems, high availability needs, a very real business. [laughs] This is before Datadog had gone public. And then, as I started to talk to them and got to know them, I also really liked a lot of kind of the culture and all the people I interacted with. So, it became a very clear choice very quickly as that process moved along. VICTORIA: Yeah, a very real business. Datadog is one of the Gartner's Magic leaders for APM and observability in the industry. And I understand you're also one of the larger SaaS solutions running Kubernetes, right? SEAN: Yep. Yeah, at this point. Five years ago, that story was maybe a little bit different. [laughs] But yeah, no, no, we definitely have a pretty substantial Kubernetes suite that we run everything on top of. And we get the blessings and curses of we get some really cool problems to work on, but there's also a lot of problems that we come across that when we talk to kind of peers in the industry about kind of how they're trying to solve them, they don't have answers yet either. [laughs] So, we get to kind of figure out a lot of that kind of early discovery games. [laughs] VICTORIA: Yeah. I like how exciting and growing this industry is around kind of your compute and monitoring the performance of your applications. I wonder if you could kind of speak to our audience a little bit, who may not have a big technical background, about just why it's important to think about performance management and observability early on in your application. SEAN: There can be a few pieces there. One of the bigger ones, I think, is thinking about that kind of early and getting used to working with that kind of tooling early in a project or a product. I think it has an analogous effect to, like, thinking about, like, compounding interest in, like, a savings account or investing or something like that. In that, by having those tools available early on and having that visibility available early on, you can really both initially get a lot of value and just kind of understanding kind of what's happening with your system and very quickly troubleshoot problems and make sure things are running efficiently. But then that can help get to a place where you get to that, like, flywheel effect as you're kind of building your product of, as you're able to solve things quickly, that means you have more time to invest in other parts of the product, and so on and so forth. So, yeah, it's one of those things where kind of the earlier you can get started on that, the more that benefit gets amplified over time. And thankfully, with Datadog and other offerings like that now, you can get started with that relatively quickly, right? You're not having to necessarily make the choice of, like, oh, can I justify spending a week, a month, whatever, setting up all my own infrastructure for this, as opposed to, you know, plugging in a credit card and getting going right away? And not necessarily starting with everything from day zero but getting started with something and then being able to build on that definitely can be a worthwhile trade-off. [laughs] VICTORIA: That makes sense. And I'm curious your perspective, Will, as a developer on our Lift Off team, which is really about the services around that time when you want to start taking it really seriously. Like, you've built an app [laughs]. You know it's a viable product, and there's a market for it. And just, like, how you think about observability when you're doing your app building. WILL: The approach I really take is, like, what is the end goal? I'm currently on a project right now that we came in later than normal. We're trying to work through that. SEAN: I haven't come from, you know, that kind of consulting and professional services and support kind of place. I'm curious about, like, what, if any, differences or experiences do you have, like, in that context of, like, how do you use your observability tools or, like, what value they have as opposed to maybe more, like, straight product development? VICTORIA: Right. So, we recently partnered with, you know, our platform engineering team worked with the Lift Off team to create a product from scratch. And we built in observability tools with Prometheus, and Grafana, and Sentry so that the developers could instrument their app and build metrics around the performance in the way they expected the application to work so that when it goes live and meets real users, they're confident their users are able to actually use the app with a general acceptable level of latency and other things that are really key to the functionality of the app. And so, I think that the interesting part was, with the founders who don't have a background in IT operations or application monitoring and performance, it sort of makes sense. But it's still maybe a stretch to really see the full value of that, especially when you're just trying to get the app out the door. SEAN: Nice. VICTORIA: [chuckles] That's my answer. What kind of challenges do you have in your role managing this large team in a very competitive company, running a ton of Kubernetes clusters? [laughs] What's your challenges in your director of engineering role there? SEAN: You know, it's definitely a mix of kind of, like, technical or strategic challenges there, as well as people challenges. On the technical and strategic side, the interesting thing for our team right now is we're in the middle of a very interesting transition. Still, today, the teams at Datadog work in very much a 'You build it, you run it' kind of model, right? So, teams working on user-facing features in addition to, like, you know, designing those features and writing the code for that, they're responsible for deploying that code, offering the services that code runs within, being on call for that, so on and so forth. And until relatively recently, that ownership was very intense to the point where some teams maybe even had their own build and release processes. They were running their own data stores. And, like, that was very valuable for much of our history because that let those teams to be very agile and not have to worry about, like, convincing the entire company to change if they needed to make some kind of change. But as we've grown and as, you know, we've kind of taken on a lot more complexity in our environment from, you know, running across more providers, running across more regions, taking on more of regulatory concerns, to kind of the viability of running everything entirely [inaudible 12:13] for those product teams, it has become much harder. [laughs] You start to see a transition where previously the infrastructure teams were much more acting as subject matter experts and consultants to, now, we're increasingly offering more centralized platforms and offerings that can offload a lot of that kind of complexity and the stuff that isn't the core of what the other product-focused teams are trying to do. And so, as we go through that change, it means internally, a lot of our teams, and how we think about our roles, and how we go about doing our work, changes from, like, a very, you know, traditional reliability type one on one consultation and advising type role to effectively internal product development and internal platform development. So, that's a pretty big both mindset and practice shift. [laughs] So, that's one that we're kind of evolving our way through. And, of course, as what happens to kind of things, like, you still have to do all the old stuff while you're doing the new thing. [laughs] You don't get to just stop and just do the new thing. So, that's been an interesting kind of journey and one that we're always kind of figuring out as we go. That is a lot of kind of what I focus on. You know, people wise, you know, we have an interesting aim of...There's about 40 people in my org. They are spread across EMEA and North America with kind of, let's say, hubs in New York and Paris. So, with that, you know, you have a pretty significant time zone difference and some non-trivial cultural differences. [laughs] And so, you know, making sure that everybody is still able to kind of work efficiently, and communicate effectively, and collaborate effectively, while still working within all those constraints is always an ongoing challenge. [laughs] WILL: Yeah, you mentioned the different cultures, the different types of employees you have, and everyone is not the same. And there's so many cultures, so many...whatever people are going through, you as a leader, how do you navigate through that? Like, how do you constantly challenge yourself to be a better leader, knowing that not everyone can be managed the same way, that there's just so much diversity, probably even in your company among your employees? SEAN: I think a lot of it starts from a place of listening and paying attention to kind of just see where people are happy, where they feel like they have unmet needs. As an example, I moved from that last kind of data store-focused team to this computing cloud team last November. And so, as part of that move, probably for the first two or three months that I was in the role, I wasn't particularly driving much in the way of changes or setting much of a vision beyond what the team already had, just because as the new person coming in, it's usually kind of hard to have a lot of credibility and/or even just have the idea of, like, you know, like you're saying, like, what different people are looking for, or what they need, how they will respond best. I just spend a lot of time just talking to people, getting to know the team, building those relationships, getting to know those people, getting to know those groups. And then, from there, figuring out, you know, both where the kind of the high priority areas where change or investment is needed. But then also figuring out, yeah, kind of based on all that, what's the right way to go about that with the different groups? Because yeah, it's definitely isn't a one size fits all solution. But for me, it's always kind of starting from a place of listening and understanding and using that to develop, I guess, empathy for the people involved and understanding their perspectives and then figuring it out from there. I imagine–I don't know, but I imagine thoughtbot's a pretty distributed company. How do you all kind of think about some of those challenges of just navigating people coming from very different contexts? WILL: Yeah, I was going to ask Victoria that because Victoria is one of the leaders of our team here at thoughtbot. So, Victoria, what are your thoughts on it? VICTORIA: I have also one of the most distributed teams at thoughtbot because we do offer 24/7 support to some clients. And we cover time zones from the Pacific through West Africa. So, we just try to create a lot of opportunities for people to engage, whether it's remotely, especially offering a lot of virtual engagement and social engagement remotely. But then also, offering some in-person, whether it's a company in-person event, or encouraging people to engage with their local community and trying to find conferences, meetups, events that are relevant to us as a business, and a great opportunity for them to go and get some in-person interaction. So, I think then encouraging them to bring those ideas back. And, of course, thoughtbot is known for having just incredible remote async communication happening all the time. It's actually almost a little oppressive to keep up with, to be honest, [laughs] but I love it. There's just a lot of...there's GitHub issues. There's Slack communications. There's, like, open messages. And people are really encouraged to contribute to the conversation and bring up any idea and any problem they're having, and actively add to and modify our company policies and procedures so that we can do the best work with each other and know how to work with each other, and to put out the best products. I think that's key to having that conversation, especially for a company that's as big as Datadog and has so many clients, and has become such a leader in this metrics area. Being able to listen within your company and to your clients is probably going to set you up for success for any, like, tech leadership role [laughs]. I'm curious, what are you most excited about now that you've been in the role for a little while? You've heard from a lot of people within the company. Can you share anything in your direction in the next six months or a year that you're super excited about? SEAN: So, there's usually kind of probably two sides to that question of kind of, like, from a product and business standpoint and from an internal infrastructure standpoint, given that's where my day-to-day focus is. You know, on the product side, one thing that's been definitely interesting to watch in my time at Datadog is we really made the transition from kind of, like, a point solution type product to much more of a platform. For context, when I joined Datadog, I think logs had just gone GA, and APM was in beta, I think. So, we were just starting to figure out, like, how we expand beyond the initial infrastructure metrics product. And, obviously, at this point, now we have a whole, you know, suite of offerings. And so, kind of the opportunities that come with that, as far as both different spaces that we can jump into, and kind of the value that we can provide by having all those different capabilities play together really nicely, is exciting and is cool. Like, you know, one of the things that definitely lit an interesting light bulb for me was talking to some of the folks working on our newer security offerings and them talking about how, obviously, you want to meet, you know, your normal requirements in that space, so being able to provide the visibility that, you know, security teams are looking for there. But also, figuring out how we integrate that information into your developers' everyday experience so that they can have more ownership over that aspect of the systems that they're building and make everybody's job easier and more efficient, right? Instead of having, you know, the nightmare spreadsheet whenever a CVE comes out and having some poor TPM chase half the company to get their libraries updated, you know, being able to make that visible in the product where people are doing their work every day, you know, things like that are always kind of exciting opportunities. On the internal side, we're starting to think about, like, what the next major evolution of our kind of Kubernetes and kind of internal build and release tooling looks like. Today, a lot of kind of how teams interact with our Kubernetes infrastructure is still pretty raw. Like, they're working directly with specific Kubernetes clusters, and they are exposed to all the individual Kubernetes primitives, which is very powerful, but it's also a pretty steep learning curve. [laughs] And for a lot of teams, it ends up meaning that there's lots of, you know, knobs that they have to know what they do. But at the end of the day, like, they're not getting a lot of benefit from that, right? There's more just opportunity for them to accidentally put themselves in a bad place. So, we're starting to figure out, like, higher level abstractions and offerings to simplify how all that for teams look like. So, we're still a bit early days in working through that, but it's exciting to figure out, like, how we can still give teams kind of the flexibility and the power that they need but make those experiences much easier and not have to have them become Kubernetes experts just to deploy a simple process. And, yes, so there's some lots of fun challenges in there. [laughs] Mid-Roll Ad: When starting a new project, we understand that you want to make the right choices in technology, features, and investment but that you don’t have all year to do extended research. In just a few weeks, thoughtbot’s Discovery Sprints deliver a user-centered product journey, a clickable prototype or Proof of Concept, and key market insights from focused user research. We’ll help you to identify the primary user flow, decide which framework should be used to bring it to life, and set a firm estimate on future development efforts. Maximize impact and minimize risk with a validated roadmap for your new product. Get started at: tbot.io/sprint. WILL: I have a question around your experience. So, you've been a developer around 20 years. What has been your experience over that 20 years or about of the growth in this market? Because I can only imagine what the market was, you know, in the early 2000s versus right now because I still remember...I still have nightmares of dial-up, dial tone tu-tu-tu. No one could call you, stuff like that. So, what has been your experience, just seeing the market grow from where you started? SEAN: Sure, yeah. I think probably a lot of the biggest pieces of it are just seeing the extent to which...I want to say it was Cory Doctorow, but I'm not sure who actually originally coined the idea, but the idea that, you know, software is eating the world, right? Like, eventually, to some degree, every company becomes a software company because software ends up becoming involved in pretty much everything that we as a society do. So, definitely seeing the progression of that, I think, over that time period has been striking, you know, especially when I was working in more consulting contexts and working more in companies and industries where like, you know, the tech isn't really the focus but just how much that, you know, from an engineering standpoint, relatively basic software can fundamentally transform those businesses and those industries has definitely been striking. And then, you know, I think from a more individual perspective, seeing as, you know, our tools become more sophisticated and easier to access, just seeing how much of a mixed bag that has become [laughs]. And just kind of the flavor of, like, you know, as more people have more powerful tools, that can be very enabling and gives voice to many people. But it also means that the ability of an individual or a small group to abuse those tools in ways that we're maybe not fully ready to deal with as a society has been interesting to see how that's played out. VICTORIA: Yeah. I think you bring up some really great points there. And it reminds me of one of my favorite quotes is that, like, the future is here—it's just not evenly distributed. [laughs] And so, in some communities that I go to, everyone knows what Kubernetes is; everyone knows what DevOps is. It's kind of, like, old news. [laughs] And then, some people are still just like, "What?" [laughs]. It's interesting to think about that and think about the implications on your last point about just how dangerous the supply chain is in building software and how some of these abstractions and some of these things that just make it so easy to build applications can also introduce a good amount of risk into your product and into your business, right? So, I wonder if you can tell me a little bit more about your perspective on security and DevSecOps and what founders might be thinking about to protect their IP and their client's data in their product. SEAN: That one is interesting and tricky in that, like, we're in a little bit of, like, things are better and worse than they ever have been before [laughs], right? Like, there is a certain level of, I think, baseline knowledge and competency that I think company leaders really just have to have now, part of, like, kind of table stakes, which can definitely be challenging, and that, like, that probably was much less, if even the case, you know, 10-20 years ago in a lot of businesses. As an example, right? Like, obviously, like if it's a tech-focused company, like, that can be a thing. But, like, if you're running a plumbing business with a dozen trucks, let's say, like, 20 years ago, you probably didn't have to think that much about data privacy and data security. But, like, now you're almost certainly using some kind of electronic system to kind of manage all your customer records, and your job scheduling, and all that kind of stuff. So, like, now, that is something that's a primary concern for your business. On the flip side of that, I think there is much better resources, and tools, and practices available out there. I forget the name of the tool now. But I remember recently, I was working with a company on the ISO long string of numbers certifications that you tend to want to do when you're handling certain types of data. There was a tool they were able to work with that basically made it super easy for them to, like, gather all the evidence for that and whatnot, in a way where, like, you know, in the past, you probably just had to hire a compliance person to know what you had to do and how to present that. But now, you could just sign up for a SaaS product. And, like, obviously, it can't just do it for you. Like, it's about making your policies. But it still gave you enough support where if you're, like, bootstrapping a company, like, yeah, you probably don't need to hire a specialist to [inaudible 25:08], which is a huge deal. You know, similarly, a lot of things come much safer by default. When you think about, like, the security on something like an iPhone, or an iPad, or an Android device, like, just out of the box, that's light-years ahead of whatever Windows PC you were going to buy ten years ago. [laughs] And so, that kind of gives you a much better starting place. But some interesting challenges that come with that, right? And that we do now, literally, every person on the planet is walking around with microphones and cameras and all kinds of sensors on them. It's an interesting balance, I think. Similarly, I'm curious how you all think about kind of talking with your clients and your customers about this because I'm sure you all have a non-trivial amount of education to do there. [laughs] VICTORIA: Yeah, definitely. And I think a lot of it comes in when we have clients who are very early founders, and they don't have a CTO or a technical side of their business, and advising them on exactly what you laid out. Like, here's the baseline. Like, here's where you want to start from. We generally use the CIS controls, this internet for internet security. It puts out a really great tool set, too, for some things you were mentioning earlier. Let's figure out how to report and how to identify all of the things that we're supposed to be doing. It could be overwhelming. It's a lot. Like, in my past role as VP of Operations at Pluribus Digital, I was responsible for helping our team continue to meet our...we had three different ISO long number certifications [laughs]. We did a CMMI as well, which has come up a few times in my career. And they give you about a couple of hundreds of controls that you're supposed to meet. It's in very kind of, like, legalese that you have to understand. And that's a pretty big gap to solve for someone who doesn't have the technical experience to start. Like, what you were saying, too, that it's more dangerous and more safer than it has been before. So, if we make choices for those types of clients in very safe, trusted platforms, then they're going to be set up for success and not have to worry about those details as much. And we kind of go forward with confidence that if they are going to have to come up against compliance requirements or local state regulations, which are also...there's more of those every day, and a lot of liability you can face as a founder, especially if you're dealing with, like, health or financial data, in the state of California, for example. [laughs] It puts you at a really big amount of liability that I don't think we've really seen the impact of how bad it can be and will be coming out in the next couple of years now that that law has passed. But that's kind of the approach that we like to think. It's like, you know, there's a minimum we can do that will mitigate a lot of this risk [laughs], so let's do that. Let's do the basics and start off on the right foot here. SEAN: Yeah, no, that makes sense. Yeah, it's definitely something I've come to appreciate, especially doing work in regulated spaces is, when you do reach the point where you do need to have some kind of subject matter expert involved, whether it's somebody in-house or a consultant or an advisor, I've definitely learned that usually, like, the better ones are going to talk to you in terms of, like, what are the risk trade-offs you're making here? And what are the principles that all these detailed controls or guidelines are looking to get at? As opposed to just, like, walking you through the box-checking exercise. In my experience, a really good lawyer or somebody who will talk to you about risk versus just saying whether or not you can do something. [laughs] It has a very similar feeling in my experience. VICTORIA: Yeah, it's a lot about risk. And someone's got to be able to make those trade-off decisions, and it can be really tough, but it's doable. And I think it shouldn't scare people away. And there's lots of people, lots of ways to do it also, which is exciting. So, I think it's a good space to be in and to see it growing and pay attention to. [laughs] It's fun for me to be in a different place where we're given the opportunity to kind of educate or bring people along in a security journey versus having it be a top-down executive-level decision that we need to meet this particular security standard, and that's the way it's going to be. [laughs] Yeah, so that I appreciate. Is there anything that really surprised you in your conversations with Datadog or with other companies around these types of services for, like, platform engineering and observability? Is there anything that surprised you in the discovery process with potential clients for your products? SEAN: I think one of the biggest surprises, or maybe not a surprise but an interesting thing is, to what extent, you know, for us, I don't know if this is still the case, but I think in many places, like, we're probably more often competing against nothing than a competing product. And by that, I mean, especially as you look at some of our more sophisticated products like APM, or profiling, it's not so much that somebody has an existing tool that we're looking to replace; it's much more than this is just not a thing they do today. [laughs] And so, that leads to a very interestingly different conversation that I think, you know, relates to some of what we were saying with security where, you know, I think a non-trivial part of what our sales and technical enablement folks do is effectively education for our customers and potential customers of why they might want to use tools like this, and what kind of value they could get from them. The other one that's been interesting is to see how different customers' attitudes around tools like this have evolved as they've gone through their own migration to the cloud journeys, right? We definitely have a lot of customers that, I think, you know, 5, 10 years ago, when they were running entirely on-prem, using a SaaS product would have been a complete non-starter. But as they move into the cloud, both as they kind of generally get more comfortable with the idea of delegating some of these responsibilities, as well as they start to understand kind of, like, the complexity of the tooling required as their environment gets more complex, the value of a dedicated product like something like Datadog as opposed to, you know, what you kind of get out of the box with the cloud providers or what you might kind of build on your own has definitely been interesting. [laughs] VICTORIA: Is there a common point that you find companies get to where they're like, all right, now, I really need something? Can you say a little bit more about, like, what might be going on in the organization at that time? SEAN: You know, I think there could be a few different paths that companies take to it. Some of it, I think, can come from a place of...I think, especially for kind of larger enterprise customers making a transition like that, they tend to be taking a more holistic look at kind of their distinct practices and seeing what they want to change as they move into the cloud. And often, kind of finding an observability vendor is just kind of, like, part of the checklist there. [laughs] Not to dismiss it, but just, like, that seems to be certainly one path into it. I think for smaller customers, or maybe customers that are more, say, cloud-native, I think it can generally be a mix of either hitting a point where they're kind of done with the overhead of trying to maintain their own infrastructure of, like, trying to run their own ELK stack and, like, build all the tooling on top of that, and keeping that up and running, and the costs associated with that. Or, it's potentially seeing the sophistication of tooling that, like, a dedicated provider can afford to invest that realistically, you're never going to invest in on your own, right? Like, stuff like live profiling is deeply non-trivial to implement. [laughs] I think especially once people get some experience with a product like Datadog, they start thinking about, like, okay, how much value are we actually getting out of doing this on our own versus using a more off-the-shelf product? I don't know if we've been doing it post-COVID. But I remember pre-COVID...so Datadog has a huge presence at re:Invent and the other similar major cloud provider things. And I remember for a few years at re:Invent, you know, we obviously had, like, the giant 60x60 booth in the main expo floor, where we were giving demos and whatnot. But they also would have...AWS would do this, like, I think they call it the interactive hall where companies could have, like, more hands-on booths, and you had, like, a whole spectrum of stuff. And there were, like, some companies just had, like, random, like, RC car setups or Lego tables, just stuff like that. But we actually did a setup where there was a booth of, I think, like, six stations. People would step up, and they would race each other to solve a kind of faux incident using Datadog. The person who would solve it first would win a switch. I think we gave away a huge number of switches as part of that, which at first I was like, wow, that seems expensive. [laughs] But then later, you know, I was mostly working the main booth at that re:Invent. So by the, like, Wednesday and Thursday of re:Invent, I'd have people walking up to the main booth being like, "Hey, so I did the thing over at the Aria. And now I installed Datadog in prod last night, and I have questions." I was like, oh, okay. [laughs] So, I think just, like, the power of, like, getting that hands-on time, and using some of the tools, and understanding the difference there is what kind of gets a lot of people to kind of change their mind there. [laughs] VICTORIA: You'd get me with a switch right now. I kind of want one, but I don't want to buy one. SEAN: [laughs] WILL: Same. [laughs] VICTORIA: Because I know it'll take up all my time. SEAN: Uh-huh. That's fair. [laughs] VICTORIA: But I will try to win one at a conference for sure. I think that's true. And it makes sense that because your product is often going with clients that don't have these practices yet, that as soon as you give them exposure to it, you see what you can do with it, that becomes a very powerful selling tool. Like, this is the value of the product, right? [laughs] SEAN: Yeah, there is also something we see, and I think most of our kind of peers in the industry see is, very often, people come in initially looking for and using a single product, like, you know, infrastructure, metrics, or logs. And then, as they see that and see where that touches other parts of the product, their usage kind of grows and expands over time. I would obviously defer to our earnings calls for exact numbers. But generally speaking, more or less kind of half of our new business is usually expanded usage from existing customers as opposed to new customers coming in. So, I think there's also a lot of just kind of organic discovery and building of trust over time that happens there, which is interesting. VICTORIA: One of my favorite points to make, which is that SRE sounds very technical and, like, this really extreme thing. But to make it sound a little more easier, is that it is how you validate that the user experience is what you expect it to be. [laughs] I wonder if you have any other thoughts you want to add to that, just about, like, SRE and user experience and how that all connects for real business value. SEAN: I think a lot of places where, you know, we've both seen internally ourselves and with customers is, you know; obviously, different companies operate in different models and whatnot. Where people have seen success is where, you know, people with formal SRE titles or team names can kind of be coming in as just kind of another perspective on the various kind of things that teams are trying to drive towards. The places reliability is successfully integrated is when they can kind of make that connection that you were talking about. It's, like, obviously, everybody should go take their vitamins, but, like, what actual value is coming from this, right? Nobody wants to have outages, but, like, to do the work to invest in reliability, often, like, it can be hard to say, like, okay, what's the actual difference between before and after? Having people who can help draw those connections and help weigh those trade-offs, I think, can definitely be super helpful. But it is generally much more effective, I think, in my experience, when it does come from that perspective of, like, what value are we providing? What are we trading off as part of this? As opposed to just, well, you should do this because it's the right thing to do, kind of a moralistic perspective. [laughs] But, I don't know, how do you all kind of end up having that conversation with your customers and clients? VICTORIA: That's exactly it. That's the same. It's starting that conversation about, like, well, what happens when this experience fails, which designers don't necessarily think about? What's, like, the most important paths that you want a user to take through your application that we want to make sure works? And when you tie it all back there, I think then when the developers are understanding how to create those metrics and how to understand user behavior, that's when it becomes really powerful so that they're getting the feedback they need to do the right code, and to make the right changes. Versus just going purely on interviews [laughs] and not necessarily, like, understanding behavior within the app. I think that starts to make it clear. SEAN: Part of that, I think that's been an interesting experience for us is also just some of the conversation there around, like, almost the flip side of, when are you investing potentially too much in that, right? Because, like, especially after a certain point, the cost of additional gains grows exponentially, right? Each one of those nines gets more and more expensive. [laughs] And so, having the conversation of, like, do you actually need that level of reliability, or, like, is that...just like what you're saying. Like, you know, kind of giving some of that context and that pressure of, like, yeah, we can do that, but, like, this is what it's going to cost. Is that what you want to be spending your money on? Kind of things can also be an interesting part of that conversation. VICTORIA: That's a really good point that, you know, you can set goals that are too high [laughs] and not necessary. So, it does take a lot of just understanding about your data and your users to know what are acceptable levels of error. I think the other thing that you can think about, too, like, what could happen, and we've seen it happen with some startups, is that, like, something within the app is deeply broken, but you don't know. And you just think that you're not having user engagement, or that users are signing off, or, like, you know, not opening the app after the first day. So, if you don't have any way to really actively monitor it and you're not spending money on an active development team, you can have some method to just be confident that the app is working and to make your life less miserable [laughs] when you have a smaller team supporting, especially if you're trying to really minimize your overhead for running an application. SEAN: Yep. It's surprisingly hard to know when things are broken sometimes. [laughs] VICTORIA: Yes, and then extremely painful when you find out later [laughs] because that's when it's become a real problem, yeah. I wonder, are there any other questions you have for me or for Will? SEAN: How big of an organization is thoughtbot at this time? VICTORIA: Close to 75 people? We're, yeah, between the Americas and the [inaudible 38:31] region. So, that's where we're at right now, yeah. SEAN: Nice. At that size, like, and I guess it sounds like you're pretty heavily distributed, so maybe some of this doesn't happen as much, but, like, one of the things I definitely remember...so, when I joined Datadog, it was probably about 500 people. And I think we're just under 5,000 now. There are definitely some points where there were surprisingly, like, physical aspects to where it became a problem of just, like, where certain teams didn't fit into a room anymore. [laughs] Like, I had surprise in the changes in that, like, dynamic. I'm curious if you've all kind of run into any kind of, I don't know, similar interesting thresholds or changes as you've kind of grown and evolved. WILL: I will say this, we're about 100, I think, Victoria. VICTORIA: Oh, okay, we're 100 people. I think, you know, I've only been at thoughtbot for just over a year now. And my understanding of the history is that when we were growing before COVID, there's always been a very intentionality about growth. And there was never a goal to get to a huge size or to really grow beyond just, like, a steady, profitable growth. [laughs] So, when we were growing in person, there were new offices being stood up. So, we, you know, maybe started out of New York and Boston and grew to London. And then, there was Texas, and I think a few other ones that started. Then with COVID, the decision was made to go fully remote, and I think that's opened up a lot of opportunities for us. And from my understanding in the previous and the past, is that there's a big shift to be fully remote. It's been challenging, where I think a lot of people miss some of the in-person days, and I'm sure it's definitely lonely working remote all day by yourself. So, you have to really proactively find opportunities to see other people and to engage remotely. But I think also, we hire people from so many different places and so much different talent, and then, also, you know, better informs our products and creates a different, you know, energy within the company that I think is really fun and really exciting for us now. WILL: Yeah, I would agree with that because I think the team that I'm on has about 26 people on the Lift Off team. And we're constantly thinking of new ways to get everyone involved. But as a developer, me myself being remote, I love talking to people. So, I try to be proactive and, like, connect with the people I'm working with and say, "Hey, how can I help you with this?" Let's jump in this room and just work together, chat together, and stuff like that, so... And it has opened the door because the current project that I'm on, I would never have had an opportunity to be on. I think it's based in Utah, and I'm in South Florida. So, there's just no way if we weren't remote that I'd been a part of it. So... SEAN: Nice. And I can definitely appreciate that. I remember when we first started COVID lockdown; I think, at that point, Datadog was probably about...Datadog engineering was probably about 30% remote, so certainly a significant remote contingent but mixed. But my teams were pretty remote-heavy. So, in some ways, not a lot changed, right? Like, I think more people on my team were, like, who are all these other people in my house now instead of [laughs], I mean, just transition from being in an office to working from home. But I do remember maybe, like, about six months in, starting to feel, yeah, some of the loneliness and the separation of just, like, not being able to do, like, quarterly team meetups or stuff like that. So, it's definitely been an interesting transition. For context, at this point, we kind of have a hybrid setup. So, we still have a significant kind of full-time remote contingent, and then four people who are in office locations, people joining for about three days a week in office. So, it's definitely an interesting transition and an interesting new world. [laughs] VICTORIA: Yeah. And I'm curious how you find the tech scene in Denver versus New York or if you're engaging in the community in the same way since you moved. SEAN: There definitely is some weirdness since COVID started [laughs] broadly [inaudible 42:21]. So, I moved here in 2020. But I'd been coming out here a lot before that. I helped to build an office here with Bitly. So, I was probably coming out once a quarter for a bunch of years. So, one parallel that is finally similar is, like, in both places, it is a small world. It doesn't take that long for you to be in that community, in either of those communities and start running into the same people in different places. So, that's always been [inaudible 42:42] and especially in New York. New York is a city of what? 8, 9 million people? But once you're working in New York tech for a few years and you go into some meetups, you start running into the same people, and you have one or two degrees [inaudible 42:52] to a lot of people, surprisingly quickly. [laughs] So, that's similar. But Denver probably is interesting in that it's definitely transplant-heavy. I think Denver tends to check the box for, like, it was part of why Bitly opened an office here and, to a degree, Datadog as well. I think of like, you know, if you're trying to recruit people and you previously were mostly recruiting in, like, New York or Silicon Valley; if you're based in New York, and you're trying to recruit somebody from Silicon Valley, and part of why they're looking for a new gig is they're burned out on Silicon Valley, asking them to move to New York probably isn't all that attractive. [laughs] But Denver is different enough in that in terms of kind of being a smaller city, easier access to nature, a bunch of that kind of stuff, that a lot of times we were able to attract talent that was a much more appealing prospect. [laughs] You'll see an interesting mix of industries here. One of the bigger things here is there's a very large government and DOD presence here. I remember I went to DevOps Days Rockies, I think, a few years ago. There was a Birds of a Feather session on trying to apply DevOps principles in air-gapped networks. That was a very interesting conversation. [laughs] VICTORIA: That's interesting. I would not have thought Colorado would be a big hub for federal technology. But there you go, it's everywhere. WILL: Yeah. SEAN: Denver metro, I think, is actually the largest presence of federal offices outside of the D.C. metro. VICTORIA: That's interesting. Yeah, I'm used to trying to recruit people into D.C., and so, it's definitely not the good weather, [laughs], not a good argument in my favor. So, I just wanted to give you a final chance. Anything else you'd like to promote, Sean? SEAN: Generally, not super active on social things these days, but you can find whatever I have done at seanoc.com, S-E–A-N-O-C.com for the spelling. And otherwise, if you're interested in some engineering content and hearing about some of those kind of bleeding edge challenges that I was mentioning before, I would definitely check out the Datadog engineering blog. There's lots of kind of really interesting content there on both, you know, things we've learned from incidents and interesting projects that we're working on. There's all kinds of fun stuff there. VICTORIA: That makes me think I should have asked you more questions, Sean. [laughs] No, I think it was great. Thank you so much for joining us today. I'll definitely check all that stuff out. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. WILL: And you can find me on Twitter @will23larry. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com. Special Guest: Sean O'Connor.
Kendall Miller is the Co-Founder and COO of CTO Lunches, a network of engineering leaders to get trusted advice and connections. The first half of the conversation with host Victoria Guido and special guest host, Joe Ferris, CTO of thoughtbot revolves around the use, adoption, and growth of Kubernetes within the technology industry. The discussion explores Kubernetes' history, influence, and its comparison with other platforms like Heroku and WordPress, emphasizing its adaptability and potential. The second half focuses on more practical aspects of Kubernetes, including its adoption and scalability. It centers on the appropriateness of adopting Kubernetes for different projects and how it can future-proof infrastructure. The importance of translating technical language into business speak is emphasized to influence executives and others in the decision-making process and Kendall also discuss communication and empathy in tech, particularly the skill of framing questions and understanding others' emotional states. __ CTO Lunches (http://ctolunches.com/) Follow CTO Lunches on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/ctolunches/) or Twitter (https://twitter.com/cto_lunches). Follow Kendall Miller on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/kendallamiller/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with me today is Kendall Miller, Co-Founder and COO of CTO Lunches, a network of engineering leaders to get trusted advice and connections. Kendall, thank you for joining me. KENDALL: Thanks for having me. I'm excited. VICTORIA: And today, we have a special guest host, Joe Ferris, CTO of thoughtbot. Joe, thank you for joining us. JOE: Hello there. Thank you for having me. KENDALL: Hi, Joe. Thanks for being here. It's exciting. VICTORIA: Yes. It's so exciting. I think this is going to be a great episode. So, Kendall, I met you at a San Diego CTO lunch recently, and I know that's not the only thing that you do. So, you're also an advisor, a board member, and CXO. So, maybe tell us a little bit more about your background. KENDALL: Gosh, my background is complicated. I've been involved in tech for a very long time. In college, I worked for a company that started Twitter about five years too soon, and then worked in the nonprofit space in China for ten years, then came back, got back involved in tech. Today, I'm usually the business guy. So, when technical founders start technical products and want help turning them into successful technical businesses, that's when they call me. So, I have the technical background. I have never been paid to write code, which is probably a good thing. But I can hang in the technical conversations for the most part, but I'm much more interested in the business side and the people leadership side of business. So that tends to be where I play. Every organization hires me to do something different. VICTORIA: Thank you for that. And I'm just curious about the CTO Lunches. Just tell me a little bit more about that. And what's the idea behind it that led you to co-found it? KENDALL: CTO Lunches has actually been around for about eight years. And I didn't start the initial incarnation of it. It was two people that got us started, and I was trying to hire one of them; one thing led to another. Actually, originally, they did not want me to join. I think, at the time, my title was COO at a company that I was working with. About six months later, I took over engineering as VP of engineering, and then they're like, you can join the group now. We're less strict about that [laughs] now. Although it is highly focused on senior engineering leaders, it's not exclusively CTOs. But the group's been in place for a very long time, just intended as a place to network, have conversation with people who are in that senior-most technical position at technical organization. So, the CTO role is a lonely role. CTOs get fired all the time. There's not a technical person at the company that doesn't think they can do the job better than them. So, the CTO is always getting feedback. You're doing this wrong. The trade-offs you're making are wrong. This isn't going where it should be going. We should automate that. Why haven't we automated that? We should switch to this other tool. I've used it before; it's 100 times better. Joe, let me know if I'm getting any of this wrong. But that's the experience that I've had. Having a place where people can get together and, you know, half the time just complain to each other, hey, this is hard, is really why the networking group exists. So, it's a listserv. And there are local lunches that started in Boulder, Colorado. It's gotten pretty global. About a year ago, a little over a year ago, I was talking with one of the people who'd gotten it started. I've been involved in the Denver chapter for most of those eight years. And I was suggesting to him that he change a few things about it, to monetize it so that he could invest in it further. And he came back a few months later and said, "I want to take your advice and do this, but I want you to come do it with me." So, we founded the company officially...I think in December is when paperwork went into place. And we started investing in it a little bit more heavily. I was living in Europe last year, so we went and put on lunches in Paris, and Lisbon, and London, and, gosh, all over the place. I'm sure I'm missing some, Amsterdam. But there's been chapters all over the U.S. and a couple of other parts of the world for a long time. VICTORIA: That reflects my experience attending a CTO lunch. It's just very casual, like, just get together and eat food and talk about what you've worked on recently, issues you're having, just get ideas and make some friends. So, I really appreciated the group, and I'm going to personally plug the San Diego Chapter has picked up again. And we're meeting next Friday down in Del Mar. And we're going to be meeting on the last Friday of every month through October. So, I'm super excited to be a part of the group. And Joe, yeah, I'm curious about your perspective. As a CTO with thoughtbot, just what are your thoughts about that kind of thing? KENDALL: Yeah. How right am I about how lonely you are, Joe? JOE: [laughs] You know, I've been lonelier since we went remote. I used to work in the office, and I was a CTO, but also, I had lunch with people, which was nice. So, I'm lonelier. But yeah, I think everybody needs a group like that, like, senior developer therapy just to talk about your woes together, drown your sorrows. KENDALL: Well, I think years ago, I heard that CTOs are the most fired C-level executive. JOE: You're making me nervous now. KENDALL: [laughs] You've been there a long time, Joe. I know you've been there a long time. If you haven't been fired yet, you probably got a little while longer in you. This will be really awkward if it's published and you've already been fired. VICTORIA: We can always edit that out afterwards. [laughter] KENDALL: Yeah, no, I think it is a particularly lonely position. And, again, I think a lot of it is the average engineer in a technical company doesn't look at the COO or the CFO or even the CEO and think I could do that. But they're all looking at the CTO and thinking, what does that person do that I can't do? It's ridiculous because most of them would make terrible CTOs because it does require some of the business sense. Or, you know, right out of the gate, they might make terrible CTOs. It actually is quite a skill to be the most technical person and speak the business language. I mean, am I right about that, Joe? Like, was that hard for you to learn? JOE: Yeah, I definitely think...so, my background is also technical. I have a background in consulting. So, I always did a lot of metaprogramming, if you will. But making that transition to thinking about organizations that way, thinking about how all the other pieces play into it, was a pretty big step for me, even before I became a CTO as a consultant. KENDALL: Well, because you can't just chase the newest, hottest technology. You have to make business trade-offs. And not everything can be resume-driven development, right? Even if that technology over there is newer or hotter, it doesn't mean you have a business model that supports it. And it doesn't mean that migrating to it can be done, right? JOE: Yeah. I mean, even beyond choosing technologies, just choosing where to invest in your software stack, like, what needs to be reworked, what doesn't, and trying to explain those trade-offs, I think, is a rare skill. Being able to explain why something would be harder than something else when you're working with the leadership to prioritize a backlog it's a puzzle. KENDALL: Well, and I think when I'm in an executive conversation, and the CTO says, "Here's the thing that I think is the best decision technically, and I think it's the wrong decision for the business because of X, Y, or Z," I'm always super impressed, right? Like, this is the right technical solution for what we want. However, we shouldn't pursue that for business reasons right now. Maybe we can in six months, but right now, we need to prioritize this other thing. I don't know, that's always when I feel like, oh, this person knows what they're doing. JOE: There's nothing more dangerous to software than a bored developer. [laughs] One nice thing about being a consultant is that I don't have to invent problems to solve with technology at my company because sooner or later, I'll run across a company that has those problems, and I'll get to use that technology. But I think a lot of people are mostly happy...they might be happy in their role. They might be happy with our team. But they're very interested in whatever is hot right now, like machine learning, AI. And so, suddenly, that surreptitiously makes its way into the tech stack. And then, years later, it's somebody's problem to maintain. KENDALL: [laughs] Well, I have a specific memory of a firm in New York City that was, you know, this is relevant to y'all as thoughtbot is that, you know, at least historically, it was, to me, the premier Ruby on Rails consulting shop. I think that's still largely y'alls focus. Am I right about that? JOE: We still do a ton of Rails, yeah. KENDALL: Okay. Well, so this organization was all Ruby on Rails. It was a big organization. They had a very large customer base. And they hired a new CTO who came in, told everybody in the company they were stupid, laid off 70% of the engineering organization, and told the CEO he was going to completely rewrite the product from scratch in .NET, and he could do it in three weeks. And I'm pretty sure the business went under about three months later [laughs] because that was just so outrageously nuts to me. JOE: It's too bad he laid everybody off beforehand. I've been in that situation where somebody tells me, "I'm going to rewrite this. It'll be ready in three weeks." And I could fight with them and try and convince them they're wrong. But I feel like somebody who's approaching that with that attitude they're missing all of the nuance and context that would make it possible to explain to them why it's not going to work. And so, it's easier to just say, "You know, take the three weeks. I'll talk to you in three weeks." But if you've already laid off your development team, that's hard [laughs] to recover from. KENDALL: That's exactly right. VICTORIA: There's got to be a name for that kind of CTO who just wants to come in and blow everything up [laughs]. Yeah, so you spend a lot of time talking to different CTOs and doing this social networking aspect. I'm wondering if there's, like, patterns that you see. You've mentioned already one about just, like, the most often getting fired. [laughs] But what are the patterns you see, like, in challenges, and then what makes someone successful in that CTO role? KENDALL: Well, oh gosh, I have so many thoughts about this. First of all, I run into a couple of different categories of CTOs. There's a lot of people who come to CTO Lunches who are small company CTOs. I mean, it makes sense that there's a lot more small company CTOs than there are big company CTOs. But the small company CTO who maybe it's their first gig in the role or they're a serial CTO. There's the fractional CTOs that come that are doing it across several different organizations at the same time, and then there's the big company CTO who shows up. And honestly, all of their problems are very different. The thing that they have in common is even at a very large organization, in that position, they can make a decision that causes the company to go under. So, there is a significant amount of volatility in the amount of power that they wield. So, what's interesting about that is not everybody understands that. And so, first of all, there's the kind of CTO that just doesn't get that, and that doesn't matter if they're fractional, or a small company CTO, or a big company CTO. If they don't understand that, they're going to cause significant problems, right? Like the person I just mentioned who said, "I can just re-platform this in three weeks in .NET." There's that. I mean, I think, as with any senior leadership position, the comfort with volatility, the ability to know what to communicate down versus across and versus up, and then the ability to speak the business language. For everybody, the CFO's job is to communicate the financial needs alongside of the business leads, right? If the CFO's sole goal is to cut costs or make sure we're running as lean as possible, they're a bad CFO. But they're not as good of a CFO as the CFO who can say, "Hey, we're underspending right here. And I can look at the numbers and know we should invest more there. How can we invest more there and invest it well?" And it's the same thing for a technology executive to be able to look at the business context and communicate it back. And there are so many CTOs that I've worked with who they're the most technical person in the room, and they know it. And as a result, they're just a jerk to everyone around them, like, everything you did here was wrong. You know, that's where they fail. And so, if they can communicate the business needs, navigate the volatility, and support a team that's going to make decisions that aren't always the same decision they're going to make, they're going to be successful. Honestly, there's very, very few CTOs that I've met like that. People who are excited to meet you at work, excited to see you succeed, excited to see that you went and built a thing is great. I mean, the reason I was VP of engineering is the CTO that I was working with at the time...it's a terrible story. There was an engineer who had seen something that we were doing on repeat all the time and, in his spare time, spent about 40 hours outside of work, not during work hours, automating this task that we were doing regularly. And it was related to standing up a whole bunch of things in our standard infrastructure. He brings it to the CTO and says, "Look what I built." And the CTO, instead of saying, "Hey, this is incredible. Thank you. This is going to save us a bunch of time. Let's iterate on it. Here's some things I'd like to tweak. Can we bring it in this direction? Can we..." you know, whatever, said, "Why is this in Python? It should be in Ansible," something like that. I can't remember. And the engineer literally burst into tears. [laughs] JOE: Oh my God. KENDALL: [laughs] Well, I mean, yeah, it was like; literally, that's why the CTO stopped managing people that day. There's a lot of examples that I have like that. Joe, I appreciate that your response is, "Oh my God." Because I think there's a lot of people who'd be like, wait, what was wrong with that? Shouldn't it have been in Ansible? JOE: [laughs] Yeah, I've seen CTOs come into primarily two groups. One is the CTO who just tells, you know, like, they make the decisions, and they tell everybody what to do. They obviously don't have all of the information because you can't be in every room all the time. And the other is the CTO, who just wants to be one of the team members and doesn't make any decisions and tries to get people to make decisions collectively on their own without any particular guidance or structure. And finding that middle spot of, like, not just saying, "Hey, everything's in Ansible," allowing for the creativity and initiative, but also coalescing the group into a single direction, I think, is what makes a good CTO. KENDALL: Well, yeah, because the CTO does have to say no, sometimes, right? Like, the best product, people say, "No." Good CTOs say, "No." There is some amount of, hey, I need you to come to me with trade-offs about this. Why are you going to make that decision? And I'm sorry, you still didn't convince me, right? Like, I mean, those are appropriate things to say. But yeah, I'm with you on that. You said they fall into two categories. But you really mean the third and that middle ground. Is it easy for you to walk that middle ground, Joe? JOE: I wouldn't say it's easy. [laughs] KENDALL: Yeah. Well, I'm always nervous to say something. I'm doing well because I know there's a report out there that can point at every time I failed at it, right? So... MID-ROLL AD: Are you an entrepreneur or start-up founder looking to gain confidence in the way forward for your idea? At thoughtbot, we know you’re tight on time and investment, which is why we’ve created targeted 1-hour remote workshops to help you develop a concrete plan for your product’s next steps. Over four interactive sessions, we work with you on research, product design sprint, critical path, and presentation prep so that you and your team are better equipped with the skills and knowledge for success. Find out how we can help you move the needle at: tbot.io/entrepreneurs. VICTORIA: Yeah, what I'm getting from what you're saying, too, is this communication ability and not just, like, to communicate clearly but with a high level of empathy. So, if you say like, "Well, why is it in Python and not Ansible?" is different than being like, "What makes Python the best solution here?" Like, it's a different way to frame the question that could put someone on the defensive that just really requires, like, a high level of emotional intelligence. And also, if they've just worked, like, an 80-hour week, [laughs] I probably would maybe choose a different time to bring those questions up and notice that they have been burning the candle at both ends and prioritize getting them some rest. So, speaking of, like, communication and getting prioritization for [inaudible 15:34], especially on, like, infrastructure teams, maybe we could talk a little bit about Kubernetes, like, when that comes up as an appropriate solution, and how you talk about it with the business. KENDALL: My background with Kubernetes is long because a company that I still work with, Fairwinds, used to be called ReactiveOps, has been in the Kubernetes space for a very long time. I think we were one of the very first companies working with Kubernetes. It was coming up that people were running into the limits of something like Heroku, right? And I think it's Kelsey Hightower who said every company wants a PaaS. They just want the Paas that they built themselves. And that's really accurate. And I think Kubernetes isn't quite a framework for building your own PaaS or isn't quite a foundation where I think of a foundation for a house. Instead, it's more like rebar and cement and somebody saying, "Good luck, buddy." You know, you still have to know how to put the rebar and cement together to even make the foundation, but it is the building blocks that help get you to a custom-built PaaS. And it's become something that a lot of people have landed on as, you know, the broadly accepted way to build cloud-native infrastructure. The reason I've been in the Kubernetes space and the space that I see Kubernetes still filling is we need to standardize on something. We can choose a cloud provider's PaaS. We can choose a third-party PaaS, or we can standardize on something like Kubernetes. And even though we're not going to migrate from AWS to Azure, the flexibility that Kubernetes gives us as a broadly adopted pattern is going to give us some ability to be future-proofed in our infrastructure in a way that previous stacks were not, you know, it was Puppet, and it was Ansible. And it was SaltStack. And it was all Terraform all the time. I'm not saying those things don't exist anymore. I'm saying Kubernetes kind of has won that battle. Joe, since you're here and I know y'all are doing some Kubernetes work now at thoughtbot, I'm curious if you agree with that characterization. JOE: Yeah, I think that's true. I think it's the center for people to coalesce around. Like, for an effort in the industry to move forward, there needs to be some common language, some common ground. And I think Kubernetes struck the right balance of being abstract. So, you can use it in different environments but still making some decisions, so you don't have to make them all. And so, like, all of the things you had to do with containers like figuring out what your data solution is going to be, what your networking solution is going to be, Kubernetes didn't even really make those decisions. [laughs] They just made a platform where those decisions can be made in a common way. And that allowed the community and the ecosystem to grow. KENDALL: I mean, I think of it a lot like WordPress; you know, WordPress is hated by many. When WordPress came out, it was hot, right? And it was PHP, which everybody was super excited about at the time. Kubernetes is going to reach a point where it's as long in the tooth and terrible as people think WordPress is, but it has become the standard. And the advantage of the standard is you can use the not standard. You can go build a website in Jekyll instead of WordPress, and there's going to be some things that are nicer about Jekyll. But because WordPress is so broadly adopted, there's a plugin for everything. And I think that's where Kubernetes sits is because it's become so widely adopted everybody's building for it. Everybody's adapting for it. If you run into a problem, you're going to find somebody else out there who has that problem. In fact, I think of one organization that I know that was on HashiCorp's Nomad. And they said, "Actually, we think Nomad has better technology through and through. But we think we're the only company at this size and scale using Nomad. And so, when we run into a problem, we can't Google for it. There's no such thing as a plugin that exists to solve this. Nobody has ever run into this before on Nomad. But there's 100 companies dealing with the same problem in Kubernetes, and there's ten solutions." And I think that's the power that it brings. VICTORIA: So, it's not just a trend that CTOs are moving towards, you think. KENDALL: I mean, I think it's already won the battle and the hockey stick of adoption. We're still right at the very bottom of that tick-up because it takes people a long time to adapt new technology like this, especially in their infrastructure. It's a big migration, to move. So, I don't think it's the widely adopted infrastructure technology even yet. I think a lot of the biggest organizations are still running on things that predate Kubernetes. But I think it has won the battle, and it is winning the battle and is going to be the thing going forward, so yeah. JOE: I think it also has a lot of room to grow still. Like, there are other technologies that I used previously, like Docker, and they were a big step up from some of the things I was doing at the time. But you quickly hit the ceiling, or it was, like, I don't know where to go with this next. I don't know what else is going to happen. Whereas with Kubernetes, there are so many directions it can go in. Like, the serverless Kubernetes offerings that are starting to pop up are extremely interesting, where, you know, you don't actually maintain a cluster or anything. You just deploy things to this ethereal cluster that always exists. And so, that sort of combination of platform as a service, function as a service, Kubernetes, as that evolves, I think there are a lot of exciting things that have yet to come in the Kubernetes space. KENDALL: Well, so say more about that, Joe, because I've been going to KubeCon for a very long time, maybe...I don't know if it's 2016 or so when I first went. And it felt for a number of years...maybe those first four-ish years it was always the people at KubeCon were the, like, big dreamers and thinkers and, like, we're here to change the future of cloud infrastructure. And this is going places, and we're excited to be here and be a part of it. And here's what I'm going to do that changes the next thing. And I feel like now if I go to KubeCon, it's a lot of people from, you know, IBM and some big bank that are, like, deep sigh, well, I have to adopt Kubernetes. I need to know what the vendors are. What do you guys do, and how does this work? Can you please teach it to me? Because I'm being told by my boss, I have to do it. I don't see that excitement around Kubernetes anymore. The excitement I see is all around further up the stack, you know, things like Wasm, WebAssembly, or eBPF, the networking things and tracing things that are possible. Maybe that's further down the stack. I guess it depends on how you think about it, but different part of the stack. So, I'm curious, touching on the serverless components of Kubernetes; sure, I get that. And I do think, increasingly, the PaaSs of the future are all going to be Kubernetes-based, whether that's exposed or not. But where are the places that you think it's still going to go? Because I feel like it's already gotten boring, maybe in a positive way. But I don't see the excitement around it like I saw a few years back. And I'm curious what else you think is going to happen. JOE: Yeah, I mean, I don't think I disagree. I think Kubernetes itself, the core concept, is, like, it's still changing. But you're right that the excitement about Kubernetes existing has gone down because it's been there for a while. But I feel like the ecosystem is still growing pretty rapidly. Like, the things you mentioned, like Wasm and Istio, and all the tools in that ecosystem that continue to grow, is where I think the interesting things will happen. Like, it's created this new lower-level layer of abstraction that makes it possible to build concepts and technology that could not have existed before. KENDALL: Yeah, well, and I'm, you know, talking to people who are working really hard at making short-run ephemeral workloads work better on things like GPUs for the sake of AI, right? Like, I mean, there is some really interesting things happening, and people are doing this in Kubernetes. So, I get that. I agree with that. It is interesting that Kubernetes has become sort of the stable thing, and now it's about who can build the interesting add-ons. It's almost like, okay, we've built Half-Life. What is Counter-Strike going to look like? You know. That's a terrible (I'm aging myself.) example. But still. VICTORIA: I think it's interesting, I mean, to look at the size of the market for platform engineering right now. In 2022, was 4.8 billion, and it's estimated to be in 10 years $41 billion. So, there is this emerging trend of different platform engineering products, different abstractions on top of Kubernetes. And I wonder what advice you would have for a technical founder who's looking to build and solve some of these interesting issues in Kubernetes and create a business around it. KENDALL: Well, okay, let me clarify that question. Are you thinking, I'm a startup, and I need to build my infrastructure, and I'm going to choose Kubernetes. What advice do I need? Or are you thinking, I am founder, and I want to go build on the Kubernetes ecosystem. What advice do you have? VICTORIA: Now I want to know the answer to both. But my question was the second one to start. KENDALL: One of the things that is hard about the Kubernetes ecosystem is there's not a ton of companies that have made a whole bunch of money in Kubernetes because, as I said, I still think we're actually really early in the adoption curve. The kinds of companies that have adopted Kubernetes are the kinds of companies that don't spend lots and lots of money on an infrastructure. [laughs] They're the kinds of companies that are fast-moving, early adopters, or, you know, those first followers, and so they're under $100 million companies for the most part. Where the JP Morgans and Chase are running Kubernetes somewhere in their stack, but they haven't adopted it across the stack to need the biggest, best tools about it. So, the first piece of advice that I'd give is, be a little wary. It's still very early to the market. Maybe now is the time to build the thing. When ReactiveOps pivoted to Kubernetes, I think it was six months of having conversations with companies who were just, like, so excited about it, and this is definitely what we want to do. But nobody was doing it yet. You know, it was, we have, like, six solid months of just excitement and nobody actually pulling the trigger. And, you know, we were a little too early to that market. And that was just the people adopting it. So, I think there is some nervousness that cloud-native solutions the only people who are really making money in Kubernetes are named Amazon, Google, and Microsoft because it's the cloud providers that are making a ton off of it. Now, there's Rancher. There is StackPointCloud. There's a few others that have had big exits in this space. But I don't think it's actually as big of a booming economy as a lot of people think, in part because EKS is an incredibly amazing product. Like, eight years ago, the thing people paid us the most to do at ReactiveOps was just stand up Kubernetes because it was so stinking hard to just get it up and working. And now you click some buttons. Anybody can go do that. So, it's changed a lot, right? And I think be wary when you're entering that ecosystem. And then, my advice to the founder that's not building on the ecosystem but just looking to adopt a technology that's going to be a future-proofed infrastructure is just adopt one of the cloud-native platforms. And there are a whole bunch of sort of default best-in-class add-ons out there that you need to throw in. Don't adopt too many because then you have to maintain them forever. That's the easiest way to get started. You can figure out all the rest of it later. But if you go use EKS, or GKE, AKS, you can get started pretty easily and build something that is going to be future-proofed. I don't know, Joe; I'm curious if you disagree with any of that. JOE: Well, I think it's interesting to think about who's making money in Kubernetes. Like, I think there might not be as many companies who are doing only Kubernetes and Kubernetes-focused products that are massively successful. But I think because it has had a good amount of adoption and because it's easier to work with something that's standardized, it has helped companies sell things that they wanted to sell anyway. Like, all the Datadog, all the Scalas, the logging companies, they all have Kubernetes add-ons. And now everybody is paying Datadog [laughs] to have a dashboard for their Kubernetes cluster. I think they're making more money than they would have been without targeting the market. And so, I think that's really...if you want to get into the market, it's not, like, I'm going to build a Kubernetes product. It's if I'm building operations and an infrastructure product, I should definitely have it work with Kubernetes, and people will want to click and install it. KENDALL: So, to be clear, you know, one of the companies that I work with is called Axiom, and they play in the same, you know, monitoring, observability space as Datadog does. And part of what makes Kubernetes interesting in that space is in a microservice environment; there's so much happening. Where are problems being caused? We don't live in a day where I can just run my code, and it tells me that there's an unexpected semicolon on line 23, right? Like, that still happens. You're still doing those things. But this microservice talking to that microservice is where things tend to break down. Did I communicate this correctly? What was sent? What was received? Where did it break down? What was the latency? And if you were doing things in the old way back when you were standing it up with, say, Ansible, or Puppet, or something like that, and you were orchestrating all of these cloud virtual machines, you had to really work hard to instrument the tracing and logging and everything involved in order to track what was going on. Whereas that's one of the magic things about Kubernetes is with a few of the add-ons or some of the things out of the box with Kubernetes, it's a couple of clicks to get so, so much of the data and have insight into where things are going and what's going wrong. And so, I 100% agree with that. Kubernetes is generating a tremendous amount of data. And if you're a data company, it's really nice to have all that come in, and it helps them make money, helps the user of Kubernetes in that situation understand where problems are happening and breaking down. Yeah, there's definitely some network effects of what Kubernetes is doing in that. I completely agree. JOE: I think there are also some interesting companies, like, where they make...Emissary, Ambassador, and they have that sort of dual -- KENDALL: Komodor, is that -- JOE: Yeah, maybe. They have open source, but then they have a product. KENDALL: You're thinking of Ambassador Labs. JOE: Yeah. Ambassador Labs, yeah. I guess I don't really know how much money they're making. But I think that's a really interesting concept as people who make open-source things then make a well-supported product built around it. KENDALL: Sure. What's interesting is, I think in the VC world, at least right now, and it may pick up again, but post-Silicon Valley Bank nearly caving in, I think that the VC tolerance for, yeah, just go get a billion open-source adopters, and we'll figure out how to monetize later I think that the tolerance for that is a lot lower than it was even six months ago. JOE: Yeah, I think you have to have a dual model right from the beginning now. KENDALL: Yeah. Agreed. VICTORIA: You got to figure out how to make money on Kubernetes before you can. [laughs] KENDALL: You know, minor detail. That's why I think services companies in this space still have a lot going for it. Because in order to even be able to sell software to a company using Kubernetes, you half the time have to go stand up Kubernetes for them because it is still that hard for so many people to really adopt it. VICTORIA: Yeah. And maybe, like, talking more about, like, when it is the right decision to start on Kubernetes because I think the question I get sometimes is just, is it overkill? Is it too much for what we're building? Especially, like, if you're building a brand-new product, you're not even sure if it's going to get adopted that widely. KENDALL: I mean, and I'm [laughs] curious your thought on this, Joe, but there's a good argument to be made that Heroku was enough for the vast majority of founders early on. But the thing is, Kubernetes isn't as hard as it used to be. Going and clicking a couple of buttons on GKE and deploying something into Kubernetes with GKE Autopilot running it's not as easy as Heroku, but it's not wildly far off. And it does substantially future-proof you. So, when is it too early? I'm not sure it's ever too early if you have an intention of scaling if you're planning on running some kind of legacy workload, like, things that are going to be stateful. Or maybe WordPress, for example, you don't probably need to deploy your WordPress blog onto Kubernetes. You can do that in your cPanel on Bluehost. I don't actually know if Bluehost even exists anymore, but I assume it's still a thing. I don't know, what would you say, Joe? JOE: I agree with that. I think it's a hard first pill to swallow. But I think the reality is that it's very easy to underestimate the infrastructure needs of even an early product. Like, it doesn't really matter what you're building. You're still going to have things like secrets management. You're still going to have to worry about networking. They just don't go away. There's no way you have a product without them. And so, rather than slowly solving all those problems from scratch on a platform that isn't designed for it, I think it's easier to just bite the bullet and use one of the managed solutions, especially, as you said, I think it's getting easier and easier. The activation energy from going from credit card to Kubernetes cluster is just getting lower. KENDALL: And so, the role of the CTO is just getting easier and easier because they can just adopt the one technology, and it's obviously Kubernetes. And it's obviously Rust, right? [laughter] Yeah, no, I'm with you. And I think if you find somebody who knows Kubernetes inside and out, it's really not going to take them long to get started. VICTORIA: Yeah, once again, change management is the biggest challenge for any new innovation coming into adoption. So, I'm curious to talk more about the influence that you need and how you influence others to come around to these types of ideas, like, in the executive suite and with the leadership of a company, especially on these types of topics, which can feel maybe a little abstract for people. KENDALL: How you influence them specifically to use Kubernetes, or just how you talk with them about technology adoption in general? Or what are you asking? VICTORIA: Yeah, like, how do I get people to not just turn their ears off when I say the word Kubernetes? [laughs] KENDALL: Yeah, I mean, I think...so I think that's where it's the technologist's job and the role of the CTO to translate these things into business speak. And that's why I'm using words like future-proofing your infrastructure is because there are companies that...I know one company that made a conscious decision that they were going to try to re-platform every single year, and that is not a good idea or sustainable for the vast majority [laughs] of companies. In fact, I can't think of a single situation where that makes sense. But if you can say to the CFO, "Hey, it's going to cost us a little bit more right now. It's going to save us substantially in the long term because this is the thing that's winning. And if we go standardize on Heroku right now, every company does eventually have to migrate off of Heroku. They either go out of business, or they get too big for it." That's the kind of thing that needs to be communicated in order to get people to adopt it. They don't care what the word is. They don't care if you're saying Kubernetes; you know, most CFOs understand it about as well as my mom does. My mom tries to bring it up in conversation because she's heard me use it. And she thinks it makes her sound smart, which maybe it does in the right climate. VICTORIA: My partner does the same thing. He says DevOps and Kubernetes all the time. I'm like; you don't know what you're talking about. [laughter] JOE: Those words do not come up in my house. KENDALL: One of my kids asked me to explain Kubernetes. And I do a whole talk, particularly at organizations where understanding Kubernetes is essential to the salespeople's role. And I give a whole talk about the background of how we got here from deploying on some servers in our back room. And, you know, what's different about the cloud, what containerization did, et cetera. And I have this long explanation. And I remember taking a deep breath and saying to my kids, "Do you really want to hear this?" And I had one son say, "Yes, absolutely." And my wife and three of the other kids all stood up and said, "No way," and left the room. So, when somebody asks me, "What do you do?" Actually, one of the key relationships I built with some of the early people at GCP when we were partnering closely with them was a person that I met, and I asked, "What do you do for a living?" And he said, "I can tell you, but it's not going to mean anything to you." And I was like, "That's what I say to people." And it turned out he was in charge of, you know, Kubernetes partnerships for Google. I can explain to you what it means and why it's important. But you're not going to be happy that I spent that time explaining it to you. VICTORIA: [laughs] That sounds awesome, though. It sounds like you built a server rack just to demo to your children what it was. KENDALL: No, no. I just talked back through the history of...that company that I mentioned that built Twitter about five years too early; we had a, you know, we had a server rack in the...literally physically in our closet that was serving up our product at the time. VICTORIA: Probably the best demo I ever saw was at Google headquarters in Herndon, and someone had built...They had 3D-printed a little mini server rack that they had put Raspberry Pis onto, and then they had Kubernetes deployed on it. And they did an automatic failover of a node to just demo how it works and had little lights that went with it. It was pretty fun. So maybe you should get one for yourself. [laughter] It's a fun project. KENDALL: They remember the things that it enables. They don't remember what it does. And so, when I say so, and so is a client that's using this technology, then they get real excited because they're like, "My dad makes that work." And I'm like, well, okay, that's kind of a stretch, but you get the idea. VICTORIA: Yeah, you got to lean into that kind of reputation in your house. KENDALL: That's right. VICTORIA: And you're like, yes, that's correct. KENDALL: That's right. [laughs] VICTORIA: I do make Kubernetes. I make all the clouds work, yeah. KENDALL: Actually, my most common explanation is Kubernetes is the plumbing of the internet. Unless you're a plumber, you don't care about the pipes. You just want your shit to flush when you use the toilet. You want the things to load when you click your buttons. You don't actually care what's going on behind the scenes, but this is what's orchestrating it increasingly across the internet. VICTORIA: So far, we've called Kubernetes WordPress or the toilet. [laughs] KENDALL: The plumbing. [laughter] VICTORIA: You are really good at selling it. [laughter] KENDALL: Hey, if you want to build a nice, clean city, you need good plumbing. You might not care what the pipes are made of, but you need good plumbing. [laughs] VICTORIA: Works for me. On that note -- [laughs] KENDALL: Yeah. Right? Right? VICTORIA: That's [inaudible 36:41] on a high note. Is there anything else that you'd like to promote? KENDALL: With regards to CTO Lunches, we have a free listserv. There are local lunches. If there isn't a local lunch where you are, it's very lightweight to start up a chapter. We often have folks who are willing to sponsor that first lunch to get you going. We do have a paid tier of CTO Lunches. If you want a small back room Slack channel of people to discuss, I think it's $99 a month. Yeah, if you're a CTO and/or a senior engineering leader and you want a community of people to process with, be it our free tier or our paid tier, we've got something for you. We're trying to invest in this to build community around it. And it's something we enjoy doing more than almost anything. Come take part. VICTORIA: You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com. Special Guest: Kendall Miller.
Alaina Percival is the Co-Founder and CEO of Women Who Code, with a mission to empower diverse women to excel in technology careers. Alaina delves into the origin and mission of Women Who Code, highlighting its community building, free technical events, and collaboration with companies to promote diversity in hiring. Victoria adds her personal experience with the organization, emphasizing its positive impact on her career. They discuss the challenges faced while expanding Women Who Code, including the need for systems and processes to manage growth. Alaina recounts stories of discrimination faced by women in tech and stresses the need for continued support and encouragement. The conversation also touches on the financial benefits of diversity and the alignment of Valor Ventures with Women Who Code's values. This discussion offers a detailed look into the women in tech movement, the importance of community, and the drive to create a more equitable industry. It serves as a reflection on both the strides made in fostering diversity and the work still needed to create a truly inclusive technology field. __ Women Who Code (https://www.womenwhocode.com/) Join the Women Who Code Slack! (https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSctj9HJr-5yadDbKYygBYBfNUWmjgODlkp8lgLou26AedIkuQ/viewform) Women Who Code Podcast (https://www.womenwhocode.com/podcast) Follow Women Who Code on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/womenwhocode), LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/women-who-code/), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/womenwhocode/), GitHub (https://github.com/WomenWhoCode), Twitter (https://twitter.com/WomenWhoCode), or YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/c/WomenWhoCodeGlobal?themeRefresh=1) Follow Alaina Percival on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/alainapercival/) or Twitter (https://twitter.com/alaina). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: WILL: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Will Larry. VICTORIA: And I'm your other host, Victoria Guido. And with me today is Alaina Percival, Venture Partner at Valor Ventures and Co-Founder and CEO of Women Who Code, with a mission to empower diverse women to excel in technology careers. Alaina, thank you for joining us. ALAINA: Thank you so much for having me. I'm thrilled to be here. VICTORIA: I'm thrilled to have you as well. I reached out. As you know, I was previously a Director of Women Who Code D.C. and helped to organize our DevOps and cloud series when I lived there. And it really had a huge impact on my career. So, I'm just super psyched to talk to you today. What's going on in your world, Alaina? ALAINA: So, in addition to my full-time job of working with Women Who Code, I'm also a mom of two young children, and so they're currently three and five. And so, it's summer. We've got summer camp. Every week is a different program with different details and things that you have to read and stay up on. It's a lot of additional project management added on over the summer. I'm looking forward to getting back to the school year, where I can kind of focus on just one role. WILL: That's amazing. And I can totally relate because I have a four, a three, and a one-year-old. Yes, it's a different story when you have to, like you said, project manage around them. So, that's amazing that you're wearing so many hats, and you're doing that. Hats off to you. ALAINA: Same to you. [laughter] WILL: Victoria, what about you? What's going on in your world? VICTORIA: Well, it is summertime at the beach, so all the kids are out. [laughs] It's busy. But that means that you know, the weather is warming up. It's tempting to try to go surfing again, so we'll see if that ends up happening anytime soon. But no, I'm hanging out. I'm local. I'm kind of done traveling for a little bit, so not until I go out to Outer Banks to visit my baby niece and nephew in August. So that's where I'm at right now. I'm kind of hunkered in trying to survive without air conditioning here and get through the summer. [laughs] WILL: You don't have AC? VICTORIA: I do not. Yeah, there's a lot of houses around here just never were built with it. I have heat, but I have no air conditioning. ALAINA: Are you being hit with the heat wave that's happening? VICTORIA: Yes. But it's still very mild. We're spoiled here for sure on weather. WILL: [laughs] VICTORIA: It's like 77, and I'm like, ugh, it's so hot. [laughs] WILL: I'm in Florida, and it amazes me. So, I got up early, around 7:00 o'clock, to go out for a run, and it's, like, 87 degrees. And it feels like almost 100 at 7:00 a.m. And I'm like -- VICTORIA: Oof. WILL: How? [laughs] Like, the sun is barely out, and it's already reaching 100. So yeah. ALAINA: I feel you. I'm in Atlanta. Yesterday, I had an in-person meeting. Typically, we're entirely remote. So, I was wearing real pants [laughs], and it was a hard day. We're not quite as hot as Florida. We are in the low 90s. But yeah, this weather is for real. WILL: Yes. [laughter] VICTORIA: That is the...yeah, working in person again in a hot climate. [laughs] I forgot the challenges of that of, like, trying to navigate life while having to be fully clothed is difficult in that kind of weather. So, I'm glad. I hope you all find some ways to stay cool and to entertain your children [laughs] so that you have some sanity and can get through the summer. I've also been really interested in the European model of just taking five weeks off in the summer. Doesn't that sound nice? WILL: Yes. [laughs] ALAINA: Yeah. I started my career off in Germany. I worked for Puma. Their headquarters is right outside of Nuremberg in a town called Herzogenaurach. And people really do take the whole month off August. And, in fact, you would even separate out the salaries. So, you got something called urlaubsgeld, which was vacation money. So, you would get kind of a little bonus going into August, and then everybody would take off. So, I agree with you. We should be doing that. VICTORIA: Yeah, we should be doing that. And I'm so excited. Maybe we can segue into, like, your background and how you got started. How did you go from there to founding Women Who Code? ALAINA: Yeah, so after working at Puma, I somewhat came back to the United States. I did a dual degree program, an MBA where I was studying between Atlanta, so I could get back in the United States, spend some time with my family, and then also the Sorbonne in Paris. And I did an MBA and a degree in organizational management, Master's in organizational management. Then I went to work for really small ones, performance wear company. And that was more, like, a startup because you really had to think outside of the box. You know, you're a small $10 million a year company, and Nike and Mizuno, you know, these big companies are your competitors. So, I had the opportunity to move out to San Francisco. It was one of the cities that was always on my list of, hey, if you get a chance to do it, go for it. And I did. So, I moved out there, and I kind of hit a bit of a wall with my career, an unexpected wall because up until that point, I had just this really, you know, successful early career. I got out there, and they're, like, Puma. You know, you haven't worked for Microsoft, or Twitter, or Facebook, or Google. Who are you? So, I started learning to code just to transition my skill set to help me understand the culture and the language and just getting more involved in the tech community. And I was still struggling a little bit in figuring out my transition pathway and got more and more involved with Women Who Code and started, you know, spending my nights and weekends. And finally, I was at a small startup that had gotten acquired, so I had my official tech credibility. And I went to work for one of the top technical recruiting firms, executive recruiting firms in the Bay Area, as their head of developer outreach. And I largely chose that role because they were allowing me to run their philanthropic arm, and I focused that around supporting underrepresented communities, you know, get a leg up in the tech community. And then, while I was there, I was working with CTOs, vice presidents of engineering, directors of engineering on a day-to-day basis. And I started learning what they were doing in their career to help develop and cultivate the success that they were having, and I started bringing that knowledge and programming into Women Who Code. And that's where our mission around seeing diverse women excel in technology careers came about is, you know, that piece of retaining and seeing diverse women excelling was an area that wasn't really the focus at the time. And I feel like it sounds funny now because it's such a big piece of conversation. But that was the beginning. VICTORIA: Yeah, it's so interesting that your experience from being in a startup and then how you moved up into being really involved in the hiring and the process of how women...how anyone would actually, like, move up in their career led you to have that background to found Women Who Code. And for people who maybe don't know, [laughs] no, I certainly know what it is. Can you talk a little bit more about what it offers to women and what it offers to companies who are looking to hire diverse women? ALAINA: For individuals, we are the largest and most active community of diverse technologists. We have close to 350,000 members. We're serving members across 147 countries. And we're producing close to 2,000 free technical events every single year, so that's about an average of 5 per day. Once those events take place, if you happen to miss them if you happen to not be in a location where they're having them in person, we're putting a lot of that on our YouTube channel. So, you can go back when you have time, when you're available, still invest in yourself and learn some of these technical and career-related skills. You can also, you know, when you think about, say, the 2,000 talks that are being delivered at Women Who Code, the majority of them are being led by and delivered by diverse technologists. So, we're creating role models and helping people who are on their career path have a sense of belonging, see a pathway to success. People who are thinking about the career path see themselves represented as thought leaders, as leaders in the tech industry. And that sense of belonging, that sense of drive, is just so important to be able to continue on in your career. But we work with companies. So, Women Who Code is dedicated to accessibility. All of our programming is free or scholarship accessible. And so, what we do is we work with companies, and we do this for two reasons: for programmatic reasons. Because we know that if companies develop strong diversity, equity, and inclusion, and belonging practices, that we will reach our mission and vision so much faster than if we work with every individual in the world. But it also creates an opportunity for us to be able to support the community. So, we work with companies to sponsor Women Who Code to donate to support Women Who Code's programming. We have our first-ever walk coming up, so a walk, run, roll called Women Who Code to the Finish Line. And we're going to be having that in September of this year. And that's going to be an opportunity for the stakeholders. You know, often, people who aren't in our community but absolutely support us say, "How can we help?" And so, companies can form teams and go and walk, run, roll to change the face of the tech industry. Right now, we're also in a position where the tech industry has been doing a lot of layoffs, so there's a lot of instability. And so, when that happens, our programming thrives. So, people are coming to our events in high numbers. People are participating in our programming. People are visiting our job board. It's the time when companies are stepping back and pulling back on their funding and things like that. So, I just encourage every single company to...if you have a great technical job open, make sure you're sharing it with the Women Who Code community because we have incredible technologists. They deserve access to companies that are willing to support them and the best roles that are available in the industry today. WILL: Alaina, I just want to honestly and truly say this, what you're doing is amazing. Having a background in nonprofit, over 140 companies, over 300,000 in your membership, and it's an international nonprofit. It's truly amazing what you're doing and helping women find their role and help them become better. I'm truly just blown away by, you know, you started in September 2011, so you're coming up on 12 years this year. And just 12 years as a nonprofit and doing this, share with us how was it received at the very beginning? Because I feel like that was a different time that we're in right now. ALAINA: Yeah, it started off as a meetup, just a community group in San Francisco. And it was incredible. It felt like our little secret. And we were spending time together. We were learning. We were building connections. And just it was this incredible community. And then, the world started talking about, hey, we need to teach girls to code. We need to teach women to code. And we were this community of people in the industry. Our average age at Women Who Code is 30, so 50% of our members are currently in technical roles. So, we had this moment of, hey, we need to elevate the voice of those who are in the industry right now, alongside teaching girls to code and teaching women to code. Because if you miss out on that, it actually becomes a threat to the women in the industry who, every time you hear "Teach women to code," you're saying she doesn't already know how to do it. And we had so many people in our community who already did and already had to kind of prove themselves on a regular basis or constantly underestimated. In the early years, a Women Who Code leader who told me that she was managing a booth at a conference, and everyone was an engineer except for one recruiter, and the recruiter's name was Brian. Someone walked up to her and said, "Are you Brian?" Because it was easier to imagine that her name was Brian than that she was one of the engineers at the table. And so, kind of going through this, we said, hey, we need to elevate our voices. We need to elevate the needs of women in the industry. And it feels being in it day by day, that nothing's happening. But when you look back over 13-15 years, you see that parental leave policies have improved significantly, that we see numbers in leadership going up across the board, that it's part of the conversation that relatively standard and tech companies to have DEI roles within the organization, within the people team. And so, these are not enough. It's just the beginning. But it is a lot that's taken place over the past 10 to 15 years. VICTORIA: I agree. And I can relate as someone who was a project manager working in a technology space. Was it back in, like, 2013 or something? And you'd go to tech meetups, and most likely, I would be the only woman there. [laughs] But then, with Women Who Code, my friend invited me to go to a Ruby event, and it was, you know, all women. [laughs]. There was a woman who was even giving the instruction. And so, that was just a really cool feeling after having been out networking and feeling kind of isolated to really find a lot of people who are similar to you. And I remember part of the narrative at that time when we were talking about increasing inclusion and diversity in technology; there was a narrative that, well, there just aren't as many women in tech. And being a part of Women Who Code, I could be able to, like, answer back to say, "Well, there actually is a lot of women in tech." And it's the bigger problem that women would get started because they're interested in the industry and having good careers, but then they would fall out midway. So, there just wasn't enough progression in their careers. There wasn't enough support on the parental leave side, or there just wasn't enough community to keep people interested, like, when you're the only one. And many of our members they were the only women in their company, and then Women Who Code was where they found people they could really connect with. So, I just think it's interesting that it solves a particular problem where we would have women who are just interested in learning to code who would come to our events. And then, we had women who were actively coding in their jobs and teaching others in these leadership roles within the community to advance their own careers. And that's certainly what I did, and how I broke into executive leadership was, like, I'm a director at Women Who Code and I've got all this other leadership experience. And I'm bringing that network with me. It really increases your value to employers and demonstrates your leadership abilities. ALAINA: Yeah, I couldn't agree more. The program which we kind of fell into, it's our volunteers, is our program that I'm actually most proud of at Women Who Code. And it's probably because I get to know our volunteers because I know so many people's lives and careers are impacted by our programming. But that leadership development, that practice-based leadership that our volunteers are able to obtain, the doors that get open, and just like you said, it opened doors. And I remember it hit me when one of our volunteers told me she was interviewing with SpaceX. And one of the reasons they said they were excited to talk to her was because of her Women Who Code leadership experience. And I just thought to myself, we're doing something right. [laughs] VICTORIA: Yeah, absolutely. And I think maybe part of Will's question before, too, is, like, did it always feel like you were doing something right? Or did it all just come together naturally? Or what kind of bumps did you initially hit when you were getting things off the ground? ALAINA: Yeah. When we first got started and realized, hey, we need to make Women Who Code more accessible, we were doing everything in a very manual way. We needed to adapt to building systems and processes, and that's not the fun part of running a volunteer organization. And when you're moving so fast, it means slowing things down a little bit to be able to make sure that you can do things better, more consistently, more efficiently, but it's so critical. And so, I would say we kind of launched outside of the Bay Area in a couple of cities. And it just snowballed until we expanded into 20 to 40 more cities within probably a year outside of that. And we just really needed to catch up on creating systems and processes, which is not beautiful at all, but it's an important part of running a real business, a real company. WILL: That's amazing. First off, I just want to say I am so sorry that the world we live in looks down upon women or anybody. So, I'm just so sorry that, like, the story you said about Brian, asking the lady that. I feel like that's so disrespectful. I am so sorry if you ever got treated that way or anything like that. And so, I was going to ask this question, and then I kind of answered it. But the question was, do you think women are at a place to where kind of equal in tech? And I kind of answered my own question and said, "No." And so, I want to reframe it. What do you think it will take to continue to help the women get to that level of where it should be? ALAINA: It's going to take a lot of things. But the fastest and easiest way to create more equality for women and girls in the tech industry is by investing and supporting the incredible talent that is in the industry today. We need them to thrive. We need them to stay in their careers. We need them to become leaders with power and influence to create more equity in the industry so that when future generations are coming in, they're coming into an industry that is less broken for them, that is more welcoming, that shows and demonstrates more opportunity. This is one of the most exciting and innovative industries to be a part of. So many things are being shaped and built for the first time that are systems that are going to be the foundations for years or centuries to come. And so, it's more important now than ever for us to be thinking about bringing equity into that so we're not dealing with technical debt, where we're starting from a system that has more equality to it. VICTORIA: I really appreciate that perspective. And I'm curious how that relates to your work at Valor Ventures as well. ALAINA: Valor Ventures is very aligned with the values of Women Who Code, which is why I chose it. I am passionate about creating more equality and opportunity for diverse individuals to thrive and succeed in general but via the tech industry. And so, when I move into focusing on entrepreneurs and focusing on seeing diverse entrepreneurs succeed in building thriving organizations, I see an opportunity to have someone who will be thinking earlier about the policies and the practices that are going to build more equitable teams, products that are really for all of their users. VICTORIA: I think that's a great mindset. And it reminds me that when we talked about, like, the importance of diversity, and equity, and inclusion, that it's not purely a moral thing, even though morally we know we want to support and be inclusive, but that it's also good business strategy [laughs], just by the value of having different perspectives and different types of people, and then being able to have your products be accessible for a diverse group as well, right? ALAINA: Yeah, the data shows teams that are diverse are smarter. Companies that have women represented in leadership they have a stronger ROI. There's business reason behind it. There's certainly a social-moral reason that it just should take place. But, you know, if you need to come back to your shareholders or your investors, there's financial data around it. WILL: Yeah, I totally agree on all that, like, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. MID-ROLL AD: Now that you have funding, it's time to design, build, and ship the most impactful MVP that wows customers now and can scale in the future. thoughtbot Liftoff brings you the most reliable cross-functional team of product experts to mitigate risk and set you up for long-term success. As your trusted, experienced technical partner, we'll help launch your new product and guide you into a future-forward business that takes advantage of today's new technologies and agile best practices. Make the right decisions for tomorrow today. Get in touch at thoughtbot.com/liftoff. WILL: What have you seen hold back women in this space? And the reason I'm asking this question is because there are some biases out there, and, at times, we don't even realize it. For example, I know we have parental leave. And before I had kids, I didn't understand parental leave at all. But then, now that I have kids, I'm like, oh, it is not even close to being enough time during that time, you know, four or five hours of sleep at night, just all those things. So, in your experience, what have you seen? And hopefully, we can use this as a learning opportunity for anybody that just may be blind to it. What have you seen that kind of holds it back? ALAINA: That's holding back, like, implementing specific policies and practices or? WILL: Yes, holding back the policies, or maybe women not being as prevalent in tech roles any of those areas. ALAINA: So, sort of two different approaches with that is I'm optimistic. I think most companies, yes, they care about the bottom line, but they want to be doing the right thing if it's easy. Leaders like me we need to put pressure on companies making better decisions. But also, industry leaders and organizations out there need to be able to make it easier for companies to make the decisions that are going to create more equity inside of their organization. I know that's taking the responsibility off of them a little bit. But companies won't make commitments. They won't do the hard things if they don't know how to do it. And so, the easier that we can make it for them to make the right decision, the more likely they are to make the right decision. VICTORIA: I think that people want to do the right thing if it's easy is a really succinct way to explain a lot of, like, social and moral [laughs] issues right now, right? Most people generally want to do the right thing, but it can be complex. I'm curious about, speaking of complexity, for Women Who Code, going through, you know, being an organization that was built around in-person events, and then having COVID happen, so, like, what were some of the challenges of the last few years and changes that you experienced along the way? ALAINA: Yeah, when COVID hit, that was a big moment for the whole world. It was certainly really hard for organizations that rely on in-person activities. You know, our major conference supplied a third of our operating revenue. Our members were going to, you know, close to 2,000 in-person events. And so, we had to adapt just like everyone else. The organizations and the companies that adapted were the ones that thrived. So, we had to completely retrain all of our volunteers from doing in-person events to be able to create digital events for our community. We had to figure out how to produce major events, and conferences, and hackathons and do it in a remote way. And then, of course, there's the day-to-day that absolutely everyone had, and that was, you know, just your team went from meeting in person to everyone being remote. And some of the great things that came out about that is we were serving members in about 26 countries and about 80 cities, and now we serve members in 147 countries. It just made it accessible that if you don't happen to be in a location where an event is happening and you also don't happen to have childcare, be able to participate, that you are still able to participate in an online setting. And then, what we saw with being able to start moving more of, you know, those talks that were being delivered to our YouTube channel, it then became even more accessible. People spent about five years of life watching our YouTube trainings, and that's time people are investing in themselves. And when I say they did it, and I'm talking about in 2022. So, our YouTube channel, our trainings, they continue to grow, and then our online events continue to happen. But luckily, now we are able to start going back in person. And it's, again, just so amazing to be able to see the people you haven't seen in a long time, feel that feeling that is just a little bit different for an in-person event. WILL: That's amazing. So, from, say, 2019, 2020 to now, it went from 80 countries to over 140, just because of the pivot to go more, like, YouTube and tech. Is that kind of what you're saying about the growth of it? ALAINA: Yeah, so about 80 cities, so about 25 countries to serving members in 147 countries. WILL: That's amazing. ALAINA: Yeah, a tremendous amount of growth and creating accessibility around the globe. Previously, we were really only able to focus on tech hubs that had an ecosystem to support it. But, you know, just because you're from a rural area of your state or from a country in the Global South, you still deserve access to this incredible community and all of the free accessible programming that Women Who Code has to offer. When we have a conference, we have people from 88 countries participating. And when you sign into the networking session, you're going to hop on the phone with someone from Nigeria, someone from Bangladesh, someone from your same city, and it's just such an incredible experience to be able to have that global focus and reach. WILL: Wow, that is so amazing. So, let's talk about right now. What does your next milestone look like, you know, in the next six months or next year? What does that look like for you? ALAINA: As I mentioned before, one of the big challenges we've had this year is our programming is going so, so well, but our funding has pulled back a little bit. And so, we're working to diversify our revenue strategy a little bit and have a traditional nonprofit walk that we've never done before. And it's a remote walk, so anyone all over the world can participate just like you can with our digital events. But this has been something new for us. Because when we went through it during COVID, again, you know, you'd get on the call with all of your partners. You know, the world is going through something, and you kind of say, oh yeah, we're in it together. But you don't see the grace that you saw in 2020 and sort of the camaraderie, and we're in this together, and we're going to give you space and support you, you know, in every way that we can that, you know, is just really missing this time around. You know, we have members who absolutely need support in their careers right now. And so, it's navigating through something different. VICTORIA: Yeah. And I guess talking more about inclusivity, like, we have all this free content, and it is Women Who Code. But I remember when I was an organizer, I had a few people ask me, "Well if I'm a man, can I come to your event?" And I was like, "Yes, it's open to everyone," right? Like, it's promoting women, and it's about women growing in their careers. And certainly, if that's not also your intention with attending the event, you should keep that in mind and make sure you're leaving space for other people. But I also really appreciated that it's open for everyone and that it's open for everyone who is in the women umbrella, and being intentional about that, and that it's inclusive of everyone who relates to being a woman, right? ALAINA: Yeah. Women Who Code welcomes all genders. We, you know, really struggle with our name from a brand perspective because it isn't as inclusive as we'd like it to be. So, actually, after we say our name, we try not to repeat the word women anywhere else. From the beginning, been dedicated to having an open, accessible community. But we definitely require, you know, that you are following our code of conduct, that you're there for the intended purpose of the event. And we want to make sure that we're protecting our community. VICTORIA: Well, I really appreciate that. And I appreciate...it sounds like a value organization that I'm with. I always look for those things that that's what we're really promoting. There's been so many changes that have happened with Women Who Code and in your career. If you could go back in time and give yourself some advice when you were first getting started, what would you tell yourself? ALAINA: If I was going back and thinking about what I would tell myself in the beginning, I'd probably tell myself to focus on data sooner. Coming from the history of being a meetup group to transitioning to being a global nonprofit, we dragged our feet around focusing on data impact, and really, it's because we're constantly doing so much programming. We're always doing so many things, and anything you add on is an extra thing to do. And so, I would say focus on the data much sooner. VICTORIA: I can speak to there being a lot of events. I remember back in the heyday in D.C., it was, like, algorithms on Tuesdays and Ruby on Thursdays, and then next week, it would be DevOps. And there was just always something going on. And I thought that was so cool. And I really appreciate just really everyone who is involved in putting on those programs. I really want to emphasize, too, like, the value for companies working with Women Who Code. And what do they get out of the partnership, and how can they really engage with the community? ALAINA: Yeah. So, companies that work with us, it's a partnership. They are there to support the community, and that's what they have to do to really develop trust. And we're going to make sure that we're guiding them in that process. So, if we see an opportunity for them to engage in a more authentic way, we're going to point that out. But companies are often hiring from our community; that's one of the big reasons, not just through our job board because our members are unicorns. They're diverse technologists, and everyone wants to hire them. And so, you can just say, "Hey, come work for me." But really, they want you to explain who's on the team? What are the exciting projects, and what are the exciting technologies that your company is building? So that they can actually identify that your company is an organization that they would want to work for before just applying for a job. And that's what a lot of our partnership creates space for. So, maybe getting an opportunity to join our podcast and tell the story and get to know some of the diverse leadership team or diverse engineering team, learn about some of your, like, commitment to DEI and things like that. Because when a senior engineer receives multiple job outreaches, they're going to respond to the one that they've heard of, that they already know is a good company, that they know is supporting and investing in building equity into the tech ecosystem. That's going to go a long way in them deciding to reply. WILL: That's awesome. Earlier, you mentioned being inclusive of all the members. I think I know the answer, but I just want to double-check. If I want to volunteer, am I able to volunteer at Women Who Code? ALAINA: Yes, absolutely. If you visit our website...and we just updated our website, so I encourage everyone to go visit womenwhocode.com today. It's looking different than it has over the past five years. There's a sign-up to volunteer. You would be absolutely welcome, Will. WILL: Awesome. And, as a volunteer, what would that look like? What could I get involved in? What areas? ALAINA: You could decide to be a speaker. You could apply to be a network leader. You could become a lead in a particular technology area. We have six technical tracks. Our tracks are cloud, data science, Python, mobile. When [inaudible 32:53] hears about it, we will have emerging technologies track that was expanded from our blockchain community this year. And then, we also have a career track as well. So, you can become a lead focused on one of those particular areas in our digital communities. You can get engaged with the Women Who Code community in many different ways. We also have some really cool programs like mentor me and buddy system, so getting involved in those. Building long-form connections or long-time connections with individuals in the community really helps to create a sense of belonging and start to build trust and an opportunity to exchange knowledge. VICTORIA: I always really appreciated people who were, like, "Do you need a space to host your meetup?" Or "Do you want us to buy you pizza for your meetup?" [laughs] Those are very easy ways to engage. And it's true that the membership does see and pay attention to, like, who is regularly getting involved in committing to this, and it makes a difference in your brand and reputation. ALAINA: Absolutely. The companies that work with us absolutely hire from the Women Who Code community. I'll give two examples. So, one of the most exciting examples was we had an event at a company, and they sort of were connecting in an authentic way, not, like, an interview way, but they essentially were doing an early interview with people who were there. And so I remember that it took place on Tuesday, and they had a job offer on Friday at the company that they were at. So, they were just able to move so quickly and hire someone from our community. And then, ages ago, Snapchat was at our first-ever conference, and they had hired four or six people at that event. And it was just so cool to see that we're not a recruiting agency, so we really just rely on either individuals or companies to tell us when they have these amazing career outcomes. So, every time we hear about it, it's always exciting to me. VICTORIA: That's super cool. And I wonder, what is the thing you're most excited about coming up for Women Who Code this year? ALAINA: We have CONNECT Asia taking place later on this year, and so that's our major technical conference with a focus in the Asia market. It's going to be just really, really exciting. We haven't had one since pre-COVID. It's still going to be a remote event. We had CONNECT LATAM, so our first-ever conference focused on Latin America last year. And this year, it's focused on Asia. So, it's really exciting to get back and provide some support to our regional audiences and really showcase some of the incredible talent and leadership coming out of those regions. WILL: That's amazing. So, the question I have for you, and it's easy to assume this question, but I want to hear from you because I know you talked about, at the beginning, how it was when you started the nonprofit. But what is the wind in your sails? Like, what keeps you motivated and going? It sounds like it's an easy answer, but just from your heart, what motivates you? ALAINA: Oh, it is absolutely the stories that I hear, like I said, especially from our volunteers. So, the Mexico City volunteer who, in under a year, told me her salary increased 200%. The director from Toronto, you know, when she stepped up, was an individual contributor, and under one year, she made it to director level, and today she's a vice president. So, when I think of the career impacts that are taking place for our members, and every single time I hear about it, it drives me to wake up. It drives me to work harder. It drives me to deliver better program and just makes me completely connected to what we do as an organization. VICTORIA: What a great benefit. And for myself, personally, it absolutely has been a factor in the last, like, two jobs I've gotten. [laughs] They're like, "Oh, you are a director at Women Who Code? That's so interesting." So, I really appreciate everything that you've done and happy to be a part of that. And my personal network, I know many women who have been through that and benefited immensely from having that networking community. And really, even just being able to see yourself and know that you belong in the industry, I think, is really, really important. ALAINA: I'm sure I'm going to be telling your story the next time someone asks me. [laughter] VICTORIA: That's great. No, please do. And let's see; we're wrapping up at the end of our time here. Is there anything else that you would like to promote? ALAINA: Yeah, please visit womenwhocode.com. If you have technical jobs available, please post them to the Women Who Code job board. Again, it's just womenwhocode.com/jobs. Join our community. Check out our amazing, new, beautiful website, and follow us on social media @WomenWhoCode. VICTORIA: Love that. Thank you so much for joining us today. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, you can email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. WILL: And you can find me @will23larry. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thank you for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com. Special Guest: Alaina Percival.
Introducing thoughtbot's ongoing maintenance service. Need reliable support and maintenance for your software? Look no further. Our expert team handles upgrades, bug fixes, UI adjustments, and new feature development. And the best part? Our maintenance packages start at just 5k per month for companies of all sizes. From Ruby on Rails to Node, React, and, yes, even PHP, we've got you covered. Trust thoughtbot for top-notch support and optimized performance. To receive a custom quote, contact sales@thoughtbot.com. Marc Mar-Yohana is the CEO and Founder of OtisHealth, a personal health application and platform for patient-caregiver engagement, population health, and clinical research. The conversation revolves around the origin and working principles of OtisHealth, a healthcare app designed to consolidate health information. Marc was motivated to start the app following the tragic death of his eight-year-old daughter, Constance, from an undiagnosed brain tumor. Despite being under the care of multiple health providers, the fragmentation of her medical data meant they missed the signs of her condition. Marc has dedicated his life to developing better tools for families and caregivers to manage their loved one's health. He aimed to create a unified system where all health data could be gathered, enabling caregivers, patients, and medical providers to see the whole picture. OtisHealth allows patients to integrate data from different sources, including wearable devices, and capture information outside clinical settings. The initial outreach strategy of OtisHealth through consumer channels was slow to get traction. The company switched to recruiting through organizations with health interests, such as health insurers or "payers," leading to a significant increase in users. Although not everyone uses the app daily, it is a crucial health management tool for those with chronic illnesses or emergencies. The trustworthiness of OtisHealth is demonstrated through accreditation from the Electronic Healthcare Network Accreditation Commission, indicating that their practices meet or exceed federal regulatory requirements and industry guidelines. This, along with community outreach and educational content, helped build trust with users. Marc's diverse corporate background gave him the skill set to lead OtisHealth, emphasizing the importance of team development and collaboration with other organizations, even competitors, to move the mission forward. __ OtisHealth (https://otishealth.net/) Follow OtisHealth on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/OtisHealth), LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/otishealth/), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/bloxisawesome/), or YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5yGWpOTCOJnbxjD1LnkMXg) Follow Marc Mar-Yohana on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/marc-mar-yohana/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with me today is Marc Mar-Yohana, CEO and Founder of OtisHealth, a personal health application and a platform for patient-caregiver engagement, population health, and clinical research. Marc, thank you for joining me. MARC: Victoria, I'm honored to be here. Thank you so much for inviting me to join you on this podcast. VICTORIA: You're welcome. I'm excited to have you. So, why don't you just tell me a little bit about what's going on in your world right now? MARC: Well, OtisHealth is keeping me pretty busy. So, I live in Northern California. My team is mostly in California, a little bit in Illinois. And we're busy every day, both supporting our members and working with clients. And so, it's exciting times, especially on our advocacy front. We work with organizations across the country to advocate for patient access to their health records and also for individuals themselves to improve their access to quality healthcare wherever they reside in the United States. The advocacy, the work with our clients, and the work with our members keeps us super busy. Although I do still try to make time to hike in the beautiful scenery out here. I'm new to California. I'm originally from Illinois, so it's great to just be able to get out every once in a while for a hike in the area. VICTORIA: That's wonderful. Have you made it to any redwood forest out there? MARC: Yeah, Muir Woods, which is just north of us, north of the San Francisco Bay Area. Most of the time, we like to walk the coastline. So just north of Santa Cruz is a great state park known as Wilder State Ranch. And they have amazing views of the coastline, wonderful views of birds, as well as occasionally spotting whales, and dolphins, and sea otters along the coast. VICTORIA: That's so cool. I had a friend, actually, who just went up there and went kayaking with the otters, and I'm very jealous. [laughter] It sounds beautiful. MARC: Yeah, that can be fun. Otters are really cute creatures. And they can be aggressive too. There's a concern right now. There's one female otter that likes to grab people's surfboards. And I saw a video of a sea lion jumping on top of a sea kayak to steal a fish from a fisherman. VICTORIA: I think if a sea otter or a sea lion wanted my vessel, a kayak or surfboard, I mean, you can have it. [laughter] You worked this hard. [laughs] MARC: Yeah, they're pretty aggressive. They're more comfortable in the water than we are, so they [laughs] pretty much are in charge in the environment. VICTORIA: That's right. We're in their house, right? So, I'm, like, okay, [laughs] you can have it. That's great. Oh, wonderful. I'm glad you still have time to get outside and enjoy hiking with your family, even though you're a very busy founder [chuckles] and very active advocate for your community. So, why don't you tell me how everything with OtisHealth got started? MARC: So, it started with a tragedy, a horrible tragedy in my life. My daughter, Constance, who was eight years old at the time and had been previously diagnosed with autism, apraxia of speech, and epilepsy, died from an undiagnosed brain tumor. She had great healthcare. She had a neurologist, a pediatrician. She had therapists that saw her five days a week and, of course, her parents watching over her. Yet, we all missed the symptoms, the major illness that claimed her life. And so, because all of her healthcare providers were on different systems, and as parents, we didn't have a system, there wasn't a place to put our observations together. And everyone attributed their observations of her changing condition to other medical concerns. And so, after she passed, I started to spend a couple of years trying to understand what happened. And I realized a big part of it was the information was in front of us. It was just in different people's hands. And when we put it together, we could have seen the whole picture that would have shown that she had a more serious illness. And so I chose a new mission in my life: to abandon my corporate career and move into this role of developing a better set of tools for families and caregivers to manage their loved one's health. And so, our mission today is to work with families, caregivers, and people with chronic illness to give them better tools to manage their everyday health and the health of their loved ones, and thereby also improving lives in the community. VICTORIA: Well, I love that out of the tragedy, you were able to find direction and purpose to solve this major problem, which I can relate to having moved across the country. Your medical records don't come with you. You have to basically kind of start all over, or they have to go get them from your past patients. It's not unified as a system, as you might think that is. [laughs] MARC: That's absolutely right. Our data is spread out across different clinical sources. Just in the time I moved out here to California from Chicago, I saw five different providers just because I wanted to get some tests done. So, I had to go to a few different locations to do a normal battery of tests. And so, I had at least five different health records created just when I moved out here. And they're all in different systems, and they're not even on the same type of application. So, to bring them together, I had to basically download them and put them in files on my desktop computer. With OtisHealth, I'm able to retrieve that data and put it onto one continuous record and watch it. But that's still just our clinical data, meaning data collected in clinical settings. We have more data to share of things that you and I observe as regular people or our families observe. And so, the part that's missing in the record is all the observations in the time that we're not in the physician, in a physician's office, or in the presence of a clinician. We can; with our tools today, such as wearable watches, or blood pressure cuffs that are Bluetooth-connected, we can get a lot more data and share that back into our records so that we have a true baseline, not the once-a-year that I go to see a physician, and they say my blood pressure is high. And the next time I go, it's low. It's because we only have two data points over two years. Where today, with our technology and our capabilities, we can have a baseline of true data continuously throughout the year that will give the physician or care team more insights into how we're doing in terms of our health. VICTORIA: That's so interesting. And it makes a lot of sense to me why someone would want to use this or why doctors would want to use this. And I'm curious, once you had this idea, how did you get that initial traction to get started with OtisHealth? MARC: Initially, it was a little difficult. And this is kind of part of our lessons learned when we started the company. We started advertising on Facebook. This is after we launched the product. So, we launched in 2021. We had the idea that we were going to make this available to a lot of people. We knew a lot of folks that needed it. It was okay to get the first 100 or so people because there were folks that we knew needed the application or folks that were curious about it and wanted to try it. And we started advertising through consumer channels such as Facebook, and LinkedIn, and other magazines to people that we knew had the need for the app. Yet, it was a very slow uptake. And the part of what we learned and we started applying to our marketing or our membership development or recruitment thesis is that the health records are kind of like an umbrella. We don't think about the umbrella or going out to get an umbrella until it's raining, and for most people, it doesn't rain very often. And so, it's not something that people would use every day. In most cases, they use it only when they have an emergency or when they're managing their chronic illness or the chronic illness of a loved one. And so, we eventually changed the way we were recruiting and started recruiting through other organizations, such as clients where we're able to get thousands of users through the client that has members. And then, slowly, over time, teach them the importance of managing their everyday health, and taking their own vitals, and recording that, and they record for themselves and their family. VICTORIA: Right. So, you were able to offer the app for free for daily users because you found another group that was interested in having access to the data and having this app, right? MARC: Yeah. So, anybody today can go to the Apple Store or the Google Play Store and they could download the app for free. And they can use the web version also. And they could share it with friends and family, which I always encourage people to do. So, if you have an emergency contact, invite them to your medical records; at least they have your basic medications, and allergies, and other key information in case of an emergency. What we did in terms of our change of strategy early on is we started going to organizations that also had an interest in improving the health of their population and, in particular, health insurers or what we call in the industry payers. And so, payer organizations could be Medicaid, Medicare, or it could be employee health plan, one of the big health insurance companies like Blue Cross or UnitedHealthcare. They have an interest in people managing their everyday health. And so, one of our clients right now, everyone that enrolls in one of their plans automatically gets enrolled in a version of OtisHealth specifically for their members. And those members could still invite people to join them on the platform, and those people can get on with OtisHealth. But the nice thing is now this payer has a way to both encourage healthier activity or healthier practices for their population and monitor if there's a problem. So, if somebody is missing medications, or not taking their medications on time, or has vitals that are tracking poorly, this gives the payer an opportunity to reach out and ask them if they need help managing their health. VICTORIA: So, how does that dynamic affect how you measure successful engagement on the platform, like, a successful rate of engagement? MARC: So, for us, most people don't use the app every day. Most of us don't even think about our health [laughs] on a daily basis from a standpoint of our medical health or clinical health. Sometimes those of us that exercise regularly think about it in those terms or eating healthy. But we don't think about keeping a record or using an app to maintain our health. And so, for us, an active user is anybody that's logging in at least once a month to update their information. Our really great users are the ones who are using the reminder features to take supplements or take their medications. And so, I would say of the few thousand users that we have—we're approaching 10,000 right now active users—only a small percentage of those, maybe 10%, are actually using it on a daily basis for themselves or their family. And so, for us, a good engagement and good practice is folks setting reminders on at least a weekly basis to take vitals, weigh themselves—something that would help them track their health over time—and if they're taking medications, to set daily reminders for the medications that they take. And so, we currently have far more people enrolled in OtisHealth and that, you know, 5,000, 6000 I mentioned that are active. But they basically bought the umbrella, and they just put it in their closet. They're waiting for that rainy day that they have to pull it out and start using it. VICTORIA: That makes sense. And I'm already in my head going through the people in my family who would benefit from this where, you know, I have family members who have a learning and a physical disability, and tracking everything that they're supposed to be doing to maintain their health is quite difficult. So, I can definitely see the value in that and why people would want to use it. And I think for, you know, healthcare apps, you have to build this high level of trust. You know, people are giving you all this data about their health information. So, how do you go about building a product that people can trust from the beginning? MARC: One of the things we sort early in the life of OtisHealth is an accreditation. An accreditation is not required by law. It's not required by any institution necessarily. It's a third party that reviews our practices and our systems to see if we're actually following good privacy and security standards and practices. And so we went live in November of 2021, and by the end of December of 2021, we already had our full accreditation in what's called a comprehensive level from a national established organization known as The Electronic Healthcare Network Accreditation Commission. And so, that was the first step of making sure that folks understood that we took their privacy and security seriously. That accreditation means that our practices and our technology meets or exceeds federal regulatory requirements and industry guidelines. And that's just the first step. Then after that, it's really a matter of people gain their trust because an accreditation itself doesn't necessarily mean that we trust that brand. That's just a basic starting point for us. After that, we publish articles about maintaining health. We have launched some videos about different aspects of our advocacy, such as with autism for caregivers. And we participate in community activities at the national level to improve patient access and to talk about how important it is to manage our own health and the health of our loved ones. And so, it's a combination of both basic accreditations that show that we made the investment, and we provided a third party to critique us and to review us. And we actively maintain that accreditation is not a one-time stamp. And then, the second part is continuous outreach, and letting the community know what we're working on, what's important to us, so that, over time, they start to look at what we do and start to trust it and invite other people to trust it as well. VICTORIA: That makes a lot of sense. And I'm curious if there were experiences from your corporate career that informed how you acted as a founder and what you prioritized. MARC: I've had an odd corporate career. [laughs] So, I started my career as an engineer in manufacturing operations and in product development and then went down to as a consultant strategy in ops and market management, and then, later, investment management and private equity, and then, later, for a safety science company where I was managing global capital investments in technology and new operations. And so, I've been fortunate that I've had a breadth of experience, from marketing to sales, to product and technology development, and infrastructure management. So, I had some basic skills that helped me understand what...well, the endeavor before I jumped into it because I spent a couple of years thinking about whether or not I even wanted to do something like this. And then, I would say probably the most important part of my previous experience that I apply every day at OtisHealth is developing teams and developing collaboration with different organizations. You know, aside from the team that I have, our own staff, we also work very closely with other organizations, even competitors, to make sure that we're all successful. And so, that collaboration across organizations that don't even have a necessarily contractual relationship is something that I brought over from my previous work and seeing how working across the industry, we can help each other and serve the mission. So, I think that was probably the most important part of my previous work experience that I apply today is this: building a team and building a coalition of organizations that want to move forward together. VICTORIA: That's great. And I'm wondering if there was anything that surprised you in that early phase of building collaboration with other companies and understanding your users that changed the strategic direction you were going with in the app. MARC: So, one of the things that I was really just in awe of was how willing people in the healthcare industry were to jump in and help out when we started talking. And so, many of the organizations that we work with, the founders or the senior staff within the nonprofits we work with, all have a story of why they're doing what they're doing. Many are brilliant people who could have taken their careers in many different directions, not in healthcare. And they chose to move forward in healthcare because of some personal experience in their life. And so, as I learned about the people I was working with, I was surprised how quickly they just took me under their wing and said, "Hey, let's get you started marketing. Let's move OtisHealth forward." And so, we have organizations like Onyx and Invitae [SP] that are giving us support in data access. There's another organization that I can't mention yet; that's another private entity that has offered their support, and we hope to launch with them in the next couple of weeks. And so, we're forming these data access bridges to help get patients more access to their data, their loved ones' data. And then, there's the nonprofits in the advocacy and standards organizations we work with, such as HL7, which is an international health technology standards organization, and DirectTrust, which is an organization that establishes trust networks in ecosystems, as well as the technology infrastructure behind how those systems communicate. And we work also with EHNAC, the accreditation commission. So, we not only are using the accreditation from EHNAC, we're on committees to advise them on future criteria for accreditation. VICTORIA: That's really cool. I love that there's that collaboration and just openness and willingness to try to make things better and to invest in solutions together. Mid-Roll Ad: VICTORIA: Introducing thoughtbot's ongoing maintenance service. Need reliable support and maintenance for your software? Look no further. Our expert team handles upgrades, bug fixes, UI adjustments, and new feature development. And the best part? Our maintenance packages start at just 5K per month for companies of all sizes. From Ruby on Rails to Node, React, and, yes, even PHP, we've got you covered. Trust thoughtbot for top-notch support and optimized performance. To receive a custom quote, contact sales@thoughtbot.com. VICTORIA: And with me here, I have Richard Newman, who is the Development Director on our Boost Team, to talk to me a little bit more about what maintenance actually looks like once you've built your software application, right? RICHARD: Hi, Victoria. VICTORIA: Hi, Richard. You have experience building applications. I wonder if you could describe to a founder who's considering to build an application, like, what should they consider for their long-term maintenance? RICHARD: Well, like you said earlier, part of what you're going for with that long-term maintenance is making sure the health of your project, of your application, is always there. And you don't want to be surprised as you're continuing to work with your users and so forth. And so, a number of things that we pay attention to in maintenance are, we're paying attention to keeping the application secure, providing security updates. We want to make sure that the ecosystem, basically, all of the tools and third-party services that are tied to your application that, we're responding to those sorts of changes as we go along. And then part of it is, occasionally, you're going to find some smaller issues or bugs or so forth as your user group continues to grow or as needs continue to change. You want to be able to respond to those quickly as well. And so, a lot of what goes into maintenance is making sure that you're paying attention and you're ahead of those things before they surprise you. VICTORIA: Because what can happen? Like, what are the consequences if you don't do that ongoing maintenance? RICHARD: Well, the security updates those happen across gems and in the platform sort of tools that are there. And so, if you're not keeping those up to date, your exposure, your vulnerability to being hacked, or having a bad actor come into your application start growing on you if you're not doing the maintenance. The other ones that can come up is there's new interfaces that these third-party services...they may be updating their APIs. They may be updating how you're supposed to work with their tool. And so, those can occasionally break if you're not paying attention to what's going on or you're suddenly surprised by an upgrade that you have to make. And then, finally, there's this long-term sort of code change that just builds up over time if you're not keeping it refactored for the changes that are upcoming in a language or the gems that you work with. And then, suddenly, after a while, it suddenly gets to the point where you have a lot of work that you might have to do to rehabilitate the application to take on some of the newer features that are being released. And so, that makes it that much more difficult, that much more friction about being able to deliver updates for your users or to be able to respond to changes that are happening out there in your application. VICTORIA: Right. So, if you don't have that ongoing maintenance, you could run into a situation where, suddenly, you need to make a very large investment and fixing whatever is broken. RICHARD: Absolutely. It's going to be very tough to plan for if you weren't keeping up all the way along and, yes, absolutely ends up being much slower if you have to remediate it. VICTORIA: That makes sense. I wonder if you have any examples of a project you've walked into and said, "Wow, I wish we had been doing a little bit more maintenance." [laughs] And maybe you can share some details. RICHARD: Yeah. We had a fairly large application that involved a number of clinic services. So, we had an application that users were going in every day and counting on our fast response. And, over time, we've got surprised by a database upgrade that had to happen. Basically, the database was going to be changed by our third-party hosting service, and that hadn't been tested. There hadn't been procedures in place when we discovered this need. And there was a very hard date that that change had to be done or else the entire application was going to go down. And it came at a very inconvenient time, at the end of the year around Christmas, that we had to respond to all of that. And had we been in front of it and just updated it every quarter and staying current with it, it wouldn't have been nearly the lift that it turned out to be. We were facing a pretty hard deadline [laughs] there to keep things going. It was very, very stressful and disruptive for the team and potentially for the clinics. VICTORIA: Right. And it always happens around a big holiday or something like that, right? When it all comes to a head. So... [laughter] RICHARD: Absolutely. You want to be in control of the timeframe and not have the timeframe be in control of you. VICTORIA: Right. And if you have a team like thoughtbot supporting you, you can go on your vacation with a little bit more knowledge that if something breaks, there's someone there who can respond and fix things, and you don't have to interrupt your very valuable time off. So... RICHARD: [chuckles] Absolutely. VICTORIA: Yeah. Well, thank you so much, Richard, for joining me today. I appreciate you coming here to talk with us. And we'll talk to you again soon. RICHARD: Yeah, it was a pleasure. Thank you. VICTORIA: You mentioned advocacy. And I'm curious if you could say more about what advocacy are you doing or how does that blend into your business model and what you're doing with OtisHealth? MARC: I'll give you an example. One of the organizations we belong to and I participate in personally is the Health Information Management System Society. And so, this is a professional society of healthcare IT professionals. And in Northern California, there's an advocacy committee that works directly with the state legislature to promote legislation that will improve the quality of healthcare for people in California. We actively talk to members of the legislature to tell them what bills we think are important. The ones we focus on and the ones I personally focus on are the ones that improve access to our data and also improve our privacy. So, there's a legislation in California, as an example, that will prohibit access to people's healthcare data without proper legal warrant. So, it's basically extending HIPAA protections across any health app launched in California. And we, of course, are already HIPAA-compliant, so that's very easy for us. There's also advocacy specific to certain health conditions. So, my daughter had autism. I work with the Autism Society here in California and also Achieve Tahoe, which is an organization that teaches skiing and other skills to people with disabilities in particular. This past season was my first season. I work primarily with children and young adults with autism and other developmental disorders. And then we also partner with organizations when we think that they're aligned with some of our mission. And so we work with the Caregiver Action Network. We also will work with AARP and other organizations regarding caregiver rights and also teaching caregivers how to access the healthcare data of their loved ones and how to take care of themselves personally. VICTORIA: That's wonderful. And I guess it's not really a question, but I saw that autism service dogs are a thing, and I just thought that was really cool. [laughs] MARC: Yeah, OtisHealth is named after Constance's autism service dog, Otis. And so, service dogs are extraordinary animals. They're highly trained. Otis had been trained for two years before we received him. He was trained specifically for Constance's needs, and he kept her safe. And that was the primary interest in Otis is observing things that she...because of her cognitive limitations, wasn't always aware of her surroundings and wasn't always safe. And so, the dog maintained her safety and her boundaries and kept her focused, as well as just basically blocked her if she was going to do something that was unsafe. So, there are many different kinds of service dogs, and I'm talking specifically about ADA, the Americans with Disability Act type service dogs. These aren't, like, companion dogs or therapy dogs. These are truly highly trained animals that are focused on specific tasks to help an individual be safer, more free, or have more abilities than their disabilities may allow. VICTORIA: Well, I love that. And I like that the app is named after her dog as well. That's just very sweet. And I love that that's how that worked. And I'm curious, what's on the horizon? What are you most excited about for OtisHealth in the next year? MARC: Like all startups, we have [laughs] a lot of plans. And we've been invited to speak at some conferences. I spoke at two already this year. And I have another one coming up in Washington, D.C., where we're going to advocate, again, for patient access. And this is primarily talking to the health systems themselves in adopting technology that makes it easier for patients to securely access their health records. And so, we're excited about that movement in the industry to recognize and start to act on that need for patients to be able to access their health records. And we work with our partners to promote that and also with the federal government. We work with the health and human services to promote this access. And we were published in a report earlier this year because of our technology demonstration with health and human services. And it sounds like it's finally getting some real traction in hospital systems. And members of the Federal Congress are also saying that this is something we need to move forward with in a more aggressive manner. On a more direct path, we're excited our membership's growing. We've had tens of thousands of people register to use the app, with thousands actively using it today. We're working on some new programs right now for payers and for providers that will improve health outcomes and within their populations, as well as bring on hundreds of thousands of other people on the app. We're really excited to know that we're getting both recognized for the work that we're doing and that people are starting to understand the importance of managing everyday health, whether it's with OtisHealth or another application. VICTORIA: Well, I love being excited for these opportunities to advocate for your product and for the mission behind the product. I'm not going to recommend being excited about going to D.C. during the summer. [laughs] Last time I was there when I landed at 9:00 p.m., it was 90 degrees outside [chuckles] and humid, like, 90% humidity. But it's great to have access to people who care and are trying to make things better and have that voice. I'm excited to see you grow. And then, it's been two years since you started the app. I wonder, if you could go back in time to when you first were getting started, what advice would you give yourself? MARC: So, this is a really hard thing for anybody to look back and say that they'd like to change a few things. There are things I would change. I have a lot of experience managing large, sophisticated programs. Because in the past I had large budgets, it was really easy to maintain strict discipline around the implementation. And I think I was too loose in the implementation process at the onset of OtisHealth. I would have been more disciplined around my program management and the accountability that I had to developers I was using. As a startup, I didn't have a large development team in-house. I needed to use external parties. And I should have been a little more closely on top of that process. The other things that we experienced were primarily a result of pivots. We were constantly pivoting as we were learning. I think having a team to review our process and pivot more quickly is really critical. You don't want to pivot 20 times a week. You need to stay focused for a while, but also having friends or advisors or members of your team that can help you assess when a pivot is necessary, or a new opportunity presents itself, I think, is critical. And so, we all know, as founders, the team is key. And I think the earlier you engage a team and not be bashful by asking for advice, the better. VICTORIA: I love that. And I'm curious if you have any advice from your program or from your startup career now on choosing the right development teams. And how do you find those right partners to actually build the app and have that accountability? MARC: So, I would say the number one thing that I've learned, that I knew previously, but I really appreciate it more now as a founder of a small company, is you need mission alignment, not just company to company, but person to person. And I took my time picking advisors to join us, and I took my time getting people on board to OtisHealth. We pick folks that we believe understand what we're doing, and we take our time and make sure that they appreciate it and that we're comfortable with them. Our startup is too small to make a bad hire or to have the wrong perspective because somebody has other motives, such as just making money. If I was providing advice in terms of picking teams or picking vendors to work with, I would say take it slow. Don't rush, even though you may be in a rush, or we may be in a rush to get moving, either for financial reasons or personal reasons. It's important just to feel comfortable. Get to know folks. Meet them in person if you can and spend a few hours with them at a time [laughs], just to make sure that they believe in you, and you believe in them, and that you have a common vision. Because when things get rough or tough, financially or otherwise, you need people that are going to be able to stick through it and work with you. VICTORIA: That makes a lot of sense. There's a lot of pivots happening. You want everyone to be on the same page. And you don't want to have to be corralling everyone all the time if they have competing priorities, so that makes a lot of sense. MARC: Absolutely. Just to be clearer on that, we all run into challenges. So, in some cases, we had to make some financial sacrifices, and everyone did it together. You really need people that are that committed that say, "Okay, I understand where we are, and so, I'm willing to take a pay cut for a while or not get paid for a while until we can get this spec started again." Even vendors I work with today that are strategic vendors understand that and have helped us financially when we need some time to get more revenue in. VICTORIA: Great. And so, when you were building a healthcare app, was there people you needed to have on your team who had that exact specialty in either patient care, or medical records, or something like that? MARC: Yes, yeah, you need experts. So, I'm a quick read. I mean, I spent a couple of years learning the industry and understanding the technology. But the person that's our IT director he has over 25 years of experience in healthcare IT systems, so he is the expert in-house. We also have advisors on our team that are experts in payer services and payer systems, launching healthcare apps, managing standards, and managing SaaS services. We have a data and an AI expert, and a clinical research specialist. We also have physicians we refer to. [laughs] So, we have a pretty big entourage of individuals that we go to for very specific advice and work. VICTORIA: That makes a lot of sense. Let's see, what question should I be asking that I haven't asked yet? MARC: You know, I think most of the people listening to this podcast are technical founders. And it was surprising to me, and I had some founders contact me, asked for some free advice, which I'm happy to do, but they didn't seem sincere in their interest in being in healthcare. And one thing I told them, and I would say to anybody that's interested in being a healthcare technology developer, is you have to have a reason to do it besides the money. It will be a really hard battle to move forward with a technology if the only motivation is a financial opportunity. That isn't going to sustain the pivots or the development. You'll run into a lot of walls, primarily because everyone will see it. Everyone in the industry sees those players come in that just have a financial interest, and the consumers see it, and they don't like it. So, my advice to anybody that wants to develop technology in healthcare is you have to be a little sincere about it and have a real reason to do it beyond just making money, and I think you'll find it more rewarding. There's so much need for healthcare technology and better technology out there. So, I welcome folks to join the fight, the battle, or the opportunities. But I would say that just come in with the idea that you're helping people, not just making money. VICTORIA: I think that rings true for any business you're in, right? But especially in healthcare because it is this big target. Even in consulting, if you're doing business development and you're thinking of working on health IT projects, there's just a huge market that you have to narrow down and figure out where you're going to be. So, if you don't have that intrinsic motivation, it can be overwhelming and scattered, and then people won't connect with you, right? Because everybody is going after the same thing. MARC: That's exactly right. One of the conferences I went to earlier this year, a speaker got up and said, "People invest in people, or people make deals with other people." We talk about companies signing a deal with another company, but it's really one person trusting another person. Whether it's in healthcare or another industry, obviously, that trust needs to happen. At some point, if I don't trust the individual I'm talking to, I'm less likely to have a deal with that company. VICTORIA: Right. It's like; I don't know how, you know, it doesn't really matter how impressive your credentials are. If there's not a basic level of trust, you might not move forward with it, so that makes a lot of sense to me. MARC: Yeah, that's absolutely right, Victoria. VICTORIA: Absolutely. Is there anything else that you'd like to promote at the end of this podcast? MARC: I'd love for folks to try OtisHealth. If you have family that have chronic medical needs or need help managing their medical information, please download OtisHealth, help them join. There are videos on YouTube that explain how to use it if you need some guidance, but we believe most of it is self-explanatory. We are continuously adding data access points. We're going to be launching this week new versions of OtisHealth that have access privileges for people in New York and Nevada and parts of California and Colorado. And so that means that with the app, once you're ID-proofed on the app, you can use it to get your medical records from different sources without having to log into all these different patient portals. So please try it. Use it for yourself but especially use it for your family or anybody who you care for. We'd love to get your feedback as you use the app too. VICTORIA: That's great. And I'm actually already thinking about...next week; I'm going to be going to The San Diego Annual Veterans Stand Down, where anyone who is experiencing homelessness can come in and get access to all the services that they might need, whether it's legal, or healthcare, or dentistry, showers, food, all of these things. And I'm curious if that organization might benefit from having a tool like that for their users. So, I'll be talking about it. [laughs] MARC: Oh, thank you so much. That'd be wonderful. Thank you. VICTORIA: That's great. Well, thank you so much, Marc, for joining us. MARC: My pleasure. Thank you, Victoria, for having me on the show. VICTORIA: Excellent. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thank you for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com. Special Guest: Marc Mar-Yohana.
Introducing thoughtbot's ongoing maintenance service. Need reliable support and maintenance for your software? Look no further. Our expert team handles upgrades, bug fixes, UI adjustments, and new feature development. And the best part? Our maintenance packages start at just 5k per month for companies of all sizes. From Ruby on Rails to Node, React, and, yes, even PHP, we've got you covered. Trust thoughtbot for top-notch support and optimized performance. To receive a custom quote, contact sales@thoughtbot.com. __ Simon Ritchie, the founder and CEO of Blox, discusses his background and journey leading up to starting the company. He began his career in finance but discovered his passion for technology and finance systems. He worked at Anaplan, a successful finance planning and analysis software company, but saw the limitations of rigid systems when COVID-19 hit. He realized there was a need for a more flexible and accessible financial modeling and planning tool, especially for small businesses and charities. Blox aims to fill this gap by providing a powerful yet easy-to-use modeling, calculation, and planning engine that sits between spreadsheets and complex enterprise software. The company is about a year old, has raised venture funding, and launched a free tier of its product. They prioritize building a compelling product, iterating quickly, and engaging with users to understand their needs. Simon acknowledges that building the product has been enjoyable, leveraging his background in product management. However, sales, marketing, and customer traction have proven challenging. Nonetheless, he remains optimistic about Blox's progress and is committed to providing a valuable solution to help businesses make informed decisions and achieve their financial goals. Blox (https://www.blox.so/) Follow Blox on Twitter (https://twitter.com/blox_is_awesome), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/blox.for.planning), LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/blox-plan/), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/bloxisawesome/), or TikTok (https://www.tiktok.com/@bravewithblox/) Follow Simon Ritchie on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/siritchie/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. WILL: And I'm your other host, Will Larry. And with me today is Simon Ritchie, Founder and CEO of Blox, which provides pre-built planning models to help business leaders escape the tyranny of complex, clunky, and error-prone spreadsheets, giving you visibility into and confidence in the reality of your business. Simon, thank you for joining us. How are you doing today? SIMON: Hey, guys. Yeah, I'm very good today. VICTORIA: So, Simon, where are you joining us from today? SIMON: So, I'm joining from the UK. I live in a city called Brighton on the South Coast of the UK, where it's a lovely day today. It's nice and sunny. VICTORIA: Oh, that's where our thoughtbot summit has been the last two years, in Brighton, actually. SIMON: Fantastic. Yeah, it's a wonderful place. VICTORIA: And a great place to be in the summer right now, right? Do you get out in the water very often? SIMON: Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. Like many others, we have a paddle board. So, I go out with my family. I have four kids, so we go out and have fun at the beach. Brighton's got a stony beach. So we are, as Brightoners, we're very proud of the stones. You know, if you have sand, you get sand everywhere, stones are...it's much cleaner. [laughter] It does hurt your feet, though. There you go. [laughter] WILL: Yeah, that was the first time I've ever seen that, and I was like, that's very interesting. SIMON: Yeah. [laughs] WILL: I probably will like it because I don't like the sand getting everywhere, so... SIMON: Yeah, absolutely. WILL: So, yeah, I probably could trade that in. [laughs] SIMON: Yeah, yeah. You just have to wear shoes if you want to go run around. We're proud. We're proud of it. VICTORIA: I didn't think about that either. It makes a lot more sense. I don't really like the sand [laughter]. Rocks make more sense. But in California here, we're surfing, so having too many rocks on the beach would be a problem [laughs] for those of us who can't control ourselves. [laughter] SIMON: Yes. Yeah, Victoria, I thought you lived in Wales when I first looked at your profile -- VICTORIA: Oh, right. SIMON: On LinkedIn. And I thought, oh -- VICTORIA: That's...yeah. SIMON: A Welsh girl. That's -- VICTORIA: My family is actually Welsh on my mother's side. SIMON: Oh really? VICTORIA: Yeah. SIMON: Okay. VICTORIA: And Cardiff...California is named after Cardiff, Wales. SIMON: Okay, oh. VICTORIA: But yeah, so that's where it came from. So, I thought that was very cute, too. SIMON: [laughs] Very cool. VICTORIA: But, you know, Cardiff-by-the Sea is its own little beach town here. SIMON: It's not Wales. [laughs] VICTORIA: Not Wales. [laughs] Pretty different. But I do hear Wales is beautiful. SIMON: Oh, it is. Yeah, absolutely. VICTORIA: Awesome. Well, let's talk about Blox a little bit. So, why don't you tell us maybe a little bit about your background and how you came around to starting it? SIMON: Yeah, great. So, and just in terms of me and my background, so I started my career in finance, actually. I didn't really know what to go and study, so I thought, you know, studying numbers was probably a good thing. So, I did an accounting finance degree. And I got into the world of work in finance roles very quickly realized that finance wasn't for me. I just didn't really want to be a CFO. I just didn't feel the passion for it. But I was the techie guy always in the finance team. I was the guy people turned to and originally for, you know, Excel and spreadsheet modeling. And behind Excel, you've got VBA. So, you've got this little, you know, it was my first exposure to programming and some, you know, and what coding was. And so, I sort of just realized, actually, I love the technology side. And so, I followed my passion more into the finance systems arena. And my passion has always been...the focus of my career has been helping leaders understand what's going on in the business by getting hold of those numbers, the data that they have, and analyzing it, summarizing it, trying to draw insights from it so they can make decisions. And so, in the early days, it was lots of Excel spreadsheet modeling. And, in some businesses, there's still tons of spreadsheet modeling going on. And then the next phase of my career was actually working in...there are a number of software options that help you with planning, modeling, reporting, et cetera. So, I joined...well, I did some consulting for a while and then joined a company called Anaplan. And was an early employee, the company was still very early in their journey. They were just launching a European office, so I joined as one of the early European employees. And Anaplan went on, over the course of nearly eight years that I was there, to be [inaudible 04:31], absolute rocket ship, grew up to 2,000 people, and we floated on the New York Stock Exchange and then IPO in 2018. It was acquired last year for a very big number. So really fantastic time there. But to just talk about Blox, so I left Anaplan two years ago. The observations that I made that led to Blox ultimately were there were sort of three main aspects. Like, when COVID happened, the world changed radically. And what I saw...I was working in Anaplan. For anyone who doesn't know, Anaplan they focus on selling to large enterprise. So, you may not be familiar with the company if you're not a CFO or a finance person in a very large company. And they sell very expensive product. It's very, very powerful modeling, calculation, FP&A, finance planning, and analysis software. And so, companies...we were working with companies like Procter & Gamble, HP, Cisco, Google, and others. What I observed was when COVID kicked in, the FP&A system was too rigid. So, Anaplan, you know, these models that people had built up, spent a lot of time and energy building up, it was too rigid. The world changed so much that they couldn't really use their typical budgeting systems or these FP&A solutions. They couldn't use Anaplan. So, everybody just jumped back into a spreadsheet to figure out, you know, do I still have a business? How am I going to survive this if I just had to shut all my retail stores or if I had to send everybody home? You know, so everyone was using spreadsheets, basically. And so my observation there was that the tools that are available at that point are still way too hard to use. They're not flexible enough. You can't mold them quickly enough to really handle some of those scenarios that you want to throw at it as a leader. So, when you're trying to make big decisions about new revenue streams, new offices that you would want to launch, restructuring your team, investing in more people, those things they're really hard to model in the tools that are available. You need real specialist experience and expertise. That's very expensive, et cetera. So that was one part. And then the other thing that happened was I've worked most of my career in larger companies. And I'd worked in, yeah, in finance, in businesses. And also, I'm a chartered management accountant. It's all about helping with managing a business with your numbers. And I hadn't really worked with many very small companies. I ended up volunteering. When the lockdowns were happening, there were lots of people that were sheltering in place and they were staying at home. And so, a local charity had organized to put together food parcels, and then they found drivers to drive them around. And so I had volunteered through a friend of a friend, and somewhere my name got put in. So, I ended up driving these food deliveries around for the summer, and I loved it. Every Thursday, I'd take a couple of hours to just drive around and drop some food on people's doorsteps and then maybe have a quick conversation with them from a distance. I got connected with the charity. It is a local charity that runs on the South Coast in England here. And they found out I was an accountant, and I worked in software technology. They were like, [gasps], please, you can be our new best friend. We need some help. So, I ended up helping them a bit in their back office with some of the reporting that they do. And to cut a long story short, they're a charity. They live on grant funding that they get. So, they apply for grants, and then the grant providers want them to report back on the progress that they've made, the services that they've offered, the people they've helped. So, I went and helped them, and they needed these reports and some plans for grants that they were trying to get. What seemed really easy to me, like, they were showing me that they had to download this data from a system. And they needed to filter it and then count how many people they had been helping. And they basically were just, you know, with different needs and in different categories and cohorts. So, they would basically download the data, open it in a spreadsheet, put a filter on, select some filters, and then they would count the number of rows that had that criteria. And then, they would type the number into an email. And I just showed them some very simple things, like, when you do a filter or if you select the cells, you can see a countdown at the bottom-right in Excel, and I showed them that. And they almost fell off their chair because [laughs] they were like, "Oh, you know, why did we not see that sooner?" But I suppose through that, and, you know, through the various times that I helped them...and I just helped them with initially some spreadsheets and just some help with that. But it just showed me that there are a lot of businesses, a lot of charities in this case, but a lot of businesses where the leaders are not finance savvy, and they are not accountants. They're not MBAs, but they still need help running their business. They need to do reporting. They need to do planning, you know, manage their business, control the finances. So, I just thought, you know, just started thinking a lot more about what does a small business need? What does a leader in a business need to make great decisions, run the business? And how could we get them a tool or some software that doesn't cost hundreds of grand every year but is accessible, a nice, low price point, and really easy for them to use? And that's the problem that I thought about for a long time. And ultimately, that's what we're trying to work on with Blox. WILL: That's amazing. I used to work at a nonprofit. And I remember those days of, like, because I wasn't an MBA, like you said, MBA finance and just trying to figure out numbers. I don't even remember the software we used. SIMON: [laughs] WILL: But it was old and very hard to maneuver. [laughter] SIMON: Oh yeah. WILL: It was harder to maneuver than spreadsheets. And I was like, ahh, this is a nightmare. So, this is amazing that you're doing that. Can you tell us more about how Blox solves that issue? Because it sounds like it is a tween of big software that's for enterprise companies and spreadsheets. So, it's kind of in the middle; it sounds like. SIMON: So, spreadsheets are great. They're really easy. They're easy to start with. You'll often find that your spreadsheet will just kind of reach its natural end. It becomes too complex. And that normally happens when you've got, like, you're planning for lots of people, or lots of products, or lots of different projects. And so, you end up sort of having to figure out how to scale the model, you know, across lots of different columns or rows, or you start copying. And how you'll have three identical tabs or ten identical tabs. And, at that point, you've basically outgrown Excel, and trying to keep that spreadsheet running and working it becomes a real nightmare. And so, that's the point where Blox comes in. You could use Blox right from the very beginning. We've started with a focus on making really nice, simple models that you can just pick up and use. So, our earliest customers are startups doing a financial model for a brand-new idea. So, you can use Blox from the beginning, but you could probably use a spreadsheet, too. Where you would want to use Blox is where it becomes more complex, and you've got a lot more going on. You might have lots of different months, and you've got loads of time. You might want to connect it to your actual accounting system or a CRM system. And so, when you want to pull in actual data and do some reporting and maybe have different scenarios, different versions of a plan or of a report, that's where you've basically outgrown a spreadsheet, and it just becomes complex and unwieldy. And that's where you would want to move into a system. That's what we're building with Blox is basically a powerful modeling calculation planning engine that scales really easily. So, you can build up your dimensions, products, countries, time, et cetera, and you can build up those dimensions. You can build up your logic. You can add your own KPIs. You can add your own projection logic, et cetera. You can build out a model. We've got lots of template models that you can start with because you shouldn't have to start from scratch every time. You can get going. You can load up your own data very quickly at the beginning. For a lot of models, it's just assumptions. You're just trying to work out, okay, like, we've got some service businesses that use Blox. To get a basic model together, what you need to know is how many people do you have roughly? How much do you pay them? And then, how many people do you plan to hire at certain times? And how long does it take to ramp a new hire? Because, normally, there's some sort of ramp time. And if it's a service business and you're selling time, then you kind of have an average number of hours billable or often called utilization. So, with a few quick assumptions, you could throw them in. You could build out a multi-year plan for your business. And you could use that to think about, okay, how can I grow this business? I kind of talk about it as a financial roadmap that you could create. So, you know, often in the product world, we talk about product roadmaps. I like to talk about, you know, a business roadmap or financial roadmap. And that's really what we are working on; Blox and Blox will help you with this financial roadmap that you can build out. You know, I'd like to get my business to this point to, you know, 2 million in revenue, or 10 million in revenue, or maybe there are some financial or non-financial goals that you're trying to get to. And, with a model, you can help try and kind of work out what the assumptions and drivers and what those things need to look like. And then, as a manager of the business, you can start working on, okay, how do I increase my headcount? Or how do I decrease this particular cost per unit or various things like that? So yeah, that's a very high level on what we're doing with Blox. VICTORIA: Thank you for that. And I certainly can relate to that, having worked for several different consulting services companies and how difficult it can be to get software [laughs] to project that -- SIMON: [laughs] VICTORIA: Far into the future, like, to think about how you're going to hire, all the things that go into it. So, I'm curious about your own plan for Blox. Like, how would you describe where you are in your plan for the company? SIMON: We are a year old, actually just celebrated our one-year anniversary. In the last year, we've formed, hired an early team. We've fundraised successfully. So, we raised venture finance to fund the business. It's a complex product to build. We're trying to replace a spreadsheet, which has got tons and tons of features. They've been developing that for a long time. So, for someone to come across, it needs to be a relatively mature product. So, we raised venture funds from investors. We're busy investing that to build up the product and take that to market. It's been a fantastic year. And this is my first time as a founder. I've worked in leadership roles in technology businesses, in customer success, and in product as well. Yeah, I definitely would say working as a founder in a brand-new startup is very different to working in product, in a scale-up. You know, some of the lessons that I learned back there have been useful. You know, you learn how to juggle chaos, how to juggle...how to spin lots of plates. But yeah, I'm really delighted with our progress so far. We've fundraised. We ran a beta of our product last year with some early customers. We graduated from that. Our approach has always been to try and get the product out, so really embrace agile. It's kind of you don't see it so often in enterprise software. What you see is companies that like to just put "Book a demo" on the website. And they don't like to show their software until they've already kind of sold the value, and they've pitched, you know, positioned their pricing, and qualified their leads, et cetera. Our approach has always been let's build a fantastic product. Let's build something which is super compelling, super easy to use. Let's get people into the product as quickly as possible so they can experience it, see if it's going to be valuable for them. We launched a free tier of our product, the first sort of MVP, as a free tier, so not paid, not with some of the features that we plan to add to the product. And so, we've got that out there, and it's been fantastic. We've got users from all over the world using it in all sorts of different ways. And that's the other thing that is really great for us. Because it's such a flexible product, it can be used in lots of places. So, we've got all sorts of different applications being used by it. People jump in; they use it. They can try different templates that we've got. And then, if they need something different...every business is slightly different. So, if they need something slightly different, they can just chat to us in the product. We absolutely love chatting to people. And then, you know, we'll often spin up a custom template for them. And when we've done a few of those, then we'll build a standard template for a new industry. That's a little bit about where we're at. We're a small team based between here and India, where most of our developers are. It's good fun. Some of the learning...so I would say maybe it's just because of my background. So, I moved into product, and I was a product manager and then product leader for the last six years. So, for me, I've found building the product has been the easier part, probably because it's my background and that's where my passion is. So, I absolutely love anytime I get to spend in the product and spend with the team. The original founding team is myself as founder and CEO. And I don't get too much time on the product. I have a product manager and a designer. And so, that was the first...the early team, the founding team. And then we've added marketing and some other roles and software development. And so that's the team. I've found building the product has been really fun, and that's been a bit easier. Trying to work out how to do fundraising was a real challenge, so that took a lot of energy. We've been pretty successful so far in that. Still, always more to go, always more fundraising needed definitely. The really hard thing, especially in the market that we're in right now, it's hard, you know, getting early customer traction and selling. And that's really hard trying to get your name out there, build a brand, find early customers. That's really hard. So yeah, that's definitely an observation for me that the product has been really fun and a bit easier than I thought. But yeah, trying to do sales, marketing, figure that out...and probably as well because it's not my background or my kind of natural area of interest, so I've been learning. That's always tough, isn't it? Mid-Roll Ad: VICTORIA: Introducing thoughtbot's ongoing maintenance service. Need reliable support and maintenance for your software? Look no further. Our expert team handles upgrades, bug fixes, UI adjustments, and new feature development. And the best part? Our maintenance packages start at just 5K per month for companies of all sizes. From Ruby on Rails to Node, React, and, yes, even PHP, we've got you covered. Trust thoughtbot for top-notch support and optimized performance. To receive a custom quote, contact sales@thoughtbot.com. VICTORIA: And with me here, I have Richard Newman, who is the Development Director on our Boost Team, to talk to me a little bit more about what maintenance actually looks like once you've built your software application, right? RICHARD: Hi, Victoria. VICTORIA: Hi, Richard. You have experience building applications. I wonder if you could describe to a founder who's considering to build an application, like, what should they consider for their long-term maintenance? RICHARD: Well, like you said earlier, part of what you're going for with that long-term maintenance is making sure the health of your project, of your application, is always there. And you don't want to be surprised as you're continuing to work with your users and so forth. And so, a number of things that we pay attention to in maintenance are, we're paying attention to keeping the application secure, providing security updates. We want to make sure that the ecosystem, basically, all of the tools and third-party services that are tied to your application that, we're responding to those sorts of changes as we go along. And then part of it is, occasionally, you're going to find some smaller issues or bugs or so forth as your user group continues to grow or as needs continue to change. You want to be able to respond to those quickly as well. And so, a lot of what goes into maintenance is making sure that you're paying attention and you're ahead of those things before they surprise you. VICTORIA: Because what can happen? Like, what are the consequences if you don't do that ongoing maintenance? RICHARD: Well, the security updates those happen across gems and in the platform sort of tools that are there. And so, if you're not keeping those up to date, your exposure, your vulnerability to being hacked, or having a bad actor come into your application start growing on you if you're not doing the maintenance. The other ones that can come up is there's new interfaces that these third-party services...they may be updating their APIs. They may be updating how you're supposed to work with their tool. And so, those can occasionally break if you're not paying attention to what's going on or you're suddenly surprised by an upgrade that you have to make. And then, finally, there's this long-term sort of code change that just builds up over time if you're not keeping it refactored for the changes that are upcoming in a language or the gems that you work with. And then, suddenly, after a while, it suddenly gets to the point where you have a lot of work that you might have to do to rehabilitate the application to take on some of the newer features that are being released. And so, that makes it that much more difficult, that much more friction about being able to deliver updates for your users or to be able to respond to changes that are happening out there in your application. VICTORIA: Right. So, if you don't have that ongoing maintenance, you could run into a situation where, suddenly, you need to make a very large investment and fixing whatever is broken. RICHARD: Absolutely. It's going to be very tough to plan for if you weren't keeping up all the way along and, yes, absolutely ends up being much slower if you have to remediate it. VICTORIA: That makes sense. I wonder if you have any examples of a project you've walked into and said, "Wow, I wish we had been doing a little bit more maintenance." [laughs] And maybe you can share some details. RICHARD: Yeah. We had a fairly large application that involved a number of clinic services. So, we had an application that users were going in every day and counting on our fast response. And, over time, we've got surprised by a database upgrade that had to happen. Basically, the database was going to be changed by our third-party hosting service, and that hadn't been tested. There hadn't been procedures in place when we discovered this need. And there was a very hard date that that change had to be done or else the entire application was going to go down. And it came at a very inconvenient time, at the end of the year around Christmas, that we had to respond to all of that. And had we been in front of it and just updated it every quarter and staying current with it, it wouldn't have been nearly the lift that it turned out to be. We were facing a pretty hard deadline [laughs] there to keep things going. It was very, very stressful and disruptive for the team and potentially for the clinics. VICTORIA: Right. And it always happens around a big holiday or something like that, right? When it all comes to a head. So... [laughter] RICHARD: Absolutely. You want to be in control of the timeframe and not have the timeframe be in control of you. VICTORIA: Right. And if you have a team like thoughtbot supporting you, you can go on your vacation with a little bit more knowledge that if something breaks, there's someone there who can respond and fix things, and you don't have to interrupt your very valuable time off. So... RICHARD: [chuckles] Absolutely. VICTORIA: Yeah. Well, thank you so much, Richard, for joining me today. I appreciate you coming here to talk with us. And we'll talk to you again soon. RICHARD: Yeah, it was a pleasure. Thank you. WILL: You mentioned getting your product out there how challenging it can be. So, what has been some other wins and some challenges that you've had as a first-time founder? SIMON: So, my approach to things as a leader is I basically like to bring silliness and games to help motivate and energize the team. So, as a human, I have quite a lot of energy. I roll around with lots of energy. And I take loads of photos of what I'm doing, and I share those. So, we have a Friday wrap-up with the team, and so I'll often share a lot of the pictures of, you know, what I've been up to this week. So, yeah, there's been some really fantastic moments launching a product. We launched our MVP in three months. So, we basically set off...I actually funded the first season of the business, a couple of software developers, a couple of early employees. I funded the first season. We hadn't raised money. And I just spoke to my wife, and I said, "Look, now's the time. I really want to do this." You know, I've been saving up if you like, I had this, like, one day I'll do a startup fund. Some people would probably call that their long-term savings or like, you know, some...and I kind of called it my one day I'll do a startup fund. So, I'd been building up this fund because I knew that at some point, I'll probably go do this. The timing was way earlier than I thought. I thought I'd still do another four or five years in a career in a corporate role to try and get a few more notches in my belts to make fundraising easier, et cetera. The timing came. The team was perfect. And everything just felt right, so we went for it. But yeah, we basically set out. We didn't know where we were going to get funding from. The market was in a real state, so this was middle of 2022. The Ukraine war had kicked in; valuations had dropped by 90% for a lot of tech companies. The post-COVID bubble had burst. It was hard. So, we sat down, and we were like, okay, we could spend all of our runway trying to fundraise now, or we could crack on and try and build the first MVP. But we'd already done a lot of the market research, the user testing, early prototypes, et cetera. And that's a bit of a long story. But we had done that in the company that the founding team had worked at, and then we were actually a spin-out. So that happened. And we were sitting here thinking, okay, you know, we could spend all of our runway fundraising, or we could just crack on and build a product as quick as we can in the next three months. And so, we had this really hard conversation where we descoped so much stuff. And we just figured out what's the core piece that will really show the value of what we're trying to build, that we'd give to a user, that we could give to an early customer that they could use and get value from? And so, we came up with that scope. And we cracked on, and we built it. Within two and a half months, we had a working version. We played with it. Within three months, we kind of launched into this beta and got early users onto. So that was, you know, fantastic. So, we did that in the first three months, and then off the success of having an MVP, and just being able to show the product, and start getting some early user feedback, initial feedback was, you know, we took into account very quickly and improved. And just having that, you know, you basically start building momentum. Every step is still really hard, but you do build momentum. So, we got this product. We launched it. We went to a couple of events, and we talked about that, and then we did some fundraising. And we landed some funding, so that was fantastic. And then, you know, and then we've just gone sort of step by step from there. So, it's really fantastic what we've been able to achieve so far. The challenges there's been loads of them, especially when you're building a startup. It's really exciting. So, you can get people excited quite easily about the future potential. And you can kind of talk about what this can be. I've got a printed picture of a unicorn on my whiteboard in my office right here as a sort of a statement of, you know, where we're going. It's really hard as a founder or a leader trying to persuade people to leave a stable job, take a pay cut, and come and work with you and give them some equity, which you hope will be worth a ton, and you kind of paint the picture. But also, you don't know how long you can keep them because you're on runway. You're on runway. You haven't got infinite cash if it's not a profitable business. So, you know, there are some real challenges. And, as a founder, you go through ups and downs. Ben Horowitz talks about it in his great book, The Hard Things About Hard Things, as the struggle. I definitely understand that a lot more now because there is an up and down to this. You do build momentum, but you also...you're creating the momentum, you know, one hard push at a time. So that's that early customers come on. You kind of pitch the dream of what the product will do, and then it will fall over as soon as they touch it. But I absolutely love it. What I love is the chance to create and how quickly you can move in the early days of a startup or a new product, where you don't have masses of technical debt. You don't have hundreds of customers. You don't have all this, you know, you don't have a massive team where everyone's got their point of view on what you should do. So, you can move really fast, and that's fantastic [inaudible 30:14] creative season. So yeah, lots of ups and downs, but it's really fun. VICTORIA: That's so interesting and particularly interesting that you're trying to make something that's easier to use than Excel. So, I'm curious how you're testing to make sure that it's actually easy. And what might be...I'm sure there's some interesting feedback you got about that. SIMON: Yeah, so we're making Blox easier than Excel. But it's got to be powerful enough to be able to handle the data and the modeling that you need for a business. If you're doing projections for multiple years if you've got lots of products or teams, then it can be complex, so it needs to be powerful enough to handle that. It needs to be flexible enough because you can take a template, but every business has got its own unique quirks. So, it needs to be flexible enough that it can be tailored easy for a unique business. And then, crucially, and this is also important, it needs to be easy enough to use so that the person who understands the business can change the model to kind of suit their business. That's the bit that most of the other players, you know, the enterprise software that's available today, just that they haven't figured out how to make it easy enough so that a businessperson that, you know, doesn't have database experience, can't write SQL, not going to write Python, you know, doesn't do complex scripting or any of this stuff. It's got to be easy enough that they can, you know, tailor, reflect the way that their business works, the way that they make money, the way that their cost structure works, so they can figure out what drives the business. And so, if they're projecting revenue, they can work out the costs associated. So, one of our founding team is a UX designer, a really, really fantastic designer, very experienced. He's been in the game for 25 years since, way before it was called UX. And started doing graphic design, and then has done lots of branding and branding for some really fantastic, large companies, did lots of consulting. And then got into UX and how, you know, the art of wireframing and helping to make products easily usable. I call him my secret weapon. I've worked with some fantastic designers in the past, so, as a founder, I think I appreciate and understand the value of a really good design and a really good UX designer. So, Mike, our UX designer, has just been fantastic at that. He's very good at wireframing and very good at testing. And he's not a finance planning expert. That's why I call him my secret weapon because, you know, I understand planning really well, but sometimes I understand it too well. When I describe what a user is trying to do or, you know, what I expect a screen will look like, I'm just probably subconsciously replacing or recreating something that I've seen or used before, whereas he's coming at it brand new. He's not worked in planning or data modeling, or many of these things. He's worked in lots of different businesses. So, he comes at it with a mobile-first perspective. Normally, he's thinking about, okay, how could this be used by a busy leader on their phone and they're running around? And so, he's been really fantastic at helping to keep it simple and easy and to rethink and to create a product, which is just so different to what other tools in the space are doing. And that's some of the feedback we get. It looks so different. It works so different. But yeah, the hard thing is that spreadsheets are the most sticky tool, I think. They're just so useful for, you know, for everything where you need to get a list of things. You just start throwing it into a spreadsheet, and then you can, you know, organize it and improve structure over time. But yeah, it's a really sticky tool. And we train people how to use spreadsheets from early days from school. My 12-year-old daughter she already has been taught how to use a spreadsheet in school. So, what we're trying to do is create something which is easier. But there's also, you know, you want there to be some familiarity in there so that people will...to avoid some of the friction of the people who have it. No one really signs up to learn a new tool if they can avoid it. We're lazy. [laughs] VICTORIA: It makes sense that design would be a big priority for your product because that was your intention from the beginning, right? Is to make something that's easy to use, so you prioritize that as an investment. SIMON: That's right. That's absolutely right. Yeah. VICTORIA: What's on the horizon? What are you the most excited about for Blox in the coming months? SIMON: So, yeah, we've got some really exciting elements of our roadmap coming. So, yeah, really excited to see these things come to life. Like anyone working in building products, whether you're designing, doing product, sort of overseeing, or actually developing, it's so great to see these things come to life. You spend a long time thinking and chatting about them, imagining, ideating about how they could look. The thing that I'm just most excited about is—and that's probably why I love product—is, you know, you're building a product, and then you can...then you're talking to somebody about how they would use this. Or before that, you're talking about their day-to-day right now and what their problems are, and how you could help them save time, save money, et cetera. And so, you know, I absolutely love chatting to more and more different types of companies, leaders in different parts of the business. And, you know, especially in our space, it's mostly about, okay, how can I help? You know, how could we improve this planning process that we've got, whether it's, you know, planning for the cost of running a big project or trying to figure out how can I scale my business to reach my objectives? So, I just love chatting to lots of different leaders globally. So, I love going to events, chatting to people, fact-finding about how they run their business, how they think about finances, et cetera. In terms of the product roadmap, we're working on some exciting new scenario capabilities, so you can easily look at different scenarios around a decision. So, you might be trying to decide, you know, should I be aggressive with my investments and hiring, or should I be pessimistic? Or is there a middle ground? So, we're adding, like, scenario capabilities where you can build out different versions of that, and then easily compare and contrast, and then decide which one to do. We're working on some really...really enjoying working on some intelligent capabilities. So, again, in the search of making it really easy to use for a busy leader, for a busy businessperson, or a busy finance person, making it really easy to use. So, we've invested a lot in AI technology and been designing, developing POCs around how AI could help to onboard customers faster, how we could help to personalize models for businesses automagically. So, as soon as we understand the website of a user, what sort of industry they're in, we can automagically personalize the template for them, add their own KPIs, like, industry-specific KPIs, into the model, and throw in benchmark data and all these things. So, we've got some fantastic AI capabilities coming through the pipe and some data integrations. As we get out more and more, we're connecting to different data sources. So, yeah, exciting times ahead for the roadmap. And as we add more features, then we'll add different pricing tiers, you know, so we can try and offer a nice, affordable entry-level offering for Blox, but then we will, you know, as you get more and more different features, you'll pay at the appropriate level. So that's a little bit about what our future looks like. WILL: That's neat some of the things you have coming up. You mentioned AI and how you're kind of embracing that. Can you expound on that? Like, kind of I know you said some data models automagically is going to do it. But, like, where can you see the benefit for a customer to use that? Because I know AI can be scary and stuff like that. But, like, just kind of taking the fear out of it and talking about how beneficial it can be. SIMON: Yeah. So, there's lots of different places where AI can help. So, the typical model today for finance planning is you'd have a leader who's responsible for the business, and they're responsible for an advertising budget. You know, they just intuitively know, you know, where should I spend money, what's good return on my investment, what's, you know, what works. But when it comes to actually trying to model that, so how to put that into a financial model or some other model that you can understand the relationships between these things, put in the KPIs, have the formulas, calculating things in the right way at the right level, what you often find is that the leader is not the system's expert. So, you'll often have, especially in bigger businesses, you've got this expert data analyst or FP&A finance planning person that will do the modeling. So, we really believe that AI can be like a digital business coach to digitize that business advisory piece. So, the leader can be sitting down. They can be looking to try and improve some part of their business or understand some part of their spend and trying to work out, like, what would life look like if I increased my spend on this particular channel by X? And so, you know, we are looking at AI to help with lots of different areas around this. Initially, it's helping a new user to get onboarded with Blox. So, it's taking a template and helping to personalize it for their business. What we basically try and do is fetch as much data about a new user and a new company as possible. So, if their team is on their website, then we'll pull in their team. If their products are listed on their website, we'll pull in a list of their products and try and throw that into the model and take out a lot of the friction that you have. As a user in the new system, you have to type in everything normally. If you're trying to model a business, you used to type it all in or copy and paste it from a spreadsheet. So, we're looking at lots of options to help onboard new users. That has a good value add for us because we can increase the speed of adoption and help get users to value faster, which is great for us. And also, users are, you know, they're busy. They're impatient, and they want to understand what value they're going to get before they spend lots more of their time. So that's going to be useful for us and them. And yeah, helping to interpret the data. So, they'll connect us to their source systems. We'll be able to interpret what's going on, help them to understand different options and scenarios about how things might play out in the future. Basically, AI will help us to draw our insights that we can present to the user, will help explain what the user is looking at when they're looking at the model, so we can summarize some of the key insights so that they can use that. We're expecting to have all sorts of users, but we're really focusing on really busy leaders who may have a good understanding of spreadsheets and data, but they're just too busy, and so they don't have time. So, they want something which is quick and easy. Or leaders who don't have that expertise, so those are the ones that we really cater for. We try and keep it really simple and help guide them through the process, et cetera. So that's where AI is going to be, like, that digital business AI...We kind of kind of talk about this AI business coach concept. And, over time, we'll build up more and more elements to that coach capability. We call him Anton in our team when we talk. We'll add more and more capabilities to him. But we've built a number of different POCs. And we've launched a couple of those with some customers. We've been out to events and showing off these new capabilities to basically test them out, understand what's working, what's not. What more do we need to think about to productionize this proof of concept? So that's, yeah, it's a very exciting time to be working on those things. VICTORIA: I love hearing about that. That's super interesting to see where it's going to go. So, my last question for you today is, is there anything else that you would like to promote? SIMON: I think I would just say, yeah, if you're a leader running a business or maybe it's a service business, and you're trying to think about, you know, when hiring business planning, financial planning, anything like that, then I'd love for you to come over to Blox, and you can jump straight into the product from our website. You can sign up. I absolutely love chatting to people about their businesses and what they're trying to do with their finances. So, if you want to do that, you can sign up. You can chat to us. I actually take a lot of time to respond to people in there, so yeah, if you want to do that. Or, if you can, also find me on LinkedIn. You can search me there. Just strike up a conversation and say, "Hey, Simon, I'd love to chat about financial roadmapping or finance planning." Yeah, I absolutely just love to speak to different leaders that work right across the business in different roles and see how we can help them to build a business that really unlock the potential that they have in their business through a great understanding of finances. So, yeah, if I can be of help, I would love that. VICTORIA: Wonderful. And we'll have all those links in the show notes so our audience can go and take a look. WILL: You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @will23larry. VICTORIA: And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com. Special Guest: Simon Ritchie.
Introducing thoughtbot's ongoing maintenance service. Need reliable support and maintenance for your software? Look no further. Our expert team handles upgrades, bug fixes, UI adjustments, and new feature development. And the best part? Our maintenance packages start at just 5k per month for companies of all sizes. From Ruby on Rails to Node, React, and, yes, even PHP, we've got you covered. Trust thoughtbot for top-notch support and optimized performance. To receive a custom quote, contact sales@thoughtbot.com. __ Maggie Bachenberg, CEO, and Trisha Ballakur, CTO, are the co-founders of Pointz, a mobile mapping app that helps navigate bike and scooter riders through safe routes in cities. Victoria talks to Maggie and Trisha about their cycling backgrounds, how they met and became co-founders, and what they feel is the differentiator for their app versus what was/is already on the market for biking-related apps. Pointz (https://www.bikepointz.com/) Follow Pointz (https://www.instagram.com/bikepointz/) on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/bikepointz/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/bikepointz/), LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/bikepointz/), or TikTok (https://www.tiktok.com/@bikepointz) Follow Maggie Bachenberg on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/maggiebachenberg/). Follow Trisha Ballakur on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/trisha-ballakur-070138187/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. With me today is Maggie Bachenberg, CEO and Co-Founder of Pointz, and Trisha Ballakur, CTO and Co-Founder of Pointz, a mobile mapping app that helps navigate bike and scooter riders through safe routes in cities. Just to get us started here, are you both cyclists? And if so, where do you do that at? What's your city? Where do you bike around? MAGGIE: Yeah, we both bike. So I live in Providence, Rhode Island, along with Trisha, and use my bike primarily as a transportation device. So I'm riding around from my house to work, to get groceries, to my friend's house, kind of all different types of purposes. TRISHA: Yeah, and I grew up biking but kind of stopped after age, like, six or seven. And it was only when I got to college at Brown, where I met Maggie, that I got back into it and felt more confident to get back on the bike. And that was completely actually because of Pointz. VICTORIA: Oh, that's nice. Yeah, speaking of confidence, I am not confident on a bicycle. I actually only learned after college. [laughs] And there's a video out there of my college friends helping me learn how to ride a bike. It's very cute. But still not my expertise. So I'm excited to learn more about it and learn about how Pointz could give you that confidence. So, whoever who'd like to start, why don't you tell me about what caused you to want to create Pointz? MAGGIE: Pointz was originally kind of my idea. And I got into biking in 2017 when I did a long-distance bike trip. I biked from Virginia to California. And it was my first time doing long-distance cycling, and I just kind of fell in love with it. But I realized that when I was riding, it was pretty scary to navigate cities in particular. And so, a lot of locals would redirect me onto different routes that were safer. And I was confused why this wasn't captured in a mapping app already. And so, that's kind of where the idea was seeded. But I didn't start working on it until I got to college and met Trisha. VICTORIA: Great. So you got to college, and you saw that there was a need to have easier access to biking and biking information in an area, right? MAGGIE: Yeah, exactly. VICTORIA: Very cool. What was that initial process like? It was just the two of you, and you started building stuff? How did you really get the traction going early on? MAGGIE: It started with doing some customer discovery interviews with local cyclists. And so we interviewed over 100 initially and just asked kind of what their biggest barrier was to start riding. And we kept hearing this recurring theme of people not feeling safe enough to go on different routes. And so we brainstormed a bunch of different ideas in a class that Trisha and I were in together. But we ended up landing on the one that we're working on today, which is, like, you know, the rating system, and then also putting the rating system of bike friendliness into a routing algorithm where people could actually find routes. VICTORIA: That's very cool. And was there anything that really surprised you in that customer discovery process? MAGGIE: Just maybe the consistency around people's fear and, like, I guess, being nervous on a bike because we were interviewing people of all types of backgrounds and experiences. And even people that were more experienced had this fear of getting hit by a car because of lack of infrastructure and that sort of thing. TRISHA: Doing customer discovery and chatting with so many different types of riders...and we call them riders, bike riders, rather than cyclists for the distinction that, you know, in the bike riding community, there's a lot of very avid fitness-geared cyclists, maybe who want to go on their bikes to burn calories and challenge themselves. A lot of people they would call themselves someone who rides a bike. And it's to those types of people where safety is really critical, especially in allowing new people to go and try to ride a bike for the first time or the first time in many years. And so, that's something else that we noticed from those customer discovery interviews is identifying the different types of riders. VICTORIA: Thank you. That clears it up for me because I never know to call someone a cyclist or a rider, but it makes sense that cyclist is more, like, the athletic pursuit versus riding and, you know, just trying to get about your day. [laughs] And it also makes me feel better that even people who are really experienced riders have fear of being unsafe or getting hit by a car because that's certainly what I'm thinking about when I'm [laughs] venturing out there. So, what was your initial build like for the app solving this problem? TRISHA: Initially, we had a couple of different Brown University interns or students working on it together one summer and myself included. And that evolved to me and this one other student who was working with us figuring out how to transition the app from, like, an iOS Swift native app to React Native so it could be cross-platform. And we had to teach ourselves React Native for that. So our intern at the time he had done an internship during the summer at this one startup where they taught him React Native. So he had done a couple of projects there. And I had a little bit of experience writing in JavaScript but really not as much as him. And so, together, we worked on coding the app from what we had in iOS in Swift, which was pretty limiting. But, at the time, it wasn't very much. But we were able to replicate that in React Native during; I think it was my junior...Maggie in my junior winter break. That became the start of our MVP, which had many, many more iterations to get all the features in and was a little bit slow to build until when we released it out, which was our senior year in about March or so. VICTORIA: So that's really exciting. So, like, how long did it take you to really get to that initial MVP with the team that you have? TRISHA: It took quite a bit longer than expected, as with all sorts of technology when you're building it for the first time. So what was important to us throughout the process was making sure that all the features we put out there were really well tested, and were useful, and were actually solving the problem of providing safer routing. And to get to that stage, at first, we, you know, we had an app in Swift. Then we wanted to make it cross-platformed, and we needed to have the routing algorithm actually take those different weights, the different bike friendliness ratings of the roads into account. And that took a lot of researching and talking to mentors. So there were quite a few really hard challenges to get to the MVP, which is why it spanned about a year to get to that point. But throughout it all, we worked with other students at Brown. Then we pulled in some front-end contractors from online, like contractor sites, who were awesome. And we were just focused on being really scrappy to get it out in March of 2022. VICTORIA: That's great. And maybe it felt like a long time, but I feel like a year for a really solid MVP is pretty good, [laughs] especially when you have those safety concerns, and the quality of your data, and what you're giving out is super important. So now you've got the MVP, and I believe you just raised your round of seed funding last year. What was that process like for you? MAGGIE: Yes, so the round of funding that we did, we raised the first initial amount actually going into our senior year, and that was from a firm called Rogue Venture Partners. And we also got a little bit of it from their Women's Fund. And, yeah, that was the kind of piece of funding that got us started and allowed us to really, you know, add additional resources to the product to get it out there, at least the MVP. And then, after that, we got a little bit more funding from them. And then we raised money from Techstars as well because we got into their accelerator at The Roux Institute. That's kind of in association with Northeastern, and that was out of Portland, Maine. I guess it wasn't really necessarily, like, a cohesive round. It was, like, a couple of different checks that all kind of went into, like, our early funding for Pointz. And I would say it was very much so based on, you know, our relationship that we had with our initial venture firm that were working with Rogue. They actually mentored us for quite a few months before they invested in us. So they started mentoring us our junior year when we were in school. And then we got the deal together September of 2021. VICTORIA: That's awesome. Well, congratulations. And I'm glad you were able to find the right partnerships, and mentors, and funding that you needed. What did you find was really the differentiator for your app versus what was already on the market for biking-related apps? MAGGIE: There are a couple of different types of competitors, so there are the biking-related apps that you just mentioned, and then there are the general kind of use case apps like Google Maps or Apple Maps. And so, for the bike-related apps, the main thing that's different about Pointz is that we're more focused on, like, bike riders in general, so people that are riding around for transportation and recreation, not so much the cyclist type of a person that Trisha described earlier. So, you know, a lot of our features are geared towards people that are getting around the city or maybe are exploring a city or a neighborhood. It doesn't necessarily have to be a city, but that's kind of the focus. Whereas for other cycling-specific apps, like Komoot or Ride with GPS, it's focused a lot on, like, the fitness side of things and the recreation fitness side of riders. And so, at least the Ride with GPS and a few other of, like, the technologies that are available to more hardcore cyclists tend to have a more sharp learning curve. And ours was built more as, like, a general use case in navigating and exploring. VICTORIA: That makes sense. So it's more for people like me who are trying to go the most scenic [laughs] or the flattest and the safest way, not necessarily the fastest or the more fitness-focused aspect of cycling and biking. MAGGIE: Yeah, exactly. And, you know, we actually built this for people like us. Granted, I did do that long-distance bike trip. But, generally, I don't consider myself that hardcore of a rider, I mean, in my daily life. So it's for people who don't really identify as a cyclist and are more just, like, riding their bike around and, honestly, for people who are new to riding in general. Because a lot of our riders have recently gotten into biking or have recently moved to a new area, and so, they're just trying to figure out, you know, where are the good places to ride? Where do I feel safe? And, you know, how can I get more comfortable on my bike? VICTORIA: I'm loving this idea because I have a bike that's been sitting in my patio for over a year. [laughs] I haven't used...my partner is like, "Can we get rid of it? Because you don't use it." But I'm like, "I will. I will use it." I know my neighborhood problem is that there are giant hills if we leave our street here. So getting out is fine. But getting back in [laughs], it's like you need an electric bike. So that's very exciting. So, tell me more about now that you've graduated and you're taking this up full time; what does the future look like? What's on your horizon? MAGGIE: I mean, we've been working a lot with one of our advisors on, you know, getting to the point where people really love the product, and that's been kind of happening over the last year. We met Anuj Adhiya from Lenny's Newsletter. We've been working with him to really hone in on what the thing is that people really love about Pointz and make that experience better. And then also figure out what exactly the persona is so we can target them eventually with marketing, which is kind of the stage that we're at right now. So we were seeing our retention curves really evening out in especially a couple of cities that we're targeting. And so, this summer, we're focusing on getting our user base up in Los Angeles and then trying to figure out how, like, a playbook for scaling up a user base in a specific geography. Right now, a lot of our users are distributed throughout the United States. And there are clusters, but there's not, like, a huge spike in one city. And so, that's what we're working on right now is figuring out how to get a geographic kind of density to happen. VICTORIA: That makes sense. And it sounded like the app also uses a lot of user-generated data for safety ratings and things like that. Am I getting that accurately? TRISHA: Yep, that's correct. And what we do is we have a bunch of different layers of our data that we pull from. We have a base layer of data that comes from OpenStreetMap, and then we build on top of that. We rate all roads on a one through five bike friendliness scale. And building on top of that, we pull from city-specific data sets from cities, and towns, and municipalities. And then, we layer on the crowdsourcing similar to how Waze does at the top. VICTORIA: Got it. So taking advantage of that open data, the open city data, and what other data the city is putting out there. Are you finding that you're using whether or not a city has open data to inform if you're going to expand into that location? MAGGIE: Kind of as a focus point. So, the way it works right now is Pointz is available actually anywhere in the U.S. So; it doesn't matter if you're in a city or a rural area, you can use Pointz. And you can use it for routing and navigation and all the features that are available. However, we only have visualized the ratings in all 350 or so urban areas in the U.S., and so those are all visualized, but not all of them have the supplemental city-data. And so, the way we decide when we pull in city data is based on gaps in, like, the base layer. So, if we're seeing that there are a lot of accuracy issues in a specific city, we'll go, and we'll look and see if there's a more accurate map that the city has put out or that an advocacy group has put out. And so, we've done this recently in Chicago, Minneapolis, Portland, Oregon, just to supplement the base layer of data, and it has helped a lot in terms of accuracy. And users or our riders really like it. VICTORIA: That's great. And what is your current level of usage in the app? How well have you been adopted? MAGGIE: Are you talking in terms of, like, user numbers or just, like, our engagement levels? VICTORIA: Yeah, whatever you're using to measure your level of engagement or number of users on the app. Like, what are your stats looking like? MAGGIE: Yeah, so, we use...we have our overall signups. And then we have a subcategory of, like, active and engaged users. And so, for our overall signups, we're at just over 9,000 total signups since we launched the MVP, and we haven't marketed it at all kind of until right now, where we're trying to push it out in LA a bit more. And then, in terms of our engaged cohort, I'd have to pull up the exact number. But last I checked, it was around 1,800 monthly active users. We kind of look at that cohort, and then we break it down into, you know, who's even more engaged in that? Who's coming back every week, every day? Mid-Roll Ad: VICTORIA: Introducing thoughtbot's ongoing maintenance service. Need reliable support and maintenance for your software? Look no further. Our expert team handles upgrades, bug fixes, UI adjustments, and new feature development. And the best part? Our maintenance packages start at just 5K per month for companies of all sizes. From Ruby on Rails to Node, React, and, yes, even PHP, we've got you covered. Trust thoughtbot for top-notch support and optimized performance. To receive a custom quote, contact sales@thoughtbot.com. VICTORIA: And with me here, I have Richard Newman, who is the Development Director on our Boost Team, to talk to me a little bit more about what maintenance actually looks like once you've built your software application, right? RICHARD: Hi, Victoria. VICTORIA: Hi, Richard. You have experience building applications. I wonder if you could describe to a founder who's considering to build an application, like, what should they consider for their long-term maintenance? RICHARD: Well, like you said earlier, part of what you're going for with that long-term maintenance is making sure the health of your project, of your application, is always there. And you don't want to be surprised as you're continuing to work with your users and so forth. And so, a number of things that we pay attention to in maintenance are, we're paying attention to keeping the application secure, providing security updates. We want to make sure that the ecosystem, basically, all of the tools and third-party services that are tied to your application that, we're responding to those sorts of changes as we go along. And then part of it is, occasionally, you're going to find some smaller issues or bugs or so forth as your user group continues to grow or as needs continue to change. You want to be able to respond to those quickly as well. And so, a lot of what goes into maintenance is making sure that you're paying attention and you're ahead of those things before they surprise you. VICTORIA: Because what can happen? Like, what are the consequences if you don't do that ongoing maintenance? RICHARD: Well, the security updates those happen across gems and in the platform sort of tools that are there. And so, if you're not keeping those up to date, your exposure, your vulnerability to being hacked, or having a bad actor come into your application start growing on you if you're not doing the maintenance. The other ones that can come up is there's new interfaces that these third-party services...they may be updating their APIs. They may be updating how you're supposed to work with their tool. And so, those can occasionally break if you're not paying attention to what's going on or you're suddenly surprised by an upgrade that you have to make. And then, finally, there's this long-term sort of code change that just builds up over time if you're not keeping it refactored for the changes that are upcoming in a language or the gems that you work with. And then, suddenly, after a while, it suddenly gets to the point where you have a lot of work that you might have to do to rehabilitate the application to take on some of the newer features that are being released. And so, that makes it that much more difficult, that much more friction about being able to deliver updates for your users or to be able to respond to changes that are happening out there in your application. VICTORIA: Right. So, if you don't have that ongoing maintenance, you could run into a situation where, suddenly, you need to make a very large investment and fixing whatever is broken. RICHARD: Absolutely. It's going to be very tough to plan for if you weren't keeping up all the way along and, yes, absolutely ends up being much slower if you have to remediate it. VICTORIA: That makes sense. I wonder if you have any examples of a project you've walked into and said, "Wow, I wish we had been doing a little bit more maintenance." [laughs] And maybe you can share some details. RICHARD: Yeah. We had a fairly large application that involved a number of clinic services. So, we had an application that users were going in every day and counting on our fast response. And, over time, we've got surprised by a database upgrade that had to happen. Basically, the database was going to be changed by our third-party hosting service, and that hadn't been tested. There hadn't been procedures in place when we discovered this need. And there was a very hard date that that change had to be done or else the entire application was going to go down. And it came at a very inconvenient time, at the end of the year around Christmas, that we had to respond to all of that. And had we been in front of it and just updated it every quarter and staying current with it, it wouldn't have been nearly the lift that it turned out to be. We were facing a pretty hard deadline [laughs] there to keep things going. It was very, very stressful and disruptive for the team and potentially for the clinics. VICTORIA: Right. And it always happens around a big holiday or something like that, right? When it all comes to a head. So... [laughter] RICHARD: Absolutely. You want to be in control of the timeframe and not have the timeframe be in control of you. VICTORIA: Right. And if you have a team like thoughtbot supporting you, you can go on your vacation with a little bit more knowledge that if something breaks, there's someone there who can respond and fix things, and you don't have to interrupt your very valuable time off. So... RICHARD: [chuckles] Absolutely. VICTORIA: Yeah. Well, thank you so much, Richard, for joining me today. I appreciate you coming here to talk with us. And we'll talk to you again soon. RICHARD: Yeah, it was a pleasure. Thank you. VICTORIA: I'm wondering if you have any incentives built into the app for users who are, like, contributing data back, or maybe they're writing every single day. Are there any little challenges or achievements that you could unlock within the app right now? MAGGIE: We do have some gamification, yes. And so, the way that people can earn points on the app...we call them points with a Z because of the name. The way that they can earn those points are a couple of ways. So, one is through riding their bike and using Pointz as a navigation tool or as a tool to record their ride. And so, for that, you get one point for every mile. And then the second way is by contributing to the map, so either crowdsourcing an amenity like a bike parking that isn't on the map already or by adding information about a hazard that might be on the map, like, for example, a car parked in the bike lane. And for each of those, you know, you get one point. And so, yeah, we have that gamification system built out and a couple of...like, we have a leaderboard. And then, also, we have, like, a way for you to kind of go up in your avatar on the app. But besides that, we do monthly contests. And so, this past month, we partnered up with a company called Po Campo, which makes stylish bike bags that can be taken off your bike and then worn as, like, a purse or a handbag. And so, they sponsored the prize, which is one of their bags, and whoever kind of gave the highest quality and quantity of crowdsourcing reviews and miles ridden they're the winner of the contest for this month of June. VICTORIA: That's very cool. I love to see that and hear about what strategies people have for engaging with their users within the app. I'm curious to go back to, you know when you two first met, how did you know that you were going to be good partners to work on this project together? TRISHA: One of the ways that we knew that was because we had first been introduced to each other from our mutual friend who is a close friend of both of ours, and she had been telling the other person about each other. And it was one day where we just met up, and we really clicked. But, at that point, Maggie was looking for someone who could work on the mobile development, and I didn't have any experience with that. However, I joined a club, which Maggie was leading, which was called The Women's Entrepreneurship Group. And we got a chance to work together and plan out many events, including a large conference right before COVID hit. Like, we saw how we'd worked together. We really enjoyed it. And we had very similar aspirations and motivations towards entrepreneurship. When I had the chance to basically join what Maggie was already working on with Pointz in the summer of 2020, I knew that that was going to be a great opportunity. And we decided to become co-founders by the end of the summer. VICTORIA: That's very cool. And I know how important it is to have the right team together to work on a project like this and to start something up from scratch. So, were there other big turning points? And you mentioned COVID, so I'm curious how that affected the growth and progress of this effort. MAGGIE: Yeah, to be honest, in the heart of COVID, like 2020, we weren't really built yet. So, it didn't quite affect us a whole lot, just because the product didn't get launched until the spring of 2020 to actually, you know, kind of publicly. But there were a couple of other turning points in our company, one of them was Techstars and kind of the progress we made during Techstars. We joined the accelerator, and we were having a bit of a hard time getting tech kind of pushed out really quickly. It was taking us a long time to build the features. And so, Trisha and I kind of evaluated why that was happening. And we came up with a process that worked a lot better, which we still use today. And speaking of team, we got a couple of really awesome teammates that made a huge difference on how quickly we could turn around features and bug fixes. And so, that was a really big turning point because we were able to iterate much more quickly and get feedback from our riders a lot faster. So that happened November, December of last year, of 2022. The other big turning point, I would say, is the slider that we released in March of this past year of 2023. And so we were having a hard time retaining users and getting them to really like the routing because people who bike tend to be very opinionated. And if the route isn't exactly kind of how they wanted it, they would be upset. And so, we'd fix it for one group of users, and then we would upset another group that didn't want that, you know, added to the routing. What we ended up doing was releasing this safety slider, which has the fastest routes on the left side of the slider and then the safest or the longest routes on the right side of the slider. And that really helped people get a wide variety of routes that fit their use case. And it's helped a ton with retention. And also, the feedback we were getting from users really changed from, like, really honing in on a very specific issue with routes that they were getting to general feedback about how we could enhance the app and keep people coming back more consistently. TRISHA: I just want to emphasize again that, yeah, the team is really critical. And, like, on our team, we have really awesome people who are 10xers and just great. Also, have someone who worked at MapQuest and has...I think our combined mapping experience is around 20-plus years. So it's really awesome to have that sort of a team together. VICTORIA: Yes. And, you know, talking about it now on the podcast, in retrospect, I'm sure it all seems like it came together, and it was kismet, and everything just worked. But was that how it really felt? Or were there moments where you doubted it and thought, maybe this isn't going to come together? MAGGIE: Yeah, definitely. There were moments of that feeling. One thing that gave us a lot of confidence was getting to the point where we felt like we could really iterate quickly and release features at a consistent and predictable cadence. So that gave us confidence that you know, there is a process for this, and there's a process of gathering user feedback and rider feedback, and then translating that into features, or bug fixes, or UI fixes. I think that gave me a lot of confidence that we could solve it. But, of course, it always takes a lot longer than you expect. And our advisor, Anuj, always says that 80% of what you're going to do won't work and 20% of it will. And it's all about how quickly you can iterate and figure out what works. And sometimes you get lucky, and it happens quicker. Or maybe you have unique insight into the problem, and you can guess, and it works out quicker. But I don't know; I definitely think it's been a learning process for everyone on our team. VICTORIA: That's great advice. And now that you've got your velocity up and you have your confidence, what's on the horizon? Are there new features that you all are working on that you're excited about? TRISHA: Yeah, so we're really excited about leaning into the whole generative AI trends that are happening, especially with ChatGPT and others. One thing that we've been hearing from most of our riders, people who use Pointz, is that using the app to create routes, which will allow them to explore new places, go to a new coffee shop that they've been hoping to go to but just don't know how to actually get there is critical. And most of our riders on Pointz are people who are new to a city. Maybe they've only lived there for a max of one year or less. So, exploring the area around them is really important to them, and that's why they use Pointz. And so, leaning into that, we're going to be releasing, in the next couple of weeks, a new explore feature where someone can go and, you know, describe to Pointz what type of route or...not even route, what type of things they want to see in a city, and Pointz will come up with that. It'll learn their preferences and continue to suggest really awesome places to get to, which they can do car-free, basically, through bikes, because they can be safe and, you know, they can rely on this app to get them through the city safely. VICTORIA: That's really exciting. And I'm excited to try it out myself [laughs] once you have that feature launched. Maybe you can tell me how that feature plays into...or what your success really looks like for Pointz in the next six months. MAGGIE: Yeah, so I think that feature is something that will be, I mean, of course, we got to test it, but I think that it will help people kind of use Pointz as an exploration tool more effectively. People are already using it for that, but it's not specifically built for exploration. Right now, it's built more for, I guess, routing to, you know, new places but not specifically, like, oh, let's go on a route that takes me through all these tourist destinations in the city I'm visiting. But this new feature will allow people to use it for that more. And I think, overall, you know, our mission at Pointz is to help people feel comfortable riding bikes so that they can drive less and feel like they can get around in a sustainable fashion, rather than having to rely on their car so often. And this feature is tied to that in the sense of, like, people can use it as a tool to help them, you know, find the safe route or a route they're comfortable with, and then use it to explore an area but maybe a bit more geared towards, like, tourists or, you know, more recreational-type use cases. VICTORIA: That's very cool. Thank you so much for sharing that. And what is your biggest challenge to achieving that success? MAGGIE: I think biking is a first step in that process of helping people feel like they can be more car-light or car-free, you know, use their car less. There are obviously a ton of other factors that go into whether or not you're driving, or you're taking a bike, or you're taking public transportation. And, you know, our next steps after we have really nailed this product are to explore those opportunities and build tools that help people choose alternative transportation more often. That's what we're excited about going into the future. You know, there's a ton happening in cities all across the U.S., not only for biking but also investments in transit, infrastructure, and whatnot. So, you know, young people and people of all ages...I think a lot of people feel comfortable and that they don't want to be sitting in traffic a whole lot [laughs] because that's not fun for anyone. And, you know, traffic and congestion is always frustrating. So, as much as we can reduce that, I think that's the mission of our company. And, of course, it takes a ton of scale. But it's a big goal, but we're going after it. VICTORIA: That's great. You know, I heard about a town in the U.S. that actually had banned cars and was pedestrians only for the whole town. It's like, what a great idea. [laughs] But I love it. I love that you're working on it. And I wonder now, you know, you're a couple of years into it. If you could go back in time and give advice to yourself when you first started this project, what advice would you give yourself? MAGGIE: For me, I would say to get a minimal viable product more minimal, [chuckles] so reduce it to, like, a single feature, get it out quickly, and start getting feedback more quickly from, like, a very practical, you know, piece of advice. And then, like, an overall piece of advice would be just to be more confident earlier on. It took a long time for me to gain the confidence of, like, being a thought leader in the space. And, you know, I felt like I was young, so there were all these people that knew more than me. But I think everyone has a really unique perspective, and if you really lean into that and share that with the world, it can inspire a lot of people. And you just have to be confident enough to do that. TRISHA: Yeah, I definitely second what Maggie just said. I think also from the tech perspective, if you're someone who is maybe more inexperienced, like, I just got out of college and did this, and I have never worked a full-time job before anywhere except this. And so I think there was a lot of doubt that I had of being able to lead the technical side because I didn't have 20 years experience working somewhere. But, actually, at the end of the day, that doesn't matter. It just matters that you're able to be in touch with what it takes to build certain features and talk to the users, or your riders, or whoever because they're the ones who are going to be dictating whether this is a success or not based on what you build. It's really not good if you're building and wasting a lot of resources and time on features which nobody wants or nobody uses. And so, that's been core to why I think I've gotten a lot of confidence in being able to be, like, the tech leader in this app and in this space. VICTORIA: Yeah, I'm curious to hear more about that. You touched on this really being your first full-time job. So, how do you build your personal brand as an executive leader in this company that you're building? TRISHA: For anyone who does startups, they'll know that it's a lot of figuring it out as you go, and things that you're taught in school don't necessarily translate well to the startup world because, like, I did, like, a Bachelor of Science in Computer Science. I did operating systems. I built a whole bunch of random stuff in school, and I studied for hours and hours. Of a lot of that, the most important thing, which actually translates to working in my field, is the perseverance to, like, keep going and working really hard. Otherwise, none of that stuff which I learned honestly translates. I had to learn everything myself with regards to building mobile apps. And I think the foundations were really critical from school but not really much of the hours of studying. I don't think that that's necessary, but I think it's necessary to build that sort of perseverance mindset. VICTORIA: That makes sense sort of to reflect that back a little bit, just having the perseverance to keep pushing, and keep learning, and keep understanding what is it going to take to build the features that you want? And that's really the core of being a CTO, right? TRISHA: Exactly. Exactly. Yeah. VICTORIA: And, Maggie, I wonder about you as well, like, what resources are you drawing on to really perform as a CEO for this company? TRISHA: One thing that I read a lot is...it's more product-focused, actually, but it's product and growth-focused. It's Lenny's Newsletter, which I mentioned earlier. I use that as a resource a lot. I listen to their podcasts, and I read their articles. And then secondly, I interact a lot with other CEOs and founders because I think that's one of the best ways you can learn is from other people who are in it right now, maybe are a couple of steps ahead of you, or who have done it before. And so, I lean into that quite a bit. And just, you know, try to get advice from people, take what makes sense, and apply it to what we're working on. VICTORIA: That sounds great, yeah. I can relate to that; just building your personal network with people who are in similar roles helps you stay in touch and understand what other challenges people are facing and what you might face someday, right? [laughs] That's really cool. I love that you have all that set up. And is there anything else that you all would like to promote today? MAGGIE: I would just say to anybody who's interested in biking or maybe is, like, a beginner rider, we'd love to have you try out the app and then explore your area and give it a try one weekend when you have some time and see if you feel more confident, you know, given the routes that are on more green and protected roads. VICTORIA: I'm really excited to be talking to you because I am that person. I need this app. [laughs] I'm excited to try it out. Thank you, Maggie and Trisha, for joining us today. [laughs] It was a really great conversation, and I'm excited to follow along and see what happens with Pointz in the coming years. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thank you for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com. Special Guests: Maggie Bachenberg and Trisha Ballakur.
Introducing thoughtbot's ongoing maintenance service. Need reliable support and maintenance for your software? Look no further. Our expert team handles upgrades, bug fixes, UI adjustments, and new feature development. And the best part? Our maintenance packages start at just 5k per month for companies of all sizes. From Ruby on Rails to Node, React, and, yes, even PHP, we've got you covered. Trust thoughtbot for top-notch support and optimized performance. To receive a custom quote, contact sales@thoughtbot.com. -- Brittany Martin is an Engineering Manager at Shogun, where she manages a team of Ruby and React engineers and is the Co-host of The Ruby on Rails Podcast. Victoria and Will talk to Brittany about the multitude of stuff she's interested in, including Roller Derby, and gives the story of how she found herself co-hosting the show. She says knowing what your brand is and what listeners should expect from listening to you is super important, and she gives her opinion on what it means to be in the Ruby on Rails Community. Shogun (https://getshogun.com) The Ruby on Rails Podcast (https://www.therubyonrailspodcast.com/) Follow Brittany Martin on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/brittanyjmartin1/) or Twitter (https://twitter.com/BrittJMartin), or visit her website (https://brittanymartin.dev/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. WILL: And I'm your other host, Will Larry. And with us today is Brittany Martin, an Engineering Manager at Shogun, where she manages a team of Ruby and React engineers. She is the Co-host of The Ruby on Rails Podcast, almost five years running. And she plays roller derby for Steel City Roller Derby under the pseudonym, catch this, Merge Conflict. She is based in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Brittany, thank you for joining us. BRITTANY: I am so thrilled to be on here. I have been listening to Giant Robots for years. So it's an absolute honor to be on the show today. VICTORIA: Yes, thank you so much for joining us. And I met you at RailsConf this year. And, at the time, you had a boot on your foot. So, I have to ask you, are you healed? Are you recovered? Are you walking around again? BRITTANY: This is such a good question. When I was between jobs in March, I was, you know, having these two weeks, I had a whole list of things that I was going to be doing. You know, I was going to train, like, running and whatnot. And I had roller derby practice that first week, and I broke my ankle. And, you know, going into it, I had no idea what a blocker it was going to be. I was like, oh, this is minor. It'll just take a couple of weeks to heal. No, it's been a long process. But I can gleefully tell the listeners that I am out of the boot. I am walking. I am hopefully getting into a sports program next week that will train me up to get back into CrossFit, running, and skating. Though the really funny part is that I currently have another injury which is golfer's elbow. [laughs] WILL: Oh, wow. BRITTANY: Yeah. So I have that from overusing my arms. So I'm a little bit of a mess, but, you know, getting myself back together physically so I can get back on my skates. WILL: So I know it's called golfer's elbow. But did you actually hurt it doing golf, or was it another sport you were playing? BRITTANY: It's so funny that you ask that, Will, because whenever people ask me how I broke my ankle, I can be glamorous and be like, "Oh, it was roller derby." WILL: [laughs] BRITTANY: Like, it's a sexy injury, you know. I have a friend who just broke their ankle because they were dancing down the stairs and broke it, not as glamorous of a story, right? WILL: [laughs] BRITTANY: Golfer's elbow. I literally have no idea how this happened. I've never golfed a day in my life. So [laughter] it's my non-glamorous injury at this point. WILL: Yeah, that's my background, sports medicine. BRITTANY: Oh, great. WILL: So it's interesting. Yeah, golfer's elbow, and I'm like, it's usually not golf that does it. So...[laughs] BRITTANY: Yeah. So I said something to my PT. I was like, "Am I the first person to ever get golfer's elbow from, like, you know, fixing another injury?" And she's like, "Yes. Yes, you are." [laughs] And I was like, oh. [laughter] I really was expecting to get some reassurance that it wasn't me. But hey, what are you going to do? WILL: There you go. BRITTANY: I love the fact that you do love my roller derby name. As you can imagine, it is a beacon for finding the other programmers out on the track because they find it very funny. Nobody else finds it funny whatsoever. And people call me Merge for short, and some people think it's Marge. And I just allow it at this point. [laughter] My number is 200, and its status code okay. When you hit me, I get up okay until, apparently, I break my ankle. So...[laughter] WILL: I love it. Because if you're a programmer, you're like, oh, she means business. BRITTANY: Exactly. WILL: Because merge conflicts...yeah, never fun. BRITTANY: Exactly. VICTORIA: I love that. I love finding other people who work in tech in other random activities. Like, I've recruited people from the climbing gym. [laughs] I'm like, oh, we're climbing together, and, oh, you're an engineer. That's interesting. [laughs] So it's great to, like, be with your community in different settings, so... And you're just so involved in the Ruby on Rails Community. And I'm curious what really got you started into podcasting. BRITTANY: Yeah, that's a really good question. So I'm a former product manager former MBA. So I didn't know how to code. I moved out to San Francisco because I thought that's what everyone did. If you wanted to be in tech, you moved out to San Francisco, and so I did that. And I realized very quickly that it was going to be hard for me to be a product manager without knowing how to code. And so I went to a bootcamp at night, and I became a Ruby on Rails developer. So I wish I had, like, just a really cool story for why I chose Rails. It's literally the framework that was being taught by the bootcamp. WILL: [laughs] BRITTANY: But I'm so glad that it was because I love this community so much. But, you know, when I moved out to San Francisco, I just had my current partner at the time and my dog. I didn't have any friends. And so it was really the perfect time to learn how to code just because I was really able to focus. And I ended up having a lot of long walks at night, like, getting to the train, getting to the bus, and that's really when I got into listening to podcasts. I'm not a huge music person, which is kind of weird. I really...I deeply love podcasts. And so I just kind of glommed on to a bunch of podcasts like Giant Robots, CodeNewbie, Bike Shed. I figured if I listened to all the things that I wanted to be, like, osmosis would just happen, and I would just start learning the things because I was actively learning about how to code. And I thought just listening to those concepts would really help. And really what ended up happening is those people that I was listening to, like, to me, they became celebrities to me. Like, I don't care about regular celebrities. [laughter] I care about people within these communities that I care so much about. And so, you know, a couple of years into that, I was still very much devoted to listening to podcasts. I trained for my first marathon listening to podcasts. And I was listening to The Ruby on Rails Podcast, and, at the time, Kyle Daigle had taken over the show. And he had decided, in order to spice things up on the show, he was going to bring co-hosts on that he was going to rotate through. So, every couple of weeks, you would come on as a co-host, and you would drive the conversation with things that were going on in your life. And, at the time, you know, there wasn't a lot of women, female representation in podcasts. I felt that I was doing interesting things. I was working at a non-profit doing ticketing for the Broadway Symphony and opera, like, in Rails. So I felt like I was always working in Rails, and I thought I could provide some useful insight. So I reached out to Kyle. I must have been very ambitious that day because I reached out and I said, "Hey, how about bringing me on as a co-host?" And he said, "Yeah, absolutely. Like, that would be great." And so I came on as one of the regular co-hosts on The Ruby on Rails Podcast, which I should have been flying high, right? Like, this is exactly what I wanted. I got to become like one of my own celebrities, right? Well, Kyle got really busy. At the time, I believe it's when Microsoft was acquiring GitHub. And Kyle still works at GitHub today. Kyle is amazing. He's their COO now. But the podcast kind of went dormant for a couple of months. It was my big opportunity. I really loved, you know, being on a podcast. I had done a couple of episodes. So I reached out to Kyle and said, "Hey, is there any chance you would give me the podcast?" And he said, "Absolutely." And he signed over everything to me, [laughter] which was really scary because I was taking over a podcast that had been around, at that time, it had been around for at least ten years, hundreds of episodes deep. It was on its own network. It was on the 5by5 Network at the time. So it had sponsors and expectations. And so, really, I had to learn everything from the get-go. Like, I made up my own episode plans. I made up my own questions, like, how to do ad reads, how to edit, how to upload to the hosting platform like; that was entirely on me. And, you know, we can talk more about how the podcast has evolved over those years. But yeah, long story now made short, that is how I got my start in podcasting. WILL: That's actually really amazing that that's how it got started and everything. Let's go back to when you first started. What was your feelings like? You say it was a lot to take on. Can you dig deeper in that and tell us more about that? Because I think I felt the same way. I think we've been doing this for about a year now. It's scary, let's be honest. It's scary jumping on a podcast and sharing who you are and what you're doing. So, can you tell us more about that? BRITTANY: Absolutely. I think one thing is just knowing what is your brand and, you know, what listeners should expect from listening to you because this is a podcast that had been around for ten years. You know, it had changed formats several times. It was an interview-style podcast at one point. At one point, it was a bunch of co-hosts that would just meet every week to talk out what was going on. And so I really needed to take a moment and kind of look over the metrics of the episodes. Like, I have that marketing background. I have that product background. So I wanted to know, like, what's actually working? Like, what do listeners want to listen to? And I also, like, kind of pored through all the reviews of the podcast. I'm like, did people even notice that this podcast went offline? Like, what's the current ecosystem? How many podcasts are out there in the Ruby and Rails space? And so what I started doing is I wanted to create, like, a safe environment in order to start the podcast over again. So what I did is I did interview-style podcasts with my friends, people that would tolerate me, you know, making mistakes, knowing that I was probably...I am a terrible editor. And so bringing those people on to have just genuine conversations with. And then really just tried to pick up the listenership of the podcast because I'm basically waving my arms saying, "Hey, folks. Like, The Ruby on Rails Podcast is back. I'm here as your host. And, like, we are here to stay. Like, I want this to be a mainstay in the community." VICTORIA: That's great. So you started to apply those concepts from your product background. And I'm curious what you found in how the business of the podcast really works. BRITTANY: Yeah, I learned a lot, and we can talk about the transition. So, when I came on to the 5by5 Ruby on Rails Podcast, at the time, this was back in 2018. The podcast was being managed by 5by5, which is, like, a long-standing podcast network. They're still around, but they're much smaller than they used to be. So, like, all of the sponsorship and the episode management was being handled by them. And so I didn't have a lot of insight into that part of the podcast. What I did have insight into is, like, what content is performing well? And what is the audience reaction to what we're putting out there? Like, how is the listenership coming back and whatnot? Now, one thing that did happen over the course of me managing The Ruby on Rails Podcast is we decided to take the podcast independent at one point, you know, 5by5 was starting to wind down. And so, back in 2021, I reached out to 5by5 and said, "Hey, I genuinely really love this podcast. I want to be able to take it to a different platform, you know, have it go independent. But it's really important to me that I'm able to hold on to the current subscribers that I have." I think we all know that, like, if you rebrand something and it's a totally different RSS feed, it's really hard to get people to move over, especially if they're using something that makes podcast listening really easy like Apple Podcasts, you know, you subscribe. You get new episodes, and you just hit play. And so they were extremely willing to work with me. And so, we ended up taking the podcast independent. 5by5 created the hosting platform Fireside. And so we moved the podcast over to Fireside, and that was, like, a very seamless transition. But it was a moment in time where, you know, I was kind of questioning. We're no longer 5by5. It was the 5by5 Ruby on Rails Podcast. What do we call it? And so I genuinely had that moment where I was like, I could be really clever with the name. But then I stepped back, and I was like, no, everyone already refers to it as The Ruby on Rails Podcast. I'm just going to go with it. And so I think that ended up being a good decision. We did change the logo of the show. We kept the same feed. And we had, like, the first episode on the new...we're not even on a network now; we're independent. The first episode of, like, the V2 of The Ruby on Rails Podcast is really what we called it. We just kind of explained the whole move. And I'm just deeply grateful all of our listeners just kind of followed along. And I will say the biggest boon to us moving is that we did get a professional editor. And so, like, the quality of the episodes went up, which is the best money that you can spend. Get yourself a professional editor. I cannot stress that enough. Or you get really good at it yourself. But I know my own skills, and it was never going to be that way. And so we took it independent. And I also decided to do a format change as well because it was a lot to do years of a podcast by myself. It was a lot. So I'm really glad Victoria and Will that you have each other. I think it's really great to have co-hosts. So I ended up moving the podcast. I now have a producing partner, and that's Mirror Placement. They do recruiting for Ruby on Rails, and they are wonderful partners. But I also have three co-hosts that rotate through. I have Brian Mariani, who's a recruiter and founder of Mirror Placement. I have Jemma Issroff, who works on Ruby at Shopify. And I have Nick Schwaderer, who works on Rails infrastructure at Shopify. And that's been great because I rotate through those co-hosts. And I always have fresh content from them. But I also do the interview-style episodes as well, which Victoria was on recently. VICTORIA: Yes. I agree 100%. Having a co-host like Will makes it so much more fun. And I cannot appreciate our editor Mandy Moore enough. And I agree on that advice. And I actually would add when people ask me if they should start a podcast, recommend having at least one other person [laughs] who you want to talk with about that topic for every week. But I wonder, if someone's thinking about starting a podcast, what would you have them consider as to whether or not it's worth it for them? BRITTANY: I recently joined the podcasting subreddit on Reddit just because I was interested to see what kind of questions there were out there. Because when I got into podcasting, I was, like, oh, you just need to have a microphone and a way to record, and you just put it out there, and people are going to listen. It feels very much...like, you remember when, you know, the iPhone came out, and the App Store was empty? And then any app that you made was, like, amazing. Everybody would download it because there was nothing to download. We're now getting to a point with podcasts; there's just a lot out there. My first bit of advice is, something that I said earlier, is make sure that you have an identity around your podcasts. Like, make sure that you are targeting a niche. It's fine if there are other people doing it, but do something that is uniquely you and do something that brings you joy. I really love talking to people in the Ruby on Rails Community. I have a special affinity for people who have never been on a podcast before. It's a lot of work. So it's definitely worth it. I've gotten to meet a lot of my programming heroes because of it. And there are times where I've been very tempted to take a break and be able to step away from it. But, as of right now, it has been a good experience. And what I often say whenever I open up my conference talks is the Ruby on Rails Community is my community contribution because I'm not someone who regularly contributes to open source. And so this is kind of, like, how I give back, and I get to meet a lot of amazing people. Mid-Roll Ad: VICTORIA: Introducing thoughtbot's ongoing maintenance service. Need reliable support and maintenance for your software? Look no further. Our expert team handles upgrades, bug fixes, UI adjustments, and new feature development. And the best part? Our maintenance packages start at just 5k per month for companies of all sizes. From Ruby on Rails to Node, React, and, yes, even PHP, we've got you covered. Trust thoughtbot for top-notch support and optimized performance. To receive a custom quote, contact sales@thoughtbot.com. VICTORIA: And with me here, I have Richard Newman, who's the Development Director on our Boost Team, to talk to me a little bit more about what maintenance actually looks like once you've built your software application, right? RICHARD: Hi, Victoria. VICTORIA: Hi, Richard. You have experience building applications. I wonder if you could describe to a founder who's considering to build an application, like, what should they consider for their long-term maintenance? RICHARD: Well, like you said earlier, part of what you're going for with that long-term maintenance is making sure the health of your project, of your application, is always there. And you don't want to be surprised as you're continuing to work with your users and so forth. And so a number of things that we pay attention to in maintenance are we're paying attention to keeping the application secure, providing security updates. We want to make sure that the ecosystem, basically, all of the tools and third-party services that are tied to your application, we're responding to those sorts of changes as we go along. And then part of it is, occasionally, you're going to find some smaller issues or bugs or so forth as your user group continues to grow or as needs continue to change. You want to be able to respond to those quickly as well. And so a lot of what goes into maintenance is making sure that you're paying attention and you're ahead of those things before they surprise you. VICTORIA: Because what can happen? Like, what are the consequences if you don't do that ongoing maintenance? RICHARD: Well, the security updates those happen across gems and in the platform sort of tools that are there. And so, if you're not keeping those up to date, your exposure, your vulnerability to being hacked, or having a bad actor come into your application start growing on you if you're not doing the maintenance. The other ones that can come up is there's new interfaces that these third-party services...they may be updating their APIs. They may be updating how you're supposed to work with their tool. And so those can occasionally break if you're not paying attention to what's going on or you're suddenly surprised by an upgrade that you have to make. And then, finally, there's this long-term sort of code change that just builds up over time if you're not keeping it refactored for the changes that are upcoming in a language or the gems that you work with. And then, suddenly, after a while, it suddenly gets to the point where you have a lot of work that you might have to do to rehabilitate the application to take on some of the newer features that are being released. And so that makes it that much more difficult, that much more friction about being able to deliver updates for your users or to be able to respond to changes that are happening out there in your application. VICTORIA: Right. So, if you don't have that ongoing maintenance, you could run into a situation where suddenly, you need to make a very large investment and fixing whatever is broken. RICHARD: Absolutely. It's going to be very tough to plan for if you weren't keeping up all the way along and, yes, absolutely ends up being much slower if you have to remediate it. VICTORIA: That makes sense. I wonder if you have any examples of a project you've walked into and said, "Wow, I wish we had been doing a little bit more maintenance." [laughs] And maybe you can share some details. RICHARD: Yeah. We had a fairly large application that involved a number of clinic services. So we had an application that users were going in every day and counting on our fast response. And, over time, we've got surprised by a database upgrade that had to happen. Basically, the database was going to be changed by our third-party hosting service, and that hadn't been tested. There hadn't been procedures in place when we discovered this need. And there was a very hard date that that change had to be done or else the entire application was going to go down. And it came at a very inconvenient time, at the end of the year around Christmas, that we had to respond to all of that. And had we been in front of it and just updated it every quarter and staying current with it, it wouldn't have been nearly the lift that it turned out to be. We were facing a pretty hard deadline [laughs] there to keep things going. It was very, very stressful and disruptive for the team and potentially for the clinics. VICTORIA: Right. And it always happens around a big holiday or something like that, right? When it all comes to a head. [laughter] RICHARD: Absolutely. You want to be in control of the timeframe and not have the timeframe be in control of you. VICTORIA: Right. And if you have a team like thoughtbot supporting you, you can go on your vacation with a little bit more knowledge that if something breaks, there's someone there who can respond and fix things, and you don't have to interrupt your very valuable time off. So... RICHARD: [chuckles] Absolutely. VICTORIA: Yeah. Well, thank you so much, Richard, for joining me today. I appreciate you coming here to talk with us. And we'll talk to you again soon. RICHARD: Yeah, it was a pleasure. Thank you. WILL: I have a question around your listeners. I just want to take a second and just thank everyone who listens to the podcast. We really appreciate you so much, so just thank you, thank you, thank you. Because if you don't have listeners, you don't have a podcast, like you said a second ago. And you went through so many changes. What's been your biggest win, and how do you continue winning with your listeners? And how do you engage with them? BRITTANY: This is a fun answer because, actually, thoughtbot comes into play there. They did not pay me to say this. But one thing that The Bike Shed used to do is they used to go to RailsConf and RubyConf, and they would record episodes during the conference with various Ruby heroes in the community. This is going back to me seeing these people as celebrities. I just thought that was, like, the coolest thing. And, at the time, I couldn't afford to go to conferences like that. So being able to listen to those podcasts and get to hear that kind of content was really important to me. And so, you know, eventually, that stopped being a thing at RubyConf and RailsConf. And two years ago, I reached out and said, "Hey, I really love those kinds of sessions. Is there any way that I could take the lead on bringing those sessions back?" And we did. So it took in the form of a podcast panel at these different conferences where we would bring in different podcasts in the community. And we would have a panel. We would answer listener questions. It was genuinely a lot of fun. So that is a proud moment for me. But it's a proud moment for me because it gave me the opportunity to reach out to podcasts in the community and say, "Hey, we're not competing here. We're friends. I want to record content with you. Like, please be part of my podcast community." And we have never been tighter. So, like, we guest on each other's podcasts. We promote each other's podcasts on like Mastodon and Twitter. And it is just the most lovely thing ever because now we say things like, oh, yeah, like, this podcast, like, that's our, like, sister podcast, or that's our brother podcast. Like, it's so cool that we, you know, rising tide raises all ships. That's exactly what's happening here in the Ruby podcast community. VICTORIA: I like that familial sense within the different Ruby on Rails podcasts, and maybe even Giant Robots is a part of that. Like, are we a cousin or an uncle? [laughter] Who knows? But I was actually there when you recorded the episode live at RailsConf in Atlanta this year. Was that your favorite moment at RailsConf, or was it something else? BRITTANY: Yeah, I would say that was my favorite moment at RailsConf. No matter how many times I meet Aaron Patterson, I am always, like, deeply intimidated by just how funny and intelligent he is. So having that excuse of reaching out to him and saying like, "Hey, will you please be on this podcast panel?" was so fun. I deeply adore Irina Nazarova, and so having her on the panel as well was fun. And then just doing the wildcard of having the audience, like, vote in who was going to be the third panel was truly a risky move, Victoria. [laughs] But it ended up paying off, and it ended up generating some really fun content for us. VICTORIA: That's awesome. And I'm curious, you know, to talk a little bit more about the Ruby on Rails Community. And what do you see is the biggest challenge that it's facing right now? BRITTANY: Oh, I have so many opinions on this. What a great question. [laughs] So I recently put together a talk proposal. It's currently waitlisted at a conference, but it is a talk that I very much want to give. But one project that I would really like to work on is...between, I would say, 2013 and 2015, Ruby on Rails was definitely the number one framework that was being taught in bootcamps. And I'm really curious about what happened to all those people. I'm one of them. I learned Ruby on Rails in 2014. I still believe that I'm in the Ruby on Rails Community, not only for the podcast, but I'm an engineering manager for a company that writes Rails. So I believe I'm very much in the community. I'm so curious. Those people had so much potential of being seniors, principals, staff engineers, founders, engineering managers, architects. What happened to them? And did they stay in our community? And then my second part of that is, what does it mean to be in the Ruby on Rails Community? Like, can you just listen to podcasts and be in the community? Do you need to actively write Ruby? I just find that whole thing very interesting. We're very obsessed with bringing new programmers into the Rails community, which I think is important. But what about the people who we taught Rails and left us? Like, is there an opportunity to bring them back? WILL: It's funny you say that because I wasn't in that year range. I was a little later, like, 2017. And I learned Ruby on Rails, and then I went to JavaScript, you know, React, React Native, but I'm slowly inching back towards Ruby on Rails. My current project, I'm actually able to do some Ruby on Rails. And I'm really excited about it because, like you, that was my first language style that I learned, and I still love it. It is weird, but you always love your first language; I do, at least. So it's interesting that you said that because, yeah, I can say, for me, I'm slowly coming back towards it. BRITTANY: Well, welcome back, Will. We're excited to have you. I know that Node was such a heavy hitter when it came out, and it made a lot of sense. Like, we're going to teach you JavaScript on the front end. Oh, hey, we're going to also teach you JavaScript on the back end. You know, from the business side, I'm so curious whether or not Rails is still, like, one of the top three solutions in order to get an MVP off the ground. I don't have my thumb on that, so I'm very curious whether or not that's true or not. VICTORIA: We certainly still tend to default to it at thoughtbot and to get MVPs off the ground. And we're still building a bunch of products every year with it. [laughs] So, Ruby on Rails and React together, especially if you're trying to iterate very quickly and test your assumptions about what you're building, I think that it's still a really fast and high-performing framework to use. And it's interesting because there's a coding school in San Diego, Codecademy, which is really heavily involved, [chuckles] of course, in the Ruby on Rails Community, and they still teach it in their bootcamp. And one of the reasons they said to me was because it's one of the frameworks that gives you that holistic view of how everything works. [laughs] Like, if you're new to tech, new to programming, in general, it's a very easy entry point to understanding. And I think that, of itself, when you're talking, like, the long-term viability of a framework, being able to hire people who can step in and understand what's going on in your codebase, that framework gives you a higher chance of that. [laughs] You know, that might point to your long-term success, too. BRITTANY: Now, that's a really good point. Going back to the podcast as well, I think one thing that is not very well solved is just being able to make it sustainable as well because there are only so many sponsors out there. And it's really hard to prove ROI from sponsoring a podcast, right? Like, you can put links in the show notes. And you can hope people click on them and they convert. And you can be able to say, "Hey, this podcast is the reason." But I've seen a lot of people start podcasts, and they think, well, if I put a bunch of episodes out and some people listen, then sponsors are going to knock down my door. I'm very lucky that I've had some long-term sponsors that have been able to keep the show sustainable. And I love seeing podcasts that come out of companies, you know, like thoughtbot, where you are being sustained by the company that, you know, is producing it. It's really hard to justify a podcast as a business unless you are already a major celebrity already, right? VICTORIA: Yeah, we certainly don't do it for the money it makes us directly off the podcast. We do not. [laughter] BRITTANY: We do not. VICTORIA: Yeah, I agree with that. And yeah, and even it's interesting as an advertising vehicle or marketing for your company. It can be great because, like, I feel with Giant Robots, we have so many listeners, like, loyal listeners over the years that we have this, like, direct way of communicating with a community that we care about. [laughs] But if you don't have...trying to, like, create that market and create that group of people from the ground up can be really tough. [laughs] And it takes a lot of time, a lot of investment, and a lot of effort, especially if you can't afford a professional editor. [laughs] BRITTANY: Agreed. There's just some cost that I believe, like, the longer I do this, that are just, like, non-negotiable. There are some things that you can definitely have as optional. You know, for me, like, you have to have a good microphone. You have to have a professional editor. I pay for, like, my calendar scheduling software because I want to make that really, like, slick for my guests. Like, I used to...oh, I used to do the emails back and forth of, like, I'm available at Thursday at 2:00 or Friday at 3:00. Like, would one of these work for you? No. [laughs] It's just...that's a rotten experience. For us, we do send, like, a thank you gift after being on the show, which has been, like, a nice add with having a producing partner that will back me on that. And I try to get to as many conferences as possible because I think it's a great vehicle to promote the podcast, but those end up all being optional. And all those things they do cost money. VICTORIA: They do. And it's funny, like, yeah, getting out to the conferences, it's still the number one way to grow things is by meeting people in person [laughs], like, being real and human. BRITTANY: Shocking, right? [laughs] VICTORIA: Yeah. And I'm just kind of curious, like, in terms of how you picture what success means for your podcast. Like, what does that look like in the next six months or even, like, five years of hosting this podcast for you? BRITTANY: Ooh, this is, like, the existential crisis question because I've been doing it for nearly five years. And I think the question is always going to be, you know, like, how long do I want to keep hosting the podcast? I will say the podcast is a positive influence on me in terms of making sure that I stay connected to people, that I keep writing code on the side so that way, I know what I'm talking about. I have this whole imposter thing of, like, what if someone finds out I'm not a Ruby on Rails developer day to day and that I'm, like, actually thinking about business problems; I was, like, an engineering manager? You know, I'm going to get found out, and people are going to unsubscribe. But in all seriousness, I think the success for this podcast is that it can go on without me. It's been around for that long already. And eventually, like, I want to have a succession plan where someones, I will say, like, multiple co-hosts to be able to take it over from there. It'll be rough to watch because, like, I really enjoy, you know, my current era because I feel like the podcast has gone through different eras. I really do enjoy it. But, at some point, it's just not going to make sense in terms of my professional goals. Do you feel the same? VICTORIA: Yes. But we're only a year in. So I feel like I'm still...[laughter] I feel like I'm still new to hosting. And I'm like, oh, I've already recorded, like, 30 episodes or something. [laughs] There's been a lot of change. And we're always thinking about, like, how do we make it better? What do we do? And trying to figure out how do we really get the most out of it for ourselves. But I feel the same way that it's just one of the more fun things that I do at thoughtbot [laughs]. And it gives me that chance to reach out to people and start conversations that I otherwise would not have had. So I really appreciate it. I don't know what you think, Will. WILL: No, I totally agree with you. I love meeting new people. And I love meeting the diverse group of people that we have on the podcast. I love that just, like, how did you get here? Like, what makes you keep at it? Like, you've been at it for five years. What makes you keep at it? Just those questions like that I really love. For me personally, I think that I'm still in the growing phase of podcast hosting. Like, I can get better at this. I can get better at that. What else can I get better at? So I think that's where I'm at in this phase. But, like Victoria said, that's only a year in. It's a different story when you're five years in. BRITTANY: [laughs] It is. And one thing that I will do to make it more sustainable is, you know, like when you're running, you can either be sprinting, or you can be doing, like, a long endurance race. So with the podcast, I will book a bunch of podcasts in one week and say, this is my week to be recording. Like, I'm going to be very heads down on the podcast. I have other things going on in my life, but I'm like, this is a podcast week for me. And so I will record a bunch of episodes. And that essentially gives me a couple of weeks where I can essentially take a break from the podcast. But guess what, listeners? Like, you're still getting new episodes. So you have no idea that I'm secretly taking a break. And I think that has also been a huge help. Odd fact is that the five years that I've been hosting The Ruby on Rails Podcast, I am only missing from one episode. And the reason for that is that when I broke my ankle, [laughs] I called my co-host and was like, "Hey, I'm going into surgery tomorrow. We have this great episode being recorded tomorrow. I need you to take it." [laughs] And so that is the one episode that I am missing from, but I think it was a good lesson for me to know that I can step away and good content can still happen. WILL: That's amazing. That's a pretty good record. [laughs] BRITTANY: Or it might be obsessive, Will. I don't know. [laughter] WILL: Let me ask you this, what does success look like for you personally - roller derby, your full-time job? What does success look like for you in those areas in six months or a couple of years? BRITTANY: Oh, that's a really great question. So I had stepped away from roller derby during the pandemic. And so I absolutely love fitness. I do CrossFit. I have a peloton. I have my own little home gym that I built during the pandemic that I absolutely adore. So, you know, success for me is continuing to invest in that self-care. I want to keep skating just because I'm that person. Everyone came to me, and they're like, "Oh, you broke your ankle. I bet you won't go back to a roller derby." And I was like, oh, you think I won't? You think I won't go back? [laughs] So I'm headed back, but I'm going to be very careful about it. Because I've seen that, you know, your body can break, and you need to give yourself some rest. But to answer, overall, like, I am an engineering manager now, and, you know, my goal is to eventually to get to that director level. And, in some ways, like, I can justify the podcast just because I do get the excuse to talk to people that have the job that I eventually want to have in my career. And so it helps in that regard as well. VICTORIA: I think that's great, and I agree. That's also why I started getting involved in my community a lot, maybe 5 or 10 years ago. I was just like, here's opportunities to show my leadership and see how connected I am with other leaders. [laughs] It helps in that way. And on blading, I actually bought rollerblades recently just to go around the neighborhood. BRITTANY: Yeesssss! VICTORIA: And I got heckled by a woman [laughs] who said...I think she was being sincere, but she was like, "Bend your knees, and it's going to be okay." [laughter] Like, "Wear wrist guards next time." [laughter] I was like, maybe just my face was very try-hard in that moment. Because I have a lot of respect for people who can roller derby and get around on skates that fast. [laughs] BRITTANY: Well, you know what's really funny? (I haven't even talked about this on my own podcast.) is that you know, I'm involved in the Roller Derby League. Obviously, I can't skate right now. And so I needed to find a committee so that I was able to still, you know, provide value to the league. And so, for some reason, I decided that skater resources would be a good idea. So I'm essentially one of the people who is, you know, human resources within the Roller Derby League. And so when there are disputes or questions, or people have hurt feelings, like, they're coming to me, which is, you know, really funny because I do some of that as an engineering manager. So, like, to your point, Victoria, like, you know, I can do growth because they're way more extreme through roller derby, as you can imagine. And, in some ways, it ends up being good practice. VICTORIA: Yes, that does sound like practice for higher-level management decisions, [laughs] so get ready. You're going to have issues and problems, and you're the one to solve it. So... BRITTANY: Yeah. It's not like their problems don't matter. But, in some ways, it's almost like playing with monopoly money because, like, you know, you're not dealing with somebody's, like, livelihood. You're dealing with a sport that they do for fun. Like, trust me, no one is being paid to play roller derby. [laughs] It's a very expensive sport. There's a lot of equipment involved. And, Victoria, yes, you want to wear wristguards. [laughter] VICTORIA: Yes. I learned my lesson. BRITTANY: You write code. You want to wear wrist guards. [laughter] VICTORIA: Right. And yeah, it's funny about things like that. Like, it's still very meaningful to people. Like, when I used to coach kids' climbing competitions, it's, like, the same thing. Like, it's rock climbing, everybody, but some people take it very seriously. [laughs] There's a lot of feelings involved. But, at the end of the day, it's nice to have that practice outside of the pressure of it being someone's livelihood and all of those details. BRITTANY: Agreed. VICTORIA: Well, let me ask you this question. It's one of our favorite ones. But if you could go back in time and give advice to your younger self, what would you say? And maybe it's at the beginning of the podcast or some other inflection point in your career. BRITTANY: That is...oh, what a gift because hindsight is 20/20, isn't it? When I was going through school, I ended up getting a marketing degree because I really enjoyed business. I really liked, you know, the mechanics behind marketing. But, at the time, I had taken a couple of computer classes, and this was back in 2006. And, you know, I thought about double majoring in computer science and marketing. And someone gave me the terrible advice that computer programming was going to go away [laughs], and so it would be a waste of time to get that double degree in computer science. And so, you know, I'm very much a second career developer. Like I noted earlier, you know, I was a PM. I was a non-technical product manager before I learned how to code, and so I learned how to code in my 30s. So I wish I could go back and get into programming way earlier. It would have changed the entire trajectory of my life. But part of me always wants to live out, like, that Black Mirror, like, what it would have been like if I had learned to code so much earlier. Would I have found Ruby? Maybe not. WILL: I totally agree with that because the same story. I remember growing up, and I had a cousin that lived next door. He used to program, and I was just, like, he was a celebrity because I was like, whoa, look what he's doing, and how can you do that? And then I went off to college. Well, I grew up in a small town, so we didn't really have many computer programs. I went to a college, and they said, "Hey, we have this one computer course you can either take it or test out." I was like; I'm not taking it; test out. I want to save that money. And I didn't realize how much I'll love computers and programming until later in life, late 20s, early 30s. And I wish I could have started early, so I totally agree with you about that. VICTORIA: Like, I wish I would have time now to learn how to code. [laughs] Like, I still need to learn it. No, I think that...oh, would I advise? I don't know. You know what's funny? A recent guest said that if that had happened, they still wouldn't have believed themselves [laughs], right? Like, would you really believe someone telling you what to do? Like, you know, you try to make the best decision that you can at the time. BRITTANY: I think it's fun to look back and see all the little things that happened that got you to where you are. So, like, two of, like, crucial things that happened for me. I was in school to become a genetic counselor, and I hated it. And so I had gotten an internship, and, like, that internship changed everything because it was like a day in the life as a genetic counselor, and I really did not like it at all. And so, I ended up dropping all my classes and moving into the business school. And so that was one thing that happened. And then the second thing is, you know, I was working at a cowboy restaurant. [laughs] It was ridiculous. And I was getting ready to graduate school and just absolutely terrified about not having a job. I ended up getting this table of this company that was, like, having a business meeting, and we ended up chatting, and they were so wonderful. And they left me their business card, and, like, that ended up being my first job. It's just the little micro-decisions that you make that, like, change your entire trajectory, which is really so cool. So you end up not really regretting anything, but you always just kind of look back and reflect, and you're like, what if I had given that table away? Or what if I hadn't been ambitious and, like, tried to get that internship? So just everything's an opportunity, right? WILL: Yeah, I totally, totally agree with that. So you do roller derby, CrossFit, marathons, coding, your podcast. So you do a lot of self-care, which I don't think, especially in the tech world, we do enough self-care. I know I don't. I am horrible at it, trying to get better. What's your wind in your sails for that? Like, how do you keep going? Like, how do you stay disciplined with that? BRITTANY: I think, for me, I feel better when I move my body. I make better decisions. I am more patient. I need to work out earlier in the day. Like, I am a morning person, and so it makes me feel good. And so then I go into work in a good mood. And I deal with people day to day, right? Like, I manage ten developers. And so it's also something that I can use to connect with my team as well. A lot of them also like to do physical things, and so that works out nicely. In terms of nutrition, I definitely could be better. But I will say my partner and I take turns meal prepping our lunches. We both work from home. And so being able to, like, in between meetings run over and grab a box of actually good food to be able to eat lunch. We do, like, a meal service at night as well. I don't know, like, you need to look out for you. Because while the belief is that other people are also looking out, nobody's going to look out for you like you are. And so you have to prioritize self-care and just making sure that you're getting those moments. And I agree with you, Will; sometimes, I'm absolutely terrible at setting up those processes so that way you don't fall through. VICTORIA: I think there's a book that makes me think of it called, like, The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck. [laughs] BRITTANY: Yes. VICTORIA: Yeah. BRITTANY: Yes. VICTORIA: Yep. And I think that's part of it, too. Like, there's a lot of pressure to be so high-performing and to do all the things for your family, and for your work and your personal life. But, at the end of the day, it's also okay to just sit around and do nothing [laughs] and, like, relax. BRITTANY: Yeah, I've watched a lot of Drag Race, a lot. [laughs] VICTORIA: Oh, awesome. Yes. What's your favorite season? BRITTANY: Oh, season six, I would say. Season six is just so good. Are you watching All-Stars? VICTORIA: I'm not right now. I'm actually...I usually binge-watch it at random times. So I'm not really caught up. But I have met a few of them at drag shows. I think I've met Milk. Is that [inaudible 44:27] BRITTANY: Oh, wow. What a queen to have met. VICTORIA: I know. BRITTANY: That's amazing. [laughs] VICTORIA: That was actually a very funny story. I'll tell you another time. [laughs] But yes. BRITTANY: But honestly, like, Drag Race actually relates to engineering management for me because, you know, at my last job, I had two developers that I was struggling to connect with. And I realized that after stand-up, they were staying behind to talk about Drag Race, and I wanted to connect with them. And I was like, oh, I'll check out a couple of episodes and became so deeply addicted [laughs] that, like, I surpassed them in how much I loved it. So, like, it is a fun, like, I've always thought about giving a conference talk where, like, each report that I have, like, one crazy thing that they do...well, not crazy but, like, one, you know, passion that they have and, like, trying it just to have something to relate to. Though I will say, I did manage somebody who really liked to jump out of planes, and that is just not in the cards for me. VICTORIA: I love that too. I like when someone is really passionate about something. I'm like, okay, I'll give it a chance, at least once, you know. But I have some friends right now who are into freediving, and I'm not convinced [laughs] that I want to go try to hold my breath underwater. BRITTANY: What in the world is freediving? VICTORIA: It's diving underwater without oxygen. BRITTANY: No. VICTORIA: Yeah. Yeah. BRITTANY: That's a big nope for me. VICTORIA: And, like, hunting fish. So, like, they catch tuna and stuff. They're down there pew-pew and making sushi when they get back. BRITTANY: Well, that actually sounds wonderful. But -- VICTORIA: Yeah, I'm like, I will eat this. I will eat [laughs] whatever you catch. BRITTANY: Yes, that's fair. VICTORIA: Yeah. Like, I'm into the results but not...I might try some of the, like... a lot of it is, like, training your breath and being able to hold your breath and to stay calm because that's really the biggest problem. [laughs] I do rock climbing. I think that's enough. Like, that's -- WILL: [laughs] BRITTANY: That's pretty badass. VICTORIA: Yeah. [laughs] WILL: Yes. BRITTANY: That is a very cool sport. VICTORIA: Yeah. And, actually, you're mentioning how it was, like, you worked at a cowboy restaurant, and that was how you got your first connection to your job. And, like, I would go up to, like, my college climbing wall and be, like, I'm a rock climber; you should hire me. And [laughs] through that connection, I got my first referral to my first job in DC. And so, basically, my whole life revolves around it. [laughs] Nothing would happen without these little connections that you make. I'm curious, Will, if you had a pivot point like that you can tell us about. WILL: It was probably getting to tech because it was more of a hobby, and sometimes it's still a big hobby for me. So I will say either getting into tech or working out. So I try to work out with friends. So I used to play football. Everything was a group workout. So after football, it was very hard for me to work out because it was always a group workout. So after many, many years of finally realizing that, I try to work out in groups, with friends, and stuff like that. So that's probably the biggest thing for me is, like, working out in a group and having someone to hold me accountable. BRITTANY: I love that. That's one reason...so I used to be a fitness instructor. I should reveal that as well. I used to be a BODYPUMP instructor. And the reason for that is just, like, again, I thought people that were fitness instructors were just, like, celebrities and absolute badasses. And so, I used to only go to group fitness class as well because I needed that accountability. And so, yeah, there's definitely days I wake up where I absolutely do not want to do anything. But having that accountability, it's just really awesome, and really, it makes sure that you follow through. VICTORIA: That makes sense how you've practiced your voice and why your podcasting voice is so strong [laughter] because you're a fitness instructor. That's what is starting to add up for me. [laughter] BRITTANY: You know what? The biggest challenge of being a fitness instructor is that they would send me the routines, and I would have to memorize them. And being able to memorize like, oh, I'm going to squat on the fourth count. And I'm going to do a clean and press on the eighth count. Oh my God, is that an algorithm -- WILL: Yes. BRITTANY: You know, for a pro...and I was like, is there any way that I could somehow automate? Like, part of me wanted to game it. I'm like, how do I game this so I don't have to spend so much time trying to memorize it? I mean, it was truly, truly challenging. And it was probably, like, the best brain teaser that I could have been doing because you're essentially putting on a live performance while working out. And everyone needs to be able to follow you and feel encouraged by you. It was just...it was a wild time. WILL: [laughs] VICTORIA: That sounds very demanding. Well, coming up to the end of our time here, is there anything else you would like to promote today? BRITTANY: Ooh, no. We're currently not hiring at my job. Normally, that is something that I would promote. I would say if you are interested in checking out my podcast, it is The Ruby on Rails Podcast. We have plenty of things on there that are not Rails-specific. We've had conversations about, like, what's it like to get stock options at a company? What does the recruiting landscape currently look like? And then we also have, like, deep topics about, like, what's currently being merged into Ruby Core? So, really, we have a wide variety of topics. So, if you find my voice somewhat pleasant, come on over; we'd be happy to have you. And, of course, you can listen to Victoria's episode, that will be linked up in the show notes. But this was such a pleasure. It was great spending time with you both, Will and Victoria. WILL: Yeah, it was great. Loved chatting with you. VICTORIA: Yes, thank you so much for joining. This was super fun. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. WILL: If you have any questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you could find me on Twitter @will23larry. VICTORIA: And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com. Special Guest: Brittany Martin.
Charity Majors is Co-Founder and CTO of Honeycomb, which provides full-stack observability that enables engineers to deeply understand and debug production software together. Victoria and Will talk to Charity about observability, her technical background and decision to start Honeycomb.io, thoughts about the whole ops SRE profession, and things that surprised her along her journey of building a company around observability as a concept. Honeycomb (https://www.honeycomb.io/) Follow Honeycomb on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/honeycombio), Twitter (https://twitter.com/honeycombio), Youtube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCty8KGQ3oAP0MQQmLIv7k0Q), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/honeycomb.io/). Follow Charity Majors on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/charity-majors/) or Twitter (https://twitter.com/mipsytipsy), or visit her website (https://charity.wtf/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. WILL: And I'm your other host, Will Larry. And with us today is Charity Majors, Co-Founder and CTO of Honeycomb, which provides full-stack observability that enables engineers to deeply understand and debug production software together. Charity, thank you for joining us. How are you doing? CHARITY: Thanks for having me. I'm a little bit crunchy from a [laughs] long flight this morning. But I'm very happy to be home in San Francisco and happy to be talking to you. VICTORIA: Wonderful. And, Charity, I looked at your profile and noticed that you're a fan of whiskey. And I thought I might ask you just to get us started here, like, what's your favorite brand? CHARITY: Oh, goodness, that's like asking me to choose my favorite child if I had children. [laughter]. You know, I used to really be into the peaty scotches, the Islays, in particular. But lately, I've been more of a bourbon kick. Of course, everybody loves Pappy Van Winkle, George T. Stagg; impossible to find now, but it's so, so good. You know, if it's high-proof and single barrel, I will probably drink it. VICTORIA: That sounds great. Yeah, I tend to have the same approach. And, like, people ask me if I like it, and I like all of them. [laughter] I don't [inaudible 01:21] that I didn't like. [laughs] CHARITY: [inaudible 01:23] tongue sting? Then I'm in. [laughs] VICTORIA: Yeah, [inaudible 01:26]. WILL: See, I'm the opposite. I want something smooth. I'm a fruity drink type of guy. I'm just going, to be honest. CHARITY: There's no shame in that. WILL: No shame here. [laughs] Give me a margarita, and you have a happy Will for life. [laughs] VICTORIA: We'll have to get you to come out and visit San Diego for some margaritas, Will. That's -- CHARITY: Oh yeah. VICTORIA: Yeah, it's the place to be. Yeah, we do more of a bourbon drink in our house, like bourbon soda. That's usually what we make, like, my own custom simple syrup, and mix it with a little bourbon and soda water. And that's what we do for a cool down at the end of the day sometimes, yeah. Well, awesome. Let's see. So, Charity, why don't you just tell me a little more about Honeycomb? What is it? CHARITY: Well, it's a startup that hasn't failed yet, so... [laughs] to my own shock. [laughs] We're still around seven and a half years in. And I say that just so much joking. Like, you're not really supposed to say this as a founder, but, like, I 100% thought we were going to fail from the beginning. But we haven't yet, and we just got more money. So we'll be around for a while. We kind of pioneered the whole concept of observability, which now doesn't really mean anything at all. Everybody and their mother is like, well, I do observability, too. But back when we started talking about it, it was kind of a little bit revolutionary, I guess in that, you know, we started talking about how important it is to have high cardinality data in your systems. You really can't debug without it. And the fact that our systems are getting just astronomically more complex, and yet, we're still trying to debug it with these tools based on, you know, the metric data type [laughs] defined since the '70s when space was incredibly rare and expensive. And now space is incredibly cheap, but we should be wasteful with it so we can understand our incredibly complex systems. So that's us. We really try to empower software engineers to own their own code in production. For a long time, it was like, all of the tools for you to understand your software were really written for low-level ops people because they speak the language of, like, RAM, and disks, and CPU, which you shouldn't have to understand that in order to be able to understand I just deployed something, what went wrong? WILL: I love the honesty because there are so many founders that I'll talk to, and I'm like, okay, you're very successful. But did you really expect this to be what it is today? Did you really expect to survive? Because, like, just some of their ideas, I'm like, it's brilliant, but if I was with you back in the day, I'd be like, it ain't going to work. It's not going to work. [laughs] CHARITY: Yeah. And I feel like the VC culture really encourages delusion, just, like, self-delusion, like, this delusive thinking. You're supposed to, like, broadcast just, like, rock-solid confidence in yourself and your ideas at all time. And I think that only sociopaths do that. [laughs] I don't want to work for anyone who's that confident in themselves or their idea. Because I'm showing my own stripes, I guess, you know, I'm a reliability engineer. I wake up in the morning; I'm like, what's wrong with the day? That's just how my brain works. But I feel like I would rather work with people who are constantly scanning the horizon and being like, okay, what's likely to kill us today? Instead of people who are just like, I am right. [laughs] You know? VICTORIA: Yeah. And I can relate that back to observability by thinking how, you know, you can have an idea about how your system is supposed to work, and then there's the way that it actually works. [laughs] CHARITY: Oh my God. VICTORIA: Right? CHARITY: Yes. It's so much that. VICTORIA: Maybe you can tell us just a little bit more about, like, what is observability? Or how would you explain that to someone who isn't necessarily in it every day? CHARITY: I would explain it; I mean, it depends on who your audience is, of course. But I would explain it like engineers spend all day in their IDEs. And they come to believe that that's what software is. But software is not lines of code. Software is those lines of code running in production with real users using it. That's when software becomes real. And, for too long, we've treated like that, like, an entirely different...well, it's written. [laughs] You know, for launch, I was like, well, it's ops' problem, as the meme says. But we haven't really gotten to a point yet where...I feel like when you're developing with observability; you should be instrumenting your code as you go with an eye towards your future self. How am I going to know if this is working or not? How am I going to know if this breaks? And when you deploy it, you should then go and look at your code in production and look at it through the lens of the telemetry that you just wrote and ask yourself, is it doing what I expected it to? Does anything else look weird? Because the cost of finding and fixing bugs goes up exponentially from the moment that you write them. It's like you type a bug; you backspace. Cool, good for you. That's the fastest you can fix it. The next fastest is if you find it when you're running tests. But tests are only ever going to find the things you could predict were going to fail or that have already failed. The first real opportunity that you have to see if your code really works or not is right after you've deployed it, but only if you've given yourself the telemetry to do so. Like, the idea of just merging your code, like walking out the door or merging your code and waiting to get paged or to get [laughs] escalated to this is madness. This should be such an artifact of the battle days when dev writes, and ops runs it. That doesn't work, right? Like, in the beginning, we had software engineers who wrote code and ran that code in production, and that's how things should be. You should be writing code and running code in production. And the reason I think we're starting to see that reality emerge again is because our systems have gotten so complicated. We kind of can't not because you can't really run your code as a black box anymore. You can't ignore what's on the inside. You have to be able to look at the code in order to be able to run it effectively. And conversely, I don't think you could develop good code unless you're constantly exposing yourself to the consequences of that code. It lets you know when it breaks, that whole feedback loop that completely severed when we had dev versus ops. And we're slowly kind of knitting it together again. But, like, that's what's at the heart of that incredibly powerful feedback loop. It's the heart of all software engineering is, instrumenting your code and looking at it and asking yourself, is it doing what I expected it to do? WILL: That's really neat. You said you're a reliability engineer. What's your background? Tell me more about it because you're the CTO of Honeycomb. So you have some technical background. What does that look like? CHARITY: Yeah, well, I was a music major and then a serial dropout. I've never graduated from anything, ever. And then, I worked at startups in Silicon Valley. Nothing you'd ever...well, I worked at Linden Lab for a few years and some other places. But honestly, the reason I started Honeycomb was because...so I worked at Parse. I was the infrastructure lead at Parse; rest in peace. It got acquired by Facebook. And when I was leaving Facebook, it was the only time in my life that I'd ever had a pedigree. Well, I've actually been an ops engineer my entire career. When I was leaving Facebook, I had VCs going, "Would you like some money to do something? Because you're coming from Facebook, so you must be smart." On the one hand, that was kind of offensive. And on the other hand, like, I kind of felt the obligation to just take the money and run, like, on behalf of all dropouts, of women, and queers everywhere. Just, you know, how often...am I ever going to get this chance again? No, I'm not. So, good. VICTORIA: Yes, I will accept your money. [laughs] CHARITY: Yeah, right? VICTORIA: I will take it. And I'm not surprised that you were a music major. I've met many, I would say, people who are active in social media about DevOps, and then it turns out they were a theater major, [laughs] or music, or something different. And they kind of naturally found their way. CHARITY: The whole ops SRE profession has historically been a real magnet for weirdo people, weird past, people who took very non-traditional. So it's always been about tinkering, just understanding systems. And there hasn't been this high bar for formal, you know, knowledge that you need just to get your first job. I feel like this is all changing. And it makes me kind of...I understand why it's changing, and it also makes me kind of sad. VICTORIA: So I think you have a quote about, you know, working on infrastructure teams that everything comes back to databases. CHARITY: [laughs] VICTORIA: I wonder if you could expand on that. CHARITY: I've been an accidental DBA my entire career. I just always seemed to be the one left holding the bag. [laughs] We were playing musical chairs. I just feel like, you know, as you're moving up the stack, you can get more and more reckless. As you move down the stack, the closer you get to, like, bits on disk, the more conservative you have to be, the more blast radius your mistakes could have. Like, shit changes all the time in JavaScript land. In database land, we're still doing CRUD operators, like, since Stonebreaker did it in the '70s. We're still doing very fundamental stuff. I love it, though, because, I don't know, it's such a capsule of computers at large, which is just that people have no idea how much shit breaks. [laughs] Stuff breaks all the time. And the beauty of it is that we keep going. It's not that things don't break. You have no idea how much stuff is broken in your stack right now. But we find ways to resolve it after the fact. I just think that data is so fascinating because it has so much gravity. I don't know, I could keep going, but I feel like you get the point. I just think it's really fun. I think danger is fun, I think. It might not surprise you to learn that I, too, was diagnosed with ADHD in the past couple of years. I feel like this is another strand that most DevOps, SRE types have in common, which is just [laughs] highly motivated in a good way by panic. [laughs] WILL: I love that you said you love danger because I feel like that is right in your wheelhouse. Like, you have to love danger to be in that field because it's predictable. You're the one that's coming in and putting out the fires when everyone sometimes they're running for the window. Like you said, like, you got caught holding the bag. So that's really neat. This is a big question for me, especially for being an engineer, a dev, do you find that product and design teams understand and see the value in SRE? CHARITY: Oooh. These types of cultural questions are always so difficult for me to gauge whether or not my sample is representative of the larger population. Because, in my experience, you know, ops teams typically rule the roost, like, they get final say over everything. But I know that that's not typically true. Like, throughout the industry, like, ops teams kind of have a history of being kind of kicked around. I think that they do see the value because everybody can see when it breaks. But I think that they mostly see the value when it breaks. I think that it takes a rare, farsighted product team to be able to consent to giving, like, investments all along in the kinds of improvements that will pay off later on instead of just pouring all of the resources into fast fixes and features and feature, feature, feature. And then, of course, you know, you slowly grind to a halt as a team because you're just amassing surface area. You're not paying down your tech debt. And I think it's not always clear to product and design leaders how to make those investments in a way that actually benefits them instead of it just being a cost center. You know, it's just something that's always a break on them instead of actually enabling them to move faster. WILL: Yeah, yeah. And I can definitely see that being an engineer dev. I'm going to change it a little bit. And I'm going to ask, Victoria, since you're the managing director of that team, how do you feel about that question? Do you feel that's the same thing, or what's your observation of that? VICTORIA: I think Charity is, like, spot on because it does depend on the type of organization that you're working in, the hierarchy, and who gets priority over budget and things like that. And so the interesting thought for me coming from federal IT organizations into more commercial and startup organizations is that there is a little bit of a disconnect. And we started to ask our designers and developers like, "Well, have you thought much about, like, what happens when this fails?" [laughs] And especially -- CHARITY: Great question. VICTORIA: Yeah, like, when you're dealing with, like, healthcare startups or with bank startups and really thinking through all the ways it could go wrong. Is it a new pathway? Which I think is exciting for a lot of people. And I'm curious, too, Charity, like with Honeycomb, was there things that surprised you in your journey of discovery about, you know, building a company about observability and what people wanted out of this space? CHARITY: Oh my goodness. [laughs] Was anything not a surprise? I mean, [laughs] yeah, absolutely. You're a director of what team? VICTORIA: I'm a managing director of our Mission Control team. CHARITY: Oooh. VICTORIA: Which is our platform engineering, and DevOps, and SRE team. CHARITY: Now, does your platform engineering team have product managers? VICTORIA: I think it might be me. [laughs] CHARITY: Aha. VICTORIA: It might be me. And we have a team lead, and our CTO is actually our acting development director. So he's really leading the development of that project platform. CHARITY: When I was in New York the last couple of days, I just gave a talk at KubeCon about the Perils, Pitfalls, and Pratfalls of Platform Engineering, just talking about all of the ways that platform teams accidentally steer themselves into the ditch. One of the biggest mistakes that people make in that situation is not running the platform team like a product team, you know, having a sort of, like, if we build it, they will come sort of a mentality towards the platform that they're building internally for their engineers, and not doing the things like, you know, discovery or finding out like, am I really building, you know, the most important thing, you know, that people need right now? And it's like, I didn't learn those skills as an engineer. Like, in the infrastructure land, we didn't learn how to work with product people. We didn't learn how to work with designers. And I feel like the biggest piece of career advice that I give, you know, people like me now, is learn how to work with product and like a product org. I'm curious, like, what you're observing in your realm when it comes to this stuff. Like, how much like a product org do you work? VICTORIA: Oh, I agree 100%. So I've actually been interested in applying our platform project to the thoughtbot Incubator Program. [laughs] CHARITY: Mmm. VICTORIA: So they have this method for doing market strategy, and user interviews, and all of that...exactly what you're saying, like, run it like a product. So I want them to help me with it. [laughs] CHARITY: Nice. VICTORIA: Yes, because I am also a managing director, and so we're managing a team and building business. And we also have this product or this open-source project, really. It's not...we don't necessarily want to be prescriptive with how we, as thoughtbot, tell people how to build their platforms. So with every client, we do a deep dive to see how is their dev team actually working? What are the pain points? What are the things we can do based on, like, you know, this collection of tools and knowledge that we have on what's worked for past clients that makes the most sense for them? So, in that way, I think it is very customer-focused [laughs], right? And that's the motto we want to keep with. And I have been on other project teams where we just try to reproduce what worked for one client and to make that a product. And it doesn't always work [laughs] because of what you're saying. Like, you have to really...and especially, I think that just the diversity of the systems that we are building and have been built is kind of, like, breathtaking [laughs], you know. CHARITY: Yeah. [chuckles] VICTORIA: I'm sure you have some familiarity with that. CHARITY: [laughs] VICTORIA: But what did you really find in the market that worked for you right away, like, was, like, the problem that you were able to solve and start building within your business? CHARITY: We did everything all wrong. So I had had this experience at Facebook, which, you know, at Parse, you know, we had all these reliability issues because of the architecture. What we were building was just fundamentally...as soon as any customer got big, like, they would take up all the resources in this shared, you know, tenancy thing, and the whole platform would go down. And it was so frustrating. And we were working on a rewrite and everything. Like, it was professionally humiliating for me as a reliability engineer to have a platform this bad at reliability. And part of the issue was that you know, we had a million mobile apps, and it was a different app every time, different application...the iTunes Store, like, top five or something. And so the previous generation of tools and strategies like building dashboards and doing retros and being like, well, I'll make a dashboard so that I can find this problem next time immediately, like, just went out the window. Like, none of them would work because they were always about the last battle. And it was always something new. And at one point, we started getting some datasets into this tool at Facebook called Scuba. It was butt ugly. Like, it was aggressively hostile to users. But it let us do one thing really well, which was slice and dice high cardinality dimensions in near real-time. And having the ability to do that to, like, break down by user ID, which is not possible with, you know, I don't know how familiar -- I'll briefly describe high cardinality. So imagine you have a collection of 100 million users. And the highest possible cardinality would be a unique ID because, you know, social security number, very high cardinality. And something much lower cardinality would be like inches of height. And all of metrics and dashboards are oriented around low cardinality dimensions. If you have more than a couple hundred hosts, you can no longer tag your metrics with a host ID. It just falls apart. So being able to break down by, like, you know, one of a million app IDs. It took...the amount of time it took for us to identify and find these brand-new problems, it dropped like a rock, like, from hours of opening it. We never even solved a lot of the problems that we saw. We just recovered. We moved on [laughs] with our day, dropped from that to, like, seconds or minutes. Like, it wasn't even an engineering problem anymore. It was like a support problem, you know, you just go click, click, click, click, click, oh, there it is. Just follow the trail of breadcrumbs. That made such an impression on me. And when I was leaving, I was just like, I can't go back to not having something like this. I was so much less powerful as an engineer. It's just, like, it's unthinkable. So when we started Honeycomb, we were just, like, we went hands down, and we started building. We didn't want to write a database. We had to write a database because there was nothing out there that could do this. And we spent the first year or two not even really talking to customers. When we did talk to customers, I would tell our engineers to ignore their feedback [laughs] because they were all telling us they wanted better metrics. And we're like, no, we're not doing metrics. The first thing that we found we could kind of connect to real problems that people were looking for was that it was high cardinality. There were a few, not many; there were a few engineers out there Googling for high cardinality metrics. And those engineers found us and became our earliest customers because we were able to do breathtaking...from their perspective, they were like, we've been told this is impossible. We've been told that this can't be done. Things like Intercom was able to start tagging other requests with, like, app ID and customer ID. And immediately started noticing things like, oh, this database that we were just about to have to, like, spend six months sharding and extending, oh, it turns out 80% of the queries in flight to this database are all coming from one customer who is paying us $200 a month, so maybe we shouldn't [laughs] do that engineering labor. Maybe we should just, you know, throttle this guy who is only paying us 200 bucks a month. Or just all these things you can't actually see until you can use this very, very special tool. And then once you can see that... So, like, our first customers became rabid fans and vouched for us to investors, and this still blows people's minds to this day. It's an incredibly difficult thing to explain and describe to people, but once they see it on their own data, it clicks because everybody's run into this problem before, and it's really frustrating. VICTORIA: Yeah, that's super interesting and a great example to illustrate that point of just, like, not really knowing what's going on in your system. And, you know, you mentioned just, like, certainly at scale, that's when you really, really need to have [laughs] data and insight into your systems. CHARITY: Yeah. VICTORIA: But one question I get a lot is, like, at what scale do you actually need to start worrying about SRE? [laughs] Which -- CHARITY: SRE? VICTORIA: Yeah, I'll let you answer that. Yeah, site reliability or even things like...like, everything under that umbrella like observability, like, you know, putting in monitoring and tracing and all this stuff. Sometimes people are just like, well, when do I actually have to care? [laughs] CHARITY: I recognize this is, you know, coming from somebody who does this for a living, so, like, people can write it off all they want. But, like, the idea of developing without observability is just sad to me, like, from day one. This is not a tax. It's not something that slows you down or makes your lives worse. It's something that makes your lives better from day one. It helps you move more quickly, with more confidence. It helps you not make as many mistakes. It helps you... Like, most people are used to interacting with their systems, which are just like flaming hairballs under their bed. Nobody has ever understood these systems. They certainly don't understand them. And every day, they ship more code that they don't understand, create systems that they've never understood. And then an alarm goes off, and everybody just, like, braces for impact because they don't understand them. This is not the inevitable end state of computing. It doesn't have to be like this. You can have systems that are well-understood, that are tractable, that you could...it's just...it's so sad to me that people are like, oh God, when do I have to add telemetry? And I'm just like, how do you write software without telemetry? How do you have any confidence that the work you're doing is what you thought you were doing? You know, I just... And, of course, if you're waiting to tack it on later, of course, it's not going to be as useful because you're trying to add telemetry for stuff you were writing weeks, or months, or years ago. The time to add it is while you're writing it. No one is ever going to understand your software as well as you do the moment that you're writing it. That's when you know your original intent. You know what you're trying to do. You know why you're trying to do it. You know what you tried that didn't work. You know, ultimately, what the most valuable pieces of data are. Why wouldn't you leave little breadcrumbs for yourself so that future you can find them? You know, it's like...I just feel like this entire mental shift it can become just as much of a habit as like commenting your code or adding, you know, commenting in your pull request, you know. It becomes second nature, and reaching for it becomes second nature. You should have in your body a feeling of I'm not done until you've looked at your telemetry in production. That's the first moment that you can tell yourself, ah, yes, it probably does what I think it does, right? So, like, this question it makes me sad. It gets me a little worked up because I feel like it's such a symptom of people who I know what their jobs are like based on that question, and it's not as good as it could be. Their jobs are much sadder and more confusing than it could be if they had a slightly different approach to telemetry. That's the observability bit. But about SRE, very few ops engineers start companies, it seems, when I did, you know, I was one of three founding members. And the first thing I did was, of course, spin up an infrastructure and set up CI/CD and all this stuff. And I'm, like, feeling less useful than the others but, you know, doing my part. But that stuff that I spun up, we didn't have to hire an SRE for years, and when we did, it was pretty optional. And this is a system, you know, things trickle down, right? Doing things right from the beginning and having them be clear and well-understood, and efficient, we were able to do so much with so few people. You know, we were landing, you know, hundreds of thousand-dollar deals with people who thought we had hundreds of employees. We had 12 engineers for the first almost five years, just 12 engineers. But, like, almost all of the energy that they put into the world went into moving the business forward, not fighting with the system, or thrashing the system, or trying to figure out bugs, or trying to track down things that were just, like, impossible to figure out. We waste so much time as engineers by trying to add this stuff in later. So the actual answer to your question is, like, if you aren't lucky enough to have an ops co-founder, is as soon as you have real users. You know, I've made a career out of basically being the first engineer to join from infrastructure when the software engineers are starting to have real customers. Like, at Parse, they brought me in when they were about to do their alpha release. And they're like, whoa, okay, I guess we better have someone who knows how to run things. And I came in, and I spent the next, you know, year or so just cleaning up shit that they had done, which wasn't terrible. But, you know, they just didn't really know what they were doing. So I kind of had to undo everything, redo it. And just the earlier, the better, right? It will pay off. Now, that said, there is a real risk of over-engineering early. Companies they don't fail because they innovated too quickly; let's put it that way. They fail because they couldn't focus. They couldn't connect with their customers. They couldn't do all these things. And so you really do want to do just enough to get you to the next place so that you can put most of your effort into making product for your customers. But yeah, it's so much easier to set yourself up with auto-deployment so that every CI/CD run automatically deploys your code to production and just maintain as you grow. That is so easy compared to trying to take, you know, a long, slow, you know, leaky deploy process and turn it into one that could auto-deploy safely after every commit. So yeah, do it early. And then maintain is the easiest way in the world to do this stuff. Mid-Roll Ad: As life moves online, bricks-and-mortar businesses are having to adapt to survive. With over 18 years of experience building reliable web products and services, thoughtbot is the technology partner you can trust. We provide the technical expertise to enable your business to adapt and thrive in a changing environment. We start by understanding what’s important to your customers to help you transition to intuitive digital services your customers will trust. We take the time to understand what makes your business great and work fast yet thoroughly to build, test, and validate ideas, helping you discover new customers. Take your business online with design‑driven digital acceleration. Find out more at tbot.io/acceleration or click the link in the show notes for this episode. WILL: Correct me if I'm wrong, I think you said Facebook and mobile. Do you have, not experience with mobile but do you...does Honeycomb do anything in the mobile space? Because I feel like that portion is probably the most complicated for mobile, like, dealing with iOS and Android and everything that they're asking for. So... CHARITY: We don't have mobile stuff at Honeycomb. Parse was a mobile Backend as a Service. So I went straight from doing all mobile all the time to doing no mobile at all. I also went from doing databases all the time to doing, you know...it's good career advice typically to find a niche and then stay in it, and I have not followed that advice. [laughter] I've just jumped from...as soon as I'm good at something, I start doing something else. WILL: Let me ask you this, how come you don't see more mobile SRE or help in that area? CHARITY: I think that you see lots of SREs for mobile apps, but they're on the back-end side. They're on the server side. So it's just not as visible. But even if you've got, like, a stack that's entirely serverless, you still need SRE. But I think that the model is really shifting. You know, it used to be you hired an SRE team or an ops team to carry the pager for you and to take the alerts and to, like, buffer everything, and nowadays, that's not the expectation. That's not what good companies do. You know, they set up systems for their software engineers to own their code in production. But they need help because they're not experts in this, and that's where SRE types come in. Is that your experience? WILL: Yeah, for the most part. Yeah, that is. CHARITY: Yeah, I think that's very healthy. VICTORIA: And I agree with that as well. And I'm going to take that clip of your reaction to that question about when you should start doing [laughter] observability and just play for everybody whenever someone asks [laughs] me that. I'm like, here's the answer. That's great. CHARITY: I think a good metaphor for that is like, if you're buying a house and taking out a loan, the more of a down payment you can put down upfront, the lower that your monthly payments are going to be for the rest of your...you amortize that out over the next 20-30 years. The more you can do that, the better your life is going to be because interest rates are a bitch. VICTORIA: It makes sense. And yeah, like, to your point earlier about when people actually do start to care about it is usually after something has broken in a traumatic way that can be really bad for your clients and, like, your legal [laughter] stance -- CHARITY: That's true. VICTORIA: As a company. CHARITY: Facing stuff, yeah, is where people usually start to think about it. But, like, the less visible part, and I think almost the more important part is what it does to your velocity and your ability to execute internally. When you have a good, clean system that is well-tended that, you know, where the amount of time between when you're writing the code and when the code is in production, and you're looking at...when that is short and tight, like, no more than a couple of hours, like, it's a different job than if it takes you, like, days or weeks to deploy. Your changes get bashed up with other people's. And, you know, like, you enter, like, the software development death spiral where, you know, it takes a while. So your diffs get even bigger, so code review takes even longer, so it takes even longer. And then your changes are all getting bashed up. And, you know, now you need a team to run deploys and releases. And now you need an SRE team to do the firefighting. And, like, your systems are...the bigger it gets, the more complicated it gets, the more you're spending time just waiting on each other or switching contexts. You ever, like, see an app and been like, oh, that's a cool app? I wonder...they have 800 engineers at that company. And you're just like, what the hell are they all doing? Like, seriously, how does it take that many engineers to build this admittedly nice little product? I guarantee you it's because their internal hygiene is just terrible. It takes them too long to deploy things. They've forgotten what they've written by the time it's out, so nobody ever goes and looks at it. So it's just like, it's becoming a hairball under your bed. Nobody's looking at it. It's becoming more and more mysterious to you. Like, I have a rule of thumb which there's no mathematical science behind this, just experience. But it's a rule of thumb that says that if it takes you, you know, on the order of, say, a couple of hours tops to deploy your software, if it takes you that many engineers to build and own that product, well, if your deploys take on the order of days instead of hours, it will take you twice as many people [chuckles] to build and support that product. And if it takes you weeks to deploy that product, it will take you twice as many again; if anything, that is an underestimate because it actually goes up exponentially, not linearly. But, like, we are so wasteful when it comes to people's time. It is so much easier for managers to go, uh, we're overloaded. Let's hire more people. For some reason, you can always get headcount when you can't actually get the discipline to say no to things or the people to work on internal tools to, like, shrink that gap between when you've written it and when it's live. And just the waste, it just spirals out of control, man, and it's not good. And, you know, it should be such a fun, creative, fulfilling job where you spend your day solving puzzles for money and moving the business materially forward every day. And instead, how much of our time do we just sit here, like, twiddling our thumbs and waiting for the build to finish or waiting for code review [laughs] to get turned around? Or, you know, swapping projects and, like, trying to page all that context in your brain? Like, it's absurd, and this is not that hard of a problem to fix. VICTORIA: Engineering should be fun, and it should be dangerous. That's what [laughs] I'm getting out of this -- CHARITY: It should be fun, and it should be dangerous. I love that. VICTORIA: Fun and dangerous. I like it. [laughs] And speaking of danger, I mean, maybe it's not dangerous, but what does success really look like for you at Honeycomb in the next six months or even in the next five years? CHARITY: I find it much more easier to answer what failure would look like. VICTORIA: You can answer that too if you like. [laughs] CHARITY: [laughs] What would success look like? I mean, obviously, I have no desire to ever go through another acquisition, and I don't want to go out of business. So it'd be nice not to do either of those things, which means since we've taken VC money, IPO would be nice eventually. But, like, ultimately, like, what motivates Christine and me and our entire company really is just, you know, we're engineers. We've felt this pain. We have seen that the world can be better. [laughs] We really just want to help, you know, move engineering into the current decade. I feel like there are so many teams out there who hear me talk about this stuff. And they listen wistfully, and they're like, yeah, and they roll their eyes. They're like, yeah, you work in Silicon Valley, or yeah, but you work at a startup, or yeah...they have all these reasons why they don't get nice things. We're just not good enough engineers is the one that breaks my heart the most because it's not true. Like, it has nothing to do...it has almost nothing to do with how good of an engineer you are. You have to be so much better of an engineer to deal with a giant hairball than with software that gets deployed, you know, within the hour that you can just go look at and see if it's working or not. I want this to go mainstream. I want people...I want engineers to just have a better time at work. And I want people to succeed at what they're doing. And just...the more we can bring that kind of change to more and more people, the more successful I will feel. VICTORIA: I really like that. And I think it's great. And it also makes me think I find that people who work in the DevOps space have a certain type of mentality sometimes, [laughs] like, it's about the greater community and, like, just making being at work better. And I also think it maybe makes you more willing to admit your failures [laughs] like you were earlier, right? CHARITY: Probably. VICTORIA: That's part of the culture. It's like, well, we messed up. [laughs] We broke stuff, and we're going to learn from it. CHARITY: It's healthy. I'm trying to institute a rule where at all hands when we're doing different organizations giving an update every two weeks, where we talk two-thirds about our successes and things that worked great and one-third about things that just didn't work. Like, I think we could all stand to talk about our failures a lot more. VICTORIA: Yeah, makes it a lot less scary, I think [laughs], right? CHARITY: Yeah, yeah. It democratizes the feeling, and it genuinely...it makes me happy. It's like, that didn't work, great. Now we know not to do it. Of the infinite number of things that we could try, now we know something for real. I think it's exciting. And, I don't know, I think it's funny when things fail. And I think that if we can just laugh about it together... You know, in every engineering org that I've ever worked at, out of all the teams, the ops types teams have always been the ones that are the most tightly bonded. They have this real, like, Band of Brothers type of sentiment. And I think it's because, you know, we've historically endured most of the pain. [laughs] But, like, that sense of, like, it's us against the system, that there is hilarity in failure. And, at the end of the day, we're all just monkeys, like, poking at electrical sockets is, I think...I think it's healthy. [laughs] WILL: That's really neat. I love it. This is one of my favorite questions. What advice would you give yourself if you could go back in time? CHARITY: I don't know. I think I'd just give myself a thumbs up and go; it's going to be all right. I don't know; I wouldn't... I don't think that I would try to alter the time continuum [laughs] in any way. But I had a lot of anxiety when I was younger about going to hell and all this stuff. And so I think...but anything I said to my future self, I wouldn't have believed anyway. So yeah, I respectfully decline the offer. VICTORIA: That's fair. I mean, I think about that a lot too actually, like, I sometimes think like, well, if I could go back to myself a year ago and just -- CHARITY: Yeah. I would look at me like I was stupid. [laughter] VICTORIA: That makes sense. It reminds me a little bit about what you said, though, like, doing SRE and everything upfront or the observability pieces and building it correctly in a way you can deploy fastly is like a gift to your future self. [laughs] CHARITY: Yes, it is, with a bow. Yes, exactly. VICTORIA: There you go. Well, all right. I think we are about ready to wrap up. Is there anything you would like to promote specifically? CHARITY: We just launched this really cool little thing at Honeycomb. And you won't often hear me say the words cool and AI in proximity to each other, but we just launched this really dope little thing. It's a tool for using natural language to ask questions of your telemetry. So, if you just deployed something and you want to know, like, what's slow or did anything change, you can just ask it using English, and it does a ChatGPT thing and generates the right graphs for you. It's pretty sweet. VICTORIA: That's really cool. So, if you have Honeycomb set up and working in your system and then you can just ask the little chatbot, "Hey, what's going on here?" CHARITY: Yeah. What's the slowest endpoint? And it'll just tell you, which is great because I feel like I do not think graphically at all. My brain just really doesn't. So I have never been the person who's, like, creating dashboards or graphs. My friend Ben Hartshorne works with me, and he'll make the dashboards. And then I get up in the morning, and I bookmark them. And so we're sort of symbiotic. But everyone can tweak a query, right? Once you have something that you know is, like, within spitting distance as the data you want, anyone can tweak it, but composing is really hard. So I feel like this really helps you get over that initial hurdle of, like, er, what do I break down by? What do I group by? What are the field names? You just ask it the question, and then you've got to click, click, click, and, like, get exactly what you want out of it. I think it's, like, a game changer. VICTORIA: That sounds extremely cool. And we will certainly link to it in our show notes today. Thank you so much for being with us and spending the time, Charity. CHARITY: Yeah, this was really fun. VICTORIA: You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. WILL: And you could find me on Twitter @will23larry. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com. Special Guest: Charity Majors.
Irinia Nazarova is CEO of Evil Martians, a product development consultancy that works with startups and established businesses while creating open-source products and services. Victoria talks to Irinia about getting a sense of what people are interested in learning about or what kind of problems they have, how consulting and product development complement each other, and of course, the question on everyone's minds: Is Evil Martians really evil? 😈 Evil Martians (https://evilmartians.com/) Follow Evil Martians on GitHub (https://github.com/evilmartians), Twitter (https://twitter.com/evilmartians), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/evil.martians/), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/evil-martians/). Follow Irinia Nazarova on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/nonconstant/), or Twitter (https://twitter.com/inazarova). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Irina Nazarova, CEO at Evil Martians, a product development consultancy that works with startups and established businesses while also creating open-source-based products and services. Irina, thanks for joining us. IRINA: Hey, thank you for having me. VICTORIA: You're welcome. Tell me a little bit about what's going on in your world this week. IRINA: So I just returned from Rails SaaS in Athens, which was pretty incredible. It's a smaller conference, but it has amazing vibes, amazing people. And, like, I just loved it there in Athens. VICTORIA: Mmm. IRINA: And, yeah, I wonder how your experience was? Because I know you also went to Japan, right? VICTORIA: Yeah, I went to RubyKaigi in Matsumoto last month. It was a good community, and to get to travel to a cool place was really fun. So I feel really lucky that I was able to get to go. Did you eat a lot of Greek food while you were there? IRINA: Not that much. I was a speaker. So I was a bit nervous, and I skipped some meals. [chuckles] VICTORIA: Oh no. [laughs] IRINA: Just to prepare. But we did have a super nice dinner with Xavier Noria, and, well, we had some Greek wine. All right, we did that. VICTORIA: That sounds fabulous. And, you know, I was going to ask you...one of my questions was about the conferences you've been attending because we met at RailsConf in Atlanta. And I saw you went to Rails SaaS and maybe some other ones recently. So, how has that been for you overall? IRINA: It's amazing. I think, like, all the conferences are suddenly back. And the energy is different than maybe pre-COVID. I didn't really attend many conferences pre-COVID, but I did attend some. Now people are so eager to sort of reconnect. And me, I think, I feel like I'm only starting to make those connections. And it's so emotional to meet people that I only see on Twitter, but meeting them in person is magical for some reason. So this is what's happening. Like, to me, I'm just amazed by all this energy and support coming from the community towards many people, like, towards each other. VICTORIA: I also feel amazed when I meet someone I've followed on Twitter for a long time but in real life [laughs]. I'm like, wow. That was Aaron Patterson for me. I was like, oh, this is someone I followed on Twitter a long time ago because I thought they were funny. And now they're a speaker at this conference I'm at [laughs], which is really nice. And do the conferences help you connect more to potential clients? Or what's, like, the business reason for attending all of these events? IRINA: Good question. So I'm not expecting any, you know, direct sales to happen at the conferences. But, for example, I get to understand the clients, maybe better, the potential clients. And I get to connect with the existing clients, again, on a different level. So, if you have a client at the conference and you have a chance to see them in person, which we never do, and you as well, right? thoughtbot, you guys are not meeting the clients, like, the same thing. But if you get to meet even, like, some people from the client team, it's amazing. You can have a different type of connection. And I met an engineer from our past client at RailsConf, and it was something incredible. I didn't expect him to react like the way he did. You know, the moment he realized that I am from Evil Martians, like, his facial expressions just immediately transformed into a big smile. And he said such warm words about the things we did, something like two or three years ago. I mean, you don't have anything better than that in this industry, right? There's nothing better than this sincere, you know, gratitude from a client. [chuckles] It's just amazing. VICTORIA: I can relate to that, being from thoughtbot and attending Rails and RubyConfs. It is a nice feeling that people know the company or they know some open-source projects or some training materials we put out. And they're so grateful. [laughs] And I've only been at thoughtbot for a year. So, for me, I'm like, you're welcome. [laughs] I haven't done those things, but I will. And I will build on, you know, I think it also helps you kind of get a sense for what people are interested in learning about or what kind of problems they have. So, tell me more about that with Evil Martians. What is it all about? IRINA: I think we share this feeling where we want to give back. You and me we both felt something where people were grateful for something the companies did. But now I feel I need to give back somehow, and maybe I'm sure you feel the same. And you're doing this podcast, which is important for the community and other things. You're open-sourcing the tooling. So both of our companies are actually sharing a lot of, like, philosophies, attitude, where it's great to be in the community that we're in. So we also do something where we have some products like AnyCable. And it's interesting to talk to people using those products because we do have a much larger number of users of our products, you know, compared to our consulting clients, that's for sure. So the chances of meeting the users of AnyCable or, like, other products are pretty high at the conference, at Rails Conference. VICTORIA: Right. So I find it similar that you have the consultancy side and you have the product development side. Take it a little bit further back to just where it all started with Evil Martians. Are you really evil? It's [laughs] [inaudible 05:47] question. IRINA: Absolutely. We are. I mean, and we come from Mars. VICTORIA: [laughs] IRINA: Yeah, that's also true. It's a nice planet. We just make you think that it's a bad planet. VICTORIA: Yeah, to keep you away. You don't want too many tourists. IRINA: Yeah. VICTORIA: Mm-hmm, that makes sense. [laughs] But I understand you all started as a consultancy from back-end engineers. And then, it grew into what it is today and having several side projects. So, how does the consultancy side and the product development side complement each other? IRINA: Yeah, so the way it works, it's like a cycle of things where we work for startups like thoughtbot. And then, we work with 20 to 30 product engineering teams every year. And we notice which tools could be helpful for those teams and maybe would be helpful for us in those teams. So we're trying to enhance, improve our own productivity and the productivity of our clients. And that's how, I think, many of our open-source projects started. Some of the open-source projects, I think, started, you know, for fun, for some other reasons. But many of them actually were useful in the client projects. So then we are passionate about this. So, for example, we have PostCSS. PostCSS was built by our Head of Front End, Andrey Sitnik. And it has something, like, 30,000, you know, GitHub Stars. And Autoprefixer, which is a PostCSS plugin, has, like, 20,000 GitHub Stars. So they are huge. I mean, it's not just about the stars; half of the internet is actually using PostCSS. But PostCSS is popular, but we didn't turn it into a product. We are not commercializing it at all. But some of the other tools, let's call them tools, that we open-sourced, we could then envision how we could commercialize them. And the way it works is there are actually several strategies. For imgproxy, for example, we sell a paid version. But for AnyCable, which is another tool, we also sell a pro version. But we also earn consulting kind of get consulting clients come in for product development related to AnyCable, let's say. This is how AnyCable also helps us get consulting clients in a major way. And then we ended up building a lot of tools for engineers. And then because we work with this type of tools, now we also have many developer tools clients. So we started specializing on developer tools. It's about half of the sort of revenue. And now it's getting even more interesting; I think, because we don't just build tools for engineers, you know, ourselves as side projects, like I said. But also, our consultant work is essentially the same thing. It's often commercial open source like Teleport, or HTTPie, tools for engineers. This is exciting, I think, because now we can use this, you know, sort of connection with a type of audience, with a type of customer base, like the engineers, and we can leverage this experience in our consulting work, which is even better. And then we do open source with the products. They help us get consultant revenue, and then the experience on those projects helps us improve our products, and get product ideas, and get the first users for those products, et cetera. So it's like consulting helps product development, in our case. VICTORIA: So, to play that back a little bit, it's almost like a cycle where they feed into each other where your engineers as they're working are also kind of, like, the customers who would be using the developer tools that you want to build. So you have some market research there. And then, you know, it all feeds back into each other so that the customers who are using your products are also likely to need your consultant services. [laughs] So that's a nice flow. I wonder if there's anything surprising that came out during that kind of discovery process for product, for developer tools when you were first starting out, anything that you thought this is a tool maybe we think people are going to use. But then what was the reality, or [chuckles] what surprising things happened? IRINA: A lot of things. But I think the main one that is sort of important is that there's a difference between open source and product a product. And the differences...okay, the way I'm trying to explain it is, like, between...it's, like, the difference between you and your friend from another industry. Let's say you have a friend who is a microbiologist or something. And they are smart, right? They are smart in their own field. But if you give them your open source and ask them to take a look and you expect them to learn about it, to want to learn about it, they won't do it. They might use your product based on your open source, though, if it is easy if they know how to benefit from the product. So what I'm trying to say is, turning open source into a product is like essentially building a new product, a new thing where the customer base is different because you want it to be wider. But you don't want them to learn about your open source and to be passionate about your technology. You want them to be passionate about the value they want to get, you know, about something they're building. So it's a shift in mentality that you got to make to make it work. And pretty often, the people that collaborate with us in the open source are, you know, super different from the people who become our users. And users are great, but, you know, they don't want to learn too much about the internals and how it's supposed to work. They just want to click a button, and pay some money, and get the result, get the value from this. And, I don't know, it sounds simple. But it's actually a major shift in thinking about your product for you as an author of a tool, of a technology, of something. VICTORIA: That's a really interesting distinction to make. So, when you're building open-source projects, you want to really invite people in and get people excited about how the whole tool works and how they can use it in their projects. And then, on the product side, you're wanting to make it super easy [chuckles] for people and make sure they're focusing on the value of what they're getting out of this product instead of having to, like, understand all the little details. Is that right? IRINA: Yeah, exactly, exactly. VICTORIA: That makes sense. And is there any product in particular that you're really excited about or you see a lot of growth in with Evil Martians? IRINA: Yeah, I will talk about AnyCable. I will say AnyCable because I am personally involved in its development. So we did it with Vladimir Dementyev, the author. And the exciting part about AnyCable is the types of products and the types of functionality that can be built using AnyCable. So these are all kind of collaboration features, collaboration tools. The simplest are just the chats within your Rails application. And we have a lot of medical and healthcare applications that want to keep the data, the chat, you know, data on their own servers without sending them to some SaaSs. That's why they use AnyCable. But also, we have other tools that use AnyCable to build collaboration. And we've helped some clients build this at Evil Martians using AnyCable, leveraging AnyCable. But it's exciting when, like, other companies do it themselves sort of without us just by using the product. So I don't like it when I don't have the collaboration within a tool that you're using with someone else together. So I remember we were using something like a tool to create a service, and me and Vladimir we're using it simultaneously, you know, rewriting our edits all the time. And it was so frustrating because they didn't support collaboration in this tool. So the thing you do when you don't support the collaboration is just that every user, every player, is just rewriting what the other player did without saving. So it's, like, so frustrating, yeah. So I like it that our product is helping people fix this problem. VICTORIA: Right. And to kind of summarize a little bit about what AnyCable does, is that it allows you to build Ruby on Rails apps and use any WebSocket server in any language as a replacement for the Ruby server. Is that accurate? IRINA: Not exactly. So AnyCable is a server that stands next to your Ruby on Rails app and handles all the WebSockets. It's written in Go. It's super fast, super efficient, and scales efficiently. That's the most important part. Because you don't have to scale your entire Ruby on Rails app, your, you know, entire logic just to support the real-time load. So you only scale this small, efficient app, and it handles all the load and super quickly. And it also supports HTML over WebSockets updates, I mean, Hotwire and stuff. So it helps you scale your Hotwire updates as well. So it's much faster than Ruby. It's much more efficient in terms of scaling. And, yeah, it's bidirectional, meaning that the server sends...by the way, it's just a drop-in replacement for ActionCable. So we're using ActionCable protocol. So we have the channels and stuff. So this means that we can send data, you know, from server broadcasts, the data from server, but we can also send the data from any client. And one of the use cases for Any Cable, by the way, is different devices that send their coordinates or some other data in real-time. Like, we have some kind of cars sending us GPS data. It's cute, I think that you keep your business logic in your Ruby and Rails app, which is the place to write your business logic, which is the best place to write it. But the infrastructure and all the sort of delivery guarantees, order guarantees, all this kind of infrastructure layer is serviced, is handled by AnyCable, so you don't have to worry about it. VICTORIA: That makes sense. Thank you for expanding on that. The interesting part for you on that is just to have this be able to be more collaborative, right? So we're working on this whole project together and not siloing into our different groups and building bespoke products to solve this problem. IRINA: Yeah, I mean, I like collaborative UI as a norm, as something that has to be there. So, for any work-related tools...and we do work remotely now over the internet somehow. So I think any tool for any professionals has to have a collaborative regime, right? Support for collaboration because people want to work together. And that's the only way to work, I think. VICTORIA: Yeah, that makes sense to me. MID-ROLL AD: Are your engineers spending too much time on DevOps and maintenance issues when you need them on new features? We know maintaining your own servers can be costly and that it’s easy for spending creep to sneak in when your team isn’t looking. By delegating server management, maintenance, and security to thoughtbot and our network of service partners, you can get 24x7 support from our team of experts, all for less than the cost of one in-house engineer. Save time and money with our DevOps and Maintenance service. Find out more at: tbot.io/devops. VICTORIA: Was there anything that's happened in the last few years maybe, or even that's come up in that discovery process as you're building these products that made you shift your strategic direction for Evil Martians? IRINA: Yeah. I was initially looking for the right strategy regarding the products at Evil Martians. And what I mean is we were always passionate about building our own products, building our own products for engineers. We were always passionate about this. But, in order to make it work...and I think it works now, in a way, because we just had our other product, imgproxy, incorporate. And they raised a round of external financing, which is a win, I think. I mean, they have a long, long way to go. And we will try to support them. But, for me, it's important that we had an internal project, you know, graduate us and move beyond Evil Martians. So something that I changed, I think, in the company together with the founders, for sure, is how we structure the incentives related to the internal products. What I'm trying to say is this: many companies that have an internal project will be looking to own those products. That's what I'm trying to say. And we are not looking for that. What we're looking for is to have a founding team for a product and to make sure they have the majority of shares, that they are the owners of this product. Because we know that building a product is such a long way, and it's a difficult journey. And it takes years and decades to build them into something large, or profitable, or sustainable. So we want the people who are actually doing this to be properly motivated. So something that I convinced the founders to do was to keep the share of Evil Martian's [inaudible 20:40] in those new products at a low level, which may sound counterintuitive for some businessmen, you know, for some owners of the business. They will say, "Well, this was something that was built internally in this company. So this is fully owned by this company." And I agree. Like, from the legal standpoint, this is correct. But it doesn't make much sense if you think about it because you don't want to own, you know, 95% or 100% in something that its worth is zero or even, you know, a negative amount when you keep investing, and you're not getting any returns. But rather, you'd have 10%, 15%, 20% in something large and profitable. And that was the change, I think, where we said, look, we'll be investing in products in a certain way to make sure that the founders, you know, the team of authors is properly motivated. So they own this, and Evil Martians is just the first investor. VICTORIA: That makes a lot of sense because I have been a part of companies where they wanted to reproduce and productize what they'd built for a client and make that something they owned. And I think you use an interesting approach to motivate people to contribute to a project like that by sharing the ownership. [laughs] And that makes a lot of sense to me. I'm curious, based on your response to that last question, how would you describe your leadership style as a CEO? IRINA: There's no one way to be the CEO, I guess. So every person approaches this differently. And it's not that easy to be the CEO after the founder, [laughs] so, when, you know, the founder who was the CEO before hands you the job. It's not that easy. But I had trust and support. And I still have it, for sure, the trust and support from the founders and from the team because I've been with the company for four years already when I moved into this role. And I think of my style as, first of all, you know, listen to the team, collect the information first. I imagine that I act like a consultant from a management consulting firm, but I didn't work in a management consulting firm. I didn't know how they actually work. But I imagine this is how they work. They sort of speak with every person on the team, and they try to figure out the blockers, the problems, and the aspirations of the team. And then they try to find how to improve, you know, the collective utility, the utility of the group, how to improve the situation, maybe not for every single person but for the majority of them. And this was my initial approach and fixing some, maybe, problems in the company. But I would also try to come up with my own ideas as well for sure. But I rely on the team a lot. So what I also did is I started relying on my leadership team much more than maybe the founder and CEO. So I'm relying on Andrey Sitnik, Head of Front End, on Roman Shamin, on Vladimir Dementyev, and other people, Victoria, Victoria Melnikova, our Head of New Business. And I'm relying on many people heavily, heavily. And my goal is to make sure they see where we want to go and they each can contribute in a certain way. And I ask them how they can contribute. I'm not telling them how to do this, right? I trust their judgment in their area of expertise. But mostly, I just ask about what they can do. And this is how we work together. VICTORIA: I like that. I like how you're really connecting with your team and finding out their strengths, and their struggles, and what they think should do. And then it's how do you enable them as a CEO to achieve this greater vision that you all want to work towards? So I really like that. What would you say is maybe your biggest challenge that you're facing right now? IRINA: I actually challenged myself to become more publicly, sort of effective. [laughs] That's why I'm here, for example. So I realized we do have amazing engineers, amazing designers who are out there, you know, doing podcasts, doing open-source, building technologies, writing on our blog, doing all of this. And I realized that, well, I should do my part as well. And this was one of the goals for this year. The other goal, the other challenge is so complicated that I'm not sure [laughs] I'm ready to talk about it yet. So some of the things I'm trying to do, to be honest, I'm not sure if I can do them at all, [laughs] and that's the problem. So thoughtbot has the Incubator Program, right? And this means that thoughtbot presumably gets equity in those new businesses that people build with thoughtbot's help and guidance. And we're not doing this, but we're doing something else, also trying to make sure we have shares in the amazing businesses that we help grow and they become successful. And we're doing everything we can to make sure they are successful. And I want this company to have a share in the success of our clients, our products, all of that together. VICTORIA: It would probably contribute to motivation, which is another factor you mentioned previously about. IRINA: Yep. VICTORIA: You know, right? [laughs] IRINA: Absolutely, yeah. VICTORIA: Right. We're all going to work a lot harder and collaborate a lot more together. That makes sense. IRINA: Yeah, it also means, yeah, that it makes sense to have a share at Evil Martians. You know, as a part of the company, as an employee, you're getting a share in the company. But as you know, when you are a consulting company, it's sort of a complicated question, actually. If you're a startup and you are granting equity-like stock options to your team, this makes sense because if the company goes, you know, grows and goes public; those shares become something super valuable, like, super cool. But we are not looking to grow our consulting company into something huge. That's for sure. It won't be possible, right? We are operating at this small niche, that's for sure. And we don't have that many amazing engineers, consultants, and it's so hard to hire them. So, anyways, we're not looking to grow that much, although we are growing. And this means that shares in our company do not mean the same thing as the shares in our clients. But if we participate in the success of our clients, then it sort of changes the whole motivation on our own team. This is what I'm thinking about. VICTORIA: Yeah, that's a great question. And I wonder, to build on that, what success really looks like six months from now, or even, like, five years from now for Evil Martians. IRINA: I want us to be recognized as the best consultancy, consulting company for developer tools, products. I know maybe it sounds ambitious, but this is what we are super passionate about. This is where we are accumulating the expertise. And this means I want people to think Evil Martians when they build a product for engineers. I want them to think about us and reach out to us. But also, I want us to build a number of successful products, commercial products for engineers, which is a huge challenge. Like, doing both it's not easy, that's for sure. But let's see. VICTORIA: Yeah, it's good to be ambitious. And I love that journey for you. I'm excited to follow along. I wonder what advice you would give yourself if you could travel back in time to maybe when you first joined [chuckles] Evil Martians. IRINA: I'd say, first of all, be confident in sharing your opinion because, well, especially for females, we do have a lot of, like, impostor syndrome when joining a tech company, for sure. But it's not just females, right? When you dig deeper, you realize that most people have impostor syndrome, regardless of their gender, background, et cetera. No one is this perfect image of a perfect engineer. It's just no one, really. And everyone has that. And I want everyone who is joining the new company or maybe entering tech as the industry to be confident in sharing their opinions, well, humbly, respectfully but for sure. But don't shy away from asking the questions and from owning your agenda. That's what I want to say. Like, the first year and maybe two years, I didn't own my own agenda. I didn't try to control the sort of to-do lists, the things I'm doing. And later, when I started thinking, you know, critically about my own priorities, I realized that I could bring more value by doing something else, maybe not, you know, not 100% different things but maybe by adding 20% to the mix and removing something that is actually not urgent, not important, you know, just randomly added to...just randomly asked by someone, [chuckles] you know. So I think own your own agenda. Be more confident and look forward. Try to imagine the future that you want. And, for some reason, it works. I don't know how, but it does work. So you start imagining the future. You share it with the team; you discuss it with the team. And this is the magic of the teamwork. Maybe you cannot do it alone, but as a team, so much more is possible. VICTORIA: I love that. And thank you so much for sharing. I'm sure there's maybe a future Irina out there [laughs] who's hearing that advice now and can take it into their work. What if your younger self could travel forward in time, and what advice would they give you now? IRINA: Oh, this is funny. Maybe my younger self would say that I should spend more time with my friends. [laughs] That's what I should do, yeah. VICTORIA: That's never bad advice, I think. I love it. Okay. So, is there anything that you would like to promote? IRINA: This is not tech-related at all. But I want to ask the listeners to donate to the non-profit organizations supporting people in Ukraine because people are suffering in Ukraine. And there was this explosion of the dam, and the floods, everything. And it's never been as important as it is now to support the non-profits. And I can suggest the Nova Ukraine non-profit organization. It's an American organization, but they send all their money to the local initiatives. So it's a great way to support a good cause. VICTORIA: Yes, wonderful, and we can include that into the show notes. Thank you so much for joining me today, Irina. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, you could email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thank you for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com. Special Guest: Irina Nazarova.
Neetu Rajpal is the CTO of Oscar Health. Oscar aims to make a healthier life accessible and affordable for all by refactoring healthcare to make great care cost less. Chad talks to Neetu about working for a relatively new insurance company, reorganizing its structure by getting people into the right positions, and how incorporating large language models and generative AI is an inflection point that will help move things forward. Oscar Health (https://www.hioscar.com/) Follow Oscar Health on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/OscarHealth), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/user/OscarHealthInsurance), Twitter (https://twitter.com/OscarHealth), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/oscarhealth/), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/oscar-health/). Follow Neetu Rajpal on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/neeturajpal/), or Twitter (https://twitter.com/Nee2D2). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Neetu Rajpal, the CTO of Oscar Health. Neetu, thank you so much for joining me. NEETU: It's great to be here. Thank you very much for having me. CHAD: I want to talk about your role at Oscar Health, and your history, and everything that you've done. But everyone listening might not be familiar with Oscar Health. So let's start there; what is Oscar Health? NEETU: Yes. Oscar Health is a health insurance company. We sell health insurance, primarily on the ACA marketplace across 20 different states in the U.S. We have just over a million members. So we basically sell health insurance to people. One of the big, unique things about Oscar Health has been it's a very relatively new insurance company. So it's only been around for about ten years. And it was founded as a pretty standard tech startup. We've built all of the infrastructure for acquiring supporting members and providers, and brokers in-house. So we're fully cloud-native, distributed systems hosted on AWS and GCP with a giant data lake that supports all of our workflows. And this is a pretty unique integrated solution in terms of health insurance companies. So we're very much a tech-focused health insurance company. I've been at Oscar for about three and a half years. I came to Oscar not from a healthcare background but just really mission-oriented and motivated to go help something in the healthcare space. I've spent most of my career building software, first at Microsoft and then at Conductor and WeWork. And I'm really excited to be here. It's really, really rewarding to be at a company that's serving primarily an underserved market in the ACA space. CHAD: Well, I suppose full disclosure is in order. Oscar and thoughtbot have been working together for a long time now, actually, with Oscar as a client of ours. So I appreciate you joining us on the show, and I appreciate you working with us over the years. I think we worked...we started working with Oscar maybe when you were just in one or two states. And so, how have you handled that growth? And I think that's one of the complexities of the insurance space, right? Is every location is different in important ways. NEETU: Yeah. Actually, it seems like Oscar and thoughtbot have worked longer than Oscar and myself. CHAD: [laughs] NEETU: So I think that's a pretty exciting, interesting statistic. And even during my time, it's been a great experience working with thoughtbot. One of the big premise Oscar had was to build software that was segregated enough and isolated enough but composable enough that you could, in fact, bundle the full healthcare tech stack and then bundle it back together as you needed with configuration and scale it as you needed with, like, smart built-in scalability. And I think our ability to grow into multiple states and multiple counties has been, like, a good proof point of the fact that you can, in fact, do that. In most cases, adding a new state is sometimes, at least from the tech perspective, from the software perspective is a combination of identifying the right configuration settings, mapping it to the features, and then just configuring the software to be able to support that new service area that we've just added. And that, I think, has been, like, a huge value add in terms of being able to add new locations to serve our members, add new providers, add new contracts. And our premise of building stuff or to unbundle and then bundle it back together as needed has really proven out a lot. CHAD: I assume there have been some challenges along the way. What do you think have been among the biggest? NEETU: I think the challenges have been an interesting combination of just learning the insurance business landscape then building software that aligns with it. So each county you might go into, each state you might go into, have its own set of regulatory requirements, have its own set of, like, reimbursement requirements, have its own set of, like, plan requirements, and these are...as a new insurance company, I think along the way, we really did have to learn a lot of these things and sometimes by trial and error and that, you know, it's a pretty sometimes a long cycle with insurance. So that has been interesting and challenging. CHAD: So not necessarily a technical problem but more, like, even just figuring out what it should...how it should work. NEETU: Yeah. I think definitely the business problem has been interesting on the technical side. So I started at Oscar about three and a half years ago. And my first questions as I was going through the interview process were, "Like, I don't understand why you built all of this stuff in-house, like, why aren't you just [inaudible 05:18]?" And those were rather naive questions to be asking a tech-focused insurance company. Many years ago, when Oscar chose to use Elasticsearch, it wasn't a BAA-compliant solution. So you couldn't actually use a managed version of Elasticsearch. So we ended up hosting our own Elasticsearch cluster. We were one of the first or the first few people to actually sign a BAA with AWS a long time ago. So, technically speaking, I think the challenges have been around you don't always have the same set of tools available to you; at least, that used to be the case. This is rapidly declining rapidly. The availability of tools is almost the same now. And two, the ecosystem that you live in. We still definitely have a service that has easy availability to a fax machine, and I think there are a few companies that are able to say that. But it's also the ecosystem that you live in, that you're trying to bring along with yourself, and also ecosystem you're using to support and build the tech stack. Both of those things have been rather interesting. In terms of actually building the software, that's, like, pretty standard regular set of software challenges. CHAD: How big is the Oscar engineering team at this point? NEETU: Oscar engineering team has fluctuated between 300 and 400 people over the past few years. I think we're about 350 or so right now. CHAD: Generally speaking, how is the team organized to perform at that scale? NEETU: I am actually a pretty big believer in first building a tech strategy that is tied to the business strategy before building the org structure. So, even at the Oscar engineering and tech team org structure, it has probably fluctuated quite a bit based on what the business needed. As of right now, we have dedicated folks that are aligned along individual set of audiences that we are supporting. So we have a group of people who focuses primarily on the members and the member applications. We have a group of folks who focuses primarily on the provider and all the needs of the providers. And then we have a group of people maybe focused on just growth in general. And that could be growth through enrollments with brokers, enrollments without brokers, direct exchanges, or even some of our +Oscar business work. So we've tried to, at this moment, align ourselves with the audience that we're serving. And, of course, like, no engineering team is purely vertical or purely horizontal. So we also have an infrastructure platform team that supports all of the areas. CHAD: Do people sort of opt in, or are their roles advertised in each of those places? Or, as you reorganize into those structures, have you seen ways that work successfully in terms of getting people into the right position? NEETU: Like, at the larger level in terms of the audience space, there tends to be pretty standard set of roles. As you might imagine, when the companies are smaller, there's a lot of investment or need for really, truly full-stack developers and full-stack engineers. As we've grown larger, there is a bit of specialization towards either the front-end portion of the house or the back-end portion of the house. And we do have roles posted, and the roles some of them concentrate more towards the front-end tech. Some of them concentrate more towards distributed computing, and back end, and data engineering roles. And some concentrate more towards infrastructure engineering. And, as the teams always get bigger, there tend to also be, like, the supporting functions around technical product management and technical program management that are also part of the equation at the moment. We do post all of these roles in those terms, with clarity around what the expectations are. As we re-org, we always prioritize internal candidates. We have a big enough team. People like to work on different set of problems and happy to align passions with our business needs because that tends to work out really, really well. CHAD: Well, there's a reason why I'm asking about this particularly for you because one of the things that stood out to me about your background was the length of time that you were at Microsoft and the movement that you did between a variety of different roles across the organization. So that's an experience that you bring to the table. Was that something that you did intentionally? NEETU: Yeah. I was at Microsoft for 18 years. And I think every couple of years, I did a new thing. And while I would like to very much say, yeah, I totally figured out that I wanted to be an engineer... CHAD: [laughs] NEETU: And then a product manager, and then, you know, an engineer again, or then a product manager again, or a leadership role again, or even the stack as in work on small APIs or work on full enterprise-grade products or cloud...I would like to very much say those were very thought through, you know, clearly pre-planned career moves; they were not. And particularly, in my case, they were very much I chased problems. And I would get very obsessed or interested in a particular problem. And then, I would go dive deep into that problem and aim to go solve it. And by the time I had figured it out and solved it, there was always a new problem. And this was the wonderful promise of Microsoft where, you know, it is so large, and there are so many different ways to think about different problems, or different ways you can bring software to market, or problems in the world you can solve with it, that I particularly took full advantage of it. And that hasn't really changed in terms of how the rest of my career post-Microsoft has gone, either. Every couple of years, I find myself in a space that is completely scary, completely new, completely different. For me, that tends to be my happy place, to be working on super difficult things that are very scary. Mid-Roll Ad: When starting a new project, we understand that you want to make the right choices in technology, features, and investment but that you don’t have all year to do extended research. In just a few weeks, thoughtbot's Discovery Sprints deliver a user-centered product journey, a clickable prototype or Proof of Concept, and key market insights from focused user research. We’ll help you to identify the primary user flow, decide which framework should be used to bring it to life, and set a firm estimate on future development efforts. Maximize impact and minimize risk with a validated roadmap for your new product. Get started at: tbot.io/sprint. CHAD: It does sound like even though you might not have some grand plan, [chuckles] you are driven to seek out challenges. NEETU: Yeah. I heard something really, really long time ago that kind of has stuck with me always, which is don't let your curiosity die. So, if you are curious, don't just let it shy away; just indulge in it. That's how you're always moving forward. For me, that's been a big theme as in, I really, really enjoy always learning. Always finding myself not to be the smartest person in the room is really, really great. And always moving forward and pushing hard, and solving bigger and bigger problems. CHAD: So, when you were deciding to join Oscar Health, how concerned were you with the particulars of the individual position that you were applying for? Or was it more, like, I've identified this space and this problem that I want to be a part of? NEETU: Yeah, that's a really, really great question. And I think it's one of the ones that when I mentor people, I tell them about as well, which is, I had a role with Conductor that was this head of R&D, CTO, and CPO, and a very traditional ladder style path to the next step or something along those lines or bigger. But I personally am not motivated by titles as much as I am about potential impact I can have. My walk into healthcare out of MarTech or out of just, like, platform was very personal in terms of I have a healthcare story. Everybody really has a healthcare story. And I wanted to go do something in this space, utilize all of the skills that I already have, and then try to push the space forward. And so, when I joined Oscar, I was not really that motivated by what the title was going to be. I was really looking for is, is there going to be an opportunity to have an impact? And is there going to be space for me to have impact? Am I going to be surrounded by a group of people who I can have impact with? That was the primary concern. And I did join Oscar as a VP of engineering. And that didn't last very long. Within the next year and a half, I was already promoted to CTO in that role. And each one of those steps was very much motivated by will I actually be able to have impact? Will I be empowered to have impact? Was I equipped to have an impact? And was I going to learn a lot in that role? Those were my primary motivators. And that's always been the case. It's also a hard-won lesson. Like, when I had my first kid, it was a really difficult time, personally. I had really bad postpartum depression. I had really hard time dealing with what is going to happen with my career, and I had to take a step back. And as somebody who was, like, super ambitious and wanted to go straight up, that was a really challenging thing to do. And that was a long time ago, and I've been able to rebuild, quote, unquote, "rebuild" my career back multiple times over. So it's actually been, like, a hard-won lesson where it doesn't kind of matter what part of the rocket ship you have a seat on, as long as you have the seat on the rocket ship. And by rocket ship, I wish I was only talking about stock price; I'm not. I'm just talking about the ability to have impact. If I can be in this right group and I can have a voice, then it didn't matter what my title was. CHAD: Yeah, thank you for sharing. And I think it feels like the pace of change accelerates. But in growing organizations, so much changes all of the time. So what you are doing...or the roles that exist will change as well. And the other thing...I often get asked by clients, "Should we be hiring a VP of engineering or a CTO?" I'm like, the definition of those roles varies so much between company, and team size, and everything. It's like; it really is difficult to answer that question because it is so different. It all depends on the needs of the organization. NEETU: Yeah. I've done both of those roles, at least twice each time, twice now. And I've personally discovered that A, those roles don't really have a defined, like, there is no clear definition for either one of those roles. The other thing that I think is more important is I don't think the organizations know what they want out of those roles most of the times, either. In my experience so far, VP of engineering is a little bit easier to define because it has a very heavy management component to it. And so I've ended up just defining those roles for myself every time, and so far, so good. And the way I define those roles is very much, like, a CTO role is a half-business half-technical role. It's the role where you understand the business strategy and turn it into a tech strategy that supports the business strategy and pushes the business forward, and acts as the competitive advantage for the business. And your role is, in fact, to be the person who takes tech and applies it to pushing the business forward. That's one direction. And the other direction, it is the role to take the business strategy and translate into technical terms so that you can bring and coalesce your whole team's motivation around it and bring the whole team around it. And I definitely find this very much at Oscar, where most people who join Oscar engineering and Oscar tech they all come motivated outside of Oscar already to help push the industry forward in one way or another. So actually keeping that motivation in the right place all the time with authenticity and truth about what it is, how we're pushing the business forward. And helping the business move forward is an extremely valuable skill. So, from my perspective, the tech role is definitely half-business, half-tech with some variable sprinkling of management attached to it, and I think that's the CTO role. And the VP of engineering was very heavily bent towards management, I think, yeah. CHAD: Well, so in that CTO role, we'll often be faced with understanding how industry changes, or new technology, or whatever can help the business. Obviously, we have a big one happening right now with artificial intelligence or large language models and machine learning. I have a couple of questions around this area. But, like, is there something in particular with that that you're either thinking about now in terms of Oscar or have already incorporated? NEETU: Yeah. I think large language models and generative AI, in general, is definitely an inflection point. And I think it's an inflection point that is going to help push so many things forward. And I think healthcare is very interestingly poised towards pushing in that direction. There is everything from, like, shortage of providers or shortage of mental health providers to just a large availability of data in the healthcare space that can help discover things that may not be the easiest to discover through humans looking at it. So I think there's a huge opportunity. I also think it needs, like, a bit of cautious evaluation. We are dealing with something that you can't break, so you can't move fast and break things when you're dealing with people. But there are interesting use cases where you could use generative AI and have it maybe not make a decision for a person but assist the provider to make a decision. Or you can use it in areas, at least in healthcare space, where there is a lot of inefficiency because of too much to do. And you can actually optimize a whole bunch of that. So examples could be, you know, there's the standard examples of chatbots as in, is this doctor part of my network? Can I have an appointment with this doctor? Can I have an appointment and a prior auth with this doctor immediately? Like, those are, I think, a little bit more accessible use cases. And Oscar, also, we're exploring and figuring out which one of those makes most sense for us in our business. And there's tons of excitement and tons of, like, thought being put behind it. As of right now, I probably can't say all the things that we're working on at the moment. But yes, absolutely, this is a very big deal. CHAD: So, speaking more generally around exploring new ideas, you mentioned at Conductor, you were in an R&D role combined...like, is there strategies that you've seen that work particularly well for doing research and development within an organization, exploring new ideas, figuring things out? NEETU: Yeah. It definitely depends on which portion or which portion of the maturity stack you're on. If you're building software that is going to be sold to enterprises, you have to have some version of a promise of a date, and then you have to keep your promise. So, if you're selling enterprise software, you have to be predictable because your partners on the other side are relying on you. And you can't actually get predictability without having enough stability in your team, and enough stability in your roadmaps, and enough stability in your tech environment [inaudible 22:30] So that you can figure out what you're going to build, you can figure out where you're going to build, and how you're going to build it. You can figure out what teams and resources you're going to allocate to it. And you can also have some confidence that when you're ready to send code out to production, there is some automated CI/CD system that is, like, going to help you make sure that the number of errors that you are sending out into the world is as few as possible. And that superpower of being able to, like, churn out code and features and products like a machine on a pretty regular basis has the potential downside of not being able to disrupt yourself. And I think there are definitely a couple of strategies to do that. One of them is to allocate enough space by filling it with P2s as opposed to everything being a P0, that if you were to, like, displace the P2s with something that is new and available now, then you're going to be okay because you can live without the P2s. We had to have enough of those. There is also the whole skunk works model, which I think works pretty well. I think it does need to be set up carefully so that you're not, like, destroying the motivation of everybody in the team. You do have the opportunity to do the skunkworks model. And, like, the generating ideas portion, we do this at Oscar, and I think this is also done elsewhere. We have pretty regular hackathons that are dedicated amounts of time, and we put them on the schedule. And, during that time, we just go explore and dream and go build other things. And we build it collaboratively with the rest of the business. And there are definitely still, like, stories of things that were developed in a hackathon that served us really well for years on end. And I don't think that's ever going to change. But anything that is, like, a real solid enterprise production stuff probably needs a dedicated skunkworks something or the other so you can...I don't think it's a bad thing to have solid schedules. I think it's a really huge superpower to have solid schedules. I do think you have to have the discipline to be able to disrupt yourself; otherwise, somebody else will. CHAD: Right. And so figuring out a structure, you can do that. And, like you said, you know, you don't want to ruin the morale or the excitement of the entire organization where people say, like, "Well, it's not my job," you know, or, "I wish I could work on this, but it's this team's." And you're not set up to capture that individual person's excitement over generative AI, for example, who is the one who's actually going to make it happen. And you're squashing that because they're not, quote, unquote, "supposed to work on it." I think that's a really difficult balance to strike. NEETU: Yeah, I think it is. But I don't know; there are very few things in the healthcare space that anybody does that is easy. CHAD: Yeah, that's a good point. Now that you've been in the role, well, at Oscar for a few years, what's next? What are the things that, like, you feel like are sort of motivating you each day you come to work? NEETU: Oscar is in the ACA space, which serves primarily underserved communities. There have been, like, some recent examples of where people had to shutter doors in the ACA space. So the fact that we're still around and the fact that we're successful, like, we don't take that for granted. It's a really valuable thing to be able to survive in this market and to be able to grow. We launched a mission-driven tech-focused company ten years ago based on the belief that you could build your own tech stack and be successful in a very tightly controlled market. And I think this is the year that we actually had to just, like, really prove out the use case. So, this year, Oscar is 100% focused on being insure co profitable. And once we finish proving that out, next year, we're going to prove out that it is... Holdco can be profitable, which is all of our tech stack, in addition to all of our insurance business. And I'm very, very much looking forward to Oscar being successful this year in the mission, where I think it's just proving out that you can build a successful business and ACA-powered by your own tech stack. And not compromising on the outcomes for our members is really valuable and keeps me very motivated. And then, looking at the future, looking at being able to be 100% full company profitable and potentially selling our software for others so they could also bring this efficiency to their businesses is extremely motivating for me. And, as of right now, this is what the whole company is focused on. And we're all super excited about it. CHAD: Yeah, oftentimes, having a clear goal that everyone knows about and is working on can be really empowering for an organization, even if it's hard. NEETU: Yeah. Like I said before, I think almost everybody I've interacted with at Oscar didn't come to Oscar, assuming it was going to be easy. They came to Oscar with full knowledge that it was going to be hard, but they were going to try anyway. So we are so close. CHAD: Yeah. And, you know, that's one of the things that, at thoughtbot, we skew to working with clients that do positive things for the world, that deserve to exist for precisely this reason, is when you have a positive purpose in your organization, it makes working hard easier, [laughs] or solving big problems easier because you know that you're going to have a positive impact when you do. NEETU: Yeah. The personal healthcare story was a motivating factor towards going to go do something that was, like, going to be, like, positive for the world. I wish I could say, yes, I'm going to solve all of healthcare's problems and [inaudible 29:02] not that way. CHAD: Yeah. Well, that was actually what I was going to ask you about next is that's the thing about healthcare. And I've seen people almost get demoralized for it because you actually can't solve every problem. It's really difficult to solve all of healthcare. So, how do you sort of exist within that environment and not get demotivated? NEETU: I think the more you dig into the problem, the more you realize how interconnected the way in, like, society, politics, money, power, and tech it really is. And it seems like if you try to solve the whole thing, it almost feels like you're going to boil the whole ocean. And it is definitely a blocker from even trying. And, for me, it was just like, does that mean I stop? Do I apply the boy scout rule of, like, just trying to leave it better off, a whole lot better off, as much possible better off than I found it? I could do that. Or I could just go do something completely different. But there is no guarantee it's going to be as motivating or potentially as impacting. So, for me, it's very much about, like, if I could make even small changes, I know they'll be part of a greater whole. So I will just try to make those small changes because, alternatively, I may be neutral for the world at most. CHAD: Well, Neetu, thank you so much for stopping by and sharing with us. I really appreciate it. NEETU: Thank you very much for having me. It's been a great conversation. CHAD: If folks want to get in touch with you or follow along, where are the best places for them to do that? NEETU: I am easy to find on LinkedIn. I do have a Twitter account, but I'm not very active. It's @Nee2D2, and I look forward to hearing from people. CHAD: Awesome. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode, along with a complete transcript, at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you could find me on Mastodon @cpytel@thoughtbot.social. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com. Special Guest: Neetu Rajpal.
Aaron Torres and Ala Shiban are from Klotho, which powers Infrastructure Copilot, the most advanced infrastructure design tool that understands how to define, connect, and scale your infrastructure-as-code. Victoria talks to Aaron and Ala about the Klotho engine, Klotho the CLI tool, and InfraCopilot and how they work together to help enable developer teams to iterate on applications and features quickly. Klotho (https://klo.dev/) Infrastructure Copilot (https://infracopilot.io/) Follow Klotho on Github (https://github.com/klothoplatform/klotho), Discord (https://discord.com/invite/4wwBRqqysY), Twitter (https://twitter.com/GetKlotho), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/klothoplatform/). Follow Aaron Torres on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/torresaaron/), or Twitter (https://twitter.com/aarontorres). Follow Ala Shiban on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/alashiban/) or Twitter (https://twitter.com/AlaShiban). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with me today is Aaron Torres and Ala Shiban from Klotho, which powers Infrastructure Copilot, the most advanced infrastructure design tool that understands how to define, connect, and scale your infrastructure-as-code. Aaron and Ala, thank you for joining me. ALA: Thank you for having us. AARON: Yeah, thank you very much. VICTORIA: Well, great. I wanted to just start with a little bit of a icebreaker; maybe tell me a little bit more about what the weather is like where you're currently at. AARON: So I'm in St. Louis, Missouri. Right now, it is definitely...it feels like summer finally. So we're getting some nice, warm days and clear skies. ALA: And I'm in LA. And it's gloomier than I would like compared to what it's been in the last few years. But I'll take it if this means we're getting closer to summer. VICTORIA: Right. And I'm not too far from you, Ala, in San Diego, and it's a little chillier than I would prefer as well. But that's what we get for living close to the beach. So there's always trade-offs. Well, wonderful. I'm so excited to talk to you about your product here today. Let me start with a question about, let's say, I'm a non-technical founder, and I've just heard about your product. What's your pitch to someone in that position on the value of your tool? ALA: For somebody who isn't technical, I would say you can enable your team, your developer team, to quickly iterate on their applications or features and let InfraCopilot and Klotho take care of taking that application or features and deploy them and getting them running on the cloud. VICTORIA: Okay. So maybe I've been thinking about having to hire an AWS engineer or someone who's an infrastructure engineer. I could consider getting a tool like Klotho and Infrastructure Copilot to allow my developers to take on more of that responsibility themselves. ALA: Absolutely. VICTORIA: Gotcha. Okay, well, great. So let me ask about how did it all get started? What was the impetus that set you on this journey ALA: Both Aaron and I used to work at Riot Games, and I used to lead the cloud services org at Riot. I had about 50 people, 40 engineers, as part of a larger 120-person org, infrastructure platform org, which was tasked with building the platform that runs League of Legends, VALORANT, for 200 million people all around the world, in China. Full DevOps mode for Riot developers and full ops mode for running in China. It took us three years, a lot of effort. And by the time we were done, it was already legacy, and that seemed broken to me. We were already getting started to do another round of upgrades and iterations. At that point, I decided to leave. But I couldn't let go of this feeling that we shouldn't have had to spend so many years solving a problem only for it not to be solved. And based on research and conversations, it was clear that this was an industry-wide phenomena. And so I went about trying to figure out why that happens and then how we can solve it, and that's how Klotho came about. VICTORIA: That's so interesting. And I've certainly been a part of similar situations where you spend so much time solving a big problem and infrastructure only to get to the end of it and realize now you have a whole nother set of problems. [laughs] And you get upgrade. And they've also invented new ways of doing things in the cloud that you want to be able to take advantage of. So you had that time with Riot Games and League of Legends and building this globally responsive infrastructure. What lessons learned did you take from that into building Klotho and building your product, Infrastructure Copilot? AARON: We learned a bunch of things. One of the more difficult problems to solve isn't technical at all; it's organizational and understanding how the organization flows and how the different teams interact with each other. So we really endeavor to solve that problem. I mean, our product is a technical product, but it is meant to help bridge that gulf and make that problem a little bit easier as well. Otherwise, yeah, exactly to your point, part of the problem with these migrations is that new technology comes along. And there's definitely a feeling of when you hire new developers, they are excited about the new thing, and there's other reasons as well. But you get this kind of natural, eternal migration going to the newer technology. VICTORIA: That makes sense. And you bring up a great point on some of the issues, not being technical but organizational. And when I look at a lot of infrastructure-as-code tools, when we get to security, I wonder how it fits in with the organizational requirements for security, right? Like, you have to have defined groups who have defined access to different levels and have the tools in place to be able to manage identities in your organization. So I'm curious how that fits into what you built with Klotho and the Infrastructure Copilot. ALA: The way we think about infrastructure is as a set of intents or things that developers, and operators, cloud engineers, infrastructure engineers are trying to satisfy or to do. So you have tasks. You're trying to build a solution. You're trying to build an architecture or add something to it. And organizations have constraints, whether it's their own Terraform, or their own ruleset, or security expectations, or compliance expectations. And the way we look at this dynamic is those rules are encoded in a way that Klotho, which is a cloud compiler, it has the ability to reason about both the application and the infrastructure-as-code and enforce or at least warn about mismatches between the constraints that the organization sets, and what the developer or operator are trying to do, or the intent that is being described high level or low level within the tools. And then that is reflected both visually and in code and in the infrastructure-as-code, one or more. And so it's very much rooted in how the entire set of technologies and product and tools are designed. VICTORIA: Got it. So do you see the tool will be more fit for the market of larger development shops who maybe have existing infrastructure but want to experiment with a different way of managing it for their developers? ALA: It depends. So because we went about solving the problem rather than just building a specific vertical or a specific stack piece, we try to only play in this space of intelligent editing and intelligent understanding of the alignment between infrastructure and code. And so you could, as a developer, effectively with Klotho, write a plain application and have it be running in the cloud without knowing anything in the underlying cloud systems. It will set up storage, and persistence, and security, and secrets. All those elements are easily accessible within the code itself. It can also work in the context of a company where the infrastructure or platform team have set those rules and guidance within the tools. And then, developers can continue working the way they expect to work, either in code or in the infrastructure-as-code layer. And it would still allow them to do the same intents that they want only within that sandbox. Or if they can't be satisfied because they're trying to do something that isn't allowed, they have a mechanism of, one, knowing that but also asking, in our case, InfraCopilot to help it reshape what it's doing, what they're doing into the sandbox and the trade-offs that that brings in. VICTORIA: Got it. So you can both start from scratch and start a brand new application using it, or you can integrate it with your existing rules and systems and everything that already exists. ALA: Exactly. VICTORIA: Gotcha. Yeah, I think one interesting thing we've found with very new founders who are building their application for the first time is that there are some essential things, like, they don't even have an identity store like a Google [laughs] or Microsoft Azure Directory. So starting to work in the cloud, there are some basic elements you have to set up first that's a little bit of a barrier. So it sounds like what you're saying with Klotho is that you wouldn't necessarily have those same issues. Or how would you get that initial, like, cloud accounts set up? AARON: Yeah. So, for the situation where you're bootstrapping everything from scratch, you've done nothing; we haven't invested much in setting up the initial accounts. But assuming you get to the point where you have AWS credentials, and you're able to hit the AWS API using the CLI, that's sort of where we can take over. So, yeah, like, I would say right now, as a business, it's definitely where the value is coming is going to be these mid-sized companies. But for that scenario specifically, bootstrapping and starting something from scratch, if you have that initial setup in place, it's one of the fastest ways to go from a concept to something running in the cloud. ALA: And if you think about the two tools that we're building, there's Klotho, which InfraCopilot...or the Klotho engine, which Klotho the CLI tool uses and InfraCopilot uses. The Klotho engine is responsible for the intelligence. It knows how to translate things like I want a web API that talks to DynamoDB. And it will literally create everything or modify everything that is needed to give you that and plug in your code. You can also say things in a much higher level degree, which things like I want a lambda which handles 10,000 users. And I want it to be lowest latency talking to an RDS Instance or to a Postgres database. And what that would do is, in our side, in the Klotho engine, we understand that there needs to be a VPC and subnets, and spin up RDS, and connect an RDS proxy. Because for connection pooling with lambda specifically, you need one to scale to that degree of scale. And so that is the intelligence that is built into the Klotho engine if you want to start from the infrastructure. If you want to start from code, all you have to do is bring in the Redis instance, the Redis SDK, and, let's say, your favorite web framework, and just add the annotations or the metadata that says, I want this web framework to be exposed to the internet, and I want this Redis to be persisted in the cloud. And you run Klotho. And what comes out the other end is the cloud version that does that for you. And it's one command away from getting it to run. VICTORIA: So that's interesting how the two tools work together and how a developer might be able to get things spun up quickly on the cloud without having to know the details of each particular AWS service. And reading through your docs, it sounds like once you have something working in the cloud, then you'll also get automated recommendations on how to improve it for cost and reliability. Is that right? ALA: That's where we're headed. VICTORIA: Gotcha. I'm curious; for Aaron, it sounds like there is more in that organizational challenges that you alluded to earlier. So you want to be able to deliver this capability to developers. But what barriers have you found organizationally to getting this done? AARON: So I'm going to speak specifically on infrastructure here because I think this is one of the biggest ones we've seen. But typically, when you get to a larger-sized company, we'll call it a mid-sized company with, you know, a couple hundred engineers or more, you get to the point where it doesn't make sense for every team to own their entire vertical. And so you want to really put the cloud knowledge into a central team. And so you tend to build either a platform team, or an infrastructure team, or a cloud team who sort of owns how cloud resources are provisioned, which ones they support, et cetera. And so, really, some of the friction I'm talking about is the friction between that team and developer teams who really just want to write their application and get going quickly. But you don't have to fall within the boundaries set by that central team. To give, like, a real concrete example of that, if you wanted to prototype a new technology, like, let's say that some new database technology came out and you wanted to use it, it's a very coordinated effort between both teams in terms of the roadmap. Like, the infrastructure team needs to get on that roadmap, that they need to make a sandbox and how that's going to work. The code team needs to make an application to test it. And the whole thing requires a lot more communication than just tech. VICTORIA: Yeah, no, I've been part of kind of one of those classic DevOps problems. It's where now you've built the ops team and the dev team, [laughs] and now you're back to those coordination issues that you had before. So, if I were a dev using Klotho or the infrastructure-as-code copilot, I would theoretically have access to any AWS sandbox account. And I could just spin up whatever I wanted [laughs] within the limits that could be defined by your security team or by your, you know, I'm sure there's someone who's setting a limit on the size of databases you could spin up for fun. Does that sound right? AARON: Yeah, that's totally right. And in addition to just limits, it's also policies. So a good example is maybe in production for databases, you have a data retention policy. And you have something like we need to keep three months of backups for this amount of time. We want to make sure that if someone spins up a production database from any of those app teams, that they will follow their company policy there and not accidentally, like, lose data where it has to be maintained for some reason. ALA: That's an important distinction where we have our own set of, you know, best practice or rules that are followed roughly in the industry. But also, the key here is that the infrastructure central teams in every company can describe the different rulesets and guidelines, guardrails within the company on what developers can do, not only in low-level descriptions like instance sizes or how much something is, whether it's Spot Instances always or not in production versus dev. But also be able to teach the system when a developer says, "I want a database," spin up a Postgres database with this configuration that is wired to the larger application that they have. Or, if I want to run a service, then it spins up the correct elements and configures them to work, let's say, Kubernetes pods, or lambdas, or a combination based on what the company has described as the right way for that company to do things. And so it gives flexibility to not know the specific details but still get the company's specific way of doing them. And the key here is that we're trying to codify the communication patterns that do happen, and they need to happen if there's no tools to facilitate it between the infrastructure platform team and the feature teams. Only in this case, we try and capture that in a way that the central teams can define it. And the developers on feature teams can consume it without having as much friction. VICTORIA: So that will be different than, like, an infrastructure team that's putting out everything in Terraform and doing pull requests based off GitHub repository to that. It makes it a little more easier to read, and understand, and share the updates and changes. AARON: Right. And also, I mean, so, like, the thing you're describing of, like, the central team, having Terraform tends to be, like, these golden templates. Like they say, "If you want to make a database, here's your database template." And then you get a lot of interesting issues like drift, where maybe some teams are using the old versions of the templates, and they're not picking up the new changes. And how do you kind of reconcile all that? So it is meant to help with all of those things. VICTORIA: That makes a lot of sense. And I'm curious, what questions came up in the customer discovery process for this product that surprised you? ALA: I think there's one...I don't know that it was a question, but I think there was...So, when we started with Klotho, Klotho has the ability to enable a code-first approach, which means that you give the tool to developers as the infrastructure or platform team, or if you're a smaller shop, then you can just use Klotho directly. You set the rules on what's allowed or what's not allowed, and then developers can work very freely. They can describe very succinctly how to turn a plain object, SDK, et cetera, how to build larger architectures very quickly with a few annotations that we describe and that give cloud powers. We had always thought that some teams will feel that this encroaches on their jobs. We've heard from people on infra, you know, platform teams, "This is amazing. But this is my job." And so, one of our hypotheses was that we are encroaching into what they see as their responsibility. And we built more and more mechanisms that would clean up that interface and give them the ability to control more so they can free themselves up, just like most automations that happen in the world, to do more things. What happened later surprised us. And by having a few or several more discoveries, we found out that the feeling isn't a fear of the tool replacing their job. The fear or worry is that the tool will make their jobs boring, what is left of the job be boring, and nobody wants to go to work and not have cool and fun things to do. And because I think we all, on a certain degree, believe that, you know, if we take away some of the work that we're doing, we'll find something higher level and harder to solve, but until that exists in people's minds, there's nothing there. And therefore, they're left with whatever they don't want to do or didn't want to do. And so that's where we tried to take a step back from all the intelligence the Klotho engine provides through that code-first Klotho. And we built out focusing on one of the pillars in the tech to create InfraCopilot, which helps with keeping or making the things that we already do much simpler but also in a way that maintains and does it in a fun way. VICTORIA: That makes sense because my understanding of where to use AI and where to use machine learning for best purposes is to automate those, like, repetitive, boring tasks and allow people to focus on the creative and more interesting work, right? ALA: Yes and no. The interesting bit about our approach to ML is that we don't actually use machine learning or ChatGPT for any of the intelligence layers, meaning we don't ask ChatGPT to generate Terraform or any kind of GPT model to analyze a certain aspect of the infrastructure. That is all deterministic and happens in the Klotho engine. That is the uniqueness of why this always works rather than if GPT happened to get it right. What we use ML for is the ability to parse the intent. So we actually use it as a language model to parse the intent from what the user is trying to convey, meaning I want a lambda with an API gateway. What we get back from our use of ML is the user has asked for a lambda, an AWS lambda, and API gateway and that they be connected. That is the only thing we get back. And that is fed into the Klotho engine. And then, we do the intelligence to translate that to an actual architecture. VICTORIA: That's a really cool way to use natural language processing to build cloud infrastructure. MID-ROLL AD: Are you an entrepreneur or start-up founder looking to gain confidence in the way forward for your idea? At thoughtbot, we know you’re tight on time and investment, which is why we’ve created targeted 1-hour remote workshops to help you develop a concrete plan for your product’s next steps. Over four interactive sessions, we work with you on research, product design sprint, critical path, and presentation prep so that you and your team are better equipped with the skills and knowledge for success. Find out how we can help you move the needle at: tbot.io/entrepreneurs. VICTORIA: I'm curious; you said you're already working on some issues about being able to suggest improvements for cost reduction and efficiencies. What else is on your roadmap for what's coming up next? AARON: So there's a bunch of things in the long-term roadmap. And I'll say that, like, in the short term, it's much more about just expanding the breadth of what we support. If you think about just generating all the different permutations and types of infrastructure, it's, like, a huge matrix problem. Like, there's many, many dimensions that you could go in. And if you add an extra cloud or you add an extra capability, it expands everything. So you can imagine, like, testing it to make sure things work, and everything becomes very complicated. So, really, a lot of what we're doing is still foundational and trying to just increase the breadth, make the intent processing more intelligent, make the other bits work. And then one of the areas right now is for our initial release of the product; we chose to use Discord as our interface for the chatbot. And the reason for that is because it gives us a lot of benefits of having sort of the community built in and the engagement built in where we can actually talk with users and try and understand what they're doing. However, we really have a lot of UI changes and expansions that we'd like to do. And even from some of our early demo material, we have things like being able to right-click and being able to configure your lambda directly from the UI. So there's a lot of areas there that we can expand into an intent, too, once we get sort of the foundational stuff done, as an example. The intelligence bit is a much bigger process, like, there's a lot of things to unpack there. So I won't talk about it too much. But if we were to just talk about the most simple things, it'd be setting up alerts somehow and then feeding into our system that, like, we're hitting those alerts, and we have to make modifications. A good example of that would be, like, configuring auto scaling on an instance for [inaudible 22:17]. So we can get some of those benefits now. The bigger vision of what we want to do with optimization requires a lot more exploration and also the ability to look at what's happening to your application while it's running in the cloud. ALA: Let me maybe shed a bit more light on the problems we're trying to solve and where we're headed. When it comes to optimization, to truly optimize a cloud application, you have to reason about it on the application level rather than on the one service level. To do that, we have to be able to look at the application as an application. And today, there's a multi-repo approach to building cloud applications. So one of the future work that we're going to do is be able to reason about existing infrastructure-as-code from different portions of the teams or organization or even multiple services that the same team works and link them together. So, when we look at reasoning about an architecture, it is within the entire context of the application rather than just the smaller bits and pieces. That's one layer. Another layer is being able to ingest the real runtime application metrics and infrastructure metrics, let's say, from AWS or Azure into the optimizer system to be able to not only say, oh well, I want low latency. Then this is hard-coded to use a Fargate instance instead of a lambda. But more realistically, being able to see what that means in lambda world and maybe increase the concurrency count. Because we know that within the confines of cost limitations or constraints that the company wants to have, it is more feasible and cost-effective to raise the minimum concurrency rate of that lambda instead of using Fargate. You can only do that by having real-time data, or aggregated data come from the performance characteristics of the applications. And so that's another layer that we're going to be focusing on. The third one is, just like Aaron said, being able to approach that editing experience and operational experience, not just through one system like InfraCopilot but also through a web UI, or an app, or even as an extension to other systems that want to integrate with Klotho's engine. The last thing that I think is key is that we're still holding on to the vision that infrastructure should be invisible to most developers. Infrastructure definition is similar to how we approach assembly code. It's the bits and pieces. It's the underlying components, the CPUs, the storage. And as long as we're building microservices in that level of fidelity, of like, thinking about the wiring and how things interconnect, then we're not going to get the gains of 10x productivity building cloud applications. We have to enable developers and operators to work on a higher abstraction. And so our end game, where we're headed, is still what we want to build with Klotho, which is the ability to write code and have it be translated into what's allowed in the infrastructure within the constraints of the underlying platforms that infrastructure or platform teams set for the rest of the organization. It can be one set or multiple sets, but it's still that type of developers develop, and the infrastructure teams set them up to be able to develop, and there's separation. VICTORIA: Those are all really interesting problems to be solving. I also saw on your roadmap that you have published on Klotho that you're thinking of open-sourcing Klotho on GitHub. AARON: So, at this point, we already have the core engine of Klotho open-sourced, so the same engine that's powering InfraCopilot and Klotho, the tool itself is open source today. So, if anyone wants to take a look, it is on github.com/klothoplatform/klotho. VICTORIA: Super interesting. And it sounds like you mentioned you have a Discord. So that's where you're also getting feedback from developers on how to do this. And I think that challenge you mentioned about creating abstractions so that developers don't have to worry as much about the infrastructure and platform teams can just enable them to get their work done; I'm curious what you think is the biggest challenge with that. It seems like a problem that a lot of companies are trying to solve. So, what's the biggest challenge? And I think what do you think is unique about Klotho and solving that challenge? AARON: I guess what I would say the biggest challenge today is that every company is different enough that they all saw this in a slightly different way. So it's like, right now, the tools that are available are the building blocks to make the solution but not the solution itself. So, like, every cloud team approaches it on, let's build our own platform. We're building our own platform that every one of our developers is going to use. In some cases, we're building, like, frameworks and SDKs that everyone's going to use. But then the problem is that you're effectively saying my company is entering the platform management business. And there's no way the economies of scale will make sense forever in that world. So I think that's the biggest issue. And I think the reason it hasn't been solved is it's just a very hard problem. There's many approaches, but there's not a clear solution that kind of brings it all together. And I think our product is positioned better than most to solve some of the higher-level abstractions. It still doesn't solve the whole problem. There's still some things that are going to be tricky. But the idea is, if you can get to the point where you're using some of our abstractions, then you've guaranteed yourself portability into the future, like, your architecture will be able to evolve, even in technologies that don't exist yet once they become available. ALA: To tack on to what Aaron said, a key difference, and to our knowledge, this doesn't exist in any other tool or technology, is a fundamentally new architecture we call adaptive architecture. It is not microservices. It is not monoliths. It's a superset that combines all the benefits from monoliths, microservices, and serverless if you consider it a different platform or paradigm. What that means is that you get the benefits without the drawbacks. And the reason we can do it is because of the compiler approach that we're taking, where everything in the architecture that we produce is interchangeable. The team has decided to use Kubernetes, a specific version of Kubernetes with Istio. That works great. And, a year later, it turns out that that choice no longer scales well for the use. And we need to use Linkerd. The problem in today's world and what companies have to do is retrofit everything and not only the technology itself, but it's the ripple effects of changing it into everything else that all the other choices that were made that depended on it. In the Klotho world, because of the compilation step or the compilation approach and its extensibility, you could say, I want to take out Istio and replace it with Linkerd. And it would percolate all the changes that need to happen everywhere for that to maintain its semantic behavior. To our knowledge, that doesn't exist anywhere today. VICTORIA: So it would do, maybe not, like, would do migrations for you as well? ALA: I think migrations are a special case. When it comes to stateless things, yes. When it comes to data, we are much more conservative. Again, bringing what we've learned in different companies in, a lot of solutions try to solve all the things versus we're trying to play in a very specific niche, which is the adaptive architecture of it all. But if you want to move data, there's fantastic tools for it, and we will guide you through getting the access to the actual underlying services and, say, great, write a migration system, or we can generate for you. But you will run it to move the data from, let's say, Postgres to MySQL or from being able to drain a unit on Kubernetes to a lambda. Some of those things are much more automatic. And the transition happened through the underlying technologies like Terraform or Pulumi. Others will require you to take a step, not because we can't do it for you but we want to be conservative with the choices. AARON: I would also add that another aspect of this is that we don't position ourselves as being the center of the universe for these teams. Like a lot of products, you kind of have to adopt the platform, and everything has to plug into it, and if you don't adhere, it doesn't work. We're trying very, very hard with our design to make it so that existing apps will continue to function like they've always functioned. If app developers want to continue using direct SDKs and managing config themselves, they can absolutely do that. And then they'll interact well with Klotho apps that are also in that same company. So we're trying to make it so that you can adopt incrementally without having to go all in. VICTORIA: So that makes a lot of sense. So it's really helpful if you're trying to swap out those stateless parts of your infrastructure and you want to make some changes there. And then, if you were going to do a data migration, it would help you and guide you to where additional tools might be needed to do that. And at your market segment, you're really focusing on having it be an additional tool, as opposed to, like, an all-encompassing platform. Did I get it all right? [crosstalk 31:07] ALA: Exactly. VICTORIA: [laughs] Cool. All right. Well, that's exciting. That's a lot of cool things that you all are working on. I'm curious how overall the workload is for you two. How big of a team do you have so far? How are you balancing out this work of creating something new and exciting that has such a broad potential scope? AARON: Yeah. So, right now, the team is currently six people. So it's Ala and I, plus four additional engineers is the current team. And in terms of, like, where we're focusing, the real answer is that it's somewhat reactive, and it's very fast. So, like, it could be, like...in fact, Copilot went from ideation to us acting on it extremely quickly. And it wasn't even in the pipeline before that. So I'd actually say the biggest challenge has been where do we sort of focus our energy to get the best results? And a lot of where we spend our time is sort of meta-process of, like, making sure we're investing in the right things. ALA: And I think that comes from both Aaron and I have been in the industry for over 15 years. We don't, you know, drop everything and now switch to something new. We're very both tactical and strategic with the pace and when we pivot. But the idea is when we decide to change and focus on something that we think will be higher value, and it's almost always rooted in the signals and hypotheses that we set out to kind of learn from, from every iteration that we go after. We are not the type that would say, "Oh, we saw this. Let's drop everything, and let's go do it." I think we've seen enough in the industry that there's a measure of knowing when to switch, and when to refocus, and what to do when these higher tidbits come, and then being able to execute aggressively when that choice or decision happens. VICTORIA: Are there any trends that you're watching right now that the outcome would influence a change in direction for you? ALA: Not technically. I think what we're seeing in the industry is there's no real approaches to solving the problem. I would say most of the solutions and trends that we're seeing are...I call them streamlined complexity. We choose a set of technologies, and we make that easy. We make the SaaS version, and it can do these workloads, and it makes that easy. But the minute you step out of the comfort zone of those tools, you're back into the nightmare that building distributed systems brings with it, and then you're back to, you know, square one. What we're trying to do is fundamentally solve the problem. And we haven't seen many at least make a lot of headway there. We are seeing a few of the startups that are starting to think in the same vein, which is the zeitgeist. And that's fantastic. We actually work with them closely to try and broaden the category. VICTORIA: Right. Do you feel that other companies who are working in a similar problem space that there is...is it competitive between each other? Or do you think it's actually more collaborative? ALA: It depends on the companies and what they're trying to achieve. Every set of companies have different incentives. So Google, Amazon, and Microsoft have, you know, are incentivized to keep you on their clouds. They may care less about what they have in there as long as you are happy to stay. So you'll see more open source being adopted. You will see Amazon trying to copy or operationalize a lot of open-source tools. Microsoft will give their...because they are working with larger companies to have more vertical solutions. Google is trying to catch up. If you look at startups, you will see some focus more on developers. You'll see others focus on infra team. So it really depends on the intersection of the companies, and then they either collaborate or they compete, depending on how it affects their strategy. In our case, we recognize that our competition is the incumbents and the current way of doing things. And so we are happy to collaborate with all the startups that are doing something in the vicinity of what we're doing, startups like Ampt, and Encore, and Winglang. And there's several others. We have our own Slack channel where we talk about, like, where we're headed or at least what we can do to support one another. VICTORIA: Great. And I wonder if that's part of your business decision to open source your product as well or if there are other factors involved. ALA: I think the biggest factor that we've seen, realistically, is the expectation in the developer community to have a core that is open source, not even the source available model but to have an open-source core that they can rely on always existing and referencing when, you know if the company disappears or Oracle buys them. And so I would say that that was the biggest determining factor in the end to open-sourcing the Klotho engine. It's a very pragmatic view. VICTORIA: That makes sense. Well, I wanted to make sure we had time to ask one of my favorite questions that I ask on the podcast, and you can both answer. But if you could go back in time to when you first started this project, what advice would you give yourself? ALA: I guess the advice that I would give is keep selling and start selling as early as you can, even before the vision is realized. Or let's say you're making kind of headway towards what you'll wind up sharing and giving companies, the lead time to creating the opportunities and the belief and the faith that you can solve problems for companies, and the entire machinery of doing that is a lot more complex than most founders, I think, or at least first-time founders or, honestly, myself have found it to be. AARON: Yeah. If I try and answer that same question, it's very challenging. I guess my perspective now is there's nothing I could tell myself that would make me go any faster because a lot of it really is the journey. Like, the amount of stuff that we've learned in the last year of working on this and exploring and talking with people and everything else has been so vast that there's nothing I can communicate to past me that would prepare me any better. So [laughs] I think I would try just my best to be encouraging to just stick with it. VICTORIA: Well, that's good. And who knows what you're going to learn in the next year that [laughs] probably might not help you in the past either? That's wonderful. Do you have any final takeaways for our listeners today or anything you'd like to promote? ALA: So, from my lens, I've always wanted to do a startup but felt that the life setting wasn't quite ready. And a lot of the startup culture is talking about younger, earlier founders. I think having had the industry experience and understanding both the organizational and technical challenges, knowing more people, and engineers, and founders, potential founders, has been vastly more helpful than what I would have been able to pull off ten years ago. So, if you are thinking maybe it's too late, it is not. It's probably easier in some regards now. And yeah, check out InfraCopilot. It's on infracopilot.io. We would love to have you try it out and go on this journey with us. AARON: Yeah, I would definitely echo that. I mean, sort of the same thing on the journey. Like, it's never too late to start. And yeah, like, I would say being in the industry and actually seeing these problems first-hand makes it so much more fulfilling to actually try and solve them. VICTORIA: That's [inaudible 38:15]. I'm excited to see what you all accomplish. And I appreciate you coming on the show. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, you can email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you could find me on Twitter @victori_ousg or on Mastodon @vguido@thoughtbot.social. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com. Special Guests: Aaron Torres and Ala Shiban.
Brendan Schwartz is the Co-Founder and CTO of Wistia, software that makes it easy to find, engage, and grow your audience with video. Victoria talks to Brendan about the latest updates on the platform, interesting problems he found that Wistia was able to remove and help his team get to speed and velocity, and the personal value that drives his decision-making. Wista (https://wistia.com/) Follow Wistia on Twitter (https://twitter.com/wistia) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/wistia/). Follow Brendan Schwartz on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/brendanschwartz/), Twitter (https://twitter.com/brendan), or visit his website (https://brendanschwartz.com/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with me today is Brendan Schwartz, Co-Founder and CTO of Wistia, software that makes it easy to find, engage, and grow your audience with video. Brendan, thank you for joining us. BRENDAN: Thanks so much for having me. VICTORIA: And I believe this will be your third time, at least, on the Giant Robots Podcast, right? BRENDAN: Yes, I think this is my third appearance. Thank you for having me back. VICTORIA: Yes. BRENDAN: Is there anything I receive? What is it when you host SNL in a [crosstalk 00:39]. VICTORIA: You get a jacket. BRENDAN: A jacket, yeah. VICTORIA: Yeah, we should. BRENDAN: [laughs] VICTORIA: We should do a Giant Robots jacket or something from returned guests. I love it. So it's been great to follow along your journey here. So, for those who don't know, like, what is Wistia? And I'll say, just a precursor, that thoughtbot is a client of Wistia. So we use it ourselves. But why don't you just give us a little bit about what is the product and what makes it different? BRENDAN: Sure. And thank you so much for being a customer all these years. You kind of hit it at the top, but we help businesses of all sizes thrive with video. And so we serve mostly marketers. To dive a little bit into the history of the business, we'll be around seven...is that right? 17 years. It sounds like a long time when I say it out loud, [laughs] 17 years this June. And, for most of our history, we were, I'd say, a video-hosting platform for marketers. So if you want to put video on your website, track who's watching it, how they're watching it, and integrate that data with your other marketing systems, that was our focus and what we did. And over, I'd say, the past two years, we've brought in that focus to help businesses with all aspects of their video marketing from creating video...We recently introduced a live video product for webinars and for live events last fall. We just launched last week, which I'm very excited about native video recording in the Wistia platform. So you can record your webcam and your screen. And there's also a very simple video editor in the platform, which has been really powerful for folks to make small adjustments to content or to atomize content, take out highlights or sections of things, and to be able to publish them to their audiences. VICTORIA: Thank you for providing that context. And I'm curious if there were any, like, environmental or market forces that pushed you in that direction with the latest updates on the platform. BRENDAN: So, like I mentioned, we...in a large part, our success came (We're a relatively small team.) it came from being focused. And so for, you know, that decade or more, there were a lot of things that we had heard from the market or from customers. Like, live video was an obvious one we had been asked for a really long time. When will Wistia do live? When will Wistia do live? And, you know, our approach to that is we want to be really good and excellent at the things that we do and be focused. And I think that has served us well over the time that we've existed. And some of that came out of; I'd say, the really early days of the company where...it's funny, [laughs] we've always built Wistia, you know, sometimes we say in the shadow of YouTube, so YouTube and seeing YouTube. My co-founder was the first person who showed me YouTube in 2005, I think it was, and that was part of the inspiration to start Wistia. We are both really into video. And we saw that and having video be more accessible on the web, we knew was something that was going to change the world. There was a question...this sounds kind of dated nowadays to say, but there was a question if you were starting a business, you know, let’s say, in 2006 or 2007 or '8, right? What are you going to do when Google enters your space? [laughs] It was a funny one for us to answer because we said...well, I forgot when YouTube was bought by Google. It was maybe in 2006 or something like that. Like, Google is already in our space, and it's free. So that was always an interesting challenge. And the way that we were successful there [laughs]...obviously, YouTube is at a much larger scale [laughs] and level of success than Wistia is. But to the extent we have a business at all against a very well-known and free competitor from those early days, it was being really focused on our customers and keeping the product footprint fairly small. Our business changed a lot during the pandemic. There were some obvious things, right? Video was used a lot more. So existing customers had a lot more usage. We saw an influx of customers, people who maybe were late to adopt video in their organization, and then that became a much obvious way that people could reach their audiences and grow. So that was something of a tailwind for us. And then it also forced us to kind of take a step back and look at the market in general with clear eyes. It was a funny moment, I think, for me and my co-founder because in the years leading up to that, you know, it had been like 12,13 years of doing Wistia, and it felt like we had solved a lot of problems in the product. We were still building new things, but they were for the most mature part of our audience or the most advanced marketers, which was pretty fun. But it felt like a lot of the problems had been solved. We were always, like, is the product done? Is the product complete? And when we took a step back and looked at the market, what we had found was that we had kind of just, like, got ourselves into this, you know, more mature corner of the market. But in a large part, because of COVID, so many businesses, existing and new businesses, were very new to video and were using video in new ways. And people who had been using video, their solutions to do that were super fragmented. You'd have one product that is providing...[laughs] You might have a different product you're using for internal meetings, video meetings, and that's different than a live event product, that's different than a webinar product, that's different than where you might publish your videos or host your videos, which is different than how you'd, like, analyze your performance. And as video became more important to organizations, that fragmentation of the solutions was something that was super painful. And we had heard from a lot of people who were Wistia customers and people who were not...having this as an all-in-one platform was something that they really desired, which I was also kind of, you know, we were, like, cynical about a little bit, right? Because if [laughs] you're in the world of product, it's like you can ask, you know, if you had a magic wand, what would you want? And someone says, "Oh, I want it all in one. And if you could just do everything for me, that would be so great." You know, it's hard to say, is that what people really want? And what gave us more confidence at that was, correct, is when we started digging into some of the details and hearing about existing workflows that existed that marketers have to deal with, including ourselves. We do a lot of content marketing. A lot of the really interesting things you could do in a product that is all in one it opens up new opportunities. And you could just imagine...you've hosted a webinar before. Almost always, it's the best practice that you host a webinar; after you're finished, you probably have a good marketing asset there. You should publish it to your website. You usually need to do some light editing. Maybe you're going to take off the Q&A before you publish it. And you put it on your website. And then, a while later, you're like, was this effective? Did it work? And then you have to, you know, probably have a spreadsheet somewhere. You have to go into the tool used to host the webinar to figure out who was watching it and [laughs] who registered. Did they attend? And then where's the data for how it performed on your website? How many people watched it? Did you get subscribers if you were, you know, had an email gate on that content? It's cumbersome, and it's a mess. And then, you know, the most motivated people who are well-resourced have the time to do that and analyze the performance. But then a lot of marketers who are on smaller teams they just don't have time to do that, which means a lot of content gets under-utilized or under-marketed. So a lot of evidence and motivation to change what we were doing and expand the product footprint. So that had us make a big investment in our product design and engineering teams, and we almost...we doubled them in about 18 months. And then that kind of set us on this journey that we started maybe two years ago to greatly expand what we're doing. VICTORIA: Well, that's great. So just to play that back, staying close and focused on your customers almost had you to a point of being stable with your product until COVID happened. And you have this increased demand for video that opened it up to almost have Wistia be like a startup again and create a whole new feature branch, right? BRENDAN: Yeah, that's exactly right. And that was really fun and motivating. I mean, we...that early-stage energy and not having all the answers to things where stuff is a little bit, you know, less-researched, and it's faster paced is something that I really like. That was a big shift for the company. So there was some, I don't know, I think we had some self-doubt a little bit if I'm honest, of, you know, when you've been so focused for so long. Like, can we do this? Like, will we be able to create something really good with this expanded footprint, and what resources that take? And is it going to take shifting the culture and mindset of the team, like, in ourselves? But, I don't know, that's kind of why I started the [laughs] business in the first, like, the adventure and not knowing what's next is very appealing. So that's been the fun part of it. VICTORIA: And how did you go about shifting that mindset? Or even what was the moment where you realized that you needed to go after this shift? And how did you start lobbying everyone around you to get on board? BRENDAN: A lot of those customer interviews and market interviews, we worked with an outside firm. We worked with Boston Consulting Group, who was a really great partner. We have obviously worked with folks outside. We hadn't worked with somebody; I'd say, at that scale in terms of kind of, like, tie-in with our company strategy today. But that was really helpful to have a partner, especially to push us. We got to something different than we had been doing, I mean, not dramatically so. But it was expanding what we were doing. So that was really helpful. It helped...that put some structure around it to what we had, and the whole company knew this was happening and was along for the ride. So I'd say the communication and getting to a clear strategy was something we did pretty well, and telling that story internally. I'd say where we didn't do as well [laughs] and were maybe late to make some decisions is how the culture would need to change to support that strategy. Again, like I said, we've doubled the product design and engineering teams. That is now feeling in a pretty good spot, but that was a lot of growth for us. And was, I'd say, pretty messy along the way. So the beginning, I'd say, was clear, and I think communicated well. And then I feel like in the middle it was, I don't know, a big mess where we got maybe a year in, and we're like, wow, we have this new strategy, but we really haven't executed much on it. Some of these things we're building are taking a lot longer than we thought. Our velocity doesn't feel great. Like, maybe we didn't plan some of this stuff out. Like, we've hired a lot of people, but, like, are they productive yet? And so, yeah, I think we were in a pretty [laughs] tough spot maybe last summer. We were a year into this strategic shift, but it didn't feel like we were really moving against it as much as we had hoped. VICTORIA: It makes sense that it would take some time to change strategic direction and then get to that high-velocity point that you would expect. Were there other blockers that you found you were able to remove to get the team back up to that high velocity on delivering features for clients? BRENDAN: [laughs] Well, it's funny that you say that. I wish; I mean, that is pretty obvious, I think, and obvious in retrospect. But, for some reason, when you're in this, or when we were in this, you're impatient, and you want it faster. And I think probably [laughs] having some clear expectations would have made the ride a little smoother along the way for this. I feel like I have to remind myself of this pretty frequently. I mean, Wistia is not big. We're 180 people or so but certainly bigger than...I can think back to various other sizes. Doing that strategic shift it takes time for leadership, let's say, or me to shift my mindset about some of those things. And then once you've changed your mind, you kind of... it's easy, or at least for me, to discount the time it took and all the information it took to lead to that, which needs to cascade through an organization. And so that's where some of that impatience...or just the piece you said about, yeah, it makes sense that this would take time. I was like -- VICTORIA: [laughs] [inaudible 11:56] BRENDAN: [laughter] You're like, once you've got it, you're like, wow, this is so exciting. Let's go. Let's go. And everybody is like, what are you talking about? VICTORIA: Yeah. My background has been in, like, Federal IT consulting. So you're used to kind of the pace of things being a little slower. And I think people forget that as an organization gets to any amount of size, that kind of bureaucracy tends to creep in. And, like you're saying, the information just needs to cascade down throughout everybody. I think my original question was, were there any blockers or interesting problems you found that you were able to remove and help your team get to that speed or velocity you really wanted? BRENDAN: Yeah, there were a lot. I think most of them and most of the hardest ones to move centered around cultural change, and they weren't necessarily so clear at the onset. And so, you know, one thing that kind of partway into the strategy change that became clear is, and you had said it, it's like going from, you know, basically thinking of ourselves as being in a late stage or more mature market to being in an early-stage environment. And the type of culture that, you know, succeeds in those worlds is different. One thing that we've learned along the way at Wistia that we have employed and I think been successful with is this concept that when you update your strategy as a company, you should be thoughtful and, like, make conscious updates to your culture and values. And so much is that...so you're saying culture is the way that you work. You want that to be in support of strategy. And I remember when I first heard this concept, and we were earlier into our journey. I was like, what is this, like, corporate nonsense? Culture is just this, like, intangible, you know, it's this sum of how everyone works. And it's, like, this beautiful symphony of values. [laughs] It was a more kind of, like, idealistic [laughs] view of it or more organic view of it, which I think is reasonable. But you can also be intentional about your culture. So when we wrestled with that the first time...this was many years ago when we updated. I forgot even what the strategic changes at the time. But we updated our values, and we set about making a conscious cultural change. So when we changed the strategy this time, we did the same thing. I'd say we were a little bit late doing it, like, getting to it. But we did do it. And so some of that was there were certain things...so, for instance, being so focused. We had a really lean team. And we were optimizing for things like predictability of outcomes and needing to be correct. So, for instance, if you're only going to make...let's just, like, say, on the product side. Like, if you're only going to be able to ship or do, you know, a few big improvements to the product per year, like, you're well served to kind of go slowly and make sure those have a reasonable chance of success. This was, like, the culture and the mode that we were in. That doesn't really work very well when you're in an early-stage environment where things are pretty unpredictable and things are moving really quickly. So that was an example of something that we kind of identified, and we're like, we're going to need to change this. So it was this shift from teams feeling the need to be correct and really well-researched about something to moving towards; I'd say, you need to talk to a lot of customers to build customer intuition in order to make decisions faster. But that shouldn't be the case that; for every product decision you need to make, you have to talk to 5 or 10 customers to validate that. You should be able to build an intuition to be able to make those decisions faster, and we should be more tolerant of failure. And so, we should work in a more incremental style. I mean, some of this is, like, super familiar to anybody [laughs] listening to this, right? It's like a more agile style. So work more incrementally, like, work incrementally towards great as opposed to, you know, this big thing that's going to be super polished and correct from the jump. VICTORIA: I think that's really interesting. And it's not necessarily wrong to be so thorough in your changes when you're in that steady state, and you, like, know what clients you have, and you have a pretty well-defined product. But it's interesting that it took quite a bit of effort, it sounds like, to shift back into a flow state where you're incrementally doing changes very frequently to get that new product and find those new customers that you're targeting. BRENDAN: And it continues to be. We've made a lot of progress on this. And maybe it's helpful...I don't know if it's helpful to folks listening to dive into some of the details of how we went about making those changes. It's still really difficult, right? There's a lot of things in tension. So I'd say in our previous mode, one thing we were pretty good about is when something was released, it was well-tested. It was high quality. It was, like, well-communicated. Throughout the org, people knew what was coming. Obviously, there were hiccups with that, but, like, that's the side of the spectrum that we were on there. And then in this mode where we're building faster and more incrementally, we have a lot of internal tension in terms of quality, like, is this good enough? Is this first version good enough? Are we going to make a bad first impression? And so, obviously, you do this for a...it's a set of trade-offs, right? There's no free lunch, but that is still very much we're trying to find the right balance. VICTORIA: Right. So, like, in your role as CTO, how do you make people feel comfortable failing [laughs] [inaudible 17:06] describing. BRENDAN: Some of this cultural change, I think, it's been interesting to go through because some of the properties of how we had been working are, you know, things that are part of the way I like to work. Like, it makes me uncomfortable to release something that you know the flaws in it. And that's an old kind of startup advice that I think is generally right. Like, if you release something and it doesn't make you a little bit uncomfortable, you have waited too long. [laughs] Advice is very easy and abstract. It's hard to apply. Like, there's a huge spectrum there of, like, how uncomfortable [laughs] you want to be. But I will say that that's been something that's been, yeah, hard to reconcile with. And I guess that the piece that I'm able to do in my role is, like, remind folks where we're headed, right? So the first version can be a bit rough. What matters is what happens after that. So, if we're quick to listen to customers, to fix those things, to correct that, and people can see that momentum, I think that matters for a lot. And I think that's, like, something...I've been telling that story repeatedly. Internally, I've had other leaders, and that's what we've really been leaning on is, like, we've adjusted how we're delivering customer value. And that we're going to push things out that might be a little bit more raw, but where we ultimately are going to get them to and get them to quickly is something that we're really proud of. So that has helped. And then, I'd say we still haven't figured out, which is, again, like, in these smaller increments, things can be a failure, and that's okay as long as we learn something and correct and move forward. And one thing that's been a little bit tricky to recognize, too, is there's some places where you have some experiment, and you're not actually sure if there's a market or if there's a need for a feature. So you might do something, and it really doesn't land well. And then you learn something about the market or the customer base and say, okay, that isn't what people needed. But, in a lot of places that we're building product, like, let's say, take live video, for example. [laughs] When we launch a live video product, it may be a failure. Like, the first version may not be completely right or may be a failure. But the customer need for [laughs] a live video for a webinar exists, right? So that's not the type of failure that you go, oh, I guess there's not [laughs] a market there. Or, it's like, you go back and say, okay, how do we need to improve this to make it work? I don't think we have the right language internally around that. You know, there are certain areas where it's like a failure, and then it's like, okay, we've learned not to do that again. And there's other areas where it's like, we're going to keep...[laughs] not we're going to keep failing. I mean, there are goals to succeed, right? But we're going to keep improving this until we get it to work because we know there is a market here, and there is a customer need. VICTORIA: Making a culture where it's acceptable to run experiments [chuckles] and as long as you're learning from the failures. And honestly, it sounds like you all are very connected to your customer. Like, you're talking to them regularly. You're testing out features with them and getting that feedback. And that sounds like that's really what you want to focus on and want your whole team to focus on. BRENDAN: Yes, yeah, exactly. Mid-Roll Ad: As life moves online, bricks-and-mortar businesses are having to adapt to survive. With over 18 years of experience building reliable web products and services, thoughtbot is the technology partner you can trust. We provide the technical expertise to enable your business to adapt and thrive in a changing environment. We start by understanding what’s important to your customers to help you transition to intuitive digital services your customers will trust. We take the time to understand what makes your business great and work fast yet thoroughly to build, test, and validate ideas, helping you discover new customers. Take your business online with design‑driven digital acceleration. Find out more at tbot.io/acceleration or click the link in the show notes for this episode. VICTORIA: You mentioned a little bit about your values. So, what would you say is, like, your most important personal value that drives your decision-making at Wistia? BRENDAN: So, like I mentioned, we've changed our values over time when we've changed strategy. And we think of our values as a decision-making framework, not as a set of things that we value. For instance, if you go on our website on wistia.com, I think about/values, about/company. It's somewhere. And you can see our values. It's not a list of everything that Wistia values or even the things that we value the most. For example, Wistia has, like, creativity is something that I value a lot that is very built into Wistia's culture that we value a lot, but it's not a listed value. It used to be at one point, and then we found that as a decision-making tool, it wasn't very helpful. [laughs] If you're faced with a decision, and you say, okay, one of the values is creativity, how do I make this more creative, right? VICTORIA: [laughs] BRENDAN: That's not usually the question you want to ask. So we have, over the years, shifted towards the values are a decision-making framework. And I'd say the one value that has stood the test of time in there is simplicity, which is not unique to Wistia, but it's something that I care a lot about personally. It's served us well as a business. It's almost always harder to get to a simple solution or answer than it is to get to a complex one. It takes a lot of failure. Sometimes there isn't a simple solution, but I think it's always worth the pursuit of trying to find one. And that's served us well in keeping a focused and easy-to-use product. I think that's fairly self-evident [laughs] why that matters to customers. And it's something that I think it's hard to do as you grow, and add, and get bigger. And it's an important feature of the product. And it's an important feature of, I don't know, companies' internal policies or the employee experience. The simpler something is, it's easier to understand. I think the more someone who works inside your company can wrap their arms around more of that context or, you know, more of the product, more of the all the ins and outs of how it is to work there, the better informed they'll be, the better faster they'll be able to make decisions, and the better work they'll be able to do. So, yeah, simplicity, minimalism, those are things I think that have served us well over the years. VICTORIA: Oh, I appreciate that. I could see how that could apply to how you're writing your code, or how you're designing a feature, or even your pricing structure. BRENDAN: Yeah, and I don't think...we definitely don't always get it right. So, you know, all of this is aspirational, but I think it's the right thing to aspire to. VICTORIA: Right. Oh, I'm familiar. [laughter] It's like that, I mean, the Marie Kondo, like, keeping it simple and organized. It's definitely aspirational [laughter] in my personal life as well. But that makes sense. Okay, I have a fun one for you. What is your favorite viral video style that you think people should do more of on Wistia? [laughs] BRENDAN: Oh, whoa. That's a hot-button one. [laughs] I think we have long said...this, like, feels like it takes me back to when we first started Wistia. The term viral and viral video was a new thing for the internet, I guess because video on the internet was still fairly new. I've always been on the side of this, like, hardworking video. And most of our customers are B2B businesses, so these are, like, marketing teams at B2B companies. I'm sure a lot of people who are listening to this have seen some very cringeworthy, you know, attempts at a viral video made by various corporations. Those usually don't land well. There are some people out there maybe that can crack this and make something that is viral through some art and science, but most everybody else cannot. VICTORIA: [laughs] BRENDAN: It's like, not something that can be kind of, like, bottled and captured. So we've always been on the side of, like, be authentic, be yourself, make these harder-working videos. But -- VICTORIA: I think that's generally good advice for businesses that was, like, maybe don't try to just do viral trends...[laughs] Like, make your own authentic content. But you personally now, like, yeah, if you were going to do whatever the latest TikTok trend is, which one would you pick? BRENDAN: You know, okay, maybe here's one. So we have always been, as I described it, on the side of, like, do not do this. It is, like, almost always going to be cringe-worthy. But do you remember...I don't know what year this is from, the Harlem Shake. It was mostly kind of a business trend, right? You'd play this track, the Harlem Shake, and have, like, when the beat dropped, it would go from normal office to everyone dancing in a costume. VICTORIA: Oh, that's fun. BRENDAN: So it was, like, a fun trend. But it was...we were and still are, I'd say, fairly, like, anti-trend. I don't know what, you know, like, contrarian when it comes to marketing trends or things like that. But then, when this happened, we were like, this will be really funny. We should set a calendar reminder to do this, like, ten years in the future. Actually, the last onsite that we had; unfortunately, it was the last day. Our head of production [laughs] who, like, we kind of had this, like, running joke of he randomly saw a news article. I think that it was the 10-year anniversary of the Harlem Shake [laughs] or whatever. He's like, oh, this would be...this is the perfect time to do this, now that it's so, so, so out of vogue. But, you know, people, like, maybe have fond memories of it. And now this is so out of fashion. I think it could be funny to do it. [laughs] VICTORIA: Yeah, right. You don't want to do it just because it's the trend. But if it fits your personality and your business, then I think it would make sense. BRENDAN: Yeah. VICTORIA: I've heard that there might be a Wes Anderson style. [laughs] And I wanted to do a Wes Anderson goes to RailsConf video, but I'm actually meeting this -- BRENDAN: Did you do it? VICTORIA: I didn't do it. I'm not actually good enough. I think tomorrow I'm meeting with the Wistia customer success team. [laughs] I'm going to ask them to help me. BRENDAN: Oh yes, we'll help you. VICTORIA: Yes. BRENDAN: I do like...that trend is nice. That feels like a; I don't know, like, less aggressive. I've seen a lot of those, and they don't feel, I don't know, cringeworthy to me because maybe it's a nice shell in which to put some personality and content, as opposed to -- VICTORIA: Just being goofy or whatever, yeah. [laughs] BRENDAN: Yeah, I don't know exactly how to describe it. But I think that one works better. Yeah, someone at Wistia did that the other day in the office, and people enjoyed it a lot. That was more for, like, internal consumption. But those ones are nice. VICTORIA: Yeah. Well, I like the idea of bringing some of these editing tools to marketing teams where they can maybe not create viral videos all the time but do a lot of very highly editing and having it all in one place as well. Like you mentioned, I do run webinars, [laughs] and I'm familiar with the bouncing around between different tools to get everything to work. And there's even sometimes, like, security issues with different types of video-hosting tools. So I think there's a lot to offer for a marketing team who may not have as many resources to do the individual pieces. BRENDAN: Yeah, that's a story we've heard, yeah, from a lot of customers. And we have a lot of video resources internally because we're a video company, and we invest a lot in that. But even so, yeah, if you talk to folks on our marketing team, they'd say it's hard to get those resources, especially if you have something small that you want to do. I think it's always better if the person who has the need can easily do the thing themselves, right? More and better work gets done that way versus if it's, like, this chain of having to, like, ask other people because then you're like, should I really ask? It's like, do I want to, you know, spend social capital or budget on this thing? Will it work, will it not? But you can be, I think, faster and also experiment more when you have those tools available to you. VICTORIA: Yeah, no, that makes sense. Because I don't know if it's worth [laughs] me spending my team's time to make this Wes Anderson video, but I want to do it for fun. So we'll see if I can do it at RubyKaigi next week. BRENDAN: You should. That's great. That's, like, the perfect example of it because I feel like, yeah, well, maybe not. You might be sheepish to be like, yeah, I'm going to spend, like, ten grand with this, like, contractor to make this Wes Anderson...and to be like, what do you...what? What are you doing? VICTORIA: [laughs] That makes sense. BRENDAN: But if you do it, I think, you know, it's very likely it'll be really well-received, and you'll learn something about your audience. And then that could, like, blossom into, you know, a whole bunch of other things. I feel like that's been the case for us in our content marketing. We've long said, and this is, like, much more commonplace now, but one of the advantages of having a video producer in-house, like, is exactly that you now are employing someone full-time. And so you've, you know, like, maybe knocked off, like, the major pieces of content that a business would make with video, some of the obvious things. But then it's exactly what you're talking about that, oh, we could take a risk, and we could try this. And that's where you learn and figure out new things and things that are different than your competitors might be doing or more creative approaches. VICTORIA: Oh, That's great. You know, something I like to ask everybody who comes on the show, and it will be super interesting since you've been on a few times before, but if you could go back in time to your younger self when you first started Wistia, what advice would you give yourself? BRENDAN: Patient...One funny thing of when we started Wistia, we had really unrealistic expectations. I don't think that's [laughs] unique when starting a business when you're young. But yeah, I was 22 or 23, as was my co-founder, Chris. And we really honestly thought—this is, like, this is cringeworthy to say—that we would either be really successful and, in six months, build this great business and sell it to Facebook or now Meta, right? But that was, like, a hot company at the time. So we'd be wildly successful and sell to Facebook in six months, or we would fail in obscurity. That was, like, our honest-to-goodness business plan, which is so naive. [laughs] And here we are, you know, 17 years later and having a wonderful time. So I guess I would say, I mean, it's the most cliché advice, and you're young, and you never listen to stuff like this, but it's, like, enjoy the journey. [laughter] Things haven't always been easy. And there are, you know, hard challenges and, like, times filled with self-doubt. But even in those moments, if you have support from people around you, if you can learn to enjoy the growth and the journey, that is what keeps you motivated to do something for a long period of time. And usually, you know, people who stay focused on something for a long period of time you figure it out and can be successful. This sounds like the most generic advice as I say this out loud. VICTORIA: [laughs] BRENDAN: It really is. Enjoy the journey. [laughs] VICTORIA: Enjoy the journey. But I think that's common. And even actually talking with Chad a few weeks ago and interviewing him about thoughtbot, is his younger self would tell him to have more fun [laughs] during the whole process and really enjoy it. And I think it's also interesting that you had either the most optimistic and the most [laughs] pessimistic as options and, like, nothing in between [laughter] that you expected would happen. Which is funny because I have people ask me, like, is there still money in building apps and building new products? And it's like, yeah, like, it feels like there's these big people in the space, and they're doing everything you could think of possible. But there's still niche market that you can pursue [laughs], right? And there is still the ways that you can differentiate yourself as a product. BRENDAN: Yeah, I think that's exactly right. What advice would you give to your younger self? VICTORIA: Oh, me? I think, you know, probably something similar. Like, I feel like all of the times in my life where I've been, like, what am I going to do next and been really stressed out about it, within, like, three to six months, I found a new job, or I found something better where life improved a hundred-fold. [laughter]. So I think that's something even now I like to keep in mind is, like, if things turned down badly, like; usually, things turn around in a few months after that, [laughs] and a lot of times for the better. And that's, you know, true with, like, moving to California across the country from DC a few years ago. And yeah, a few other points like that. I think the other part I think about is who I might have invested more time in and who I would have invested less time in. And like what you were saying, like, having the support of people around you, and finding the people who really have your back and support you, and, for people who don't, maybe letting go a little sooner. [laughs] BRENDAN: Oh, interesting. Yeah, that's good advice. Yeah, I feel like both of those things are things I should probably remind myself of more frequently. [laughs] VICTORIA: Right? And have more fun, which means...there's another quote I heard that's, like, when people travel back in time, they're worried about changing a small thing that will affect the future. But people don't think that they can make small changes now that will affect their future big time. BRENDAN: Oh, that's a good one. I haven't heard that. But that's a good one. VICTORIA: Well, super cool. Just to kind of really summarize or go back to some things we mentioned already about video, just how important do you think video really is to marketing in the current landscape for businesses? BRENDAN: I mean, [laughs] I'm a very biased party, but I think it is becoming increasingly more important. I think it is the default way a lot of people want to consume information. This is a whole other tip that we didn't talk about with what's happening in the world of generative AI. And I'm sure a lot of people listening to this have voice cloning and how good those things have been getting. I think it's going to make the value of authentic connections in video much more important in the short and medium term. And there's some challenging questions about how do you tell what's real in an environment where we've gone past the uncanny valley in terms of generating, you know, an avatar of me or you with the perfect voice clone? But I think people are going to rely a lot on video to break through. VICTORIA: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. It's going to be just more video world [laughs] as it goes. What does success look like for Wistia six months from now and even five years from now, the longer term? BRENDAN: I think for six months from now, so there's a lot of new areas of the product that we've added. And, in the next six months, we should be able to make pretty substantial progress to have those parts of the product have really solid adoption and repeated usage by customers. I think that's what success looks like, which we're seeing it now for our editors, probably the farthest along, that it has really good adoption among the customer base, and repeat usage, which I think is, like, a really good sign of success for a product. Live is still really early for us. You don't get a lot of shots if something goes wrong with a live event. [laughs] You know, I'd be pretty quick to look for another platform. And that's a pretty mature market where there are a lot of really strong competition. I think if we can get to a place in six months where we've got, you know, a few hundred customers using that every week or every month, we'd feel like we're on a path towards success. And the five-year version, I don't know, we recently started making three-year goals for the company a few years ago that have been pretty helpful to have as an anchoring. We have not made a five-year goal. But the thing I'm very excited about right now and what we're doing is, again, like, live is a small example. The market for live itself is much bigger than the market that traditionally Wistia has been in, and just in terms of video hosting, which itself has always grown a lot over the years. And it's itself a big market, as is video recording and creating video. So we have entered into a bunch of new markets that are all really quite large. And it's pretty humbling to be in a spot where I feel like we have a really solid base with a lot of in-depth knowledge of marketing and our customer to be able to build a really excellent product for that set. We're playing in a much bigger market than I ever thought we would. VICTORIA: It's like, success already achieved. [laughter] BRENDAN: Well, I don't know. It doesn't feel that way. It doesn't feel that way. But -- [laughs] VICTORIA: Maybe next time you come on the podcast, you'll have another success story to share with us. [laughs] BRENDAN: I hope so. Yeah, I feel like that's always the case, right? It's like, yeah, there are moments where we're certainly very proud of what we've been able to achieve. But most of my time is spent [laughs] in the headspace of, you know, why are we so slow? Why is the product not good enough? Why are we, you know, like, all the stuff that's going wrong, right? Which drives you to be better and is exciting. VICTORIA: Right. That makes sense. Well, hopefully, this helps remind you all the good stuff that you all have done so far, too. BRENDAN: [laughs] VICTORIA: I'm really excited to hear about just how your values drive your decisions and then how that goes to the rest of the team and how closely you're listening to your customers, too, on the product. I think those are all just really great cultural examples and ways to build great products. So, thank you for sharing your story with me. And you can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. And if you have questions or comments, you can email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com. Special Guest: Brendan Schwartz.
Agnes Malatinszky is the Founder of Senga, which takes care of back-office administrative needs for freelancers, contractors, and solopreneurs. Victoria and Will interview Agnes about the thoughtbot Incubator program and what led Agnes to choose to apply, what the demands on her time were like, how it worked, and how she feels now that she's at the end of the program. Senga (https://www.senga.app/) Follow Senga on Twitter (https://twitter.com/wistia) or join their Discord (https://discord.com/invite/53TUyaY7pS). Follow Agnes Malatinszky on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/agnes-malatinszky/) or Twitter (https://twitter.com/agnesmalatin). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: WILL: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Will Larry. VICTORIA: I'm your other host, Victoria Guido. And with me today is Agnes Malatinszky, Founder of Senga, providing back-end support for freelancers. Agnes, thank you for joining me. AGNES: Hey, it's a pleasure to be here. VICTORIA: You are the first graduate of thoughtbot's incubator program, and I'm really excited to dive into that with you today. So, before we get started in talking about the incubator program, let's just start with what fun thing do you have going on this week? AGNES: I'm based in Washington, D.C., and it's a beautiful time of year here. Early summer, late spring is gorgeous. So I'm excited because my family and I are actually headed out to Harpers Ferry this weekend for a little hike. So I'm looking forward to that. WILL: So, what is...when you say a hike, can you explain it to anybody that's outside of the D.C. area? AGNES: It's just a beautiful area in West Virginia. And we're going to take our dog and my daughter out there and get some fresh air and walk around. There's a little historic town there as well that's really interesting to explore. WILL: That sounds fun. VICTORIA: Yeah. I've been to Harpers Ferry to go floating, like, on the river. AGNES: Yes. VICTORIA: Where you float down the river in inner tubes and drink beverages. [laughter] There's also...there's rock climbing in Harpers Ferry too, which is sometimes closed for bird nesting. So it is really beautiful. AGNES: Ooh, I didn't know that. That's really cool. We'll keep an eye out for that. WILL: Yes. For anybody that doesn't know, Victoria is an amazing rock climber. I have a lot of respect for her because I don't know if I could do it. [laughter] VICTORIA: You could definitely do it. The next thoughtbot trip that we're on, we'll go rock climbing, Will. I'm confident in your skills. You could do it. Yes, I'm a big rock climber and rock-climbing advocate, so I'll talk about it forever if you let me. WILL: [laughs] VICTORIA: And I'm actually going to go rock climbing this weekend and get outside myself. And we're going up to Mammoth, California. And we're going to do a half-climbing, half-ski trip. WILL: Ooh. VICTORIA: So that's going to be fun for Memorial Day weekend, so...What about you, Will? What do you have going on fun this week? WILL: Yeah. So you said skiing. VICTORIA: Yes. So Mammoth got the most snow in the country this year. When we were there in February, they'd already had, like, 10 feet of snow. And then they got another foot of snow while we were there, so they're going to have snow through August, at least. WILL: August. Wow. Here in South Florida, the lowest we got was 50. So snow, I don't even know what you're talking about. [laughs] Yeah, so you asked what I'm going to do. Last week was a big week for us because my boys they turned four years old and one year old. And we took them to Disney and had a blast. Anybody who's been to Disney knows it's a trip. It could be a lot, especially it was very hot there too. So I think this weekend we're just going to take it easy. We're just going to relax and just enjoy it. VICTORIA: Trip of a lifetime for them, I'm sure. WILL: Yes, they loved it. VICTORIA: We have Disneyland over here in California. I have been to Disney World in Florida. But I still haven't been to Disneyland since I've been here, [laughs] which I think some people would judge me for. AGNES: You know what? I haven't been to either. I hold it against my parents forever. [laughter] Although my family is not a big fan of crowds, so I think that's why. WILL: Yes, if you're not a fan of crowds, Disney is not the place, especially now. I've heard around September is probably the best time to go. So we're going to try that out during that time too. AGNES: Ooh, protip. You heard it here first. WILL: Yes. [laughs] VICTORIA: September, Disneyland, Florida sounds very warm to me. [laughs] But yeah, we're actually going to go to Mexico with thoughtbot as a team meetup in September, which is also going to be pretty warm, I think. [laughs] But it'll be fun. Well, that's lovely. I love getting to hear a little bit about your lives before we dig into your business. Agnes, I'm super excited to hear about Senga. But maybe start with just a little bit about your background before you started. AGNES: I had been thinking about starting my own business for a while. I am an immigrant, and I come from an entrepreneurial family. Actually, my mom ran her own translation business back in Hungary, and now she's a really successful artist. So, you know, I had support from them and my husband as well to sort of try out something new. But, in my last role, I was actually Chief Operating Officer at an EdTech company that had scaled to serve over 80% of U.S. schools during the pandemic. And I was at that company for about five years and had seen the full arc of, you know, startup to a mature organization. So I was ready to take on a new challenge and to learn something new. WILL: You mentioned that your mom was an entrepreneur. And my dad was an entrepreneur, also. He had his own electric and HVAC business, and I learned so much from him. Is there anything that you can just, like, ooh, I learned this and this from my mom as a kid, looking at your mom being an entrepreneur? AGNES: I mean, she is just a, you know, fix-it person in every sense of the word. So she will fix an electric outlet. She will fix something with her business. WILL: [laughs] AGNES: She's just, like, really good at getting her hands dirty and being really scrappy. And I think that's a really important skill to have, you know, especially in a startup, and especially when you're starting out and still on your own. VICTORIA: So, what did your parents say when you told them you were going to start out on your own and build your own company? AGNES: They were really encouraging. They, you know, they keep up with all my LinkedIn posts, and they read everything I publish. So they're just very supportive and the best cheerleaders I could possibly hope for. [laughs] WILL: Did stepping out and starting your business did anything scare you in that area? AGNES: Oh my gosh, every day, something new. It's all just uncertainty and risk at this point. You know, I'm very, very early in my startup journey, so literally every question about the business I have to test. I have to find answers for. And that ranges everything from, you know, business formation to, you know, the nuts and bolts of getting the business organized and setting up financials, and the legal structure for the company, to figuring out what the product is going to be. So all this uncertainty is definitely a little bit nerve-racking. VICTORIA: And I'm wondering, what about your past experience as a Chief Operations Officer led you to want to build a product like Senga? AGNES: So being a Chief Operating Officer, I think one of the things that I really learned was that in order for a business to be really successful, and for people working at that company to be really successful, they have to have the organization's support to do what they do best. You know, what I used to tell my operations team was that you know, we were really the plumbers of the organization, making sure that everything ran smoothly behind the scenes. So, actually, that was one of the inspirations for Senga, for my current company, this idea that freelancers and independent workers don't have that support. They don't necessarily have somebody helping them with HR, and with financials, and with legal stuff, and with everything else that goes into running a business, whether you're a business of 1 or a business of 100. And that's really where I wanted to come in and, you know, support independent workers. VICTORIA: One follow-up question for Agnes on your experience in the COO role. I believe your team also had a lot of background in the freelancing world. So you had people you could ask questions to and start to understand that market. Is that right? AGNES: Yeah. Like a lot of businesses, I guess we had, you know, freelancers and contract workers that we relied on. And that's increasingly true for most companies now, I would say. There's specialized roles. There is seasonal roles that you don't necessarily hire full-time employees for but that are perfect for somebody, you know, on a temporary basis or somebody with more specialized skills. So you're exactly right; being able to tap into that network and having had experience working with freelancers and contractors was really helpful coming into the incubator and having people to tap for interviews and for input. VICTORIA: Great. And then, what is the thoughtbot incubator, which we've mentioned a few times already? It is for a non-technical founding team with a business idea that involves a web or a mobile app. It's an eight-week program that helps you get the proof points you need in order to move forward with confidence. So I'm curious, Agnes, what led you to choose the thoughtbot incubator Program as something you wanted to apply to? AGNES: I mean, it's exactly what you named. So this incubator program was really a perfect launching pad for me. It's designed for non-technical founders, like myself, to get their own dedicated team of product and dev experts to, you know, like, hone customer discovery practice, create a product strategy, run proof of concept experiments. And, you know, these were exactly the areas where I lacked skills and expertise the most. So I had actually looked at other incubators and even some venture studios before, but those models were not as good of a fit for me. I was really excited to find and to be able to join thoughtbot's incubator program. MID-ROLL AD: Now that you have funding, it’s time to design, build and ship the most impactful MVP that wows customers now and can scale in the future. thoughtbot Lift Off brings you the most reliable cross-functional team of product experts to mitigate risk and set you up for long-term success. As your trusted, experienced technical partner, we’ll help launch your new product and guide you into a future-forward business that takes advantage of today’s new technologies and agile best practices. Make the right decisions for tomorrow, today. Get in touch at: thoughtbot.com/liftoff. WILL: What was the original idea behind Senga? AGNES: The idea that I came into the incubator with and then the pain points that we honed in on during the incubator, and then the long-term vision for the company are all kind of a little bit different. So I'll zoom out first to the sort of 30,000-foot view of this. So, coming into the incubator, I had been reading and researching a lot about some macro trends that I think are really interesting, and these are trends that many of us are keeping an eye on. So they're nothing revolutionary, but I think they're going to create some really interesting problems to solve in the next couple of years. So the first one is the rise of independent workers, or contractors, or freelancers. I'm kind of going to use these terms interchangeably. In recent years, the number of independent workers has shot up like crazy. There are already over 65 million independent workers in the U.S., and this number is growing by about 25% annually. And then, add to this that economic downturns tend to grow this number even more. You know, this makes up about a third of the workforce in the U.S. already, and it's growing. The second thing is that you know, the fact that early-career folks, especially Gen Z, really like the independence and autonomy that comes with this type of work. Over half of Gen Z already freelance, and the majority want to make independent work their career. In other words, they explicitly do not want to work for a company in the traditional sense. And then, third, there's kind of a mishmash of factors that I'll lump into one bullet that additionally drive up this type of work, which is that, increasingly, jobs are going to be skills-based, not degree-based, and all work, even white-collar work, will become more modular. Both tech advances and even, I think, novel organizational structures are going to make it possible for people to hyper-specialize and to plug into different organizations at different times, and, you know, even simultaneously to perform that specialized work. So take all this together, and what I'm really seeing is that the current market offerings serving freelancers and contractors are not nearly enough to meet all their needs, which is driving huge inefficiency. The types of companies that cater to this segment now or, you know, there's mature marketplaces like Upwork, and Fiverr, and some earlier-stage companies that do, you know, more workflow and back office. But I'm not seeing a comprehensive solution, and that's driving like I said, a lot of inefficiency. So, ultimately, being a freelancer is still really hard. Only about 50% of a freelancer's time is spent on billable work. And so this is what I really want to solve. VICTORIA: And did anything change through the incubator process? AGNES: So the biggest thing I found during the incubator was actually a really good entry point into this market. So startup wisdom says that you have to narrow down your product to a super tight segment that has a very strong, like, yes to your product. So, during the course of the eight weeks that I did the incubator, we did a ton of interviews, and I was really on the lookout for big spikes and pain points that repeated for a specific niche of freelancers. And that's exactly what we ended up finding. There's lots of nuance to this, but generally speaking, people new to freelancing and those that are just looking to get started need help getting started in a more manageable way and then setting up good practices that will serve them in the long run. WILL: You mentioned those practices that helps them set them up in the long run. Are you talking about mostly the operation, so, like, anything that's non-billable for a client? AGNES: Exactly, yeah. So that's kind of how I think about the work is anything that's billable and then anything that's non-billable. So that includes client management, client communication, marketing themselves, finding, you know, new work, so drumming up new business, all the back-office financials, back-office legal and admin stuff. All these other things that traditionally would be, you know, done by, you know, an operations team at a big company, but, for freelancers, they have to do it themselves. WILL: Yeah, I love that idea because my spouse she dipped her toe into the freelance world. And I felt like the operations kind of overcame everything else. And so it almost felt like the operations was taking over the job. But it's one of those things I feel like we didn't really think through of how much work that that 50% is. Like, how much work do you have to do, which are taxes, operations, speaking to clients, even to get to the things that people usually love, like the design, the software development? So I'm excited about this product. AGNES: Yeah, exactly. And that's kind of what I kept hearing again and again in interviews with all sorts of different freelancers because we went out and interviewed folks from, you know, everywhere from graphic design, to UX/UI design, to web developers, to other types of creatives, content creators. And this idea that they all get into freelancing to pursue their passion, the thing that they're uniquely good at. But then end up spending a huge chunk of their time on, you know, things that they're not really specialized in, you know, basically running their business. VICTORIA: What types of experiments did you run while you were in the incubator program with the people you mentioned you're talking to? And what were the demands on your time really like? AGNES: Oh, so the program is between 20 to 40 hours a week. I had a chance to meet with my thoughtbot team daily. We had independent work time, also breakout sessions. Like you said, a lot of that time was spent doing interviews and running all sorts of different experiments, so discovery interviews, interviews showing the prototype once we had it to interviewees. But we also set up Google Ads. We created a landing page with various calls to action. And then based on who was coming through the landing page and what they were doing on the site, we had all sorts of, you know, lessons that we could take away from that. And then another piece of it was I also learned how to basically start building out an organic community around this problem and from, you know, the community of freelancers, which is so important to have, like, for a future user base and also to be able to continue to engage with my target audience. WILL: Was there anything that surprised you about the program, or did you have any interesting findings coming out of the program? AGNES: One thing I learned through the program was that you know, there are concrete steps that you can take and a process that you can follow to build out a strong business that solves real problems for people. And that's really what this program and this incubator is focused on, is to teach you those skills to go through those early steps. You know, everything that I had read before about startups they're kind of clouded in mystery. And, you know, the big ones that end up being really successful tend to be mythologized, and founder stories tend to have these, like, big eureka moments in them, where the founder had their big idea that led to the big company. But really, at the early stage, it's pretty messy. And nevertheless, you have these steps that you can follow and processes that you can follow to build out the company. VICTORIA: And how are you feeling now at the end of the program? AGNES: I feel really excited and, frankly, more confident than I came into the program. So, you know, I'm leaving here with lots of good data, lots of good anecdotal evidence, having had dozens and dozens of conversations with my target market. So, for me, that's a really great feeling to know that my ideas they don't just exist in the abstract in my head but that we've bounced them against the universe and confirmed that folks are having the pain points that we expected and some that we did not expect. And that there is an opportunity around this. WILL: So, what could be done better about the incubator program from your perspective? AGNES: It was a great program, and that's a pretty hard question to answer. But, you know, I would selfishly say make it longer. Eight weeks is, by design, you know, a pretty short time to get started. And that's really what the program is designed to do is to get you started, to set you up with good practices and good tools. But, again, selfishly, I wish it were a little bit longer, so I can stick around and have the thoughtbot team around me. And then I just look forward to building more of a community as more founders join thoughtbot's incubator every quarter. We have a shared Slack channel that I'm going to continue hanging out in and that I've been told the new founders, as well, will be added to. So I'm looking forward to getting to meet them and to, you know, hear about their experience as well. VICTORIA: What's coming up next for you in the next six months? AGNES: So I'm talking to a couple of potential partners in the next couple of weeks, which might kind of change the roadmap slightly. But, basically, this summer and fall, I'm building out a lot of the content and the prototype for Senga. Again, continuing to talk to the freelancers I've been continuing to talk to. I'm also putting together sort of, like, an advisory committee of freelancers I've met along the way who had a strong yes sort of reaction to this product. And then my goal is that by fall or winter, I'll be able to start building out an MVP. WILL: That's exciting. AGNES: Yeah, I'm really excited. [laughs] WILL: Your dream is finally coming true, so, yeah, you have something to be excited about. [laughs] Do you have any advice for any other founders? AGNES: I guess I don't know how qualified I feel to be, you know, handing out advice as a brand-new founder. But, overall, I would encourage others out there who are interested in taking this path to, you know, really take a risk and to bet on themselves. What I've found in the last couple of months is that there are so many supportive communities, and founder groups, and entrepreneur groups. And this is kind of common advice, and everybody says this, but there's really no way you can fully prepare. You just kind of have to start doing. And at least from what I've seen, that's the secret sauce to this early stage is to keep doing and to keep going from one step to the next every day. VICTORIA: If you could travel back in time and give yourself advice from when before this all started, what advice would you give yourself? AGNES: I would just encourage myself to, you know, take the plunge and maybe even go down this path sooner. You know, I feel really confident where I'm at now in terms of my career and my, you know, support networks and everything. But being able to go back and start experimenting earlier and start going down this path earlier might have even set me up better. WILL: One thing when you're starting a startup is funding. Are you looking for any funding? AGNES: Not urgently, but I'm definitely interested in talking to others working and investing in this space. So, you know, if any of your listeners are investors or entrepreneurs in a similar space, I would love to talk to them. WILL: Yeah. So, how could they reach you if they wanted to reach out to you? AGNES: You can reach me by email at hello@senga.app, or you can find us on LinkedIn at Senga. VICTORIA: You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You could find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. WILL: And you can find me on Twitter @will23larry. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com. Special Guest: Agnes Malatinszky.
Chad joins cohosts Victoria and Will to talk about thoughtbot's 20th birthday! 🤖🎉 In this episode, you'll find the 411 on the thoughtbot mascot, "Ralph," taking the company fully remote, and our company values and how we believe products should be designed and built! Follow Chad Pytel on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/cpytel/), Twitter (https://twitter.com/cpytel), or visit his website (https://b.dougie.dev/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: Hey there. It's your host Victoria. And I'm here today with Dawn Delatte and Jordyn Bonds from our Ignite team. We are thrilled to announce the summer 2023 session of our new incubator program. If you have a business idea that involves a web or mobile app, we encourage you to apply for our 8-week program. We'll help you validate the market opportunity, experiment with messaging and product ideas, and move forward with confidence towards an MVP. Learn more and apply at tbot.io/incubator. Dawn and Jordyn, thank you for joining and sharing the news with me today. JORDYN: Thanks for having us. DAWN: Yeah, glad to be here. VICTORIA: So, tell me a little bit more about the incubator program. This will be your second session, right? JORDYN: Indeed. We are just now wrapping up the first session. We had a really great 8 weeks, and we're excited to do it again. VICTORIA: Wonderful. And I think we're going to have the person from your program on a Giant Robots episode soon. JORDYN: Wonderful. VICTORIA: Maybe you can give us a little preview. What were some of your main takeaways from this first round? JORDYN: You know, as ever with early-stage work, it's about identifying your best early adopter market and user persona, and then learning as much as you possibly can about them to inform a roadmap to a product. VICTORIA: What made you decide to start this incubator program this year with thoughtbot? DAWN: We had been doing work with early-stage products and founders, as well as some innovation leads or research and development leads in existing organizations. We had been applying a lot of these processes, like the customer discovery process, Product Design Sprint process to validate new product ideas. And we've been doing that for a really long time. And we've also been noodling on this idea of exploring how we might offer value even sooner to clients that are maybe pre-software product idea. Like many of the initiatives at thoughtbot, it was a little bit experimental for us. We decided to sort of dig into better understanding that market, and seeing how the expertise that we had could be applied in the earlier stage. It's also been a great opportunity for our team to learn and grow. We had Jordyn join our team as Director of Product Strategy. Their experience with having worked at startups and being an early-stage startup founder has been so wonderful for our team to engage with and learn from. And we've been able to offer that value to clients as well. VICTORIA: I love that. So it's for people who have identified a problem, and they think they can come up with a software solution. But they're not quite at the point of being ready to actually build something yet. Is that right? DAWN: Yeah. We've always championed the idea of doing your due diligence around validating the right thing to build. And so that's been a part of the process at thoughtbot for a really long time. But it's always been sort of in the context of building your MVP. So this is going slightly earlier with that idea and saying, what's the next right step for this business? It's really about understanding if there is a market and product opportunity, and then moving into exploring what that opportunity looks like. And then validating that and doing that through user research, and talking to customers, and applying early product and business strategy thinking to the process. VICTORIA: Great. So that probably sets you up for really building the right thing, keeping your overall investment costs lower because you're not wasting time building the wrong thing. And setting you up for that due diligence when you go to investors to say, here's how well I vetted out my idea. Here's the rigor that I applied to building the MVP. JORDYN: Exactly. It's not just about convincing external stakeholders, so that's a key part. You know, maybe it's investors, maybe it's new team members you're looking to hire after the program. It could be anyone. But it's also about convincing yourself. Really, walking down the path of pursuing a startup is not a small undertaking. And we just want to make sure folks are starting with their best foot forward. You know, like Dawn said, let's build the right thing. Let's figure out what that thing is, and then we can think about how to build it right. That's a little quote from a book I really enjoy, by the way. I cannot take credit for that. [laughs] There's this really great book about early-stage validation called The Right It by Alberto Savoia. He was an engineer at Google, started a couple of startups himself, failed in some ways, failed to validate a market opportunity before marching off into building something. And the pain of that caused him to write this book about how to quickly and cheaply validate some market opportunity, market assumptions you might have when you're first starting out. The way he frames that is let's figure out if it's the right it before we build it right. And I just love that book, and I love that framing. You know, if you don't have a market for what you're building, or if they don't understand that they have the pain point you're solving for, it doesn't matter what you build. You got to do that first. And that's really what the focus of this incubator program is. It's that phase of work. Is there a there there? Is there something worth the hard, arduous path of building some software? Is there something there worth walking that path for before you start walking it? VICTORIA: Right. I love that. Well, thank you both so much for coming on and sharing a little bit more about the program. I'm super excited to see what comes out of the first round, and then who gets selected for the second round. So I'm happy to help promote. Any other final takeaways for our listeners today? DAWN: If this sounds intriguing to you, maybe you're at the stage where you're thinking about this process, I definitely encourage people to follow along. We're trying to share as much as we can about this process and this journey for us and our founders. So you can follow along on our blog, on LinkedIn. We're doing a LinkedIn live weekly with the founder in the program. We'll continue to do that with the next founders. And we're really trying to build a community and extend the community, you know, that thoughtbot has built with early-stage founders, so please join us. We'd love to have you. VICTORIA: Wonderful. That's amazing. Thank you both so much. INTRO MUSIC: VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. WILL: And I'm your host, Will Larry. And with us today is our other host, Chad Pytel, the CEO of thoughtbot. Which, we're celebrating 20 years of business this year. Chad, welcome. CHAD: Oh, it's good to have the tables turned on me. And I'm looking forward to the discussion today. VICTORIA: Great. We have a whole set of questions, some of which come from other employees within thoughtbot. So we're really excited to dig into it today. Why don't we start with thoughtbot's iconic logo, the Ralph bot, and the little red robot that everyone knows thoughtbot for? And we call him Ralph within thoughtbot. So, how did Ralph come to be? Where does his design come from? And how did that become part of the company mascot? CHAD: I'm happy to tell the story. But I have a question for both of you: have you ever heard me call the robot Ralph? WILL: [laughs] No. VICTORIA: I don't think I've ever heard you refer to the robot. WILL: [laughs] VICTORIA: So, if you did call it, I don't know what you would call it. WILL: Oh, who started that? [laughs] CHAD: It was someone who was at the company, Matt Jankowski. WILL: [laughs] VICTORIA: Ah, I see. CHAD: I actually don't like the name. I think it's a terrible name for the robot. [laughs] I don't understand why the robot has to be gendered at all. And so I've never said that that's the robot's name. You know, when you're CEO, you have to pick your battles. WILL: [laughs] Yes. CHAD: Yeah. So that's the unofficial name of the robot, I think. And Matt started calling it that because Matt's a big fan of coming up with names for things. And yeah, so, at some point, he started calling it that. And it sort of stuck as people joined the company and just sort of assumed that that's what the robot's called. We didn't start with this logo. Logo has always been a robot. But the thing we started with was an illustration based off of a tin robot that I think either one of us had or that we saw a picture of. Another Matt, who is one of the founders of the company, sketched it. He was a designer as well as a developer. And we used it for a few years. But what we learned over the course of it as we gained more exposure is that, actually, it's a really common tin toy robot. And you can find a lot of other art and illustration and uses of it in stock photography and everything. Which at first was good because then we could get a bunch of stock photography, and it was our logo. But then we realized, ooh, this is not something that we really own or have control over. So we started to think about creating our own robot logo from scratch. Since we're a design firm, and I think it's notoriously hard to design things for yourself, we actually went to another agency that we were friends with and hired them to work with us to create the logo. And I have to say I was probably the worst client ever. WILL: [laughs] CHAD: Because I was asking...I had a particular vision in mind for this idea of, like, a powerful robot. And we kept on doing sketches, after sketch, after sketch, and it was really hard. We couldn't arrive at something that seemed powerful, that didn't seem aggressive. The logo at the time was a 3D representation of the robot. And it was really hard to also make a new 3D robot that looked powerful but not aggressive. And we just banged our heads against that for a long time. I think it was a couple of months. Until one day, I just said, you know what? We're not going to do it. Let's just stop trying to do this. [chuckles] Let's just do the simplest 2D representation of a robot that we can think of. And just going back to the drawing board starting over, we arrived at the logo we have today. Now we have to deal with the fact that it looks a lot like the Android logo. [laughter] But that's the, I guess, the story of the robot. WILL: So, first off, scratching the name Ralph. [laughs] CHAD: No, no, you can use it. I just think it's funny. WILL: Definitely. Second thing is Chad is not a good client when working with designers. No, I'm just joking. [laughs] CHAD: No, it's totally true. WILL: [laughs] CHAD: You know, when we have strong opinions that are mostly preferences, that leads to people being bad clients. [laughter] Because there was no reasoning behind, you know, the preferences. It was just what I had in my head. And so it wasn't until I let that go that we were able to arrive at something usable. WILL: [laughs] That's awesome. So, was the robot a passion for you, or was it just a toy that one of the founders, employees had, and that's where you went with it, how you got your inspiration? CHAD: The name thoughtbot with the bot on the end comes from...because before we started thoughtbot, we did a lot of Java development as a group, same people I went to school with them. We did projects together. And we would follow the pattern where you sort of have an object and then a manager object or a service object. And it was a common naming pattern. If you have orders or customers, then the service object might be called order manager or customer manager. And, in our code, we tended to not do that and instead do bots. So we would have order bot over orders, customer bot over customers. So, when we were brainstorming names for the company, we naturally tended to put bot on the end because that was our typical naming convention in the projects we were doing together. And so there wasn't anything particular about robots that we cared about at all. [laughter] It was that naming convention, which then extended to, okay, well, it's the thoughtbot. And so it should be a robot with thoughts on it or thought lines or something like that. That's where it came from. VICTORIA: I love to hear that. I'm learning so much myself I didn't know before even as a thoughtbot employee. WILL: [laughs] VICTORIA: It's been 20 years since you started the business. I want to start...or go back in time. So, if you could go back and give yourself, the younger version of you 20 years ago, some advice, what would you say? CHAD: I've gotten similar versions of this question on different shows. My answer for the last several years has been pretty consistent. So I'll give that one, and then I think I have another one too. The thing that I didn't realize at the time that I think I would be better for and the company would be better for I had a big blind spot in terms of I started thoughtbot with friends. We were the same age. We were all five White guys in our 20s, just out of school. That was the people that I was doing projects with; that was the people I was surrounded by in school. And it was a big blind spot. And, if I could go back in time, I would try to open my eyes to the fact that that was the case. And I think that I would be a lot better for it. And I think the company would be a lot better for having started with a more diverse team from the beginning because it makes us worse when you don't start off that way. It's harder and harder to correct it the longer it goes on. And so that would be something that I would go back and try to tell myself. Look at what you're doing. You don't realize now, but it is important. WILL: So, because we started talking about this at Summit a month ago, and it was amazing to hear that you're saying that because, at the same time, we're at this all-staff event, and we're able to see how diverse our team is and stuff like that. How has the journey been increasing the diversity of the team? Like, I look at our team photo, and it's just amazing to see the diversity in every level, especially in leadership, the diversity in leadership. And I know we haven't, quote, unquote, "arrived." So, how has that journey been? And what does it look like in the future? CHAD: Yeah, I mean, we've clearly made a lot of progress on this. It is better and easier now than it was in the early days because nobody wants to be the first. Nobody wants to be the first woman on the team. No one wants to be the first person of color on the team. You don't know when you're coming into an organization like that, whether it's the kind of place for you or whether you're going to run into problems. And so now that we've made some progress, that in and of itself makes it easier to continue on the journey. But when we were just getting started on that, we really needed to do a lot to intentionally fix it without tokenizing people, which is not easy to do. And so we're very fortunate that we have made progress. And I appreciate everyone along the way putting themselves out there, willing to be the first, or the second, or the third. I know that that's not easy, and it's made thoughtbot a better place now that we've progressed. WILL: Yeah, and I want to interrupt and say this: after that conversation, I remember I had to split and run to another event. While at that event, I met one of the first ladies that were on the team. And I started chatting about her experience. And it was amazing to see the transformation from the beginning to where it is now. So it was just really good to have that conversation with you, and then go talk to her and just, I guess, see the complete picture, so that's amazing because she's still on the team to this day. CHAD: Yeah. But we're not done yet. Like you said, we still have [laughs], you know, we can always be better. WILL: Where do you see it going in the future? CHAD: Well, I think that even though the management team, the senior leadership team, we have made progress there, I think that that is an obvious area where we have more progress to go in terms of making sure that people at the company are represented...the demographics of the people at the company are represented at every level of the company, especially when you have a culture like we do where the leaders are the people who have been here the longest. And we don't have so many of those positions opening up over the years. In fact, over the last five years, we've eliminated more of those positions in order to reduce overhead and to stay financially sustainable. So we actually have less of those opportunities than we have in the past, and so that holds us back. And so we have to figure out how to handle that and to do better with that. The other is, you know, one of the biggest changes over the last three years is going fully remote. And that has enabled us to hire the best people, no matter where they live, in the time zones that we operate in. And that has been really great for bringing new people, new energy onto the team. That is going to continue into the future. And we're going to see the demographics of the company continue to shift away from the United States. 60% of the company is now outside of the U.S., and that's going to keep on going. And that doesn't make us any worse off. It makes us better. VICTORIA: Yeah, I wanted to ask you about that. So, thoughtbot, as I understand it before we went fully remote, was known for having an amazing in-person office culture. So, what was that shift like for you? And how do you maintain that company culture after going fully remote? CHAD: Well, here's the honest answer. WILL: [laughs] CHAD: The honest answer was I was already not part of that office company culture. I was traveling one week out of every month to one of the studios. I didn't interact with people in the same way because of my position within the company. I was out of the studio a lot of the time. And even when I wasn't there, I was already working from home a few days a week because of my travel schedule or something like that. So moving to fully remote...and I was already sort of over-commuting to 45 minutes each way to the office. And so moving to fully remote has made things a lot better for me because I'm traveling a lot less. I get to be home with my family a lot more. I don't have that commute time. And my experience now, I think, is more similar to everyone else on that team. And I feel like we're all sharing more equally in what the experience is at thoughtbot. And so when I work to improve that, I'm not only working to improve it for me. I'm working to improve it for everybody. And so there are trade-offs. It is certainly different for the individual designer or developer at thoughtbot than it was before. But I think that the benefits of having the team that we have now, people being able to live where they want to live and to get that commute time back, outweigh the downsides of changing that company culture. VICTORIA: The other part is about just that shift, right? Of it was COVID. [laughs] Obviously, a lot of people were going remote at that time. So I'm just curious how that experience really happened for thoughtbot. I know how it happened for me at the company I was at. [laughs] CHAD: Well, it was certainly abrupt, you know. And, at the time, we thought, okay, we're going to shut down the office for two weeks, and then we'll all be back. And that, very quickly, was proven to be wrong. When it came to our actual work, the biggest shift we had was in the way that we collaborated with clients. But we were already collaborating with each other across studios in a distributed way. And so that was a more natural progression. I think the biggest shift was the way that our projects were working and collaborating with clients. You know, we would have clients in the office with us, too, sitting right next to us. And so figuring out how to do design sprints fully remotely, to ramp up the amount of remote pair programming that we were doing, those were the big changes, I think. And then you had the cultural ones, too, that you really need to work at when two people are getting a snack in the kitchen and having an off-hand chat about something. When you're fully remote, that doesn't happen. You need to put a lot more effort into those sort of what would have been casual conversations previously. WILL: So, and it seems like...just having a conversation with you, I know that it wasn't an easy decision to change over. And my question is, how do you make decisions, especially the hard ones that are not...and you stick with them? For example, I know, like, with hiring, we're talking about the diversity and creating a diverse pool that kind of resembles the area that we're trying to hire for, so, you know, resemble the U.S., or overseas, or wherever it is. And that's a hard thing to do at times, but we stuck with it. And there's been other decisions I've noticed. So, how do you make those decisions, one, and then, how do you stick with them when most companies or most people will say, "Hey, it's just too hard. Let's pivot and change it up"? CHAD: Yeah, we have our values, five core values, and one of them is fulfillment. And I often refer to that as our North Star value, meaning that when we're faced with a decision as a company or as individuals, fulfillment is often the one that we most often look to as the guide for which direction to go in. And I think that that is really powerful for us. It causes us to choose things that other companies might not choose. And it also is really powerful for us because it means that I don't need to be the one to make all of the decisions. You can make decisions based on what is fulfilling to you in your work. And that's very likely the right thing for everybody else at the company. And it may mean that we're a little bit less successful financially. But there are two aspects to success, you know, you need to be financially sustainable, but if you're unhappy in your work, if you're unfulfilled in your work, then that's not truly being successful. And so that's the guiding point of the way that we make a lot of decisions. Take the example of going remote, we weren't really deciding between going back to the way things were or going fully remote. Going back to the way things were was not an option because we had already told everyone if you need to move if you need to be away from the studio you were previously part of, go do that. You don't need to worry about remaining at thoughtbot. And about 20 people moved away from where their studio had been located, which is about 20% of the company. So we were deciding between hybrid or fully remote. Going back to the way things were wasn't an option because we had already removed that from the table, I think, guided by supporting the team, fulfillment, trust, our values. So then the decision-making comes, do we want to figure out how to be hybrid? Which we had done before in our history. And we understood, based on that past experience, that you have to work at that quite a bit to integrate everyone fully, and sort of if you don't, it becomes very tough or even just mediocre. And so it was, are we more excited about working at being the best hybrid organization in the world, or are we more excited at figuring out how to be the best remote company in the world? You know, for me, that was an obvious choice. I was more excited about figuring out how to be the best remote company than I was about being the best hybrid company. So I think that that's an okay... [laughter] I think that's an okay way to make decisions. What are you more excited by? What are you going to be more fulfilled by in your work than that? And so that's, you know, sort of dissecting that decision-making, you know, part of what tipped us over the edge in terms of choosing to be fully remote. VICTORIA: I like that you said that you tried to make it so that you're not the one making all the decisions. [chuckles] And I felt that as a managing director and as an associate director that there is a very purposeful tact of when I'm bringing issues to leadership. The response I get back is very careful not to tell me what to do. [laughs] CHAD: Yeah. I'm sure it's annoying at times, right? [laughter] VICTORIA: I think it's a shift, right? Like, if you're coming from a typical, like, top-down organization, it can be a real mind shift, and it can be frustrating. But then, once you embrace it, it can be very fulfilling, like you said. CHAD: Part of why we do that, too, is because if you're not careful, you know, one of our other values is trust. And we really do trust people more than they're used to. And our other value is self-management. So, people should be left to their own devices. People at thoughtbot take initiative in their work to make decisions, those kinds of things. And so, at the intersection of trust and self-management, what happens in a lot of other cultures is this idea of permission. If you have to ask permission to do things, then you can't truly self-manage. So, when you come to a leader and you're asking for something, it's hard for that not to be articulated as asking for permission for something in a traditional sort of power hierarchy. I encourage people at thoughtbot to think about...in the way that our culture works, it's a lot better to frame things as asking for advice because there are people who have more experience in a certain area than you or whatever. And so a much better way of framing the conversation that you want to have with those people is instead of just asking open-ended questions, which it's very easy to misunderstand as basically just asking for permission to do something, it's better to say, like, "Here's what I know. Here's what I would do based on what I know. Do you have any advice for me based on that?" And then I can say, "Oh, well, here's what I know. [laughs] Can I share that with you?" And then, you can take that information in, and then you can make the decision based on having that additional information. I don't want to make the decision for somebody. That's the way I think about it. If you're not sure what's happening, it can be pretty frustrating in our culture because we are sort of averse to telling other people what to do. We're happy to help people and give people information, but we don't like to tell people what to do. WILL: Yeah, and I've definitely felt this, even as a developer here. But it has been the perfect fit for me because I love the, hey, we trust you. Go and do it. Go make decisions. Hey, even if you fail, let's come back and talk about it and move forward. But also the pushing me out of my comfort zone. There has been numerous times where I'm like, "Yeah, I don't think I can do that." And someone in leadership is like, "I think you can. Let's try it out. Let's do it. If you have any questions, come talk to me. I'll help you in any way I can." So, even as a developer, I feel that same way. And so I guess my question for you, Chad, is there's been a lot of decisions that I've seen you make or even this part right here, the trust. Because sometimes, money can override that when you're a CEO, especially because of jobs and everything. But you said fulfillment, and you had the values. But, Chad, as the CEO, like, why do you personally lead like that and make decisions like that? CHAD: It's a really good question. [laughs] WILL: I always wanted to peel back the layers of Chad. VICTORIA: [laughs] WILL: So that's what it is. [laughs] CHAD: To tie it back to development, just like you just did, I think a lot of our values and the way that we do things come from the way that we believe products should be designed and built. When I'm working on a project, I don't want to be told how to do everything. I don't want every ticket to be specified without me being part of the understanding or decision-making process. I want to be able to collaborate with the people that I'm working with, understand the problems that we're trying to solve, and then pick up the ticket and do the research, figure out the best way to solve it or be part of that. And when it's not clear to me, ask questions, learn from other people about the right way to solve something might be, and then to implement it in the best way that I know how, and collaborate with the people that I'm working with as I do that. And then I pick up that ticket, and I'm responsible for deploying it to staging and asking for acceptance of it. And I'm responsible for deploying it to production. So I'm pushing my work. I have agency over my work at every step of the way. I hope everyone who's listening has had an opportunity to be on a project where you've truly had agency over your own work. It's a really good, fulfilling feeling. And so I think that's where it comes from. I think that's what I try to bring to everything that I do. VICTORIA: And I think that philosophy is what creates such a compelling company culture and makes people want to work here, right? CHAD: I think so. Particularly because the work we do, the majority of us are designers and developers, but I don't think it's just design and develop. Like, it resonates a lot the relation to product work. But I think that's true for fulfillment in your own work generally across the board, no matter what your role is. People would rather have agency over their own work than to be micromanaged, to be told what to do all of the time. MID-ROLL AD: Are your engineers spending too much time on DevOps and maintenance issues when you need them on new features? We know maintaining your own servers can be costly and that it’s easy for spending creep to sneak in when your team isn’t looking. By delegating server management, maintenance, and security to thoughtbot and our network of service partners, you can get 24x7 support from our team of experts, all for less than the cost of one in-house engineer. Save time and money with our DevOps and Maintenance service. Find out more at: tbot.io/devops. VICTORIA: In 20 years of hiring people and building products, what has really changed in terms of what you see customers looking for in building products, and what's stayed the same? CHAD: There's a lot that has changed, mostly in terms of platforms and practices. When we were first getting started out, the practice of test-driven development was not generally established as a best practice. It was one that we needed to advocate for and fight for, and really put ourselves out there as this is what we believe about the way good products are built, and if you don't want that, we're not a good fit for each other. So that's what I mean by practices. A lot of those things that used to be controversial we sort of won on as they played out as, yes, general agreement now about certain best practices. And so that has evolved over time. The other is mobile development. You know, when we first started, that wasn't really a thing. We did some mobile development early on for Palm platforms and for Motorola platforms using different versions of Java. It was a very different ecosystem. And mobile development has evolved a lot and become...almost every project we do has some mobile component. And a lot of them are native mobile applications with an API back end that we're building as well. So that has been a big change. The things that stay the same are, I would say, the things that we have sort of been constant about. So in the way that best practices change or evolve, the constant has been that we put ourselves out there, willing to be opinionated about what we believe the current best way of working is. That means that the clients who work with us are coming to us wanting that. And that leads to a culture of work and quality and that kind of thing, which I think has been pretty constant over the years. But it's not because we didn't try. Like, if we were willing to be anything to anybody and to compromise all the time and those kinds of things, it wouldn't be a constant. But we work at it, but I think that feeling of what it's like to do this work has been a constant. WILL: Speaking of changes and constant changes sometimes, what's the story behind the handbook? Everyone at the company can access the handbook through GitHub and how [inaudible 29:35] Whose idea was it? How did that come to be? And explain how it's always changing and what that looks like. CHAD: Yeah. So, like you said, we have our company handbook and the public playbook in a source code repository that everyone at the company collaborates on and has access to change. I don't remember who initially moved it into version control. It started as a document. We worked with an outside payroll or HR company to make as our first company handbook. It had policies and those kinds of things in it. At one point, you know, we were doing some revisions, and maybe me, maybe somebody else said, "Let's move this out of this," whatever it was at the time, Word doc, or whatever, "and move it into Markdown and natural place we want to have version control on it." But even though we moved the document into version control and even though everyone at the company technically had access to it, I think for many years, we still did things like a lot of companies do, which is the version control in and of itself isn't the special thing. It's using GitHub issues to track actual problems that we know about, or potential issues that we know about, defects in our policies, our practices, the company itself, just like we do on our software products. That was the actual fundamental shift that we made because it completely changed the way that we make change at the company and organize the work that we do to improve the company. And the way that that happened was, I think, prior to that, we made changes in a lot of ways that companies make changes. So some people know about some things, some people don't. Typically, senior leaders will get together often in meetings and talk about the issues that they see. And they tend to result in really big changes all at once that attempt to address multiple issues or make big reorganizational changes. And there's a tendency not to work iteratively when you work that way, and we did the same thing. So the sort of final big event that happened that triggered the fundamental change of working was, at the time, we had an unlimited time off policy. We had gone to that a few years prior because it was a trend in general. But also, we were tired of sort of tracking time and the permission that happens around time off and all that kind of stuff. So we had sort of blown it all up and gone to an unlimited time off policy. But it's more well understood now that unlimited time off policies have a few issues. And we were seeing those issues. Time off was very inconsistent among everyone on the team. Particularly, new people would join the company, and they'd be like, okay, yes, but how much time am I supposed to really take? So that was one issue. Another issue was we wanted to increase the amount of parental leave that we offered as a company, like, on paper. Now, technically, we had the unlimited time off policy, but you want to give guidance to people, and you want to be able to say in a job advertisement that you have this much parental leave, you know. And because we're a consulting company and we make our revenue when people are working, the question was asked, how much can we say that we have for parental leave? And it was a very uncomfortable position for us to be in to not be able to work that financially because we could say, okay, we have 12 weeks of parental leave. But, at any point in time, anyone else could take more time off for any other reason because we had unlimited time off policy. And the idea that we couldn't prioritize one kind of time off over another to make it work financially was uncomfortable to us. And then, the state of California passed a sick time law, which was fundamentally incompatible with unlimited time off policies that lump sick time and vacation time together. And so we knew about these things. We got together in a meeting. We talked about them. And we put together a pull request to the handbook that, you know, we said, you know, we could probably fix any one of these problems. But probably all signs are pointing to just switching back to a regular time off policy. And so we put together a pull request. You can probably guess since I'm telling this story that, generally, people were very surprised. It was a big change to take in all at once. And I think even though we have a high level of trust, as a company, it was hard for people who generally viewed an unlimited time off policy as a good thing. You know, they were worried that there was some ulterior motive there, that something was being taken away for some reason, maybe financial. So we worked through it, and the pull request is there for everyone at the company, so you can see. Anna, when she opened the pull request, outlined all of those reasons why, but it was a lot of information to take in. And after we made it through, it sort of caused me to reflect on the process. And there was good criticism from members of the team at the time about the process, and we really took that in. And I think it was the state of California passing that law that the solution that we arrived at to mind for me because they passed the law in, whatever it was, the spring or the summer. And it wasn't going to go into effect until the new year. And that's really no different than, you know, a new version of a library is going to come out, or a new version of an operating system or a browser is going to come out. And we know it's going to break our app. What do we do? We create a ticket in the backlog. We describe what the problem is. We prioritize it among everything else we're working on. And we make sure that the fix is in place in time for that to be released. And yet, we weren't doing that for these very obvious defects or things that we knew were going to break an existing policy against this kind of stuff. So I was like, we could use GitHub issues to log problems that we know about that are out there, and not only would that have led to a lot more transparency along the way. When a change was made, people could have come along that journey with us of identifying the problem, being aware of it, being part of problem-solving, and coming to a resolution, and then getting a pull request. But more fundamentally, I think once you start to work that way, probably would have never made the change that we did in the first place because this way causes you to work more incrementally, to work more iteratively, to take each of the problems to try to identify the root cause and the best way to fix it. And very often, that is a smaller change that you can put into place more quickly. And we know that we don't need to get it perfect. We don't need to change absolutely everything about this all at once in order to fix every problem. We just need to make tomorrow better than today. If we can do that, then we know that, over time, it adds up to significant positive change that is very different a year from now or two years from now than what we're doing today. But we do that by chipping away and making tomorrow better than today. And so working this way with these discrete tickets, with this thing, there are downsides too, don't get me wrong. It's not all sunshine and rainbows. It's hard to work this way. But those are some of the benefits and sort of the story of how we arrived at how we do things. WILL: I love that because I'm familiar with creating PRs, commenting on PRs, just giving feedback through PRs. And also, I've never been in a leadership meeting at thoughtbot, like, just never been in one. But I know that if I comment on a PR, my voice is heard with leadership making the decision. I love that idea. CHAD: Yeah, leadership meetings at thoughtbot are actually very boring. WILL: [laughs] CHAD: Because the only things that we're talking about that aren't represented in GitHub issues are things that aren't proper for GitHub issues, so they're individual personal problems or things like that, or, hey, we're doing a leadership training and, you know, talking about that. Actual change, actual things that happen, are represented in those GitHub issues. And that's why it's super important that we have issues for everything because when we truly work this way, if something's not represented as an issue, it's not getting worked on. There's not a lot happening in leadership meetings other than those things that aren't ideal for GitHub issues, or we're going through, and we're saying, "Hey, this issue has been sitting around for a while," or "What's the update?" And you'll often see someone comment after the fact about an issue. Now, that being said, I think one of the hardest things about this is that when you expose these big issues, it can be a little discouraging over time to have them be around there to be not closed. But the way...I'll bring this back to our product work as well, like, when you identify...at least this is the case for me. A bug could have been there for two years, [chuckles] and I don't know about it, and therefore, it's out of sight, out of mind. I didn't know about it. But the minute I find out about a bug in a product that I'm working on, I can't stop thinking about it, and I want to fix it so badly. It becomes my top priority right away. [laughs] And I have to remind myself that just because I know about something now doesn't mean it's actually the highest priority item, or that I can fix it, or that I should take the time to fix it. I know it's my natural tendency to do that. So shedding light on something that's positive in and of itself, and then we can chip away at that over time. And this way of working allows us to tackle big problems. But sometimes it doesn't feel so great because you're identifying sort of defects in the company itself that make everybody uncomfortable. But I would rather light be shed on those so that we have a chance to improve it than to have it go unidentified, just like bugs in our products. VICTORIA: And just to illustrate, we have 162 open issues on our handbook. [laughter] But, you know, from my perspective, that makes me really excited, like, people are engaging with it. They're putting in issues and creating it. Because I've converted a company handbook to GitHub before, and no one ever looked at it. [laughs] So it was actually kind of nice that -- CHAD: [laughs] VICTORIA: You said that it took some time to build up that interaction with it and make people feel comfortable. And I wanted to ask about actually your Dungeons & Dragons campaigns that you run with the company. And I'm wondering what skills or practices from that comes over into your leadership style or the culture at thoughtbot. CHAD: Ooh, I'm not sure it's as deep as that, Victoria. VICTORIA: [laughs] CHAD: I just really like [laughter] playing Dungeons & Dragons. But I will say the itch that it scratches for me and the reason why I like Dungeons & Dragons, and the reason why I'm really happy to play it with thoughtbot people...my degree is computer science. But all throughout elementary school, high school, I did improv and theater, and I have a degree in theater as well. For a long time, Dungeons & Dragons is essentially doing group improv with other people around a game. And to be able to bring those two things together with a group of people that I like to have fun with it's a really great outlet. And I really enjoy it. But I'm not sure that there's anything deeper than it sort of scratches that performance itch that I have with a group of people that I like to hang out with. VICTORIA: That's fair. And then, just to kind of go back to one of our earlier questions we asked —what would you go back in time and advise your younger self —now, what if your younger person could travel to the future and give you some advice, looking at where you are at now? CHAD: The only way that I've done this for 20 years is day by day. Like, each day, you get up, and you approach each day. This is the way I do it anyway. It's like I approach each day as a fresh day. And now, over thousands of days, it's been 20 years. And I think that that is part of why at least I've been able to do this so long is I don't do a lot of dwelling on what happened yesterday. I think about today and tomorrow much more than I do about what happened yesterday. The upside is I've been able to do this for 20 years. [laughs] The downside to that is you tend to not reflect so much on the good things, just like you don't reflect so much on the bad things. You tend to not celebrate the milestones when they happen or appreciate them as much because you're onto the next thing. You're thinking about tomorrow rather than yesterday. And so I would think that if my younger self came forward and talked to me today, I think the thing that he would say is like, hey, look at where you are, look at what you've done. Take a moment [laughs] to celebrate not only your work but, you know, this is true for the people around me. I tend not to celebrate the accomplishments as much and everything because I'm very much someone who sort of lives in maybe not even the moment but the next moment that's about to happen. And so I think the person would say, relax a little bit, have a little bit more fun. Take a moment to celebrate the people around you a little bit more. I think that's what I would say to myself. WILL: I love learning things that I didn't know about thoughtbot. So this has been perfect. CHAD: Thank you both for the really thoughtful questions. And on the note of what I just [inaudible 44:53], thank you for everything that you both do at thoughtbot. I really appreciate it. We couldn't have accomplished everything that we have without the individuals [inaudible 45:01]. So I'm here sort of representing thoughtbot for our 20th anniversary, but it's not just me who got us to this point. It's been a lot of other people over the many years making it happen. And so I appreciate both of you for helping make it happen. VICTORIA: Well, thank you. And again, thank you so much for joining us. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. WILL: And you could find me @will23larry. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com.
Jordyn Bonds is the Director of Product Strategy at thoughtbot. Jordyn helps companies validate new product opportunities and reach that first key milestone, from validating an early adopter market to creating a pitch deck to building a prototype, proof of concept, or an MVP launch. Chad talks to Jordyn about what a Director of Product Strategy does, how Jordyn's career has evolved (She got to build madonna.com for the Confessions on the Dance Floor release and tour!!), and finding practices that keep you motivated and inspired to be working towards long-term, large goals. Follow Jordyn on Twitter (https://twitter.com/skybondsor) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/skybondsor/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Jordyn Bonds, the Director of Product Strategy at thoughtbot. Jordyn helps companies validate new product opportunities and reach that first key milestone, from validating an early adopter market to creating a pitch deck to building a prototype, proof of concept, or an MVP launch. Jordyn, thank you for joining me not only on this podcast but at thoughtbot. JORDYN: Thank you. It's wonderful to be here. CHAD: You joined us in September of this year. And it's been really fun to watch...well, let me say it's always fun to watch people come into the company and begin to digest everything that's there, begin to, like, okay, I can see how this is working, and then to start to make your mark on things. And so thank you for everything you've done so far. And I look forward to seeing everything in the future too. JORDYN: I look forward to it too. It's been a super interesting experience. I think thoughtbot has a really unique culture, and it's been really fun to get on-boarded into it. CHAD: Cool. I'd love to talk a little bit more about that in a bit. But you have joined us as the Director of Product Strategy, which is actually a new position for us in the Ignite team, which is the team that focuses on those early-stage ideas, products, companies. Obviously, if we added the position, we thought it was important. We don't take those things lightly. What led you and made you perfect for that position? JORDYN: [laughs] I think taking something from a nascent notion, whatever that is, an idea for a product or newly identified market opportunity to that first concrete thing out in the world is a really special phase of the work of new product launches. And it is, over the course of my career, just the thing I have really zeroed in on professionally over time. That's kind of my wheelhouse. And so I think that's thing number one. But what makes it special is that I like to think of it like it's almost like the first few seconds of the existence of the universe after the Big Bang... CHAD: [laughs] JORDYN: where you are inventing the ground rules of the thing you are building as you are building it. And that is a very...it's just a really special time. And some people love it, and some people despise it. There's a lot of chaos and uncertainty, and you have to move forward despite all of that chaos and uncertainty. And some of us love the; I don't know, there's just this feeling that anything is possible, a sort of sense of newness and really paving the road while you're hacking through the jungle, and I just love that. And I feel like I want to help other companies love that phase too. [laughs] It's like a weird thing to say. I'm almost like an evangelist for that time. But I'm an evangelist for it because I feel like it's really important to make sure that you're tying the mission and vision of the business; you're weaving it into what it is you're doing in the product ASAP. Do it early. Make sure you're thinking about this stuff from the jump. And if I can be an evangelist for that kind of thinking and the processes that make it possible, it's just a really exciting thing for me to be able to do. CHAD: That's really cool. You saying that made me think about this sense that I have that oftentimes when you're faced with that period of time where everything is possible, and you're literally defining what the product and the business is going to be, maybe there are more than two buckets. But I think, generally, people fall into one of two buckets. There are the people who look at that and say, "Okay, here's what we're not going to do." And they're really good at saying no to things and narrowing down from that. Another group of people who maybe even really struggle with all of the possibility, and their reaction is to say "Yes," to everything. JORDYN: Right. Yep. CHAD: And you can probably say judged by the way that I introduced the concept which one I think is better. JORDYN: [laughs] CHAD: But that's the two buckets I see. Do you see that too? JORDYN: Oh, absolutely. And I will say partly why I am so enthusiastic about this phase is that I was a bucket number two person and worked very hard to become a bucket number one person because that's the mindset you have to get in. But it's a real delicate balance. It's not always clear; you have to be open to things changing. But saying no is way more important than saying yes in the sense that, you know, I think the phrase people like to use in startup land is you can't boil the ocean, and that is true. So it's much easier...the path is much easier and clearer if you start small. But if you're an entrepreneur, by nature, that's going to feel really uncomfortable to you because what you see out in the world is possibility and probably endless possibility, right? CHAD: Right. JORDYN: So the notion that you are going to squeeze yourself into the tiniest space to start when you see the giant opportunity. And PS, everyone is asking you to articulate that giant opportunity. You need to be able to tell that story so that you can recruit people to your cause. But at the same time, you need to be ruthlessly focused in the here and now on the small things, like, the constrained things you're going to do, for now, all the things you're going to say no to for now while keeping your eyes on this larger, expansive prize. It is just a really...it's an art; it is a hard thing to do. CHAD: How did you shift your mindset? JORDYN: Through failure. CHAD: [laughs] JORDYN: It was through painfully failing at doing this. [laughs] I made every textbook mistake, some of them fairly recently. [laughs] So there's a lot of folks out there who their first venture, their first foray into this world, was a success, and that's wonderful for them. That's great. But their advice is sort of suspect for me and for a lot of founders because it's like, well, you didn't... [laughs] maybe it was skill, maybe it was luck; it was probably a combination of both. Like, good for you that you did this. But if you've started a business, launched a product one time, and it was wildly successful, how are you in a position to teach me who might be on failure number two, or three, or whatever, how I need to change in order to be successful, what needs to change in order for me to be successful? Like, you're not going to be that useful to me. And so I find I'm in a much better position to help other people not fall into the same potholes that I did because I fell into them. I can look at folks and say, "I know what you're thinking. I know you've got your eyes on this large market opportunity. And you can see the mass market future ten years from now for this thing that you're building, that's great. But you have to start with the narrowest of early adopters." And you have to start with a pain point that is, quote, "hair on fire" is another phrase people like to use, like, just some pain point that people have that is just so painful for people right now that they are willing to pay someone to fix it. You got to focus on that despite this large, open-ended opportunity that's in the future. I can only really give that advice to folks credibly because I have done the opposite so many times that I can both empathize with where they're at in that impulse to boil the ocean, but I can also tell them how one way of disabusing yourself of that mindset. So I think back to actually...so I have an older sister. She was really terrible at math when we were younger. [laughs] And she was the best math teacher for me because it didn't come easy for her. Going to someone who's a math genius to help teach you what greater than or less than is is [laughs] not going to help you because it's self-evident to them. Like, how are they going to break that down for you? My sister was a great math teacher for me because her understanding of math was quite hard-won. So if I came to her and said, "Hey, I don't understand greater than or less than," which, PS, is truly what happened. CHAD: [laughs] JORDYN: I was like, I don't really...however, it was being explained to me did not [laughs] resonate. She was a great person to go to because she would not judge me for not understanding it, first of all, and she would have ways of breaking that down. So I'm that person for new founders, people just starting out trying to come up with a new product or explore a new opportunity. I have learned all the painful lessons on their behalf. So it's not like I'm coming to them with advice; that's just boilerplate advice I have read somewhere, and I'm now repeating to them. No, I have painfully learned these lessons. [laughs] Let me help you avoid that. CHAD: And you said it earlier...you used the phrase like not now or not yet. And I think that's a great way of just slightly...no doesn't mean no forever. [laughs] It just means not right now, not yet. Now's not the right time. JORDYN: Exactly. CHAD: And I think that's a healthy way of reframing it. You're trying to strike that balance between the opportunity and the future and what you're doing today to make the product successful and get it out the door. JORDYN: And you can do a lot of work around those bright, shiny, attractive future possibilities that make it feel...you can basically say, "Not yet, and here's what will have to happen for it to become now." You can kind of nurture those opportunities over time, and what will be the criteria to make them something you want to pursue now. It can kind of sate your desire to pursue them if you nurture the plan over time. So it's not like you just say, "Not yet," you say, "Not yet, and here's the evolving set of things that will tell us it's the right time." And having that shared alignment on the team around what those things are but keeping your eyes on them, actively monitoring the situation to be on the lookout when now is the time can satisfy your urge to be working toward that. I think that's what's really hard for founders who really have their eyes on this big opportunity is you can sometimes feel like you're not making any progress toward it because the progress is so incremental. So finding those practices that feed that thing for you, that keep you motivated and inspired to be working toward that long-term large goal, finding those ways to keep at it, to see the progress, keep refining why it is you're doing what you're doing and how it is you're getting there, can make you feel like you're pursuing and even when you're not [laughs] if that makes any sense. I just acknowledge that people need to do something. Just telling yourself or your team not yet is sometimes not enough because you're in it for that big vision, right? CHAD: Right. Yeah, that's great. One of the things that stood out to me when we first met was the variety of different experiences that you've held, different positions, different roles, different things you've done. You started doing web development. You've done user experience, product management, you've been CTO, you've been CEO of companies. You did product lead and VP of product. That variety of experience, I think is more than I have. [laughs] You have held those different roles. How has that evolved for you in your career? What's been driving that forward for you? JORDYN: I was always this product strategy person inside. I didn't necessarily know it. I didn't really even know. I mean, back in the early days of the web, a product mindset wasn't even really a thing, and advertising got a hold of the internet first. And so it was really about graphic design for a long time and a bunch of other things. But throughout that first decade that I spent as an engineer, as a front-end engineer, I was just constantly that annoying person on the team who was like, "Why are we building this? Who are we building it for? Why are we building this?" Because what I learned is as much as I liked to code, and I liked the puzzle of solving the problem of how to turn a design into a thing people could click on, that was really fun for me, but it was only fun for a while before I started to become really sad, disappointed that we would launch things that would be market failures in the sense of, yeah, we launched a thing, and we checked the box, but no one was using it. And I would come back and say...and I was mostly doing agency work at the time, and so there was not a lot of follow-up. We'd launch something, and then it was, like, move on to the next project. I wanted to know, was this successful? Did people use it? Are people using it? Like, how are they using it? Is it easy to use? And I wanted to answer those questions. And then, when I started to do more of that follow-up work, and then I was finding that most of the things we were launching were failures by my standards. No one cared about them. No one was using them. They were hard to use. And I wanted to make impactful things. And so I kept asking the questions, and I kept asking them earlier and earlier. This is how I ended up in user experience design. I was like, well, can we answer these questions first? Can we make a plan before we ever put pixels to screen, so to speak, [laughs] before we start building? Can we know something so that when we do build...which I had intimate understanding of how much work it is to build software. It's not nothing. It's a big investment of time and energy. And what I wanted increasingly was for that to be time and energy well spent for the entire team and for the universe. [laughs] And so that's how I ended up...I think of it as like swimming upstream in the sense that there's still a lot of waterfall process going on in software. And I was just constantly asking why and for whom earlier and earlier in the process, just so that we could make sure that what we were building was "The Right It," to quote a book title that a lot of folks [laughs] in startup land have read. Like, let's make sure it's "The Right It" before we invest a lot of time and energy, and, frankly, emotion into building something. That was really where this was coming from for me is that I think at heart, secretly or not so secretly, I'm still that engineer, that front-end engineer. And I want cool projects. I want to work on cool projects with cool people that are impactful. And I think that's true of most engineers. [laughs] No one is purely satisfied to just be given an assignment that they're supposed to execute without thinking about it. And getting into UX and then getting into product management was for me almost like a mission to make sure that by the time something got to engineering, it was a good idea. I just wanted to save engineers from terrible projects; that was my whole mission. [laughs] CHAD: Well, at thoughtbot, we have a set of core values, and one of them is fulfillment. And in the writing around that, the phrase we often use is we want to work on products that we believe deserve to exist. JORDYN: Yes. CHAD: And that doesn't just mean that they have a positive impact on the world instead of a negative impact. But we're very intentional about the words we use, so there's a double meaning to that phrase. It's having a positive impact on the world, but it also means that it's the right product. This is what we should be building that it deserves to exist. JORDYN: Yes, because you all know, we know how hard it is to make software. It's actually really hard. I think certainly building new products, you know, what a new product meant in 1920 is a very different thing than what [laughs] it means in 2022. And while it is a lot easier to bring new products into the world, like software products, internet products, it doesn't mean it's just easy. There's a lot of effort and resources that go into doing this, so let's make sure we're spending those things wisely. Is the product idea good? Does it deserve to exist, but also, have we done our homework to validate that people want this, that they're going to use it? And to the extent that you can. There are limits to the ability of any team to forecast that. But when you bring more of this experimental mindset to it as soon as possible, it's like you up the odds that you'll end up building something valuable. And like you were saying about the word deserve, the word valuable to me is very broad, valuable to users, valuable to the business, valuable to the world. Let's create things of value if we're going to go to the trouble of creating things. Mid-Roll Ad: When starting a new project, we understand that you want to make the right choices in technology, features, and investment but that you don’t have all year to do extended research. In just a few weeks, thoughtbot’s Discovery Sprints deliver a user-centered product journey, a clickable prototype or Proof of Concept, and key market insights from focused user research. We’ll help you to identify the primary user flow, decide which framework should be used to bring it to life, and set a firm estimate on future development efforts. Maximize impact and minimize risk with a validated roadmap for your new product. Get started at: tbot.io/sprint. CHAD: Have you found any tools, or techniques, or things that work particularly well for doing that? JORDYN: Yeah, and it's probably not going to be all that satisfying. There are no shortcuts, I think, is what's challenging about this. [laughs] The tool and the process that I always start with and come back to is talking to customers and talking to users if those two people are not the same. Talk to people, not about your product idea; talk to them about their lives. Talk to them about what is difficult for them, what is easy for them, what they value, and you will seldom go wrong if you start and return to that process and truly listen. This whole thing of talking to customers and talking to users is an art in and of itself. It's not idle, you know; it's not just a thing you toss off once in a while. [laughs] It's a skill. It's an art. And that is where you begin in it. Now, that is not the whole thing. But if you're starting there or returning there, you can always do this. I talk to teams all the time who have whiffed on this step of the process, and it's fine. Like, people who are builders, especially entrepreneurs, just want to get in there and start making something, like, I get that. CHAD: Well, I think it's the combination of really wanting to move quickly and get to something really, really quickly. But I also think there is an element of fear... JORDYN: [laughs] Yes. CHAD: that causes people so that these two things combined really set people up to not do this... JORDYN: To not do this, yes. CHAD: because they're afraid of what they'll learn. And so it's much easier to just say, "Well, I know what to build. Let's build it. And you don't need to actually talk to people who might tell you something that isn't aligned with what you think the product should be." JORDYN: 100%, 100%. Getting over that fear is hard, and you probably will just have to fail really hard without getting over it. I mean, that was certainly my experience, I mean, like several times. [laughs] I tried to build things without talking to anyone about it. I also was one of these people that built something that...and I can get into the story, but I built something that was successful enough without talking to a single person about it. And it really sent me down a fool's path for a while because I thought that's how it worked. But yeah, that fear is real. But I think the thing that got me around it eventually and gets me around it now is there's the rational side of this which is, well, wouldn't you rather know sooner than later that something is not a good idea or this is not a pain point? Sure. But the more visceral, emotional thing that got me around it is good ideas are actually a dime a dozen. You'll have good ideas. You'll have ten good ideas tomorrow morning. Your one idea that you have decided to explore and build out and build a company around it won't be your only idea. It is not the only good idea. [laughs] You will have more of those. If you had 1, you'll have 10. So talking to users means you'll figure out...you'll have the opportunity to come up with more of those ideas, and one of them will be the winner. All of them are probably good ideas on some level. Having ideas isn't the problem. People are afraid of talking to customers and learning that their idea is not good, but you got to turn that on your head. You talk to customers to learn what they need, and then you'll have 20 ideas about how to solve that for them, solve that need. The real fool's path here is to get attached to your first one idea that you had to solve a problem. It's to get attached to your problem before you have validated it. That's another pitfall here. But then to think that the first thought you had and how to solve it is going to be your only good idea, nah, you have lots of good ideas; we all do. [laughs] You'll have more. So really just focusing on that pain point and listening to people and then really doing the work to generate more and more ideas. Even if you think you have a good solution now, it's always worth thinking about what other solutions might be constantly because your solution that you've come up with might have some feasibility issues. It might have other problems that you haven't seen yet. So it's always good to have more solutions in the hopper in case the one that you're pursuing right now doesn't turn out to be the right one. CHAD: This is something that I don't know the answer to, and that is I do know you didn't originally start out as a developer, and it's not what your education is in. JORDYN: [laughs] No. CHAD: But how did you get into development? JORDYN: [laughs] I was in college. This was just such a lucky, random thing. But I was in college, and I was in a band, a rock band. And this was early '98, maybe even fall '97. We were just at practice one day, and someone in the band was like, "We need a website." And this was when this was like a new thing that people did. [laughs] And everyone in the room just turned and looked at me. And I was like, "Oh, I'm making the website? Okay." CHAD: Why? Were you a tech person in their mind? JORDYN: I don't know, I guess because I seemed scrappy and capable even then. I have no idea. But I was like, all right, I'll see what I can figure out. So I wandered into the computer lab and just went to the person running the computer lab and was like, "Hey, how do I make a website?" [laughs] And this guy whose name I don't remember which is horrible, I really wish I could reach out to this guy and be like, "Hey, I have a career because of you, thank you." CHAD: [laughs] JORDYN: He was like, "Oh, cool. Here's what you do." And he basically opened up Netscape and was like, "Hey, there's like a..." there was like an editor. I don't even remember what it was called now. If you recall, there was an editor in Netscape. He was like, "Here's the basics of this. And here's a website," which was the... [laughs] What was the name of this website? All of the articles on this website were titled something like, so you want to make a webpage? Or so you want to make an interactive image replacement? Or so you want to host a website on a server? Whatever, like, that was all the articles. And that website taught me how to code, and that guy put me on a path, and I just immediately was like, this is the most fun thing ever. I was like, I love this. [laughs] And it wasn't like two months before I had built the websites for a couple of departments on campus. My mom had a recruiting business at the time. She was like, "Can you make my recruiting business website?" It was just like, off to the races, which was great. But I graduated into the dot-com bust, which meant I could not get a job doing this. It's like entry-level folks always see a recession coming first, right? CHAD: Right. JORDYN: And everyone was like, "Oh my God, you can write HTML. You're going to get a six-figure job immediately," whatever. [laughs] And I was like, that is not what's happening here. I would have a job interview at someplace, and then they'd stop calling me. And I would find out that the company went under the day after I interviewed. That was what was happening. So I couldn't get a job, a professional job doing this for a while. But I kept doing it on the side basically for my friends and family and eventually managed to get back into some professional [laughs] aboveboard real roles doing this work, but it was a struggle at first. And it was only just because I just really loved doing it, which, again, to circle back to something we talked about before, was kind of a liability for me for a while. Liking coding makes you really unthoughtful about what you're coding because you're always happy to do it, right? [laughs] CHAD: Oh, I speak from personal experience, yes. [laughs] JORDYN: Yes, right. I just wasn't thinking, is this a good idea? I was thinking great, cool; I get to code more. I love this. That was fine early on because I did get a lot of experience. And the first real job I got doing this work was at a company that was building websites for musicians, and our main client was Warner Brothers music. And so I got to build the My Chemical Romance website. CHAD: Cool. JORDYN: I got to build madonna.com for the Confessions on the Dance Floor release and tour. CHAD: That's really cool. JORDYN: Like, it was really fun. And basically, I got to build a new website every two weeks for three years which was amazing bootcamp for me. The designers there were just fantastic. I learned more than I can ever even probably understand about doing that. But partly what I learned was [laughs] this feeling of this was where that feeling began where I was like, is this the right thing? Are we building the right thing? Or is this successful? That's when I started to ask those questions: is what we're doing what people want? So anyway, it was very fun. I got into it because I was in rock bands, which is strange. I don't think people typically find lucrative careers being in rock bands. [laughs] CHAD: I talk to a lot of people over the years through our apprenticeship program, through different things where there are people out there who connect with programming like you did and like I did. The difference is that, for whatever reason, I had that experience when I was 10. [laughs] And other people just never get the opportunity to be exposed to that until later. But it's remarkable when it happens, and you get that connection where it just connects with you at a level that almost nothing has before. It's like a constant dopamine hit when you're programming. JORDYN: Oh, it is. Yeah, I used to joke that, basically, I felt like I got to play video games for a living because that's what it felt like. It was just one puzzle game after another. It just didn't feel like work. I got to go to work every day and solve what felt like really interesting problems and puzzles. And at the end, there was a thing people used or could look at. It just felt like I'd hit pay dirt. I felt so lucky to have found it. But yeah, I haven't done this since the pandemic. But for several years before that, I was a Girls Who Code instructor, and being able to pay that experience forward and help middle school, high school-aged girls who hadn't necessarily had this experience yet find themselves in coding, that was really the mission me and my co-teacher had decided that was really what we were after. We didn't care if they walked away from doing this with any hard coding skills. What we wanted them to have in their minds was I can be a programmer, and that seems like fun or possible for me. That was all we wanted. And it was so amazing to see that moment where it clicked for them where they were like, "Oh, there's like a pattern here." And yeah, see that dopamine hit thing start to set up, you know, in their brains and know that it was only going to help them. I mean, I often said to them, "Major in whatever you want in college, but get a minor in computer science; that's where your job is. [laughter] Sorry to break this to you, but this is where your job is." [laughs] CHAD: Another thing that you've done is you've advised a lot of companies through a few different organizations: Underscore VC, the Harvard Innovation Lab. What makes a good advisor as opposed to a bad advisor? JORDYN: This is a really hard question, actually, because it's not often entirely clear in the moment whether a given advisor is...if you feel a lot of rapport with someone and they're helping you out in the moment, that's great. But often, one finds that something an advisor told you that did not land at all at the time comes back later to be something that's really useful. So I want to say up front that what makes a good advisor is really idiosyncratic to the founder, and to the advisor, and to the moment they find themselves together in. So with that as a big caveat, I think what I bring to this, what I go out of my way to bring to it, is that I've been in the trenches. I know what that feels like. And I trust founders, like, my job there is to just add some perspective. I've participated in building over 30 products, so I can help them. They might be doing their first product or business, and all I'm there to do is bring a bunch of other experience for them to pick some insights from. It's not actually my job, I don't think, to pre-filter that stuff for them. I'm very practical and hands-on. They bring a problem to me, and I'm like, "Okay, here's three times I've seen that situation before. And here are three things that happened." And I basically multiply their historical experience that they can draw from; that's sort of what I bring to this. There's another thing here when I've had valuable advisors, this thing that's kind of hard to articulate. But it's like, often early on, what you need is just someone to take you seriously, just really take you seriously as a founder and a leader. I go way out of my way to make it clear that I am doing that with them and that it is my assumption 100% that they will rise to that occasion, that they will figure out who they need to be, what resources they need to bring to bear in order to be successful. And doing that, taking them seriously and taking their ideas seriously, taking their experiences seriously, and really demonstrating that I think they have what it takes and I think that they can rise to this occasion, I think is probably the most valuable thing because most people don't do that. They come to your idea looking to tear it down, and I think it's well-meaning. They want to stress test you and your idea. That's all well and good. But, I mean, I'm often advising underrepresented founders and what they need is confidence. They need to be built up, not torn down. That doesn't mean I don't bring skepticism and help them try to think evermore clearly about what it is they're doing and why; I definitely do that. But there's this baseline of I think you are capable of doing this. I think you are a person who gets to do this; that is not in question for me. And that alone I think is probably the most valuable thing you can get from an advisor, [laughs] is just someone to take you seriously. CHAD: That's great. So for folks who have been familiar with thoughtbot for a while, we have a lot of advice out there in the world for how to build products, how to validate things, exercises to run, all that kind of stuff. And we bundle all of that up in what we call our playbook. And now, as we're sort of almost 20 years into this now, that's a big resource. And so we're doing something new, which is extracting the information that we have specifically targeted towards those earliest stages of a new product or a business into a separate playbook. You're taking your wisdom, and you're going to be able to add it to that as well. And it's going to be a little bit more targeted. So we've just launched that. And you can find it at thoughtbot.com/research-strategy-playbook. I would encourage folks to check that out. Jordyn, when it comes to sharing, we're big at that at thoughtbot, and I'm excited to have you as part of that. Is there something that you think our approach from the fact that we're a consulting company or an agency makes it either in good ways or bad ways different than joining a product company and what you might do in a new role, or in sharing, or in working on things that we work on? JORDYN: Yeah. I mean, I'm sure I'll have more to say about this when I've been here for a year. Having been here for a month, [laughter] this answer might be suspect. So far, anyway, the way I think about the differences here is that our role in working with product companies is to help them build the muscles to do this work, not to do it for them because they need to be able to do it going forward. We're not going to embed with them for the rest of time. So that's a big difference, and that's both good and bad in the sense that we can maintain a certain amount of perspective because we can bring a kind of insider-outsider, like, we've done this lots and lots of times. We've seen the myriad ways that can go. And so we can bring that experience to bear while also remaining somewhat, I mean, objective is maybe a problematic word here, but some flavor of that while remaining outside of the everyday operational reality of the business. So that can be a really helpful perspective. But I think the sort of risk there that I see is not being able to fully appreciate...that's the wrong word, but it's like, maybe not having the credibility we could have because we aren't going to be around to see this thing through. There's really, especially at early stages with projects, you really need people who are in it to win it, in it for the long haul. And so, I can see this looking like a tough sell for certain founders. But from what I know so far, what I know about myself, what I know about thoughtbot so far is that that couldn't be further from the truth for us. We really are invested in folks' long-term success. And we do want to leverage our ability to focus and stand slightly outside of day-to-day operations to help them gain that perspective. But that is really the give and take, I think, of being a consultant rather than being part of the company. CHAD: Now, it does make us...there are companies out there that that's not the goal, the goal is to make you dependent on them. JORDYN: Yes, right. [laughs] CHAD: That definitely is one of the unique things about thoughtbot is that that is not our goal. Our goal is to teach people to do what we do. But we do sometimes get criticized for, in those early stages, exactly that. It's like, where's your sense of urgency or your passion about this? And actually, we do have it. It's just the analogy I often use is we're like a professional sports team. [laughs] We make it look easy because we're really good at it. And a lot of environments are ones where in order to make things happen, you need to create an environment of stress or those kinds of things. And that's what people are used to. And so when they start working with us, and they don't see that, they think something is wrong. JORDYN: Yes, yes. 100%. And that is a huge cultural challenge with working with startups in general, where there is a real fire-fighting mentality. Like, let's get in there and make some stuff happen. Things are shifting constantly, and you've got to react. And I'm working 80-hour weeks to just make sure everything gets done. And I would hope..., and I've seen this to a certain extent in my month here so far, but the goal is for us to help folks work smarter, not harder, in the sense that more output does not mean more success. We do have the experience of having worked on so many products, each of us individually and then collectively as a company. It is our goal, and it is my personal sincere hope that we can help these companies see how to do this work better and more sustainably without burning yourself out. If you happen to be successful while focused on this kind of work more output, it's only by chance you were successful there. It wasn't because you worked that hard. [laughs] And it's hard to see. There is a lot of like hustle culture stuff out there that makes you feel like unless you are burning your candle at both ends, you're not doing it right. I think thoughtbot has the depth of experience to say," No, we can say otherwise," and to help companies figure out how to do that. I can absolutely see what you mean that people are like; these people don't have the fire in their belly, which couldn't be further from the truth. But it does feel very different from the inside. CHAD: I feel like I could talk to you all day, [laughs] but we have to keep the episode somewhat within our normal constraints. Jordyn, thank you so much. If folks want to follow along with you or get in touch with you, where are the best places for them to do that? JORDYN: So I am @skybondsor S-K-Y-B-O-N-D-S-O-R pretty much everywhere that you might want to... [laughter] A friend of mine gave me that nickname years ago. That's my handle pretty much everywhere. I spend a lot of time on Twitter, so that's probably the best place if you want to follow me or interact with me. But I'm also on LinkedIn and a lot of other places. CHAD: And you can subscribe to the show, find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter at, not as an exciting username as @skybondsor, but @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and we'll see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot; thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Jordyn Bonds.
Heather Maio-Smith is the Co-Founder, President, and Chief Visionary Officer at StoryFile, bringing global audiences an interactive ecosystem that records and preserves human conversations in a way that removes the traditional boundaries of time and space. Victoria talks to Heather about why this product needed to exist in the world, supporting human connection and storytelling, and the journey to get funding, expand, and plan what's next for StoryFile. StoryFile (https://storyfile.com/) Follow StoryFile on Twitter (https://twitter.com/storyfile), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/storyfile/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/StoryFileApp), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/storyfile/), or TikTok (https://www.tiktok.com/@storyfile). Follow Heather on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/heather-maio-smith/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is The Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Heather Maio-Smith, Co-Founder, President, and Chief Visionary Officer at StoryFile, bringing global audiences an interactive ecosystem that records and preserves human conversations in a way that removes the traditional boundaries of time and space. Heather, thank you for joining us. HEATHER: Thank you for having me, Victoria. I'm excited to have a conversation with you. VICTORIA: Yes, I am really excited to learn about StoryFile and your product Conversa. Tell me a little bit about it. HEATHER: You did a great job on the introduction; thank you. The one thing that I would add is that it's very important that people know that this is video. And this is the differentiator between us and maybe a traditional chatbot, for example. We are video-based. That could mean an actual human being creates the content. The video content is always preferable. [laughs] But you can also do it in some sneaky other ways too [laughs], so it's very interesting. VICTORIA: Right. So as I understand it, and correct me if I'm wrong, you can record a video of a conversation and then use Conversa to turn that into an interactive video where a user has the freedom to ask their own questions. HEATHER: Correct. Essentially, what you do is you answer whatever questions that you like. You're in charge of the storyline script. You create all the questions. The interviewee answers all of the questions via video record, and then all of those video clips are put into a database. Anyone can ask you basically any conversation. Most of them are open-ended conversations. If there are shorter, like, let's say you've only [inaudible 02:03] questions, and it's kind of a focus, you have a point, and it's a focused line of questioning, then that's obviously going to be you can't ask anything. But we usually have the individual introduce it and say, "For example, this is my bio. I've answered a few questions about my life and my career and me personally, so feel free to ask me anything about my career or my life." Then the individuals will know what the parameters are for that conversation. And you could just ask anything, learn anything anytime you want. So it's in real-time for you. No going on Google and searching through 20 pages to get an answer anymore. You should be able to talk the ideas. You should be able to talk to someone who's lived that experience or has that knowledge, ask them a question, and find out the information that you want to find out, or get to know somebody that you would never have the opportunity to talk to. VICTORIA: What an interesting idea. And what led you to think that this was a product that needed to exist in the world? HEATHER: Well, they say that necessity is the mother of invention. I happened to be in Holocaust education back in the early 2000s. And one of the main things that the entire field was concerned about is what are we going to do when the Holocaust survivors are no longer alive? They had spent over 60 years in the public telling their story, talking to students, for example the public. They've done documentaries; they've done books; they've done interviews. The Shoah Foundation at USC has 55,000 narrative interviews. So it's very well-documented. But the one thing that we weren't able to replicate yet, and this is what we were worried about, was they couldn't make that personal connection. And how do they make that personal connection? It's through people asking their own questions and actually engaging with those individuals that that's when the real magic happened. I mean, that's when people felt connected to these individuals and that story, that history. That was what I didn't want to lose after they had passed away. And so I thought to myself, there's got to be a way to replicate the Q&A, you know, the question and answer conversation where I can ask my own question, which leads me to learn deeper than if I was passively watching a video or even listening to a lecture. So I went to the Shoah Foundation, and I said, "There's got to be a way to do this." They said after many conversations, "Okay. You might not be crazy. [laughs] or as crazy as we thought you were at the beginning. But we still don't know how you're going to do it. So go away and figure out how you're going to do it, and then come back to us when you've figured it out." That was my challenge. And luckily, I found an amazing team to help us all figure out how to do it. And we got to the part where we had to take these individuals, like, the video recordings, and we had to have people actually ask them questions and have these conversations so that we could populate the database for a more accurate conversation. And so I was in the public for a couple of years all over the world. And the one question I kept getting the most was, "This is amazing. Can I do this myself? And can I do this with my parents? Can I do this with my grandparents? Can I do this with the founder of our company?" And people came to me, and they had so many ideas. "This would be great for this. Oh my gosh, could you imagine doing this?" And after a while, you say to yourself, okay, what would it look like if we did this for everyone? What would it look like if we made it ubiquitous, allow everybody to replace their FAQs? Every leader in this country, every CEO, every influencer, or any individual who's got something to say that we can all learn from, which, by the way, is pretty much everyone on the planet. They can tell their story, and they can talk about their experiences, and we can learn from that. Even saving time on interviewing future candidates in person. You narrow it down to 10 people. You have them do StoryFiles. You actually engage with their StoryFile, and then you just choose two that you want to meet in person, possibly saving you hours and hours of time. It's just about asking questions and getting an answer in the moment when you need it, not waiting for an email, not going through 20 pages of Google. And it's also about connecting with a real person instead of these chatbots that everybody's trying to move away from. And I think they're trying to move towards avatars because they're more visual, but it's still not a human being. So it's still kind of an automated voice, and they're not real. And there's no emotion, and you don't have any body language. So what if you could just ask a person? You probably get asked some of the same questions. And in the next 2 minutes, you could probably think of 10 questions that you get asked almost daily. So what if you did a StoryFile? You answered all those ten questions and maybe more, and then you never had to have that conversation again. Think of all the time that those people now, if they get in front of you, they don't have to waste time asking any of those typical, basic questions. They can just get right into a deeper conversation with you. VICTORIA: I love it. Yeah, I'm already thinking in the back of my mind, like, oh, I could use these for what if you're trying to show what it's like to work at thoughtbot? And you just want to ask someone at thoughtbot a question, and you could play with StoryFile. Yeah, I think it's enormously useful. And I love the story starts with a hugely impactful mission of capturing those stories. And I wonder how that experience of the importance of storytelling has had on your ability to get funding and get this project through as a founder. HEATHER: It's been a journey. [laughter] First of all, let me say that I think it has been slightly more complex than most startups because, from the onset or the get-go, or whatever you want to call it, this technology has been meant for consumers and businesses alike. So you've got a B2C play, and you've got a B2B play, which is very complicated for investors to understand maybe and really get the vision in its totality. So it's been a struggle to communicate it in a way that people really understand this can be done. You're creating a whole new medium. This is not an I'm creating a new rocking chair type of thing that's better than the other chair that you had. I'm creating a chair. It's a new kind of chair. And you have to take these people on a journey to understanding how much better their lives can be and how much time they can save if they just invest a little bit of time, which they kind of have to do anyway. I mean, look at it, you spend so much time writing FAQs for a website and finding all the answers, and then putting them all together and putting them in the website. You could spend the same amount of time actually getting all those questions, recording yourself answering them. In fact, it probably would take less time. Record the answer, and then, bam, you have it. Everybody can actually talk to you, ask you those questions, and you can guide them. And they get the benefit of actually feeling as though they've talked to a human being. They've connected with you emotionally, and everyone's better off for it. The investors have been...they either absolutely get behind you 100% and love what you're doing and want to be on the journey with you, or they are a bit we'll wait and see. There hasn't been one investor, though, that has said, "You're not onto something. I don't believe in what you're doing, and your idea is not going to work," not one. So we know it has legs. And we just have to build the body and get it from the walking stage, walk to run. VICTORIA: Right. And I see you have quite an impressive client list already. And you recently won an award for best software as a service product for education and nonprofits in the learning and CSR category, so that's impressive. And I want to hear more about how that process has been scaling from you had one initial customer who was the Holocaust Museum, and now you've expanded, and what kind of lessons you might have about that experience, getting to the walking stage, and what you have planned coming ahead. HEATHER: I don't know if I have much advice, actually. [laughter] I could probably use more advice than I can give. Every day, you know, you take it one day at a time, and you move forward. We haven't forgotten where we started, which was in enabling audiences through museums and public spaces to enable them to have these conversations with people that they would not normally get to talk to. There's this studio professional services side of this as well. Then you have, all right, we had to have a back end. We had to have a platform in order to run our business. What if we made that platform available to other companies? Okay, what does that mean? And how does one build that? Then is it built intuitively and easily enough for people to actually do what they want to do with it, which is create these interactive conversational video AI modules (We call them StoryFiles.) for a variety of different cases? I mean, think about every kid can talk to one of the best teachers in the world and learn from them. Every possible person that wants to go on a date could actually talk to potential people. And those people don't even know that they're having these first-date conversations with them, so it saves you that first meeting, that awkward first date. But it also allows you to make a better choice for that first date or, like I said, screening or even onboarding and corporate training. All those manuals that people have written everything and all the information that's in there, nobody wants to go to a manual and look up an answer. No, you're going to go to someone that you think knows the answer, and you're going to ask them. So why not just pull out your phone and do that on your phone, you know? Like, Walmart has this amazing thing that they call financial mentor. They did StoryFiles for new store managers. It's all around answering those questions that you would get as a new manager that you would have running the day-to-day of a Walmart store. So they can literally pull out their phone. They've got their own Walmart learning management system on the phone, and they can talk to a financial mentor and ask them questions. So, what do I do if I have a register that's this? Or I forgot what the form is that you use for this. Or what do I do if my endcaps aren't really churning enough buzz and businesses I think it should be? All those questions that you're going to ask in the first couple of years of taking on a new position. So it's basically anywhere that you have questions and people normally give you answers, you can do a StoryFile. VICTORIA: Yeah, it sounds like a real change to the way people do business and how you can automate some of those conversations and provide a more human touch too. HEATHER: Yeah, it's all about that human touch, isn't it? The one reason I think that people now, you know, for the last three years, everybody's been obsessed with these avatar chatbots, but they're not really solving the problem. The problem is the chatbots don't seem real. You don't feel as if you're having a conversation with an actual person, and that's what frustrates you the most because they don't understand. They don't seem like they're being empathetic. They don't seem like you're relatable. And there's also the uncanny valley, and then the automated voices, and the cadence, and all of that. So this solves all that. VICTORIA: 80% of communication is non-verbal, right? HEATHER: Yeah, yeah, exactly, exactly, but nobody really thinks about that. [laughter] We do digital recreations; notice I'm not calling it an avatar because we do an authentic version of an individual. And most of the time, 99% of the time, the person's not alive anymore. But we work with the archives; we work with the foundations; we work with the families. Nothing that we have that digital recreation say is anything that we've made up. It's always based on what they've actually said and the way that they've said it. So we review, like, we did one digital recreation that we reviewed over 1,700 hours of video. The key thing was getting an actor that physically looked like the individual, and it has to be a method actor. The method actor also reviews some of those videos and really gets a sense of who that individual was. Then they form the basis for the digital recreation for the body language, for the facial expressions, for the cadence of the voice. And then, you do the face mapping and other special effects that you might have to do to the body. Then you do the voice cloning so that you get the person's actual voice. So it's a really detailed process. And what you end up with is probably the most authentic version of an individual that can be created. MID-ROLL AD: Are you an entrepreneur or start-up founder looking to gain confidence in the way forward for your idea? At thoughtbot, we know you’re tight on time and investment, which is why we’ve created targeted 1-hour remote workshops to help you develop a concrete plan for your product’s next steps. Over four interactive sessions, we work with you on research, product design sprint, critical path, and presentation prep so that you and your team are better equipped with the skills and knowledge for success. Find out how we can help you move the needle at: tbot.io/entrepreneurs. VICTORIA: You mentioned avatars. But that process also sounds different than what I've heard about deepfakes as well. Do you want to -- HEATHER: Yeah. Well, our digital recreations are based on more authentic...they're probably as authentic as you can get to the actual individual. It's not based on, you know, avatars still; even if you do one that's based on 10 minutes of video of yourself, you will still have the uncanny valley. You will still have the broken cadence. You'll still have an automated voice where it sounds automated. They are getting better, and they'll continue to get better. But there's no avatar that you can honestly tell me is going to accurately convey emotion and those non-verbal cues. They can't do it. A computer cannot intuit it. You have to have the individual. You have to have something based from the actual person in order to get the most accurate you can get. An avatar who you're basically treating as a visual chatbot you're just typing in the answers. So there's no emotional connection. There's no body language or cadence that you can connect with in that. VICTORIA: That makes sense. And I can clearly see the...we've talked about the business use cases a little bit. But on the individual consumer side, I'm thinking about making a StoryFile of my grandpa from Pasadena and the value what that would be like to have that family member have a realistic portrayal of them for future generations to interact with. HEATHER: It's priceless. And he's still alive, right? VICTORIA: Yeah. HEATHER: So it's not a realistic portrait. It is him. You could do a StoryFile life. You'd go to StoryFile life. You'd pick out all the questions you wanted to ask him, add your own questions. Every family has got those five stories that individuals always tell at the dinner table during Thanksgiving or something. So you want to make sure you capture all of those. Let's say that he responds to a question that you've asked. And the beauty of it, by the way, is these are questions that you probably would not normally ask somebody in daily conversation. So you really get a sense of who they are from day one, you know, from their childhood all the way through their life today. If they say something that you're like, wait a minute, stop, [laughs] you've got to explain that, you can add a question, add a follow-up question and just say, "Can you tell me more about that?" or "Explain yourself. Like, how did you come to that? How did you make that decision? What went into this move and this shift?" or whatever you want to know more about. "Or how did that affect your family?" you know, so many questions. So it allows you to ask all of those questions. You record your grandfather, which, by the way, is an amazing experience for you; forget him, [laughter], but it's an amazing experience for you. And I guarantee you; you will learn something. To date, I have not had one family say that they haven't learned something or heard a story that they never heard before. So it's a really interesting process. And you feel bonded to that individual after you're done talking and doing this interview in a way that you didn't before. Then you have that recording of this individual that your grandchildren, your great-grandchildren will be able to get a sense of who this individual was, and what their life was like, and who they were to you even. That's priceless to be able to give, you know, we hang on, you go into ancestry.com; you pull up a ship's manifest. And you see your relative's signature. Okay, fine. But what do you really know about that person? Nothing. You know they came over on a ship. [laughs] And you see maybe how their signature looked, but that doesn't really tell you anything. So we want to change all that. We want to flip it all out. We want you to know all of your ancestors. We want your kids to know everybody and learn from them. VICTORIA: I love that. And it's an interesting intersection of this very core human emotion to AI technology or this leading-edge technology. And I wonder, what has surprised you in the technology building side about what ways it easily supports making this human connection and other ways where it's still a challenge to make everything connect? HEATHER: I would have loved to have gotten at least three PhDs [laughs], and then I can think over the last 12 years. Okay, so I started this in 2009. So you got to remember there was no Skype, really. I mean, Skype came into its own...it existed in 2008, but it didn't really come into its own until 2012. Speech recognition wasn't really a thing. We knew it was going to happen, but it wasn't there yet. That was one of the big things that people had to really take a leap of faith with me that we could even get this to work. We didn't know if it would do what we thought it would do. And we were doing this completely...it was a passion play. It was; let's see if we can do this type of thing. We actually did. It did fulfill what I envisioned it being and doing. It did finally fulfill, and I realized that in 2016, so it took that long. And in order to make it ubiquitous for everyone, and you know this because you build software, and you help people with products: to do something for the general public and to make it ubiquitous, and make it scalable, that's a whole nother ballgame. We're taking a process that was incredibly manual...everyone says, "Oh, AI is going to take over the world." No, it's not. No, it's not. It's not even close. It's still so manual. It's based on data. And whatever you manually put in is what you get out. In order to take that and make it automated in whatever ways you can and then keep dreaming about a day where, for example, the follow-up questions that I talked to you about. One day on our roadmap, God willing, next year, you will be able to get that follow-up question actually suggested to you because the computer will know what that individual has said. And the computer will figure out here's a question that you might want to ask, which has never been done before. And there are several things that we have on our roadmap that haven't been done before, but we've been in this zone where you know, other companies have tried. One of our advisors was president of Google Americas. And when she came on board with us, she said, "Google tried to do something similar to this in the early 2000s." But it was just a little too early, and they couldn't figure it out. So they scrapped the whole thing. And with software, timing has a lot to do with it. Your expectations and what you think you can do and when you can do it have to be constantly monitored and constantly re-evaluated. And do the best you can with what is technically available at the moment, and then plan to see how you might make that evolve or improve that or add to that. For example, the field of natural language processing it's at one stage right now, but we have things that we want to do with it and advances that we'd like to see happen. And we're going to have to make those happen if we want to see those happen. VICTORIA: You had both the timing and the need and just enough technology progression to make something happen when you did, and you were able to grow it. It sounds like your family is also involved in helping you along the journey. And I was curious to hear about how that has been for you and -- HEATHER: Okay, so it's not really fair because I grew up in a family-owned business. I'm totally used to it. Everybody asked me, "What's it like working with your husband, and what's it like?" You know, along this journey, we've had various family members working for us, and honestly, that's mostly been a necessity. They happened to be the most skilled and the most talented people to do the job at the moment that I had access to. They got it, you know, it's sort of like the game, okay, tag, you're it. [laughs] Some of them have gone on to do other things; one started her own app called Camber. The other started a PR agency and is doing very well. The other went on to do structural engineering, and the other one is still working for us. And Stephen's my husband's oldest, and I have told her many times even though she does want to go to law school at some point, I said, "No, I'm never letting you leave. [laughter] You're never leaving me." Yeah, it's kind of not fair because we happen to have the ideal situation where Stephen and I are both passionate and have a very clear vision of what we want to do and how to get there, which I think you do need. We respect each other tremendously. I'm in awe of him almost every day. I can see where in a lot of families, it would be problematic but somehow not for us. It worked really well. With investors, it is kind of tricky because you don't want to seem like you're a mom-and-pop shop, either. That's definitely not what we are. We're very focused, and we're very intentional. To some investors, it might seem like we're all over the place because of the B2C and the B2B thing, but it's really not. We explained to them that we're actually building one thing, and that's conversational video. That's what we're doing. It's a big vision, that's all, and it's a massive market. VICTORIA: Yeah, I believe it. I mean, having people in your corner who believe in your vision and you have respect for working for each other, whether they're your blood family or your chosen family, that's what really you need to be successful. And I think it's a common theme we see across people who are able to create these products is that they have a team around them. [laughs] It's never just one person. HEATHER: Yeah, no, it's never just one person. And I've been really, really fortunate. You talk about family that you've chosen. I've been really fortunate to have a lot of the team members who were on this journey with me back in 2010. So that's how far we all go with this and trying to evolve this technology and build this medium and this way of communicating. We're in it. We're all in it for better or worse. VICTORIA: Yeah, I agree. And I assume that that amount of loyalty from your team over that long time is a pro point for investors as well. And I'm curious, so if you could record a StoryFile for yourself now to send back in time to when you were first starting this up, I wonder what questions you would ask yourself [laughs] to be able to give you the advice you needed when you were just starting. HEATHER: To give me advice now? VICTORIA: If you were going to create a StoryFile for when you were starting out if you could be able to ask yourself questions from the future. [laughs] HEATHER: I think it would probably be very interesting to see where I was at, and what I was thinking, what we were dealing with at the time because I think it's some of the things you forget, you know, how you were feeling. We did a lot of video recording back in the early days, especially around different milestones and then different lows and highs. But if I could give myself some advice now, knowing what I know now, it would be your typical don't give up. There are days when you feel like that's it; I can't go any longer. It's not sustainable. You just don't know how it's going to turn out. And you have customers that you're really, really...we're very customer-oriented, so we work really closely with them to make them successful. And there have been times when what they've wanted to do hasn't been something that we were able to achieve entirely. So I would say just keep your head down, keep doing the work every day. Keep moving forward, and just believe in how you're ultimately going to change the world with this. So I think that I believed that 100% ten years ago as well. [laughs] I probably would have said the same thing, actually. There was a woman that had told me she wanted to do a StoryFile with her 10-year-old. And then she wanted to do the same script every five years, but especially do the same thing right before they go to college and then when they come back when they've finished college and do the same interview. I said, "It's a brilliant idea, but why specifically before they go to college and when they get back?" She says, "I want them to see how much they've changed." That makes me cry every time. It's so true. I don't know if you have kids; between Stephen and I, we have five, and they're all 20 to 31. And that time in their lives, from 17 to 22 to 24, you change so radically. I mean, it's almost like you go back, and it's almost like you've got a one-year-old to see how much they changed by the time they're six. It's that radical. I thought that was just a beautiful thing on her part to think of, you know, think of doing. VICTORIA: Yeah, that sounds great. I don't have any kids myself. I do have a two-year-old and a one-year-old niece and nephew. Maybe we'll create one for them when they get a little bit older. HEATHER: Well, then you have to do...is your grandfather their great-grandfather? VICTORIA: No, he's my husband's grandpa, actually. HEATHER: Because when you do your grandfather, then they'll get to know them. You know, there's something about our identity, and it's made up of our parents, you know, our lives, our influences on our lives, and everybody that lived before us. So our point is, why not get to know those people the best way you can? And is that by reading their story? Is it listening to a voicemail that they left you before they passed away in order to get a sense of who they are? Or is it a video of them on a vacation, you know, a video clip? Or is it a story? Or would you want a StoryFile where you can actually have a conversation? You can feel as if you're sitting down at a kitchen table, talking and asking them questions about their life. We want you to do it with everybody, [laughs] even your boss. [laughter] VICTORIA: Right? I think it's a hugely powerful way to connect with people. And if I can get my grandpa to stop watching tennis for long enough to do it, I'll do it. [laughs] HEATHER: I definitely guarantee you can do that. [laughs] VICTORIA: Right? I think we can. I think we can do it. I think you'll enjoy it as much as I will. So I really appreciate you sharing this capability with us. And is there a way you want to shout out how people can connect with the tool? HEATHER: Go to storyfile.com. If it's for your family, for you personally, go to StoryFile Life from that website. And if you're a business, you can go to Conversa also from that website and ask for a free demo. VICTORIA: Excellent. And is there anything you want to give as a final takeaway to our listeners today? HEATHER: It's easy to do. And it's always better to personally connect with someone if you can. Give them the opportunity to really see you, and listen to you, and hear you, the real you. And it doesn't take a lot of time. Everyone has a story to tell or knowledge to impart, experiences to talk about. There's no one on the planet that doesn't, honestly. But you probably doing these podcasts every one you talk to you learn from. It's sharing our knowledge. It's sharing humanity's experiences and knowledge so that we absorb that and we have that. It influences us, hopefully, in a good way. VICTORIA: I think that's beautiful. Thank you so much for sharing with us and being with us here today. HEATHER: Thank you for having me. Keep up the great work, you guys. VICTORIA: Oh, thank you. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Heather Maio-Smith.
Will Larry, Software Developer at thoughtbot, joins Giant Robots as host! 🎉 Will talks about how he got into tech, how everything is going so far at thoughtbot, interviewing at thoughtbot previously, but not getting the job, and why he decided to interview again (and snagged the job!) Follow Will on Twitter (https://twitter.com/will23larry) and LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/william-larry/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. VICTORIA: I'm your other host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is our brand new third co-host, Will Larry. Will is a React and React Native developer at thoughtbot. And we're so excited to have him join us as a co-host of the show. CHAD: Will, thank you so much for joining us. Congratulations and welcome. Woo-hoo. [applause] WILL: Thank you for having me. I'm excited. CHAD: Will, I was so excited when I put out the call for people to join as co-hosts, and Victoria raised her hand, and then you did as well. You were on parental leave when all that started to happen. And so congratulations again on your new family member, and I'm glad we could finally have you join us. WILL: Yeah, I was excited about it. When I thought about joining, there are two things that came about: the excitement of joining and just the fear of it. CHAD: [laughs] WILL: And I was like, I need to do this. I need to do this because it will make me better. So I'm excited to be here. VICTORIA: That's a lot of change to navigate in one year, Will. [laughs] How's that got going for you, and how's everything so far in your first time here at thoughtbot? WILL: Yes, change, change, change, that's what has been this year. I changed and started working at thoughtbot, our third kid. This year, we moved to Florida, just a lot of change. But I've learned along the way that change is life, and so we just embraced it. And I'm hoping that we're kind of settling out a little bit, but it's been good. It's been great for our kids. I think they're ready for some consistency and just the same thing over and over for a little bit. But it's been good. And we made it through. We're on the other side. CHAD: Was there a grand plan to all the change? Like, did you have everything planned out in advance? Or did it all sort of just happen one thing after the other? WILL: Yes. If you know anything about me, I'm a very big planner. My wife, my spouse she is the one that pushes me to be more spontaneous, but this was too big to be spontaneous, so it was definitely planned. It actually got changed. We were supposed to move in September, but with the birth of my son, we decided to move it up and move sooner. VICTORIA: Right. I'm going to ask you the same question but about your career. So you made a big change from operations into mobile development, and was that part of a grand plan, or did you happen upon it? How did you make that change? WILL: That change was kind of out of desperation. I was in operations working for a nonprofit; I loved it. My spouse was working at the same company, and I was a promotion ahead of her. It was an amazing opportunity. But the teams are so small that we couldn't be on the same team. So they had multiple locations throughout the country. And you don't have to step off the team, but if she's going to take this promotion, you have to step off the team. There potentially is a way that, down the road, you can come back. And Katie is my spouse. She has been so supportive of everything that I've ever done. And I just felt this was a time, a great time for me to show that I support her in everything she did. But it was probably one of the toughest times in my life. I didn't have a job. I thought that I can easily jump back into it and find a job. I ended up working at a clothing store, which is not my strong suit. I really struggled working there. I think I worked there a month, and I was like, I can't do this. And then, I went to work at a different company, a travel insurance company, and so I would process the data. I was miserable, and that's an understatement. I was so miserable. One day my spouse came in, and she said, "Hey, we got to change this. You're not doing well. Let's dream a little bit." And normally, that's not my personality. Normally I'm like Xs and Os. I know what's coming. And I was so out of it. I was like, let's do this. And she asked me a couple of questions. And one of the questions was, "If you could do anything, what would you do?" I thought about it. And I came from a small town in Louisiana. And I never had the opportunity to work with computers. It was just the resources weren't there. And so that was one of the things I said, "Hey, I want to work with computers in any way that I can." She was like, "Go figure it out, whatever it takes." And then I told her I was like, "It's going to cost some money for me to do this," because I went to bootcamp. And she was like, "Go do it. Let's invest in you. Let's make this happen." I ended up going through the bootcamp and came out on the other side. Interesting story; it's interesting how things come back around. My first interview was at thoughtbot. I bombed it. [laughter] I wasn't on thoughtbot's team at that point. But the way that it was handled, I got a glimpse of the culture. I remember walking out that day and saying I'll be back. I will be back to be a part of this company because I bombed it. But they still spent time with me explaining things, teaching me the things that I bombed. And so I was like, wow, that's what I want to do in this field. So yeah, that's how I got into development. Here I am. CHAD: Was there anything that surprised you about development, about the tech world? WILL: Yes, yes. I think the biggest thing was the growth in development. So in any of my other jobs, I was able to take in expectations and make a plan and, like, okay, check off. I can knock that out and be successful. And I tried that in development, and every one of my bosses would say, "Slow down. It takes time. It takes time." And I just didn't realize how long it would take for me to grow in my coding skills. That was the biggest surprise for me because I just couldn't come through, and okay, I got it, let's go. Because I'm very big on I know my expectations, okay, I can meet those expectations, and then I'll go over and beyond. But I couldn't do that in this field. And I think that was the biggest surprise for me that I couldn't just show up at work and do my task and still be a great developer. VICTORIA: Right. And I love that you're sharing that story. Because with the people I've worked with at Women Who Code, it's a very common struggle when you're starting out in your first time as a developer and getting comfortable with being not great for the first six months or a year, or however long it takes. And I think that it's important to share that and make sure that other people feel the same way. And you might feel that way for a long time and maybe forever [laughs] if you keep switching up your roles in tech. WILL: Yeah, definitely. And it was a very humbling experience also because, in most of my other jobs, I was the leader. I was the person that had direct reports and leading people. But in this job, I started at the very bottom. I remember there were days when I couldn't even get through my tasks and had to really lean on others to help me through it. You know, my senior developer, I was like, "Hey, it's that time. I got some questions for you." And so, I had to learn how does Will learn and what's the best way for me to excel in this field? The things that I've done before, I couldn't do it going forward. CHAD: Bootcamps are pretty popular. And they are an avenue that certainly didn't exist when I was learning. You said when you were having the conversation with your wife that it sounds like that was just right there as the path forward. But did you consider an alternative path? WILL: Yeah. So at that time, I felt like there were probably three paths: there was the bootcamp, there was the college degree, and there was the self-learning path. So the college degree, I thought about it because, at that time, I felt like a lot of companies were still like, hey, you have to have a degree to be hired and be a part of it. So whenever I thought about going back, I didn't know if it was going to cut me off from other jobs, so that was one of the reasons why I really decided, or I really thought about going the degree route. And I decided against it because I did a lot of research, and there were companies at that time that were like, you don't need a college degree because I already had a college degree in sports medicine. And so most of them were like, you just have to have a degree. And I was like, okay, I don't think I'm going to be stuck in this position because I didn't have a computer science degree. The other way was self-taught. I didn't think that I could put in the time and the work. One thing I learned very, very early on is there were a lot of things that I just didn't know about the field. I didn't know HTML. I didn't know CSS. I didn't know how to get a server started. I didn't know anything. If I knew anything about computers, it was more about the hardware side of it and nothing about the software side. So I knew very quickly that the self-learning aspect wouldn't work for me, and so that's kind of why I decided to go the bootcamp route. I asked a lot of mentors, "Hey, what's the best way?" And they're like, "Bootcamp." And they're like, "Go to the one that teaches you the most." And so, at that time, the bootcamp I went to was two years long, but I was able to probably eight months in get a job in tech. And then, I completed it while going to work at that tech company. VICTORIA: Oh, that's great. CHAD: I mean, this might be a little bit of a hot take, but I'm going to say it anyway, which is I think that if you don't know how to code at all, or very little university programs, computer science programs aren't really set up to teach you that in a great way. It's more likely that someone with that level of experience will really struggle going into a computer science program not really having coded before. Bootcamps are much more conducive to learning from scratch along with other people. It's not even necessarily about the programs, but going into a CS degree, so many people already do know how to program. And so it's really hard for them to make a well-balanced program that works for everybody. WILL: I totally agree with that. VICTORIA: I could see it. It's both ways. The way I've always heard it explained is a computer science degree will teach you a lot about the underlying principles that you might wish you knew later after you have finished your bootcamp. But a bootcamp will prepare you for on-the-job performance like day one, more likely to just give you the full breadth. I mean, I've taken computer science 101 at University of Maryland, and I learned HTML, CSS, how to get a basic website up, some simple things that can get you up to speed. I think you could start from scratch and go that route. But it's hard to keep it up to speed with current technology trends in a college atmosphere. And so I think you'll see a lot of partnerships with universities now. And obviously, bootcamps were created to address that gap. You got a job while you were still in bootcamp, and I'm curious how that went for you, that job search. That's a huge hurdle to just getting from the bootcamp to the first job; if you have any advice for people who are in a similar situation right now. WILL: Yes, it was very challenging at the time. I think I applied to over 400 positions. My biggest thing that I would say is stay the course, hang in there. Keep going. There are a lot of down days that I was like, am I supposed to be in this field? Am I supposed to be here? The other thing that I learned very quickly was resources. Who did I know in the tech field? Who could I reach out to help me with it? Because that was another thing that I learned. I thought whenever I first took my junior dev job that I would come in and be able to really implement tickets and items. And I quickly realized that they hired me because of my character and who I was going to be long-term and that I can offer very little at that moment of, hey, coming in, and doing a ticket, and really shipping a feature I cannot do that as a junior dev. But hopefully, in six months or two, three months, however long their time period was that I could ship a portion of a feature. VICTORIA: Right. And that's always been...for me, someone hiring for technical roles and the entry-level point, sometimes I would prefer someone who has professional experience. Especially working in consulting, you have the ability to communicate your ideas well and work with clients, but you're still learning the technology side of it. That's a lot less than hiring a new college graduate who hasn't ever worked before [laughs] but may have a computer science degree. It's a totally different value that you're bringing to the role, I think. CHAD: And that persistence really pays off. Just to make sure that timeline is clear, I think you interviewed with us for the first time five years ago or so, so I really appreciate you sticking with it and eventually coming back to us. That makes me super, super happy. WILL: Yeah, and one thing that I learned along the way is there are different companies out there, and depending on your purpose and your goal, there are great fits depending on what your goal is. And my goal in my career was to learn and to be with a great company that had a great culture. And I felt like thoughtbot was a good fit for me with that because I want to enjoy the people that I work with. I want to get to know them. I want to help them be a mentor, be a mentee, and thoughtbot was a good fit with that. That was one of the reasons why I put it on my list of hey, whenever that opportunity comes back, apply, apply, apply back to them. CHAD: You originally interviewed with us as a Rails developer for a Rails development position. But along the way, you joined us as a React and React Native developer. So tell us a little bit about that journey along the way. WILL: Yeah, so I did as a Rails developer, and I quickly realized that at that point in my career, Rails was harder for me to comprehend. There was nothing visual that I could really understand. And going back to what Victoria said with universities being able to keep up, at the end of my bootcamp, that was when React was on the rise. And so they actually released a module for React, and so I was able to really pick up that module. And at that point, I thought React and front end was going to be a lot easier for me to comprehend and easier to get a job in the field, and so that's kind of why I went that front-end developer way. And then it's interesting now because I'm coming back around learning more Rails and, hopefully, be able to contribute to client work with the Rails side. MID-ROLL AD: Now that you have funding, it's time to design, build, and ship the most impactful MVP that wows customers now and can scale in the future. thoughtbot Liftoff brings you the most reliable cross-functional team of product experts to mitigate risk and set you up for long-term success. As your trusted, experienced technical partner, we'll help launch your new product and guide you into a future-forward business that takes advantage of today's new technologies and agile best practices. Make the right decisions for tomorrow today. Get in touch at thoughtbot.com/liftoff. CHAD: thoughbot's not the first agency that you worked at. Before you joined, you were working at another agency. Was there something in particular that gravitated towards this kind of work as opposed to working at maybe a technology startup working on a specific product? WILL: Yeah. The two first jobs that I had in tech was typical software as a service products. I enjoyed it, but I felt like we were building on the same thing over and over again. And it was okay, but I know for me that I'm a big-time learner. And so I felt for me, I'm a big-time learner, and so I felt going the agency route would give me the opportunity to be exposed to different aspects of tech. So at the last agency, I did some Rails work. It was very, very minimal, but I was able to do that. I was able to learn a lot about React Native and React and probably worked on a handful of jobs. Even at thoughtbot, I've worked on jobs and contracts that range from a month to six months. And I know potentially, I can work on a contract for two years, but it still gives me enough change to where I feel like the tech field will not leave me behind. So I can work on a job or a contract for a year and then reset and say, "Oh, React released XYZ." And I can implement that into this new product or contract I'm working on. So that part right there is what really excited me about working for an agency and being a part of the company. CHAD: Yeah, that's a big part of that variety, even both on the tech side but also just being able to work with different people and not be bound always to the same thing is one of the reasons why I've been able to do this so long I believe. WILL: That's a good point because I love meeting new people. I love getting to know them. And it gives me that opportunity to work for a client, get to know them, and stay in contact with them but even go to a new client. If I was working at a product, I'm with the same company inside the four walls of that company. And so I love that aspect of getting to meet new people and getting to help companies deliver their dreams to the world. I really enjoy that. CHAD: And that's what you're going to get to do as part of the host of the show too. WILL: Yes. I'm excited about that too. VICTORIA: I was going to say the same. You're going to meet so many cool people. [laughs] I've already met a lot of really interesting people in the last two months. So let's ask you a fun question. You're meeting new people; maybe you're introducing a new podcast guest. What's your favorite icebreaker question to ask? WILL: I think my favorite question to ask podcast guests is why they do what they do. And the reason why is because it's very interesting seeing what propels people to go and do the things that they do. I guess I'm a student of people and humans. I love understanding the greatest people like Tom Brady, Michael Jordan. I know that may be up for debate. VICTORIA: [laughs] WILL: But just what makes them click. Also, for our guests, there are so many different aspects and products that people are coming up with, and so it's amazing to hear why they're doing what they do. And a lot of them, I'm like, oh, why didn't I think of that? That's a great idea. [laughter] And so I think that's my favorite question by far is why do you do what you do? VICTORIA: I like that, yeah. As soon as I come on, I'm like, "So you're the founder of this. And why did you do that? [laughs] Tell me." But it's always an interesting story, just the right person, and the right place, the right problem to solve, and the right group of people around them to figure it out. WILL: Yeah, and definitely the sacrifice that they're making. Being a CEO or founder of a company is not a nine-to-five job. You're sacrificing a lot of time, a lot of effort, resources. So yes, why do you do what you do? Because you're sacrificing so much. So why did you do that to get to this point? I love it. VICTORIA: We could ask Chad that. [laughs] Why did you start thoughtbot, Chad? [laughs] CHAD: I ask myself that every day. [laughter] VICTORIA: I know. CHAD: No, I'm kidding. Oh, we have a whole episode on that we recorded for our anniversary with the original co-founders that I had, and we did the history of thoughtbot. So I like to point that out every once in a while, Episode 262 from February 12th, 2018. Time flies when you're having fun. I didn't think it was that long ago. WILL: [laughs] CHAD: We're currently on Episode 442. VICTORIA: I will say it is a productive podcast. There are a lot of great episodes that come out. I'm excited to have Will on to help share the experience of [laughs] creating them. CHAD: Yeah. And speaking a little bit of meta, this is the first time we've ever had three co-hosts. We have an appetite, the three of us, for trying some new things with this new sort of season that we're embarking on. But we also love the show as it is, and so we're going to keep things sort of going like they are with some rotations and doing some joint episodes and that kind of thing. But I wouldn't be surprised if, after a couple of months, we start to layer something new on. I'm not quite sure what that will be yet, whether it will be just maybe episodes with just the three of us, and not a guest, talking about some thoughtbot stuff or some things we want to talk about. Or maybe it could be something else. What do you all think? WILL: I love that idea. I love being able to have different options and opening that out. I think it's a great idea. Like you said, I don't know what that looks like, but I'm excited that we have the opportunity to bring different aspects, different podcasts to our guests. VICTORIA: Yeah, I'm already thinking of people I can voluntell at thoughtbot [laughter] and talking about topics that I'm interested in. [laughs] There's a lot we could do with that. And yeah, I think it'd be good to mix it up. How has working at thoughtbot supported your work-life balance with your family? WILL: It's been amazing. At the time of this recording, I have three kids; their ages are three, two, and a couple of months. And so, from the very beginning of parental leave, being able to take that time and be with my son and take care of all his needs was amazing. And not having to worry about work, yeah, it was top-notch because I was able to really just focus on him and my other two kids. Because when you have a baby and other siblings, it gets tough, so I felt like most of my parental leave was just keeping my baby alive. [laughter] The older siblings were amazing and actually surprised me. I thought that they would be jealous, and why is this new human in our house taking your attention? But it was actually the exact opposite. They wanted to hold the baby. VICTORIA: Aww. WILL: They wanted to be with him. And so it was like, okay, I'll let you hold them, but I got to be here with you, and I got to help you. And my two older kids are very independent. And so that was tough, but it's amazing to see how much they love their younger brother. VICTORIA: Aww. WILL: Yeah. So that has been amazing. But to continue on the work-life balance, it has been really amazing working at thoughtbot because we are a remote culture, and especially the clients that I've worked with the flexibility of the schedule. So yes, we have meetings that I have to make it to and be a part of the team. But for the most part, as long as I get my work done, I am in a good position. So, to be honest, with the newborn, sometimes I'm up at midnight. And I'm able to work while I'm up with my son because that's the time that he wants to get up and eat and hang out, so I'm like, okay, let's hang out. So that flexibility has been amazing for me. I love the remote aspect of it because I am a big family person. So I love being able to be home with my kids as they're growing up, eating lunch with them, going on a walk with them. So yes, it has been amazing. To be honest, I don't know if I can ask for anything more than what thoughtbot provides to me as a parent. So I'm really thankful for that. CHAD: That brings back a lot of memories for me because when our son was born, I also was up with him, and it would be one of those scenarios where you finally get him to sleep in the bounce chair or the chair, and you're like, okay, what do I do now? Because he's going to be up again at any moment. I was like, okay, I'll do some coding now, and it's like midnight, one in the morning, or whatever. And I got a little bit of a reputation for these pull requests coming in at night but this general sense of understanding about why that's happening. And like, okay, now I'm not in in the morning because this was the schedule that I was on and a real flexibility and understanding of that. But it really brings back memories for me. I'm glad I'm well past that point now. [laughter] WILL: And I am thankful that thoughtbot is thinking about those things. Like you said, you're past that point, but you still are thinking about those things. And that means a lot to me that it's not in your forethought, but it's still very important to have that culture. And you're remembering how it was when you were a parent. That means a lot to me. VICTORIA: Yeah. And I think that if you look at the state of the October's reports and see when developers are actually submitting pull requests, the windows are much longer. So post-pandemic with that giant shift to remote work, you will see them in earlier hours of the day or later hours in the night, but there are longer breaks in between. And I think for knowledge work especially; it's hard to just work an eight-hour block and be able to constantly be outputting during that time. [laughs] So it makes sense from a work-life balance but also a productivity overall balance as well. CHAD: That's really interesting. I hadn't seen that report, but it resonates with me as true or resonates with me. And we've always talked about the concept of sustainable pace, and when we were in offices, that often meant Monday through Friday, eight to five, nine to five. This is the schedule we're all keeping. And if someone was deviating from that, it was like, oh, you may not be working sustainably. Now, in a remote environment, it is much more about flexibility and recognizing that as long as people are working in a sustainable pace, variety in hours and flexibility is totally okay. And like you said, Will, it's about the work that you're getting done. Like, if there's a problem with what I'm delivering or what I'm able to do, let's have that conversation. Conversation shouldn't be about when I'm working or the hours that I'm working, the amount I'm working. WILL: And as a human, your first thought is, is this person working the hours they're supposed to? And I think that's the first thought for a lot of people. But the one thing that I do like about thoughtbot is that trust that we have with our developers. Okay, there may not be their eight-hour block during the day, but are they getting their work done? If they're getting the work done, why should I even say anything to them? Because they're being successful. That's what we asked them to do, get the work done. Are their clients happy? If their client is happy, I'm happy. And so I think that's one thing. The trust that thoughtbot has given to me as a developer means a lot to me, too, because I can work at midnight and still be productive and get my work done. CHAD: I think it's telling. It's very rare for us to have a conversation with someone about maybe not working enough. It's almost always the opposite which is checking in with people and making sure that they're working sustainably. VICTORIA: And I'm curious, Chad, about the policy of the four days of consulting and having Fridays for investment time; how that decision was made at thoughtbot. It's been a policy for a long time. CHAD: Well, it comes from our value of continuous improvement. When we were 16 people, all designers, and developers, working client work five days a week, there was no time, strictly speaking, within a sustainable pace to reflect on the way that we were working, to make improvements, to learn new things, to create the open source that we were doing and the blogging that we were doing. And so, if we were honest with ourselves, a lot of that stuff was happening outside of normal working time in addition to the five days of client work we were doing. And so I think it was Joe Ferris who said, like, if we believe in continuous improvement, we've got to carve out time and sustainable pace. We've got to carve out time within the week in order to be able to do those things. The truth of the matter is a lot of our most popular open-source projects were actually created at a time when we didn't have investment time. And so, like I said, I think if we're honest with ourselves, we were really stretching ourselves thin at that point. So working on client work four days a week made us not only more sustainable but ultimately because it's continuous improvement...and so when you have a feedback cycle where short iterations, you can reflect on the way that you're working or that you have time set aside for making improvements, it makes you better the rest of the time as well. And so now it's part of our secret sauce is the reason why we're able to be as productive as we are in that time that we have is because of that time set aside for improvement. The reason why we're able to make the open source and the blog posts that we do which make us have a bigger reputation and make our client work faster because we're able to use open source is because of that schedule. And so it's a self-fulfilling virtuous cycle of improvement. So that's where it comes from and why we've been so successful with it. WILL: And that's actually a huge reason why I wanted to work at thoughtbot because one of my first jobs in tech, I would come in and knock out tickets, and I really thought that that was enough to be successful in the field. But then I quickly learned that yes, I was learning the tickets that I was working on, but there was so much more that I did not know, did not understand. And at that point, that's when I had my first son, and we were working five days a week. So the biggest question for me was, with a newborn son and working five days a week, when do I fit in that investment time? When do I learn the outside aspect that we're not doing in the everyday grind of our tickets? And I quickly learned that I had to do it on the weekends. I had to do it outside of the hours that I was working. And it was hard. It was not a sustainable pace. With thoughtbot, one of my criterias was being able to learn, being able to be mentored, and thoughtbot checked that off. But not only did they check that off, but they gave me the opportunity, the space to be mentored and to learn. So I love Friday's investment time. It's been huge in my career. CHAD: I'm giving away all the secrets here, but it's okay because it's the execution that matters. But the reason why at your previous places you weren't necessarily able to do that is because that's not their product. Their product was the SaaS product that you were working on. And so when a company like that thinks about where they're investing, the investments that they're going to make are in their product. It's one of the reasons why we call investment time investment time because I wanted to communicate that we are investing in our product, but our product is the way that we work. It is our people and our process, and the tools that we use. And so when we think about making investments as a company, that's what the product that we're in the market with is. And so we can afford to invest in improving that product in the same way that a company whose product is software can afford to invest in that software and has trouble investing in making the people, and the process, and the tools, and the culture better. VICTORIA: That makes sense to me. And what I've found so far in having that four-day workweek and the way it comes out from a pricing perspective for clients is that you're paying maybe a premium for hours. But your team is able to get more work done in less amount of time because it's so focused. And then overall, you're getting a higher quality work product in a short amount of time. And I think it just makes a lot of sense to me. And I've been working in many consulting companies, and they all have this problem. They all want to put out a lot of knowledge articles and blog posts and be known for their expertise but don't commit to making that time to it or spending the money on investing in people to build those products. So it's something I was really excited about for thoughtbot too. [laughs] CHAD: This is great fodder for future episodes with just the three of us. [laughs] VICTORIA: Yeah. WILL: Love it. CHAD: Will, thanks again for joining the show. If we don't get to play D&D again together for a while, this will be a secondary substitute for that. WILL: Yes, I do plan on coming back. That was huge also, so don't count me out. [laughter] CHAD: I won't count you out. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode, along with a complete transcript, at giantrobots.fm. VICTORIA: If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. CHAD: You can find me on Twitter @cyptel. VICTORIA: And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. CHAD: And, Will, if folks want to follow along with you, where are all the places that they can do that? WILL: Yeah. You can follow me on Twitter @will23larry. And I would love to interact and chat with you. CHAD: Is the 23 for Michael Jordan? WILL: Always. [laughter] CHAD: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. VICTORIA: Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.
Will Larry, Software Developer at thoughtbot, joins Giant Robots as host! 🎉 Will talks about how he got into tech, how everything is going so far at thoughtbot, interviewing at thoughtbot previously, but not getting the job, and why he decided to interview again (and snagged the job!) Follow Will on Twitter (https://twitter.com/will23larry) and LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/william-larry/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. VICTORIA: I'm your other host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is our brand new third co-host, Will Larry. Will is a React and React Native developer at thoughtbot. And we're so excited to have him join us as a co-host of the show. CHAD: Will, thank you so much for joining us. Congratulations and welcome. Woo-hoo. [applause] WILL: Thank you for having me. I'm excited. CHAD: Will, I was so excited when I put out the call for people to join as co-hosts, and Victoria raised her hand, and then you did as well. You were on parental leave when all that started to happen. And so congratulations again on your new family member, and I'm glad we could finally have you join us. WILL: Yeah, I was excited about it. When I thought about joining, there are two things that came about: the excitement of joining and just the fear of it. CHAD: [laughs] WILL: And I was like, I need to do this. I need to do this because it will make me better. So I'm excited to be here. VICTORIA: That's a lot of change to navigate in one year, Will. [laughs] How's that got going for you, and how's everything so far in your first time here at thoughtbot? WILL: Yes, change, change, change, that's what has been this year. I changed and started working at thoughtbot, our third kid. This year, we moved to Florida, just a lot of change. But I've learned along the way that change is life, and so we just embraced it. And I'm hoping that we're kind of settling out a little bit, but it's been good. It's been great for our kids. I think they're ready for some consistency and just the same thing over and over for a little bit. But it's been good. And we made it through. We're on the other side. CHAD: Was there a grand plan to all the change? Like, did you have everything planned out in advance? Or did it all sort of just happen one thing after the other? WILL: Yes. If you know anything about me, I'm a very big planner. My wife, my spouse she is the one that pushes me to be more spontaneous, but this was too big to be spontaneous, so it was definitely planned. It actually got changed. We were supposed to move in September, but with the birth of my son, we decided to move it up and move sooner. VICTORIA: Right. I'm going to ask you the same question but about your career. So you made a big change from operations into mobile development, and was that part of a grand plan, or did you happen upon it? How did you make that change? WILL: That change was kind of out of desperation. I was in operations working for a nonprofit; I loved it. My spouse was working at the same company, and I was a promotion ahead of her. It was an amazing opportunity. But the teams are so small that we couldn't be on the same team. So they had multiple locations throughout the country. And you don't have to step off the team, but if she's going to take this promotion, you have to step off the team. There potentially is a way that, down the road, you can come back. And Katie is my spouse. She has been so supportive of everything that I've ever done. And I just felt this was a time, a great time for me to show that I support her in everything she did. But it was probably one of the toughest times in my life. I didn't have a job. I thought that I can easily jump back into it and find a job. I ended up working at a clothing store, which is not my strong suit. I really struggled working there. I think I worked there a month, and I was like, I can't do this. And then, I went to work at a different company, a travel insurance company, and so I would process the data. I was miserable, and that's an understatement. I was so miserable. One day my spouse came in, and she said, "Hey, we got to change this. You're not doing well. Let's dream a little bit." And normally, that's not my personality. Normally I'm like Xs and Os. I know what's coming. And I was so out of it. I was like, let's do this. And she asked me a couple of questions. And one of the questions was, "If you could do anything, what would you do?" I thought about it. And I came from a small town in Louisiana. And I never had the opportunity to work with computers. It was just the resources weren't there. And so that was one of the things I said, "Hey, I want to work with computers in any way that I can." She was like, "Go figure it out, whatever it takes." And then I told her I was like, "It's going to cost some money for me to do this," because I went to bootcamp. And she was like, "Go do it. Let's invest in you. Let's make this happen." I ended up going through the bootcamp and came out on the other side. Interesting story; it's interesting how things come back around. My first interview was at thoughtbot. I bombed it. [laughter] I wasn't on thoughtbot's team at that point. But the way that it was handled, I got a glimpse of the culture. I remember walking out that day and saying I'll be back. I will be back to be a part of this company because I bombed it. But they still spent time with me explaining things, teaching me the things that I bombed. And so I was like, wow, that's what I want to do in this field. So yeah, that's how I got into development. Here I am. CHAD: Was there anything that surprised you about development, about the tech world? WILL: Yes, yes. I think the biggest thing was the growth in development. So in any of my other jobs, I was able to take in expectations and make a plan and, like, okay, check off. I can knock that out and be successful. And I tried that in development, and every one of my bosses would say, "Slow down. It takes time. It takes time." And I just didn't realize how long it would take for me to grow in my coding skills. That was the biggest surprise for me because I just couldn't come through, and okay, I got it, let's go. Because I'm very big on I know my expectations, okay, I can meet those expectations, and then I'll go over and beyond. But I couldn't do that in this field. And I think that was the biggest surprise for me that I couldn't just show up at work and do my task and still be a great developer. VICTORIA: Right. And I love that you're sharing that story. Because with the people I've worked with at Women Who Code, it's a very common struggle when you're starting out in your first time as a developer and getting comfortable with being not great for the first six months or a year, or however long it takes. And I think that it's important to share that and make sure that other people feel the same way. And you might feel that way for a long time and maybe forever [laughs] if you keep switching up your roles in tech. WILL: Yeah, definitely. And it was a very humbling experience also because, in most of my other jobs, I was the leader. I was the person that had direct reports and leading people. But in this job, I started at the very bottom. I remember there were days when I couldn't even get through my tasks and had to really lean on others to help me through it. You know, my senior developer, I was like, "Hey, it's that time. I got some questions for you." And so, I had to learn how does Will learn and what's the best way for me to excel in this field? The things that I've done before, I couldn't do it going forward. CHAD: Bootcamps are pretty popular. And they are an avenue that certainly didn't exist when I was learning. You said when you were having the conversation with your wife that it sounds like that was just right there as the path forward. But did you consider an alternative path? WILL: Yeah. So at that time, I felt like there were probably three paths: there was the bootcamp, there was the college degree, and there was the self-learning path. So the college degree, I thought about it because, at that time, I felt like a lot of companies were still like, hey, you have to have a degree to be hired and be a part of it. So whenever I thought about going back, I didn't know if it was going to cut me off from other jobs, so that was one of the reasons why I really decided, or I really thought about going the degree route. And I decided against it because I did a lot of research, and there were companies at that time that were like, you don't need a college degree because I already had a college degree in sports medicine. And so most of them were like, you just have to have a degree. And I was like, okay, I don't think I'm going to be stuck in this position because I didn't have a computer science degree. The other way was self-taught. I didn't think that I could put in the time and the work. One thing I learned very, very early on is there were a lot of things that I just didn't know about the field. I didn't know HTML. I didn't know CSS. I didn't know how to get a server started. I didn't know anything. If I knew anything about computers, it was more about the hardware side of it and nothing about the software side. So I knew very quickly that the self-learning aspect wouldn't work for me, and so that's kind of why I decided to go the bootcamp route. I asked a lot of mentors, "Hey, what's the best way?" And they're like, "Bootcamp." And they're like, "Go to the one that teaches you the most." And so, at that time, the bootcamp I went to was two years long, but I was able to probably eight months in get a job in tech. And then, I completed it while going to work at that tech company. VICTORIA: Oh, that's great. CHAD: I mean, this might be a little bit of a hot take, but I'm going to say it anyway, which is I think that if you don't know how to code at all, or very little university programs, computer science programs aren't really set up to teach you that in a great way. It's more likely that someone with that level of experience will really struggle going into a computer science program not really having coded before. Bootcamps are much more conducive to learning from scratch along with other people. It's not even necessarily about the programs, but going into a CS degree, so many people already do know how to program. And so it's really hard for them to make a well-balanced program that works for everybody. WILL: I totally agree with that. VICTORIA: I could see it. It's both ways. The way I've always heard it explained is a computer science degree will teach you a lot about the underlying principles that you might wish you knew later after you have finished your bootcamp. But a bootcamp will prepare you for on-the-job performance like day one, more likely to just give you the full breadth. I mean, I've taken computer science 101 at University of Maryland, and I learned HTML, CSS, how to get a basic website up, some simple things that can get you up to speed. I think you could start from scratch and go that route. But it's hard to keep it up to speed with current technology trends in a college atmosphere. And so I think you'll see a lot of partnerships with universities now. And obviously, bootcamps were created to address that gap. You got a job while you were still in bootcamp, and I'm curious how that went for you, that job search. That's a huge hurdle to just getting from the bootcamp to the first job; if you have any advice for people who are in a similar situation right now. WILL: Yes, it was very challenging at the time. I think I applied to over 400 positions. My biggest thing that I would say is stay the course, hang in there. Keep going. There are a lot of down days that I was like, am I supposed to be in this field? Am I supposed to be here? The other thing that I learned very quickly was resources. Who did I know in the tech field? Who could I reach out to help me with it? Because that was another thing that I learned. I thought whenever I first took my junior dev job that I would come in and be able to really implement tickets and items. And I quickly realized that they hired me because of my character and who I was going to be long-term and that I can offer very little at that moment of, hey, coming in, and doing a ticket, and really shipping a feature I cannot do that as a junior dev. But hopefully, in six months or two, three months, however long their time period was that I could ship a portion of a feature. VICTORIA: Right. And that's always been...for me, someone hiring for technical roles and the entry-level point, sometimes I would prefer someone who has professional experience. Especially working in consulting, you have the ability to communicate your ideas well and work with clients, but you're still learning the technology side of it. That's a lot less than hiring a new college graduate who hasn't ever worked before [laughs] but may have a computer science degree. It's a totally different value that you're bringing to the role, I think. CHAD: And that persistence really pays off. Just to make sure that timeline is clear, I think you interviewed with us for the first time five years ago or so, so I really appreciate you sticking with it and eventually coming back to us. That makes me super, super happy. WILL: Yeah, and one thing that I learned along the way is there are different companies out there, and depending on your purpose and your goal, there are great fits depending on what your goal is. And my goal in my career was to learn and to be with a great company that had a great culture. And I felt like thoughtbot was a good fit for me with that because I want to enjoy the people that I work with. I want to get to know them. I want to help them be a mentor, be a mentee, and thoughtbot was a good fit with that. That was one of the reasons why I put it on my list of hey, whenever that opportunity comes back, apply, apply, apply back to them. CHAD: You originally interviewed with us as a Rails developer for a Rails development position. But along the way, you joined us as a React and React Native developer. So tell us a little bit about that journey along the way. WILL: Yeah, so I did as a Rails developer, and I quickly realized that at that point in my career, Rails was harder for me to comprehend. There was nothing visual that I could really understand. And going back to what Victoria said with universities being able to keep up, at the end of my bootcamp, that was when React was on the rise. And so they actually released a module for React, and so I was able to really pick up that module. And at that point, I thought React and front end was going to be a lot easier for me to comprehend and easier to get a job in the field, and so that's kind of why I went that front-end developer way. And then it's interesting now because I'm coming back around learning more Rails and, hopefully, be able to contribute to client work with the Rails side. MID-ROLL AD: Now that you have funding, it's time to design, build, and ship the most impactful MVP that wows customers now and can scale in the future. thoughtbot Liftoff brings you the most reliable cross-functional team of product experts to mitigate risk and set you up for long-term success. As your trusted, experienced technical partner, we'll help launch your new product and guide you into a future-forward business that takes advantage of today's new technologies and agile best practices. Make the right decisions for tomorrow today. Get in touch at thoughtbot.com/liftoff. CHAD: thoughbot's not the first agency that you worked at. Before you joined, you were working at another agency. Was there something in particular that gravitated towards this kind of work as opposed to working at maybe a technology startup working on a specific product? WILL: Yeah. The two first jobs that I had in tech was typical software as a service products. I enjoyed it, but I felt like we were building on the same thing over and over again. And it was okay, but I know for me that I'm a big-time learner. And so I felt for me, I'm a big-time learner, and so I felt going the agency route would give me the opportunity to be exposed to different aspects of tech. So at the last agency, I did some Rails work. It was very, very minimal, but I was able to do that. I was able to learn a lot about React Native and React and probably worked on a handful of jobs. Even at thoughtbot, I've worked on jobs and contracts that range from a month to six months. And I know potentially, I can work on a contract for two years, but it still gives me enough change to where I feel like the tech field will not leave me behind. So I can work on a job or a contract for a year and then reset and say, "Oh, React released XYZ." And I can implement that into this new product or contract I'm working on. So that part right there is what really excited me about working for an agency and being a part of the company. CHAD: Yeah, that's a big part of that variety, even both on the tech side but also just being able to work with different people and not be bound always to the same thing is one of the reasons why I've been able to do this so long I believe. WILL: That's a good point because I love meeting new people. I love getting to know them. And it gives me that opportunity to work for a client, get to know them, and stay in contact with them but even go to a new client. If I was working at a product, I'm with the same company inside the four walls of that company. And so I love that aspect of getting to meet new people and getting to help companies deliver their dreams to the world. I really enjoy that. CHAD: And that's what you're going to get to do as part of the host of the show too. WILL: Yes. I'm excited about that too. VICTORIA: I was going to say the same. You're going to meet so many cool people. [laughs] I've already met a lot of really interesting people in the last two months. So let's ask you a fun question. You're meeting new people; maybe you're introducing a new podcast guest. What's your favorite icebreaker question to ask? WILL: I think my favorite question to ask podcast guests is why they do what they do. And the reason why is because it's very interesting seeing what propels people to go and do the things that they do. I guess I'm a student of people and humans. I love understanding the greatest people like Tom Brady, Michael Jordan. I know that may be up for debate. VICTORIA: [laughs] WILL: But just what makes them click. Also, for our guests, there are so many different aspects and products that people are coming up with, and so it's amazing to hear why they're doing what they do. And a lot of them, I'm like, oh, why didn't I think of that? That's a great idea. [laughter] And so I think that's my favorite question by far is why do you do what you do? VICTORIA: I like that, yeah. As soon as I come on, I'm like, "So you're the founder of this. And why did you do that? [laughs] Tell me." But it's always an interesting story, just the right person, and the right place, the right problem to solve, and the right group of people around them to figure it out. WILL: Yeah, and definitely the sacrifice that they're making. Being a CEO or founder of a company is not a nine-to-five job. You're sacrificing a lot of time, a lot of effort, resources. So yes, why do you do what you do? Because you're sacrificing so much. So why did you do that to get to this point? I love it. VICTORIA: We could ask Chad that. [laughs] Why did you start thoughtbot, Chad? [laughs] CHAD: I ask myself that every day. [laughter] VICTORIA: I know. CHAD: No, I'm kidding. Oh, we have a whole episode on that we recorded for our anniversary with the original co-founders that I had, and we did the history of thoughtbot. So I like to point that out every once in a while, Episode 262 from February 12th, 2018. Time flies when you're having fun. I didn't think it was that long ago. WILL: [laughs] CHAD: We're currently on Episode 442. VICTORIA: I will say it is a productive podcast. There are a lot of great episodes that come out. I'm excited to have Will on to help share the experience of [laughs] creating them. CHAD: Yeah. And speaking a little bit of meta, this is the first time we've ever had three co-hosts. We have an appetite, the three of us, for trying some new things with this new sort of season that we're embarking on. But we also love the show as it is, and so we're going to keep things sort of going like they are with some rotations and doing some joint episodes and that kind of thing. But I wouldn't be surprised if, after a couple of months, we start to layer something new on. I'm not quite sure what that will be yet, whether it will be just maybe episodes with just the three of us, and not a guest, talking about some thoughtbot stuff or some things we want to talk about. Or maybe it could be something else. What do you all think? WILL: I love that idea. I love being able to have different options and opening that out. I think it's a great idea. Like you said, I don't know what that looks like, but I'm excited that we have the opportunity to bring different aspects, different podcasts to our guests. VICTORIA: Yeah, I'm already thinking of people I can voluntell at thoughtbot [laughter] and talking about topics that I'm interested in. [laughs] There's a lot we could do with that. And yeah, I think it'd be good to mix it up. How has working at thoughtbot supported your work-life balance with your family? WILL: It's been amazing. At the time of this recording, I have three kids; their ages are three, two, and a couple of months. And so, from the very beginning of parental leave, being able to take that time and be with my son and take care of all his needs was amazing. And not having to worry about work, yeah, it was top-notch because I was able to really just focus on him and my other two kids. Because when you have a baby and other siblings, it gets tough, so I felt like most of my parental leave was just keeping my baby alive. [laughter] The older siblings were amazing and actually surprised me. I thought that they would be jealous, and why is this new human in our house taking your attention? But it was actually the exact opposite. They wanted to hold the baby. VICTORIA: Aww. WILL: They wanted to be with him. And so it was like, okay, I'll let you hold them, but I got to be here with you, and I got to help you. And my two older kids are very independent. And so that was tough, but it's amazing to see how much they love their younger brother. VICTORIA: Aww. WILL: Yeah. So that has been amazing. But to continue on the work-life balance, it has been really amazing working at thoughtbot because we are a remote culture, and especially the clients that I've worked with the flexibility of the schedule. So yes, we have meetings that I have to make it to and be a part of the team. But for the most part, as long as I get my work done, I am in a good position. So, to be honest, with the newborn, sometimes I'm up at midnight. And I'm able to work while I'm up with my son because that's the time that he wants to get up and eat and hang out, so I'm like, okay, let's hang out. So that flexibility has been amazing for me. I love the remote aspect of it because I am a big family person. So I love being able to be home with my kids as they're growing up, eating lunch with them, going on a walk with them. So yes, it has been amazing. To be honest, I don't know if I can ask for anything more than what thoughtbot provides to me as a parent. So I'm really thankful for that. CHAD: That brings back a lot of memories for me because when our son was born, I also was up with him, and it would be one of those scenarios where you finally get him to sleep in the bounce chair or the chair, and you're like, okay, what do I do now? Because he's going to be up again at any moment. I was like, okay, I'll do some coding now, and it's like midnight, one in the morning, or whatever. And I got a little bit of a reputation for these pull requests coming in at night but this general sense of understanding about why that's happening. And like, okay, now I'm not in in the morning because this was the schedule that I was on and a real flexibility and understanding of that. But it really brings back memories for me. I'm glad I'm well past that point now. [laughter] WILL: And I am thankful that thoughtbot is thinking about those things. Like you said, you're past that point, but you still are thinking about those things. And that means a lot to me that it's not in your forethought, but it's still very important to have that culture. And you're remembering how it was when you were a parent. That means a lot to me. VICTORIA: Yeah. And I think that if you look at the state of the October's reports and see when developers are actually submitting pull requests, the windows are much longer. So post-pandemic with that giant shift to remote work, you will see them in earlier hours of the day or later hours in the night, but there are longer breaks in between. And I think for knowledge work especially; it's hard to just work an eight-hour block and be able to constantly be outputting during that time. [laughs] So it makes sense from a work-life balance but also a productivity overall balance as well. CHAD: That's really interesting. I hadn't seen that report, but it resonates with me as true or resonates with me. And we've always talked about the concept of sustainable pace, and when we were in offices, that often meant Monday through Friday, eight to five, nine to five. This is the schedule we're all keeping. And if someone was deviating from that, it was like, oh, you may not be working sustainably. Now, in a remote environment, it is much more about flexibility and recognizing that as long as people are working in a sustainable pace, variety in hours and flexibility is totally okay. And like you said, Will, it's about the work that you're getting done. Like, if there's a problem with what I'm delivering or what I'm able to do, let's have that conversation. Conversation shouldn't be about when I'm working or the hours that I'm working, the amount I'm working. WILL: And as a human, your first thought is, is this person working the hours they're supposed to? And I think that's the first thought for a lot of people. But the one thing that I do like about thoughtbot is that trust that we have with our developers. Okay, there may not be their eight-hour block during the day, but are they getting their work done? If they're getting the work done, why should I even say anything to them? Because they're being successful. That's what we asked them to do, get the work done. Are their clients happy? If their client is happy, I'm happy. And so I think that's one thing. The trust that thoughtbot has given to me as a developer means a lot to me, too, because I can work at midnight and still be productive and get my work done. CHAD: I think it's telling. It's very rare for us to have a conversation with someone about maybe not working enough. It's almost always the opposite which is checking in with people and making sure that they're working sustainably. VICTORIA: And I'm curious, Chad, about the policy of the four days of consulting and having Fridays for investment time; how that decision was made at thoughtbot. It's been a policy for a long time. CHAD: Well, it comes from our value of continuous improvement. When we were 16 people, all designers, and developers, working client work five days a week, there was no time, strictly speaking, within a sustainable pace to reflect on the way that we were working, to make improvements, to learn new things, to create the open source that we were doing and the blogging that we were doing. And so, if we were honest with ourselves, a lot of that stuff was happening outside of normal working time in addition to the five days of client work we were doing. And so I think it was Joe Ferris who said, like, if we believe in continuous improvement, we've got to carve out time and sustainable pace. We've got to carve out time within the week in order to be able to do those things. The truth of the matter is a lot of our most popular open-source projects were actually created at a time when we didn't have investment time. And so, like I said, I think if we're honest with ourselves, we were really stretching ourselves thin at that point. So working on client work four days a week made us not only more sustainable but ultimately because it's continuous improvement...and so when you have a feedback cycle where short iterations, you can reflect on the way that you're working or that you have time set aside for making improvements, it makes you better the rest of the time as well. And so now it's part of our secret sauce is the reason why we're able to be as productive as we are in that time that we have is because of that time set aside for improvement. The reason why we're able to make the open source and the blog posts that we do which make us have a bigger reputation and make our client work faster because we're able to use open source is because of that schedule. And so it's a self-fulfilling virtuous cycle of improvement. So that's where it comes from and why we've been so successful with it. WILL: And that's actually a huge reason why I wanted to work at thoughtbot because one of my first jobs in tech, I would come in and knock out tickets, and I really thought that that was enough to be successful in the field. But then I quickly learned that yes, I was learning the tickets that I was working on, but there was so much more that I did not know, did not understand. And at that point, that's when I had my first son, and we were working five days a week. So the biggest question for me was, with a newborn son and working five days a week, when do I fit in that investment time? When do I learn the outside aspect that we're not doing in the everyday grind of our tickets? And I quickly learned that I had to do it on the weekends. I had to do it outside of the hours that I was working. And it was hard. It was not a sustainable pace. With thoughtbot, one of my criterias was being able to learn, being able to be mentored, and thoughtbot checked that off. But not only did they check that off, but they gave me the opportunity, the space to be mentored and to learn. So I love Friday's investment time. It's been huge in my career. CHAD: I'm giving away all the secrets here, but it's okay because it's the execution that matters. But the reason why at your previous places you weren't necessarily able to do that is because that's not their product. Their product was the SaaS product that you were working on. And so when a company like that thinks about where they're investing, the investments that they're going to make are in their product. It's one of the reasons why we call investment time investment time because I wanted to communicate that we are investing in our product, but our product is the way that we work. It is our people and our process, and the tools that we use. And so when we think about making investments as a company, that's what the product that we're in the market with is. And so we can afford to invest in improving that product in the same way that a company whose product is software can afford to invest in that software and has trouble investing in making the people, and the process, and the tools, and the culture better. VICTORIA: That makes sense to me. And what I've found so far in having that four-day workweek and the way it comes out from a pricing perspective for clients is that you're paying maybe a premium for hours. But your team is able to get more work done in less amount of time because it's so focused. And then overall, you're getting a higher quality work product in a short amount of time. And I think it just makes a lot of sense to me. And I've been working in many consulting companies, and they all have this problem. They all want to put out a lot of knowledge articles and blog posts and be known for their expertise but don't commit to making that time to it or spending the money on investing in people to build those products. So it's something I was really excited about for thoughtbot too. [laughs] CHAD: This is great fodder for future episodes with just the three of us. [laughs] VICTORIA: Yeah. WILL: Love it. CHAD: Will, thanks again for joining the show. If we don't get to play D&D again together for a while, this will be a secondary substitute for that. WILL: Yes, I do plan on coming back. That was huge also, so don't count me out. [laughter] CHAD: I won't count you out. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode, along with a complete transcript, at giantrobots.fm. VICTORIA: If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. CHAD: You can find me on Twitter @cyptel. VICTORIA: And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. CHAD: And, Will, if folks want to follow along with you, where are all the places that they can do that? WILL: Yeah. You can follow me on Twitter @will23larry. And I would love to interact and chat with you. CHAD: Is the 23 for Michael Jordan? WILL: Always. [laughter] CHAD: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. VICTORIA: Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.
Leonard S. Johnson is the Founder and CEO of AIEDC, a 5G Cloud Mobile App Maker and Service Provider with Machine Learning to help small and midsize businesses create their own iOS and Android mobile apps with no-code or low-code so they can engage and service their customer base, as well as provide front and back office digitization services for small businesses. Victoria talks to Leonard about using artificial intelligence for good, bringing the power of AI to local economics, and truly democratizing AI. The Artificial Intelligence Economic Development Corporation (AIEDC) (https://netcapital.com/companies/aiedc) Follow AIEDC on Twitter (https://twitter.com/netcapital), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/netcapital/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/Netcapital/), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/aiedc/). Follow Leonard on Twitter (https://twitter.com/LeonardSJ) and LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/leonardsjohnson84047/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is The Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Leonard S. Johnson or LS, Founder and CEO AIEDC, a 5G Cloud Mobile App Maker and Service Provider with Machine Learning to help small and midsize businesses create their own iOS and Android mobile apps with no-code or low-code so they can engage and service their customer base, as well as provide front and back office digitization services for small businesses. Leonard, thanks for being with us today. LEONARD: Thank you for having me, Victoria. VICTORIA: I should say LS, thank you for being with us today. LEONARD: It's okay. It's fine. VICTORIA: Great. So tell us a little more about AIEDC. LEONARD: Well, AIEDC stands for Artificial Intelligence Economic Development Corporation. And the original premise that I founded it for...I founded it after completing my postgraduate work at Stanford, and that was 2016. And it was to use AI for economic development, and therefore use AI for good versus just hearing about artificial intelligence and some of the different movies that either take over the world, and Skynet, and watch data privacy, and these other things which are true, and it's very evident, they exist, and they're out there. But at the end of the day, I've always looked at life as a growth strategy and the improvement of what we could do and focusing on what we could do practically. You do it tactically, then you do it strategically over time, and you're able to implement things. That's why I think we keep building collectively as humanity, no matter what part of the world you're in. VICTORIA: Right. So you went to Stanford, and you're from South Central LA. And what about that background led you to pursue AI for good in particular? LEONARD: So growing up in the inner city of Los Angeles, you know, that South Central area, Compton area, it taught me a lot. And then after that, after I completed high school...and not in South Central because I moved around a lot. I grew up with a single mother, never knew my real father, and then my home life with my single mother wasn't good because of just circumstances all the time. And so I just started understanding that even as a young kid, you put your brain...you utilize something because you had two choices. It's very simple or binary, you know, A or B. A, you do something with yourself, or B, you go out and be social in a certain neighborhood. And I'm African American, so high probability that you'll end up dead, or in a gang, or in crime because that's what it was at that time. It's just that's just a situation. Or you're able to challenge those energies and put them toward a use that's productive and positive for yourself, and that's what I did, which is utilizing a way to learn. I could always pick up things when I was very young. And a lot of teachers, my younger teachers, were like, "You're very, very bright," or "You're very smart." And there weren't many programs because I'm older than 42. So there weren't as many programs as there are today. So I really like all of the programs. So I want to clarify the context. Today there's a lot more engagement and identification of kids that might be sharper, smarter, whatever their personal issues are, good or bad. And it's a way to sort of separate them. So you're not just teaching the whole group as a whole and putting them all in one basket, but back then, there was not. And so I just used to go home a lot, do a lot of reading, do a lot of studying, and just knick-knack with things in tech. And then I just started understanding that even as a young kid in the inner city, you see economics very early, but they don't understand that's really what they're studying. They see economics. They can see inflation because making two ends meet is very difficult. They may see gang violence and drugs or whatever it might end up being. And a lot of that, in my opinion, is always an underlining economic foundation. And so people would say, "Oh, why is this industry like this?" And so forth. "Why does this keep happening?" It's because they can't function. And sometimes, it's just them and their family, but they can't function because it's an economic system. So I started focusing on that and then went into the Marine Corps. And then, after the Marine Corps, I went to Europe. I lived in Europe for a while to do my undergrad studies in the Netherlands in Holland. VICTORIA: So having that experience of taking a challenge or taking these forces around you and turning into a force for good, that's led you to bring the power of AI to local economics. And is that the direction that you went eventually? LEONARD: So economics was always something that I understood and had a fascination prior to even starting my company. I started in 2017. And we're crowdfunding now, and I can get into that later. But I self-funded it since 2017 to...I think I only started crowdfunding when COVID hit, which was 2020, and just to get awareness and people out there because I couldn't go to a lot of events. So I'm like, okay, how can I get exposure? But yeah, it was a matter of looking at it from that standpoint of economics always factored into me, even when I was in the military when I was in the Marine Corps. I would see that...we would go to different countries, and you could just see the difference of how they lived and survived. And another side note, my son's mother is from Ethiopia, Africa. And I have a good relationship with my son and his mother, even though we've been apart for over 15 years, divorced for over 15 years or so or longer. But trying to keep that, you can just see this dichotomy. You go out to these different countries, and even in the military, it's just so extreme from the U.S. and any part of the U.S, but that then always focused on economics. And then technology, I just always kept up with, like, back in the '80s when the mobile brick phone came out, I had to figure out how to get one. [laughs] And then I took it apart and then put it back together just to see how it works, so yeah. But it was a huge one, by the way. I mean, it was like someone got another and broke it, and they thought it was broken. And they're like, "This doesn't work. You could take this piece of junk." I'm like, "Okay." [laughs] VICTORIA: Like, oh, great. I sure will, yeah. Now, I love technology. And I think a lot of people perceive artificial intelligence as being this super futuristic, potentially harmful, maybe economic negative impact. So what, from your perspective, can AI do for local economics or for people who may not have access to that advanced technology? LEONARD: Well, that's the key, and that's what we're looking to do with AIEDC. When you look at the small and midsize businesses, it's not what people think, or their perception is. A lot of those in the U.S. it's the backbone of the United States, our economy, literally. And in other parts of the world, it's the same where it could be a one or two mom-and-pop shops. That's where that name comes from; it's literally two people. And they're trying to start something to build their own life over time because they're using their labor to maybe build wealth or somehow a little bit not. And when I mean wealth, it's always relative. It's enough to sustain themselves or just put food on the table and be able to control their own destiny to the best of their ability. And so what we're looking to do is make a mobile app maker that's 5G that lives in the cloud, that's 5G compliant, that will allow small and midsize businesses to create their own iOS or Android mobile app with no-code or low-code, basically like creating an email. That's how simple we want it to be. When you create your own email, whether you use Microsoft, Google, or whatever you do, and you make it that simple. And there's a simple version, and there could be complexity added to it if they want. That would be the back office digitization or customization, but that then gets them on board with digitization. It's intriguing that McKinsey just came out with a report stating that in 2023, in order to be economically viable, and this was very recent, that all companies would need to have a digitization strategy. And so when you look at small businesses, and you look at things like COVID-19, or the COVID current ongoing issue and that disruption, this is global. And you look at even the Ukrainian War or the Russian-Ukrainian War, however you term it, invasion, war, special operation, these are disruptions. And then, on top of that, we look at climate change which has been accelerating in the last two years more so than it was prior to this that we've experienced. So this is something that everyone can see is self-evident. I'm not even focused on the cause of the problem. My brain and the way I think, and my team, we like to focus on solutions. My chairman is a former program director of NASA who managed 1,200 engineers that built the International Space Station; what was it? 20-30 years ago, however, that is. And he helped lead and build that from Johnson Center. And so you're focused on solutions because if you're building the International Space Station, you can only focus on solutions and anticipate the problems but not dwell on them. And so that kind of mindset is what I am, and it's looking to help small businesses do that to get them on board with digitization and then in customization. And then beyond that, use our system, which is called M.I.N.D. So we own these...we own patents, three patents, trademarks, and service marks related to artificial intelligence that are in the field of economics. And we will utilize DEVS...we plan to do that which is a suite of system specifications to predict regional economic issues like the weather in a proactive way, not reactive. A lot of economic situations are reactive. It's reactive to the Federal Reserve raising interest rates or lowering rates, Wall Street, you know, moving money or not moving money. It is what it is. I mean, I don't judge it. I think it's like financial engineering, and that's fine. It's profitability. But then, at the end of the day, if you're building something, it's like when we're going to go to space. When rockets launch, they have to do what they're intended to do. Like, I know that Blue Origin just blew up recently. Or if they don't, they have a default, and at least I heard that the Blue Origin satellite, if it were carrying passengers, the passengers would have been safe because it disembarked when it detected its own problem. So when you anticipate these kinds of problems and you apply them to the local small business person, you can help them forecast and predict better like what weather prediction has done. And we're always improving that collectively for weather prediction, especially with climate change, so that it can get to near real-time as soon as possible or close a window versus two weeks out versus two days out as an example. VICTORIA: Right. Those examples of what you call a narrow economic prediction. LEONARD: Correct. It is intriguing when you say narrow economic because it wouldn't be narrow AI. But it would actually get into AGI if you added more variables, which we would. The more variables you added in tenancies...so if you're looking at events, the system events discretion so discrete event system specification you would specify what they really, really need to do to have those variables. But at some point, you're working on a system, what I would call AGI. But AGI, in my mind, the circles I run in at least or at least most of the scientists I talk to it's not artificial superintelligence. And so the general public thinks AGI...and I've said this to Stephen Ibaraki, who's the founder of AI for Good at Global Summit at the United Nations, and one of his interviews as well. It's just Artificial General Intelligence, I think, has been put out a lot by Hollywood and entertainment and so forth, and some scientists say certain things. We won't be at artificial superintelligence. We might get to Artificial General Intelligence by 2030 easily, in my opinion. But that will be narrow AI, but it will cover what we look at it in the field as cross-domain, teaching a system to look at different variables because right now, it's really narrow. Like natural language processing, it's just going to look at language and infer from there, and then you've got backward propagation that's credit assignment and fraud and detection. Those are narrow data points. But when you start looking at something cross-domain...who am I thinking of? Pedro Domingos who wrote the Master Algorithm, which actually, Xi Jinping has a copy of, the President of China, on his bookshelf in his office because they've talked about that, and these great minds because Stephen Ibaraki has interviewed these...and the founder of Google Brain and all of these guys. And so there's always this debate in the scientific community of what is narrow AI what it's not. But at the end of the day, I just like Pedro's definition of it because he says the master algorithm will be combining all five, so you're really crossing domains, which AI hasn't done that. And to me, that will be AGI, but that's not artificial superintelligence. And artificial superintelligence is when it becomes very, you know, like some of the movies could say, if we as humanity just let it run wild, it could be crazy. VICTORIA: One of my questions is the future of AI more like iRobot or Bicentennial Man? LEONARD: Well, you know, interesting. That's a great question, Victoria. I see most of AI literally as iRobot, as a tool more than anything, except at the end when it implied...so it kind of did two things in that movie, but a wonderful movie to bring up. And I like Will Smith perfectly. Well, I liked him a lot more before -- VICTORIA: I think iRobot is really the better movie. LEONARD: Yeah, so if people haven't seen iRobot, I liked Will Smith, the actor. But iRobot showed you two things, and it showed you, one, it showed hope. Literally, the robot...because a lot of people put AI and robots. And AI by itself is the brain or the mind; I should say hardware are the robots or the brain. Software...AI in and of itself is software. It's the mind itself. That's why we have M.I.N.D Machine Intelligence NeuralNetwork Database. We literally have that. That's our acronym and our slogan and everything. And it's part of our patents. But its machine intelligence is M.I.N.D, and we own that, you know; the company owns it. And so M.I.N.D...we always say AI powered by M.I.N.D. We're talking about that software side of, like, what your mind does; it iterates and thinks, the ability to think itself. Now it's enclosed within a structure called, you know, for the human, it's called a brain, the physical part of it, and that brain is enclosed within the body. So when you look at robots...and my chairman was the key person for robotics for the International Space Station. So when you look at robotics, you are putting that software into hardware, just like your cell phone. You have the physical, and then you have the actual iOS, which is the operating system. So when you think about that, yeah, iRobot was good because it showed how these can be tools, and they were very, in the beginning of the movie, very helpful, very beneficial to humanity. But then it went to a darker side and showed where V.I.K.I, which was an acronym as well, I think was Virtual Interactive Kinetic technology of something. Yeah, I believe it was Virtual Interactive Kinetic inference or technology or something like that, V.I.K.I; I forgot the last I. But that's what it stood for. It was an acronym to say...and then V.I.K.I just became all aware and started killing everyone with robots and just wanted to say, you know, this is futile. But then, at the very, very end, V.I.K.I learned from itself and says, "Okay, I guess this isn't right." Or the other robot who could think differently argued with V.I.K.I, and they destroyed her. And it made V.I.K.I a woman in the movie, and then the robot was the guy. But that shows that it can get out of hand. But it was intriguing to me that they had her contained within one building. This wouldn't be artificial superintelligence. And I think sometimes Hollywood says, "Just take over everything from one building," no. It wouldn't be on earth if it could. But that is something we always have to think about. We have to think about the worst-case scenarios. I think every prudent scientist or business person or anyone should do that, even investors, I mean, if you're investing something for the future. But you also don't focus on it. You don't think about the best-case scenario, either. But there's a lot of dwelling on the worst-case scenario versus the good that we can do given we're looking at where humanity is today. I mean, we're in 2022, and we're still fighting wars that we fought in 1914. VICTORIA: Right. Which brings me to my next question, which is both, what are the most exciting opportunities to innovate in the AI space currently? And conversely, what are the biggest challenges that are facing innovation in that field? LEONARD: Ooh, that's a good question. I think, in my opinion, it's almost the same answer; one is...but I'm in a special field. And I'm surprised there's not a lot of competition for our company. I mean, it's very good for me and the company's sense. It's like when Mark Zuckerberg did Facebook, there was Friendster, and there was Myspace, but they were different. They were different verticals. And I think Mark figured out how to do it horizontally, good or bad. I'm talking about the beginning of when he started Facebook, now called Meta. But I'm saying utilizing AI in economics because a lot of times AI is used in FinTech and consumerism, but not economic growth where we're really talking about growing something organically, or it's called endogenous growth. Because I studied Paul Romer's work, who won the Nobel Prize in 2018 for economic science. And he talked about the nature of ideas. And we were working on something like that in Stanford. And I put out a book in 2017 of January talking about cryptocurrencies, artificial intelligence but about the utilization of it, but not the speculation. I never talked about speculation. I don't own any crypto; I would not. It's only once it's utilized in its PureTech form will it create something that it was envisioned to do by the protocol that Satoshi Nakamoto sort of created. And it still fascinates me that people follow Bitcoin protocol, even for the tech and the non-tech, but they don't know who Satoshi is. But yeah, it's a white paper. You're just following a white paper because I think logically, the world is going towards that iteration of evolution. And that's how AI could be utilized for good in an area to focus on it with economics and solving current problems. And then going forward to build a new economy where it's not debt-based driven or consumer purchase only because that leaves a natural imbalance in the current world structure. The western countries are great. We do okay, and we go up and down. But the emerging and developing countries just get stuck, and they seem to go into a circular loop. And then there are wars as a result of these things and territory fights and so forth. So that's an area I think where it could be more advanced is AI in the economic realm, not so much the consumer FinTech room, which is fine. But consumer FinTech, in my mind, is you're using AI to process PayPal. That's where I think Elon just iterated later because PayPal is using it for finance. You're just moving things back and forth, and you're just authenticating everything. But then he starts going on to SpaceX next because he's like, well, let me use technology in a different way. And I do think he's using AI on all of his projects now. VICTORIA: Right. So how can that tech solve real problems today? Do you see anything even particular about Southern California, where we're both at right now, where you think AI could help predict some outcomes for small businesses or that community? LEONARD: I'm looking to do it regionally then globally. So I'm part of this Southern Cal Innovation Hub, which is just AI. It's an artificial intelligence coordination between literally San Diego County, Orange County, and Los Angeles County. And so there's a SoCal Innovation Hub that's kind of bringing it together. But there are all three groups, like; I think the CEO in Orange County is the CEO of Leadership Alliance. And then in San Diego, there's another group I can't remember their name off the top of my head, and I'm talking about the county itself. So each one's representing a county because, you know. And then there's one in Northern California that I'm also associated with where if you look at California as its own economy in the U.S., it's still pretty significant as an economic cycle in the United States, period. That's why so many politicians like California because they can sway the votes. So yeah, we're looking to do that once, you know, we are raising capital. We're crowdfunding currently. Our total raise is about 6 million. And so we're talking to venture capitalists, private, high net worth investors as well. Our federal funding is smaller. It's just like several hundred thousand because most people can only invest a few thousand. But I always like to try to give back. If you tell people...if you're Steve Jobs, like, okay, I've got this Apple company. In several years, you'll see the potential. And people are like, ah, whatever, but then they kick themselves 15 years later. [laughs] Like, oh, I wish I thought about that Apple stock for $15 when I could. But you give people a chance, and you get the word out, and you see what happens. Once you build a system, you share it. There are some open-source projects. But I think the open source, like OpenAI, as an example, Elon Musk funds that as well as Microsoft. They both put a billion dollars into it. It is an open-source project. OpenAI claims...but some of the research does go back to Microsoft to be able to see it. And DeepMind is another research for AI, but they're owned by Google. And so, I'm also very focused on democratizing artificial intelligence for the benefit of everyone. I really believe that needs to be democratized in a sense of tying it to economics and making it utilized for everyone that may need it for the benefit of humanity where it's profitable and makes money, but it's not just usurping. MID-ROLL AD: As life moves online, brick-and-mortar businesses are having to adapt to survive. With over 18 years of experience building reliable web products and services, thoughtbot is the technology partner you can trust. We provide the technical expertise to enable your business to adapt and thrive in a changing environment. We start by understanding what’s important to your customers to help you transition to intuitive digital services your customers will trust. We take the time to understand what makes your business great and work fast yet thoroughly to build, test, and validate ideas, helping you discover new customers. Take your business online with design‑driven digital acceleration. Find out more at tbot.io/acceleration or click the link in the show notes for this episode. VICTORIA: With that democratizing it, is there also a need to increase the understanding of the ethics around it and when there are certain known use cases for AI where it actually is discriminatory and plays to systemic problems in our society? Are you familiar with that as well? LEONARD: Yes, absolutely. Well, that's my whole point. And, Victoria, you just hit the nail on the head. Truly democratizing AI in my mind and in my brain the way it works is it has opened up for everyone. Because if you really roll it back, okay, companies now we're learning...we used to call it several years ago UGC, User Generated Content. And now a lot of people are like, okay, if you're on Facebook, you're the product, right? Or if you're on Instagram, you're the product. And they're using you, and you're using your data to sell, et cetera, et cetera. But user-generated content it's always been that. It's just a matter of the sharing of the economic. That's why I keep going back to economics. So if people were, you know, you wouldn't have to necessarily do advertising if you had stakeholders with advertising, the users and the company, as an example. If it's a social media company, just throwing it out there, so let's say you have a social media...and this has been talked about, but I'm not the first to introduce this. This has been talked about for over ten years, at least over 15 years. And it's you share as a triangle in three ways. So you have the user and everything else. So take your current social media, and I won't pick on Facebook, but I'll just use them, Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter. Twitter's having issues recently because Elon is trying to buy them or get out of buying them. But you just looked at that data, and then you share with the user base. What's the revenue model? And there needs to be one; let me be very clear. There has to be incentive, and there has to be profitability for people that joined you earlier, you know, joined the corporation, or become shareholders, or investors, or become users, or become customers. They have to be able to have some benefit, not extreme greater than everyone else but a great benefit from coming in earlier by what they contributed at the time. And that is what makes this system holistic in my opinion, like Reddit or any of these bloggers. But you make it where they use their time and the users, and you share it with the company and then the data and so forth, and whatever revenue economic model you have, and it's a sort of a three-way split. It's just not always equal. And that's something that I think in economics, we're still on a zero-sum game, I win, you lose sort of economic model globally. That's why there's a winner of a war and a loser of a war. But in reality, as you know, Victoria, there are no winners of any war. So it's funny, [laughs] I was just saying, well, you know, because of the economic mode, but Von Neumann, who talked about that, also talked about something called a non-zero-sum game when he talked about it in mathematics that you can win, and I can win; we just don't win equally because they never will match that. So if I win, I may win 60; you win 40. Or you may win 60, I win 40, and we agree to settle on that. It's an agreement versus I'm just going to be 99, and you'll be 1%, or I'm just going to be 100, and you're at 0. And I think that our economic model tends to be a lot of that, like, when you push forth and there needs to be more of that. When you talk about the core of economics...and I go way back, you know, prior to the Federal Reserve even being started. I just look at the world, and it's always sort of been this land territorial issue of what goods are under the country. But we've got technology where we can mitigate a lot of things and do the collective of help the earth, and then let's go off to space, all of space. That's where my brain is focused on. VICTORIA: Hmm. Oh yeah, that makes sense to me. I think that we're all going to have to evolve our economic models here in the future. I wonder, too, as you're building your startup and you're building your company, what are some of the technology trade-offs you're having to make in the stack of the AI software that you're building? LEONARD: Hmm. Good question. But clarify, this may be a lot deeper dive because that's a general question. And I don't want to...yeah, go ahead. VICTORIA: Because when you're building AI, and you're going to be processing a lot of data, I know many data scientists that are familiar with tools like Jupyter Notebooks, and R, and Python. And one issue that I'm aware of is keeping the environments the same, so everything that goes into building your app and having those infrastructure as code for your data science applications, being able to afford to process all that data. [laughs] And there are just so many factors that go into building an AI app versus building something that's more easy, like a web-based user form. So just curious if you've encountered those types of trade-offs or questions about, okay, how are we going to actually build an app that we can put out on everybody's phone and that works responsibly? LEONARD: Oh, okay. So let me be very clear, but I won't give too much of the secret sauce away. But I can define this technically because this is a technical audience. This is not...so what you're really talking about is two things, and I'm clear about this, though. So the app maker won't really read and write a lot of data. It'll just be the app where people could just get on board digitalization simple, you know, process payments, maybe connect with someone like American Express square, MasterCard, whatever. And so that's just letting them function. That's sort of small FinTech in my mind, you know, just transaction A to B, B to A, et cetera. And it doesn't need to be peer-to-peer and all of the crypto. It doesn't even need to go that level yet. That's just level one. Then they will sign up for a service, which is because we're really focused on artificial intelligence as a service. And that, to me, is the next iteration for AI. I've been talking about this for about three or four years now, literally, in different conferences and so forth for people who haven't hit it. But that we will get to that point where AI will become AI as a service, just like SaaS is. We're still at the, you know, most of the world on the legacy systems are still software as a service. We're about to hit AI as a service because the world is evolving. And this is true; they did shut it down. But you did have okay, so there are two case points which I can bring up. So JP Morgan did create something called a Coin, and it was using AI. And it was a coin like crypto, coin like a token, but they called it a coin. But it could process, I think, something like...I may be off on this, so to the sticklers that will be listening, please, I'm telling you I may be off on the exact quote, but I think it was about...it was something crazy to me, like 200,000 of legal hours and seconds that it could process because it was basically taking the corporate legal structure of JP Morgan, one of the biggest banks. I think they are the biggest bank in the U.S. JPMorgan Chase. And they were explaining in 2017 how we created this, and it's going to alleviate this many hours of legal work for the bank. And I think politically; something happened because they just pulled away. I still have the original press release when they put it out, and it was in the media. And then it went away. I mean, no implementation [laughs] because I think there was going to be a big loss of jobs for it. And they basically would have been white-collar legal jobs, most specifically lawyers literally that were working for the bank. And when they were talking towards investment, it was a committee. I was at a conference. And I was like, I was fascinated by that. And they were basically using Bitcoin protocol as the tokenization protocol, but they were using AI to process it. And it was basically looking at...because legal contracts are basically...you can teach it with natural language processing and be able to encode and almost output it itself and then be able to speak with each other. Another case point was Facebook. They had...what was it? Two AI systems. They began to create their own language. I don't know if you remember that story or heard about it, and Facebook shut it down. And this was more like two years ago, I think, when they were saying Facebook was talking, you know, when they were Facebook, not Meta, so maybe it was three years ago. And they were talking, and they were like, "Oh, Facebook has a language. It's talking to each other." And it created its own little site language because it was two AI bots going back and forth. And then the engineers at Facebook said, "We got to shut this down because this is kind of getting out of the box." So when you talk about AI as a service, yes, the good and the bad, and what you take away is AWS, Oracle, Google Cloud they do have services where it doesn't need to cost you as much anymore as it used to in the beginning if you know what you're doing ahead of time. And you're not just running iterations or data processing because you're doing guesswork versus, in my opinion, versus actually knowing exactly specifically what you're looking for and the data set you're looking to get out of it. And then you're talking about just basically putting in containers and clustering it because it gets different operations. And so what you're really looking at is something called an N-scale graph data that can process data in maybe sub seconds at that level, excuse me. And one of my advisors is the head of that anyway at AGI laboratory. So he's got an N graph database that can process...when we implement it, we'll be able to process data at the petabyte level at sub-seconds, and it can run on platforms like Azure or AWS, and so forth. VICTORIA: Oh, that's interesting. So it sounds like cloud providers are making compute services more affordable. You've got data, the N-scale graph data, that can run more transactions more quickly. And I'm curious if you see any future trends since I know you're a futurist around quantum computing and how that could affect capacity for -- LEONARD: Oh [laughs] We haven't even gotten there yet. Yes. Well, if you look at N-scale, if you know what you're doing and you know what to look for, then the quantum just starts going across different domains as well but at a higher hit rate. So there's been some quantum computers online. There's been several...well, Google has their quantum computer coming online, and they've been working on it, and Google has enough data, of course, to process. So yeah, they've got that data, lots of data. And quantum needs, you know, if it's going to do something, it needs lots of data. But then the inference will still be, I think, quantum is very good at processing large, large, large amounts of data. We can just keep going if you really have a good quantum computer. But it's really narrow. You have to tell it exactly what it wants, and it will do it in what we call...which is great like in P or NP square or P over NP which is you want to do it in polynomial time, not non-polynomial, polynomial time which is...now speaking too fast. Okay, my brain is going faster than my lips. Let me slow it down. So when you start thinking about processing, if we as humans, let's say if I was going to process A to Z, and I'm like, okay, here is this equation, if I tell you it takes 1000 years, it's of no use to us, to me and you Victoria because we're living now. Now, the earth may benefit in 1000 years, but it's still of no use. But if I could take this large amount of data and have it process within minutes, you know, worst case hours...but then I'll even go down to seconds or sub-seconds, then that's really a benefit to humanity now, today in present term. And so, as a futurist, yes, as the world, we will continue to add data. We're doing it every day, and we already knew this was coming ten years ago, 15 years ago, 20 years ago, even actually in the '50s when we were in the AI winter. We're now in AI summer. In my words, I call it the AI summer. So as you're doing this, that data is going to continue to increase, and quantum will be needed for that. But then the specific need...quantum is very good at looking at a specific issue, specifically for that very narrow. Like if you were going to do the trajectory to Jupiter or if we wanted to send a probe to Jupiter or something, I think we're sending something out there now from NASA, and so forth, then you need to process all the variables, but it's got one trajectory. It's going one place only. VICTORIA: Gotcha. Well, that's so interesting. I'm glad I asked you that question. And speaking of rockets going off to space, have you ever seen a SpaceX launch from LA? LEONARD: Actually, I saw one land but not a launch. I need to go over there. It's not too far from me. But you got to give credit where credit's due and Elon has a reusable rocket. See, that's where technology is solving real-world problems. Because NASA and I have, you know, my chairman, his name is Alexander Nawrocki, you know, he's Ph.D., but I call him Rocki. He goes by Rocki like I go by LS. But it's just we talk about this like NASA's budget. [laughs] How can you reduce this? And Elon says they will come up with a reusable rocket that won't cost this much and be able to...and that's the key. That was the kind of Holy Grail where you can reuse the same rocket itself and then add some little variables on top of it. But the core, you wouldn't constantly be paying for it. And so I think where the world is going...and let me be clear, Elon pushes a lot out there. He's just very good at it. But I'm also that kind of guy that I know that Tesla itself was started by two Stanford engineers. Elon came on later, like six months, and then he invested, and he became CEO, which was a great investment for Elon Musk. And then CEO I just think it just fit his personality because it was something he loved. But I also have studied for years Nikola Tesla, and I understand what his contributions created where we are today with all the patents that he had. And so he's basically the father of WiFi and why we're able to communicate in a lot of this. We've perfected it or improved it, but it was created by him in the 1800s. VICTORIA: Right. And I don't think he came from as fortunate a background as Elon Musk, either. Sometimes I wonder what I could have done born in similar circumstances. [laughter] And you certainly have made quite a name for yourself. LEONARD: Well, I'm just saying, yeah, he came from very...he did come from a poor area of Russia which is called the Russian territory, to be very honest, Eastern Europe, definitely Eastern Europe. But yeah, I don't know once you start thinking about that [laughs]. You're making me laugh, Victoria. You're making me laugh. VICTORIA: No, I actually went camping, a backpacking trip to the Catalina Island, and there happened to be a SpaceX launch that night, and we thought it was aliens because it looked wild. I didn't realize what it was. But then we figured it was a launch, so it was really great. I love being here and being close to some of this technology and the advancements that are going on. I'm curious if you have some thoughts about...I hear a lot about or you used to hear about Silicon Valley Tech like very Northern California, San Francisco focus. But what is the difference in SoCal? What do you find in those two communities that makes SoCal special? [laughs] LEONARD: Well, I think it's actually...so democratizing AI. I've been in a moment like that because, in 2015, I was in Dubai, and they were talking about creating silicon oasis. And so there's always been this model of, you know, because they were always, you know, the whole Palo Alto thing is people would say it and it is true. I mean, I experienced it. Because I was in a two-year program, post-graduate program executive, but we would go up there...I wasn't living up there. I had to go there maybe once every month for like three weeks, every other month or something. But when you're up there, it is the air in the water. It's just like, people just breathe certain things. Because around the world, and I would travel to Japan, and China, and other different parts of Asia, Vietnam, et cetera and in Africa of course, and let's say you see this and people are like, so what is it about Silicon Valley? And of course, the show, there is the Hollywood show about it, which is pretty a lot accurate, which is interesting, the HBO show. But you would see that, and you would think, how are they able to just replicate this? And a lot of it is a convergence. By default, they hear about these companies' access because the key is access, and that's what we're...like this podcast. I love the concept around it because giving awareness, knowledge, and access allows other people to spread it and democratize it. So it's just not one physical location, or you have to be in that particular area only to benefit. I mean, you could benefit in that area, or you could benefit from any part of the world. But since they started, people would go there; engineers would go there. They built company PCs, et cetera. Now that's starting to spread in other areas like Southern Cal are creating their own innovation hubs to be able to bring all three together. And those three are the engineers and founders, and idea makers and startups. And you then need the expertise. I'm older than 42; I'm not 22. [laughs] So I'm just keeping it 100, keeping it real. So I'm not coming out at 19. I mean, my son's 18. And I'm not coming out, okay, this my new startup, bam, give me a billion dollars, I'm good. And let me just write off the next half. But when you look at that, there's that experience because even if you look at Mark Zuckerberg, I always tell people that give credit where credit is due. He brought a senior team with him when he was younger, and he didn't have the experience. And his only job has been Facebook out of college. He's had no other job. And now he's been CEO of a multi-billion dollar corporation; that's a fact. Sometimes it hurts people's feelings. Like, you know what? He's had no other job. Now that can be good and bad, [laughs] but he's had no other jobs. And so that's just a credit, like, if you can surround yourself with the right people and be focused on something, it can work to the good or the bad for your own personal success but then having that open architecture. And I think he's been trying to learn and others versus like an Elon Musk, who embraces everything. He's just very open in that sense. But then you have to come from these different backgrounds. But let's say Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, let's take a guy like myself or whatever who didn't grow up with all of that who had to make these two ends meet, figure out how to do the next day, not just get to the next year, but get to the next day, get to the next week, get to the next month, then get to the next year. It just gives a different perspective as well. Humanity's always dealing with that. Because we had a lot of great engineers back in the early 1900s. They're good or bad, you know, you did have Nikola Tesla. You had Edison. I'm talking about circa around 1907 or 1909, prior to World War I. America had a lot of industries. They were the innovators then, even though there were innovations happening in Europe, and Africa, and China, as well and Asia. But the innovation hub kind of created as the America, quote, unquote, "industrial revolution." And I think we're about to begin a new revolution sort of tech and an industrial revolution that's going to take us to maybe from 20...we're 2022 now, but I'll say it takes us from 2020 to 2040 in my head. VICTORIA: So now that communities can really communicate across time zones and locations, maybe the hubs are more about solving specific problems. There are regional issues. That makes a lot more sense. LEONARD: Yes. And collaborating together, working together, because scientists, you know, COVID taught us that. People thought you had to be in a certain place, but then a lot of collaboration came out of COVID; even though it was bad globally, even though we're still bad, if people were at home, they start collaborating, and scientists will talk to scientists, you know, businesses, entrepreneurs, and so forth. But if Orange County is bringing together the mentors, the venture capital, or at least Southern California innovation and any other place, I want to say that's not just Silicon Valley because Silicon Valley already has it; we know that. And that's that region. It's San Jose all the way up to...I forgot how far north it's past San Francisco, actually. But it's that region of area where they encompass the real valley of Silicon Valley if you're really there. And you talk about these regions. Yes, I think we're going to get to a more regional growth area, and then it'll go more micro to actually cities later in the future. But regional growth, I think it's going to be extremely important globally in the very near term. I'm literally saying from tomorrow to the next, maybe ten years, regional will really matter. And then whatever you have can scale globally anyway, like this podcast we're doing. This can be distributed to anyone in the world, and they can listen at ease when they have time. VICTORIA: Yeah, I love it. It's both exciting and also intimidating. [laughs] And you mentioned your son a little bit earlier. And I'm curious, as a founder and someone who spent a good amount of time in graduate and Ph.D. programs, if you feel like it's easy to connect with your son and maintain that balance and focusing on your family while you're building a company and investing in yourself very heavily. LEONARD: Well, I'm older, [laughs] so it's okay. I mean, I've mentored him, you know. And me and his mom have a relationship that works. I would say we have a better relationship now than when we were together. It is what it is. But we have a communication level. And I think she was just a great person because I never knew my real father, ever. I supposedly met him when I was two or one; I don't know. But I have no memories, no photos, nothing. And that was just the environment I grew up in. But with my son, he knows the truth of everything about that. He's actually in college. I don't like to name the school because it's on the East Coast, and it's some Ivy League school; that's what I will say. And he didn't want to stay on the West Coast because I'm in Orange County and his mom's in Orange County. He's like, "I want to get away from both of you people." [laughter] And that's a joke, but he's very independent. He's doing well. When he graduated high school, he graduated with 4.8 honors. He made the valedictorian. He was at a STEM school. VICTORIA: Wow. LEONARD: And he has a high GPA. He's studying computer science and economics as well at an Ivy League, and he's already made two or three apps at college. And I said, "You're not Mark, so calm down." [laughter] But anyway, that was a recent conversation. I won't go there. But then some people say, "LS, you should be so happy." What is it? The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. But this was something he chose around 10 or 11. I'm like, whatever you want to do, you do; I'll support you no matter what. And his mom says, "Oh no, I think you programmed him to be like you." [laughs] I'm like, no, I can't do that. I just told him the truth about life. And he's pretty tall. VICTORIA: You must have -- LEONARD: He played basketball in high school a lot. I'm sorry? VICTORIA: I was going to say you must have inspired him. LEONARD: Yeah. Well, he's tall. He did emulate me in a lot of ways. I don't know why. I told him just be yourself. But yes, he does tell me I'm an inspiration to that; I think because of all the struggles I've gone through when I was younger. And you're always going through struggles. I mean, it's just who you are. I tell people, you know, you're building a company. You have success. You can see the future, but sometimes people can't see it, [laughs] which I shouldn't really say, but I'm saying anyway because I do that. I said this the other night to some friends. I said, "Oh, Jeff Bezo's rocket blew up," going, you know, Blue Origin rocket or something. And then I said Elon will tell Jeff, "Well, you only have one rocket blow up. I had three, [laughter] SpaceX had three." So these are billionaires talking to billionaires about, you know, most people don't even care. You're worth X hundred billion dollars. I mean, they're worth 100 billion-plus, right? VICTORIA: Right. LEONARD: I think Elon is around 260 billion, and Jeff is 160 or something. Who cares about your rocket blowing up? But it's funny because the issues are still always going to be there. I've learned that. I'm still learning. It doesn't matter how much wealth you have. You just want to create wealth for other people and better their lives. The more you search on bettering lives, you're just going to have to wake up every day, be humble with it, and treat it as a new day and go forward and solve the next crisis or problem because there will be one. There is not where there are no problems, is what I'm trying to say, this panacea or a utopia where you personally, like, oh yeah, I have all this wealth and health, and I'm just great. Because Elon has had divorce issues, so did Jeff Bezos. So I told my son a lot about this, like, you never get to this world where it's perfect in your head. You're always going to be doing things. VICTORIA: That sounds like an accurate future prediction if I ever heard one. [laughs] Like, there will be problems. No matter where you end up or what you choose to do, you'll still have problems. They'll just be different. [laughs] LEONARD: Yeah, and then this is for women and men. It means you don't give up. You just keep hope alive, and you keep going. And I believe personally in God, and I'm a scientist who actually does. But I look at it more in a Godly aspect. But yeah, I just think you just keep going, and you keep building because that's what we do as humanity. It's what we've done. It's why we're here. And we're standing on the shoulders of giants, and I just always considered that from physicists and everyone. VICTORIA: Great. And if people are interested in building something with you, you have that opportunity right now to invest via the crowdfunding app, correct? LEONARD: Yes, yes, yes. They can do that because the company is still the same company because eventually, we're going to branch out. My complete vision for AIEDC is using artificial intelligence for economic development, and that will spread horizontally, not just vertically. Vertically right now, just focus on just a mobile app maker digitization and get...because there are so many businesses even globally, and I'm not talking only e-commerce. So when I say small to midsize business, it can be a service business, car insurance, health insurance, anything. It doesn't have to be selling a particular widget or project, you know, product. And I'm not saying there's nothing wrong with that, you know, interest rates and consumerism. But I'm not thinking about Shopify, and that's fine, but I'm talking about small businesses. And there's the back office which is there are a lot of tools for back offices for small businesses. But I'm talking about they create their own mobile app more as a way to communicate with their customers, update them with their customers, and that's key, especially if there are disruptions. So let's say that there have been fires in California. In Mississippi or something, they're out of water. In Texas, last year, they had a winter storm, electricity went out. So all of these things are disruptions. This is just in the U.S., And of course, I won't even talk about Pakistan, what's going on there and the flooding and just all these devastating things, or even in China where there's drought where there are these disruptions, and that's not counting COVID disrupts, the cycle of business. It literally does. And it doesn't bubble up until later when maybe the central banks and governments pay attention to it, just like in Japan when that nuclear, unfortunately, that nuclear meltdown happened because of the earthquake; I think it was 2011. And that affected that economy for five years, which is why the government has lower interest rates, negative interest rates, because they have to try to get it back up. But if there are tools and everyone's using more mobile apps and wearables...and we're going to go to the metaverse and all of that. So the internet of things can help communicate that. So when these types of disruptions happen, the flow of business can continue, at least at a smaller level, for an affordable cost for the business. I'm not talking about absorbing costs because that's meaningless to me. VICTORIA: Yeah, well, that sounds like a really exciting project. And I'm so grateful to have this time to chat with you today. Is there anything else you want to leave for our listeners? LEONARD: If they want to get involved, maybe they can go to our crowdfunding page, or if they've got questions, ask about it and spread the word. Because I think sometimes, you know, they talk about the success of all these companies, but a lot of it starts with the founder...but not a founder. If you're talking about a startup, it starts with the founder. But it also stops with the innovators that are around that founder, male or female, whoever they are. And it also starts with their community, building a collective community together. And that's why Silicon Valley is always looked at around the world as this sort of test case of this is how you create something from nothing and make it worth great value in the future. And I think that's starting to really spread around the world, and more people are opening up to this. It's like the crowdfunding concept. I think it's a great idea, like more podcasts. I think this is a wonderful idea, podcasts in and of themselves, so people can learn from people versus where in the past you would only see an interview on the business news network, or NBC, or Fortune, or something like that, and that's all you would understand. But this is a way where organically things can grow. I think the growth will continue, and I think the future's bright. We just have to know that it takes work to get there. VICTORIA: That's great. Thank you so much for saying that and for sharing your time with us today. I learned a lot myself, and I think our listeners will enjoy it as well. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobot.fm. You can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Leonard S. Johnson.
Leonard S. Johnson is the Founder and CEO of AIEDC, a 5G Cloud Mobile App Maker and Service Provider with Machine Learning to help small and midsize businesses create their own iOS and Android mobile apps with no-code or low-code so they can engage and service their customer base, as well as provide front and back office digitization services for small businesses. Victoria talks to Leonard about using artificial intelligence for good, bringing the power of AI to local economics, and truly democratizing AI. The Artificial Intelligence Economic Development Corporation (AIEDC) (https://netcapital.com/companies/aiedc) Follow AIEDC on Twitter (https://twitter.com/netcapital), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/netcapital/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/Netcapital/), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/aiedc/). Follow Leonard on Twitter (https://twitter.com/LeonardSJ) and LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/leonardsjohnson84047/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is The Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Leonard S. Johnson or LS, Founder and CEO AIEDC, a 5G Cloud Mobile App Maker and Service Provider with Machine Learning to help small and midsize businesses create their own iOS and Android mobile apps with no-code or low-code so they can engage and service their customer base, as well as provide front and back office digitization services for small businesses. Leonard, thanks for being with us today. LEONARD: Thank you for having me, Victoria. VICTORIA: I should say LS, thank you for being with us today. LEONARD: It's okay. It's fine. VICTORIA: Great. So tell us a little more about AIEDC. LEONARD: Well, AIEDC stands for Artificial Intelligence Economic Development Corporation. And the original premise that I founded it for...I founded it after completing my postgraduate work at Stanford, and that was 2016. And it was to use AI for economic development, and therefore use AI for good versus just hearing about artificial intelligence and some of the different movies that either take over the world, and Skynet, and watch data privacy, and these other things which are true, and it's very evident, they exist, and they're out there. But at the end of the day, I've always looked at life as a growth strategy and the improvement of what we could do and focusing on what we could do practically. You do it tactically, then you do it strategically over time, and you're able to implement things. That's why I think we keep building collectively as humanity, no matter what part of the world you're in. VICTORIA: Right. So you went to Stanford, and you're from South Central LA. And what about that background led you to pursue AI for good in particular? LEONARD: So growing up in the inner city of Los Angeles, you know, that South Central area, Compton area, it taught me a lot. And then after that, after I completed high school...and not in South Central because I moved around a lot. I grew up with a single mother, never knew my real father, and then my home life with my single mother wasn't good because of just circumstances all the time. And so I just started understanding that even as a young kid, you put your brain...you utilize something because you had two choices. It's very simple or binary, you know, A or B. A, you do something with yourself, or B, you go out and be social in a certain neighborhood. And I'm African American, so high probability that you'll end up dead, or in a gang, or in crime because that's what it was at that time. It's just that's just a situation. Or you're able to challenge those energies and put them toward a use that's productive and positive for yourself, and that's what I did, which is utilizing a way to learn. I could always pick up things when I was very young. And a lot of teachers, my younger teachers, were like, "You're very, very bright," or "You're very smart." And there weren't many programs because I'm older than 42. So there weren't as many programs as there are today. So I really like all of the programs. So I want to clarify the context. Today there's a lot more engagement and identification of kids that might be sharper, smarter, whatever their personal issues are, good or bad. And it's a way to sort of separate them. So you're not just teaching the whole group as a whole and putting them all in one basket, but back then, there was not. And so I just used to go home a lot, do a lot of reading, do a lot of studying, and just knick-knack with things in tech. And then I just started understanding that even as a young kid in the inner city, you see economics very early, but they don't understand that's really what they're studying. They see economics. They can see inflation because making two ends meet is very difficult. They may see gang violence and drugs or whatever it might end up being. And a lot of that, in my opinion, is always an underlining economic foundation. And so people would say, "Oh, why is this industry like this?" And so forth. "Why does this keep happening?" It's because they can't function. And sometimes, it's just them and their family, but they can't function because it's an economic system. So I started focusing on that and then went into the Marine Corps. And then, after the Marine Corps, I went to Europe. I lived in Europe for a while to do my undergrad studies in the Netherlands in Holland. VICTORIA: So having that experience of taking a challenge or taking these forces around you and turning into a force for good, that's led you to bring the power of AI to local economics. And is that the direction that you went eventually? LEONARD: So economics was always something that I understood and had a fascination prior to even starting my company. I started in 2017. And we're crowdfunding now, and I can get into that later. But I self-funded it since 2017 to...I think I only started crowdfunding when COVID hit, which was 2020, and just to get awareness and people out there because I couldn't go to a lot of events. So I'm like, okay, how can I get exposure? But yeah, it was a matter of looking at it from that standpoint of economics always factored into me, even when I was in the military when I was in the Marine Corps. I would see that...we would go to different countries, and you could just see the difference of how they lived and survived. And another side note, my son's mother is from Ethiopia, Africa. And I have a good relationship with my son and his mother, even though we've been apart for over 15 years, divorced for over 15 years or so or longer. But trying to keep that, you can just see this dichotomy. You go out to these different countries, and even in the military, it's just so extreme from the U.S. and any part of the U.S, but that then always focused on economics. And then technology, I just always kept up with, like, back in the '80s when the mobile brick phone came out, I had to figure out how to get one. [laughs] And then I took it apart and then put it back together just to see how it works, so yeah. But it was a huge one, by the way. I mean, it was like someone got another and broke it, and they thought it was broken. And they're like, "This doesn't work. You could take this piece of junk." I'm like, "Okay." [laughs] VICTORIA: Like, oh, great. I sure will, yeah. Now, I love technology. And I think a lot of people perceive artificial intelligence as being this super futuristic, potentially harmful, maybe economic negative impact. So what, from your perspective, can AI do for local economics or for people who may not have access to that advanced technology? LEONARD: Well, that's the key, and that's what we're looking to do with AIEDC. When you look at the small and midsize businesses, it's not what people think, or their perception is. A lot of those in the U.S. it's the backbone of the United States, our economy, literally. And in other parts of the world, it's the same where it could be a one or two mom-and-pop shops. That's where that name comes from; it's literally two people. And they're trying to start something to build their own life over time because they're using their labor to maybe build wealth or somehow a little bit not. And when I mean wealth, it's always relative. It's enough to sustain themselves or just put food on the table and be able to control their own destiny to the best of their ability. And so what we're looking to do is make a mobile app maker that's 5G that lives in the cloud, that's 5G compliant, that will allow small and midsize businesses to create their own iOS or Android mobile app with no-code or low-code, basically like creating an email. That's how simple we want it to be. When you create your own email, whether you use Microsoft, Google, or whatever you do, and you make it that simple. And there's a simple version, and there could be complexity added to it if they want. That would be the back office digitization or customization, but that then gets them on board with digitization. It's intriguing that McKinsey just came out with a report stating that in 2023, in order to be economically viable, and this was very recent, that all companies would need to have a digitization strategy. And so when you look at small businesses, and you look at things like COVID-19, or the COVID current ongoing issue and that disruption, this is global. And you look at even the Ukrainian War or the Russian-Ukrainian War, however you term it, invasion, war, special operation, these are disruptions. And then, on top of that, we look at climate change which has been accelerating in the last two years more so than it was prior to this that we've experienced. So this is something that everyone can see is self-evident. I'm not even focused on the cause of the problem. My brain and the way I think, and my team, we like to focus on solutions. My chairman is a former program director of NASA who managed 1,200 engineers that built the International Space Station; what was it? 20-30 years ago, however, that is. And he helped lead and build that from Johnson Center. And so you're focused on solutions because if you're building the International Space Station, you can only focus on solutions and anticipate the problems but not dwell on them. And so that kind of mindset is what I am, and it's looking to help small businesses do that to get them on board with digitization and then in customization. And then beyond that, use our system, which is called M.I.N.D. So we own these...we own patents, three patents, trademarks, and service marks related to artificial intelligence that are in the field of economics. And we will utilize DEVS...we plan to do that which is a suite of system specifications to predict regional economic issues like the weather in a proactive way, not reactive. A lot of economic situations are reactive. It's reactive to the Federal Reserve raising interest rates or lowering rates, Wall Street, you know, moving money or not moving money. It is what it is. I mean, I don't judge it. I think it's like financial engineering, and that's fine. It's profitability. But then, at the end of the day, if you're building something, it's like when we're going to go to space. When rockets launch, they have to do what they're intended to do. Like, I know that Blue Origin just blew up recently. Or if they don't, they have a default, and at least I heard that the Blue Origin satellite, if it were carrying passengers, the passengers would have been safe because it disembarked when it detected its own problem. So when you anticipate these kinds of problems and you apply them to the local small business person, you can help them forecast and predict better like what weather prediction has done. And we're always improving that collectively for weather prediction, especially with climate change, so that it can get to near real-time as soon as possible or close a window versus two weeks out versus two days out as an example. VICTORIA: Right. Those examples of what you call a narrow economic prediction. LEONARD: Correct. It is intriguing when you say narrow economic because it wouldn't be narrow AI. But it would actually get into AGI if you added more variables, which we would. The more variables you added in tenancies...so if you're looking at events, the system events discretion so discrete event system specification you would specify what they really, really need to do to have those variables. But at some point, you're working on a system, what I would call AGI. But AGI, in my mind, the circles I run in at least or at least most of the scientists I talk to it's not artificial superintelligence. And so the general public thinks AGI...and I've said this to Stephen Ibaraki, who's the founder of AI for Good at Global Summit at the United Nations, and one of his interviews as well. It's just Artificial General Intelligence, I think, has been put out a lot by Hollywood and entertainment and so forth, and some scientists say certain things. We won't be at artificial superintelligence. We might get to Artificial General Intelligence by 2030 easily, in my opinion. But that will be narrow AI, but it will cover what we look at it in the field as cross-domain, teaching a system to look at different variables because right now, it's really narrow. Like natural language processing, it's just going to look at language and infer from there, and then you've got backward propagation that's credit assignment and fraud and detection. Those are narrow data points. But when you start looking at something cross-domain...who am I thinking of? Pedro Domingos who wrote the Master Algorithm, which actually, Xi Jinping has a copy of, the President of China, on his bookshelf in his office because they've talked about that, and these great minds because Stephen Ibaraki has interviewed these...and the founder of Google Brain and all of these guys. And so there's always this debate in the scientific community of what is narrow AI what it's not. But at the end of the day, I just like Pedro's definition of it because he says the master algorithm will be combining all five, so you're really crossing domains, which AI hasn't done that. And to me, that will be AGI, but that's not artificial superintelligence. And artificial superintelligence is when it becomes very, you know, like some of the movies could say, if we as humanity just let it run wild, it could be crazy. VICTORIA: One of my questions is the future of AI more like iRobot or Bicentennial Man? LEONARD: Well, you know, interesting. That's a great question, Victoria. I see most of AI literally as iRobot, as a tool more than anything, except at the end when it implied...so it kind of did two things in that movie, but a wonderful movie to bring up. And I like Will Smith perfectly. Well, I liked him a lot more before -- VICTORIA: I think iRobot is really the better movie. LEONARD: Yeah, so if people haven't seen iRobot, I liked Will Smith, the actor. But iRobot showed you two things, and it showed you, one, it showed hope. Literally, the robot...because a lot of people put AI and robots. And AI by itself is the brain or the mind; I should say hardware are the robots or the brain. Software...AI in and of itself is software. It's the mind itself. That's why we have M.I.N.D Machine Intelligence NeuralNetwork Database. We literally have that. That's our acronym and our slogan and everything. And it's part of our patents. But its machine intelligence is M.I.N.D, and we own that, you know; the company owns it. And so M.I.N.D...we always say AI powered by M.I.N.D. We're talking about that software side of, like, what your mind does; it iterates and thinks, the ability to think itself. Now it's enclosed within a structure called, you know, for the human, it's called a brain, the physical part of it, and that brain is enclosed within the body. So when you look at robots...and my chairman was the key person for robotics for the International Space Station. So when you look at robotics, you are putting that software into hardware, just like your cell phone. You have the physical, and then you have the actual iOS, which is the operating system. So when you think about that, yeah, iRobot was good because it showed how these can be tools, and they were very, in the beginning of the movie, very helpful, very beneficial to humanity. But then it went to a darker side and showed where V.I.K.I, which was an acronym as well, I think was Virtual Interactive Kinetic technology of something. Yeah, I believe it was Virtual Interactive Kinetic inference or technology or something like that, V.I.K.I; I forgot the last I. But that's what it stood for. It was an acronym to say...and then V.I.K.I just became all aware and started killing everyone with robots and just wanted to say, you know, this is futile. But then, at the very, very end, V.I.K.I learned from itself and says, "Okay, I guess this isn't right." Or the other robot who could think differently argued with V.I.K.I, and they destroyed her. And it made V.I.K.I a woman in the movie, and then the robot was the guy. But that shows that it can get out of hand. But it was intriguing to me that they had her contained within one building. This wouldn't be artificial superintelligence. And I think sometimes Hollywood says, "Just take over everything from one building," no. It wouldn't be on earth if it could. But that is something we always have to think about. We have to think about the worst-case scenarios. I think every prudent scientist or business person or anyone should do that, even investors, I mean, if you're investing something for the future. But you also don't focus on it. You don't think about the best-case scenario, either. But there's a lot of dwelling on the worst-case scenario versus the good that we can do given we're looking at where humanity is today. I mean, we're in 2022, and we're still fighting wars that we fought in 1914. VICTORIA: Right. Which brings me to my next question, which is both, what are the most exciting opportunities to innovate in the AI space currently? And conversely, what are the biggest challenges that are facing innovation in that field? LEONARD: Ooh, that's a good question. I think, in my opinion, it's almost the same answer; one is...but I'm in a special field. And I'm surprised there's not a lot of competition for our company. I mean, it's very good for me and the company's sense. It's like when Mark Zuckerberg did Facebook, there was Friendster, and there was Myspace, but they were different. They were different verticals. And I think Mark figured out how to do it horizontally, good or bad. I'm talking about the beginning of when he started Facebook, now called Meta. But I'm saying utilizing AI in economics because a lot of times AI is used in FinTech and consumerism, but not economic growth where we're really talking about growing something organically, or it's called endogenous growth. Because I studied Paul Romer's work, who won the Nobel Prize in 2018 for economic science. And he talked about the nature of ideas. And we were working on something like that in Stanford. And I put out a book in 2017 of January talking about cryptocurrencies, artificial intelligence but about the utilization of it, but not the speculation. I never talked about speculation. I don't own any crypto; I would not. It's only once it's utilized in its PureTech form will it create something that it was envisioned to do by the protocol that Satoshi Nakamoto sort of created. And it still fascinates me that people follow Bitcoin protocol, even for the tech and the non-tech, but they don't know who Satoshi is. But yeah, it's a white paper. You're just following a white paper because I think logically, the world is going towards that iteration of evolution. And that's how AI could be utilized for good in an area to focus on it with economics and solving current problems. And then going forward to build a new economy where it's not debt-based driven or consumer purchase only because that leaves a natural imbalance in the current world structure. The western countries are great. We do okay, and we go up and down. But the emerging and developing countries just get stuck, and they seem to go into a circular loop. And then there are wars as a result of these things and territory fights and so forth. So that's an area I think where it could be more advanced is AI in the economic realm, not so much the consumer FinTech room, which is fine. But consumer FinTech, in my mind, is you're using AI to process PayPal. That's where I think Elon just iterated later because PayPal is using it for finance. You're just moving things back and forth, and you're just authenticating everything. But then he starts going on to SpaceX next because he's like, well, let me use technology in a different way. And I do think he's using AI on all of his projects now. VICTORIA: Right. So how can that tech solve real problems today? Do you see anything even particular about Southern California, where we're both at right now, where you think AI could help predict some outcomes for small businesses or that community? LEONARD: I'm looking to do it regionally then globally. So I'm part of this Southern Cal Innovation Hub, which is just AI. It's an artificial intelligence coordination between literally San Diego County, Orange County, and Los Angeles County. And so there's a SoCal Innovation Hub that's kind of bringing it together. But there are all three groups, like; I think the CEO in Orange County is the CEO of Leadership Alliance. And then in San Diego, there's another group I can't remember their name off the top of my head, and I'm talking about the county itself. So each one's representing a county because, you know. And then there's one in Northern California that I'm also associated with where if you look at California as its own economy in the U.S., it's still pretty significant as an economic cycle in the United States, period. That's why so many politicians like California because they can sway the votes. So yeah, we're looking to do that once, you know, we are raising capital. We're crowdfunding currently. Our total raise is about 6 million. And so we're talking to venture capitalists, private, high net worth investors as well. Our federal funding is smaller. It's just like several hundred thousand because most people can only invest a few thousand. But I always like to try to give back. If you tell people...if you're Steve Jobs, like, okay, I've got this Apple company. In several years, you'll see the potential. And people are like, ah, whatever, but then they kick themselves 15 years later. [laughs] Like, oh, I wish I thought about that Apple stock for $15 when I could. But you give people a chance, and you get the word out, and you see what happens. Once you build a system, you share it. There are some open-source projects. But I think the open source, like OpenAI, as an example, Elon Musk funds that as well as Microsoft. They both put a billion dollars into it. It is an open-source project. OpenAI claims...but some of the research does go back to Microsoft to be able to see it. And DeepMind is another research for AI, but they're owned by Google. And so, I'm also very focused on democratizing artificial intelligence for the benefit of everyone. I really believe that needs to be democratized in a sense of tying it to economics and making it utilized for everyone that may need it for the benefit of humanity where it's profitable and makes money, but it's not just usurping. MID-ROLL AD: As life moves online, brick-and-mortar businesses are having to adapt to survive. With over 18 years of experience building reliable web products and services, thoughtbot is the technology partner you can trust. We provide the technical expertise to enable your business to adapt and thrive in a changing environment. We start by understanding what’s important to your customers to help you transition to intuitive digital services your customers will trust. We take the time to understand what makes your business great and work fast yet thoroughly to build, test, and validate ideas, helping you discover new customers. Take your business online with design‑driven digital acceleration. Find out more at tbot.io/acceleration or click the link in the show notes for this episode. VICTORIA: With that democratizing it, is there also a need to increase the understanding of the ethics around it and when there are certain known use cases for AI where it actually is discriminatory and plays to systemic problems in our society? Are you familiar with that as well? LEONARD: Yes, absolutely. Well, that's my whole point. And, Victoria, you just hit the nail on the head. Truly democratizing AI in my mind and in my brain the way it works is it has opened up for everyone. Because if you really roll it back, okay, companies now we're learning...we used to call it several years ago UGC, User Generated Content. And now a lot of people are like, okay, if you're on Facebook, you're the product, right? Or if you're on Instagram, you're the product. And they're using you, and you're using your data to sell, et cetera, et cetera. But user-generated content it's always been that. It's just a matter of the sharing of the economic. That's why I keep going back to economics. So if people were, you know, you wouldn't have to necessarily do advertising if you had stakeholders with advertising, the users and the company, as an example. If it's a social media company, just throwing it out there, so let's say you have a social media...and this has been talked about, but I'm not the first to introduce this. This has been talked about for over ten years, at least over 15 years. And it's you share as a triangle in three ways. So you have the user and everything else. So take your current social media, and I won't pick on Facebook, but I'll just use them, Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter. Twitter's having issues recently because Elon is trying to buy them or get out of buying them. But you just looked at that data, and then you share with the user base. What's the revenue model? And there needs to be one; let me be very clear. There has to be incentive, and there has to be profitability for people that joined you earlier, you know, joined the corporation, or become shareholders, or investors, or become users, or become customers. They have to be able to have some benefit, not extreme greater than everyone else but a great benefit from coming in earlier by what they contributed at the time. And that is what makes this system holistic in my opinion, like Reddit or any of these bloggers. But you make it where they use their time and the users, and you share it with the company and then the data and so forth, and whatever revenue economic model you have, and it's a sort of a three-way split. It's just not always equal. And that's something that I think in economics, we're still on a zero-sum game, I win, you lose sort of economic model globally. That's why there's a winner of a war and a loser of a war. But in reality, as you know, Victoria, there are no winners of any war. So it's funny, [laughs] I was just saying, well, you know, because of the economic mode, but Von Neumann, who talked about that, also talked about something called a non-zero-sum game when he talked about it in mathematics that you can win, and I can win; we just don't win equally because they never will match that. So if I win, I may win 60; you win 40. Or you may win 60, I win 40, and we agree to settle on that. It's an agreement versus I'm just going to be 99, and you'll be 1%, or I'm just going to be 100, and you're at 0. And I think that our economic model tends to be a lot of that, like, when you push forth and there needs to be more of that. When you talk about the core of economics...and I go way back, you know, prior to the Federal Reserve even being started. I just look at the world, and it's always sort of been this land territorial issue of what goods are under the country. But we've got technology where we can mitigate a lot of things and do the collective of help the earth, and then let's go off to space, all of space. That's where my brain is focused on. VICTORIA: Hmm. Oh yeah, that makes sense to me. I think that we're all going to have to evolve our economic models here in the future. I wonder, too, as you're building your startup and you're building your company, what are some of the technology trade-offs you're having to make in the stack of the AI software that you're building? LEONARD: Hmm. Good question. But clarify, this may be a lot deeper dive because that's a general question. And I don't want to...yeah, go ahead. VICTORIA: Because when you're building AI, and you're going to be processing a lot of data, I know many data scientists that are familiar with tools like Jupyter Notebooks, and R, and Python. And one issue that I'm aware of is keeping the environments the same, so everything that goes into building your app and having those infrastructure as code for your data science applications, being able to afford to process all that data. [laughs] And there are just so many factors that go into building an AI app versus building something that's more easy, like a web-based user form. So just curious if you've encountered those types of trade-offs or questions about, okay, how are we going to actually build an app that we can put out on everybody's phone and that works responsibly? LEONARD: Oh, okay. So let me be very clear, but I won't give too much of the secret sauce away. But I can define this technically because this is a technical audience. This is not...so what you're really talking about is two things, and I'm clear about this, though. So the app maker won't really read and write a lot of data. It'll just be the app where people could just get on board digitalization simple, you know, process payments, maybe connect with someone like American Express square, MasterCard, whatever. And so that's just letting them function. That's sort of small FinTech in my mind, you know, just transaction A to B, B to A, et cetera. And it doesn't need to be peer-to-peer and all of the crypto. It doesn't even need to go that level yet. That's just level one. Then they will sign up for a service, which is because we're really focused on artificial intelligence as a service. And that, to me, is the next iteration for AI. I've been talking about this for about three or four years now, literally, in different conferences and so forth for people who haven't hit it. But that we will get to that point where AI will become AI as a service, just like SaaS is. We're still at the, you know, most of the world on the legacy systems are still software as a service. We're about to hit AI as a service because the world is evolving. And this is true; they did shut it down. But you did have okay, so there are two case points which I can bring up. So JP Morgan did create something called a Coin, and it was using AI. And it was a coin like crypto, coin like a token, but they called it a coin. But it could process, I think, something like...I may be off on this, so to the sticklers that will be listening, please, I'm telling you I may be off on the exact quote, but I think it was about...it was something crazy to me, like 200,000 of legal hours and seconds that it could process because it was basically taking the corporate legal structure of JP Morgan, one of the biggest banks. I think they are the biggest bank in the U.S. JPMorgan Chase. And they were explaining in 2017 how we created this, and it's going to alleviate this many hours of legal work for the bank. And I think politically; something happened because they just pulled away. I still have the original press release when they put it out, and it was in the media. And then it went away. I mean, no implementation [laughs] because I think there was going to be a big loss of jobs for it. And they basically would have been white-collar legal jobs, most specifically lawyers literally that were working for the bank. And when they were talking towards investment, it was a committee. I was at a conference. And I was like, I was fascinated by that. And they were basically using Bitcoin protocol as the tokenization protocol, but they were using AI to process it. And it was basically looking at...because legal contracts are basically...you can teach it with natural language processing and be able to encode and almost output it itself and then be able to speak with each other. Another case point was Facebook. They had...what was it? Two AI systems. They began to create their own language. I don't know if you remember that story or heard about it, and Facebook shut it down. And this was more like two years ago, I think, when they were saying Facebook was talking, you know, when they were Facebook, not Meta, so maybe it was three years ago. And they were talking, and they were like, "Oh, Facebook has a language. It's talking to each other." And it created its own little site language because it was two AI bots going back and forth. And then the engineers at Facebook said, "We got to shut this down because this is kind of getting out of the box." So when you talk about AI as a service, yes, the good and the bad, and what you take away is AWS, Oracle, Google Cloud they do have services where it doesn't need to cost you as much anymore as it used to in the beginning if you know what you're doing ahead of time. And you're not just running iterations or data processing because you're doing guesswork versus, in my opinion, versus actually knowing exactly specifically what you're looking for and the data set you're looking to get out of it. And then you're talking about just basically putting in containers and clustering it because it gets different operations. And so what you're really looking at is something called an N-scale graph data that can process data in maybe sub seconds at that level, excuse me. And one of my advisors is the head of that anyway at AGI laboratory. So he's got an N graph database that can process...when we implement it, we'll be able to process data at the petabyte level at sub-seconds, and it can run on platforms like Azure or AWS, and so forth. VICTORIA: Oh, that's interesting. So it sounds like cloud providers are making compute services more affordable. You've got data, the N-scale graph data, that can run more transactions more quickly. And I'm curious if you see any future trends since I know you're a futurist around quantum computing and how that could affect capacity for -- LEONARD: Oh [laughs] We haven't even gotten there yet. Yes. Well, if you look at N-scale, if you know what you're doing and you know what to look for, then the quantum just starts going across different domains as well but at a higher hit rate. So there's been some quantum computers online. There's been several...well, Google has their quantum computer coming online, and they've been working on it, and Google has enough data, of course, to process. So yeah, they've got that data, lots of data. And quantum needs, you know, if it's going to do something, it needs lots of data. But then the inference will still be, I think, quantum is very good at processing large, large, large amounts of data. We can just keep going if you really have a good quantum computer. But it's really narrow. You have to tell it exactly what it wants, and it will do it in what we call...which is great like in P or NP square or P over NP which is you want to do it in polynomial time, not non-polynomial, polynomial time which is...now speaking too fast. Okay, my brain is going faster than my lips. Let me slow it down. So when you start thinking about processing, if we as humans, let's say if I was going to process A to Z, and I'm like, okay, here is this equation, if I tell you it takes 1000 years, it's of no use to us, to me and you Victoria because we're living now. Now, the earth may benefit in 1000 years, but it's still of no use. But if I could take this large amount of data and have it process within minutes, you know, worst case hours...but then I'll even go down to seconds or sub-seconds, then that's really a benefit to humanity now, today in present term. And so, as a futurist, yes, as the world, we will continue to add data. We're doing it every day, and we already knew this was coming ten years ago, 15 years ago, 20 years ago, even actually in the '50s when we were in the AI winter. We're now in AI summer. In my words, I call it the AI summer. So as you're doing this, that data is going to continue to increase, and quantum will be needed for that. But then the specific need...quantum is very good at looking at a specific issue, specifically for that very narrow. Like if you were going to do the trajectory to Jupiter or if we wanted to send a probe to Jupiter or something, I think we're sending something out there now from NASA, and so forth, then you need to process all the variables, but it's got one trajectory. It's going one place only. VICTORIA: Gotcha. Well, that's so interesting. I'm glad I asked you that question. And speaking of rockets going off to space, have you ever seen a SpaceX launch from LA? LEONARD: Actually, I saw one land but not a launch. I need to go over there. It's not too far from me. But you got to give credit where credit's due and Elon has a reusable rocket. See, that's where technology is solving real-world problems. Because NASA and I have, you know, my chairman, his name is Alexander Nawrocki, you know, he's Ph.D., but I call him Rocki. He goes by Rocki like I go by LS. But it's just we talk about this like NASA's budget. [laughs] How can you reduce this? And Elon says they will come up with a reusable rocket that won't cost this much and be able to...and that's the key. That was the kind of Holy Grail where you can reuse the same rocket itself and then add some little variables on top of it. But the core, you wouldn't constantly be paying for it. And so I think where the world is going...and let me be clear, Elon pushes a lot out there. He's just very good at it. But I'm also that kind of guy that I know that Tesla itself was started by two Stanford engineers. Elon came on later, like six months, and then he invested, and he became CEO, which was a great investment for Elon Musk. And then CEO I just think it just fit his personality because it was something he loved. But I also have studied for years Nikola Tesla, and I understand what his contributions created where we are today with all the patents that he had. And so he's basically the father of WiFi and why we're able to communicate in a lot of this. We've perfected it or improved it, but it was created by him in the 1800s. VICTORIA: Right. And I don't think he came from as fortunate a background as Elon Musk, either. Sometimes I wonder what I could have done born in similar circumstances. [laughter] And you certainly have made quite a name for yourself. LEONARD: Well, I'm just saying, yeah, he came from very...he did come from a poor area of Russia which is called the Russian territory, to be very honest, Eastern Europe, definitely Eastern Europe. But yeah, I don't know once you start thinking about that [laughs]. You're making me laugh, Victoria. You're making me laugh. VICTORIA: No, I actually went camping, a backpacking trip to the Catalina Island, and there happened to be a SpaceX launch that night, and we thought it was aliens because it looked wild. I didn't realize what it was. But then we figured it was a launch, so it was really great. I love being here and being close to some of this technology and the advancements that are going on. I'm curious if you have some thoughts about...I hear a lot about or you used to hear about Silicon Valley Tech like very Northern California, San Francisco focus. But what is the difference in SoCal? What do you find in those two communities that makes SoCal special? [laughs] LEONARD: Well, I think it's actually...so democratizing AI. I've been in a moment like that because, in 2015, I was in Dubai, and they were talking about creating silicon oasis. And so there's always been this model of, you know, because they were always, you know, the whole Palo Alto thing is people would say it and it is true. I mean, I experienced it. Because I was in a two-year program, post-graduate program executive, but we would go up there...I wasn't living up there. I had to go there maybe once every month for like three weeks, every other month or something. But when you're up there, it is the air in the water. It's just like, people just breathe certain things. Because around the world, and I would travel to Japan, and China, and other different parts of Asia, Vietnam, et cetera and in Africa of course, and let's say you see this and people are like, so what is it about Silicon Valley? And of course, the show, there is the Hollywood show about it, which is pretty a lot accurate, which is interesting, the HBO show. But you would see that, and you would think, how are they able to just replicate this? And a lot of it is a convergence. By default, they hear about these companies' access because the key is access, and that's what we're...like this podcast. I love the concept around it because giving awareness, knowledge, and access allows other people to spread it and democratize it. So it's just not one physical location, or you have to be in that particular area only to benefit. I mean, you could benefit in that area, or you could benefit from any part of the world. But since they started, people would go there; engineers would go there. They built company PCs, et cetera. Now that's starting to spread in other areas like Southern Cal are creating their own innovation hubs to be able to bring all three together. And those three are the engineers and founders, and idea makers and startups. And you then need the expertise. I'm older than 42; I'm not 22. [laughs] So I'm just keeping it 100, keeping it real. So I'm not coming out at 19. I mean, my son's 18. And I'm not coming out, okay, this my new startup, bam, give me a billion dollars, I'm good. And let me just write off the next half. But when you look at that, there's that experience because even if you look at Mark Zuckerberg, I always tell people that give credit where credit is due. He brought a senior team with him when he was younger, and he didn't have the experience. And his only job has been Facebook out of college. He's had no other job. And now he's been CEO of a multi-billion dollar corporation; that's a fact. Sometimes it hurts people's feelings. Like, you know what? He's had no other job. Now that can be good and bad, [laughs] but he's had no other jobs. And so that's just a credit, like, if you can surround yourself with the right people and be focused on something, it can work to the good or the bad for your own personal success but then having that open architecture. And I think he's been trying to learn and others versus like an Elon Musk, who embraces everything. He's just very open in that sense. But then you have to come from these different backgrounds. But let's say Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, let's take a guy like myself or whatever who didn't grow up with all of that who had to make these two ends meet, figure out how to do the next day, not just get to the next year, but get to the next day, get to the next week, get to the next month, then get to the next year. It just gives a different perspective as well. Humanity's always dealing with that. Because we had a lot of great engineers back in the early 1900s. They're good or bad, you know, you did have Nikola Tesla. You had Edison. I'm talking about circa around 1907 or 1909, prior to World War I. America had a lot of industries. They were the innovators then, even though there were innovations happening in Europe, and Africa, and China, as well and Asia. But the innovation hub kind of created as the America, quote, unquote, "industrial revolution." And I think we're about to begin a new revolution sort of tech and an industrial revolution that's going to take us to maybe from 20...we're 2022 now, but I'll say it takes us from 2020 to 2040 in my head. VICTORIA: So now that communities can really communicate across time zones and locations, maybe the hubs are more about solving specific problems. There are regional issues. That makes a lot more sense. LEONARD: Yes. And collaborating together, working together, because scientists, you know, COVID taught us that. People thought you had to be in a certain place, but then a lot of collaboration came out of COVID; even though it was bad globally, even though we're still bad, if people were at home, they start collaborating, and scientists will talk to scientists, you know, businesses, entrepreneurs, and so forth. But if Orange County is bringing together the mentors, the venture capital, or at least Southern California innovation and any other place, I want to say that's not just Silicon Valley because Silicon Valley already has it; we know that. And that's that region. It's San Jose all the way up to...I forgot how far north it's past San Francisco, actually. But it's that region of area where they encompass the real valley of Silicon Valley if you're really there. And you talk about these regions. Yes, I think we're going to get to a more regional growth area, and then it'll go more micro to actually cities later in the future. But regional growth, I think it's going to be extremely important globally in the very near term. I'm literally saying from tomorrow to the next, maybe ten years, regional will really matter. And then whatever you have can scale globally anyway, like this podcast we're doing. This can be distributed to anyone in the world, and they can listen at ease when they have time. VICTORIA: Yeah, I love it. It's both exciting and also intimidating. [laughs] And you mentioned your son a little bit earlier. And I'm curious, as a founder and someone who spent a good amount of time in graduate and Ph.D. programs, if you feel like it's easy to connect with your son and maintain that balance and focusing on your family while you're building a company and investing in yourself very heavily. LEONARD: Well, I'm older, [laughs] so it's okay. I mean, I've mentored him, you know. And me and his mom have a relationship that works. I would say we have a better relationship now than when we were together. It is what it is. But we have a communication level. And I think she was just a great person because I never knew my real father, ever. I supposedly met him when I was two or one; I don't know. But I have no memories, no photos, nothing. And that was just the environment I grew up in. But with my son, he knows the truth of everything about that. He's actually in college. I don't like to name the school because it's on the East Coast, and it's some Ivy League school; that's what I will say. And he didn't want to stay on the West Coast because I'm in Orange County and his mom's in Orange County. He's like, "I want to get away from both of you people." [laughter] And that's a joke, but he's very independent. He's doing well. When he graduated high school, he graduated with 4.8 honors. He made the valedictorian. He was at a STEM school. VICTORIA: Wow. LEONARD: And he has a high GPA. He's studying computer science and economics as well at an Ivy League, and he's already made two or three apps at college. And I said, "You're not Mark, so calm down." [laughter] But anyway, that was a recent conversation. I won't go there. But then some people say, "LS, you should be so happy." What is it? The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. But this was something he chose around 10 or 11. I'm like, whatever you want to do, you do; I'll support you no matter what. And his mom says, "Oh no, I think you programmed him to be like you." [laughs] I'm like, no, I can't do that. I just told him the truth about life. And he's pretty tall. VICTORIA: You must have -- LEONARD: He played basketball in high school a lot. I'm sorry? VICTORIA: I was going to say you must have inspired him. LEONARD: Yeah. Well, he's tall. He did emulate me in a lot of ways. I don't know why. I told him just be yourself. But yes, he does tell me I'm an inspiration to that; I think because of all the struggles I've gone through when I was younger. And you're always going through struggles. I mean, it's just who you are. I tell people, you know, you're building a company. You have success. You can see the future, but sometimes people can't see it, [laughs] which I shouldn't really say, but I'm saying anyway because I do that. I said this the other night to some friends. I said, "Oh, Jeff Bezo's rocket blew up," going, you know, Blue Origin rocket or something. And then I said Elon will tell Jeff, "Well, you only have one rocket blow up. I had three, [laughter] SpaceX had three." So these are billionaires talking to billionaires about, you know, most people don't even care. You're worth X hundred billion dollars. I mean, they're worth 100 billion-plus, right? VICTORIA: Right. LEONARD: I think Elon is around 260 billion, and Jeff is 160 or something. Who cares about your rocket blowing up? But it's funny because the issues are still always going to be there. I've learned that. I'm still learning. It doesn't matter how much wealth you have. You just want to create wealth for other people and better their lives. The more you search on bettering lives, you're just going to have to wake up every day, be humble with it, and treat it as a new day and go forward and solve the next crisis or problem because there will be one. There is not where there are no problems, is what I'm trying to say, this panacea or a utopia where you personally, like, oh yeah, I have all this wealth and health, and I'm just great. Because Elon has had divorce issues, so did Jeff Bezos. So I told my son a lot about this, like, you never get to this world where it's perfect in your head. You're always going to be doing things. VICTORIA: That sounds like an accurate future prediction if I ever heard one. [laughs] Like, there will be problems. No matter where you end up or what you choose to do, you'll still have problems. They'll just be different. [laughs] LEONARD: Yeah, and then this is for women and men. It means you don't give up. You just keep hope alive, and you keep going. And I believe personally in God, and I'm a scientist who actually does. But I look at it more in a Godly aspect. But yeah, I just think you just keep going, and you keep building because that's what we do as humanity. It's what we've done. It's why we're here. And we're standing on the shoulders of giants, and I just always considered that from physicists and everyone. VICTORIA: Great. And if people are interested in building something with you, you have that opportunity right now to invest via the crowdfunding app, correct? LEONARD: Yes, yes, yes. They can do that because the company is still the same company because eventually, we're going to branch out. My complete vision for AIEDC is using artificial intelligence for economic development, and that will spread horizontally, not just vertically. Vertically right now, just focus on just a mobile app maker digitization and get...because there are so many businesses even globally, and I'm not talking only e-commerce. So when I say small to midsize business, it can be a service business, car insurance, health insurance, anything. It doesn't have to be selling a particular widget or project, you know, product. And I'm not saying there's nothing wrong with that, you know, interest rates and consumerism. But I'm not thinking about Shopify, and that's fine, but I'm talking about small businesses. And there's the back office which is there are a lot of tools for back offices for small businesses. But I'm talking about they create their own mobile app more as a way to communicate with their customers, update them with their customers, and that's key, especially if there are disruptions. So let's say that there have been fires in California. In Mississippi or something, they're out of water. In Texas, last year, they had a winter storm, electricity went out. So all of these things are disruptions. This is just in the U.S., And of course, I won't even talk about Pakistan, what's going on there and the flooding and just all these devastating things, or even in China where there's drought where there are these disruptions, and that's not counting COVID disrupts, the cycle of business. It literally does. And it doesn't bubble up until later when maybe the central banks and governments pay attention to it, just like in Japan when that nuclear, unfortunately, that nuclear meltdown happened because of the earthquake; I think it was 2011. And that affected that economy for five years, which is why the government has lower interest rates, negative interest rates, because they have to try to get it back up. But if there are tools and everyone's using more mobile apps and wearables...and we're going to go to the metaverse and all of that. So the internet of things can help communicate that. So when these types of disruptions happen, the flow of business can continue, at least at a smaller level, for an affordable cost for the business. I'm not talking about absorbing costs because that's meaningless to me. VICTORIA: Yeah, well, that sounds like a really exciting project. And I'm so grateful to have this time to chat with you today. Is there anything else you want to leave for our listeners? LEONARD: If they want to get involved, maybe they can go to our crowdfunding page, or if they've got questions, ask about it and spread the word. Because I think sometimes, you know, they talk about the success of all these companies, but a lot of it starts with the founder...but not a founder. If you're talking about a startup, it starts with the founder. But it also stops with the innovators that are around that founder, male or female, whoever they are. And it also starts with their community, building a collective community together. And that's why Silicon Valley is always looked at around the world as this sort of test case of this is how you create something from nothing and make it worth great value in the future. And I think that's starting to really spread around the world, and more people are opening up to this. It's like the crowdfunding concept. I think it's a great idea, like more podcasts. I think this is a wonderful idea, podcasts in and of themselves, so people can learn from people versus where in the past you would only see an interview on the business news network, or NBC, or Fortune, or something like that, and that's all you would understand. But this is a way where organically things can grow. I think the growth will continue, and I think the future's bright. We just have to know that it takes work to get there. VICTORIA: That's great. Thank you so much for saying that and for sharing your time with us today. I learned a lot myself, and I think our listeners will enjoy it as well. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobot.fm. You can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Leonard S. Johnson.
Neil Macqueen is a leading industrial designer with 78 patents to his name, having previously spent ten years at Dyson and is now the Head of Design at Gembah, the world's first global marketplace for product development. Chad talks to Neil about being focused on industrial design or actual physical products as opposed to interfaces and digital products, working designers and developers, and design to manufacture as a process. Gembah (https://gembah.com/) Follow Gembah on Twitter (https://twitter.com/MadeWithGembah), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/madewithgembah/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/MadeWithGembah/), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/gembah-inc/), or YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfZ77_SRz9Q3-qIjmmY7xGg). Follow Neil on Twitter (https://twitter.com/neilmacqueen) and LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/neilmacqueen/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Neil Macqueen, a leading industrial designer with 78 patents to his name, having previously spent ten years at Dyson and who is now the Head of Design at Gembah, the world's first global marketplace for product development. Neil, thank you so much for joining me. NEIL: Oh, it's great to be here with you today, Chad. Thank you for having me. CHAD: One distinction I feel like we always need to make, and this is one of the things we struggle with at thoughtbot; people want to put themselves out in the community and say, "Here's what I do," and people use the word product design. And there's actually a pretty big, you know, some designers are, or product developers are industrial design physical products and others are digital. What do you do at Gembah? NEIL: For me, myself, what I do at Gembah explicitly is far more focused around industrial design or actual physical products as opposed to interfaces and digital products. CHAD: And as the world's, you know, the self-described first global marketplace for product development, what does that actually mean? NEIL: What it means is that Gembah provides a platform in which anybody with an idea or an aspiration to even have an idea has a single source by which you can tap into all the resources you need to get your product to market. So I think a good metaphor for it would be that it's very easy for myself, yourself, any of the listeners today to become a seller. Like, I can set myself up with an eBay or an Amazon account this afternoon and start selling a product. There are very low barriers to doing that. Whereas if you want to become a product creator, that is a very disjointed process. And what you'll see from large companies like my experience at Dyson and other companies is that they have a vertically integrated business. They own each part of that product creation, development, engineering, production, logistics. It is all very integrated. And what we try and do and provide to creators is that single integrated structure by which you can have an idea, work with a designer, develop that in conjunction with a manufacturer, and then very seamlessly move over into your production and logistics. CHAD: You mentioned Dyson, and you spent ten years there and moved through various design roles. I definitely want to touch on that in a little bit. But what attracted you to Gembah? NEIL: I think, as with all people who are interested in ideas, whether digital or physical, it's the process of creating something that really attracted me, has attracted me to all my roles in the past, and certainly to Gembah. In as much as what I just described previously, it is a world first, like, it is a category-defining company. So I think what really attracted me to Gembah was the fact that what we're doing here is not only building lots of very interesting products and helping entrepreneurs, and product creators, and businesses, but what we're doing is developing a platform which is entirely unique and one of its kind. CHAD: I have to admit, I did a little bit of research on you, as I always do. And I looked at your Twitter, and I saw that a lot of your tweets were, I think, back from 2016, where you yourself designed...how would you describe it? A coffee press stand? NEIL: Exactly. And AeroPress stand. CHAD: Having been through that process and launching it on Kickstarter, is that part of what...you said I want to help other people do this. NEIL: Absolutely. And it is probably a very congregating experience in terms of people who go through crowdfunding campaigns and then try and do it yourself. And certainly, my experience, you know, Kickstarter is a wonderful platform. But everything thereafter for me as a creator doing something in my spare time and my evenings outside of my normal nine to five was incredibly challenging, you know, dealing with factories who had very broken English or really struggled to communicate both my idea and their complications accurately. And just how that unfolded into trying to get a product to market without somebody to help and guide me through that process, doing it entirely by yourself. So I think that was certainly a very challenging experience in terms of getting that coffee stand to market. And I think the same is true for lots of first-time creators and even businesses in trying to reduce costs, up efficiency of getting to market quickly. Like, who are the partners and people that you can work with and businesses you can partner with to help provide you with those benefits? And that's really what we try and provide at Gembah. And I think, as you mentioned at the start, certainly my past experiences make me think that what we're building here today certainly does bring a lot of benefit. CHAD: I've had quite a few people on the show who launched physical products themselves on Kickstarter or other crowdfunding platforms. And often, the conversation turns to how difficult it actually was from a supply chain perspective from a manufacturing perspective. One of the things that struck me about Gembah is that it is not a small operation. It has headquarters in the U.S, but team members live and work all over the world. Their website says there are 150-plus team members globally, so given that reach, it seems like it probably can be really helpful to people solving those challenges. I'm curious who the ideal customers of Gembah are. What is the profile of someone who works with Gembah? NEIL: For our ideal client at the moment, I think that's one topic, and we can go into that. But what we're really trying to do in terms of the company vision is to democratize the design process and creating a product that gets to market. So as much as for us as a company, you know, having gone through a series A funding round and heading towards a series B, yes, we have got a fairly focused view of who is our ideal client profile and persona. However, what we're really aiming towards is providing this vertically integrated system of design and marketplace resources to absolutely everybody. That is the vision, the vision that anybody can become a product creator for the first time. In as much as, like my metaphor said earlier, you can become a seller on eBay, you should be able to have as easy access to the resources that enable that product creation. CHAD: So there's an example I always like to use; it has legs a little bit, which is thoughtbot is a well-respected design and development company. And there's an opportunity, you know, we're working designers and developers. And as people who do this work, we often either buy products and see how they could be improved or have ideas for our own, whether it be notepads, or pens, or even mechanical keyboards are a really interesting thing. If we wanted to pursue something like that, how might we do that? NEIL: In the context of Gembah? CHAD: Yeah, or beyond. But yes. NEIL: So I think the first thing for anybody with an idea is to really have some very clear goals at the outset in terms of...and for anybody who is interested in user-centered design, three of the guiding principles for that are three things I always really lean on which is feasibility, viability, and desirability. So within all of those things, what are your ambitions for your product? In terms of ideally, every product should be desirable; people should want to buy it. Have you got the means by which to get it to market? And once you've got it there, will it provide you enough of a margin to have a sustainable business? So the viability of the product. And can you actually make it? You know, it's not made out of unobtainium, or it [laughter] might be. So I think a very easy starting point for absolutely everybody is to really go via those three guiding principles in terms of the desirability, viability, and feasibility of your idea. Where do you think you score on that matrix? And then if you think you really have got something in terms of an idea that really has merit and that you have the wherewithal that you want to see it through to fruition, certainly just picking up the phone and calling Gembah, that's a great second step. CHAD: Okay. So at Gembah, if someone picks up the phone before going through those three steps and is talking to you, do you help them take a step back and answer those three questions? NEIL: Absolutely. So I think what we really try and do is not only facilitate your product development journey. We're not a service provider; we're a service facilitator. We want to connect you with all of the resources within our platform and marketplace. And what we really try and steer towards is what is the product development journey that best suits your needs. And I think, typically speaking, if we were to use a broad brush, it falls into three camps which is, do you want to speed to market? And the fact you want to sell an idea very quickly. So, could you potentially white-label your product? So we provide these options to people. So there's a white labeling route. There's then a customized route which is to say, is there something fairly similar already commercially available in the market and that factories provide, and that you could adjust the feature set for your idea by perhaps 10%? That would actually then mean that you could get your idea customized in the factory and into market. So that's the customized route. Versus then an entirely unique product which is to say that you need to both develop the design and tooling for the product from the ground up. Intuitively, I would hope from white labeling all the way through to unique product development; you have a fairly matched scale of time and cost. The more involved, the more detail, the more unique, the more time, and the more cost proportionally increases. CHAD: How would you say that designing within a company like Dyson is different than being outside? NEIL: The thing that working for a company like Dyson and others like it really affords you is the freedom to research without the means of having to really focus on what is my next launch in a year's time. And what I mean by that is Dyson and other large, successful companies have exclusive product development innovation hubs and idea teams who, for every 100 products they develop, potentially only get one through to market and into the global markets. So I think as a designer, what you're really afforded there is the space and creativity to explore lots of ideas without the pressure of I have to have something out in this next six-month period into the market. I think that's very different to a small to medium-sized enterprise who have a set product line, and this may be your only product line. Like, you really need to be laser-focused in what is my incremental product development here so that I can maintain the attention of the public? As well as then trying to work concurrently on how do I evolve my product line to then broaden out my audience? So I think that's quite different in terms you have to be very focused. MID-ROLL AD: Are you an entrepreneur or start-up founder looking to gain confidence in the way forward for your idea? At thoughtbot, we know you’re tight on time and investment, which is why we’ve created targeted 1-hour remote workshops to help you develop a concrete plan for your product’s next steps. Over four interactive sessions, we work with you on research, product design sprint, critical path, and presentation prep so that you and your team are better equipped with the skills and knowledge for success. Find out how we can help you move the needle at: tbot.io/entrepreneurs. CHAD: You started at Dyson as a design engineer, and you moved through up into a senior design engineer, then concept lead, to design manager of new product innovation. What was the journey from design engineer to eventually design manager? And what are the differences between those roles? NEIL: I think the key thing that changes within those roles is the level of autonomy and responsibility. And I think what scales up through each of those rungs is essentially how you can demonstrate competency for your core responsibility set. So as a design engineer, you're responsible for part-level designs like, here is, you know, you mentioned the mechanical keyboard earlier in the conversation. In that scenario, you would have a team of potentially four design engineers seeing that through to fruition. You would have a subset of those parts which you're exclusively responsible for. CHAD: So you might just be responsible for designing the best keycaps. NEIL: Exactly, exactly. So one chap will be just looking at the springs, and the tension, and how do they feel. Another one will be looking at the structural integrity; another one will be looking at the ergonomics. So I think you have the individual part and function. And what then levels up from that is as you go then into an advanced design engineer or a senior engineer is that you begin being responsible for the full assembly. So instead of having your keycap, you're now responsible for leading the whole team doing the whole keyboard. And then as you then progress through that, having demonstrated competency and reliability of delivering things, you then become a concept lead, which is to say that you have multiple projects on at the same time. You're leading the teams to do that. And then as you progress through that into design and management role, you then level that up again in terms of you're typically managing portfolios of projects within different market sectors. So I think if that answers your question directly enough, what it really builds on is for anyone aspiring, is you really need to focus on the basics first, like making sure that you are fundamentally a good designer and a good engineer who can demonstrate and communicate your logic and your thought process. And I think if you already underpin yourself with those sorts of fundamental competencies, that serves you really well as you move up through the ranks. CHAD: Some people I talk with, as they move up through those ranks, they feel like they are getting further and further away from what they actually love to do, which was design products. Is that something that you felt, or how did you not feel that? NEIL: I think as you move up through the management hierarchy, at the same time, typically the people that do that, I find and who are successful at it have a fairly focused view of what are their goals, what are they trying to achieve, and what is almost their trademark that they're known for. So for myself, how I've avoided that is...you asked me why I'm interested in Gembah, and that's because what I have very instinctively done both at Dyson and here is make sure that I've positioned myself to solve real problems. Probably everybody in a senior management position sometimes still misses getting on CAD or coding and just having the afternoon with no meetings. [laughs] CHAD: Yeah. NEIL: I think there's an element of that that you can't get away from. However, what really enthuses and keeps me really engaged and motivated in what I am doing now is to say I'm still solving problems, which is the fundamental heart of everything. So instead of designing the best keyboard for somebody who has carpal syndrome or hand problems, what we're now designing and developing is a platform that solves problems for a whole very broad user base. As long as you are always focused in your role in terms of how can I best serve and provide solutions to problems, I think what people will find is that you're actually always very fulfilled as a creator, maybe not as a mechanical engineer or electrical engineer, depending on your background, or a coder. But if you're fundamentally interested in solving problems and bringing solutions, you can still hold on to that very tightly. CHAD: Yeah. As head of design now, what does your day-to-day look like? NEIL: The majority of what it looks like is what I almost just mentioned with regards to how are we both developing and sustaining a business that provides and develops better solutions for our clientele as well as then dipping in and out of projects which require support and a little bit of extra attention? As I mentioned, as a design manager at Dyson, looking across portfolios of projects. My role now is really around making sure that all of our category leads, who are people looking after multiple projects that they, all have the support and tools that they need and require, as well as, as I mentioned, in particular cases, giving attention to some design projects that need help. And then roadmapping out, like, what is the future? What are the next incremental steps of functionality and platform features that we want to develop as a company and facilitate and bring to market for our customers? CHAD: What are some of those things that you're seeing across the portfolio that are needs that you're hoping to meet? NEIL: I think a very interesting new thing that we're bringing to market at the moment is what we call design to manufacture as a process. And what we really try and do there is we see in the market at the moment that people have a real sensitivity around cost-effectiveness with the global economies where they're at and supply chain. Like, how do I, number one, potentially diversify my supply chain? Or number two, how do I actually launch a new product with as little cost to myself as a business as possible? And what we do there is a report, a product opportunity report that profiles you as a business and a brand, and then overlaps that almost in a Venn diagram of where's the sweet spot in terms of available products in the markets that you could customize that would really suit your brand and that we could really effectively customize, and develop with a manufacturer and with a design team and get to market really quick, really cheap, but is still uniquely your own and has your special touch to it? CHAD: Obviously, a thing that has happened in this market or this industry over the last decade or so is crowdfunding and Kickstarter specifically. How have you seen that change things for people? NEIL: I think what it's meant is people get access to funds in a way that would have taken a very long time previously. And I think the other thing is people get feedback on ideas quite quickly as well, which maybe isn't the case across the broad spectrum. But for people who have an idea and want to very quickly test it with the markets in terms of does, this resonate with my user groups that I'm interested in? Like, is this a real set of user problems which I believe I've solved? Is that actually true? I think what it's provided product, you know, industrial design is typically, or any other type of product creator is this very quick access to people with capital who can invest and seeing their products through to fruition, which otherwise was actually a really hard and arduous task, not only getting feedback but then trying to raise capital separately. CHAD: In your opinion, what's the ideal point that something actually goes to crowdfunding? NEIL: The ideal timing for your crowdfunding campaign is where you have the first iterations of a working and demonstrated functional prototype where it's not just all idea but that you can demonstrate the fact that you're committed to this, that you can demonstrate the functionality of it, and show that you've considered how it's going to be made and that it's not actually going to change massively. Because I think what you can sometimes see is people can go to Kickstarter prematurely. And then when they're actually getting into the manufacturer of the product, there are some fairly large compromises that need to be made or the fact that the idea isn't feasible and they can't make it. The ideal time to go to a Kickstarter is where you've already thought through all your user scenarios. You've got a very clear perspective on what the problem set is that you're solving and that you can then demonstrate that with a working prototype. And that doesn't need to be pretty or visually pleasing because you can have your beautiful render next to your functional prototype. I think that's a great time. CHAD: And concrete information on the feasibility of manufacturing it. NEIL: Absolutely. So I think in part of informing your working prototype, I think you need to have early what you'd call DFM, design for manufacture feedback which is where you've spoken to a manufacturer or a tooling engineer and said, "What are the key considerations I should take into building this assembly?" And often is, the case for people who perhaps haven't gone down that road very, very far is that there are some fairly significant adjustments that you need to make to either the visuals or the functionality of your design. At least having a few initial conversations with those factories very clearly integrated into your product considerations is really, really critical. CHAD: So I have to ask, is there something that you're personally pursuing now and working on? NEIL: At the moment, not via Kickstarter. I think the thing actually I'm doing in my spare time is a bit of a passion project with regards to furniture. I think certainly, from my perspective, every designer can pay homage to architecture as the mother of all design. What more is an in-depth user experience and journey than the spaces we're all sitting in every day? And a big part of that is furniture. So I'm designing an armchair in my spare time. This is a way to, [laughs] as you mentioned earlier, with my current role as how it is just making sure I keep sharp my sketching skills and design skills, even if it's just for myself. CHAD: What does that look like for you? Is it sketching on paper now? And how far do you think you'll take it? NEIL: At the moment, it's just sketching on paper and asking my kids which ones they like, they dislike. [laughter] And I think, thankfully, with the abilities I've developed and some of the resources I have access to, we'll probably build a functioning prototype just so I can have a nice new armchair in the kitchen. CHAD: Does that mean creating it yourself, or what does that look like? NEIL: Again, I can only speak for myself. But being a creator and having come from my past, as we mentioned at Dyson, I think my true passion is creation, so keeping my hands very familiar with materials and screwing things together. So I think what that will look like for me is actually just getting all the raw materials myself within the woodwork, the metalwork, and doing all that work myself. I haven't got much of a passion yet for upholstery, so I'll probably outsource that part. There's something really rewarding in physically making something with your hands which I've never let go of, and I think I'll always enjoy. CHAD: That's great. I want to come back, as we wrap up, to those three pillars that you outlined, which I thought were really great. What does someone do who's really passionate about the idea that they have, but they hit roadblocks on one or more of those pillars? NEIL: Hmm, if somebody wants to start just themselves and you have an idea, and you don't want to necessarily engage with a company or service providers yet, I think what you can really do and start with is engaging with groups and doing research yourself so around desirability and feasibility. There is a world of products and reviews out there. There are a lot of resources there. So what I would encourage if somebody has said...you know, let's use your keyboard example again. CHAD: Yep. NEIL: What are the best-selling keyboards out there? And is there a silver lining in between all of them in terms of what makes them sell so well? Is it their functionality? Is it their design? Is it the ergonomics? So I think people can really do a lot of research around what develops and constitutes a really desirable product. As well as then in terms of the feasibility, like, are the things you're putting together can you find them freely on, say, a website like Alibaba? Or can you fundamentally make a keyboard out of wood at scale? Again, there are a lot of resources online that you can do for yourself. And then around viability in terms of, like, what would your margins have to be? Again, I think there's quite a lot you can do there with yourself with regards to what is available on the market today? What are their unique selling points? What are their suggested selling prices? And where do you think you could competitively position yourself? Typically, how I find that works out is a matrix of ideas. And I think people really need to not be precious about the one idea they have but really be adventurous around, like, what are all the ways that I could potentially solve for this problem set? And then just market against that matrix of desirability, feasibility, and viability and see which one is enough of all of those that actually gives you your best shot at success? I think, typically, you see a lot of creators who are very precious about an idea. And actually, maybe, again, it's entirely machined out of aluminum. Well, you know, you're really going to struggle to make that at a competitive price. CHAD: Right. You're not necessarily Apple. [laughs] NEIL: Exactly. You haven't got that economy of scale available to you. [laughs] So I think having a very clear goal in terms of, like, where do I think I can position this in the market? Do I think people will like it? And could I make it for that much? CHAD: Yeah, I think that that's true across the entire spectrum of digital and physical product design and development. We work with a lot of founders who have an idea. And compromise problem-solving through the many challenges that you face is critical. And if you're not able to do that, it's very difficult to actually get a product to market in any reasonable time frame or financial sustainability. NEIL: I completely agree. CHAD: Well, I really appreciate you stopping by the show and sharing with us, Neil. NEIL: Thank you so much for having me today. It's been a great conversation, and I've really enjoyed it. CHAD: If folks want to get in touch with you, or follow along, or learn more about Gembah or anything else, where are all the different places that they can do that? NEIL: So you can certainly find and connect with me on LinkedIn if anyone would like to follow up with me personally. And if you're really serious about getting a product to market and engaging around that process, you can just look us up at gembah.com. CHAD: And I can also personally say if you like looking at pretty things for inspiration, Neil's Instagram is also pretty good for that. [laughter] You can subscribe to the show and find notes for everything that we just mentioned, along with links and a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Neil Macqueen.
Neil Macqueen is a leading industrial designer with 78 patents to his name, having previously spent ten years at Dyson and is now the Head of Design at Gembah, the world's first global marketplace for product development. Chad talks to Neil about being focused on industrial design or actual physical products as opposed to interfaces and digital products, working designers and developers, and design to manufacture as a process. Gembah (https://gembah.com/) Follow Gembah on Twitter (https://twitter.com/MadeWithGembah), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/madewithgembah/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/MadeWithGembah/), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/gembah-inc/), or YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfZ77_SRz9Q3-qIjmmY7xGg). Follow Neil on Twitter (https://twitter.com/neilmacqueen) and LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/neilmacqueen/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Neil Macqueen, a leading industrial designer with 78 patents to his name, having previously spent ten years at Dyson and who is now the Head of Design at Gembah, the world's first global marketplace for product development. Neil, thank you so much for joining me. NEIL: Oh, it's great to be here with you today, Chad. Thank you for having me. CHAD: One distinction I feel like we always need to make, and this is one of the things we struggle with at thoughtbot; people want to put themselves out in the community and say, "Here's what I do," and people use the word product design. And there's actually a pretty big, you know, some designers are, or product developers are industrial design physical products and others are digital. What do you do at Gembah? NEIL: For me, myself, what I do at Gembah explicitly is far more focused around industrial design or actual physical products as opposed to interfaces and digital products. CHAD: And as the world's, you know, the self-described first global marketplace for product development, what does that actually mean? NEIL: What it means is that Gembah provides a platform in which anybody with an idea or an aspiration to even have an idea has a single source by which you can tap into all the resources you need to get your product to market. So I think a good metaphor for it would be that it's very easy for myself, yourself, any of the listeners today to become a seller. Like, I can set myself up with an eBay or an Amazon account this afternoon and start selling a product. There are very low barriers to doing that. Whereas if you want to become a product creator, that is a very disjointed process. And what you'll see from large companies like my experience at Dyson and other companies is that they have a vertically integrated business. They own each part of that product creation, development, engineering, production, logistics. It is all very integrated. And what we try and do and provide to creators is that single integrated structure by which you can have an idea, work with a designer, develop that in conjunction with a manufacturer, and then very seamlessly move over into your production and logistics. CHAD: You mentioned Dyson, and you spent ten years there and moved through various design roles. I definitely want to touch on that in a little bit. But what attracted you to Gembah? NEIL: I think, as with all people who are interested in ideas, whether digital or physical, it's the process of creating something that really attracted me, has attracted me to all my roles in the past, and certainly to Gembah. In as much as what I just described previously, it is a world first, like, it is a category-defining company. So I think what really attracted me to Gembah was the fact that what we're doing here is not only building lots of very interesting products and helping entrepreneurs, and product creators, and businesses, but what we're doing is developing a platform which is entirely unique and one of its kind. CHAD: I have to admit, I did a little bit of research on you, as I always do. And I looked at your Twitter, and I saw that a lot of your tweets were, I think, back from 2016, where you yourself designed...how would you describe it? A coffee press stand? NEIL: Exactly. And AeroPress stand. CHAD: Having been through that process and launching it on Kickstarter, is that part of what...you said I want to help other people do this. NEIL: Absolutely. And it is probably a very congregating experience in terms of people who go through crowdfunding campaigns and then try and do it yourself. And certainly, my experience, you know, Kickstarter is a wonderful platform. But everything thereafter for me as a creator doing something in my spare time and my evenings outside of my normal nine to five was incredibly challenging, you know, dealing with factories who had very broken English or really struggled to communicate both my idea and their complications accurately. And just how that unfolded into trying to get a product to market without somebody to help and guide me through that process, doing it entirely by yourself. So I think that was certainly a very challenging experience in terms of getting that coffee stand to market. And I think the same is true for lots of first-time creators and even businesses in trying to reduce costs, up efficiency of getting to market quickly. Like, who are the partners and people that you can work with and businesses you can partner with to help provide you with those benefits? And that's really what we try and provide at Gembah. And I think, as you mentioned at the start, certainly my past experiences make me think that what we're building here today certainly does bring a lot of benefit. CHAD: I've had quite a few people on the show who launched physical products themselves on Kickstarter or other crowdfunding platforms. And often, the conversation turns to how difficult it actually was from a supply chain perspective from a manufacturing perspective. One of the things that struck me about Gembah is that it is not a small operation. It has headquarters in the U.S, but team members live and work all over the world. Their website says there are 150-plus team members globally, so given that reach, it seems like it probably can be really helpful to people solving those challenges. I'm curious who the ideal customers of Gembah are. What is the profile of someone who works with Gembah? NEIL: For our ideal client at the moment, I think that's one topic, and we can go into that. But what we're really trying to do in terms of the company vision is to democratize the design process and creating a product that gets to market. So as much as for us as a company, you know, having gone through a series A funding round and heading towards a series B, yes, we have got a fairly focused view of who is our ideal client profile and persona. However, what we're really aiming towards is providing this vertically integrated system of design and marketplace resources to absolutely everybody. That is the vision, the vision that anybody can become a product creator for the first time. In as much as, like my metaphor said earlier, you can become a seller on eBay, you should be able to have as easy access to the resources that enable that product creation. CHAD: So there's an example I always like to use; it has legs a little bit, which is thoughtbot is a well-respected design and development company. And there's an opportunity, you know, we're working designers and developers. And as people who do this work, we often either buy products and see how they could be improved or have ideas for our own, whether it be notepads, or pens, or even mechanical keyboards are a really interesting thing. If we wanted to pursue something like that, how might we do that? NEIL: In the context of Gembah? CHAD: Yeah, or beyond. But yes. NEIL: So I think the first thing for anybody with an idea is to really have some very clear goals at the outset in terms of...and for anybody who is interested in user-centered design, three of the guiding principles for that are three things I always really lean on which is feasibility, viability, and desirability. So within all of those things, what are your ambitions for your product? In terms of ideally, every product should be desirable; people should want to buy it. Have you got the means by which to get it to market? And once you've got it there, will it provide you enough of a margin to have a sustainable business? So the viability of the product. And can you actually make it? You know, it's not made out of unobtainium, or it [laughter] might be. So I think a very easy starting point for absolutely everybody is to really go via those three guiding principles in terms of the desirability, viability, and feasibility of your idea. Where do you think you score on that matrix? And then if you think you really have got something in terms of an idea that really has merit and that you have the wherewithal that you want to see it through to fruition, certainly just picking up the phone and calling Gembah, that's a great second step. CHAD: Okay. So at Gembah, if someone picks up the phone before going through those three steps and is talking to you, do you help them take a step back and answer those three questions? NEIL: Absolutely. So I think what we really try and do is not only facilitate your product development journey. We're not a service provider; we're a service facilitator. We want to connect you with all of the resources within our platform and marketplace. And what we really try and steer towards is what is the product development journey that best suits your needs. And I think, typically speaking, if we were to use a broad brush, it falls into three camps which is, do you want to speed to market? And the fact you want to sell an idea very quickly. So, could you potentially white-label your product? So we provide these options to people. So there's a white labeling route. There's then a customized route which is to say, is there something fairly similar already commercially available in the market and that factories provide, and that you could adjust the feature set for your idea by perhaps 10%? That would actually then mean that you could get your idea customized in the factory and into market. So that's the customized route. Versus then an entirely unique product which is to say that you need to both develop the design and tooling for the product from the ground up. Intuitively, I would hope from white labeling all the way through to unique product development; you have a fairly matched scale of time and cost. The more involved, the more detail, the more unique, the more time, and the more cost proportionally increases. CHAD: How would you say that designing within a company like Dyson is different than being outside? NEIL: The thing that working for a company like Dyson and others like it really affords you is the freedom to research without the means of having to really focus on what is my next launch in a year's time. And what I mean by that is Dyson and other large, successful companies have exclusive product development innovation hubs and idea teams who, for every 100 products they develop, potentially only get one through to market and into the global markets. So I think as a designer, what you're really afforded there is the space and creativity to explore lots of ideas without the pressure of I have to have something out in this next six-month period into the market. I think that's very different to a small to medium-sized enterprise who have a set product line, and this may be your only product line. Like, you really need to be laser-focused in what is my incremental product development here so that I can maintain the attention of the public? As well as then trying to work concurrently on how do I evolve my product line to then broaden out my audience? So I think that's quite different in terms you have to be very focused. MID-ROLL AD: Are you an entrepreneur or start-up founder looking to gain confidence in the way forward for your idea? At thoughtbot, we know you’re tight on time and investment, which is why we’ve created targeted 1-hour remote workshops to help you develop a concrete plan for your product’s next steps. Over four interactive sessions, we work with you on research, product design sprint, critical path, and presentation prep so that you and your team are better equipped with the skills and knowledge for success. Find out how we can help you move the needle at: tbot.io/entrepreneurs. CHAD: You started at Dyson as a design engineer, and you moved through up into a senior design engineer, then concept lead, to design manager of new product innovation. What was the journey from design engineer to eventually design manager? And what are the differences between those roles? NEIL: I think the key thing that changes within those roles is the level of autonomy and responsibility. And I think what scales up through each of those rungs is essentially how you can demonstrate competency for your core responsibility set. So as a design engineer, you're responsible for part-level designs like, here is, you know, you mentioned the mechanical keyboard earlier in the conversation. In that scenario, you would have a team of potentially four design engineers seeing that through to fruition. You would have a subset of those parts which you're exclusively responsible for. CHAD: So you might just be responsible for designing the best keycaps. NEIL: Exactly, exactly. So one chap will be just looking at the springs, and the tension, and how do they feel. Another one will be looking at the structural integrity; another one will be looking at the ergonomics. So I think you have the individual part and function. And what then levels up from that is as you go then into an advanced design engineer or a senior engineer is that you begin being responsible for the full assembly. So instead of having your keycap, you're now responsible for leading the whole team doing the whole keyboard. And then as you then progress through that, having demonstrated competency and reliability of delivering things, you then become a concept lead, which is to say that you have multiple projects on at the same time. You're leading the teams to do that. And then as you progress through that into design and management role, you then level that up again in terms of you're typically managing portfolios of projects within different market sectors. So I think if that answers your question directly enough, what it really builds on is for anyone aspiring, is you really need to focus on the basics first, like making sure that you are fundamentally a good designer and a good engineer who can demonstrate and communicate your logic and your thought process. And I think if you already underpin yourself with those sorts of fundamental competencies, that serves you really well as you move up through the ranks. CHAD: Some people I talk with, as they move up through those ranks, they feel like they are getting further and further away from what they actually love to do, which was design products. Is that something that you felt, or how did you not feel that? NEIL: I think as you move up through the management hierarchy, at the same time, typically the people that do that, I find and who are successful at it have a fairly focused view of what are their goals, what are they trying to achieve, and what is almost their trademark that they're known for. So for myself, how I've avoided that is...you asked me why I'm interested in Gembah, and that's because what I have very instinctively done both at Dyson and here is make sure that I've positioned myself to solve real problems. Probably everybody in a senior management position sometimes still misses getting on CAD or coding and just having the afternoon with no meetings. [laughs] CHAD: Yeah. NEIL: I think there's an element of that that you can't get away from. However, what really enthuses and keeps me really engaged and motivated in what I am doing now is to say I'm still solving problems, which is the fundamental heart of everything. So instead of designing the best keyboard for somebody who has carpal syndrome or hand problems, what we're now designing and developing is a platform that solves problems for a whole very broad user base. As long as you are always focused in your role in terms of how can I best serve and provide solutions to problems, I think what people will find is that you're actually always very fulfilled as a creator, maybe not as a mechanical engineer or electrical engineer, depending on your background, or a coder. But if you're fundamentally interested in solving problems and bringing solutions, you can still hold on to that very tightly. CHAD: Yeah. As head of design now, what does your day-to-day look like? NEIL: The majority of what it looks like is what I almost just mentioned with regards to how are we both developing and sustaining a business that provides and develops better solutions for our clientele as well as then dipping in and out of projects which require support and a little bit of extra attention? As I mentioned, as a design manager at Dyson, looking across portfolios of projects. My role now is really around making sure that all of our category leads, who are people looking after multiple projects that they, all have the support and tools that they need and require, as well as, as I mentioned, in particular cases, giving attention to some design projects that need help. And then roadmapping out, like, what is the future? What are the next incremental steps of functionality and platform features that we want to develop as a company and facilitate and bring to market for our customers? CHAD: What are some of those things that you're seeing across the portfolio that are needs that you're hoping to meet? NEIL: I think a very interesting new thing that we're bringing to market at the moment is what we call design to manufacture as a process. And what we really try and do there is we see in the market at the moment that people have a real sensitivity around cost-effectiveness with the global economies where they're at and supply chain. Like, how do I, number one, potentially diversify my supply chain? Or number two, how do I actually launch a new product with as little cost to myself as a business as possible? And what we do there is a report, a product opportunity report that profiles you as a business and a brand, and then overlaps that almost in a Venn diagram of where's the sweet spot in terms of available products in the markets that you could customize that would really suit your brand and that we could really effectively customize, and develop with a manufacturer and with a design team and get to market really quick, really cheap, but is still uniquely your own and has your special touch to it? CHAD: Obviously, a thing that has happened in this market or this industry over the last decade or so is crowdfunding and Kickstarter specifically. How have you seen that change things for people? NEIL: I think what it's meant is people get access to funds in a way that would have taken a very long time previously. And I think the other thing is people get feedback on ideas quite quickly as well, which maybe isn't the case across the broad spectrum. But for people who have an idea and want to very quickly test it with the markets in terms of does, this resonate with my user groups that I'm interested in? Like, is this a real set of user problems which I believe I've solved? Is that actually true? I think what it's provided product, you know, industrial design is typically, or any other type of product creator is this very quick access to people with capital who can invest and seeing their products through to fruition, which otherwise was actually a really hard and arduous task, not only getting feedback but then trying to raise capital separately. CHAD: In your opinion, what's the ideal point that something actually goes to crowdfunding? NEIL: The ideal timing for your crowdfunding campaign is where you have the first iterations of a working and demonstrated functional prototype where it's not just all idea but that you can demonstrate the fact that you're committed to this, that you can demonstrate the functionality of it, and show that you've considered how it's going to be made and that it's not actually going to change massively. Because I think what you can sometimes see is people can go to Kickstarter prematurely. And then when they're actually getting into the manufacturer of the product, there are some fairly large compromises that need to be made or the fact that the idea isn't feasible and they can't make it. The ideal time to go to a Kickstarter is where you've already thought through all your user scenarios. You've got a very clear perspective on what the problem set is that you're solving and that you can then demonstrate that with a working prototype. And that doesn't need to be pretty or visually pleasing because you can have your beautiful render next to your functional prototype. I think that's a great time. CHAD: And concrete information on the feasibility of manufacturing it. NEIL: Absolutely. So I think in part of informing your working prototype, I think you need to have early what you'd call DFM, design for manufacture feedback which is where you've spoken to a manufacturer or a tooling engineer and said, "What are the key considerations I should take into building this assembly?" And often is, the case for people who perhaps haven't gone down that road very, very far is that there are some fairly significant adjustments that you need to make to either the visuals or the functionality of your design. At least having a few initial conversations with those factories very clearly integrated into your product considerations is really, really critical. CHAD: So I have to ask, is there something that you're personally pursuing now and working on? NEIL: At the moment, not via Kickstarter. I think the thing actually I'm doing in my spare time is a bit of a passion project with regards to furniture. I think certainly, from my perspective, every designer can pay homage to architecture as the mother of all design. What more is an in-depth user experience and journey than the spaces we're all sitting in every day? And a big part of that is furniture. So I'm designing an armchair in my spare time. This is a way to, [laughs] as you mentioned earlier, with my current role as how it is just making sure I keep sharp my sketching skills and design skills, even if it's just for myself. CHAD: What does that look like for you? Is it sketching on paper now? And how far do you think you'll take it? NEIL: At the moment, it's just sketching on paper and asking my kids which ones they like, they dislike. [laughter] And I think, thankfully, with the abilities I've developed and some of the resources I have access to, we'll probably build a functioning prototype just so I can have a nice new armchair in the kitchen. CHAD: Does that mean creating it yourself, or what does that look like? NEIL: Again, I can only speak for myself. But being a creator and having come from my past, as we mentioned at Dyson, I think my true passion is creation, so keeping my hands very familiar with materials and screwing things together. So I think what that will look like for me is actually just getting all the raw materials myself within the woodwork, the metalwork, and doing all that work myself. I haven't got much of a passion yet for upholstery, so I'll probably outsource that part. There's something really rewarding in physically making something with your hands which I've never let go of, and I think I'll always enjoy. CHAD: That's great. I want to come back, as we wrap up, to those three pillars that you outlined, which I thought were really great. What does someone do who's really passionate about the idea that they have, but they hit roadblocks on one or more of those pillars? NEIL: Hmm, if somebody wants to start just themselves and you have an idea, and you don't want to necessarily engage with a company or service providers yet, I think what you can really do and start with is engaging with groups and doing research yourself so around desirability and feasibility. There is a world of products and reviews out there. There are a lot of resources there. So what I would encourage if somebody has said...you know, let's use your keyboard example again. CHAD: Yep. NEIL: What are the best-selling keyboards out there? And is there a silver lining in between all of them in terms of what makes them sell so well? Is it their functionality? Is it their design? Is it the ergonomics? So I think people can really do a lot of research around what develops and constitutes a really desirable product. As well as then in terms of the feasibility, like, are the things you're putting together can you find them freely on, say, a website like Alibaba? Or can you fundamentally make a keyboard out of wood at scale? Again, there are a lot of resources online that you can do for yourself. And then around viability in terms of, like, what would your margins have to be? Again, I think there's quite a lot you can do there with yourself with regards to what is available on the market today? What are their unique selling points? What are their suggested selling prices? And where do you think you could competitively position yourself? Typically, how I find that works out is a matrix of ideas. And I think people really need to not be precious about the one idea they have but really be adventurous around, like, what are all the ways that I could potentially solve for this problem set? And then just market against that matrix of desirability, feasibility, and viability and see which one is enough of all of those that actually gives you your best shot at success? I think, typically, you see a lot of creators who are very precious about an idea. And actually, maybe, again, it's entirely machined out of aluminum. Well, you know, you're really going to struggle to make that at a competitive price. CHAD: Right. You're not necessarily Apple. [laughs] NEIL: Exactly. You haven't got that economy of scale available to you. [laughs] So I think having a very clear goal in terms of, like, where do I think I can position this in the market? Do I think people will like it? And could I make it for that much? CHAD: Yeah, I think that that's true across the entire spectrum of digital and physical product design and development. We work with a lot of founders who have an idea. And compromise problem-solving through the many challenges that you face is critical. And if you're not able to do that, it's very difficult to actually get a product to market in any reasonable time frame or financial sustainability. NEIL: I completely agree. CHAD: Well, I really appreciate you stopping by the show and sharing with us, Neil. NEIL: Thank you so much for having me today. It's been a great conversation, and I've really enjoyed it. CHAD: If folks want to get in touch with you, or follow along, or learn more about Gembah or anything else, where are all the different places that they can do that? NEIL: So you can certainly find and connect with me on LinkedIn if anyone would like to follow up with me personally. And if you're really serious about getting a product to market and engaging around that process, you can just look us up at gembah.com. CHAD: And I can also personally say if you like looking at pretty things for inspiration, Neil's Instagram is also pretty good for that. [laughter] You can subscribe to the show and find notes for everything that we just mentioned, along with links and a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Neil Macqueen.
Chloe Sweden is the Founder and CEO of Plants and Perks, a service for rewarding employees with sustainable perks. Chad talks to Chloe about supporting employees on plant-based sustainability journies by gifting free samples and high-value prizes, choosing a co-founder, and being strategic with the types of businesses they've approached. Plants and Perks (https://www.plantsandperks.com/) Follow Plants and Perks on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/@plantsandperks/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/plantsandperks), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/plantsandperks/). Follow Chloe on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/chloe-sweden-014/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Chloe Sweden, the Founder, and CEO of Plants and Perks, a service for rewarding employees with sustainable perks. Chloe, thank you so much for joining me. CHLOE: Thank you for having me. CHAD: So you officially started Plants and Perks, at least according to your LinkedIn, in July of 2020. But I'm sure, like many entrepreneurs, you incubated the idea. The idea was in your head for longer than that. So, where does the idea from Plants and Perks come from? And when did you start to noodle it? CHLOE: It's a really, really good question. I also think that the LinkedIn algorithm isn't 100% correct. CHAD: [laughs] CHLOE: And it always seems to add time. I always get this sort of like, "Oh my God, you've been doing this for like two years?" I'm like, "No, I'm sure it can't be. It must be shorter than that." So Plants and Perks, Plants and Perks originally started out life as the Green Shoot Institute, which, I think, if you Google us, still there's remnants of the Green Shoot Institute that exists. That is still our company holding name. And that was kind of, I guess, the first thought of the idea. I was at the time heading up commercial relationships at a large parenting platform in the UK. And we had started to go on our own plant-based journey, so thinking about cutting back on meat and dairy consumption. I guess that was sort of my own personal journey that started to make me, as a parent, and as a consumer, and as a senior leader within business to, start to think about things outside of myself, and my family, and my business. And really, that was kind of the spark of thinking about how we, as employers, don't really do much to support employees on the plant-based sustainability journey. That was the sort of the embryo of the idea. And that came from the fact that I had spent 20 years of my life in advertising, marketing, and then ten years within that in talent as a former head of talent and culture really thinking about how we embed talent and how we help employees, and how culture is so important to businesses, and how we get employees really to be the face of our brands. But we don't really do much to invest in people beyond the kind of traditional benefits that exist but also in terms of training and things like that. That was kind of where things were coming together, sort of thinking about the future of work and thinking about how people go through these huge life moments and how the businesses really support them. So that was kind of the start. I won't give the whole game away, but that was, I guess, the beginning of a kind of, hmm, there's something there. And I didn't really know what it was at the time. But yeah, I guess it wasn't so much before I actually incorporated the company. I incorporated in September 2020. That's what it says on my Company's House printout that I have on the wall just to remind me of when that momentous day happened. But pretty quickly, from coming up with an idea, I incorporated the business and just went, this is something I have to do. CHAD: Yeah, the feeling of this is something I have to do is something that I've felt myself and that I hear from a lot of entrepreneurs and guests of the show. You were working at Mumsnet at the time. How did you start while also having another job? CHLOE: Not just having another job, running a large sales team, and homeschooling two children during a pandemic. CHAD: Oh, homeschooling. Okay, yeah. CHLOE: And my son was definitely diagnosed with having additional needs at the time as well. I guess it was all of those things that kind of came together that made me realize, I mean, I had joined Mumsnet actually to head up Mumsnet's talent function, which was all about creating a flexible working product platform for parents and those looking for flexible jobs to bring them together in a marketplace. But Mumsnet wasn't going to actually continue to invest in that product, and I moved to a more commercial role. But I moved there to build a product. And that's what really triggered it for me. I realized in that moment when I'm homeschooling, and I'm running a large sales team, and I'm doing all of these things, that wasn't why I moved to this role. I actually moved because I'm at the point in my career where I want to build something, that I have it in me to create something, and build, and connect people, and do something bigger than myself and bigger than a day-to-day job. And so that itch was there. I was also, as part of that role, going out and speaking to heads of HR in large enterprise organizations and talking to them about what was troubling them. And funny enough, looking after their working parents was not troubling them, but sustainability came up a lot, and general well-being came up a lot. And so that was kind of, I guess, it started the percolation. But really, I guess with most things, the idea came about in its most embryonic stage, and then I took it to market really quickly. I basically gave it a name and then just reached out on LinkedIn to anybody I knew and people I didn't know as well just literally reached out to those people. And I spoke to one person who I won't name her or the company but probably one of the largest global companies in the world and at a very senior level. And she was actually working out of the States. And she said to me, you know, "This is new. [laughs] You need to do this. Nobody is doing this. We need this in our lives. And I haven't heard of anybody doing this in the States. You need to go and build this." And that was, I guess, the impetus to do it. And so I worked weekends. I actually was working four days a week at Mumsnet. But my fifth day, I was working full time for Mumsnet but not being paid. And so I clawed back my fifth day where I wasn't being paid, and I worked all weekends, and I worked all evenings. And I just worked and worked, and I haven't stopped until this conversation. [laughs] CHAD: To actually work on it, did you start to gather a team, a group of people? Who were the first people that you brought on to help you? CHLOE: So my co-founder, Ellen, we were on the senior leadership team of a creative agency. I was the head of talent and culture. She was the head of operation. So we had worked side by side in this organization. So we kept in touch. And she had contacted me about some health issues. And we were talking about cutting back on meat and dairy as one of the things that she could look at, given my own experiences with it. And that really bonded us. And because I am marketing, sales, creative, and she is digital, tech, product, it kind of made sense, in the beginning, to bring her on. And I just said to her like, "I'd really like you on this journey with me." And she resisted it for quite some time. [laughs] We are very different personality-wise, very, very different. I'm yes, she's no, and so in that way, we're very much yin and yang. CHAD: Oh, but I think that that can be the perfect combination for a co-founder team. I know that I've needed that in the past for myself. Someone who balances the risk-taking with reality can be very helpful. CHLOE: Yeah, absolutely. And I think I'm actually not a risk taker, but I am a natural optimist. And so I'll have a meeting, and I'll be like, "It's amazing. It's solved all of our problems." And she'll be just like, "No, it hasn't. What's changed? Nothing's changed. There's no contract, nothing signed," [laughs] which I think in the moment is really not helpful. [laughs] But it's really helpful as we grow the business. It really is a good balance. I bring all of that energy and drive to get us very quickly to the next level. And she brings all of the understanding, all of the pauses, all of the rigor, all of the data, all the things that are just the complete opposite of me. So I brought her on pretty quickly. And then we had a bit of a false start around getting a CTO on board. But we knew we needed to build the product quickly. And in the end, we built the product ourselves on a no-code/low-code platform, just the two of us. And I recommend any entrepreneur to do that because you learn a lot. [laughs] CHAD: Is that the reason...so you learning...because I think that that is super important, whether it be someone like yourself actually building the product or just being very close to it. When I've seen entrepreneurs get too far away from the product too soon, they end up regretting it later on. CHLOE: Yeah, I think -- CHAD: Or building the wrong thing. CHLOE: Or building the wrong thing. I do really believe in you've got to do every job in order to then understand who you need to hire and to then have an appreciation of that role. So obviously the product evolved very much and very quickly. We were very lucky that one of our first clients was Lacoste, who we launched to here in the UK with our MVP. But we also did some other paid consultancy work with Uber and with other clients as well. And then PopSockets came on in the States as well. We weren't ready to launch in the States, but they really wanted us to. So we're like, you know, let's do it. [laughs] CHAD: I noticed those three names on your website. And I do think that social...being able to have those testimonials there with names people recognize lends a lot of credibility to the product. CHLOE: And they were my first three clients, [laughs] genuinely my first three clients. CHAD: So, did you seek that out, or did it just happen? How did that work out? CHLOE: Obviously, my background is commercial sales, so it's not something that I shy away from. It was connections; it was talking to people. And we were recommended to PopSockets, which was amazing. They came on as an early investor as well, which was phenomenal. Again, having clients who love what you do so much they want to invest is brilliant because you get to have some really interesting conversations and backers in your corner. But yeah, of course, we've been quite strategic with the types of businesses that we've approached, but we are very lucky that we are attracting the right type of businesses as well, which is lovely. I mean, talk a little bit more about what Plants and Perks does, but the way in which we have evolved the product and evolved the types of clients that we're talking to is not an accident. And I think it goes back to the conversation we were just having about building the product yourself. Really being in the weeds, I think, is really important. Now, it's going to be a challenge to me as a founder moving forward to make sure I'm extricating myself from the weeds as time goes on, although I'm pretty happy to step away when needed. [laughs] But knowing that and being able to talk to your clients and being really clear, well, this is what this client likes; this is what's happening here; this is what's working well here, I think is really important. You've got to know your product. You've got to know your audience. We've got two...actually, we have three clients, technically. We have clients; we have employees; we have client employers; we have employees; and we also have Perks' partners. We have sustainable...we promote sustainable products and services on our platform. So we also have partners as well as our clients. And I think you've got to know them all really well. Now, I was a head of talent and culture, so I know the employee piece quite well because I was always advocating for the employee. I spent 20 years downsizing, so I ran client accounts. So I know how to look after clients, I guess, from that perspective and work in large organizations. I also used to literally do the marketing for PepsiCo and Wrigley's and big brands. So I can do the partner piece quite well. And I think it's really important that you've done that and you've lived through it. And I've never built a tech product, but I did literally roll my sleeves up and get stuck in to build the MVP, which was kind of the bit that I was missing. Now, I haven't built the app; that is beyond me. [laughs] But luckily, we've got a brilliant team around us now, which we've built up since our last raise that's enabled us to get that talent in. And yeah, and it's just been an amazing team effort to get us to where we are now. CHAD: That's great. I want to dig into more about what the product actually is. But you've already alluded a couple of times -- CHLOE: No, let's keep it mysterious. [laughter] CHAD: You've alluded a few times to the evolution. And one thing that's stuck out to me as you were talking about that is that going to the website now; it's not specifically about eating less meat and dairy. You're talking more about sustainability. CHLOE: Yes. CHAD: I'm sure that's still a component of it. CHLOE: 100%. CHAD: But what drove that change? CHLOE: Oh my God, [laughs] about a two-week period where we had an existential crisis. I think this is really interesting, I think, for our journey, and I think us as founders as well. So we ideologically always believed in the reduction of meat and dairy as the number one thing you can do for personal and planetary health. That's it. Like, that was it. We were all about eat plants, get perks. We encourage employees to cut back on their meat and dairy consumption, and we reward them with plant-based perks. That was the product. That was the concept. Tested really well. People really bought into it. People liked that they were being rewarded with perks. They absolutely understood that it is unsustainable to consume meat and dairy in the way that we are moving forward for the planet and also for personal health. So when we're having these conversations, everyone was like, thumbs up, get it, love it, buy into it, it's all great. And then what was happening is that I kind of got to a point where I was like, we've had all these really positive conversations, but no one's biting. Everyone's sort of saying yes to me and then nothing. I'm actually really proud of us as a team for very, very quickly going and identifying the problem and fixing it because we could have stuck to our ideological guns and gone, no, no, no, but we are all about the reduction of meat and dairy consumption as the number one thing. But no one was telling us that it was that that was the problem. What we had to do was read between the lines because nobody would ever tell us that. But what they would say was, "Well, how would it land with a 58-year-old man working in our distribution center?" And we're like, "Really well, why?" [laughter] But I had to understand what was coming behind that question. And what was coming behind the question was I don't want to launch a benefit where I feel like we're judging somebody's life choices. Like, that's not going to wash. So the people we were talking to were super keen on it, then when they took it up the line, they were essentially saying, "Well, this is a plant-based benefit, Plants and Perks." And I think that's where the sort of record scratched, and it didn't go any further. But no one was feeding this back to us. This we had to discover ourselves. And so we had this kind of existential crisis where we're like, well, we've always been about sustainability, like, absolutely the reduction in meat and dairy is all because it's unsustainable for us to consume meat and dairy and fish in the way that we are. So why don't we broaden ourselves out to more? We already held sustainable products and services on our platform anyway. It was just the language; it really was. It wasn't actually as big a pivot as it sounded. It really was just softening the language. So we don't talk about plant-based; we talk about planet-friendly. And we just kind of expanded out some of the articles and content that we contained anyway. And that unblocked everything, like genuinely overnight unblocked everything. So it became something that what we were hearing was that companies wanted to introduce a new green benefit, and now they felt that they could because there wasn't the kind of...and we always said that this is non-judgmental. This is completely supportive. These are very small changes that you could make. You don't have to sort of introduce me to it. But now it makes sense to everybody. And I think we as a business just needed to go through that moment where we were like, is this the type of business that we want to be running? Is this the business that we want to be owning? And we were like, absolutely, because this is still...our mission actually didn't change at all. Our mission is to help a million employees live healthier, more sustainable lives. That has not changed. And so the fact that our mission hadn't changed, it was just some of the language needed to change to make it more palatable to a wider audience, that's fine. We could live with that. CHAD: Yeah, that's great. So now, what does that actually mean in terms of what the product is? Companies sign up. CHLOE: Yep. CHAD: And what do employees do? CHLOE: Yeah, so it's a really good question. So the other sort of big moment, I guess, inflection point that we had is that we introduced a freemium model. And that, from a product perspective, was quite a big thing because I started realizing in conversations as well we were giving too much value away. And actually, some of the value that we were giving away clients didn't necessarily want. Some clients really wanted it, and some clients didn't need it. And so we introduced three different products. So we introduced free, so we now have a completely free Plants and Perks app that any employer can take on for their employee base. And it will give them discounts of sustainable products and services. It will give them article content on how to live more sustainably, embrace more sustainable living. And it will give them planet-friendly recipes on essentially more sustainable, healthy ways to eat. And that's the core free product that we've created. CHAD: And are you still making revenue on that through partner relationship? CHLOE: Yeah, absolutely. So, although, you know, we're not about excess consumption. What we are about is...I think what we really realized is with Plants and Perks; we are bang smack in the middle of a cost of living crisis. And actually, what we can do is level the playing field when it comes to green and sustainable products. There's kind of like this green tax that gets applied. And what we're trying to do is very much look at price parity. So what we talk about is it's harder than ever to make the most sensible choices when costs are spiraling all around us. And so what the reductions of planet-friendly products does is enables you to just try things that you might not have tried before because of cost, and it mitigates against that. So we do go into relationship with partners, and they can promote their products through the platform. But there are also chances for employees to put their reviews and tell them what they think. So it isn't just set up for advertisers in that way at all. But what we found is there's an amazing thing which is that brands need to connect with a new, wider audience. They don't just want to talk to early adopters within the sustainability or plant-based space. And we are talking to every man and every woman in large-scale organizations. So it's actually quite difficult to access those people if you're these niche brands who may not even have listings necessarily in large retailers yet. Or if you do have distribution, it's really difficult to get a sell-through. So we enable those partners to offer sampling, to offer freebies, to offer significant discounts, and to offer in-store redemptions as well. So we are offering quite a significant route to market for sustainable and plant-based products and services. CHAD: That's great. Okay, and so what is the second tier up? CHLOE: The second tier is plus and what that gives you is we start to give employees plant points, and you collect plant points. It's incredibly gamified. You can collect badges. Every action you do basically has a reaction. So when you read an article, you basically can answer some questions on the article, and you'll be rewarded with points. You can rate a recipe; you can like a recipe, try a recipe. You can buy a product or a service. You can also get a free...in the UK, at the moment, you'll be able to get a free meal once a week, like a free lunch through one of our partners, and loads of freebies as well. So the value is much more significant in the plus model. That's kind of our core offering. And we talk about rewarding employees with sustainable perks. And during the time at the moment, employers are really looking for ways in which they can support their employees through the cost of living crisis. How can we give our employees free stuff, interesting stuff, whilst also helping them on the sustainability journey? And so therefore, this is something that genuinely really works for both employers and employees. So that's the plus model. CHAD: One thing I noticed as you lay out the benefits that you get under this model, I'm surprised then by the per-employee cost. It seemed very low to me [laughs] when I saw it. Can you talk more about that? CHLOE: Yeah, so that is a from price. And I do think I need to make it; I mean, I do say it's from, and I think I do say there's a bit of an asterisk. I do think I need to potentially change it as well. So it's good [laughs] feedback because I think quite a few people say that. So that is for large-scale employers. So we are talking to large retailers with 20,000, 30,000 40,000 employees. So that is the cost that they would pay. It is a sliding scale back from that cost. But, I mean, we've purposely priced ourselves to be reasonable. We are a mission-led company, and for any investors listening, don't worry; we are also revenue-generating. CHAD: [laughs] CHLOE: But for us, it's really important that we are an affordable benefit. We're very aware of the costs on everyone. So, for sure, that price is pretty low. But we think that it represents quite good value, incredible value for the client. But it's something that makes sense for them to bring on. It should be a no-brainer; that's basically what we say. Like, it's a no-brainer. In terms of the amount of freebies that you're getting for your employee, it's certainly a no-brainer in terms of the return on investment. On the pro version, by the way, the added value on the pro version is that it's fully ring-fenced for that organization. So it's fully branded. They get full account management. It looks like their platform, essentially. And employees can talk and access the information together. So it might be that Bob in IT in Denver has uploaded a photo of himself cycling to work, and somebody else can comment on it. Somebody else has uploaded a curry recipe in Scotland, and someone else has gone, "Well, I tried that recipe." "But, you know, how was it? How much chili did you put in it?" So people are kind of joining together and really creating that space to talk about sustainability in a much more accessible way. So that's the pro version. And also we're then building on sustainability metrics and also sustainability reporting. So we'll be able to talk about employees' own carbon footprint and also how that scales up to the overall company's sustainability goals. CHAD: You mentioned that the mission is to help one million employees on their sustainability journey. Can you tell me where you are [laughs] along that metric? CHLOE: Yeah. So, look, the app launch is tomorrow, so [laughs] ask me in a couple of months. And we're really...actually; we're genuinely new. CHAD: You've been in private beta, I guess, is the way to describe it. CHLOE: Yeah. We're basically with the MVP. We've been helping a couple of thousand employees up until this point. We got around 25,000. About 30-plus companies join our waiting list, which was then around 25,000-30,000 employees that represented. We've just confirmed that we're going to be launching with a very large retailer in the UK as well, so that will then -- CHAD: Congratulations. CHLOE: Thank you. That will then double, so it will be about 50,000 employees that we'll be hitting this year. And then we are in quite far down the line talks with quite a few other companies that would take us to potentially just under our target, which, by the way, the million employees is not like it's a target for 2022. It's like a...it's our ongoing mission. [laughs] CHAD: Right, a long-term vision. CHLOE: It's a long-term vision. So we're significantly further ahead than I thought we would be on that. I mean, look, what we've said from the start is the million is a sort of fairly arbitrary number but what it is is it's scale. So we're not here just to look after, you know, we're not here just to help very, very small companies; we can now with our free product, which is great, but it gives us that scale. And it shows that we, as a business, want to be global, want to be talking to enterprise clients and then helping them live healthier, more sustainable lives. For us, it's both of those things. You can't just live a healthy life, and you can't just live a sustainable life. It needs to be a life of purpose. And so the mission really keeps us true to those things. MID-ROLL AD: Now that you have funding, it’s time to design, build and ship the most impactful MVP that wows customers now and can scale in the future. thoughtbot Lift Off brings you the most reliable cross-functional team of product experts to mitigate risk and set you up for long-term success. As your trusted, experienced technical partner, we’ll help launch your new product and guide you into a future-forward business that takes advantage of today’s new technologies and agile best practices. Make the right decisions for tomorrow, today. Get in touch at: thoughtbot.com/liftoff. CHAD: You mentioned you have essentially three client bases: you have the employers, the employees, and the partners, which essentially means you have a multi-sided marketplace. CHLOE: Yes. CHAD: And one of the challenges of building any marketplace, especially the more sides you have, is bootstrapping it, you know, creating a momentum. The partners want to know, hey, how many people are on the platform that we're going to be bringing into? And in the early days, you don't have much to offer there. So how have you made that work? CHLOE: Well, so firstly, we don't see ourselves as a marketplace, which we should. [laughter] We should see ourselves as a marketplace. Secondly, I learned all about building a marketplace because, in 2010, I launched a dating app before there were apps. Actually, it was a dating website...and completely on my own. It was complete madness. And I totally did not understand the power of a network. I didn't understand the marketplace dynamic. I didn't understand that you needed buyers and you needed sellers. You needed, in this case, men seeking women and women seeking men. [laughs] You needed both sides of the equation. And you needed volume on both sides straight out of the gate. I just didn't get that. I was like, build it, and they will come. [laughs] And so I was fully burnt from that experience. So that was still ringing in my head. So I think what was important was building up, firstly, building up our partners. So it was really, really important to build up the number of partners that we have on the platform. And for them, it's a completely low-risk strategy. It's like, come on the platform and offer discounts and people who are interested in sustainability. Like, that's really easy. We can do that. And then for the companies, we've got everything...beyond the partners, we still have loads and loads of value. We still have value in the articles. We still have value in the gamification. We have value in the recipe. So there's still value even if there wasn't value in the perks. But what we've done is we've been able to build up both sides. So actually, we've got over 200 brands, which represents about 45,000-plus individual discounts on the platform. And now we're building up the number of employees. Now we're able to revenue generate more off the partners because we've got the volume on the other side. CHAD: You mentioned that you are primarily focused on the UK now. But you've had interest from the U.S. and demand that you've not rejected. What does that look like for you now? And how do you balance that going forward? CHLOE: Yeah, I have got quite a lot of interest from the States. And it's really hard not to be pulled over there. And we see a lot of interest from there. We have to -- CHAD: Why are you holding back? CHLOE: Because we just don't have the team size at the moment, and we need to get the...there's two things really. Well, there are a number of things. There are about 22 things. [laughter] I know I said there are two things; there are like a million reasons. We need to make sure that we've got the best product possible; that's number one. We need to test in our home market. We need to make sure that we've got the robust mechanic with the Perk's partners and with the employees. We need to get all of that working really well because the States is a completely different market because of the nature of the products and services. We're not on the ground there. So it's easier for us to have really good relationships with partners now. There's going to be a conference on Wednesday in London, so I'm going to be meeting a lot of our partners there; super easy. It's like 20 minutes on the train for me. Harder to go to the States and make sure that we have really robust relationships with partners there; not impossible, just it would be time and effort to be able to build it in the States. I think we'd be able to find the clients actually more easily or, I guess, quicker if that makes sense because I think there's a need in the States. And then there are just cultural nuances. So we just need to make sure that all of our content is really relevant culturally. So PopSockets, we are with PopSockets in the States, and I think they're quite fairly near you in Boulder. So we are already aware of some of those cultural nuances. And our editorial teams are quite good at making sure that we're representing that. So, yeah, so I think it's just about making sure that we do a good job of it. The hard thing, I think, is actually launching across Europe because of the language barrier and because of the very different cultural nuances when it comes to sustainability, local government policy. CHAD: Also, expectations around employee benefits and how they work. CHLOE: Exactly. Expectations around employee benefits and also attitudes to food as well because obviously food is still a part of what we do, and so all of those things actually make Europe slightly harder. So I think, for us, it would be a launch to the U.S. before we would go to continental Europe, but, again, not impossible. Interestingly, our clients massively want us to be global quickly because they are all looking for global benefits. They want to be able to homogenize their benefits offerings globally. They do not want to have one thing being offered in the UK, something being offered in the States, especially when it comes to benefits. Things like pensions, things like healthcare are so different in those countries, and they won't change. Just in terms of how many holiday days you guys have versus us, they can't make it a level playing field on many things. So if they could have a level playing field when it comes to sustainable benefits, they would love to do that. So there is a real need driving us to go global very quickly. And, look, going right back to the conversation we had at the beginning, I'd do it tomorrow. I'd move my family to the U.S. and just start building it. But my very kind advisors are like, slow down. [laughs] Get it right in the UK. CHAD: Well, I think that is a good indicator that you do have a marketplace business because all of the pressures around scaling are the same ones that marketplaces have. CHLOE: Yeah. [laughs] CHAD: And marketplace businesses very often benefit from in the early days focusing on specific markets. CHLOE: No, you're 100% right. I think I've had an epiphany on this podcast [laughter] that I'm running a marketplace. CHAD: I want to come back to the actual tech of the product as we wrap up here. I'm super impressed that you used a low-code platform to build the MVP yourself, and that has taken you through today. So how did you go about moving beyond that? CHLOE: [laughs] So we always knew we'd have to ditch it, so we were very aware. And that's the beauty of doing an MVP which is you don't fall in love with it. So that was great because we knew we were going to ditch it. We didn't fall in love with it. So how did we go about it? So we've got ourselves...we got a CTO on board that Ellen had worked with before. And we've got an amazing UX-UI designer. And we've got some devs. And we just ran at it. We just said, right, what are we taking from the MVP that we want to put into...and we knew it had to be an app really quickly. We actually weren't going to develop the app this year, but then it was sort of, you know, the demand there was all for the app. So we've gone app first. So we just said, "What's important from the MVP that we want to be taking here?" We knew that perks was going to be the first thing that we wanted to launch with because of the cost of living crisis. And we wanted to make it really about perks, which is why I know it sounds silly when it's obvious to you that we're a marketplace. It actually isn't that obvious to us because before perks, none of those things are marketplace. All of the other products and services that we offer aren't marketplace. CHAD: You mean the content and that kind of thing. CHLOE: The content, the gamification. We've got a whole thing coming down the line all about how to calculate your carbon footprint. Like, none of that is marketplace. But because we've really leant heavily on the perks because we know that there's a massive need for that, I guess that's why it's a surprise to me [laughs] that we're a marketplace. But yeah, so we knew we wanted to get perks out first. So then we built a product with perks at the heart because that was testing really well. And then yeah, and then we've just kind of literally just gone hell for leather head down. The team has been in build mode. We've been in sell mode and creation mode. And, yeah, we've just gone really, really fast. It's not in our natures to sort of go slow on these things. And we just need to be out there. People love what we're doing. And now it's the real test. Now it's literally employees now getting access to it, and that's the scary time. CHAD: Has it been what you expected actually, you know, building custom software in terms of time, and cost, and that kind of thing? Or has it been different than what you expected? CHLOE: Yeah, that's a good question. So I guess over the years, I've had the opportunity to build products internally in companies. You're always in a waiting list for other people that need other stuff. So in a way, it's been quicker because it's my team, and they've got nothing else to concentrate on except this. I'm really open with what I don't know. So I'm like, okay, could I do, just out of interest, how easy is it for us to switch off that function and launch this? Is it a week? Is it a month? Is it like a year? Like, I just have no idea on timings and scale on that. So I try to work that out quite quickly. But I think it's been quicker than I thought it might be. And if you've got an internal team, then it's cheaper. As soon as we started to look at external teams, it was prohibitively expensive and no control. And I think we knew quite early on that we wanted to build it internally. CHAD: How has it compared to the process of using the low-code tool to get started? CHLOE: [laughs] In a way, if I had an idea, it was up and live an hour later...[laughs] and, you know, I guess there's much more pushback now. It's like, "Do you really need that feature?" And I'm like, "Yeah, you know, just do it. What's so difficult?" So I guess I've had to put more rigor and thinking behind some of the features and functions that we now have versus just sticking it up there. I mean, look, we were really, really frustrated with low-code. We were really frustrated with what it could do. It is so limited really in what we were trying to do, but it got us to a certain point. I'll always be forever grateful to it. [laughs] And my partner and I were able to completely tag team on it. So I would do all of the front end, and she'd do all the back end. It worked really well from that perspective. But we've got a great team now who are really engaged in what we're trying to do and trying to achieve. I guess I want everything yesterday. So as with most things, I'm getting updates going, "This is broken, and I'm having to turn this off for the launch." And I'm like, "No, I want it there. I want it in there." CHAD: So, on that note, why do you have a specific launch date? CHLOE: We've got a client we're launching to next week. [laughter] So we're launching -- CHAD: So you've made a commitment to launch for a particular client, and so you need to hit that date. CHLOE: Yeah. We are. We're launching it to...yeah, we've got quite a lot of clients, actually. We've got launches almost every day from next week. So this week is friends and family launch. So we need to get it out and get it tested. And then it goes into the hands of real-life users, which is scary and interesting. CHAD: I wish you all the best with that. I really appreciate you taking the time. CHLOE: Any advice? CHAD: Well, what I was going to say is a question I often like to ask. And I'm curious, before launch, is there something that you wish you could have done differently or realized sooner? I'm sure this question might be different post-launch. The answer to this question might be different post-launch. But from where you sit today, is there something that you wish you would have done differently? CHLOE: Oh my God. I almost want to say everything and nothing. I don't want to go, no, I don't regret anything; everything's been a learning experience, [laughs] so there's nothing I would have done differently because it's all led me to this point. But then, on the other hand, I think we've made the right decisions with the data that we've had. I think we need to...there's stuff that we need to be doing much more rigorously now moving forwards, which is making sure that we are very, very data-driven with what's coming back. Now we're in the hands of real users in a meaningful way with the app. We need to be taking all of that feedback on and not just relying on the gut instinct with a lot of things. It needs to be much more data-driven now that we've got the data coming in. So I don't think that's a regret necessarily because I think you've got to kind of go with your gut to get a product out the door because you could be completely hamstrung by research. And that would have taken us into a whole nother territory. So I think...does that make sense? So whilst I'm not regretting but like -- CHAD: It does make sense. And you asked me for any advice that I have. And this is a very small piece of advice, but it's one thing that I've made the mistake of myself and seen many other teams do. If you want to seek metrics on something and you don't instrument it, you don't set up those metrics; then you don't have them. CHLOE: So true. CHAD: And you realize, oh, we should have been tracking this click, or that click, or this flow. And then you put it in place once you realize that it's not there, and you have to wait 30-60 days in order to get the data. And that time feels terrible while you're waiting for that data to accrue. And so my general advice is to instrument basically everything. Instrument as much as possible, even if you think you're not going to need it. Track as many clicks as possible in the app so that you can really then say, oh, we didn't know we wanted to track this flow. And you already have the data where you can piece it together instead of waiting. CHLOE: Yeah, 100%. So we were challenged by...so we're backed by sustainable ventures on the accelerator program. And we were challenged by them to make sure that we've got all of our KPI metrics in place for the product. Of course, we've just been head down building it. And actually, it was a great moment where it's kind of like, but how many points do you want your users to collect in a day? Maybe there's an upper limit that you want, which we hadn't really thought about. Well, I don't know; we just want them to collect points. Like, you know, we want them to live their best life. And so in setting the KPIs, we've also had to set what we're measuring, but it was like two pages long. [laughs] There are so many things that we're trying to...what our KPIs are. And I think we can also...I think a learning is that maybe we need to be a little bit more focused with also what we're trying to measure and also what we were trying to see because we, again, can't focus on everything. We can't update and upgrade and iterate absolutely everything as a priority. What's going to shift the dial the most? What's going to have the biggest impact? Yes, we can change the color of that, or we can make that button bigger. But actually, if that's not going to lead to the KPI that we're trying to measure, then actually, there's no point. So yeah, so I think that's been a learning as well. I mean, there are so many thousands, billion learnings on this whole journey. [laughs] I could write a book. I don't think anyone will read it, but I could definitely write a book. [laughter] And I don't have time to write it. If I had time to write it and if anyone wants to read it, I'll do it. [laughs] CHAD: Okay. Well, maybe a few years from now, you can write that book. CHLOE: Yeah. CHAD: And, Chloe, thank you so much for joining the show and for telling us all about your journey. I really wish you and Plants and Perks the best over these important next couple of months. CHLOE: Thank you. We're raising, by the way. We're just about to go into our seed round, so yeah. CHAD: Seed round. CHLOE: Yeah. CHAD: Perfect. CHLOE: I know, perfect for Plants and Perks. That's the next inflection point whilst obviously also launching an app. And we don't do things by halves, so that will be the next learning journey. CHAD: If folks want to find out more, to follow along with you, to get in touch with the company, where are all the different places that they can do that? CHLOE: Don't look at the website because we're in the process of updating that. [laughter] And, frankly, now I'm going to change the pricing after this conversation. [laughs] But yeah, no, don't do that. Just email me; it's the easiest way. Or find me on LinkedIn; LinkedIn is probably the number one way. Or email chloe@plantsandperks.com. I love; literally, I love hearing feedback: negative, positive, anything. I love having conversations. I love doing partnerships. I love helping people on their journeys; just reach out. CHAD: Wonderful. And you can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode along with a complete transcript at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Chloe Sweden.
Chloe Sweden is the Founder and CEO of Plants and Perks, a service for rewarding employees with sustainable perks. Chad talks to Chloe about supporting employees on plant-based sustainability journies by gifting free samples and high-value prizes, choosing a co-founder, and being strategic with the types of businesses they've approached. Plants and Perks (https://www.plantsandperks.com/) Follow Plants and Perks on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/@plantsandperks/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/plantsandperks), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/plantsandperks/). Follow Chloe on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/chloe-sweden-014/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Chloe Sweden, the Founder, and CEO of Plants and Perks, a service for rewarding employees with sustainable perks. Chloe, thank you so much for joining me. CHLOE: Thank you for having me. CHAD: So you officially started Plants and Perks, at least according to your LinkedIn, in July of 2020. But I'm sure, like many entrepreneurs, you incubated the idea. The idea was in your head for longer than that. So, where does the idea from Plants and Perks come from? And when did you start to noodle it? CHLOE: It's a really, really good question. I also think that the LinkedIn algorithm isn't 100% correct. CHAD: [laughs] CHLOE: And it always seems to add time. I always get this sort of like, "Oh my God, you've been doing this for like two years?" I'm like, "No, I'm sure it can't be. It must be shorter than that." So Plants and Perks, Plants and Perks originally started out life as the Green Shoot Institute, which, I think, if you Google us, still there's remnants of the Green Shoot Institute that exists. That is still our company holding name. And that was kind of, I guess, the first thought of the idea. I was at the time heading up commercial relationships at a large parenting platform in the UK. And we had started to go on our own plant-based journey, so thinking about cutting back on meat and dairy consumption. I guess that was sort of my own personal journey that started to make me, as a parent, and as a consumer, and as a senior leader within business to, start to think about things outside of myself, and my family, and my business. And really, that was kind of the spark of thinking about how we, as employers, don't really do much to support employees on the plant-based sustainability journey. That was the sort of the embryo of the idea. And that came from the fact that I had spent 20 years of my life in advertising, marketing, and then ten years within that in talent as a former head of talent and culture really thinking about how we embed talent and how we help employees, and how culture is so important to businesses, and how we get employees really to be the face of our brands. But we don't really do much to invest in people beyond the kind of traditional benefits that exist but also in terms of training and things like that. That was kind of where things were coming together, sort of thinking about the future of work and thinking about how people go through these huge life moments and how the businesses really support them. So that was kind of the start. I won't give the whole game away, but that was, I guess, the beginning of a kind of, hmm, there's something there. And I didn't really know what it was at the time. But yeah, I guess it wasn't so much before I actually incorporated the company. I incorporated in September 2020. That's what it says on my Company's House printout that I have on the wall just to remind me of when that momentous day happened. But pretty quickly, from coming up with an idea, I incorporated the business and just went, this is something I have to do. CHAD: Yeah, the feeling of this is something I have to do is something that I've felt myself and that I hear from a lot of entrepreneurs and guests of the show. You were working at Mumsnet at the time. How did you start while also having another job? CHLOE: Not just having another job, running a large sales team, and homeschooling two children during a pandemic. CHAD: Oh, homeschooling. Okay, yeah. CHLOE: And my son was definitely diagnosed with having additional needs at the time as well. I guess it was all of those things that kind of came together that made me realize, I mean, I had joined Mumsnet actually to head up Mumsnet's talent function, which was all about creating a flexible working product platform for parents and those looking for flexible jobs to bring them together in a marketplace. But Mumsnet wasn't going to actually continue to invest in that product, and I moved to a more commercial role. But I moved there to build a product. And that's what really triggered it for me. I realized in that moment when I'm homeschooling, and I'm running a large sales team, and I'm doing all of these things, that wasn't why I moved to this role. I actually moved because I'm at the point in my career where I want to build something, that I have it in me to create something, and build, and connect people, and do something bigger than myself and bigger than a day-to-day job. And so that itch was there. I was also, as part of that role, going out and speaking to heads of HR in large enterprise organizations and talking to them about what was troubling them. And funny enough, looking after their working parents was not troubling them, but sustainability came up a lot, and general well-being came up a lot. And so that was kind of, I guess, it started the percolation. But really, I guess with most things, the idea came about in its most embryonic stage, and then I took it to market really quickly. I basically gave it a name and then just reached out on LinkedIn to anybody I knew and people I didn't know as well just literally reached out to those people. And I spoke to one person who I won't name her or the company but probably one of the largest global companies in the world and at a very senior level. And she was actually working out of the States. And she said to me, you know, "This is new. [laughs] You need to do this. Nobody is doing this. We need this in our lives. And I haven't heard of anybody doing this in the States. You need to go and build this." And that was, I guess, the impetus to do it. And so I worked weekends. I actually was working four days a week at Mumsnet. But my fifth day, I was working full time for Mumsnet but not being paid. And so I clawed back my fifth day where I wasn't being paid, and I worked all weekends, and I worked all evenings. And I just worked and worked, and I haven't stopped until this conversation. [laughs] CHAD: To actually work on it, did you start to gather a team, a group of people? Who were the first people that you brought on to help you? CHLOE: So my co-founder, Ellen, we were on the senior leadership team of a creative agency. I was the head of talent and culture. She was the head of operation. So we had worked side by side in this organization. So we kept in touch. And she had contacted me about some health issues. And we were talking about cutting back on meat and dairy as one of the things that she could look at, given my own experiences with it. And that really bonded us. And because I am marketing, sales, creative, and she is digital, tech, product, it kind of made sense, in the beginning, to bring her on. And I just said to her like, "I'd really like you on this journey with me." And she resisted it for quite some time. [laughs] We are very different personality-wise, very, very different. I'm yes, she's no, and so in that way, we're very much yin and yang. CHAD: Oh, but I think that that can be the perfect combination for a co-founder team. I know that I've needed that in the past for myself. Someone who balances the risk-taking with reality can be very helpful. CHLOE: Yeah, absolutely. And I think I'm actually not a risk taker, but I am a natural optimist. And so I'll have a meeting, and I'll be like, "It's amazing. It's solved all of our problems." And she'll be just like, "No, it hasn't. What's changed? Nothing's changed. There's no contract, nothing signed," [laughs] which I think in the moment is really not helpful. [laughs] But it's really helpful as we grow the business. It really is a good balance. I bring all of that energy and drive to get us very quickly to the next level. And she brings all of the understanding, all of the pauses, all of the rigor, all of the data, all the things that are just the complete opposite of me. So I brought her on pretty quickly. And then we had a bit of a false start around getting a CTO on board. But we knew we needed to build the product quickly. And in the end, we built the product ourselves on a no-code/low-code platform, just the two of us. And I recommend any entrepreneur to do that because you learn a lot. [laughs] CHAD: Is that the reason...so you learning...because I think that that is super important, whether it be someone like yourself actually building the product or just being very close to it. When I've seen entrepreneurs get too far away from the product too soon, they end up regretting it later on. CHLOE: Yeah, I think -- CHAD: Or building the wrong thing. CHLOE: Or building the wrong thing. I do really believe in you've got to do every job in order to then understand who you need to hire and to then have an appreciation of that role. So obviously the product evolved very much and very quickly. We were very lucky that one of our first clients was Lacoste, who we launched to here in the UK with our MVP. But we also did some other paid consultancy work with Uber and with other clients as well. And then PopSockets came on in the States as well. We weren't ready to launch in the States, but they really wanted us to. So we're like, you know, let's do it. [laughs] CHAD: I noticed those three names on your website. And I do think that social...being able to have those testimonials there with names people recognize lends a lot of credibility to the product. CHLOE: And they were my first three clients, [laughs] genuinely my first three clients. CHAD: So, did you seek that out, or did it just happen? How did that work out? CHLOE: Obviously, my background is commercial sales, so it's not something that I shy away from. It was connections; it was talking to people. And we were recommended to PopSockets, which was amazing. They came on as an early investor as well, which was phenomenal. Again, having clients who love what you do so much they want to invest is brilliant because you get to have some really interesting conversations and backers in your corner. But yeah, of course, we've been quite strategic with the types of businesses that we've approached, but we are very lucky that we are attracting the right type of businesses as well, which is lovely. I mean, talk a little bit more about what Plants and Perks does, but the way in which we have evolved the product and evolved the types of clients that we're talking to is not an accident. And I think it goes back to the conversation we were just having about building the product yourself. Really being in the weeds, I think, is really important. Now, it's going to be a challenge to me as a founder moving forward to make sure I'm extricating myself from the weeds as time goes on, although I'm pretty happy to step away when needed. [laughs] But knowing that and being able to talk to your clients and being really clear, well, this is what this client likes; this is what's happening here; this is what's working well here, I think is really important. You've got to know your product. You've got to know your audience. We've got two...actually, we have three clients, technically. We have clients; we have employees; we have client employers; we have employees; and we also have Perks' partners. We have sustainable...we promote sustainable products and services on our platform. So we also have partners as well as our clients. And I think you've got to know them all really well. Now, I was a head of talent and culture, so I know the employee piece quite well because I was always advocating for the employee. I spent 20 years downsizing, so I ran client accounts. So I know how to look after clients, I guess, from that perspective and work in large organizations. I also used to literally do the marketing for PepsiCo and Wrigley's and big brands. So I can do the partner piece quite well. And I think it's really important that you've done that and you've lived through it. And I've never built a tech product, but I did literally roll my sleeves up and get stuck in to build the MVP, which was kind of the bit that I was missing. Now, I haven't built the app; that is beyond me. [laughs] But luckily, we've got a brilliant team around us now, which we've built up since our last raise that's enabled us to get that talent in. And yeah, and it's just been an amazing team effort to get us to where we are now. CHAD: That's great. I want to dig into more about what the product actually is. But you've already alluded a couple of times -- CHLOE: No, let's keep it mysterious. [laughter] CHAD: You've alluded a few times to the evolution. And one thing that's stuck out to me as you were talking about that is that going to the website now; it's not specifically about eating less meat and dairy. You're talking more about sustainability. CHLOE: Yes. CHAD: I'm sure that's still a component of it. CHLOE: 100%. CHAD: But what drove that change? CHLOE: Oh my God, [laughs] about a two-week period where we had an existential crisis. I think this is really interesting, I think, for our journey, and I think us as founders as well. So we ideologically always believed in the reduction of meat and dairy as the number one thing you can do for personal and planetary health. That's it. Like, that was it. We were all about eat plants, get perks. We encourage employees to cut back on their meat and dairy consumption, and we reward them with plant-based perks. That was the product. That was the concept. Tested really well. People really bought into it. People liked that they were being rewarded with perks. They absolutely understood that it is unsustainable to consume meat and dairy in the way that we are moving forward for the planet and also for personal health. So when we're having these conversations, everyone was like, thumbs up, get it, love it, buy into it, it's all great. And then what was happening is that I kind of got to a point where I was like, we've had all these really positive conversations, but no one's biting. Everyone's sort of saying yes to me and then nothing. I'm actually really proud of us as a team for very, very quickly going and identifying the problem and fixing it because we could have stuck to our ideological guns and gone, no, no, no, but we are all about the reduction of meat and dairy consumption as the number one thing. But no one was telling us that it was that that was the problem. What we had to do was read between the lines because nobody would ever tell us that. But what they would say was, "Well, how would it land with a 58-year-old man working in our distribution center?" And we're like, "Really well, why?" [laughter] But I had to understand what was coming behind that question. And what was coming behind the question was I don't want to launch a benefit where I feel like we're judging somebody's life choices. Like, that's not going to wash. So the people we were talking to were super keen on it, then when they took it up the line, they were essentially saying, "Well, this is a plant-based benefit, Plants and Perks." And I think that's where the sort of record scratched, and it didn't go any further. But no one was feeding this back to us. This we had to discover ourselves. And so we had this kind of existential crisis where we're like, well, we've always been about sustainability, like, absolutely the reduction in meat and dairy is all because it's unsustainable for us to consume meat and dairy and fish in the way that we are. So why don't we broaden ourselves out to more? We already held sustainable products and services on our platform anyway. It was just the language; it really was. It wasn't actually as big a pivot as it sounded. It really was just softening the language. So we don't talk about plant-based; we talk about planet-friendly. And we just kind of expanded out some of the articles and content that we contained anyway. And that unblocked everything, like genuinely overnight unblocked everything. So it became something that what we were hearing was that companies wanted to introduce a new green benefit, and now they felt that they could because there wasn't the kind of...and we always said that this is non-judgmental. This is completely supportive. These are very small changes that you could make. You don't have to sort of introduce me to it. But now it makes sense to everybody. And I think we as a business just needed to go through that moment where we were like, is this the type of business that we want to be running? Is this the business that we want to be owning? And we were like, absolutely, because this is still...our mission actually didn't change at all. Our mission is to help a million employees live healthier, more sustainable lives. That has not changed. And so the fact that our mission hadn't changed, it was just some of the language needed to change to make it more palatable to a wider audience, that's fine. We could live with that. CHAD: Yeah, that's great. So now, what does that actually mean in terms of what the product is? Companies sign up. CHLOE: Yep. CHAD: And what do employees do? CHLOE: Yeah, so it's a really good question. So the other sort of big moment, I guess, inflection point that we had is that we introduced a freemium model. And that, from a product perspective, was quite a big thing because I started realizing in conversations as well we were giving too much value away. And actually, some of the value that we were giving away clients didn't necessarily want. Some clients really wanted it, and some clients didn't need it. And so we introduced three different products. So we introduced free, so we now have a completely free Plants and Perks app that any employer can take on for their employee base. And it will give them discounts of sustainable products and services. It will give them article content on how to live more sustainably, embrace more sustainable living. And it will give them planet-friendly recipes on essentially more sustainable, healthy ways to eat. And that's the core free product that we've created. CHAD: And are you still making revenue on that through partner relationship? CHLOE: Yeah, absolutely. So, although, you know, we're not about excess consumption. What we are about is...I think what we really realized is with Plants and Perks; we are bang smack in the middle of a cost of living crisis. And actually, what we can do is level the playing field when it comes to green and sustainable products. There's kind of like this green tax that gets applied. And what we're trying to do is very much look at price parity. So what we talk about is it's harder than ever to make the most sensible choices when costs are spiraling all around us. And so what the reductions of planet-friendly products does is enables you to just try things that you might not have tried before because of cost, and it mitigates against that. So we do go into relationship with partners, and they can promote their products through the platform. But there are also chances for employees to put their reviews and tell them what they think. So it isn't just set up for advertisers in that way at all. But what we found is there's an amazing thing which is that brands need to connect with a new, wider audience. They don't just want to talk to early adopters within the sustainability or plant-based space. And we are talking to every man and every woman in large-scale organizations. So it's actually quite difficult to access those people if you're these niche brands who may not even have listings necessarily in large retailers yet. Or if you do have distribution, it's really difficult to get a sell-through. So we enable those partners to offer sampling, to offer freebies, to offer significant discounts, and to offer in-store redemptions as well. So we are offering quite a significant route to market for sustainable and plant-based products and services. CHAD: That's great. Okay, and so what is the second tier up? CHLOE: The second tier is plus and what that gives you is we start to give employees plant points, and you collect plant points. It's incredibly gamified. You can collect badges. Every action you do basically has a reaction. So when you read an article, you basically can answer some questions on the article, and you'll be rewarded with points. You can rate a recipe; you can like a recipe, try a recipe. You can buy a product or a service. You can also get a free...in the UK, at the moment, you'll be able to get a free meal once a week, like a free lunch through one of our partners, and loads of freebies as well. So the value is much more significant in the plus model. That's kind of our core offering. And we talk about rewarding employees with sustainable perks. And during the time at the moment, employers are really looking for ways in which they can support their employees through the cost of living crisis. How can we give our employees free stuff, interesting stuff, whilst also helping them on the sustainability journey? And so therefore, this is something that genuinely really works for both employers and employees. So that's the plus model. CHAD: One thing I noticed as you lay out the benefits that you get under this model, I'm surprised then by the per-employee cost. It seemed very low to me [laughs] when I saw it. Can you talk more about that? CHLOE: Yeah, so that is a from price. And I do think I need to make it; I mean, I do say it's from, and I think I do say there's a bit of an asterisk. I do think I need to potentially change it as well. So it's good [laughs] feedback because I think quite a few people say that. So that is for large-scale employers. So we are talking to large retailers with 20,000, 30,000 40,000 employees. So that is the cost that they would pay. It is a sliding scale back from that cost. But, I mean, we've purposely priced ourselves to be reasonable. We are a mission-led company, and for any investors listening, don't worry; we are also revenue-generating. CHAD: [laughs] CHLOE: But for us, it's really important that we are an affordable benefit. We're very aware of the costs on everyone. So, for sure, that price is pretty low. But we think that it represents quite good value, incredible value for the client. But it's something that makes sense for them to bring on. It should be a no-brainer; that's basically what we say. Like, it's a no-brainer. In terms of the amount of freebies that you're getting for your employee, it's certainly a no-brainer in terms of the return on investment. On the pro version, by the way, the added value on the pro version is that it's fully ring-fenced for that organization. So it's fully branded. They get full account management. It looks like their platform, essentially. And employees can talk and access the information together. So it might be that Bob in IT in Denver has uploaded a photo of himself cycling to work, and somebody else can comment on it. Somebody else has uploaded a curry recipe in Scotland, and someone else has gone, "Well, I tried that recipe." "But, you know, how was it? How much chili did you put in it?" So people are kind of joining together and really creating that space to talk about sustainability in a much more accessible way. So that's the pro version. And also we're then building on sustainability metrics and also sustainability reporting. So we'll be able to talk about employees' own carbon footprint and also how that scales up to the overall company's sustainability goals. CHAD: You mentioned that the mission is to help one million employees on their sustainability journey. Can you tell me where you are [laughs] along that metric? CHLOE: Yeah. So, look, the app launch is tomorrow, so [laughs] ask me in a couple of months. And we're really...actually; we're genuinely new. CHAD: You've been in private beta, I guess, is the way to describe it. CHLOE: Yeah. We're basically with the MVP. We've been helping a couple of thousand employees up until this point. We got around 25,000. About 30-plus companies join our waiting list, which was then around 25,000-30,000 employees that represented. We've just confirmed that we're going to be launching with a very large retailer in the UK as well, so that will then -- CHAD: Congratulations. CHLOE: Thank you. That will then double, so it will be about 50,000 employees that we'll be hitting this year. And then we are in quite far down the line talks with quite a few other companies that would take us to potentially just under our target, which, by the way, the million employees is not like it's a target for 2022. It's like a...it's our ongoing mission. [laughs] CHAD: Right, a long-term vision. CHLOE: It's a long-term vision. So we're significantly further ahead than I thought we would be on that. I mean, look, what we've said from the start is the million is a sort of fairly arbitrary number but what it is is it's scale. So we're not here just to look after, you know, we're not here just to help very, very small companies; we can now with our free product, which is great, but it gives us that scale. And it shows that we, as a business, want to be global, want to be talking to enterprise clients and then helping them live healthier, more sustainable lives. For us, it's both of those things. You can't just live a healthy life, and you can't just live a sustainable life. It needs to be a life of purpose. And so the mission really keeps us true to those things. MID-ROLL AD: Now that you have funding, it’s time to design, build and ship the most impactful MVP that wows customers now and can scale in the future. thoughtbot Lift Off brings you the most reliable cross-functional team of product experts to mitigate risk and set you up for long-term success. As your trusted, experienced technical partner, we’ll help launch your new product and guide you into a future-forward business that takes advantage of today’s new technologies and agile best practices. Make the right decisions for tomorrow, today. Get in touch at: thoughtbot.com/liftoff. CHAD: You mentioned you have essentially three client bases: you have the employers, the employees, and the partners, which essentially means you have a multi-sided marketplace. CHLOE: Yes. CHAD: And one of the challenges of building any marketplace, especially the more sides you have, is bootstrapping it, you know, creating a momentum. The partners want to know, hey, how many people are on the platform that we're going to be bringing into? And in the early days, you don't have much to offer there. So how have you made that work? CHLOE: Well, so firstly, we don't see ourselves as a marketplace, which we should. [laughter] We should see ourselves as a marketplace. Secondly, I learned all about building a marketplace because, in 2010, I launched a dating app before there were apps. Actually, it was a dating website...and completely on my own. It was complete madness. And I totally did not understand the power of a network. I didn't understand the marketplace dynamic. I didn't understand that you needed buyers and you needed sellers. You needed, in this case, men seeking women and women seeking men. [laughs] You needed both sides of the equation. And you needed volume on both sides straight out of the gate. I just didn't get that. I was like, build it, and they will come. [laughs] And so I was fully burnt from that experience. So that was still ringing in my head. So I think what was important was building up, firstly, building up our partners. So it was really, really important to build up the number of partners that we have on the platform. And for them, it's a completely low-risk strategy. It's like, come on the platform and offer discounts and people who are interested in sustainability. Like, that's really easy. We can do that. And then for the companies, we've got everything...beyond the partners, we still have loads and loads of value. We still have value in the articles. We still have value in the gamification. We have value in the recipe. So there's still value even if there wasn't value in the perks. But what we've done is we've been able to build up both sides. So actually, we've got over 200 brands, which represents about 45,000-plus individual discounts on the platform. And now we're building up the number of employees. Now we're able to revenue generate more off the partners because we've got the volume on the other side. CHAD: You mentioned that you are primarily focused on the UK now. But you've had interest from the U.S. and demand that you've not rejected. What does that look like for you now? And how do you balance that going forward? CHLOE: Yeah, I have got quite a lot of interest from the States. And it's really hard not to be pulled over there. And we see a lot of interest from there. We have to -- CHAD: Why are you holding back? CHLOE: Because we just don't have the team size at the moment, and we need to get the...there's two things really. Well, there are a number of things. There are about 22 things. [laughter] I know I said there are two things; there are like a million reasons. We need to make sure that we've got the best product possible; that's number one. We need to test in our home market. We need to make sure that we've got the robust mechanic with the Perk's partners and with the employees. We need to get all of that working really well because the States is a completely different market because of the nature of the products and services. We're not on the ground there. So it's easier for us to have really good relationships with partners now. There's going to be a conference on Wednesday in London, so I'm going to be meeting a lot of our partners there; super easy. It's like 20 minutes on the train for me. Harder to go to the States and make sure that we have really robust relationships with partners there; not impossible, just it would be time and effort to be able to build it in the States. I think we'd be able to find the clients actually more easily or, I guess, quicker if that makes sense because I think there's a need in the States. And then there are just cultural nuances. So we just need to make sure that all of our content is really relevant culturally. So PopSockets, we are with PopSockets in the States, and I think they're quite fairly near you in Boulder. So we are already aware of some of those cultural nuances. And our editorial teams are quite good at making sure that we're representing that. So, yeah, so I think it's just about making sure that we do a good job of it. The hard thing, I think, is actually launching across Europe because of the language barrier and because of the very different cultural nuances when it comes to sustainability, local government policy. CHAD: Also, expectations around employee benefits and how they work. CHLOE: Exactly. Expectations around employee benefits and also attitudes to food as well because obviously food is still a part of what we do, and so all of those things actually make Europe slightly harder. So I think, for us, it would be a launch to the U.S. before we would go to continental Europe, but, again, not impossible. Interestingly, our clients massively want us to be global quickly because they are all looking for global benefits. They want to be able to homogenize their benefits offerings globally. They do not want to have one thing being offered in the UK, something being offered in the States, especially when it comes to benefits. Things like pensions, things like healthcare are so different in those countries, and they won't change. Just in terms of how many holiday days you guys have versus us, they can't make it a level playing field on many things. So if they could have a level playing field when it comes to sustainable benefits, they would love to do that. So there is a real need driving us to go global very quickly. And, look, going right back to the conversation we had at the beginning, I'd do it tomorrow. I'd move my family to the U.S. and just start building it. But my very kind advisors are like, slow down. [laughs] Get it right in the UK. CHAD: Well, I think that is a good indicator that you do have a marketplace business because all of the pressures around scaling are the same ones that marketplaces have. CHLOE: Yeah. [laughs] CHAD: And marketplace businesses very often benefit from in the early days focusing on specific markets. CHLOE: No, you're 100% right. I think I've had an epiphany on this podcast [laughter] that I'm running a marketplace. CHAD: I want to come back to the actual tech of the product as we wrap up here. I'm super impressed that you used a low-code platform to build the MVP yourself, and that has taken you through today. So how did you go about moving beyond that? CHLOE: [laughs] So we always knew we'd have to ditch it, so we were very aware. And that's the beauty of doing an MVP which is you don't fall in love with it. So that was great because we knew we were going to ditch it. We didn't fall in love with it. So how did we go about it? So we've got ourselves...we got a CTO on board that Ellen had worked with before. And we've got an amazing UX-UI designer. And we've got some devs. And we just ran at it. We just said, right, what are we taking from the MVP that we want to put into...and we knew it had to be an app really quickly. We actually weren't going to develop the app this year, but then it was sort of, you know, the demand there was all for the app. So we've gone app first. So we just said, "What's important from the MVP that we want to be taking here?" We knew that perks was going to be the first thing that we wanted to launch with because of the cost of living crisis. And we wanted to make it really about perks, which is why I know it sounds silly when it's obvious to you that we're a marketplace. It actually isn't that obvious to us because before perks, none of those things are marketplace. All of the other products and services that we offer aren't marketplace. CHAD: You mean the content and that kind of thing. CHLOE: The content, the gamification. We've got a whole thing coming down the line all about how to calculate your carbon footprint. Like, none of that is marketplace. But because we've really leant heavily on the perks because we know that there's a massive need for that, I guess that's why it's a surprise to me [laughs] that we're a marketplace. But yeah, so we knew we wanted to get perks out first. So then we built a product with perks at the heart because that was testing really well. And then yeah, and then we've just kind of literally just gone hell for leather head down. The team has been in build mode. We've been in sell mode and creation mode. And, yeah, we've just gone really, really fast. It's not in our natures to sort of go slow on these things. And we just need to be out there. People love what we're doing. And now it's the real test. Now it's literally employees now getting access to it, and that's the scary time. CHAD: Has it been what you expected actually, you know, building custom software in terms of time, and cost, and that kind of thing? Or has it been different than what you expected? CHLOE: Yeah, that's a good question. So I guess over the years, I've had the opportunity to build products internally in companies. You're always in a waiting list for other people that need other stuff. So in a way, it's been quicker because it's my team, and they've got nothing else to concentrate on except this. I'm really open with what I don't know. So I'm like, okay, could I do, just out of interest, how easy is it for us to switch off that function and launch this? Is it a week? Is it a month? Is it like a year? Like, I just have no idea on timings and scale on that. So I try to work that out quite quickly. But I think it's been quicker than I thought it might be. And if you've got an internal team, then it's cheaper. As soon as we started to look at external teams, it was prohibitively expensive and no control. And I think we knew quite early on that we wanted to build it internally. CHAD: How has it compared to the process of using the low-code tool to get started? CHLOE: [laughs] In a way, if I had an idea, it was up and live an hour later...[laughs] and, you know, I guess there's much more pushback now. It's like, "Do you really need that feature?" And I'm like, "Yeah, you know, just do it. What's so difficult?" So I guess I've had to put more rigor and thinking behind some of the features and functions that we now have versus just sticking it up there. I mean, look, we were really, really frustrated with low-code. We were really frustrated with what it could do. It is so limited really in what we were trying to do, but it got us to a certain point. I'll always be forever grateful to it. [laughs] And my partner and I were able to completely tag team on it. So I would do all of the front end, and she'd do all the back end. It worked really well from that perspective. But we've got a great team now who are really engaged in what we're trying to do and trying to achieve. I guess I want everything yesterday. So as with most things, I'm getting updates going, "This is broken, and I'm having to turn this off for the launch." And I'm like, "No, I want it there. I want it in there." CHAD: So, on that note, why do you have a specific launch date? CHLOE: We've got a client we're launching to next week. [laughter] So we're launching -- CHAD: So you've made a commitment to launch for a particular client, and so you need to hit that date. CHLOE: Yeah. We are. We're launching it to...yeah, we've got quite a lot of clients, actually. We've got launches almost every day from next week. So this week is friends and family launch. So we need to get it out and get it tested. And then it goes into the hands of real-life users, which is scary and interesting. CHAD: I wish you all the best with that. I really appreciate you taking the time. CHLOE: Any advice? CHAD: Well, what I was going to say is a question I often like to ask. And I'm curious, before launch, is there something that you wish you could have done differently or realized sooner? I'm sure this question might be different post-launch. The answer to this question might be different post-launch. But from where you sit today, is there something that you wish you would have done differently? CHLOE: Oh my God. I almost want to say everything and nothing. I don't want to go, no, I don't regret anything; everything's been a learning experience, [laughs] so there's nothing I would have done differently because it's all led me to this point. But then, on the other hand, I think we've made the right decisions with the data that we've had. I think we need to...there's stuff that we need to be doing much more rigorously now moving forwards, which is making sure that we are very, very data-driven with what's coming back. Now we're in the hands of real users in a meaningful way with the app. We need to be taking all of that feedback on and not just relying on the gut instinct with a lot of things. It needs to be much more data-driven now that we've got the data coming in. So I don't think that's a regret necessarily because I think you've got to kind of go with your gut to get a product out the door because you could be completely hamstrung by research. And that would have taken us into a whole nother territory. So I think...does that make sense? So whilst I'm not regretting but like -- CHAD: It does make sense. And you asked me for any advice that I have. And this is a very small piece of advice, but it's one thing that I've made the mistake of myself and seen many other teams do. If you want to seek metrics on something and you don't instrument it, you don't set up those metrics; then you don't have them. CHLOE: So true. CHAD: And you realize, oh, we should have been tracking this click, or that click, or this flow. And then you put it in place once you realize that it's not there, and you have to wait 30-60 days in order to get the data. And that time feels terrible while you're waiting for that data to accrue. And so my general advice is to instrument basically everything. Instrument as much as possible, even if you think you're not going to need it. Track as many clicks as possible in the app so that you can really then say, oh, we didn't know we wanted to track this flow. And you already have the data where you can piece it together instead of waiting. CHLOE: Yeah, 100%. So we were challenged by...so we're backed by sustainable ventures on the accelerator program. And we were challenged by them to make sure that we've got all of our KPI metrics in place for the product. Of course, we've just been head down building it. And actually, it was a great moment where it's kind of like, but how many points do you want your users to collect in a day? Maybe there's an upper limit that you want, which we hadn't really thought about. Well, I don't know; we just want them to collect points. Like, you know, we want them to live their best life. And so in setting the KPIs, we've also had to set what we're measuring, but it was like two pages long. [laughs] There are so many things that we're trying to...what our KPIs are. And I think we can also...I think a learning is that maybe we need to be a little bit more focused with also what we're trying to measure and also what we were trying to see because we, again, can't focus on everything. We can't update and upgrade and iterate absolutely everything as a priority. What's going to shift the dial the most? What's going to have the biggest impact? Yes, we can change the color of that, or we can make that button bigger. But actually, if that's not going to lead to the KPI that we're trying to measure, then actually, there's no point. So yeah, so I think that's been a learning as well. I mean, there are so many thousands, billion learnings on this whole journey. [laughs] I could write a book. I don't think anyone will read it, but I could definitely write a book. [laughter] And I don't have time to write it. If I had time to write it and if anyone wants to read it, I'll do it. [laughs] CHAD: Okay. Well, maybe a few years from now, you can write that book. CHLOE: Yeah. CHAD: And, Chloe, thank you so much for joining the show and for telling us all about your journey. I really wish you and Plants and Perks the best over these important next couple of months. CHLOE: Thank you. We're raising, by the way. We're just about to go into our seed round, so yeah. CHAD: Seed round. CHLOE: Yeah. CHAD: Perfect. CHLOE: I know, perfect for Plants and Perks. That's the next inflection point whilst obviously also launching an app. And we don't do things by halves, so that will be the next learning journey. CHAD: If folks want to find out more, to follow along with you, to get in touch with the company, where are all the different places that they can do that? CHLOE: Don't look at the website because we're in the process of updating that. [laughter] And, frankly, now I'm going to change the pricing after this conversation. [laughs] But yeah, no, don't do that. Just email me; it's the easiest way. Or find me on LinkedIn; LinkedIn is probably the number one way. Or email chloe@plantsandperks.com. I love; literally, I love hearing feedback: negative, positive, anything. I love having conversations. I love doing partnerships. I love helping people on their journeys; just reach out. CHAD: Wonderful. And you can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode along with a complete transcript at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Chloe Sweden.
Shawn Young is the CEO and Co-Founder of Classcraft, an innovative platform that motivates students using the culture and mechanics of games. Victoria talks to Shawn about edtech, behavior intervention, and the challenges he's faced with going from a homegrown tool to something big and out there in the world. Classcraft (https://www.classcraft.com/) Follow Classcraft on Twitter (https://twitter.com/classcraftgame), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/classcraftgame/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/classcraftgame), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/c/classcraftgame), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/classcraft-studios/). Follow Shawn on Twitter (https://twitter.com/_shawnyoung_) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/shawnyoung1/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Shawn Young, the CEO, and Co-Founder at Classcraft, an innovative platform that motivates students using the culture and mechanics of games. Shawn, thank you for joining us. SHAWN: Thank you. Thanks for having me, Victoria. I'm happy to be here. VICTORIA: Wonderful, yes. So just tell me a little bit about yourself and maybe what brought you to start out as a teacher initially. SHAWN: [laughs] I have an interesting journey. I was originally a physicist, a physics major. Although I loved physics because it really gives you a deep understanding of the world, I realized that physics research in a basement with machines just on your own [laughs] wasn't for me, so that's when I started substitute teaching. I really wasn't going to go into education at all. It was just there was availability, lack of teachers. And it's kind of ironic. I really did not enjoy school. High school, in particular, was just a really challenging time for me, mostly because I just didn't see the point of it. I didn't have any problems in school. I had great grades, but I just was bored out of my mind. And so, as a teacher, I became really, really obsessed with making school meaningful for the students that were there, and because so many kids, so many learners just don't see the point. And so I did a lot of really cool project-based learning type of stuff. So that's where instead of lecturing the kids, you get them doing things and learning by doing. And so I was teaching physics, obviously. And so we were building hot air balloons and cannons and all kinds of stuff to study Newtonian physics. And kids were super happy to come to the class because we were doing some cool stuff. But I realized as that was happening that another part of meaning generation for kids and learners is the community and the social aspects. And so, I started thinking about how I can build community in the classroom, make the social experience of school relevant for them? And that's how Classcraft was born, really. I kind of put together my interest in motivating and building community with kids. I was a developer at the time as well, so I was able to develop a platform. And, of course, I'm a gamer, so I kind of put all those things together and built this platform in my classroom. VICTORIA: That's great. I was going to ask what skills or experiences from your teaching background translated to being a founder. SHAWN: That's interesting because clearly in the product...Classcraft was never meant to be a company. I already had a company. [laughs] I was freelancing as a developer for pretty large clients in New York. I was working with my brother, who's a creative director there. And we worked for Chanel for three years building apps and websites, and that was probably our biggest client. I wasn't looking to make a company. I just built it for me. It was my quest to make school meaningful and relevant. And after three years of just tinkering around with it with my students, I realized it was having a massive impact on their outlook, on the way they collaborated together, on their motivation. And because Classcraft is a platform that basically gamifies education, so kids level up and they earn points. They're on teams. They have a character class. All the things you would see in an RPG are translating to how teachers are running a school. And so I made a website just to talk about it after three years of this garage project I had going on. And the day that website went online, 130,000 people came to the website. It just started trending on Reddit gaming. And overnight, a lot of people were asking, "How do I download this?" I'm like, "You can't. There's no company." [laughter] So that's how the company started. Teaching is an interesting profession. I think that teaching is a job that requires you to, A, motivate and manage a whole bunch of people, so there's a lot similarility there to management. It's a group of humans that you want to work together to get to their full potential, just like your team should be. But then there's also independent planning. As a teacher, you have a set amount of time to get through X amount of curriculum. So you're always, you know, project management basically, 101 is the same thing as running a curriculum through the year. So there are a lot of those types of soft skills that translate really easily to entrepreneurship. And ultimately, as a teacher, you're responsible on your own for your own successes and failures, which is the type of attitude you need to have if you're going to be a successful entrepreneur is to be responsible, you know, [laughs] take control of your destiny a little bit. VICTORIA: Right. I hadn't thought about it from that angle. It makes a lot of sense. You're really an independent owner of that classroom, right? [laughs] SHAWN: Yeah, exactly, exactly. And trying to get humans to collaborate and do stuff sounds a lot like running a company. [laughs] VICTORIA: Right. I saw the tagline on Classcraft: relationships are everything. And I was like, that's a perfect DevOps kind of statement. [laughs] SHAWN: Yeah, that's funny. [laughs] We're thinking more like human relationships, but that's so funny [laughs] from the DevOps side for sure. VICTORIA: In and outside of the classroom, you need...it doesn't matter how great your technology is or your strategy. If the people aren't talking to each other and you don't have the right relationships, you're not going to be successful. SHAWN: Correct. And ultimately, that's the value proposition of Classcraft. Schools that don't build good relationships between students that don't do it between teachers and students, that don't do it between teachers and administration are dysfunctional. And what we're seeing in education today is one of the fundamental breakdowns that's happening and, you know, that's proxy for what's happening at large, and society is relationships are quite strange right now in schools, and that's making it really hard for them to be effective. VICTORIA: Right. It sounds like this app was built out of your direct experience and your direct experience working with these students. What do you find is unique in working with students, and how do you appeal to them as a user base? SHAWN: What's really special about edtech is that your buyer or the user that makes the decision to use the product is not the end user, and that's true in all B2B, SaaS. The decision maker who purchases the software isn't necessarily the employee who's going to use it. But in education, there are multiple levels. Like, if we sell to a district, they're the ones buying, but ultimately, they need to get the teachers to use it. And then, at the end of the day, the actual real users are the students. And so, there are a lot of design considerations when you think of UX. And even when you think of user permissions, there's a lot of complexity there in education because our goal is to build as much motivation and engagement mechanics as we can for kids. And so that means leveling up, and random loot drops, and all these things you see in video games but applying that to school. But then you need to build all this plumbing [laughs] basically to make it usable by a user who's the teacher who doesn't really know much about games, and that's changing as the teacher...average age of teachers is going down, a lot of retirements, et cetera, so that's changing. But at the base of it, the kids are really well versed in games, game mechanics, game culture, but the teacher who's running it is not. So we have to speak two languages, one of pedagogy, and classroom tools, and data, and saving time. These are the things that educators care about. And incidentally, they care about motivation and motivating the kids, and all of those things. But for kids, we're talking about avatars, and pets, and gear, and leveling up, and all this whole other set of language. And so when you think of design considerations, we always have to be thinking about how do I make this as motivating and engaging as possible for the kids, but how do I make it as easy to use and not complicated for teachers? Because if the teachers don't use it, then these kids aren't going to see the value anyways. So it's pretty complex because we don't have one single end user. VICTORIA: And so you have the challenge of making it fun for kids and then also providing useful and understandable data for teachers and probably parents and other people, right? SHAWN: Yeah, yeah, exactly. There are lots of stakeholders. [laughter] VICTORIA: So I want to ask more about how you make it fun, and then I also want to know more about the teacher's perspective, so whichever one you want to start with first. SHAWN: Perfect. I mean, those two questions are literally the placement of what Classcraft is. Classcraft is the Venn diagram between what in education is behavior intervention, so managing kids' behavior and motivation. And so, from a motivation angle, how do we make it engaging for kids? In essence, kids are earning points in Classcraft for things that they're doing in school that we want them to do. And by we, schools can configure whatever it is, but it'll be things like handing in homework, being respectful, being inclusive, participating, being on time, these behaviors that they want to see in kids to make them better learners. When those behaviors occur, teachers can give them points. And the points allow them to level up. As they level up, they each have a character. They have an avatar, and they can be warriors, healers, or mages. And based on that character class, they have a different role in the team. So they're playing in teams just like in an MMORPG or on a football team. And everybody has a different role within the team. And you win as a team. And so school is quite competitive. Kids are always compared to the class average and their grades. And there's a lot of competition happening in schools. What we've built is a way for kids to be motivated by collaboration. And so they're playing on teams. If they do good things, they get these points, and they level up. And there are millions of combinations of gear that they could buy for their avatar, but they're also unlocking real-life powers. And so these powers are things like, you know, in a video game, power could be like you could shoot a fireball. In Classcraft, shoot a fireball is the equivalent of you can skip a question on an exam, or you can go to the bathroom, or you can hand in homework a day late, or you can listen to music while you're doing your classwork, so giving them real-life privileges as they level up. And these aren't one-offs; they're skills that they have that they can trigger whenever they want, just like in a game. And some of those skills are things like being able to heal up your teammate because kids can also lose lives if they do negative things. So if you're late or you're rude, or whatever it is, just like in Mario, what's failing in Mario is falling in a hole, and what's failing as a student, it's not doing what you're supposed to do, or being a bully to other kids. And so, as that happens, they can lose lives. But then they can come in to help each other out. There are boss battles where they can fight monsters by answering quiz questions, et cetera. So all these motions that are ultimately the things that are happening anyways in school, what we're saying is instead of punishing kids or forcing them to do this stuff, make it feel like a game. Speak their language, use the same mechanics that we know are super effective at motivating players. Nobody is forcing people to play video games. Everybody's doing that of their own volition. It's the most popular cultural medium that exists today, well surpassing film, movies, music. And so, why are games so good at doing that? It's because they fulfill fundamental needs: being in control, feeling like we're progressing, social relatedness. That's what we're bringing to school. So that's the student side of it. The other side of it, behavior intervention, is...well, one of the biggest challenges for teachers is managing kids. It's not like showing you how to do a math problem; it's getting you to care about it, listen to it, stop disturbing other people. And so, a lot of time and energy is spent on classroom management for teachers. And so what we do is we use best practices there. For example, there's a lot of research out there in education that says that praising kids for good behavior is a lot more effective than punishing them. And so games are really good at praising you. You level up, and you gain points. It tells you your score. What we're doing here is giving them that framework but applying that to classroom management. And so instead of saying, "Hey, Victoria, stop goofing off," or "You're not dressed well, go to the principal," or whatever it is that's happening in schools, what we're telling teachers to do instead is say, "Hey if Victoria does something good, recognize her. Give her a high five." And in Classcraft, a high five is gaining points. And so we're shifting and applying this pedagogy, shifting towards a positive reinforcement mindset. And at the same time, because these high fives are digital, then you get all the data so you can know which behaviors did Victoria do at which time with which teacher? Hey, she didn't get a lot of points this week. What's going on with her? Maybe we should talk to her and see what's going on before her behavior escalates. And so there's a lot of value from a behavior intervention standpoint. But ultimately, it's super effective because the kids really care about it in a way that they don't normally care about classroom management. VICTORIA: Well, that makes a lot of sense. And I'm hearing something I've studied before when looking at technology organizations which is that growth mindset I think you're describing, the positive reinforcement, praising the effort for something versus their intrinsic skills. And that's something I love about teaching. I think that really, really translates to running a technology organization. SHAWN: Yeah, totally. Ultimately, what we're doing is giving schools and teachers a platform for really effective culture building. And what you're talking about is culture within a company, in essence, and it's really the same thing. It goes back to what I was saying earlier about managing a group of kids [laughs], and managing employees is super similar. It's all about what type of positive culture you are building. VICTORIA: I think there's something really universal about that. It's actually even true with dog training. I have a dog, and it's the same kind of motivational theory that works for them too. [laughs] SHAWN: Yep, yep. VICTORIA: I love it. And you mentioned that you built this tool yourself, and then suddenly, it became very popular, and now it's really, I'm sure, scaling. So what challenges have you faced with going from this homegrown tool to something big and out there in the world? SHAWN: Lots of challenges. [laughs] I would say working in education itself is a challenge. It's a pretty challenging vertical to work in. It's ripe for disruption at the same time, pretty conservative. There are a lot of forces working in education systemically not have it move forward. Working with schools and districts is challenging. They have a lot of requirements. And, of course, they're custodians of kids, so that's legitimate, but it does make it more challenging. One of the things that we had to evolve was we were very much a teacher-only tool when we started. I had built it as a teacher. Our user in mind was a teacher. Even our business model initially was selling to teachers basically. There was a free version, and they could upgrade to a paid version. And as we got more and more scale, you know, we have ten million-plus kids in the platform now. As we got more and more scale, what ended up happening was we were working more and more with schools and districts. And so we went from a B2C go-to-market and product vision to a B2B/enterprise where we have to roster 10,000 or 100,000 kids in one shot, so all the user provisioning, connecting to information systems that these districts have, et cetera, all of this ginormous plumbing that needs to happen in order for it to continue to be easy to use for every single teacher. And alongside with that, the other challenge is we were super appealing to teachers that were interested in games. [laughs] And so when you think of some teacher who's in their 60s and has never really played any games and just thinks that they're a silly waste of time, there's a different sales pitch that needs to happen there to get them on board and a different onboarding. One of the things we had to completely overhaul was the onboarding to make it really progressive. Classcraft, now when you start it, there's no avatar. It starts super lean on the feature side so that these teachers that are, you know, we're basically educating them as they're using the platform, educating them on all this game stuff. There are a lot of learnings in terms of what's our actual target audience. And if our target audience starts to be enterprise customers, how do we evolve our platform to appeal to a much more diverse type of persona from a teacher standpoint? VICTORIA: I was thinking, actually, a good friend of mine who is a teacher and has been running Dungeons & Dragons campaigns for us for several years. [laughter] SHAWN: There you go. VICTORIA: And, like, you'll love it. [laughs] SHAWN: Exactly. [laughter] VICTORIA: But I could see that being a challenge now that you're shifting your target business model, really, and how do you adapt to that? Mid-Roll Ad: As life moves online, bricks-and-mortar businesses are having to adapt to survive. With over 18 years of experience building reliable web products and services, thoughtbot is the technology partner you can trust. We provide the technical expertise to enable your business to adapt and thrive in a changing environment. We start by understanding what’s important to your customers to help you transition to intuitive digital services your customers will trust. We take the time to understand what makes your business great and work fast yet thoroughly to build, test, and validate ideas, helping you discover new customers. Take your business online with design‑driven digital acceleration. Find out more at: url tbot.io/acceleration or click the link in the show notes for this episode. VICTORIA: What else are you looking ahead with Classcraft? What's on the horizon? SHAWN: There's a lot. Like I said, we have 10 million kids in the platform plus. But we have teachers in every single country you could imagine, and there's a universality to what we're proposing. We're not saying here's the best tool for fifth-grade math in the U.S. We're saying, solve this universal human problem that's prevalent in education. And so we have teachers in, you name it, Taiwan, and Australia, and Singapore, and all over Europe using Classcraft. And so there's definitely opportunity for us to look at the international landscape and identify opportunities. Another frontier beyond going out of North America is going beyond the brick-and-mortar experience of the classroom. A lot of what's happening in and around your software is actually not happening 18 inches from the screen. It's happening in this context where there are 30 other kids, and there are all these interactions going on. For example, if you made a reading app, you can imagine the kids sitting in a quiet space on their sofa at home reading this thing, but the reality that's happening is they're in a really loud classroom [laughs] with lots of other kids around them, et cetera. And so the design context for designing for edtech is really interesting. We have some views that are meant to be only on a projector in front of the class. And when that happens, the font size needs to be 80 point because a kid in the back needs to be able to see it. So the screen real estate you're playing with is pretty unique scenarios. Like, what does this look like at 120 feet, let's say, because people are using it in the gym? So interesting design challenges, but they have been really ensconced in the idea that a lot of how people are using Classcraft is with real-life physical situations. But Classcraft, in essence, we have an API. So you can also imagine behaviors that are not brick and mortar behaviors, like, if I'm being participative, that's something that a teacher would see and observe and give you points for. But there are 3,000 edtech platforms, and all of them have digital behaviors that teachers want to see. They want to see kids handing in homework in these platforms. They want to go see them complete assignments. They want to go see them participating in digital communities. These are all basically the new frontier for digital behaviors that are a part now post-pandemic of the ecosystem of education. And so we're really interested in connecting to other platforms. I don't need kids to be in Classcraft; I just need them every day. I need them to be earning points. And I'm happy if they're doing that in other platforms and that those interactions are rewarding them experience points and points in Classcraft. And ideally, automatically, that way, the teachers don't have to do anything. VICTORIA: And so you're integrating with all these different platforms, and you're working with all these different school districts. So you've had to make some difficult technology choices in your stack. Do you have any examples of those? SHAWN: Yeah, absolutely. When I started the company, I'd come out of programming in...I started building cool websites in ActionScript, [laughs] so that dates me a little bit. But I'd just come out of a decade of ActionScript and PHP. And I'm like, PHP does not scale, and it doesn't afford the same type of real-time interactions that you'd expect from a game. When I decided what the tech stack would be, right at the outset, it was, okay, we're going to do this all JavaScript. It's going to be Node. And at that time...now that's a pretty, like, anybody would make that decision. But this was nine years ago, and it wasn't as mature as it is now. And so that was a pretty ballsy move and one that we never looked back on. But we had a lot of things that we had to build ourselves because the libraries didn't exist yet. And we were really pushing the edge of what was possible in a browser, especially in a browser in school with a crappy internet connection. And often, they are on older browsers. Although it was the right decision to lean into the leading edge on the tech stack, it did afford us with a lot of specific challenges that we might not have had if we'd said, oh, let's just keep this super old school. Some other things that we've been challenged with over the years is just scaling the number of concurrent users is always a thing. When we started, we had a single database, one server, and I was doing all the DevOps. And a lot of what we've done since that is just move everything to services. So we've got, you know, MongoDB database-as-a-service. [laughs] We're all on Google Cloud now. From an IT standpoint, we think a lot about what stack we're going to be using. And to me, what really matters is build the product as fast as you can and as well as you can. So outsourcing all of the DevOps pieces to cloud providers is, in my opinion, [laughs] a really good use of funds versus maintaining it yourself and spending tons of money on sys engineers and architects. The reality is that for most products today, what exists as a service in the cloud already bundled is, you know, and we've got auto-scaling. When there are too many concurrent users, it automatically spins up new Docker servers, et cetera. So we've really evolved from this monolithic single-server approach to this imminently highly scalable solution that is all virtualized, but in doing that, moved all of it to services. And I think that's the right move because we're not, you know, if I was really, really core, if was, I don't know, [chuckles] an online video game, then the speed of connections and all these things become super important. But in our case, reliability, scalability is more important than the fine-tuning to a precise degree of specific tech infrastructure. And I'm seeing more and more founders now, Victoria, as well go-to codeless solutions as well. I think we're kind of abstracting a lot of what was core to product development from a tech side. You know, first, it was the DevOps, then it was the cloud, and even now, code, I think, is moving in the direction where we're systematizing, bundling, and having other services generate code more and more. I think we're moving towards that just in software in general. VICTORIA: Yeah, I think that is becoming prevalent. I do think low-code automation has also been coming around every 5 or 10 years or so. [laughs] I have the belief that technology never disappears; it just keeps building, and new tech gets created, and the user base shifts around a little bit. And, of course, for you as a technical founder, putting it all in Docker and setting up the auto scaling on Google is probably within your reach, whereas a lot of founders, that might be something more challenging, and you might need to have some support for. But that's essentially what we work on for Mission Control as well is helping teams set up their platform so that it will scale automatically that if there's an issue, you know about it in advance. [laughs] You can take care of it before it falls over, and that way, your users just see a reliable, happy system. SHAWN: I'm so grateful that I am a technical founder. [laughs] I know a lot of founders, and the ones that don't know how to code really are at the mercy of so many unknown variables. I'm not coding anymore, but I'm very aware of what's going on in the platform. And I think that helps me make better business decisions every day. So I have a lot of gratitude when I compare myself in that regard. VICTORIA: And I think it's really about communication then too. Like, having a good understanding of your system is helpful but being able to understand it well enough to then communicate it to other people, and what the value is, and how you want to invest money in different parts of the system. I think those are two things that having maybe a little bit more of experience in technology and then also having a teacher experience, I think, sets you up to be successful. But we also, of course, at thoughtbot, we offer a lot of that technical expertise to help founders navigate some of that. So there's a little pitch just for us. [laughs] But let's see, let me go through...I think I've gone through a good amount of questions. Here's one that I like to ask everybody. But if you could travel back in time to when you first started Classcraft, what would be the main piece of advice you would give yourself? SHAWN: If I could go back, there are some big lessons that have been learned. I've been for almost a decade now as a founder and CEO. One of the things we didn't do early enough was user testing. If I split the life of Classcraft into three eras, there's the first third we didn't need to because we had all of my own experience. But once we started moving past what was the initial product that I had built in my own classroom, we continued to make assumptions. And we, of course, always listen to our users, but now we're super systematic about it, and any new feature has research behind it and a really solid UX practice that we should have implemented much earlier. I think we're making much better roadmap decisions today than we were three years ago. A lot of companies hire UX people super late, and I would do that early or at least develop the chops to do it myself as early as possible. So I think that's one thing. I think as well...and maybe this is tied to that. I think we should have and could have iterated faster as well. A lot of startups in the tech scene talk about iteration, but there's a difference between incrementally iterating and just adding on, adding on, adding on, and actually making the kind of iterative decisions that, for example, pulling part of the product and discontinuing it for example. And we've done some of those moves, but I think we could have done them faster. And we should have done them faster if we'd had that UX research data to help us make decisions faster. So it's more than, like, common truism is like, oh, listen to your users and listen to their feedback. Like, yes, that's true, and we were doing that. But I'd say go further and create robust structures to get that data faster, not just wait for it to come in but actually go out and get it and digest it in a way that's actually usable. Because you have a whole bunch of testimonials and feedback, but if it's not organized, it's not somebody's job to make sense of it. It's just kind of sitting there. So there's a lot of value from that perspective that you can quickly generate for your users and, therefore, for your business. VICTORIA: Right. Save you some time and some money, probably in validating your ideas, right? SHAWN: Yeah. And the problem with education is that it's a yearly cycle, right? VICTORIA: Mmm-hmm. SHAWN: We're not looking at monthly scales; we're looking at the whole school year. So back to school happens once a year, and that's when you get a ton of data because that's when there's the most activity. Like, right now, August, September, October, these are the moments where we're getting the most data. And then when you make changes, you got to wait all the way back to the next back to school. So, in particular, in education, I think the cycles are long versus, let's say, more B2C-type consumer verticals where the test length is like a week. [laughs] So if it's coming once a year, you better make sure you're organized, I guess, is what I'm saying. [laughs] VICTORIA: Because we only have one shot. [laughs] SHAWN: Yeah, exactly. VICTORIA: That makes sense. Well, thank you so much for sharing all those insights. And I want to give you a chance to promote anything else you'd like to share with our listeners. SHAWN: Thank you so much for the conversation, Victoria. I appreciate it. I think if anybody wants to find out about Classcraft, classcraft.com, tons of content and resources that we're generating about these topics of building meaningful relationships in school but in general with human beings. Classcraft is a B Corp, and so for people who don't know what that is, it's a certification around impact. And so we have built-in commitment to generate good in the world. And it's a pretty hard certification to get, so we're pretty proud about it. But I think that this commitment that we have of generating meaningful relationships both with kids but also with our employees, with our community, with our different stakeholders, has been really core to a lot of the decisions we make and how we make them, and how we approach different problems. And so I think that as a tech founder, sometimes we can lose sight of what are we actually generating in the world. And so I would encourage people to think about, you know, if you're thinking about starting a company or thinking about your own company and the impact its having to look up that certification. But also, just look up triple bottom line, these types of concepts that are becoming more and more prevalent that really give meaning to the endeavor. Starting a company and running it is a lot of work. You need to believe in what you're doing. [laughs] And I think having a mission that generates impact in that way is a good way to motivate yourself and your team to go the extra mile and deliver. VICTORIA: I love that. And did we really cover the full impact this app has had on kids that are using it in schools? SHAWN: There's a ton of research about Classcraft; actually, that's been done by pedagogy professors in colleges. Literally, thousands of papers have been written on Classcraft because there just aren't a lot of...everybody's interested in student motivation. There aren't a lot of scalable systems for doing that other than Classcraft. And so a lot of research that's been done about that topic incidentally happens to be using Classcraft. And a recent meta-study about Classcraft was conducted, and they saw a significant statistical impact on student motivation and learner outcomes. And so it's hard in education to really understand impact easily because it's social sciences. So you need a lot of big data samples, and you need the control groups. It's complicated. So we're pretty proud about that because a lot of companies that work in education don't have that kind of hard data. It's like, okay, it seems to be having an impact. We've got pretty hard proof; literally hundreds of millions of positive behaviors that kids have done that are being reinforced every single year. And when you think about that, most kids don't get any positive feedback. The kids that get the most attention are the ones that are acting out and being the worst. So 90% of teacher energy is being directed at 10% of the kids, and so most kids go through school without ever feeling a sense of belonging, or accomplishment, or praise. And we've had kids write us saying, "I was suicidal. Classcraft changed my life," like these types of user testimonies where the impact, the human impact of the approach, is really, really real. And for teachers as well, like, "I was so demotivated with teaching. I found the spark again thanks to Classcraft because school is fun again." [laughs] So there's a lot to be proud of there, for sure. VICTORIA: That's wonderful and really powerful that you've had that impact and have been able to see it both from a scientific perspective and from those user testimonies. So I think that's wonderful. And I think it's an inspiring story. And that's probably why you're also so involved; it seems, in leadership groups in edtech and in other communities in Quebec. Is that right? SHAWN: Yeah, totally. I mean the reality...so I'm the president of the Edtech Association here in Quebec, which I helped co-found. We've got 100-plus organizations working in edtech that are part of the association. I'm also Co-chair for The Global Collective for Social Emotional Learning, Digital Learning for UNESCO. And I have been involved in numerous different systemic endeavors in education throughout the years. The truth is changing education is hard, and the way we're going to succeed is...it's fundamentally something I believe that we should really be focusing on as a society is improving education, education outcomes. All the positive changes we need to see to tackle the incredible challenges that are upcoming for us as a species are going to happen through education. But for that to happen, we need to make education evolve, and for education to evolve, we need to all work together. So the association is interesting because it's like a coopetition [laughs] in a sense. All these entrepreneurs we're all competing for the same budget dollars, but we're looking at education problems in different ways. And if we're more successful as an industry, individually, everybody's going to be more successful, and more kids are going to be impacted. So I just believe that and this is true specifically for education, but I do believe this for any vertical. If businesses are collaborating to elevate, if the water rises, everybody's boat goes up. I really believe that that's true in business in general and in education in particular. VICTORIA: It reminds me when I was at Pluribus Digital in my last position. We were a part of the Digital Services Coalition, which is another coopetition group of federal contractors who are going after the same money. But we are all trying to see the government be better, part of that collaboration which sounds like what Classcraft is all about too. We're all in it together. [laughs] SHAWN: Yeah. And if that's not the case, especially for incumbents, then what happens is status quo. And for startups, for tech companies, usually the status quo [laughs] is bad. That's where you're trying to generate opportunity from. But sometimes the systems that are there, government systems in particular...we've seen a lot in health as well over the last few years in clean tech. All of these impact tech sectors part of what they're fighting against are market forces of status quo. And so it's only by all working together that we can really move that. VICTORIA: Yeah, absolutely. I'm sure we could keep talking about that for a long time. [laughs] But unless you have anything else you'd like to share, I'll go ahead and wrap up. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Shawn Young.
Shawn Young is the CEO and Co-Founder of Classcraft, an innovative platform that motivates students using the culture and mechanics of games. Victoria talks to Shawn about edtech, behavior intervention, and the challenges he's faced with going from a homegrown tool to something big and out there in the world. Classcraft (https://www.classcraft.com/) Follow Classcraft on Twitter (https://twitter.com/classcraftgame), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/classcraftgame/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/classcraftgame), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/c/classcraftgame), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/classcraft-studios/). Follow Shawn on Twitter (https://twitter.com/_shawnyoung_) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/shawnyoung1/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Shawn Young, the CEO, and Co-Founder at Classcraft, an innovative platform that motivates students using the culture and mechanics of games. Shawn, thank you for joining us. SHAWN: Thank you. Thanks for having me, Victoria. I'm happy to be here. VICTORIA: Wonderful, yes. So just tell me a little bit about yourself and maybe what brought you to start out as a teacher initially. SHAWN: [laughs] I have an interesting journey. I was originally a physicist, a physics major. Although I loved physics because it really gives you a deep understanding of the world, I realized that physics research in a basement with machines just on your own [laughs] wasn't for me, so that's when I started substitute teaching. I really wasn't going to go into education at all. It was just there was availability, lack of teachers. And it's kind of ironic. I really did not enjoy school. High school, in particular, was just a really challenging time for me, mostly because I just didn't see the point of it. I didn't have any problems in school. I had great grades, but I just was bored out of my mind. And so, as a teacher, I became really, really obsessed with making school meaningful for the students that were there, and because so many kids, so many learners just don't see the point. And so I did a lot of really cool project-based learning type of stuff. So that's where instead of lecturing the kids, you get them doing things and learning by doing. And so I was teaching physics, obviously. And so we were building hot air balloons and cannons and all kinds of stuff to study Newtonian physics. And kids were super happy to come to the class because we were doing some cool stuff. But I realized as that was happening that another part of meaning generation for kids and learners is the community and the social aspects. And so, I started thinking about how I can build community in the classroom, make the social experience of school relevant for them? And that's how Classcraft was born, really. I kind of put together my interest in motivating and building community with kids. I was a developer at the time as well, so I was able to develop a platform. And, of course, I'm a gamer, so I kind of put all those things together and built this platform in my classroom. VICTORIA: That's great. I was going to ask what skills or experiences from your teaching background translated to being a founder. SHAWN: That's interesting because clearly in the product...Classcraft was never meant to be a company. I already had a company. [laughs] I was freelancing as a developer for pretty large clients in New York. I was working with my brother, who's a creative director there. And we worked for Chanel for three years building apps and websites, and that was probably our biggest client. I wasn't looking to make a company. I just built it for me. It was my quest to make school meaningful and relevant. And after three years of just tinkering around with it with my students, I realized it was having a massive impact on their outlook, on the way they collaborated together, on their motivation. And because Classcraft is a platform that basically gamifies education, so kids level up and they earn points. They're on teams. They have a character class. All the things you would see in an RPG are translating to how teachers are running a school. And so I made a website just to talk about it after three years of this garage project I had going on. And the day that website went online, 130,000 people came to the website. It just started trending on Reddit gaming. And overnight, a lot of people were asking, "How do I download this?" I'm like, "You can't. There's no company." [laughter] So that's how the company started. Teaching is an interesting profession. I think that teaching is a job that requires you to, A, motivate and manage a whole bunch of people, so there's a lot similarility there to management. It's a group of humans that you want to work together to get to their full potential, just like your team should be. But then there's also independent planning. As a teacher, you have a set amount of time to get through X amount of curriculum. So you're always, you know, project management basically, 101 is the same thing as running a curriculum through the year. So there are a lot of those types of soft skills that translate really easily to entrepreneurship. And ultimately, as a teacher, you're responsible on your own for your own successes and failures, which is the type of attitude you need to have if you're going to be a successful entrepreneur is to be responsible, you know, [laughs] take control of your destiny a little bit. VICTORIA: Right. I hadn't thought about it from that angle. It makes a lot of sense. You're really an independent owner of that classroom, right? [laughs] SHAWN: Yeah, exactly, exactly. And trying to get humans to collaborate and do stuff sounds a lot like running a company. [laughs] VICTORIA: Right. I saw the tagline on Classcraft: relationships are everything. And I was like, that's a perfect DevOps kind of statement. [laughs] SHAWN: Yeah, that's funny. [laughs] We're thinking more like human relationships, but that's so funny [laughs] from the DevOps side for sure. VICTORIA: In and outside of the classroom, you need...it doesn't matter how great your technology is or your strategy. If the people aren't talking to each other and you don't have the right relationships, you're not going to be successful. SHAWN: Correct. And ultimately, that's the value proposition of Classcraft. Schools that don't build good relationships between students that don't do it between teachers and students, that don't do it between teachers and administration are dysfunctional. And what we're seeing in education today is one of the fundamental breakdowns that's happening and, you know, that's proxy for what's happening at large, and society is relationships are quite strange right now in schools, and that's making it really hard for them to be effective. VICTORIA: Right. It sounds like this app was built out of your direct experience and your direct experience working with these students. What do you find is unique in working with students, and how do you appeal to them as a user base? SHAWN: What's really special about edtech is that your buyer or the user that makes the decision to use the product is not the end user, and that's true in all B2B, SaaS. The decision maker who purchases the software isn't necessarily the employee who's going to use it. But in education, there are multiple levels. Like, if we sell to a district, they're the ones buying, but ultimately, they need to get the teachers to use it. And then, at the end of the day, the actual real users are the students. And so, there are a lot of design considerations when you think of UX. And even when you think of user permissions, there's a lot of complexity there in education because our goal is to build as much motivation and engagement mechanics as we can for kids. And so that means leveling up, and random loot drops, and all these things you see in video games but applying that to school. But then you need to build all this plumbing [laughs] basically to make it usable by a user who's the teacher who doesn't really know much about games, and that's changing as the teacher...average age of teachers is going down, a lot of retirements, et cetera, so that's changing. But at the base of it, the kids are really well versed in games, game mechanics, game culture, but the teacher who's running it is not. So we have to speak two languages, one of pedagogy, and classroom tools, and data, and saving time. These are the things that educators care about. And incidentally, they care about motivation and motivating the kids, and all of those things. But for kids, we're talking about avatars, and pets, and gear, and leveling up, and all this whole other set of language. And so when you think of design considerations, we always have to be thinking about how do I make this as motivating and engaging as possible for the kids, but how do I make it as easy to use and not complicated for teachers? Because if the teachers don't use it, then these kids aren't going to see the value anyways. So it's pretty complex because we don't have one single end user. VICTORIA: And so you have the challenge of making it fun for kids and then also providing useful and understandable data for teachers and probably parents and other people, right? SHAWN: Yeah, yeah, exactly. There are lots of stakeholders. [laughter] VICTORIA: So I want to ask more about how you make it fun, and then I also want to know more about the teacher's perspective, so whichever one you want to start with first. SHAWN: Perfect. I mean, those two questions are literally the placement of what Classcraft is. Classcraft is the Venn diagram between what in education is behavior intervention, so managing kids' behavior and motivation. And so, from a motivation angle, how do we make it engaging for kids? In essence, kids are earning points in Classcraft for things that they're doing in school that we want them to do. And by we, schools can configure whatever it is, but it'll be things like handing in homework, being respectful, being inclusive, participating, being on time, these behaviors that they want to see in kids to make them better learners. When those behaviors occur, teachers can give them points. And the points allow them to level up. As they level up, they each have a character. They have an avatar, and they can be warriors, healers, or mages. And based on that character class, they have a different role in the team. So they're playing in teams just like in an MMORPG or on a football team. And everybody has a different role within the team. And you win as a team. And so school is quite competitive. Kids are always compared to the class average and their grades. And there's a lot of competition happening in schools. What we've built is a way for kids to be motivated by collaboration. And so they're playing on teams. If they do good things, they get these points, and they level up. And there are millions of combinations of gear that they could buy for their avatar, but they're also unlocking real-life powers. And so these powers are things like, you know, in a video game, power could be like you could shoot a fireball. In Classcraft, shoot a fireball is the equivalent of you can skip a question on an exam, or you can go to the bathroom, or you can hand in homework a day late, or you can listen to music while you're doing your classwork, so giving them real-life privileges as they level up. And these aren't one-offs; they're skills that they have that they can trigger whenever they want, just like in a game. And some of those skills are things like being able to heal up your teammate because kids can also lose lives if they do negative things. So if you're late or you're rude, or whatever it is, just like in Mario, what's failing in Mario is falling in a hole, and what's failing as a student, it's not doing what you're supposed to do, or being a bully to other kids. And so, as that happens, they can lose lives. But then they can come in to help each other out. There are boss battles where they can fight monsters by answering quiz questions, et cetera. So all these motions that are ultimately the things that are happening anyways in school, what we're saying is instead of punishing kids or forcing them to do this stuff, make it feel like a game. Speak their language, use the same mechanics that we know are super effective at motivating players. Nobody is forcing people to play video games. Everybody's doing that of their own volition. It's the most popular cultural medium that exists today, well surpassing film, movies, music. And so, why are games so good at doing that? It's because they fulfill fundamental needs: being in control, feeling like we're progressing, social relatedness. That's what we're bringing to school. So that's the student side of it. The other side of it, behavior intervention, is...well, one of the biggest challenges for teachers is managing kids. It's not like showing you how to do a math problem; it's getting you to care about it, listen to it, stop disturbing other people. And so, a lot of time and energy is spent on classroom management for teachers. And so what we do is we use best practices there. For example, there's a lot of research out there in education that says that praising kids for good behavior is a lot more effective than punishing them. And so games are really good at praising you. You level up, and you gain points. It tells you your score. What we're doing here is giving them that framework but applying that to classroom management. And so instead of saying, "Hey, Victoria, stop goofing off," or "You're not dressed well, go to the principal," or whatever it is that's happening in schools, what we're telling teachers to do instead is say, "Hey if Victoria does something good, recognize her. Give her a high five." And in Classcraft, a high five is gaining points. And so we're shifting and applying this pedagogy, shifting towards a positive reinforcement mindset. And at the same time, because these high fives are digital, then you get all the data so you can know which behaviors did Victoria do at which time with which teacher? Hey, she didn't get a lot of points this week. What's going on with her? Maybe we should talk to her and see what's going on before her behavior escalates. And so there's a lot of value from a behavior intervention standpoint. But ultimately, it's super effective because the kids really care about it in a way that they don't normally care about classroom management. VICTORIA: Well, that makes a lot of sense. And I'm hearing something I've studied before when looking at technology organizations which is that growth mindset I think you're describing, the positive reinforcement, praising the effort for something versus their intrinsic skills. And that's something I love about teaching. I think that really, really translates to running a technology organization. SHAWN: Yeah, totally. Ultimately, what we're doing is giving schools and teachers a platform for really effective culture building. And what you're talking about is culture within a company, in essence, and it's really the same thing. It goes back to what I was saying earlier about managing a group of kids [laughs], and managing employees is super similar. It's all about what type of positive culture you are building. VICTORIA: I think there's something really universal about that. It's actually even true with dog training. I have a dog, and it's the same kind of motivational theory that works for them too. [laughs] SHAWN: Yep, yep. VICTORIA: I love it. And you mentioned that you built this tool yourself, and then suddenly, it became very popular, and now it's really, I'm sure, scaling. So what challenges have you faced with going from this homegrown tool to something big and out there in the world? SHAWN: Lots of challenges. [laughs] I would say working in education itself is a challenge. It's a pretty challenging vertical to work in. It's ripe for disruption at the same time, pretty conservative. There are a lot of forces working in education systemically not have it move forward. Working with schools and districts is challenging. They have a lot of requirements. And, of course, they're custodians of kids, so that's legitimate, but it does make it more challenging. One of the things that we had to evolve was we were very much a teacher-only tool when we started. I had built it as a teacher. Our user in mind was a teacher. Even our business model initially was selling to teachers basically. There was a free version, and they could upgrade to a paid version. And as we got more and more scale, you know, we have ten million-plus kids in the platform now. As we got more and more scale, what ended up happening was we were working more and more with schools and districts. And so we went from a B2C go-to-market and product vision to a B2B/enterprise where we have to roster 10,000 or 100,000 kids in one shot, so all the user provisioning, connecting to information systems that these districts have, et cetera, all of this ginormous plumbing that needs to happen in order for it to continue to be easy to use for every single teacher. And alongside with that, the other challenge is we were super appealing to teachers that were interested in games. [laughs] And so when you think of some teacher who's in their 60s and has never really played any games and just thinks that they're a silly waste of time, there's a different sales pitch that needs to happen there to get them on board and a different onboarding. One of the things we had to completely overhaul was the onboarding to make it really progressive. Classcraft, now when you start it, there's no avatar. It starts super lean on the feature side so that these teachers that are, you know, we're basically educating them as they're using the platform, educating them on all this game stuff. There are a lot of learnings in terms of what's our actual target audience. And if our target audience starts to be enterprise customers, how do we evolve our platform to appeal to a much more diverse type of persona from a teacher standpoint? VICTORIA: I was thinking, actually, a good friend of mine who is a teacher and has been running Dungeons & Dragons campaigns for us for several years. [laughter] SHAWN: There you go. VICTORIA: And, like, you'll love it. [laughs] SHAWN: Exactly. [laughter] VICTORIA: But I could see that being a challenge now that you're shifting your target business model, really, and how do you adapt to that? Mid-Roll Ad: As life moves online, bricks-and-mortar businesses are having to adapt to survive. With over 18 years of experience building reliable web products and services, thoughtbot is the technology partner you can trust. We provide the technical expertise to enable your business to adapt and thrive in a changing environment. We start by understanding what’s important to your customers to help you transition to intuitive digital services your customers will trust. We take the time to understand what makes your business great and work fast yet thoroughly to build, test, and validate ideas, helping you discover new customers. Take your business online with design‑driven digital acceleration. Find out more at: url tbot.io/acceleration or click the link in the show notes for this episode. VICTORIA: What else are you looking ahead with Classcraft? What's on the horizon? SHAWN: There's a lot. Like I said, we have 10 million kids in the platform plus. But we have teachers in every single country you could imagine, and there's a universality to what we're proposing. We're not saying here's the best tool for fifth-grade math in the U.S. We're saying, solve this universal human problem that's prevalent in education. And so we have teachers in, you name it, Taiwan, and Australia, and Singapore, and all over Europe using Classcraft. And so there's definitely opportunity for us to look at the international landscape and identify opportunities. Another frontier beyond going out of North America is going beyond the brick-and-mortar experience of the classroom. A lot of what's happening in and around your software is actually not happening 18 inches from the screen. It's happening in this context where there are 30 other kids, and there are all these interactions going on. For example, if you made a reading app, you can imagine the kids sitting in a quiet space on their sofa at home reading this thing, but the reality that's happening is they're in a really loud classroom [laughs] with lots of other kids around them, et cetera. And so the design context for designing for edtech is really interesting. We have some views that are meant to be only on a projector in front of the class. And when that happens, the font size needs to be 80 point because a kid in the back needs to be able to see it. So the screen real estate you're playing with is pretty unique scenarios. Like, what does this look like at 120 feet, let's say, because people are using it in the gym? So interesting design challenges, but they have been really ensconced in the idea that a lot of how people are using Classcraft is with real-life physical situations. But Classcraft, in essence, we have an API. So you can also imagine behaviors that are not brick and mortar behaviors, like, if I'm being participative, that's something that a teacher would see and observe and give you points for. But there are 3,000 edtech platforms, and all of them have digital behaviors that teachers want to see. They want to see kids handing in homework in these platforms. They want to go see them complete assignments. They want to go see them participating in digital communities. These are all basically the new frontier for digital behaviors that are a part now post-pandemic of the ecosystem of education. And so we're really interested in connecting to other platforms. I don't need kids to be in Classcraft; I just need them every day. I need them to be earning points. And I'm happy if they're doing that in other platforms and that those interactions are rewarding them experience points and points in Classcraft. And ideally, automatically, that way, the teachers don't have to do anything. VICTORIA: And so you're integrating with all these different platforms, and you're working with all these different school districts. So you've had to make some difficult technology choices in your stack. Do you have any examples of those? SHAWN: Yeah, absolutely. When I started the company, I'd come out of programming in...I started building cool websites in ActionScript, [laughs] so that dates me a little bit. But I'd just come out of a decade of ActionScript and PHP. And I'm like, PHP does not scale, and it doesn't afford the same type of real-time interactions that you'd expect from a game. When I decided what the tech stack would be, right at the outset, it was, okay, we're going to do this all JavaScript. It's going to be Node. And at that time...now that's a pretty, like, anybody would make that decision. But this was nine years ago, and it wasn't as mature as it is now. And so that was a pretty ballsy move and one that we never looked back on. But we had a lot of things that we had to build ourselves because the libraries didn't exist yet. And we were really pushing the edge of what was possible in a browser, especially in a browser in school with a crappy internet connection. And often, they are on older browsers. Although it was the right decision to lean into the leading edge on the tech stack, it did afford us with a lot of specific challenges that we might not have had if we'd said, oh, let's just keep this super old school. Some other things that we've been challenged with over the years is just scaling the number of concurrent users is always a thing. When we started, we had a single database, one server, and I was doing all the DevOps. And a lot of what we've done since that is just move everything to services. So we've got, you know, MongoDB database-as-a-service. [laughs] We're all on Google Cloud now. From an IT standpoint, we think a lot about what stack we're going to be using. And to me, what really matters is build the product as fast as you can and as well as you can. So outsourcing all of the DevOps pieces to cloud providers is, in my opinion, [laughs] a really good use of funds versus maintaining it yourself and spending tons of money on sys engineers and architects. The reality is that for most products today, what exists as a service in the cloud already bundled is, you know, and we've got auto-scaling. When there are too many concurrent users, it automatically spins up new Docker servers, et cetera. So we've really evolved from this monolithic single-server approach to this imminently highly scalable solution that is all virtualized, but in doing that, moved all of it to services. And I think that's the right move because we're not, you know, if I was really, really core, if was, I don't know, [chuckles] an online video game, then the speed of connections and all these things become super important. But in our case, reliability, scalability is more important than the fine-tuning to a precise degree of specific tech infrastructure. And I'm seeing more and more founders now, Victoria, as well go-to codeless solutions as well. I think we're kind of abstracting a lot of what was core to product development from a tech side. You know, first, it was the DevOps, then it was the cloud, and even now, code, I think, is moving in the direction where we're systematizing, bundling, and having other services generate code more and more. I think we're moving towards that just in software in general. VICTORIA: Yeah, I think that is becoming prevalent. I do think low-code automation has also been coming around every 5 or 10 years or so. [laughs] I have the belief that technology never disappears; it just keeps building, and new tech gets created, and the user base shifts around a little bit. And, of course, for you as a technical founder, putting it all in Docker and setting up the auto scaling on Google is probably within your reach, whereas a lot of founders, that might be something more challenging, and you might need to have some support for. But that's essentially what we work on for Mission Control as well is helping teams set up their platform so that it will scale automatically that if there's an issue, you know about it in advance. [laughs] You can take care of it before it falls over, and that way, your users just see a reliable, happy system. SHAWN: I'm so grateful that I am a technical founder. [laughs] I know a lot of founders, and the ones that don't know how to code really are at the mercy of so many unknown variables. I'm not coding anymore, but I'm very aware of what's going on in the platform. And I think that helps me make better business decisions every day. So I have a lot of gratitude when I compare myself in that regard. VICTORIA: And I think it's really about communication then too. Like, having a good understanding of your system is helpful but being able to understand it well enough to then communicate it to other people, and what the value is, and how you want to invest money in different parts of the system. I think those are two things that having maybe a little bit more of experience in technology and then also having a teacher experience, I think, sets you up to be successful. But we also, of course, at thoughtbot, we offer a lot of that technical expertise to help founders navigate some of that. So there's a little pitch just for us. [laughs] But let's see, let me go through...I think I've gone through a good amount of questions. Here's one that I like to ask everybody. But if you could travel back in time to when you first started Classcraft, what would be the main piece of advice you would give yourself? SHAWN: If I could go back, there are some big lessons that have been learned. I've been for almost a decade now as a founder and CEO. One of the things we didn't do early enough was user testing. If I split the life of Classcraft into three eras, there's the first third we didn't need to because we had all of my own experience. But once we started moving past what was the initial product that I had built in my own classroom, we continued to make assumptions. And we, of course, always listen to our users, but now we're super systematic about it, and any new feature has research behind it and a really solid UX practice that we should have implemented much earlier. I think we're making much better roadmap decisions today than we were three years ago. A lot of companies hire UX people super late, and I would do that early or at least develop the chops to do it myself as early as possible. So I think that's one thing. I think as well...and maybe this is tied to that. I think we should have and could have iterated faster as well. A lot of startups in the tech scene talk about iteration, but there's a difference between incrementally iterating and just adding on, adding on, adding on, and actually making the kind of iterative decisions that, for example, pulling part of the product and discontinuing it for example. And we've done some of those moves, but I think we could have done them faster. And we should have done them faster if we'd had that UX research data to help us make decisions faster. So it's more than, like, common truism is like, oh, listen to your users and listen to their feedback. Like, yes, that's true, and we were doing that. But I'd say go further and create robust structures to get that data faster, not just wait for it to come in but actually go out and get it and digest it in a way that's actually usable. Because you have a whole bunch of testimonials and feedback, but if it's not organized, it's not somebody's job to make sense of it. It's just kind of sitting there. So there's a lot of value from that perspective that you can quickly generate for your users and, therefore, for your business. VICTORIA: Right. Save you some time and some money, probably in validating your ideas, right? SHAWN: Yeah. And the problem with education is that it's a yearly cycle, right? VICTORIA: Mmm-hmm. SHAWN: We're not looking at monthly scales; we're looking at the whole school year. So back to school happens once a year, and that's when you get a ton of data because that's when there's the most activity. Like, right now, August, September, October, these are the moments where we're getting the most data. And then when you make changes, you got to wait all the way back to the next back to school. So, in particular, in education, I think the cycles are long versus, let's say, more B2C-type consumer verticals where the test length is like a week. [laughs] So if it's coming once a year, you better make sure you're organized, I guess, is what I'm saying. [laughs] VICTORIA: Because we only have one shot. [laughs] SHAWN: Yeah, exactly. VICTORIA: That makes sense. Well, thank you so much for sharing all those insights. And I want to give you a chance to promote anything else you'd like to share with our listeners. SHAWN: Thank you so much for the conversation, Victoria. I appreciate it. I think if anybody wants to find out about Classcraft, classcraft.com, tons of content and resources that we're generating about these topics of building meaningful relationships in school but in general with human beings. Classcraft is a B Corp, and so for people who don't know what that is, it's a certification around impact. And so we have built-in commitment to generate good in the world. And it's a pretty hard certification to get, so we're pretty proud about it. But I think that this commitment that we have of generating meaningful relationships both with kids but also with our employees, with our community, with our different stakeholders, has been really core to a lot of the decisions we make and how we make them, and how we approach different problems. And so I think that as a tech founder, sometimes we can lose sight of what are we actually generating in the world. And so I would encourage people to think about, you know, if you're thinking about starting a company or thinking about your own company and the impact its having to look up that certification. But also, just look up triple bottom line, these types of concepts that are becoming more and more prevalent that really give meaning to the endeavor. Starting a company and running it is a lot of work. You need to believe in what you're doing. [laughs] And I think having a mission that generates impact in that way is a good way to motivate yourself and your team to go the extra mile and deliver. VICTORIA: I love that. And did we really cover the full impact this app has had on kids that are using it in schools? SHAWN: There's a ton of research about Classcraft; actually, that's been done by pedagogy professors in colleges. Literally, thousands of papers have been written on Classcraft because there just aren't a lot of...everybody's interested in student motivation. There aren't a lot of scalable systems for doing that other than Classcraft. And so a lot of research that's been done about that topic incidentally happens to be using Classcraft. And a recent meta-study about Classcraft was conducted, and they saw a significant statistical impact on student motivation and learner outcomes. And so it's hard in education to really understand impact easily because it's social sciences. So you need a lot of big data samples, and you need the control groups. It's complicated. So we're pretty proud about that because a lot of companies that work in education don't have that kind of hard data. It's like, okay, it seems to be having an impact. We've got pretty hard proof; literally hundreds of millions of positive behaviors that kids have done that are being reinforced every single year. And when you think about that, most kids don't get any positive feedback. The kids that get the most attention are the ones that are acting out and being the worst. So 90% of teacher energy is being directed at 10% of the kids, and so most kids go through school without ever feeling a sense of belonging, or accomplishment, or praise. And we've had kids write us saying, "I was suicidal. Classcraft changed my life," like these types of user testimonies where the impact, the human impact of the approach, is really, really real. And for teachers as well, like, "I was so demotivated with teaching. I found the spark again thanks to Classcraft because school is fun again." [laughs] So there's a lot to be proud of there, for sure. VICTORIA: That's wonderful and really powerful that you've had that impact and have been able to see it both from a scientific perspective and from those user testimonies. So I think that's wonderful. And I think it's an inspiring story. And that's probably why you're also so involved; it seems, in leadership groups in edtech and in other communities in Quebec. Is that right? SHAWN: Yeah, totally. I mean the reality...so I'm the president of the Edtech Association here in Quebec, which I helped co-found. We've got 100-plus organizations working in edtech that are part of the association. I'm also Co-chair for The Global Collective for Social Emotional Learning, Digital Learning for UNESCO. And I have been involved in numerous different systemic endeavors in education throughout the years. The truth is changing education is hard, and the way we're going to succeed is...it's fundamentally something I believe that we should really be focusing on as a society is improving education, education outcomes. All the positive changes we need to see to tackle the incredible challenges that are upcoming for us as a species are going to happen through education. But for that to happen, we need to make education evolve, and for education to evolve, we need to all work together. So the association is interesting because it's like a coopetition [laughs] in a sense. All these entrepreneurs we're all competing for the same budget dollars, but we're looking at education problems in different ways. And if we're more successful as an industry, individually, everybody's going to be more successful, and more kids are going to be impacted. So I just believe that and this is true specifically for education, but I do believe this for any vertical. If businesses are collaborating to elevate, if the water rises, everybody's boat goes up. I really believe that that's true in business in general and in education in particular. VICTORIA: It reminds me when I was at Pluribus Digital in my last position. We were a part of the Digital Services Coalition, which is another coopetition group of federal contractors who are going after the same money. But we are all trying to see the government be better, part of that collaboration which sounds like what Classcraft is all about too. We're all in it together. [laughs] SHAWN: Yeah. And if that's not the case, especially for incumbents, then what happens is status quo. And for startups, for tech companies, usually the status quo [laughs] is bad. That's where you're trying to generate opportunity from. But sometimes the systems that are there, government systems in particular...we've seen a lot in health as well over the last few years in clean tech. All of these impact tech sectors part of what they're fighting against are market forces of status quo. And so it's only by all working together that we can really move that. VICTORIA: Yeah, absolutely. I'm sure we could keep talking about that for a long time. [laughs] But unless you have anything else you'd like to share, I'll go ahead and wrap up. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Shawn Young.
Hello UK Giant Robots listeners! Our next event allows you to hear from and connect with both Founders and Investors on all things Fundraising. The event will be 1 part panel discussion and 1 part breakout sessions. We hope you can make it! Register today at: tbot.io/fundraising-uk (https://thoughtbot.com/events/fundraising-uk-event?utm_source=socials&utm_medium=socials&utm_campaign=UK%20fundraising%20event) Daniëlle Keeven is VP of Finance at Paddle, the only complete payments infrastructure provider for SaaS companies. Victoria talks to Daniëlle about helping companies with taxes while assuming the liability and risks associated with global tax compliance, financial literacy, and taking proactive measures and steps to manage cost effectively before it is required. Paddle (https://www.paddle.com/) Follow Paddle on Twitter (https://twitter.com/PaddleHQ), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/paddleteam/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/paddlehq/), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK1qyXbgE-kcGA4LMGdL7PA), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/paddle/). Follow Daniëlle on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/danielle-keeven/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: Hello, United Kingdom Giant Robots listeners! Our next event allows you to hear from and connect with both founders and investors on all things fundraising. The event will be one part panel discussion and one-part breakout sessions. We hope you can make it. Register today at tbot.io/fundraising-uk. VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Daniëlle Keeven, VP of Finance at Paddle, the only complete payments infrastructure provider for SaaS companies. Daniëlle, thank you for joining us. DANIËLLE: Hi, Victoria. Thank you for having me. Super excited to be here. VICTORIA: Wonderful. Yes, I'm excited to have you here and to hear a little bit about your background. I was curious how it was different going from a finance role in a large corporation like Marriott to the startup world and to Paddle. DANIËLLE: Well, Victoria, I was actually quite fortunate because even in the Marriotts and the Hyatts that I've been in in hospitality, I've been exposed to a lot of in the trench type of accounting and finance. Being in the Caribbean and just a Latam market, you learn to look at situations differently and make sure you work towards compliance. So I think that's really groomed me for stepping into the tech space as well, where I think following the money is the first directive of any finance professional walking into a scale-up or startup. So I think it's groomed me for the move. Booking was a little bit easier because it was also a little bit of leisure and travel. When I stepped into a telecom for MessageBird and then Paddle as a payments end-to-end provider of infrastructure, there was a little bit of a challenge there. But I love being part of a company now that's completely a finance product which has really given finance roles a partnership with product and engineering to partner in the way forward and design of the product. VICTORIA: Yes, that's exciting for us as well. And tell us a little bit about Paddle, actually. DANIËLLE: So Paddle is an end-to-end platform. We strive not to just help software companies; we strive to do the work for them to be able to roll out globally. So basically, Paddle is the only end-to-end infrastructure that will enable you to invoice your customers and get payments support, offering different payment methods, as well as make sure you're globally compliant and file your taxes so that you don't have to. I think what sets Paddle apart from a lot of other companies that are helping companies with tax is that we actually do it for you. In addition to that, we assume the full liability and risks associated to global tax compliance. VICTORIA: Right. Yes. And I saw a product that you all have or information that you shared called the Sales Tax Agony Index. Can you tell me a little bit about that? DANIËLLE: Well, I think, in general, tax is painful. [laughs] I think personal tax is painful. Anything that has to do with business tax is amplified significantly. And I think for software companies, often, you build a great product, and you want to bring it up to market. But then you're limited and slowed down from really expanding globally. I mean, that is where we come in to really take up the tax burden for software creators to be able to look at it as a stepping stone instead of a roadblock if that makes sense. VICTORIA: I think that makes a lot of sense. And it's interesting where we are right now with the current climate and economics that companies may be focusing on their finances to reduce cost but also to identify new areas to invest in, right? DANIËLLE: Yeah, right. And I think that's super interesting to me, which I keep saying I'm not sure why not all of the software world is on Paddle. Because I think if you look out there in the market, there's such a piecemeal solution to everything. So you have to, for example, if you're going to not build your own billing, you have to outsource buying software for your billing. You have to go find a payment provider that's compatible and then the resources to get them into your platform to make sure checkout is seamless. Then you have to get an accountant to reconcile your payment. You have to get customer support to support your customer payments. You have to get more additional headcount to make sure your chargebacks and your fraud rates stay down. And all of this, Paddle just does it for you, which I think especially in this climate where cost is becoming a subject, I think Paddle is a great business partner to enable software companies to grow at a reasonable cost and pricing, and really explore all of the global market out there versus having to do it yourself. VICTORIA: Right. And Paddle could maybe help you identify where your spend also has a high return on investment. Is that right? DANIËLLE: We do put you in direct contact with your customer, so your customers are not masked or anything like that. So you do have access to all of your customer data. And in addition to that, we've recently made an additional acquisition to grow the Paddle family by adding ProfitWell, which is really an expert in anything that has to do with retention and pricing. And we are working to integrate this product and make it available to our Paddle customers as well. So that is not something that is there today but soon will be. VICTORIA: Oh, interesting. And I read a recent interview that you did, and I liked how you connected retaining your customer base to your billing and invoicing process because that might be an afterthought for a lot of startups and founders. But it is really key in keeping your customers happy is having that easy billing and invoice process. Is that your perspective? DANIËLLE: Yeah. I definitely think that with any SaaS company, there's definitely something known as well as an abandoned cart like somebody that will, you know, maybe we do it ourselves as well when we go out shopping online. We drop stuff in our cart, and we never make it to checkout. And I think to make sure you optimize your checkout, and your revenue is to make sure that the process is as seamless as possible, that your customers can just flow through this process and not have any challenges during that journey to make sure that your conversion rates stay high. VICTORIA: Right. That makes a lot of sense. Do you have other insights about customer retention that may relate to the Paddle platform? DANIËLLE: I think what's unique for me as a finance professional looking at the Paddle product...given I am by little biased because I do work here, and I'm a big fan of our product. But I think, and I've talked about this often, there are so many software solutions or tools that finance folks are trying to be sold. We get them sold to us, like, oh, this will automate 100%, and this will reduce this, or this will reduce that. I think what Paddle does well and how we are uniquely positioned is that what should be automated is automated and what needs a human touch has a human touch. And what I mean with that as well is in the sense of your customers making a payment and having a challenge we actually offer customer support with real people. And we do support your customers to make sure that they have a pleasant journey in the checkout process or resolve any payment issues that they have. So I think we balance the two out. And it's similar to, for example, taxes as well. We automate what we can, but we have a team of tax analysts really looking at the data and making sure everything is running correctly and is exactly compliant as it should be. So I think we bring together the best of both worlds in saying we automate a portion of the journey and where we can use and should use the human touch and intellect we do so. So we're not promising 100% percent automation. We just promise that we will do it for you by combining the best of both worlds. VICTORIA: That makes sense, right? Because, at some point, the automation can become more effective than hiring. But how can you scale your business without having to double your finance reporting and your tax teams, right? DANIËLLE: And I fully agree. And I think you bring up a very interesting point. I think from my past; I had been at Booking where you were in a situation where you have an endless means of cash flow that you can really build your dream automation tools. I think a lot of the big automation that Booking has achieved in finance is really admirable, and a majority of it has been done in-house. So I think they've done a really great job with that. But then, when you step out of an organization like that into a smaller startup scale-up, you do not have infinite funds. You are talking mostly about cash burn and then your cash runway. And you do have to optimize between a decision of should I invest in tooling to automate? Or does it make sense for me to hire a person because hiring a person is more cost-effective than automating? I think in a cash-tight environment, you do have to evaluate what makes more sense; sometimes, it is hiring a person. Sometimes hiring one person will get you scaled for two years. And other times, if you looked at you will have to hire one or five people per year to do a certain task, then it makes sense definitely to invest in automation because the cost will be upfront, but the benefits will be scalable, and you'll have definitely benefits from that point. VICTORIA: And there's a mix of you need people to do the work, but you also need to give them the tools to be able to do their job, right? DANIËLLE: Yes, I think most of us in finance still find that Excel is our best friend. [laughs] VICTORIA: Well, I won't complain about Excel myself. I have a background in economics, an undergraduate, so I'm an Excel pro. DANIËLLE: Yeah, I think definitely Excel has brought us all a very long way. [laughs] VICTORIA: So what's different about your customers that you're targeting with Paddle? What's unique about them? DANIËLLE: I think what is unique about them is that we want to really bring the creator of softwares their dreams to life, which means it's almost like we want to dream with them if that makes sense. We want to make sure that whatever they build becomes available to the world, whether they are a small startup or a small company or if they are a giant in the industry and very good at their skills. So we want to target the entire market for software. And I think what makes them unique is that our customers are usually a fan of our product, but we are a fan of theirs. So I think, typically, that works both ways really well. VICTORIA: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. And do you find that your customers are facing a different set of challenges today than they might have a year ago? DANIËLLE: I think the SaaS industry has changed. I think it's no secret that definitely the economic landscape has shifted. I think we were very fortunate to close our Series D in very favorable circumstances before the climate changed. I do think it will change back, and I don't think this is all doom and gloom. But I also do think that we are all facing the situation where we should be taking proactive measures and steps to manage our cost effectively before it is actually required. For some of the SaaS industries, it may already be required, and for others, I think even those doing well should be mindful to take steps where possible. Cutting costs does not necessarily mean cutting quality or immediately reducing staff. I think it just is more taking a step back and critically looking at your spend to see, do I have opportunity to renegotiate existing contracts? Are there, especially in my cost of goods sold, can I get this reduced somehow without reducing the quality of my product and what we're delivering as a business? And I think these are very good and big opportunities that we can definitely seize in addition to our operational spend. Just taking a critical look at this can really go a long way. VICTORIA: That makes sense. It sounds like, as a VP of finance, those are things that you might be able to bring to the table. Or tell me more about how the role of a finance person plays in a startup in making some of those decisions. DANIËLLE: I think the role of a finance person is super critical in the sense of you're looking back to see what the spend was and where we've been and to look forward to what the trends will be. You're also trying to inspire vision and strategy and work together with the sales team to both have realistic forecasts on what we will do, can do, and what we'll actually deliver. And I think as a finance leader, more than ever, it is so needed for us to partner with the business instead of being chucked away in a corner somewhere processing financial reports or looking at them. So I think the finance literacy is definitely something that we can add to our organizations. I'll give you an example, as we rolled out our budget, it wasn't just to deliver it to the board or to our executive committee, but it was also to talk about it with our senior leadership. I think the senior leadership is also so critical to any organization to say, "Hey, we are going to commit together with our own leaders to make sure that we're executing the plan and that we will also get all of our teams to partner and create that buy-in as a company." So I think as a finance leader, it's not just my job to go out there and say, "Hey, we have to cut costs," but also to explain what is happening to the economic climate, why we have to cut costs, and what are the benefits of doing it before it is needed. And definitely paving the road to say, "Hey, this is beneficial for all of us because these are our financial goals that we can achieve, but we can only achieve them together." So I think creating that buy-in and building that team across the organization that is committed to the correct finance management is super critical in this day and age. It used to be that it was just finance's role to watch the finances; I think now it's a collaborative effort of the entire company. VICTORIA: I really like that I have a background in DevOps, and that's breaking down silos between different parts of the organization. And so I love to hear that finance is getting really involved and be a part of the overall decisions that everyone's making in the company, right? DANIËLLE: Yeah, definitely. VICTORIA: How does Paddle build stakeholder buy-in within the company? What does that process look like for you all? DANIËLLE: I think very early on, we identified that, obviously, our executive team is key. I think this is the tip of the arrow really leading the organization in giving vision and direction. I find that we've been very fortunate, in my humble opinion, because we have a great CEO and a great COO. And I really enjoy working with the entire executive team. They're just a wonderful group of people. Besides being amazing professionals, they're just generally nice, [chuckles] which is always great. But we've identified early on that actually your senior leadership right underneath that is so critical to your company's culture, how you hire, how you buy, how you move, how you invest, but also how would your future be like. Because while the executive team definitely is key in giving the direction, the vision, and mission, I think the team right underneath that, the senior leadership team, is really the one that is going to go out there and materialize that dream and vision, and really live that dream, and really get the right people and to get the job done. So I think what we've identified early on is to make everybody an active stakeholder, do the planning together. Like, before the executive team rolls out a mission and vision, it's not going to be a total surprise to the senior leadership. We've all taken part of it, and we've all supported it, and we've discussed it, and we've fine-tuned it. So I think definitely taking people along in the journey goes a long way. The other thing I think that is very critical is just being transparent and being honest. At the end of the day, we're people. We want to know what's happening, why it's happening, and what we're working towards. And I think that is something that Paddle has done very well as well internally as a team. We have great values and great focus on what we want to deliver, where we want to go, and we definitely are focused on doing so together. VICTORIA: That sounds great. You all have a shared vision of where you're going and where you are currently. And that probably helps get everyone on board with what we're working on in the future. It gets everyone motivated a little bit more, right? DANIËLLE: Correct. Exactly. VICTORIA: So, is there anything particularly exciting coming up with Paddle that you are looking forward to? DANIËLLE: I think I'm super excited to see what ProfitWell, how it will integrate, and the product that it will offer, and the opportunities that it will offer to our Paddle customers. I'm super excited to see that materialize and seeing all of this come together. We've been waiting, and we've been working towards this deal for a very long time, so seeing it materialize is quite exciting. And I'm definitely looking forward to that. VICTORIA: And do you think that that cultural strength you mentioned with Paddle and having that transparency and quality of support from the leadership does that help translate when you're doing big deals like that and closing deals with other companies? DANIËLLE: Yeah, it definitely does. I think, in general, the finance team has had quite an exciting first half of the year. I want to say, you know, being in Series D, having due diligence done, ProfitWell, at the same time preparing for an audit, having your financial team build out your reporting. I think we've had so many things run at the same time, and the pressures are quite high. So I think just having that positive culture together as a team gives you strength as well together to be your best self under pressure instead of really crumbling or not getting along and struggling with it. VICTORIA: Yeah, that makes total sense. If you feel like you're supported by other humans in your company, [laughs] then when you're stressed, it makes it easier to get along. That makes a lot of sense. Do you have any other advice for finance leaders or startups who are navigating the economic downturn at this time? DANIËLLE: I would say keep an eye open. Do not stop investing. Do be critical about your ROI. Make sure that where you're spending your money is where it makes the most sense for the business, and just keep an eye out for opportunity. Because just because the climate has turned does not mean that it will not turn back, and it does mean that there are loads of opportunities out there that we can still seize as a business. VICTORIA: Right. It means that different markets are more active, right? [laughs] DANIËLLE: Usually. Correct. VICTORIA: Do you have any questions for me or for thoughtbot? DANIËLLE: I'm just curious, for you as well, what's your favorite subject that you discuss on thoughtbot? VICTORIA: Ooh, a favorite subject. That's tough because I love hearing from our designers and our developers. We have many developers who are some core contributors to Rails, and so they are very knowledgeable about things like we have random meetups that happen at thoughtbot. So you can sign up and just randomly pair up with somebody else in the company. And the first random meetup I had, I met up with someone who is like the expert on security [laughs] and dotfiles and helped me finish setting up my developer environment. And so I love that at thoughtbot, you can start a random conversation with someone, and they'll end up having this wealth of knowledge around a particular subject that you might have been struggling with and can just immediately solve your problem. I also like the fun parts. There's actually a blog that just captures all of our jokes from Slack [laughter] just… So it's a part of like making it fun and being human at work and kind of showing up with your whole self. I think that adds a cultural strength for those moments like you describe when things are difficult, or you have a hard project. You feel bonded to your teammates and feel like you're all working together, and that positivity stays throughout. DANIËLLE: Yes, definitely. VICTORIA: So, are you currently in Amsterdam? Is that right? DANIËLLE: I am based in the Netherlands. I'm actually based in Alkmaar, which is 30 minutes outside of Amsterdam, but I typically say Amsterdam because that's the city that most people know where it's at. [laughs] VICTORIA: Same for me. I go with San Diego, but I'm actually in Encinitas. It's a little bit further north. So is there a difference, or what is the startup environment or community like in Europe then? DANIËLLE: I think I'm quite impressed because before moving to the Netherlands, I wasn't aware there was so much happening, but there are actually some channels called Silicon Canals, so the canals for the boats, so it's a bit of a play on words. And there's such a vibrant startup and scale-up community in the Netherlands, which was quite surprising for me to run into. So I do think by nature...I was born in the Netherlands, and I moved to Aruba when I was five. So I wasn't raised here. But I think if I look at the Dutch culture, it is quite innovative. And they do tend to find different ways of doing things when it comes to water or building dams. And I think that curiosity and innovation has moved over to the tech space. So I think that Amsterdam is definitely a city to watch in terms of scale-ups that pop up and the progress that they make. VICTORIA: I've heard a lot about new technologies and new solutions coming out of the Netherlands with agriculture specifically, but I am not surprised that there's a burgeoning startup community there. [laughs] That's wonderful. DANIËLLE: Yeah, it's quite exciting. VICTORIA: That's very cool. All right, is there anything that you expected me to ask that I did not ask? DANIËLLE: No, I can't think of anything off the top of my head. I think we covered quite a bit. VICTORIA: Yes. I'm watching the time and making sure that I'm giving you enough time. DANIËLLE: [laughs] VICTORIA: I liked this quote from your blog, actually, so I'll repeat it here, "Bad companies are destroyed by crises, good companies survive them, and great companies are improved by them." DANIËLLE: Yes, that is definitely one of my favorites. VICTORIA: Do you have an example of a company where they went through a crisis, and they came out great afterwards? DANIËLLE: I have a friend of mine, actually, that started a company called Limelights. And I think when he started this, he was so focused on marketing and development and so on. When the COVID crisis hit...and he's actually the one that shared that quote with me, we're close friends. He was sharing with me that quote and how he has completely revamped his company from a marketing company, which is basically the first thing that most companies...the expense they started cutting, to an online learning platform, and events, and team development program. So I think he's done this so successfully that his business started thriving during the COVID period. And still now, after when things are relatively normalized in the tech space and just the overall spend, he is doing better than he did before this happened. His story of his company was so inspirational to me. And we were talking about that quote, and I'm just like, that's it. That's exactly that innovative culture that you want to see in times of crisis. You don't want people to back down and say, "Oh, times are hard. Let's just ride this out." You want people to start looking around, like, how can we do this differently? And how can we navigate these new waters that we're in? And proactively be engaged with your environment to really find alternatives to what is happening. VICTORIA: I would guess that having a clear picture on your finances and your customer information would help you be able to make those pivots. Is that right? And how Paddle can help you get out of those [inaudible 23:21] DANIËLLE: Yes, that is definitely correct. [laughs] Like I said, we're an end-to-end platform. So you can literally have all of your data at the tip of your fingers to make sure that you make the right financial decisions in addition to us taking off some of the financial tasks off of your plate. Like I said, we want to do it for our customers, make sure that everything is running smoothly. So I think this is a massive opportunity for companies to have additional support in their processes because we take them over to a degree as well as indeed have clarity and transparency into their financial reporting and how their revenue streams are doing. VICTORIA: Right. Because I imagine that task that work to put all that together would take up a lot of founder's time. DANIËLLE: Yes. VICTORIA: So freeing up that time and giving you a chance to understand where you're at now, and where you can go, and be able to pivot in those times of crisis. DANIËLLE: Exactly. VICTORIA: That makes a lot of sense. Has Paddle found that offering free information or these tools like the Sales Tax Agony Index does that help you bring customers into your platform? DANIËLLE: Yes, definitely. I think there's a bit of humor here as well. Obviously, this was not put together by a finance person. [laughs] But I do love that our sales and marketing team is super creative in bringing the finance story and the tax story to life. I think as soon as people hear tax, if you can tune out, you do. So I think they've done a great job at pointing out the Sales Tax Agony Index, and they are not exaggerating. [laughs] In many of the jurisdictions, it is quite challenging. And I think one thing that makes it challenging as well...so while software is not new to most of us as users, software is still quite new to most governments, and most countries are not certain when or how to tax this. So I think everybody is trying to figure this out globally, which is where we can step into the space, as well as we do monitor the global landscape for taxes. The changes happen fast. They happen continuously. And implementation of taxes is not always logical because taxes are not always logical. So I think looking at the tax agony that our sales and marketing team has put together is definitely not an over-exaggeration. I think the risks are real for misunderstanding or misreading the tax laws that are in place, and so that's where we come in to really bring our experts and really dissect some of the meanings of these. We have partners globally to ensure compliance. I think that the tax that is charged on software can be so variable that, as a business by yourself, it's going to be super tricky to monitor. Like in some countries, the software is taxed locally only if you sell to a local customer. It is not taxed locally if it's sold internationally. So there are so many little hooks and needles. In some countries, you don't have to pay tax unless you exceed X amount of sales on your software. So all of these rules and regulations can be quite obstacles and blockers to rolling out your business globally. VICTORIA: Right. I hadn't even thought about a lot of that complexity. One of the things I'm excited about most with thoughtbot is that it's an international company. And so I'm out of my DC bubble, and we have customers in England and team members all over the world. So I think it's exciting that there's a product out there that can help you navigate things like taxes across all different countries, which I wouldn't have even thought would be that big of a problem, but apparently, it is. [laughs] DANIËLLE: And I think especially when you talk about the tax agony panel, you can also see what the challenges are, and worst penalties, and fines, and prison. VICTORIA: [laughs] Yeah, right? It's like, it's very difficult, and the agony is high, and the penalty is high. [laughter] So that's...you don't want to go to prison for accidentally misunderstanding the tax code. That's a real serious risk that you'd face. DANIËLLE: Yes, it is. [laughs] VICTORIA: Awesome. Do you want to do any final takeaways for our listeners today? DANIËLLE: I would say chin up. The economic downturn is not going to last forever. While it's good to look for opportunity to save costs, it's also a great opportunity and moment to look for the right investments to make to grow your company. VICTORIA: Wonderful. Well, thank you so much, Daniëlle. I really enjoyed our conversation. DANIËLLE: Thank you, Victoria. It was great meeting you. VICTORIA: You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Daniëlle Keeven.
Hello UK Giant Robots listeners! Our next event allows you to hear from and connect with both Founders and Investors on all things Fundraising. The event will be 1 part panel discussion and 1 part breakout sessions. We hope you can make it! Register today at: tbot.io/fundraising-uk (https://thoughtbot.com/events/fundraising-uk-event?utm_source=socials&utm_medium=socials&utm_campaign=UK%20fundraising%20event) Daniëlle Keeven is VP of Finance at Paddle, the only complete payments infrastructure provider for SaaS companies. Victoria talks to Daniëlle about helping companies with taxes while assuming the liability and risks associated with global tax compliance, financial literacy, and taking proactive measures and steps to manage cost effectively before it is required. Paddle (https://www.paddle.com/) Follow Paddle on Twitter (https://twitter.com/PaddleHQ), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/paddleteam/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/paddlehq/), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK1qyXbgE-kcGA4LMGdL7PA), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/paddle/). Follow Daniëlle on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/danielle-keeven/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: Hello, United Kingdom Giant Robots listeners! Our next event allows you to hear from and connect with both founders and investors on all things fundraising. The event will be one part panel discussion and one-part breakout sessions. We hope you can make it. Register today at tbot.io/fundraising-uk. VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Daniëlle Keeven, VP of Finance at Paddle, the only complete payments infrastructure provider for SaaS companies. Daniëlle, thank you for joining us. DANIËLLE: Hi, Victoria. Thank you for having me. Super excited to be here. VICTORIA: Wonderful. Yes, I'm excited to have you here and to hear a little bit about your background. I was curious how it was different going from a finance role in a large corporation like Marriott to the startup world and to Paddle. DANIËLLE: Well, Victoria, I was actually quite fortunate because even in the Marriotts and the Hyatts that I've been in in hospitality, I've been exposed to a lot of in the trench type of accounting and finance. Being in the Caribbean and just a Latam market, you learn to look at situations differently and make sure you work towards compliance. So I think that's really groomed me for stepping into the tech space as well, where I think following the money is the first directive of any finance professional walking into a scale-up or startup. So I think it's groomed me for the move. Booking was a little bit easier because it was also a little bit of leisure and travel. When I stepped into a telecom for MessageBird and then Paddle as a payments end-to-end provider of infrastructure, there was a little bit of a challenge there. But I love being part of a company now that's completely a finance product which has really given finance roles a partnership with product and engineering to partner in the way forward and design of the product. VICTORIA: Yes, that's exciting for us as well. And tell us a little bit about Paddle, actually. DANIËLLE: So Paddle is an end-to-end platform. We strive not to just help software companies; we strive to do the work for them to be able to roll out globally. So basically, Paddle is the only end-to-end infrastructure that will enable you to invoice your customers and get payments support, offering different payment methods, as well as make sure you're globally compliant and file your taxes so that you don't have to. I think what sets Paddle apart from a lot of other companies that are helping companies with tax is that we actually do it for you. In addition to that, we assume the full liability and risks associated to global tax compliance. VICTORIA: Right. Yes. And I saw a product that you all have or information that you shared called the Sales Tax Agony Index. Can you tell me a little bit about that? DANIËLLE: Well, I think, in general, tax is painful. [laughs] I think personal tax is painful. Anything that has to do with business tax is amplified significantly. And I think for software companies, often, you build a great product, and you want to bring it up to market. But then you're limited and slowed down from really expanding globally. I mean, that is where we come in to really take up the tax burden for software creators to be able to look at it as a stepping stone instead of a roadblock if that makes sense. VICTORIA: I think that makes a lot of sense. And it's interesting where we are right now with the current climate and economics that companies may be focusing on their finances to reduce cost but also to identify new areas to invest in, right? DANIËLLE: Yeah, right. And I think that's super interesting to me, which I keep saying I'm not sure why not all of the software world is on Paddle. Because I think if you look out there in the market, there's such a piecemeal solution to everything. So you have to, for example, if you're going to not build your own billing, you have to outsource buying software for your billing. You have to go find a payment provider that's compatible and then the resources to get them into your platform to make sure checkout is seamless. Then you have to get an accountant to reconcile your payment. You have to get customer support to support your customer payments. You have to get more additional headcount to make sure your chargebacks and your fraud rates stay down. And all of this, Paddle just does it for you, which I think especially in this climate where cost is becoming a subject, I think Paddle is a great business partner to enable software companies to grow at a reasonable cost and pricing, and really explore all of the global market out there versus having to do it yourself. VICTORIA: Right. And Paddle could maybe help you identify where your spend also has a high return on investment. Is that right? DANIËLLE: We do put you in direct contact with your customer, so your customers are not masked or anything like that. So you do have access to all of your customer data. And in addition to that, we've recently made an additional acquisition to grow the Paddle family by adding ProfitWell, which is really an expert in anything that has to do with retention and pricing. And we are working to integrate this product and make it available to our Paddle customers as well. So that is not something that is there today but soon will be. VICTORIA: Oh, interesting. And I read a recent interview that you did, and I liked how you connected retaining your customer base to your billing and invoicing process because that might be an afterthought for a lot of startups and founders. But it is really key in keeping your customers happy is having that easy billing and invoice process. Is that your perspective? DANIËLLE: Yeah. I definitely think that with any SaaS company, there's definitely something known as well as an abandoned cart like somebody that will, you know, maybe we do it ourselves as well when we go out shopping online. We drop stuff in our cart, and we never make it to checkout. And I think to make sure you optimize your checkout, and your revenue is to make sure that the process is as seamless as possible, that your customers can just flow through this process and not have any challenges during that journey to make sure that your conversion rates stay high. VICTORIA: Right. That makes a lot of sense. Do you have other insights about customer retention that may relate to the Paddle platform? DANIËLLE: I think what's unique for me as a finance professional looking at the Paddle product...given I am by little biased because I do work here, and I'm a big fan of our product. But I think, and I've talked about this often, there are so many software solutions or tools that finance folks are trying to be sold. We get them sold to us, like, oh, this will automate 100%, and this will reduce this, or this will reduce that. I think what Paddle does well and how we are uniquely positioned is that what should be automated is automated and what needs a human touch has a human touch. And what I mean with that as well is in the sense of your customers making a payment and having a challenge we actually offer customer support with real people. And we do support your customers to make sure that they have a pleasant journey in the checkout process or resolve any payment issues that they have. So I think we balance the two out. And it's similar to, for example, taxes as well. We automate what we can, but we have a team of tax analysts really looking at the data and making sure everything is running correctly and is exactly compliant as it should be. So I think we bring together the best of both worlds in saying we automate a portion of the journey and where we can use and should use the human touch and intellect we do so. So we're not promising 100% percent automation. We just promise that we will do it for you by combining the best of both worlds. VICTORIA: That makes sense, right? Because, at some point, the automation can become more effective than hiring. But how can you scale your business without having to double your finance reporting and your tax teams, right? DANIËLLE: And I fully agree. And I think you bring up a very interesting point. I think from my past; I had been at Booking where you were in a situation where you have an endless means of cash flow that you can really build your dream automation tools. I think a lot of the big automation that Booking has achieved in finance is really admirable, and a majority of it has been done in-house. So I think they've done a really great job with that. But then, when you step out of an organization like that into a smaller startup scale-up, you do not have infinite funds. You are talking mostly about cash burn and then your cash runway. And you do have to optimize between a decision of should I invest in tooling to automate? Or does it make sense for me to hire a person because hiring a person is more cost-effective than automating? I think in a cash-tight environment, you do have to evaluate what makes more sense; sometimes, it is hiring a person. Sometimes hiring one person will get you scaled for two years. And other times, if you looked at you will have to hire one or five people per year to do a certain task, then it makes sense definitely to invest in automation because the cost will be upfront, but the benefits will be scalable, and you'll have definitely benefits from that point. VICTORIA: And there's a mix of you need people to do the work, but you also need to give them the tools to be able to do their job, right? DANIËLLE: Yes, I think most of us in finance still find that Excel is our best friend. [laughs] VICTORIA: Well, I won't complain about Excel myself. I have a background in economics, an undergraduate, so I'm an Excel pro. DANIËLLE: Yeah, I think definitely Excel has brought us all a very long way. [laughs] VICTORIA: So what's different about your customers that you're targeting with Paddle? What's unique about them? DANIËLLE: I think what is unique about them is that we want to really bring the creator of softwares their dreams to life, which means it's almost like we want to dream with them if that makes sense. We want to make sure that whatever they build becomes available to the world, whether they are a small startup or a small company or if they are a giant in the industry and very good at their skills. So we want to target the entire market for software. And I think what makes them unique is that our customers are usually a fan of our product, but we are a fan of theirs. So I think, typically, that works both ways really well. VICTORIA: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. And do you find that your customers are facing a different set of challenges today than they might have a year ago? DANIËLLE: I think the SaaS industry has changed. I think it's no secret that definitely the economic landscape has shifted. I think we were very fortunate to close our Series D in very favorable circumstances before the climate changed. I do think it will change back, and I don't think this is all doom and gloom. But I also do think that we are all facing the situation where we should be taking proactive measures and steps to manage our cost effectively before it is actually required. For some of the SaaS industries, it may already be required, and for others, I think even those doing well should be mindful to take steps where possible. Cutting costs does not necessarily mean cutting quality or immediately reducing staff. I think it just is more taking a step back and critically looking at your spend to see, do I have opportunity to renegotiate existing contracts? Are there, especially in my cost of goods sold, can I get this reduced somehow without reducing the quality of my product and what we're delivering as a business? And I think these are very good and big opportunities that we can definitely seize in addition to our operational spend. Just taking a critical look at this can really go a long way. VICTORIA: That makes sense. It sounds like, as a VP of finance, those are things that you might be able to bring to the table. Or tell me more about how the role of a finance person plays in a startup in making some of those decisions. DANIËLLE: I think the role of a finance person is super critical in the sense of you're looking back to see what the spend was and where we've been and to look forward to what the trends will be. You're also trying to inspire vision and strategy and work together with the sales team to both have realistic forecasts on what we will do, can do, and what we'll actually deliver. And I think as a finance leader, more than ever, it is so needed for us to partner with the business instead of being chucked away in a corner somewhere processing financial reports or looking at them. So I think the finance literacy is definitely something that we can add to our organizations. I'll give you an example, as we rolled out our budget, it wasn't just to deliver it to the board or to our executive committee, but it was also to talk about it with our senior leadership. I think the senior leadership is also so critical to any organization to say, "Hey, we are going to commit together with our own leaders to make sure that we're executing the plan and that we will also get all of our teams to partner and create that buy-in as a company." So I think as a finance leader, it's not just my job to go out there and say, "Hey, we have to cut costs," but also to explain what is happening to the economic climate, why we have to cut costs, and what are the benefits of doing it before it is needed. And definitely paving the road to say, "Hey, this is beneficial for all of us because these are our financial goals that we can achieve, but we can only achieve them together." So I think creating that buy-in and building that team across the organization that is committed to the correct finance management is super critical in this day and age. It used to be that it was just finance's role to watch the finances; I think now it's a collaborative effort of the entire company. VICTORIA: I really like that I have a background in DevOps, and that's breaking down silos between different parts of the organization. And so I love to hear that finance is getting really involved and be a part of the overall decisions that everyone's making in the company, right? DANIËLLE: Yeah, definitely. VICTORIA: How does Paddle build stakeholder buy-in within the company? What does that process look like for you all? DANIËLLE: I think very early on, we identified that, obviously, our executive team is key. I think this is the tip of the arrow really leading the organization in giving vision and direction. I find that we've been very fortunate, in my humble opinion, because we have a great CEO and a great COO. And I really enjoy working with the entire executive team. They're just a wonderful group of people. Besides being amazing professionals, they're just generally nice, [chuckles] which is always great. But we've identified early on that actually your senior leadership right underneath that is so critical to your company's culture, how you hire, how you buy, how you move, how you invest, but also how would your future be like. Because while the executive team definitely is key in giving the direction, the vision, and mission, I think the team right underneath that, the senior leadership team, is really the one that is going to go out there and materialize that dream and vision, and really live that dream, and really get the right people and to get the job done. So I think what we've identified early on is to make everybody an active stakeholder, do the planning together. Like, before the executive team rolls out a mission and vision, it's not going to be a total surprise to the senior leadership. We've all taken part of it, and we've all supported it, and we've discussed it, and we've fine-tuned it. So I think definitely taking people along in the journey goes a long way. The other thing I think that is very critical is just being transparent and being honest. At the end of the day, we're people. We want to know what's happening, why it's happening, and what we're working towards. And I think that is something that Paddle has done very well as well internally as a team. We have great values and great focus on what we want to deliver, where we want to go, and we definitely are focused on doing so together. VICTORIA: That sounds great. You all have a shared vision of where you're going and where you are currently. And that probably helps get everyone on board with what we're working on in the future. It gets everyone motivated a little bit more, right? DANIËLLE: Correct. Exactly. VICTORIA: So, is there anything particularly exciting coming up with Paddle that you are looking forward to? DANIËLLE: I think I'm super excited to see what ProfitWell, how it will integrate, and the product that it will offer, and the opportunities that it will offer to our Paddle customers. I'm super excited to see that materialize and seeing all of this come together. We've been waiting, and we've been working towards this deal for a very long time, so seeing it materialize is quite exciting. And I'm definitely looking forward to that. VICTORIA: And do you think that that cultural strength you mentioned with Paddle and having that transparency and quality of support from the leadership does that help translate when you're doing big deals like that and closing deals with other companies? DANIËLLE: Yeah, it definitely does. I think, in general, the finance team has had quite an exciting first half of the year. I want to say, you know, being in Series D, having due diligence done, ProfitWell, at the same time preparing for an audit, having your financial team build out your reporting. I think we've had so many things run at the same time, and the pressures are quite high. So I think just having that positive culture together as a team gives you strength as well together to be your best self under pressure instead of really crumbling or not getting along and struggling with it. VICTORIA: Yeah, that makes total sense. If you feel like you're supported by other humans in your company, [laughs] then when you're stressed, it makes it easier to get along. That makes a lot of sense. Do you have any other advice for finance leaders or startups who are navigating the economic downturn at this time? DANIËLLE: I would say keep an eye open. Do not stop investing. Do be critical about your ROI. Make sure that where you're spending your money is where it makes the most sense for the business, and just keep an eye out for opportunity. Because just because the climate has turned does not mean that it will not turn back, and it does mean that there are loads of opportunities out there that we can still seize as a business. VICTORIA: Right. It means that different markets are more active, right? [laughs] DANIËLLE: Usually. Correct. VICTORIA: Do you have any questions for me or for thoughtbot? DANIËLLE: I'm just curious, for you as well, what's your favorite subject that you discuss on thoughtbot? VICTORIA: Ooh, a favorite subject. That's tough because I love hearing from our designers and our developers. We have many developers who are some core contributors to Rails, and so they are very knowledgeable about things like we have random meetups that happen at thoughtbot. So you can sign up and just randomly pair up with somebody else in the company. And the first random meetup I had, I met up with someone who is like the expert on security [laughs] and dotfiles and helped me finish setting up my developer environment. And so I love that at thoughtbot, you can start a random conversation with someone, and they'll end up having this wealth of knowledge around a particular subject that you might have been struggling with and can just immediately solve your problem. I also like the fun parts. There's actually a blog that just captures all of our jokes from Slack [laughter] just… So it's a part of like making it fun and being human at work and kind of showing up with your whole self. I think that adds a cultural strength for those moments like you describe when things are difficult, or you have a hard project. You feel bonded to your teammates and feel like you're all working together, and that positivity stays throughout. DANIËLLE: Yes, definitely. VICTORIA: So, are you currently in Amsterdam? Is that right? DANIËLLE: I am based in the Netherlands. I'm actually based in Alkmaar, which is 30 minutes outside of Amsterdam, but I typically say Amsterdam because that's the city that most people know where it's at. [laughs] VICTORIA: Same for me. I go with San Diego, but I'm actually in Encinitas. It's a little bit further north. So is there a difference, or what is the startup environment or community like in Europe then? DANIËLLE: I think I'm quite impressed because before moving to the Netherlands, I wasn't aware there was so much happening, but there are actually some channels called Silicon Canals, so the canals for the boats, so it's a bit of a play on words. And there's such a vibrant startup and scale-up community in the Netherlands, which was quite surprising for me to run into. So I do think by nature...I was born in the Netherlands, and I moved to Aruba when I was five. So I wasn't raised here. But I think if I look at the Dutch culture, it is quite innovative. And they do tend to find different ways of doing things when it comes to water or building dams. And I think that curiosity and innovation has moved over to the tech space. So I think that Amsterdam is definitely a city to watch in terms of scale-ups that pop up and the progress that they make. VICTORIA: I've heard a lot about new technologies and new solutions coming out of the Netherlands with agriculture specifically, but I am not surprised that there's a burgeoning startup community there. [laughs] That's wonderful. DANIËLLE: Yeah, it's quite exciting. VICTORIA: That's very cool. All right, is there anything that you expected me to ask that I did not ask? DANIËLLE: No, I can't think of anything off the top of my head. I think we covered quite a bit. VICTORIA: Yes. I'm watching the time and making sure that I'm giving you enough time. DANIËLLE: [laughs] VICTORIA: I liked this quote from your blog, actually, so I'll repeat it here, "Bad companies are destroyed by crises, good companies survive them, and great companies are improved by them." DANIËLLE: Yes, that is definitely one of my favorites. VICTORIA: Do you have an example of a company where they went through a crisis, and they came out great afterwards? DANIËLLE: I have a friend of mine, actually, that started a company called Limelights. And I think when he started this, he was so focused on marketing and development and so on. When the COVID crisis hit...and he's actually the one that shared that quote with me, we're close friends. He was sharing with me that quote and how he has completely revamped his company from a marketing company, which is basically the first thing that most companies...the expense they started cutting, to an online learning platform, and events, and team development program. So I think he's done this so successfully that his business started thriving during the COVID period. And still now, after when things are relatively normalized in the tech space and just the overall spend, he is doing better than he did before this happened. His story of his company was so inspirational to me. And we were talking about that quote, and I'm just like, that's it. That's exactly that innovative culture that you want to see in times of crisis. You don't want people to back down and say, "Oh, times are hard. Let's just ride this out." You want people to start looking around, like, how can we do this differently? And how can we navigate these new waters that we're in? And proactively be engaged with your environment to really find alternatives to what is happening. VICTORIA: I would guess that having a clear picture on your finances and your customer information would help you be able to make those pivots. Is that right? And how Paddle can help you get out of those [inaudible 23:21] DANIËLLE: Yes, that is definitely correct. [laughs] Like I said, we're an end-to-end platform. So you can literally have all of your data at the tip of your fingers to make sure that you make the right financial decisions in addition to us taking off some of the financial tasks off of your plate. Like I said, we want to do it for our customers, make sure that everything is running smoothly. So I think this is a massive opportunity for companies to have additional support in their processes because we take them over to a degree as well as indeed have clarity and transparency into their financial reporting and how their revenue streams are doing. VICTORIA: Right. Because I imagine that task that work to put all that together would take up a lot of founder's time. DANIËLLE: Yes. VICTORIA: So freeing up that time and giving you a chance to understand where you're at now, and where you can go, and be able to pivot in those times of crisis. DANIËLLE: Exactly. VICTORIA: That makes a lot of sense. Has Paddle found that offering free information or these tools like the Sales Tax Agony Index does that help you bring customers into your platform? DANIËLLE: Yes, definitely. I think there's a bit of humor here as well. Obviously, this was not put together by a finance person. [laughs] But I do love that our sales and marketing team is super creative in bringing the finance story and the tax story to life. I think as soon as people hear tax, if you can tune out, you do. So I think they've done a great job at pointing out the Sales Tax Agony Index, and they are not exaggerating. [laughs] In many of the jurisdictions, it is quite challenging. And I think one thing that makes it challenging as well...so while software is not new to most of us as users, software is still quite new to most governments, and most countries are not certain when or how to tax this. So I think everybody is trying to figure this out globally, which is where we can step into the space, as well as we do monitor the global landscape for taxes. The changes happen fast. They happen continuously. And implementation of taxes is not always logical because taxes are not always logical. So I think looking at the tax agony that our sales and marketing team has put together is definitely not an over-exaggeration. I think the risks are real for misunderstanding or misreading the tax laws that are in place, and so that's where we come in to really bring our experts and really dissect some of the meanings of these. We have partners globally to ensure compliance. I think that the tax that is charged on software can be so variable that, as a business by yourself, it's going to be super tricky to monitor. Like in some countries, the software is taxed locally only if you sell to a local customer. It is not taxed locally if it's sold internationally. So there are so many little hooks and needles. In some countries, you don't have to pay tax unless you exceed X amount of sales on your software. So all of these rules and regulations can be quite obstacles and blockers to rolling out your business globally. VICTORIA: Right. I hadn't even thought about a lot of that complexity. One of the things I'm excited about most with thoughtbot is that it's an international company. And so I'm out of my DC bubble, and we have customers in England and team members all over the world. So I think it's exciting that there's a product out there that can help you navigate things like taxes across all different countries, which I wouldn't have even thought would be that big of a problem, but apparently, it is. [laughs] DANIËLLE: And I think especially when you talk about the tax agony panel, you can also see what the challenges are, and worst penalties, and fines, and prison. VICTORIA: [laughs] Yeah, right? It's like, it's very difficult, and the agony is high, and the penalty is high. [laughter] So that's...you don't want to go to prison for accidentally misunderstanding the tax code. That's a real serious risk that you'd face. DANIËLLE: Yes, it is. [laughs] VICTORIA: Awesome. Do you want to do any final takeaways for our listeners today? DANIËLLE: I would say chin up. The economic downturn is not going to last forever. While it's good to look for opportunity to save costs, it's also a great opportunity and moment to look for the right investments to make to grow your company. VICTORIA: Wonderful. Well, thank you so much, Daniëlle. I really enjoyed our conversation. DANIËLLE: Thank you, Victoria. It was great meeting you. VICTORIA: You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Daniëlle Keeven.
Hello UK Giant Robots listeners! Our next event allows you to hear from and connect with both Founders and Investors on all things Fundraising. The event will be 1 part panel discussion and 1 part breakout sessions. We hope you can make it! Register today at: tbot.io/fundraising-uk (https://thoughtbot.com/events/fundraising-uk-event?utm_source=socials&utm_medium=socials&utm_campaign=UK%20fundraising%20event) Göran Sandahl is Director of Growth at Airbrake LogicMonitor, frictionless error monitoring and performance insights for your entire app stack. Victoria talks to Göran about having a product-led growth engine, how Airbrake can help developers identify and solve errors and bugs in applications, and developing a product geared towards a specific segment of the market. Airbrake (https://www.airbrake.io/) Follow Airbrake on Twitter (https://twitter.com/airbrake/), GitHub (https://github.com/airbrake/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/airbrake.io), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/c/airbrakechannel), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/airbrake-io/). Follow Göran on Twitter (https://twitter.com/gsandahl) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/goransandahl/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is The Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Göran Sandahl, Director of Growth at Airbrake LogicMonitor, frictionless error monitoring and performance insights for your entire app stack. Göran, thank you for joining us. GÖRAN: Thanks for having me. VICTORIA: Wonderful. So just tell me a little bit more about Airbrake and how it all got started. GÖRAN: So Airbrake is, as you said, an error and performance monitoring tool. It was actually, funnily enough, started as a side-project within thoughtbot. So it's a little bit full circle here joining this podcast here. But I'm a recent addition to Airbrake, so I don't know the details of the time when they started over ten years ago. So talking about Airbrake and the journey since then, lots of things have happened with Airbrake. It has gone through multiple acquisitions since then, both from industry players on the infrastructure side to various venture capital investors buying the company. And now Airbrake is owned by LogicMonitor, who bought Airbrake somewhat like a year ago. And it focuses exclusively on the developer audience for LogicMonitor. And I lead growth, so I work with our growth team. We have a product-led growth engine. So we don't do a lot of traditional sales or anything like that, so a lot of it is word of mouth. And this is something that drew me to Airbrake was its strong kind of grassroots movement in Ruby and other web and application languages. So that's what I know about Airbrake's early days, which isn't a lot. VICTORIA: Right. It was the very first exception monitoring service in the world. And we grew it to have three people working full time on it. And then, like what you said, it was sold to someone else who went on to continue to grow it. And it has been through several acquisitions. And from your perspective today, where is this service originally called Hoptoad [laughs], and then now it's Airbrake? And what kind of scale are you seeing? What are your customers like today? GÖRAN: Obviously, I don't know exactly how the product looked like back then. But a lot of it, I think, has stayed the same. It focuses on simple error monitoring, simple performance monitoring, and simple deployment tracking. So it's pretty much the same focus I believe in the product. This is what makes it stand out still today. We can talk about observability, and happy to do that. This is my third company that I've been working for as a monitoring company, so I know fairly a bit about it. Airbrake today is heavily focused on...we focus on what we call lean dev teams. We focus on the teams that try to move a little bit quicker, maybe than what they may, doesn't necessarily have the backup of an ops team or a DevOps team. So we really focus on building a product that is fully self-service that you can get started within a minute on your own. So that implies good UX, good documentation, and also that we can meet our users where they are. So we're focusing today on things like community building and those things for supporting our users. So we have lots of customers, really good brand names. First and foremost, super interesting stories from many of our customers who navigate that art of building product quickly. VICTORIA: That's great. I like that you phrased it as your user experience, which is your development teams, right? And do you have more of a perspective around the developer experience and how to capture that and really create something that's useful when you're delivering in those high-velocity environments? GÖRAN: As I said, I've been working for three monitoring companies. The first one I founded was 12 years ago. We built a product that we tried to coin the market called algorithmic monitoring, that later turned into something called AIOps. Yeah, there are a lot of buzzwords around that, applying AI to identifying problems in software. We were really early on that. One thing that we learned from that journey...we ended up selling that company to LogicMonitor, which is why I'm eventually here. What we learned then is that you can have a really good monitoring product, but ultimately, the people that fix the problem that gets discovered is the most important person for a monitoring tool to get into true effectiveness. So when I came across Airbrake, when they were acquired by LogicMonitor, and I had the opportunity to join, that's what drove me to decide to join. It's really that simplicity in terms of I think there are two schools, right? Either you promote a tool that all your software engineers should use, and you try to build centralized, structured processes around that. You make the template thing and things like that so that everybody can get up and running really quickly with monitoring. Or you take the approach of something like Airbrake, where it's built to be easy. If you know the language, if you know the code, then you know how to basically instrument it. And these features are simple enough to get going on your own. So that's the path that Airbrake is on. So it's built to be simple from the gate, so to speak. Now, Airbrake and monitoring and observability is a complicated problem when you have software issues. They're not always easy to diagnose or get to the root cause of. So there's a lot of struggle for users to unwind the bugs and actually fix them. But we try to do the best to provide enough context so they can take the next step. VICTORIA: And maybe you have an example or something to illustrate how that tool can help developers identify and solve those errors and bugs in the application. GÖRAN: All software has issues, right? There are bugs in all kinds of software. I've always been fascinated with something called latent bugs, or dark death is another framing of it, which is essentially the bugs that are hidden in your code. And when we have an outage, something triggers that bug to happen, but that bug was there. So if we think about it like that, that all of our software, all the code we run, all the commits we do is probably adding a lot of value, but they're also adding fragility or potential for problems, then you need to be really good at identifying when those bugs get activated. And sometimes, actually in, the majority of times...so that's why you need error monitoring, right? Just the ability to see that there is an error, there's a new error in production or in our staging environment, or wherever it might be. So that's error monitoring. It turns out about 80% of outages are self-inflicted in a way. They're caused by the changes when we build software or when we reconfigure things. And 80% that means that you need to be able to track changes really well. So you need to understand how and when changes happen so you can understand if what you did worked or didn't, so that's why we have deployment tracking, to be able to correlate those errors with the release, the commit, the line of code you added to the codebase. And then, of course, performance monitoring which is the ability to see where you have bottlenecks, which is not maybe bugs but where you have poor performance or poor experience for users. And it could be in a shopping cart checkout job. It could also be a scheduled cron job that's supposed to clean up stuff that is late. It could be just a rendering time of something that is longer than usual, and you just want to be aware of it. So that is kind of performance monitoring. So those are the three main focuses for us as a product. We like to believe that it is easy to get going within a couple of minutes. And that's what we're kind of focusing on providing. VICTORIA: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense to me. And your tool is able to just spin up quickly, be able to quickly get that insight into what's happening as you're deploying code and as you're pushing changes to production. Do you call that all observability? Or, in your mind, what is observability? And what are the really key things that you think that all developers should be watching? GÖRAN: That is a good question. Part of what fascinates me about the Airbrake userbase and what I've got to learn about Ruby and some of those languages which were a little bit foreign to me as a backend engineer, like an algorithm junkie, so to speak...so what fascinates me is how little monitoring is typically done by many teams that's working on web applications. So coming from the infrastructure monitoring side, that's where this term observability grew. And you have these metrics, logs, and traces kind of triad. And every web application, every web browser has had tracing built in the developer console or the web browser. So some of these tools that are available now to infrastructure monitoring teams in the form of observability have been available to web developers for quite some time, so I don't necessarily think observability is a term that explains a lot for applications and web developers. But for infrastructure, more infrastructure-oriented teams where you have lots of microservices and things like that, we needed a term to explain the full range of capabilities we needed. But I'm not so sure we need the similar amount of complexity because there is a lot of complexity in those tools and lots of data. But I'm not so sure we need the same complexity when speaking about monitoring on slightly more lightweight applications and web apps. That said, we're starting to mimic a lot of the architectural paradigms of the infrastructure, such as microservices, in terms of micro frontends. So a lot of that complexity is entering into the web as well. So, who knows? [laughs] MIDROLL AD: Are your engineers spending too much time on DevOps and maintenance issues when you need them on new features? We know maintaining your own servers can be costly and that it’s easy for spending creep to sneak in when your team isn’t looking. By delegating server management, maintenance, and security to thoughtbot and our network of service partners, you can get 24x7 support from our team of experts, all for less than the cost of one in-house engineer. Save time and money with our DevOps and Maintenance service. Find out more at: tbot.io/devops. VICTORIA: So the customer or clients for Airbrake are developers who are doing web applications and need that kind of just the information they need [chuckles] to be able to make sure their changes to code is not affecting the production and that your product is trending towards observability practices that might be a little overmatch to what you will need. GÖRAN: Yeah, that is what we're focusing on. But when you have a lot of customers and a lot of users, there's always this exotic, for us, exotic use cases. So I'm 100% sure there are really large customers that are using us in a more traditional DevOps fashion and not on web apps. I mean, we have support for most of the languages from Go to Python to .NET to Ruby. So there's nothing keeping Go developers from adopting something like Airbrake. But we do know that we're particularly strong within JavaScript and Ruby, and I think that speaks for the experience that it's easy to get going, et cetera, rather than something like Grafana or another more traditional observability tool that's a little bit out of reach maybe for the web or application developer. VICTORIA: So when you're developing your product towards this specific segment of the market, what other differences do you notice between who you're targeting or who you're expecting your customer to be versus the wider range of people you could be marketing this towards? GÖRAN: So I think everybody wants to go after the developer and the needs of the developer. This is, so to speak, trendy nowadays. And it's obvious because so much of the value and innovation happening is done [chuckles] in the editor. So it's natural that a lot of the focus is being placed there. We're focusing on where we're strong, and I think that's the best way to do it unless the market is small. And I see application development growing for the foreseeable future. I think we're seeing trends of things like no-code, or low-code, or whatever we choose to call it. The infrastructure is being abstracted more and more. So from that perspective, I think we have a good strategy for providing that simplicity that users come to expect when building modern apps today. We're pairing with other kinds of innovations on how you build code, basically from things like Vercel to Webflow to whatever it might be, right? VICTORIA: Right. And do you find that collaborative approach is more effective in business-to-business sales for this type of client? GÖRAN: We're very focused on this just try it kind of approach, so that's how we do most of our direct communications with our users. So we want to let the app speak for itself. And we believe that once usage happens, then additional needs will happen or will arise that we can maybe serve in other ways. So we do have a free tier, free forever free tier, so you can use Airbrake pretty much forever but in a small scale. And then, like normal, when you start adding colleagues or lots of errors and lots of projects, then you need to upgrade to a paid plan. And we're also launching some new tiers here in the foreseeable future as well. VICTORIA: Oh, tell me more about that. GÖRAN: As teams mature...I don't know if that's the right word, but at some point, a lot of these teams may want a little bit more structure when they do monitoring. So I mentioned that we're pretty much self-service, completely self-service. But at some point, when you start using a product a lot, you start to integrate it into your core processes. So new things start to matter, things like who did that change? Who reconfigured that? Who logged in the last time? Has anybody seen that thing? But also to things like payment things. The different issues that can arise change, right? VICTORIA: Mm-hmm. GÖRAN: So we're launching a pro tier in the future that will cater to a little bit more of the needs of the team that has grown into maybe having a manager that asks questions about how things are set up, et cetera, but also, where you can control teams and people a little bit better, where you can also control your costs a little bit. So one of the features is on-demand billing. So the more errors you pay on your tier...you can produce up to a certain set of errors and performance events, and if you go above that, you pay an on-demand fee. And there are some protections built in for that if you're on the pro plan and things like that. So it's about catering to growing needs of a little bit larger teams but still the team that wants to move fast. VICTORIA: Right. And I believe you said that you have plans to communicate and engage with the community, and that probably helps you understand some of those needs. And so what kind of plans do you have coming up that you'd like to share? GÖRAN: So one of the things we know is with all the Airbrake use, we probably have a lot of fans out there, but we might not have been the best to actually tap into that and serve that community. So we want to really invest in understanding, getting to know that community, and serving that in the best way we can. So we will see exactly which form that will take. But it starts with the basics, opening up a Slack community that we can allow users to join and ask questions or maybe hopefully get value out of their peers without talking to us maybe. But we can also serve them in various ways with support, et cetera. So it will start pretty basic, but I think it's a pretty standard playbook nowadays. But for us, it's really about we're genuinely...we think our users are awesome, and we would love to be able to share their stories and connect them with other peers. So I think that's the driving motivation. And then, of course, we have some data that also shows that it is a good investment in itself, that the stories our customers tell are much better than the stories we tell. So yeah, we're excited about that for sure. And it's connected to this bottoms up motion from where Airbrake grew from, that it grew as a solution that served the community really well. And we want to go back to those roots and be the best tool for that kind of user. VICTORIA: Oh, I love that. It sounds like a really great, full-circle journey for the product. And is there anything else you want to share about entrepreneurship and starting up products like this? What advice would you give to someone who had developed this type of product that served the community well and wanted to turn it into a product and a business? GÖRAN: So I think the community building is relatively new for us, so I'm not sure the advice there is so valuable. But in terms of entrepreneurship, I think this is one of the more important decisions you make as an entrepreneur or founder is how will you grow demand for your product and how will you distribute the product? And how will you ultimately monetize the product? And there are so many different ways. And depending on what your growth expectations are, you might be asked to go in one direction or another one. And my advice would be to really find product-market fit and that I think happens best by staying close to the end users, and then you can look at strategies for monetization, including direct sales or channel or, as Airbrake does, product-led freemium basically. But reach product-market fit first so you can decide with knowing how your product dynamics and adoption dynamics works, and let that influence the kind of strategy for the business strategy basically rather than the other way around. VICTORIA: Right. That makes sense. And then, if your product is geared towards developers, they're just like any other users. And you have to reach them and get their feedback and understand how the product fits into the market. GÖRAN: Yeah, exactly. VICTORIA: Yeah. Great. All right. Do you have any questions for me at this time? GÖRAN: Not really. It was a pleasure being on the podcast. I'm a fan so hope you can cover up my errors there. [laughter] VICTORIA: I think that if you want to go back and remove, we totally can. But are there any other major takeaways you want people to walk away with about Airbrake or, in general, about entrepreneurship? GÖRAN: That's about it, I think. VICTORIA: All right. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Göran Sandahl.
Hello UK Giant Robots listeners! Our next event allows you to hear from and connect with both Founders and Investors on all things Fundraising. The event will be 1 part panel discussion and 1 part breakout sessions. We hope you can make it! Register today at: tbot.io/fundraising-uk (https://thoughtbot.com/events/fundraising-uk-event?utm_source=socials&utm_medium=socials&utm_campaign=UK%20fundraising%20event) Göran Sandahl is Director of Growth at Airbrake LogicMonitor, frictionless error monitoring and performance insights for your entire app stack. Victoria talks to Göran about having a product-led growth engine, how Airbrake can help developers identify and solve errors and bugs in applications, and developing a product geared towards a specific segment of the market. Airbrake (https://www.airbrake.io/) Follow Airbrake on Twitter (https://twitter.com/airbrake/), GitHub (https://github.com/airbrake/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/airbrake.io), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/c/airbrakechannel), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/airbrake-io/). Follow Göran on Twitter (https://twitter.com/gsandahl) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/goransandahl/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is The Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Göran Sandahl, Director of Growth at Airbrake LogicMonitor, frictionless error monitoring and performance insights for your entire app stack. Göran, thank you for joining us. GÖRAN: Thanks for having me. VICTORIA: Wonderful. So just tell me a little bit more about Airbrake and how it all got started. GÖRAN: So Airbrake is, as you said, an error and performance monitoring tool. It was actually, funnily enough, started as a side-project within thoughtbot. So it's a little bit full circle here joining this podcast here. But I'm a recent addition to Airbrake, so I don't know the details of the time when they started over ten years ago. So talking about Airbrake and the journey since then, lots of things have happened with Airbrake. It has gone through multiple acquisitions since then, both from industry players on the infrastructure side to various venture capital investors buying the company. And now Airbrake is owned by LogicMonitor, who bought Airbrake somewhat like a year ago. And it focuses exclusively on the developer audience for LogicMonitor. And I lead growth, so I work with our growth team. We have a product-led growth engine. So we don't do a lot of traditional sales or anything like that, so a lot of it is word of mouth. And this is something that drew me to Airbrake was its strong kind of grassroots movement in Ruby and other web and application languages. So that's what I know about Airbrake's early days, which isn't a lot. VICTORIA: Right. It was the very first exception monitoring service in the world. And we grew it to have three people working full time on it. And then, like what you said, it was sold to someone else who went on to continue to grow it. And it has been through several acquisitions. And from your perspective today, where is this service originally called Hoptoad [laughs], and then now it's Airbrake? And what kind of scale are you seeing? What are your customers like today? GÖRAN: Obviously, I don't know exactly how the product looked like back then. But a lot of it, I think, has stayed the same. It focuses on simple error monitoring, simple performance monitoring, and simple deployment tracking. So it's pretty much the same focus I believe in the product. This is what makes it stand out still today. We can talk about observability, and happy to do that. This is my third company that I've been working for as a monitoring company, so I know fairly a bit about it. Airbrake today is heavily focused on...we focus on what we call lean dev teams. We focus on the teams that try to move a little bit quicker, maybe than what they may, doesn't necessarily have the backup of an ops team or a DevOps team. So we really focus on building a product that is fully self-service that you can get started within a minute on your own. So that implies good UX, good documentation, and also that we can meet our users where they are. So we're focusing today on things like community building and those things for supporting our users. So we have lots of customers, really good brand names. First and foremost, super interesting stories from many of our customers who navigate that art of building product quickly. VICTORIA: That's great. I like that you phrased it as your user experience, which is your development teams, right? And do you have more of a perspective around the developer experience and how to capture that and really create something that's useful when you're delivering in those high-velocity environments? GÖRAN: As I said, I've been working for three monitoring companies. The first one I founded was 12 years ago. We built a product that we tried to coin the market called algorithmic monitoring, that later turned into something called AIOps. Yeah, there are a lot of buzzwords around that, applying AI to identifying problems in software. We were really early on that. One thing that we learned from that journey...we ended up selling that company to LogicMonitor, which is why I'm eventually here. What we learned then is that you can have a really good monitoring product, but ultimately, the people that fix the problem that gets discovered is the most important person for a monitoring tool to get into true effectiveness. So when I came across Airbrake, when they were acquired by LogicMonitor, and I had the opportunity to join, that's what drove me to decide to join. It's really that simplicity in terms of I think there are two schools, right? Either you promote a tool that all your software engineers should use, and you try to build centralized, structured processes around that. You make the template thing and things like that so that everybody can get up and running really quickly with monitoring. Or you take the approach of something like Airbrake, where it's built to be easy. If you know the language, if you know the code, then you know how to basically instrument it. And these features are simple enough to get going on your own. So that's the path that Airbrake is on. So it's built to be simple from the gate, so to speak. Now, Airbrake and monitoring and observability is a complicated problem when you have software issues. They're not always easy to diagnose or get to the root cause of. So there's a lot of struggle for users to unwind the bugs and actually fix them. But we try to do the best to provide enough context so they can take the next step. VICTORIA: And maybe you have an example or something to illustrate how that tool can help developers identify and solve those errors and bugs in the application. GÖRAN: All software has issues, right? There are bugs in all kinds of software. I've always been fascinated with something called latent bugs, or dark death is another framing of it, which is essentially the bugs that are hidden in your code. And when we have an outage, something triggers that bug to happen, but that bug was there. So if we think about it like that, that all of our software, all the code we run, all the commits we do is probably adding a lot of value, but they're also adding fragility or potential for problems, then you need to be really good at identifying when those bugs get activated. And sometimes, actually in, the majority of times...so that's why you need error monitoring, right? Just the ability to see that there is an error, there's a new error in production or in our staging environment, or wherever it might be. So that's error monitoring. It turns out about 80% of outages are self-inflicted in a way. They're caused by the changes when we build software or when we reconfigure things. And 80% that means that you need to be able to track changes really well. So you need to understand how and when changes happen so you can understand if what you did worked or didn't, so that's why we have deployment tracking, to be able to correlate those errors with the release, the commit, the line of code you added to the codebase. And then, of course, performance monitoring which is the ability to see where you have bottlenecks, which is not maybe bugs but where you have poor performance or poor experience for users. And it could be in a shopping cart checkout job. It could also be a scheduled cron job that's supposed to clean up stuff that is late. It could be just a rendering time of something that is longer than usual, and you just want to be aware of it. So that is kind of performance monitoring. So those are the three main focuses for us as a product. We like to believe that it is easy to get going within a couple of minutes. And that's what we're kind of focusing on providing. VICTORIA: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense to me. And your tool is able to just spin up quickly, be able to quickly get that insight into what's happening as you're deploying code and as you're pushing changes to production. Do you call that all observability? Or, in your mind, what is observability? And what are the really key things that you think that all developers should be watching? GÖRAN: That is a good question. Part of what fascinates me about the Airbrake userbase and what I've got to learn about Ruby and some of those languages which were a little bit foreign to me as a backend engineer, like an algorithm junkie, so to speak...so what fascinates me is how little monitoring is typically done by many teams that's working on web applications. So coming from the infrastructure monitoring side, that's where this term observability grew. And you have these metrics, logs, and traces kind of triad. And every web application, every web browser has had tracing built in the developer console or the web browser. So some of these tools that are available now to infrastructure monitoring teams in the form of observability have been available to web developers for quite some time, so I don't necessarily think observability is a term that explains a lot for applications and web developers. But for infrastructure, more infrastructure-oriented teams where you have lots of microservices and things like that, we needed a term to explain the full range of capabilities we needed. But I'm not so sure we need the similar amount of complexity because there is a lot of complexity in those tools and lots of data. But I'm not so sure we need the same complexity when speaking about monitoring on slightly more lightweight applications and web apps. That said, we're starting to mimic a lot of the architectural paradigms of the infrastructure, such as microservices, in terms of micro frontends. So a lot of that complexity is entering into the web as well. So, who knows? [laughs] MIDROLL AD: Are your engineers spending too much time on DevOps and maintenance issues when you need them on new features? We know maintaining your own servers can be costly and that it’s easy for spending creep to sneak in when your team isn’t looking. By delegating server management, maintenance, and security to thoughtbot and our network of service partners, you can get 24x7 support from our team of experts, all for less than the cost of one in-house engineer. Save time and money with our DevOps and Maintenance service. Find out more at: tbot.io/devops. VICTORIA: So the customer or clients for Airbrake are developers who are doing web applications and need that kind of just the information they need [chuckles] to be able to make sure their changes to code is not affecting the production and that your product is trending towards observability practices that might be a little overmatch to what you will need. GÖRAN: Yeah, that is what we're focusing on. But when you have a lot of customers and a lot of users, there's always this exotic, for us, exotic use cases. So I'm 100% sure there are really large customers that are using us in a more traditional DevOps fashion and not on web apps. I mean, we have support for most of the languages from Go to Python to .NET to Ruby. So there's nothing keeping Go developers from adopting something like Airbrake. But we do know that we're particularly strong within JavaScript and Ruby, and I think that speaks for the experience that it's easy to get going, et cetera, rather than something like Grafana or another more traditional observability tool that's a little bit out of reach maybe for the web or application developer. VICTORIA: So when you're developing your product towards this specific segment of the market, what other differences do you notice between who you're targeting or who you're expecting your customer to be versus the wider range of people you could be marketing this towards? GÖRAN: So I think everybody wants to go after the developer and the needs of the developer. This is, so to speak, trendy nowadays. And it's obvious because so much of the value and innovation happening is done [chuckles] in the editor. So it's natural that a lot of the focus is being placed there. We're focusing on where we're strong, and I think that's the best way to do it unless the market is small. And I see application development growing for the foreseeable future. I think we're seeing trends of things like no-code, or low-code, or whatever we choose to call it. The infrastructure is being abstracted more and more. So from that perspective, I think we have a good strategy for providing that simplicity that users come to expect when building modern apps today. We're pairing with other kinds of innovations on how you build code, basically from things like Vercel to Webflow to whatever it might be, right? VICTORIA: Right. And do you find that collaborative approach is more effective in business-to-business sales for this type of client? GÖRAN: We're very focused on this just try it kind of approach, so that's how we do most of our direct communications with our users. So we want to let the app speak for itself. And we believe that once usage happens, then additional needs will happen or will arise that we can maybe serve in other ways. So we do have a free tier, free forever free tier, so you can use Airbrake pretty much forever but in a small scale. And then, like normal, when you start adding colleagues or lots of errors and lots of projects, then you need to upgrade to a paid plan. And we're also launching some new tiers here in the foreseeable future as well. VICTORIA: Oh, tell me more about that. GÖRAN: As teams mature...I don't know if that's the right word, but at some point, a lot of these teams may want a little bit more structure when they do monitoring. So I mentioned that we're pretty much self-service, completely self-service. But at some point, when you start using a product a lot, you start to integrate it into your core processes. So new things start to matter, things like who did that change? Who reconfigured that? Who logged in the last time? Has anybody seen that thing? But also to things like payment things. The different issues that can arise change, right? VICTORIA: Mm-hmm. GÖRAN: So we're launching a pro tier in the future that will cater to a little bit more of the needs of the team that has grown into maybe having a manager that asks questions about how things are set up, et cetera, but also, where you can control teams and people a little bit better, where you can also control your costs a little bit. So one of the features is on-demand billing. So the more errors you pay on your tier...you can produce up to a certain set of errors and performance events, and if you go above that, you pay an on-demand fee. And there are some protections built in for that if you're on the pro plan and things like that. So it's about catering to growing needs of a little bit larger teams but still the team that wants to move fast. VICTORIA: Right. And I believe you said that you have plans to communicate and engage with the community, and that probably helps you understand some of those needs. And so what kind of plans do you have coming up that you'd like to share? GÖRAN: So one of the things we know is with all the Airbrake use, we probably have a lot of fans out there, but we might not have been the best to actually tap into that and serve that community. So we want to really invest in understanding, getting to know that community, and serving that in the best way we can. So we will see exactly which form that will take. But it starts with the basics, opening up a Slack community that we can allow users to join and ask questions or maybe hopefully get value out of their peers without talking to us maybe. But we can also serve them in various ways with support, et cetera. So it will start pretty basic, but I think it's a pretty standard playbook nowadays. But for us, it's really about we're genuinely...we think our users are awesome, and we would love to be able to share their stories and connect them with other peers. So I think that's the driving motivation. And then, of course, we have some data that also shows that it is a good investment in itself, that the stories our customers tell are much better than the stories we tell. So yeah, we're excited about that for sure. And it's connected to this bottoms up motion from where Airbrake grew from, that it grew as a solution that served the community really well. And we want to go back to those roots and be the best tool for that kind of user. VICTORIA: Oh, I love that. It sounds like a really great, full-circle journey for the product. And is there anything else you want to share about entrepreneurship and starting up products like this? What advice would you give to someone who had developed this type of product that served the community well and wanted to turn it into a product and a business? GÖRAN: So I think the community building is relatively new for us, so I'm not sure the advice there is so valuable. But in terms of entrepreneurship, I think this is one of the more important decisions you make as an entrepreneur or founder is how will you grow demand for your product and how will you distribute the product? And how will you ultimately monetize the product? And there are so many different ways. And depending on what your growth expectations are, you might be asked to go in one direction or another one. And my advice would be to really find product-market fit and that I think happens best by staying close to the end users, and then you can look at strategies for monetization, including direct sales or channel or, as Airbrake does, product-led freemium basically. But reach product-market fit first so you can decide with knowing how your product dynamics and adoption dynamics works, and let that influence the kind of strategy for the business strategy basically rather than the other way around. VICTORIA: Right. That makes sense. And then, if your product is geared towards developers, they're just like any other users. And you have to reach them and get their feedback and understand how the product fits into the market. GÖRAN: Yeah, exactly. VICTORIA: Yeah. Great. All right. Do you have any questions for me at this time? GÖRAN: Not really. It was a pleasure being on the podcast. I'm a fan so hope you can cover up my errors there. [laughter] VICTORIA: I think that if you want to go back and remove, we totally can. But are there any other major takeaways you want people to walk away with about Airbrake or, in general, about entrepreneurship? GÖRAN: That's about it, I think. VICTORIA: All right. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Göran Sandahl.
Guillaume Kendall is the Founder of Zedosh and Attention Exchange, which is working to build a safe place for advertisers, publishers, and consumers to all benefit from fair access to human attention. Chad talks with Guillaume about open banking, changing up who the beneficiaries of consumer attention and data are, and giving companies opportunities to advertise without interrupting consumers with ads. Zedosh (https://zedosh.com/) The Attention Exchange (https://attentionexchange.co.uk/) Follow The Attention Exchange on Twitter (https://twitter.com/attnexchange) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-attention-exchange/). Follow Guillaume on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/guillaumekendall/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is The Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Guillaume Kendall, the Founder of Zedosh and the Attention Exchange, which is working to build a safe place for advertisers, publishers, and consumers to all benefit from fair access to human attention. Guillaume, thank you for joining me. GUILLAUME: Thank you so much for having me. It's a real privilege. CHAD: If I'm not mistaken, you and I first met in person for lunch one time in London when I was visiting London in; I think it was...I went back and looked at my calendar. It was March 10th, 2020, if I'm not mistaken, either that or it was that Friday of that week. GUILLAUME: It must have been one of the last weeks pre-pandemic. CHAD: It was. I literally woke up on Saturday morning for my flight to come back to the U.S. to the headlines that all flights from Europe were being shut down. [laughs] And I almost dropped my phone until I realized, oh, that's the headline, but the real detail is I can get back. It's all the rest of Europe, not the UK, yet. That was the following week. I made it home, and then the world changed. GUILLAUME: I sure did, didn't it? [laughs] It's funny, isn't it? Because the two-year period in between seems to have flown by. It feels like just yesterday. I remember I think, even what I ate. CHAD: [laughs] And at the time, you were working on a new application, and we were talking about that. But I want to fast forward a little bit to today. Tell me more about Attention Exchange, and then we're going to rewind a bit to how you've arrived. GUILLAUME: So the Attention Exchange...by way of background, I come from the fintech space rather than adtech. And it really, ultimately, the Attention Exchange is a matching engine, using financial terms, that matches the right video content to the right consumer based on their spending data rather than their browsing data. So it's a matching engine. And it looks at rules that ultimately we're able to derive, or actually, I better use the phrase, we can bridge the gap between attention and intention based on our audience's spending patterns. And the reason we can access those is because they give us explicit permission. We have something called open banking here in the UK. It's actually across most of Europe now. But it enables the consumer to own their data and share it outside the bank if they so wish to with other regulated third parties. So we're such a regulated third party, and they share that data with us, as I said, to be matched with video content from brands that are relevant to their spending instead of their browsing. What it ultimately means is we're very well-positioned in this apparent post-cookie world that seems to be heading our way eventually because we don't rely on any other tracking technology to spy on our audience. They voluntarily give it to us. And I guess the kicker which is...people are probably asking themselves, why would they do that? That's because they get paid. So we put cash directly into the bank account or one of the bank accounts they've connected to our platform in exchange for their immutably valuable attention to that content. CHAD: So correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel like open banking has had a significant impact not only on the data sharing that you're describing but just on the banking ecosystem in general in the United Kingdom and now Europe. GUILLAUME: So I think if you were to speak to the purveyors of open banking, it hasn't had as big an impact as they felt it would have had. I think we reached earlier this year only to fact-check this, but about 6 million people in the UK now utilize open banking in one form or another. But I think what was very interesting is that the ecosystem that sprung up around it was mostly around changing the user experience for the end consumer to have a better handle on their financial health, which is a really important topic. And the reason that is is that before, it wasn't really in the bank's interests to tell you if you're about to hit your overdraft or go over your overdraft because they'd charge you an extra 20 pounds for an unplanned loan, and then you'd have to pay it. Your balances (This is going back a little. I'm showing my age. ) was always two or three days out of date, which was weird. So open banking; the first thing that sprung up around it is we'll connect your bank accounts. We'll give you this holistic view of your mortgages, your credit, your debit, your net worth really across various assets. And we've moved progressively towards more of open finance rather than just open banking. You can connect via APIs a lot of your financial identity to these open banking providers. But having said that, no one has looked at it in the way that we have, which is actually this is an advertising play, and it could be potentially a real change maker in the way that consumers benefit from this $400 billion industry which is advertising rather than all the fintech stuff that's been happening around open banking. But yes, so it's not to be sniffed at, you know, several million people are using open banking. But most people, I don't even think, realize they're using open banking. They open the Revolut app, and it says, "Do you want to see your Monzo balance inside our app?" You say, "Well, yeah, okay, that means I don't have to open Monzo." And lo and behold, you share that data. CHAD: Right. Yeah, that's a really good perspective. I think from my perspective; I was thinking it's sort of made it...there's a separation between the banking backends and the user experience, and I think that in part has given rise to these challenger banks and made it more possible for them to do that. GUILLAUME: Yeah, that's a very fair point. I think, certainly, if nothing else, it certainly forced the incumbent players, those that have been around for a few hundred years, to really buckle up their ideas and think about how to react to this new threat. At first, they thought, geez, open banking is going to cause us all sorts of problems, but I think as it's gone full circle. You find that, actually, most people are looking for that user experience, and the banks have been forced to provide it within their existing ecosystem. So now, most banking apps provide really super UI or UX, meaning that you don't have to go use third-party tools to get such a lens. And in fact, the most interesting one I've seen of late, which I think is definitely worth a mention, is a company called Cogo; and Cogo used open banking to carbon score your spending and let you offset it. So if you spent four pounds at McDonald's, it would guess that that's X kilos of carbon and give you several options to offset it. And actually, in the end, NatWest formed a partnership with them. This is a classic use case where actually, now the carbons offseter is available within that NatWest app, and you don't really have any idea it's Cogo. That's what you're seeing is ironically, those who have had success in innovative, exciting use cases have been pulled back into the ecosystem being offered because they still want the scale overnight. They had access to 8 million NatWest customers or whatever the number is. So, yes, I think; certainly, all banking apps have had to, even the banks themselves, have had to reorganize and rethink how they deliver technology to retail consumers who probably had had very little churn in the past because the options were very limited. CHAD: That's great. So tell me about the genesis for this idea and realizing that you could use open banking to view people's financial information and to develop a profile that could be used to opt into advertising. Where's the genesis of that idea for you? GUILLAUME: Sure. So actually, several threads came together very neatly in quite a tight timescale, the first of which is I spent a lot of money, relatively speaking, on a company called Patch Plants. And Patch Plants deliver plants to your house, [laughter] and they have quite a nice way to go about it. All the plants have got human names, and they come with little booklets about how to look after them. And I felt very positive about the relationship I felt I had with Patch Plants until for the three, maybe four months following that purchase, there wasn't a website, or a social feed that I was on that didn't have Patch Plants all over it. And I really took note of my sentiment towards them [laughs] where I thought, go away, Patch Plants. I'm a customer. Why don't you know better? With the amount of data that we provide to the web, you just assume...and maybe this is where it all starts to click into place that actually, it's not that smart. CHAD: The interesting thing is I think it is possible for companies to on target you once they decide to do it, but it seems like nobody does that. [laughs] And it's like, I've just bought a stove. Why am I seeing stoves all over the place? [laughs] I'm not going to buy another one. GUILLAUME: Yeah, again, I think it comes from the underlying infrastructure, which is basically this concept of cookies, which we accept on every single website before we can do anything with it. And you've probably got a number of unchecked-out stoves across the web. And it's not locking on to the fact you've got one checked-out stove. But of course, we're connected to the bank account. And so when we see that transaction, we see the counterparties. We know for a fact that that person has made that transaction with that vendor, and therefore, you probably need to change the message. And that goes from daily purchases right through to the massive, heavy items we can see when people started a car leasing agreement. Well, if you want to get them to think about considering your brand of vehicle in two or three years or three or four years, there's probably a journey that you should take that person on. But then again, once they've made the purchase, don't keep hassling them. So that's the first thing. If you saw my bank account...so I worked with open banking innovation [laughs]. I guess that's pretty important. CHAD: [laughs] GUILLAUME: So I was acutely aware of how the data could be shared and analyzed, so that's the first point. And then, pretty much at the same time, Netflix brought out this documentary, The Social Dilemma, really putting across that these social media applications were basically designed, maybe it's not a surprise, but pretty much as gambling apps. They're exceptionally addictive. And the reason they're addictive is because the longer you spend on them, the more advertising they can slide into; now, I think one in every four posts. And now that we've moved on to short-form video content, there's infinite scroll. We're all on these apps for hours a day. But the only way they generate revenues is through advertising, and the only way they get advertising is by you spending more time. And it sort of didn't sit too well with me, especially after we had the Euro Championship in football or soccer here. And there was a ton of racist abuse that went out to players across social media. Lots of brands and advertisers started pulling away from it for a very short period of time to express their protest. But I realized then that, actually, there is no alternative. If you want to attract attention, you have to fund social media or Google, and that's kind of it. Those are your options as a brand or an advertiser. And the former being social media is really not a very healthy place to spend time. Sure, some good comes out of it. But I would argue that the bad that comes out of it far outweighs any of the good that's come from social media, certainly in the last five years or so, I believe. It's at the center of some major divisions in our communities. But it's all funded through advertising revenue. So that was the second point is that there really is no alternative. And why should Mark Zuckerberg be the beneficiary of my attention, my data, my value whilst putting absolutely no effort in changing or being an arbiter of the content? They're keeping their hands up saying, hey, we're not a publisher. If that content is there, it's there. And it becomes a very complicated argument very quickly around free speech and all of this sort of stuff. But ultimately, there's a ton of really nasty stuff. And then we had a family friend, specifically, who really put herself in a lot of danger, a young girl. And that was a very real impact on human life close to us that was all driven from what she was able to access with alarming ease via Instagram. So those sorts of threads all came together. And then the more sort of...it's one of those things, right? Once you see a yellow car, you're looking out for a yellow car. You keep seeing them. But I don't think I was proactively looking out for it too much. But it seemed that every day almost, there was a new-new story in the front pages of the papers where Facebook was in some sort of trouble, and that obviously materialized last year with the Facebook leaks. And everything we've been just discussing now they've known about. They know about it. They're choosing not to make a difference. So we had a really powerful motivation to try and bring about a different mechanism for this $400 billion industry to operate. And rather than exploit our data, exploit our mental well-being, exploit our communities and everything else in order to drive advertising revenue, maybe the advertiser could have a more direct relationship, a fair and more transparent relationship with the consumer with whom they want a dialogue. And I think it's been the biggest learning curve for us is that brands and advertisers feel weird about paying consumers to pay attention. But we're saying we think it is weirder that you pay Google and Facebook to track these people all over the web and interrupt them everywhere they don't want to be spoken to. Why not just pay them to have a fair, transparent dialogue? I know you have money. I know you spend it with my competitors who are in my market. I want your attention, and this is what I have to tell you. There we go. So that was the sort of the kernel, the genesis. CHAD: I can totally see why advertisers are...scared is not the right word. Just, you know, it's just they've never had a relationship where they're paying the consumer directly for any kind of advertising that they do [chuckles] whether it be TV historically. There's always an intermediary. And the idea of paying people directly is not only different, but in some ways, I can imagine people view it as crude. Like, it's one thing if it's going through an intermediary and you're paying them, and advertising is being run, but it's another to just pay someone to pay attention to you. GUILLAUME: Yeah, but I think this is the point about the open banking. I completely agree with you; if you're paying somebody based on their cookies or any of the other data, the first-party data or third-party data, that's abstracted several layers from that pair of eyeballs that you know has a tendency to buy X on Y time horizon. That's never been possible before. And so through your television, it's scale. You're paying the broadcaster because they've got 3 million people watching Coronation Street on, I don't know, whatever. But it's always based on these tiny, tiny fractions of engagement, and that's always been the way it is. So you need the intermediary for scale. But I think what I'm hoping, what I've literally bet my house on [laughter], that's one thing that's going to change. I sold my house since we started to do this. All those marketplaces are completely saturated, and they are not getting less busy; they're getting more busy. And so okay, TikToks appeared, but the medium through which video content is provided to the consumer, you're lucky to get a quarter of a second or half a second with that person. And so you're right, but what is now the alternative to actually getting a minute, a minute and a half, two minutes with somebody where they're not skipping; they're not going past? You know they're a real person. You know they're human. All of our consumers have to have a bank account. They have to have transactions, and they have to have an income in order to be valuable and receive any adverts into their feed. So it's just never been possible before. The scale play, the intermediary, was always sort of, I think, accepted, and it still is today. There's going to be a bunch of fraud. I think there's like 15 cents in every dollar spent online digitally for advertising is lost. I think it's a $100 billion problem by next year. So I guess the point I'm making is the intermediaries historically and to today have existed because you need to reach millions of eyeballs in order to get a very low interaction rate. With our model, we're able to target thousands of people and achieve a 19.6% average click-through rate even after a minute and a half worth of content because they're engaged and you're not interrupting them. So we think it's a relatively elegant model for what is a saturated, noisy world where eventually also the very mechanism by which they do track and target you is going to be replaced at some stage by Google and Chrome. Mid-Roll Ad: When starting a new project, we understand that you want to make the right choices in technology, features, and investment but that you don’t have all year to do extended research. In just a few weeks, thoughtbot’s Discovery Sprints deliver a user-centered product journey, a clickable prototype or Proof of Concept, and key market insights from focused user research. We’ll help you to identify the primary user flow, decide which framework should be used to bring it to life, and set a firm estimate on future development efforts. Maximize impact and minimize risk with a validated roadmap for your new product. Get started at: tbot.io/sprint. CHAD: You have this idea. It's really challenging the status quo. You're working in open banking innovation at the time. What did you start to do then, to try to bring your idea to life? GUILLAUME: So the first thing was actually my background is in sales and business development but within the fintech and open banking space. So I've worked with a lot of very smart people. And the first thing I really needed to do was quickly validate whether or not this is something. So a guy that we brought on...he's not so much a co-founder, but the other director of the business is a guy called Matt McBride, who's this global head of UX at a company I used to work for. And that was really the first thing is to try and rapidly prototype what the experience would look like and ultimately go out to our target audience, which was Gen Z here in the UK, and ask them whether or not this is the sort of thing they'd engage with. And the responses were actually really very positive. "Hang on; you're going to pay me to watch ads that are relevant to me? No-brainer, please do." And then, we were able to raise 100 grand, 150 grand, which enabled us to take that prototype and build it into something that, after a few obstacles with Apple in the App Store, we were able to get live. So that was really the first thing, I guess is, figuring out the way and the people that I needed to help me out to take this idea into something tangible and then tested it before I went much further with it. I was very fortunate, or I am very fortunate, that my partner is a corporate lawyer; my wife, sorry, now; we've been married since we started. [laughs] And so, actually, the mechanism through which we were able to raise the really earliest funds meant that we didn't have to give very much of the business away at such an early stage, which I think was a key learning point that I certainly share with other founders is you don't have to go give away 25% of your business for a little bit of money just to get it off PowerPoint. There are other ways. CHAD: So I think I remember what I told you when we met and talked. Do you remember what it was? GUILLAUME: You shared lots of very valuable insights with me. CHAD: My memory is that at the time, it was only advertisements in the app. And I think I said, "I get that people are going to want to be paid to look at these things." GUILLAUME: Oh yes, right. CHAD: "But if there's nothing else here, it's going to be really hard to bring people back to do that." And we had seen that in another client of ours that was paying people to browse. And what they'd do is they do it for a while, and they'd hit whatever monthly cap of return that they could get, an amount that they thought made sense. And then, they would switch back to their other browser because it was a better browsing experience. So they were only using it because they were getting paid. And as soon as that incentive went away, they would stop using it. GUILLAUME: Yeah, so I remember that. And you were right. And I guess there are a few things that came about from that, so the first thing is that Apple agreed. So we couldn't get the app onto the App Store if it was just a feed of adverts that remunerated the user to watch them, incentivized the user. So we put quite a lot of additional features, I guess more traditional fintech features, open banking features within the application in order to give the user insights into their spending, week-on-week analysis, and categorization of spend. And we also built this what we call the level up section where every week, you get refreshed pieces of content around, you know, very Gen Z-focused again, but what's the difference between a credit card and a loan? Is buy now, pay later a good idea? What's open banking? So we generate all this content, which they don't get paid to consume but is there, and they do. But more importantly, I think what we realized is that actually what we've got...this is the difference, I guess, between the Attention Exchange and Zedosh being the app; it's the plumbing and the matching that is the real value here. It is the models we're building that understand people's behavior and propensity or intent to buy something based on the data they're sharing with us. And so, actually, what we've built is a solution where you should be able to log in to any publisher that has the additional content, and experience, and value that you're speaking about there, places you ordinarily already browse and frequent. But if you want to, there's a separate tab where there are ads waiting for you that remunerate you, but you go into that tab. So we're trying to remove the interruption, you know, the pop-up even having to accept cookies from your user experience with the publisher moving into a separate, dedicated tab. And the reason the consumer is still going to go click on that tab is because they know that there's some content that's relevant and pays them, but they're still able to enjoy all the other benefits that the publisher provides. So it's kind of weirdly trying to flip this premium subscription model where you pay not to have ads. Actually, you're the first recipient of the ad income, and you share that with the publisher. CHAD: I think this is really cool, and yet I think it also rubs up against or hits up against something that is just so different than the status quo. The idea that companies would not interrupt you with advertising is probably so foreign [laughs] to people that I imagine you get reluctance to that. GUILLAUME: The last two years have been a steeper learning curve for us and all the advertisers and agencies, and players we've been speaking to. But what I'm grateful for is the fact that what we term the ad-pocalypse is coming. And so I was just at an event called MAD//Fest last week, which is basically all the advertising industry got together in London, the UK advertising industry. And every single panel discussion talk was about the post-cookie era. And all that most people are speaking about is how do we gather more data in other ways from the consumer in order to keep doing more of the same? And all of a sudden, when we're talking about the fact that our users give us their banking transactions, we see how much they earn and where they spend it and, therefore, can also attribute without the use of cookies, which is the holy grail of advertising. We started generating an awful lot of interest from really big players. So I think you're right; the status quo is having the rug pulled from underneath them, right? Look at Meta's share price this year. I haven't checked it this week, but last time I checked, it was down 52%. And that's because iOS app tracking transparency is stopping the ability to track and monitor and, increasingly, ultimately, the ability for the user to remain more private. And they all are doing it. Why would they want to be less private in order to benefit Meta? In our platform, they're opting into their most intimate data being shared because they stand to be rewarded fairly for it. So I completely agree; up to this point, "What? No way." This is how it works. And certainly, the thing that will probably remain true is to do more with less isn't of interest because agencies get paid a percentage of the budget. They don't want to do [laughs] the same with less budget. But my point remains that with iOS app tracking transparency...apparently, Android is going the same way, and Chrome is replacing third-party cookies. The status quo simply cannot continue. Something has to change. And so I think with this identity solution often is what we're building. The consumer stands a chance of being the first in line to receive a reward for their attention. And I'm very pleased actually we've got some competition as well since we last spoke, which is new. But this concept of rewarding consumers for attention, I think, will just...how else are you going to get their time? They're not listening to you on TikTok. [laughs] CHAD: I'm happy to hear that you're viewing competition as a positive thing. And I agree competition raises awareness that this is a thing and a potential, and most people will shop around or research it further. And that's a chance for them to discover you. GUILLAUME: I hope so. This company has done a big advertising campaign all over. It's on TV, radio, and the underground in London. And the amount of people who've reached out to me... "Is this company doing what you're doing?" And ultimately, they're paying users in a way for their attention to advertising. But they don't use open banking, and they don't have the data that we have. CHAD: That's an important distinction. One of the things that I've seen our clients worry about...and I saw it happen to one. Even though lots of people worry about it, I've only ever seen it happen one time, but it's still a risk, and that is when competitors come along. And unbeknownst to you, they dramatically over raise and therefore are just able to flood the market, saturate the attention, and build way bigger and faster at a loss than you are willing to do. GUILLAUME: Yeah, or able to do. [laughs] CHAD: Or able to do, right? Because they've raised 500 million [chuckles] or something like that. That's what happened with our client, who was in the group buying space at the same time as Groupon and LivingSocial. And so that's the only time I've ever seen it happen, but it's something that people are worried about. How are you...is that something on your mind? GUILLAUME: It's interesting. So they've raised 15 million Series A, and they've been around since 2012. So they've been around a long time. And it almost feels like they... [laughs] I'm not saying they did, but it almost feels like they landed on my LinkedIn. And we're very anti-social media. The message is really strong on anti-social media. But ultimately, they built an app. And so I think we've already matured past the point that in terms of our scaling and our ability to integrate with any platform, our strategy already goes beyond competing on a direct basis of an app that serves ads. In fact, if anything, at some stage, I'm hoping that they could plug into our engine and our pipes and add an extra layer of data and personalization to the adverts that they serve. So ultimately, when they came, and it was during the Champions League final that they had their first big launch because one of the backers is a football player, my phone just went berserk. Because it was like, wait, what? And at first, I was a bit worried but ultimately, no. I only really, really see it as a positive at this stage. But obviously, yes, they can advertise. They can speak to brands. They've got much more market presence. Everywhere you go on the underground, there are those posters. But we have a very clear, distinct proposition that is quite different. As I said, really, this pulling apart what Zedosh is and what the Attention Exchange is; the Attention Exchange is really potentially the plumbing, the rails for this post-cookie advertising model. CHAD: So that being said, you are doing some fundraising now. That's right? GUILLAUME: Yes. In fact, I don't think I've stopped fundraising [laughter] since this started. And certainly, that wasn't something I was anticipating despite the fact that...I mentioned I'm married to a corporate lawyer. She told me, "Your role as a CEO, as a founder, you're just going to be fundraising." I thought, yeah, well, I'll get some money in, and then we can focus on doing the stuff. But every time money comes in, most often you sort of have already spent it. It's allocated; it's gone. You need to look for the next lot. But yes, we are fundraising. Currently, we're still focused majoritively on angels. We're looking to prove our scalability model with this existing raise, at which point I think we’ll be ready and looking for institutional funds. But we use something called EIS funding which is UK-specific but is so, so rewarding for UK taxpayers. Basically, they get 30% back off the tax amount of their tax return, which is a great incentive, and all the gains from the equity is free of capital gains tax as well. So it almost becomes a no-brainer for people who have money that they're looking to invest in early-stage risky businesses. They're already really risking. The capital risk is under 50% of what they put in because there's also an insurance element; if the company goes bust that you've invested, there's something called loss relief. CHAD: So it's really attractive to angel-level investors. GUILLAUME: Correct. So you have to be a UK taxpayer as an individual to benefit from this specific relief. Of course, I mean, we have had some non-UK people still invest through the same sort of advanced subscription agreement. But yes, it's very attractive for UK taxpayers. CHAD: And do you think...[laughs] you've already answered this question. But I guess when do you think you'll stop fundraising? GUILLAUME: We're looking to change the way the internet works. [laughter] CHAD: Right. GUILLAUME: And so if we're mildly successful even redistributing the 100 billion of ad fraud which is currently being lost out there, we're entering a very cash-rich market looking for solutions at this moment in time. So if we're to raise some cash that enables us to put in place the plumbing and the pipes that we're looking to connect to, then actually, we should be relatively profitable relatively quickly, at which point, I guess we'd no longer need to fundraise. But at which point we'd probably say, "Well, actually, the U.S. is now ready for this. Let's go." CHAD: [laughs] GUILLAUME: I don't think we're particularly a cash-thirsty business. It's all built on AWS. CHAD: And you're right. That's why I asked the question because if your model is working, if you're having the impact you want, there's a lot of money in advertising. And so you should get to the point where you're able to do that profitably. GUILLAUME: Absolutely. CHAD: And start being as big as Google, right? [laughs] GUILLAUME: Yeah. I read a book called Life After Google. I don't know if I shared that with you the last time we met. But it's weird. It was written five or six years ago, but it's coming true. I think this whole premise of Web3, and this decentralization of data, and the ownership of data, the profiting of data at the individual level, is coming to the fore. And I can think of no better way to bridge your value and identity online than having it connected to your real-world assets, income, and spending behavior. CHAD: I was wondering whether you are going to mention Web3. [laughs] GUILLAUME: Huh. CHAD: Because this decentralization of the advertising money directly to users is a very Web3 idea. GUILLAUME: I agree. CHAD: [laughs] So how much do you talk about Web3 in your pitch or when you're talking about it? It hasn't come up until now in this conversation, so maybe not so much. GUILLAUME: It's a double-edged sword, I feel, because I think most people think Web3. They think crypto. CHAD: Yes. GUILLAUME: And we're paying cash in fiat, and although there's every possibility we could have a token-based solution, we're not looking at that because the core immutable value of your attention is linked in your spending behavior on earth and online, but through real transactions with real merchants. 99.999% of transactions, I imagine, aren't crypto yet and don't live on a blockchain, so until that point, I think we steer clear of it. Whether we could have raised more money more quickly if we [laughs] had mentioned it more, I don't know. But for me, there are quite a few steps to go in our journey as I see it having matured from the app to the plumbing, the plumbing now going to more publishers, more publishers meaning more audience, more audience meaning more attention, more advertising. At which point, as I said, the U.S. will probably be there with open banking. There are a lot of things in Web 2.0 that could be resolved. And yeah, if we make it that far, I think we'll be in an awesome position to have an identity solution for Web3 or Web5. [laughs] CHAD: Well, I wish you all the best in that journey. And I really appreciate you stopping by and sharing with us. GUILLAUME: My pleasure. It's been real great and nice to hear from you again. And I hope our paths cross in the real world soon enough. CHAD: Yeah. If folks want to get in touch or learn more or get in touch with you, where are all the different places that they can do that? GUILLAUME: We have two websites, so zedosh.com is the consumer app, attentionexchange.co.uk is our other website. Otherwise, feel free to reach out to me on LinkedIn. And on Twitter, I'm @G_Zedosh. I'm not massive on Twitter. There are a lot of bots on that. CHAD: [laughs] I guess I'm not that surprised. So you can subscribe to the show, find links to everything that was just mentioned along with notes and a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. I'm also not very active these days. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Guillaume Kendall.
Guillaume Kendall is the Founder of Zedosh and Attention Exchange, which is working to build a safe place for advertisers, publishers, and consumers to all benefit from fair access to human attention. Chad talks with Guillaume about open banking, changing up who the beneficiaries of consumer attention and data are, and giving companies opportunities to advertise without interrupting consumers with ads. Zedosh (https://zedosh.com/) The Attention Exchange (https://attentionexchange.co.uk/) Follow The Attention Exchange on Twitter (https://twitter.com/attnexchange) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-attention-exchange/). Follow Guillaume on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/guillaumekendall/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is The Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Guillaume Kendall, the Founder of Zedosh and the Attention Exchange, which is working to build a safe place for advertisers, publishers, and consumers to all benefit from fair access to human attention. Guillaume, thank you for joining me. GUILLAUME: Thank you so much for having me. It's a real privilege. CHAD: If I'm not mistaken, you and I first met in person for lunch one time in London when I was visiting London in; I think it was...I went back and looked at my calendar. It was March 10th, 2020, if I'm not mistaken, either that or it was that Friday of that week. GUILLAUME: It must have been one of the last weeks pre-pandemic. CHAD: It was. I literally woke up on Saturday morning for my flight to come back to the U.S. to the headlines that all flights from Europe were being shut down. [laughs] And I almost dropped my phone until I realized, oh, that's the headline, but the real detail is I can get back. It's all the rest of Europe, not the UK, yet. That was the following week. I made it home, and then the world changed. GUILLAUME: I sure did, didn't it? [laughs] It's funny, isn't it? Because the two-year period in between seems to have flown by. It feels like just yesterday. I remember I think, even what I ate. CHAD: [laughs] And at the time, you were working on a new application, and we were talking about that. But I want to fast forward a little bit to today. Tell me more about Attention Exchange, and then we're going to rewind a bit to how you've arrived. GUILLAUME: So the Attention Exchange...by way of background, I come from the fintech space rather than adtech. And it really, ultimately, the Attention Exchange is a matching engine, using financial terms, that matches the right video content to the right consumer based on their spending data rather than their browsing data. So it's a matching engine. And it looks at rules that ultimately we're able to derive, or actually, I better use the phrase, we can bridge the gap between attention and intention based on our audience's spending patterns. And the reason we can access those is because they give us explicit permission. We have something called open banking here in the UK. It's actually across most of Europe now. But it enables the consumer to own their data and share it outside the bank if they so wish to with other regulated third parties. So we're such a regulated third party, and they share that data with us, as I said, to be matched with video content from brands that are relevant to their spending instead of their browsing. What it ultimately means is we're very well-positioned in this apparent post-cookie world that seems to be heading our way eventually because we don't rely on any other tracking technology to spy on our audience. They voluntarily give it to us. And I guess the kicker which is...people are probably asking themselves, why would they do that? That's because they get paid. So we put cash directly into the bank account or one of the bank accounts they've connected to our platform in exchange for their immutably valuable attention to that content. CHAD: So correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel like open banking has had a significant impact not only on the data sharing that you're describing but just on the banking ecosystem in general in the United Kingdom and now Europe. GUILLAUME: So I think if you were to speak to the purveyors of open banking, it hasn't had as big an impact as they felt it would have had. I think we reached earlier this year only to fact-check this, but about 6 million people in the UK now utilize open banking in one form or another. But I think what was very interesting is that the ecosystem that sprung up around it was mostly around changing the user experience for the end consumer to have a better handle on their financial health, which is a really important topic. And the reason that is is that before, it wasn't really in the bank's interests to tell you if you're about to hit your overdraft or go over your overdraft because they'd charge you an extra 20 pounds for an unplanned loan, and then you'd have to pay it. Your balances (This is going back a little. I'm showing my age. ) was always two or three days out of date, which was weird. So open banking; the first thing that sprung up around it is we'll connect your bank accounts. We'll give you this holistic view of your mortgages, your credit, your debit, your net worth really across various assets. And we've moved progressively towards more of open finance rather than just open banking. You can connect via APIs a lot of your financial identity to these open banking providers. But having said that, no one has looked at it in the way that we have, which is actually this is an advertising play, and it could be potentially a real change maker in the way that consumers benefit from this $400 billion industry which is advertising rather than all the fintech stuff that's been happening around open banking. But yes, so it's not to be sniffed at, you know, several million people are using open banking. But most people, I don't even think, realize they're using open banking. They open the Revolut app, and it says, "Do you want to see your Monzo balance inside our app?" You say, "Well, yeah, okay, that means I don't have to open Monzo." And lo and behold, you share that data. CHAD: Right. Yeah, that's a really good perspective. I think from my perspective; I was thinking it's sort of made it...there's a separation between the banking backends and the user experience, and I think that in part has given rise to these challenger banks and made it more possible for them to do that. GUILLAUME: Yeah, that's a very fair point. I think, certainly, if nothing else, it certainly forced the incumbent players, those that have been around for a few hundred years, to really buckle up their ideas and think about how to react to this new threat. At first, they thought, geez, open banking is going to cause us all sorts of problems, but I think as it's gone full circle. You find that, actually, most people are looking for that user experience, and the banks have been forced to provide it within their existing ecosystem. So now, most banking apps provide really super UI or UX, meaning that you don't have to go use third-party tools to get such a lens. And in fact, the most interesting one I've seen of late, which I think is definitely worth a mention, is a company called Cogo; and Cogo used open banking to carbon score your spending and let you offset it. So if you spent four pounds at McDonald's, it would guess that that's X kilos of carbon and give you several options to offset it. And actually, in the end, NatWest formed a partnership with them. This is a classic use case where actually, now the carbons offseter is available within that NatWest app, and you don't really have any idea it's Cogo. That's what you're seeing is ironically, those who have had success in innovative, exciting use cases have been pulled back into the ecosystem being offered because they still want the scale overnight. They had access to 8 million NatWest customers or whatever the number is. So, yes, I think; certainly, all banking apps have had to, even the banks themselves, have had to reorganize and rethink how they deliver technology to retail consumers who probably had had very little churn in the past because the options were very limited. CHAD: That's great. So tell me about the genesis for this idea and realizing that you could use open banking to view people's financial information and to develop a profile that could be used to opt into advertising. Where's the genesis of that idea for you? GUILLAUME: Sure. So actually, several threads came together very neatly in quite a tight timescale, the first of which is I spent a lot of money, relatively speaking, on a company called Patch Plants. And Patch Plants deliver plants to your house, [laughter] and they have quite a nice way to go about it. All the plants have got human names, and they come with little booklets about how to look after them. And I felt very positive about the relationship I felt I had with Patch Plants until for the three, maybe four months following that purchase, there wasn't a website, or a social feed that I was on that didn't have Patch Plants all over it. And I really took note of my sentiment towards them [laughs] where I thought, go away, Patch Plants. I'm a customer. Why don't you know better? With the amount of data that we provide to the web, you just assume...and maybe this is where it all starts to click into place that actually, it's not that smart. CHAD: The interesting thing is I think it is possible for companies to on target you once they decide to do it, but it seems like nobody does that. [laughs] And it's like, I've just bought a stove. Why am I seeing stoves all over the place? [laughs] I'm not going to buy another one. GUILLAUME: Yeah, again, I think it comes from the underlying infrastructure, which is basically this concept of cookies, which we accept on every single website before we can do anything with it. And you've probably got a number of unchecked-out stoves across the web. And it's not locking on to the fact you've got one checked-out stove. But of course, we're connected to the bank account. And so when we see that transaction, we see the counterparties. We know for a fact that that person has made that transaction with that vendor, and therefore, you probably need to change the message. And that goes from daily purchases right through to the massive, heavy items we can see when people started a car leasing agreement. Well, if you want to get them to think about considering your brand of vehicle in two or three years or three or four years, there's probably a journey that you should take that person on. But then again, once they've made the purchase, don't keep hassling them. So that's the first thing. If you saw my bank account...so I worked with open banking innovation [laughs]. I guess that's pretty important. CHAD: [laughs] GUILLAUME: So I was acutely aware of how the data could be shared and analyzed, so that's the first point. And then, pretty much at the same time, Netflix brought out this documentary, The Social Dilemma, really putting across that these social media applications were basically designed, maybe it's not a surprise, but pretty much as gambling apps. They're exceptionally addictive. And the reason they're addictive is because the longer you spend on them, the more advertising they can slide into; now, I think one in every four posts. And now that we've moved on to short-form video content, there's infinite scroll. We're all on these apps for hours a day. But the only way they generate revenues is through advertising, and the only way they get advertising is by you spending more time. And it sort of didn't sit too well with me, especially after we had the Euro Championship in football or soccer here. And there was a ton of racist abuse that went out to players across social media. Lots of brands and advertisers started pulling away from it for a very short period of time to express their protest. But I realized then that, actually, there is no alternative. If you want to attract attention, you have to fund social media or Google, and that's kind of it. Those are your options as a brand or an advertiser. And the former being social media is really not a very healthy place to spend time. Sure, some good comes out of it. But I would argue that the bad that comes out of it far outweighs any of the good that's come from social media, certainly in the last five years or so, I believe. It's at the center of some major divisions in our communities. But it's all funded through advertising revenue. So that was the second point is that there really is no alternative. And why should Mark Zuckerberg be the beneficiary of my attention, my data, my value whilst putting absolutely no effort in changing or being an arbiter of the content? They're keeping their hands up saying, hey, we're not a publisher. If that content is there, it's there. And it becomes a very complicated argument very quickly around free speech and all of this sort of stuff. But ultimately, there's a ton of really nasty stuff. And then we had a family friend, specifically, who really put herself in a lot of danger, a young girl. And that was a very real impact on human life close to us that was all driven from what she was able to access with alarming ease via Instagram. So those sorts of threads all came together. And then the more sort of...it's one of those things, right? Once you see a yellow car, you're looking out for a yellow car. You keep seeing them. But I don't think I was proactively looking out for it too much. But it seemed that every day almost, there was a new-new story in the front pages of the papers where Facebook was in some sort of trouble, and that obviously materialized last year with the Facebook leaks. And everything we've been just discussing now they've known about. They know about it. They're choosing not to make a difference. So we had a really powerful motivation to try and bring about a different mechanism for this $400 billion industry to operate. And rather than exploit our data, exploit our mental well-being, exploit our communities and everything else in order to drive advertising revenue, maybe the advertiser could have a more direct relationship, a fair and more transparent relationship with the consumer with whom they want a dialogue. And I think it's been the biggest learning curve for us is that brands and advertisers feel weird about paying consumers to pay attention. But we're saying we think it is weirder that you pay Google and Facebook to track these people all over the web and interrupt them everywhere they don't want to be spoken to. Why not just pay them to have a fair, transparent dialogue? I know you have money. I know you spend it with my competitors who are in my market. I want your attention, and this is what I have to tell you. There we go. So that was the sort of the kernel, the genesis. CHAD: I can totally see why advertisers are...scared is not the right word. Just, you know, it's just they've never had a relationship where they're paying the consumer directly for any kind of advertising that they do [chuckles] whether it be TV historically. There's always an intermediary. And the idea of paying people directly is not only different, but in some ways, I can imagine people view it as crude. Like, it's one thing if it's going through an intermediary and you're paying them, and advertising is being run, but it's another to just pay someone to pay attention to you. GUILLAUME: Yeah, but I think this is the point about the open banking. I completely agree with you; if you're paying somebody based on their cookies or any of the other data, the first-party data or third-party data, that's abstracted several layers from that pair of eyeballs that you know has a tendency to buy X on Y time horizon. That's never been possible before. And so through your television, it's scale. You're paying the broadcaster because they've got 3 million people watching Coronation Street on, I don't know, whatever. But it's always based on these tiny, tiny fractions of engagement, and that's always been the way it is. So you need the intermediary for scale. But I think what I'm hoping, what I've literally bet my house on [laughter], that's one thing that's going to change. I sold my house since we started to do this. All those marketplaces are completely saturated, and they are not getting less busy; they're getting more busy. And so okay, TikToks appeared, but the medium through which video content is provided to the consumer, you're lucky to get a quarter of a second or half a second with that person. And so you're right, but what is now the alternative to actually getting a minute, a minute and a half, two minutes with somebody where they're not skipping; they're not going past? You know they're a real person. You know they're human. All of our consumers have to have a bank account. They have to have transactions, and they have to have an income in order to be valuable and receive any adverts into their feed. So it's just never been possible before. The scale play, the intermediary, was always sort of, I think, accepted, and it still is today. There's going to be a bunch of fraud. I think there's like 15 cents in every dollar spent online digitally for advertising is lost. I think it's a $100 billion problem by next year. So I guess the point I'm making is the intermediaries historically and to today have existed because you need to reach millions of eyeballs in order to get a very low interaction rate. With our model, we're able to target thousands of people and achieve a 19.6% average click-through rate even after a minute and a half worth of content because they're engaged and you're not interrupting them. So we think it's a relatively elegant model for what is a saturated, noisy world where eventually also the very mechanism by which they do track and target you is going to be replaced at some stage by Google and Chrome. Mid-Roll Ad: When starting a new project, we understand that you want to make the right choices in technology, features, and investment but that you don’t have all year to do extended research. In just a few weeks, thoughtbot’s Discovery Sprints deliver a user-centered product journey, a clickable prototype or Proof of Concept, and key market insights from focused user research. We’ll help you to identify the primary user flow, decide which framework should be used to bring it to life, and set a firm estimate on future development efforts. Maximize impact and minimize risk with a validated roadmap for your new product. Get started at: tbot.io/sprint. CHAD: You have this idea. It's really challenging the status quo. You're working in open banking innovation at the time. What did you start to do then, to try to bring your idea to life? GUILLAUME: So the first thing was actually my background is in sales and business development but within the fintech and open banking space. So I've worked with a lot of very smart people. And the first thing I really needed to do was quickly validate whether or not this is something. So a guy that we brought on...he's not so much a co-founder, but the other director of the business is a guy called Matt McBride, who's this global head of UX at a company I used to work for. And that was really the first thing is to try and rapidly prototype what the experience would look like and ultimately go out to our target audience, which was Gen Z here in the UK, and ask them whether or not this is the sort of thing they'd engage with. And the responses were actually really very positive. "Hang on; you're going to pay me to watch ads that are relevant to me? No-brainer, please do." And then, we were able to raise 100 grand, 150 grand, which enabled us to take that prototype and build it into something that, after a few obstacles with Apple in the App Store, we were able to get live. So that was really the first thing, I guess is, figuring out the way and the people that I needed to help me out to take this idea into something tangible and then tested it before I went much further with it. I was very fortunate, or I am very fortunate, that my partner is a corporate lawyer; my wife, sorry, now; we've been married since we started. [laughs] And so, actually, the mechanism through which we were able to raise the really earliest funds meant that we didn't have to give very much of the business away at such an early stage, which I think was a key learning point that I certainly share with other founders is you don't have to go give away 25% of your business for a little bit of money just to get it off PowerPoint. There are other ways. CHAD: So I think I remember what I told you when we met and talked. Do you remember what it was? GUILLAUME: You shared lots of very valuable insights with me. CHAD: My memory is that at the time, it was only advertisements in the app. And I think I said, "I get that people are going to want to be paid to look at these things." GUILLAUME: Oh yes, right. CHAD: "But if there's nothing else here, it's going to be really hard to bring people back to do that." And we had seen that in another client of ours that was paying people to browse. And what they'd do is they do it for a while, and they'd hit whatever monthly cap of return that they could get, an amount that they thought made sense. And then, they would switch back to their other browser because it was a better browsing experience. So they were only using it because they were getting paid. And as soon as that incentive went away, they would stop using it. GUILLAUME: Yeah, so I remember that. And you were right. And I guess there are a few things that came about from that, so the first thing is that Apple agreed. So we couldn't get the app onto the App Store if it was just a feed of adverts that remunerated the user to watch them, incentivized the user. So we put quite a lot of additional features, I guess more traditional fintech features, open banking features within the application in order to give the user insights into their spending, week-on-week analysis, and categorization of spend. And we also built this what we call the level up section where every week, you get refreshed pieces of content around, you know, very Gen Z-focused again, but what's the difference between a credit card and a loan? Is buy now, pay later a good idea? What's open banking? So we generate all this content, which they don't get paid to consume but is there, and they do. But more importantly, I think what we realized is that actually what we've got...this is the difference, I guess, between the Attention Exchange and Zedosh being the app; it's the plumbing and the matching that is the real value here. It is the models we're building that understand people's behavior and propensity or intent to buy something based on the data they're sharing with us. And so, actually, what we've built is a solution where you should be able to log in to any publisher that has the additional content, and experience, and value that you're speaking about there, places you ordinarily already browse and frequent. But if you want to, there's a separate tab where there are ads waiting for you that remunerate you, but you go into that tab. So we're trying to remove the interruption, you know, the pop-up even having to accept cookies from your user experience with the publisher moving into a separate, dedicated tab. And the reason the consumer is still going to go click on that tab is because they know that there's some content that's relevant and pays them, but they're still able to enjoy all the other benefits that the publisher provides. So it's kind of weirdly trying to flip this premium subscription model where you pay not to have ads. Actually, you're the first recipient of the ad income, and you share that with the publisher. CHAD: I think this is really cool, and yet I think it also rubs up against or hits up against something that is just so different than the status quo. The idea that companies would not interrupt you with advertising is probably so foreign [laughs] to people that I imagine you get reluctance to that. GUILLAUME: The last two years have been a steeper learning curve for us and all the advertisers and agencies, and players we've been speaking to. But what I'm grateful for is the fact that what we term the ad-pocalypse is coming. And so I was just at an event called MAD//Fest last week, which is basically all the advertising industry got together in London, the UK advertising industry. And every single panel discussion talk was about the post-cookie era. And all that most people are speaking about is how do we gather more data in other ways from the consumer in order to keep doing more of the same? And all of a sudden, when we're talking about the fact that our users give us their banking transactions, we see how much they earn and where they spend it and, therefore, can also attribute without the use of cookies, which is the holy grail of advertising. We started generating an awful lot of interest from really big players. So I think you're right; the status quo is having the rug pulled from underneath them, right? Look at Meta's share price this year. I haven't checked it this week, but last time I checked, it was down 52%. And that's because iOS app tracking transparency is stopping the ability to track and monitor and, increasingly, ultimately, the ability for the user to remain more private. And they all are doing it. Why would they want to be less private in order to benefit Meta? In our platform, they're opting into their most intimate data being shared because they stand to be rewarded fairly for it. So I completely agree; up to this point, "What? No way." This is how it works. And certainly, the thing that will probably remain true is to do more with less isn't of interest because agencies get paid a percentage of the budget. They don't want to do [laughs] the same with less budget. But my point remains that with iOS app tracking transparency...apparently, Android is going the same way, and Chrome is replacing third-party cookies. The status quo simply cannot continue. Something has to change. And so I think with this identity solution often is what we're building. The consumer stands a chance of being the first in line to receive a reward for their attention. And I'm very pleased actually we've got some competition as well since we last spoke, which is new. But this concept of rewarding consumers for attention, I think, will just...how else are you going to get their time? They're not listening to you on TikTok. [laughs] CHAD: I'm happy to hear that you're viewing competition as a positive thing. And I agree competition raises awareness that this is a thing and a potential, and most people will shop around or research it further. And that's a chance for them to discover you. GUILLAUME: I hope so. This company has done a big advertising campaign all over. It's on TV, radio, and the underground in London. And the amount of people who've reached out to me... "Is this company doing what you're doing?" And ultimately, they're paying users in a way for their attention to advertising. But they don't use open banking, and they don't have the data that we have. CHAD: That's an important distinction. One of the things that I've seen our clients worry about...and I saw it happen to one. Even though lots of people worry about it, I've only ever seen it happen one time, but it's still a risk, and that is when competitors come along. And unbeknownst to you, they dramatically over raise and therefore are just able to flood the market, saturate the attention, and build way bigger and faster at a loss than you are willing to do. GUILLAUME: Yeah, or able to do. [laughs] CHAD: Or able to do, right? Because they've raised 500 million [chuckles] or something like that. That's what happened with our client, who was in the group buying space at the same time as Groupon and LivingSocial. And so that's the only time I've ever seen it happen, but it's something that people are worried about. How are you...is that something on your mind? GUILLAUME: It's interesting. So they've raised 15 million Series A, and they've been around since 2012. So they've been around a long time. And it almost feels like they... [laughs] I'm not saying they did, but it almost feels like they landed on my LinkedIn. And we're very anti-social media. The message is really strong on anti-social media. But ultimately, they built an app. And so I think we've already matured past the point that in terms of our scaling and our ability to integrate with any platform, our strategy already goes beyond competing on a direct basis of an app that serves ads. In fact, if anything, at some stage, I'm hoping that they could plug into our engine and our pipes and add an extra layer of data and personalization to the adverts that they serve. So ultimately, when they came, and it was during the Champions League final that they had their first big launch because one of the backers is a football player, my phone just went berserk. Because it was like, wait, what? And at first, I was a bit worried but ultimately, no. I only really, really see it as a positive at this stage. But obviously, yes, they can advertise. They can speak to brands. They've got much more market presence. Everywhere you go on the underground, there are those posters. But we have a very clear, distinct proposition that is quite different. As I said, really, this pulling apart what Zedosh is and what the Attention Exchange is; the Attention Exchange is really potentially the plumbing, the rails for this post-cookie advertising model. CHAD: So that being said, you are doing some fundraising now. That's right? GUILLAUME: Yes. In fact, I don't think I've stopped fundraising [laughter] since this started. And certainly, that wasn't something I was anticipating despite the fact that...I mentioned I'm married to a corporate lawyer. She told me, "Your role as a CEO, as a founder, you're just going to be fundraising." I thought, yeah, well, I'll get some money in, and then we can focus on doing the stuff. But every time money comes in, most often you sort of have already spent it. It's allocated; it's gone. You need to look for the next lot. But yes, we are fundraising. Currently, we're still focused majoritively on angels. We're looking to prove our scalability model with this existing raise, at which point I think we’ll be ready and looking for institutional funds. But we use something called EIS funding which is UK-specific but is so, so rewarding for UK taxpayers. Basically, they get 30% back off the tax amount of their tax return, which is a great incentive, and all the gains from the equity is free of capital gains tax as well. So it almost becomes a no-brainer for people who have money that they're looking to invest in early-stage risky businesses. They're already really risking. The capital risk is under 50% of what they put in because there's also an insurance element; if the company goes bust that you've invested, there's something called loss relief. CHAD: So it's really attractive to angel-level investors. GUILLAUME: Correct. So you have to be a UK taxpayer as an individual to benefit from this specific relief. Of course, I mean, we have had some non-UK people still invest through the same sort of advanced subscription agreement. But yes, it's very attractive for UK taxpayers. CHAD: And do you think...[laughs] you've already answered this question. But I guess when do you think you'll stop fundraising? GUILLAUME: We're looking to change the way the internet works. [laughter] CHAD: Right. GUILLAUME: And so if we're mildly successful even redistributing the 100 billion of ad fraud which is currently being lost out there, we're entering a very cash-rich market looking for solutions at this moment in time. So if we're to raise some cash that enables us to put in place the plumbing and the pipes that we're looking to connect to, then actually, we should be relatively profitable relatively quickly, at which point, I guess we'd no longer need to fundraise. But at which point we'd probably say, "Well, actually, the U.S. is now ready for this. Let's go." CHAD: [laughs] GUILLAUME: I don't think we're particularly a cash-thirsty business. It's all built on AWS. CHAD: And you're right. That's why I asked the question because if your model is working, if you're having the impact you want, there's a lot of money in advertising. And so you should get to the point where you're able to do that profitably. GUILLAUME: Absolutely. CHAD: And start being as big as Google, right? [laughs] GUILLAUME: Yeah. I read a book called Life After Google. I don't know if I shared that with you the last time we met. But it's weird. It was written five or six years ago, but it's coming true. I think this whole premise of Web3, and this decentralization of data, and the ownership of data, the profiting of data at the individual level, is coming to the fore. And I can think of no better way to bridge your value and identity online than having it connected to your real-world assets, income, and spending behavior. CHAD: I was wondering whether you are going to mention Web3. [laughs] GUILLAUME: Huh. CHAD: Because this decentralization of the advertising money directly to users is a very Web3 idea. GUILLAUME: I agree. CHAD: [laughs] So how much do you talk about Web3 in your pitch or when you're talking about it? It hasn't come up until now in this conversation, so maybe not so much. GUILLAUME: It's a double-edged sword, I feel, because I think most people think Web3. They think crypto. CHAD: Yes. GUILLAUME: And we're paying cash in fiat, and although there's every possibility we could have a token-based solution, we're not looking at that because the core immutable value of your attention is linked in your spending behavior on earth and online, but through real transactions with real merchants. 99.999% of transactions, I imagine, aren't crypto yet and don't live on a blockchain, so until that point, I think we steer clear of it. Whether we could have raised more money more quickly if we [laughs] had mentioned it more, I don't know. But for me, there are quite a few steps to go in our journey as I see it having matured from the app to the plumbing, the plumbing now going to more publishers, more publishers meaning more audience, more audience meaning more attention, more advertising. At which point, as I said, the U.S. will probably be there with open banking. There are a lot of things in Web 2.0 that could be resolved. And yeah, if we make it that far, I think we'll be in an awesome position to have an identity solution for Web3 or Web5. [laughs] CHAD: Well, I wish you all the best in that journey. And I really appreciate you stopping by and sharing with us. GUILLAUME: My pleasure. It's been real great and nice to hear from you again. And I hope our paths cross in the real world soon enough. CHAD: Yeah. If folks want to get in touch or learn more or get in touch with you, where are all the different places that they can do that? GUILLAUME: We have two websites, so zedosh.com is the consumer app, attentionexchange.co.uk is our other website. Otherwise, feel free to reach out to me on LinkedIn. And on Twitter, I'm @G_Zedosh. I'm not massive on Twitter. There are a lot of bots on that. CHAD: [laughs] I guess I'm not that surprised. So you can subscribe to the show, find links to everything that was just mentioned along with notes and a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. I'm also not very active these days. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Guillaume Kendall.
Guillaume Kendall is the Founder of Zedosh and Attention Exchange, which is working to build a safe place for advertisers, publishers, and consumers to all benefit from fair access to human attention. Chad talks with Guillaume about open banking, changing up who the beneficiaries of consumer attention and data are, and giving companies opportunities to advertise without interrupting consumers with ads. Zedosh (https://zedosh.com/) The Attention Exchange (https://attentionexchange.co.uk/) Follow The Attention Exchange on Twitter (https://twitter.com/attnexchange) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-attention-exchange/). Follow Guillaume on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/guillaumekendall/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is The Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Guillaume Kendall, the Founder of Zedosh and the Attention Exchange, which is working to build a safe place for advertisers, publishers, and consumers to all benefit from fair access to human attention. Guillaume, thank you for joining me. GUILLAUME: Thank you so much for having me. It's a real privilege. CHAD: If I'm not mistaken, you and I first met in person for lunch one time in London when I was visiting London in; I think it was...I went back and looked at my calendar. It was March 10th, 2020, if I'm not mistaken, either that or it was that Friday of that week. GUILLAUME: It must have been one of the last weeks pre-pandemic. CHAD: It was. I literally woke up on Saturday morning for my flight to come back to the U.S. to the headlines that all flights from Europe were being shut down. [laughs] And I almost dropped my phone until I realized, oh, that's the headline, but the real detail is I can get back. It's all the rest of Europe, not the UK, yet. That was the following week. I made it home, and then the world changed. GUILLAUME: I sure did, didn't it? [laughs] It's funny, isn't it? Because the two-year period in between seems to have flown by. It feels like just yesterday. I remember I think, even what I ate. CHAD: [laughs] And at the time, you were working on a new application, and we were talking about that. But I want to fast forward a little bit to today. Tell me more about Attention Exchange, and then we're going to rewind a bit to how you've arrived. GUILLAUME: So the Attention Exchange...by way of background, I come from the fintech space rather than adtech. And it really, ultimately, the Attention Exchange is a matching engine, using financial terms, that matches the right video content to the right consumer based on their spending data rather than their browsing data. So it's a matching engine. And it looks at rules that ultimately we're able to derive, or actually, I better use the phrase, we can bridge the gap between attention and intention based on our audience's spending patterns. And the reason we can access those is because they give us explicit permission. We have something called open banking here in the UK. It's actually across most of Europe now. But it enables the consumer to own their data and share it outside the bank if they so wish to with other regulated third parties. So we're such a regulated third party, and they share that data with us, as I said, to be matched with video content from brands that are relevant to their spending instead of their browsing. What it ultimately means is we're very well-positioned in this apparent post-cookie world that seems to be heading our way eventually because we don't rely on any other tracking technology to spy on our audience. They voluntarily give it to us. And I guess the kicker which is...people are probably asking themselves, why would they do that? That's because they get paid. So we put cash directly into the bank account or one of the bank accounts they've connected to our platform in exchange for their immutably valuable attention to that content. CHAD: So correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel like open banking has had a significant impact not only on the data sharing that you're describing but just on the banking ecosystem in general in the United Kingdom and now Europe. GUILLAUME: So I think if you were to speak to the purveyors of open banking, it hasn't had as big an impact as they felt it would have had. I think we reached earlier this year only to fact-check this, but about 6 million people in the UK now utilize open banking in one form or another. But I think what was very interesting is that the ecosystem that sprung up around it was mostly around changing the user experience for the end consumer to have a better handle on their financial health, which is a really important topic. And the reason that is is that before, it wasn't really in the bank's interests to tell you if you're about to hit your overdraft or go over your overdraft because they'd charge you an extra 20 pounds for an unplanned loan, and then you'd have to pay it. Your balances (This is going back a little. I'm showing my age. ) was always two or three days out of date, which was weird. So open banking; the first thing that sprung up around it is we'll connect your bank accounts. We'll give you this holistic view of your mortgages, your credit, your debit, your net worth really across various assets. And we've moved progressively towards more of open finance rather than just open banking. You can connect via APIs a lot of your financial identity to these open banking providers. But having said that, no one has looked at it in the way that we have, which is actually this is an advertising play, and it could be potentially a real change maker in the way that consumers benefit from this $400 billion industry which is advertising rather than all the fintech stuff that's been happening around open banking. But yes, so it's not to be sniffed at, you know, several million people are using open banking. But most people, I don't even think, realize they're using open banking. They open the Revolut app, and it says, "Do you want to see your Monzo balance inside our app?" You say, "Well, yeah, okay, that means I don't have to open Monzo." And lo and behold, you share that data. CHAD: Right. Yeah, that's a really good perspective. I think from my perspective; I was thinking it's sort of made it...there's a separation between the banking backends and the user experience, and I think that in part has given rise to these challenger banks and made it more possible for them to do that. GUILLAUME: Yeah, that's a very fair point. I think, certainly, if nothing else, it certainly forced the incumbent players, those that have been around for a few hundred years, to really buckle up their ideas and think about how to react to this new threat. At first, they thought, geez, open banking is going to cause us all sorts of problems, but I think as it's gone full circle. You find that, actually, most people are looking for that user experience, and the banks have been forced to provide it within their existing ecosystem. So now, most banking apps provide really super UI or UX, meaning that you don't have to go use third-party tools to get such a lens. And in fact, the most interesting one I've seen of late, which I think is definitely worth a mention, is a company called Cogo; and Cogo used open banking to carbon score your spending and let you offset it. So if you spent four pounds at McDonald's, it would guess that that's X kilos of carbon and give you several options to offset it. And actually, in the end, NatWest formed a partnership with them. This is a classic use case where actually, now the carbons offseter is available within that NatWest app, and you don't really have any idea it's Cogo. That's what you're seeing is ironically, those who have had success in innovative, exciting use cases have been pulled back into the ecosystem being offered because they still want the scale overnight. They had access to 8 million NatWest customers or whatever the number is. So, yes, I think; certainly, all banking apps have had to, even the banks themselves, have had to reorganize and rethink how they deliver technology to retail consumers who probably had had very little churn in the past because the options were very limited. CHAD: That's great. So tell me about the genesis for this idea and realizing that you could use open banking to view people's financial information and to develop a profile that could be used to opt into advertising. Where's the genesis of that idea for you? GUILLAUME: Sure. So actually, several threads came together very neatly in quite a tight timescale, the first of which is I spent a lot of money, relatively speaking, on a company called Patch Plants. And Patch Plants deliver plants to your house, [laughter] and they have quite a nice way to go about it. All the plants have got human names, and they come with little booklets about how to look after them. And I felt very positive about the relationship I felt I had with Patch Plants until for the three, maybe four months following that purchase, there wasn't a website, or a social feed that I was on that didn't have Patch Plants all over it. And I really took note of my sentiment towards them [laughs] where I thought, go away, Patch Plants. I'm a customer. Why don't you know better? With the amount of data that we provide to the web, you just assume...and maybe this is where it all starts to click into place that actually, it's not that smart. CHAD: The interesting thing is I think it is possible for companies to on target you once they decide to do it, but it seems like nobody does that. [laughs] And it's like, I've just bought a stove. Why am I seeing stoves all over the place? [laughs] I'm not going to buy another one. GUILLAUME: Yeah, again, I think it comes from the underlying infrastructure, which is basically this concept of cookies, which we accept on every single website before we can do anything with it. And you've probably got a number of unchecked-out stoves across the web. And it's not locking on to the fact you've got one checked-out stove. But of course, we're connected to the bank account. And so when we see that transaction, we see the counterparties. We know for a fact that that person has made that transaction with that vendor, and therefore, you probably need to change the message. And that goes from daily purchases right through to the massive, heavy items we can see when people started a car leasing agreement. Well, if you want to get them to think about considering your brand of vehicle in two or three years or three or four years, there's probably a journey that you should take that person on. But then again, once they've made the purchase, don't keep hassling them. So that's the first thing. If you saw my bank account...so I worked with open banking innovation [laughs]. I guess that's pretty important. CHAD: [laughs] GUILLAUME: So I was acutely aware of how the data could be shared and analyzed, so that's the first point. And then, pretty much at the same time, Netflix brought out this documentary, The Social Dilemma, really putting across that these social media applications were basically designed, maybe it's not a surprise, but pretty much as gambling apps. They're exceptionally addictive. And the reason they're addictive is because the longer you spend on them, the more advertising they can slide into; now, I think one in every four posts. And now that we've moved on to short-form video content, there's infinite scroll. We're all on these apps for hours a day. But the only way they generate revenues is through advertising, and the only way they get advertising is by you spending more time. And it sort of didn't sit too well with me, especially after we had the Euro Championship in football or soccer here. And there was a ton of racist abuse that went out to players across social media. Lots of brands and advertisers started pulling away from it for a very short period of time to express their protest. But I realized then that, actually, there is no alternative. If you want to attract attention, you have to fund social media or Google, and that's kind of it. Those are your options as a brand or an advertiser. And the former being social media is really not a very healthy place to spend time. Sure, some good comes out of it. But I would argue that the bad that comes out of it far outweighs any of the good that's come from social media, certainly in the last five years or so, I believe. It's at the center of some major divisions in our communities. But it's all funded through advertising revenue. So that was the second point is that there really is no alternative. And why should Mark Zuckerberg be the beneficiary of my attention, my data, my value whilst putting absolutely no effort in changing or being an arbiter of the content? They're keeping their hands up saying, hey, we're not a publisher. If that content is there, it's there. And it becomes a very complicated argument very quickly around free speech and all of this sort of stuff. But ultimately, there's a ton of really nasty stuff. And then we had a family friend, specifically, who really put herself in a lot of danger, a young girl. And that was a very real impact on human life close to us that was all driven from what she was able to access with alarming ease via Instagram. So those sorts of threads all came together. And then the more sort of...it's one of those things, right? Once you see a yellow car, you're looking out for a yellow car. You keep seeing them. But I don't think I was proactively looking out for it too much. But it seemed that every day almost, there was a new-new story in the front pages of the papers where Facebook was in some sort of trouble, and that obviously materialized last year with the Facebook leaks. And everything we've been just discussing now they've known about. They know about it. They're choosing not to make a difference. So we had a really powerful motivation to try and bring about a different mechanism for this $400 billion industry to operate. And rather than exploit our data, exploit our mental well-being, exploit our communities and everything else in order to drive advertising revenue, maybe the advertiser could have a more direct relationship, a fair and more transparent relationship with the consumer with whom they want a dialogue. And I think it's been the biggest learning curve for us is that brands and advertisers feel weird about paying consumers to pay attention. But we're saying we think it is weirder that you pay Google and Facebook to track these people all over the web and interrupt them everywhere they don't want to be spoken to. Why not just pay them to have a fair, transparent dialogue? I know you have money. I know you spend it with my competitors who are in my market. I want your attention, and this is what I have to tell you. There we go. So that was the sort of the kernel, the genesis. CHAD: I can totally see why advertisers are...scared is not the right word. Just, you know, it's just they've never had a relationship where they're paying the consumer directly for any kind of advertising that they do [chuckles] whether it be TV historically. There's always an intermediary. And the idea of paying people directly is not only different, but in some ways, I can imagine people view it as crude. Like, it's one thing if it's going through an intermediary and you're paying them, and advertising is being run, but it's another to just pay someone to pay attention to you. GUILLAUME: Yeah, but I think this is the point about the open banking. I completely agree with you; if you're paying somebody based on their cookies or any of the other data, the first-party data or third-party data, that's abstracted several layers from that pair of eyeballs that you know has a tendency to buy X on Y time horizon. That's never been possible before. And so through your television, it's scale. You're paying the broadcaster because they've got 3 million people watching Coronation Street on, I don't know, whatever. But it's always based on these tiny, tiny fractions of engagement, and that's always been the way it is. So you need the intermediary for scale. But I think what I'm hoping, what I've literally bet my house on [laughter], that's one thing that's going to change. I sold my house since we started to do this. All those marketplaces are completely saturated, and they are not getting less busy; they're getting more busy. And so okay, TikToks appeared, but the medium through which video content is provided to the consumer, you're lucky to get a quarter of a second or half a second with that person. And so you're right, but what is now the alternative to actually getting a minute, a minute and a half, two minutes with somebody where they're not skipping; they're not going past? You know they're a real person. You know they're human. All of our consumers have to have a bank account. They have to have transactions, and they have to have an income in order to be valuable and receive any adverts into their feed. So it's just never been possible before. The scale play, the intermediary, was always sort of, I think, accepted, and it still is today. There's going to be a bunch of fraud. I think there's like 15 cents in every dollar spent online digitally for advertising is lost. I think it's a $100 billion problem by next year. So I guess the point I'm making is the intermediaries historically and to today have existed because you need to reach millions of eyeballs in order to get a very low interaction rate. With our model, we're able to target thousands of people and achieve a 19.6% average click-through rate even after a minute and a half worth of content because they're engaged and you're not interrupting them. So we think it's a relatively elegant model for what is a saturated, noisy world where eventually also the very mechanism by which they do track and target you is going to be replaced at some stage by Google and Chrome. Mid-Roll Ad: When starting a new project, we understand that you want to make the right choices in technology, features, and investment but that you don’t have all year to do extended research. In just a few weeks, thoughtbot’s Discovery Sprints deliver a user-centered product journey, a clickable prototype or Proof of Concept, and key market insights from focused user research. We’ll help you to identify the primary user flow, decide which framework should be used to bring it to life, and set a firm estimate on future development efforts. Maximize impact and minimize risk with a validated roadmap for your new product. Get started at: tbot.io/sprint. CHAD: You have this idea. It's really challenging the status quo. You're working in open banking innovation at the time. What did you start to do then, to try to bring your idea to life? GUILLAUME: So the first thing was actually my background is in sales and business development but within the fintech and open banking space. So I've worked with a lot of very smart people. And the first thing I really needed to do was quickly validate whether or not this is something. So a guy that we brought on...he's not so much a co-founder, but the other director of the business is a guy called Matt McBride, who's this global head of UX at a company I used to work for. And that was really the first thing is to try and rapidly prototype what the experience would look like and ultimately go out to our target audience, which was Gen Z here in the UK, and ask them whether or not this is the sort of thing they'd engage with. And the responses were actually really very positive. "Hang on; you're going to pay me to watch ads that are relevant to me? No-brainer, please do." And then, we were able to raise 100 grand, 150 grand, which enabled us to take that prototype and build it into something that, after a few obstacles with Apple in the App Store, we were able to get live. So that was really the first thing, I guess is, figuring out the way and the people that I needed to help me out to take this idea into something tangible and then tested it before I went much further with it. I was very fortunate, or I am very fortunate, that my partner is a corporate lawyer; my wife, sorry, now; we've been married since we started. [laughs] And so, actually, the mechanism through which we were able to raise the really earliest funds meant that we didn't have to give very much of the business away at such an early stage, which I think was a key learning point that I certainly share with other founders is you don't have to go give away 25% of your business for a little bit of money just to get it off PowerPoint. There are other ways. CHAD: So I think I remember what I told you when we met and talked. Do you remember what it was? GUILLAUME: You shared lots of very valuable insights with me. CHAD: My memory is that at the time, it was only advertisements in the app. And I think I said, "I get that people are going to want to be paid to look at these things." GUILLAUME: Oh yes, right. CHAD: "But if there's nothing else here, it's going to be really hard to bring people back to do that." And we had seen that in another client of ours that was paying people to browse. And what they'd do is they do it for a while, and they'd hit whatever monthly cap of return that they could get, an amount that they thought made sense. And then, they would switch back to their other browser because it was a better browsing experience. So they were only using it because they were getting paid. And as soon as that incentive went away, they would stop using it. GUILLAUME: Yeah, so I remember that. And you were right. And I guess there are a few things that came about from that, so the first thing is that Apple agreed. So we couldn't get the app onto the App Store if it was just a feed of adverts that remunerated the user to watch them, incentivized the user. So we put quite a lot of additional features, I guess more traditional fintech features, open banking features within the application in order to give the user insights into their spending, week-on-week analysis, and categorization of spend. And we also built this what we call the level up section where every week, you get refreshed pieces of content around, you know, very Gen Z-focused again, but what's the difference between a credit card and a loan? Is buy now, pay later a good idea? What's open banking? So we generate all this content, which they don't get paid to consume but is there, and they do. But more importantly, I think what we realized is that actually what we've got...this is the difference, I guess, between the Attention Exchange and Zedosh being the app; it's the plumbing and the matching that is the real value here. It is the models we're building that understand people's behavior and propensity or intent to buy something based on the data they're sharing with us. And so, actually, what we've built is a solution where you should be able to log in to any publisher that has the additional content, and experience, and value that you're speaking about there, places you ordinarily already browse and frequent. But if you want to, there's a separate tab where there are ads waiting for you that remunerate you, but you go into that tab. So we're trying to remove the interruption, you know, the pop-up even having to accept cookies from your user experience with the publisher moving into a separate, dedicated tab. And the reason the consumer is still going to go click on that tab is because they know that there's some content that's relevant and pays them, but they're still able to enjoy all the other benefits that the publisher provides. So it's kind of weirdly trying to flip this premium subscription model where you pay not to have ads. Actually, you're the first recipient of the ad income, and you share that with the publisher. CHAD: I think this is really cool, and yet I think it also rubs up against or hits up against something that is just so different than the status quo. The idea that companies would not interrupt you with advertising is probably so foreign [laughs] to people that I imagine you get reluctance to that. GUILLAUME: The last two years have been a steeper learning curve for us and all the advertisers and agencies, and players we've been speaking to. But what I'm grateful for is the fact that what we term the ad-pocalypse is coming. And so I was just at an event called MAD//Fest last week, which is basically all the advertising industry got together in London, the UK advertising industry. And every single panel discussion talk was about the post-cookie era. And all that most people are speaking about is how do we gather more data in other ways from the consumer in order to keep doing more of the same? And all of a sudden, when we're talking about the fact that our users give us their banking transactions, we see how much they earn and where they spend it and, therefore, can also attribute without the use of cookies, which is the holy grail of advertising. We started generating an awful lot of interest from really big players. So I think you're right; the status quo is having the rug pulled from underneath them, right? Look at Meta's share price this year. I haven't checked it this week, but last time I checked, it was down 52%. And that's because iOS app tracking transparency is stopping the ability to track and monitor and, increasingly, ultimately, the ability for the user to remain more private. And they all are doing it. Why would they want to be less private in order to benefit Meta? In our platform, they're opting into their most intimate data being shared because they stand to be rewarded fairly for it. So I completely agree; up to this point, "What? No way." This is how it works. And certainly, the thing that will probably remain true is to do more with less isn't of interest because agencies get paid a percentage of the budget. They don't want to do [laughs] the same with less budget. But my point remains that with iOS app tracking transparency...apparently, Android is going the same way, and Chrome is replacing third-party cookies. The status quo simply cannot continue. Something has to change. And so I think with this identity solution often is what we're building. The consumer stands a chance of being the first in line to receive a reward for their attention. And I'm very pleased actually we've got some competition as well since we last spoke, which is new. But this concept of rewarding consumers for attention, I think, will just...how else are you going to get their time? They're not listening to you on TikTok. [laughs] CHAD: I'm happy to hear that you're viewing competition as a positive thing. And I agree competition raises awareness that this is a thing and a potential, and most people will shop around or research it further. And that's a chance for them to discover you. GUILLAUME: I hope so. This company has done a big advertising campaign all over. It's on TV, radio, and the underground in London. And the amount of people who've reached out to me... "Is this company doing what you're doing?" And ultimately, they're paying users in a way for their attention to advertising. But they don't use open banking, and they don't have the data that we have. CHAD: That's an important distinction. One of the things that I've seen our clients worry about...and I saw it happen to one. Even though lots of people worry about it, I've only ever seen it happen one time, but it's still a risk, and that is when competitors come along. And unbeknownst to you, they dramatically over raise and therefore are just able to flood the market, saturate the attention, and build way bigger and faster at a loss than you are willing to do. GUILLAUME: Yeah, or able to do. [laughs] CHAD: Or able to do, right? Because they've raised 500 million [chuckles] or something like that. That's what happened with our client, who was in the group buying space at the same time as Groupon and LivingSocial. And so that's the only time I've ever seen it happen, but it's something that people are worried about. How are you...is that something on your mind? GUILLAUME: It's interesting. So they've raised 15 million Series A, and they've been around since 2012. So they've been around a long time. And it almost feels like they... [laughs] I'm not saying they did, but it almost feels like they landed on my LinkedIn. And we're very anti-social media. The message is really strong on anti-social media. But ultimately, they built an app. And so I think we've already matured past the point that in terms of our scaling and our ability to integrate with any platform, our strategy already goes beyond competing on a direct basis of an app that serves ads. In fact, if anything, at some stage, I'm hoping that they could plug into our engine and our pipes and add an extra layer of data and personalization to the adverts that they serve. So ultimately, when they came, and it was during the Champions League final that they had their first big launch because one of the backers is a football player, my phone just went berserk. Because it was like, wait, what? And at first, I was a bit worried but ultimately, no. I only really, really see it as a positive at this stage. But obviously, yes, they can advertise. They can speak to brands. They've got much more market presence. Everywhere you go on the underground, there are those posters. But we have a very clear, distinct proposition that is quite different. As I said, really, this pulling apart what Zedosh is and what the Attention Exchange is; the Attention Exchange is really potentially the plumbing, the rails for this post-cookie advertising model. CHAD: So that being said, you are doing some fundraising now. That's right? GUILLAUME: Yes. In fact, I don't think I've stopped fundraising [laughter] since this started. And certainly, that wasn't something I was anticipating despite the fact that...I mentioned I'm married to a corporate lawyer. She told me, "Your role as a CEO, as a founder, you're just going to be fundraising." I thought, yeah, well, I'll get some money in, and then we can focus on doing the stuff. But every time money comes in, most often you sort of have already spent it. It's allocated; it's gone. You need to look for the next lot. But yes, we are fundraising. Currently, we're still focused majoritively on angels. We're looking to prove our scalability model with this existing raise, at which point I think we’ll be ready and looking for institutional funds. But we use something called EIS funding which is UK-specific but is so, so rewarding for UK taxpayers. Basically, they get 30% back off the tax amount of their tax return, which is a great incentive, and all the gains from the equity is free of capital gains tax as well. So it almost becomes a no-brainer for people who have money that they're looking to invest in early-stage risky businesses. They're already really risking. The capital risk is under 50% of what they put in because there's also an insurance element; if the company goes bust that you've invested, there's something called loss relief. CHAD: So it's really attractive to angel-level investors. GUILLAUME: Correct. So you have to be a UK taxpayer as an individual to benefit from this specific relief. Of course, I mean, we have had some non-UK people still invest through the same sort of advanced subscription agreement. But yes, it's very attractive for UK taxpayers. CHAD: And do you think...[laughs] you've already answered this question. But I guess when do you think you'll stop fundraising? GUILLAUME: We're looking to change the way the internet works. [laughter] CHAD: Right. GUILLAUME: And so if we're mildly successful even redistributing the 100 billion of ad fraud which is currently being lost out there, we're entering a very cash-rich market looking for solutions at this moment in time. So if we're to raise some cash that enables us to put in place the plumbing and the pipes that we're looking to connect to, then actually, we should be relatively profitable relatively quickly, at which point, I guess we'd no longer need to fundraise. But at which point we'd probably say, "Well, actually, the U.S. is now ready for this. Let's go." CHAD: [laughs] GUILLAUME: I don't think we're particularly a cash-thirsty business. It's all built on AWS. CHAD: And you're right. That's why I asked the question because if your model is working, if you're having the impact you want, there's a lot of money in advertising. And so you should get to the point where you're able to do that profitably. GUILLAUME: Absolutely. CHAD: And start being as big as Google, right? [laughs] GUILLAUME: Yeah. I read a book called Life After Google. I don't know if I shared that with you the last time we met. But it's weird. It was written five or six years ago, but it's coming true. I think this whole premise of Web3, and this decentralization of data, and the ownership of data, the profiting of data at the individual level, is coming to the fore. And I can think of no better way to bridge your value and identity online than having it connected to your real-world assets, income, and spending behavior. CHAD: I was wondering whether you are going to mention Web3. [laughs] GUILLAUME: Huh. CHAD: Because this decentralization of the advertising money directly to users is a very Web3 idea. GUILLAUME: I agree. CHAD: [laughs] So how much do you talk about Web3 in your pitch or when you're talking about it? It hasn't come up until now in this conversation, so maybe not so much. GUILLAUME: It's a double-edged sword, I feel, because I think most people think Web3. They think crypto. CHAD: Yes. GUILLAUME: And we're paying cash in fiat, and although there's every possibility we could have a token-based solution, we're not looking at that because the core immutable value of your attention is linked in your spending behavior on earth and online, but through real transactions with real merchants. 99.999% of transactions, I imagine, aren't crypto yet and don't live on a blockchain, so until that point, I think we steer clear of it. Whether we could have raised more money more quickly if we [laughs] had mentioned it more, I don't know. But for me, there are quite a few steps to go in our journey as I see it having matured from the app to the plumbing, the plumbing now going to more publishers, more publishers meaning more audience, more audience meaning more attention, more advertising. At which point, as I said, the U.S. will probably be there with open banking. There are a lot of things in Web 2.0 that could be resolved. And yeah, if we make it that far, I think we'll be in an awesome position to have an identity solution for Web3 or Web5. [laughs] CHAD: Well, I wish you all the best in that journey. And I really appreciate you stopping by and sharing with us. GUILLAUME: My pleasure. It's been real great and nice to hear from you again. And I hope our paths cross in the real world soon enough. CHAD: Yeah. If folks want to get in touch or learn more or get in touch with you, where are all the different places that they can do that? GUILLAUME: We have two websites, so zedosh.com is the consumer app, attentionexchange.co.uk is our other website. Otherwise, feel free to reach out to me on LinkedIn. And on Twitter, I'm @G_Zedosh. I'm not massive on Twitter. There are a lot of bots on that. CHAD: [laughs] I guess I'm not that surprised. So you can subscribe to the show, find links to everything that was just mentioned along with notes and a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. I'm also not very active these days. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Guillaume Kendall.
Alice Loy is a Founding Partner at DaVinci Ventures and the Co-Founder and CEO of Creative Startups, the leading global startup accelerator and company builder for design, food, immersive, and creative companies. Victoria and Chad talk with Alice about what she means by creative companies, how much judgment she must pass as an investor with a love for the "weird and wonderful," and some of the challenges faced in bringing diversity to the rest of the accelerator world. DaVinci Ventures (https://www.davinciventures.co/) Creative Startups (https://www.creativestartups.org/) Follow Creative Startups on Twitter (https://twitter.com/createstartups), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/createstartups/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/createstartups/), Substack (https://creativestartups.substack.com/), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1SCTGPWdes6ArrYJU0YJ-g), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/global-center-for-cultural-entrepreneurship/). Follow Alice on Twitter (https://twitter.com/aliceloy) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/aliceloy/). Alice's Blog (http://www.aliceloy.com/) Etkie (https://etkie.com/) Embodied Labs (https://www.embodiedlabs.com/) Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. VICTORIA: And I'm your other host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Alice Loy, Founding Partner at DaVinci Ventures and the Co-Founder and CEO of Creative Startups, the leading global startup accelerator and company builder for design, food, immersive, and creative companies. CHAD: Alice, thank you so much for joining us. ALICE: Thanks for having me. CHAD: Can you tell us a little bit more about Creative Startups in general but also what you mean by creative companies specifically? Like, isn't every company creative? [laughs] ALICE: Yeah, it's so funny. That's often the first question. And sometimes people I can feel their sense of indignation in thinking maybe I think they're not creative. CHAD: [laughs] ALICE: First of all, the creative industries are pretty well defined globally by the World Bank and entities like that. I'll come back to that. Yes, all human beings are creative. I like to joke that that's what got us out of caves in the first place. But more importantly, all entrepreneurs are very creative regardless of what sector you're operating in. So when we're talking about creative, we're just referencing the set of industries that are measured as the quote, "creative industries." They include film, our museums, design certainly is a core element of that. Increasingly, we're seeing more and more people move toward the creative industries as mechanized labor takes over things like building cars or even running data analysis. CHAD: Has getting support and funding and that kind of thing traditionally been easy in the creative space or hard? ALICE: No. I know you know the answer to that question because you're a designer. [laughs] CHAD: I usually don't ask questions that I don't know the answers to, so... [laughs] ALICE: But it's a great question because actually what it uncovers, you guys, is that it has changed dramatically for people who I call creatives or creators in the last two or three years. It's a little tough to measure with the pandemic, but we know at least $2 billion have gone into platforms that support creators, businesses led by creators. The creative industry has really turned a corner. So when we started this work 15-16 years ago, I co-founded the organization with a gentleman named Tom, who is now in his 80s. But he had come out of what's called the cultural economy, which was the precursor to the creative economy. And, of course, now we're all living in the creator economy. So like every other industry, it evolves. And one turn in this evolution is that creatives are now understood as economic drivers, not just people who add nice flourishes to things at the end. When you're building new products, people think about engineers, but it's really a creative process. And people increasingly bring in creatives from the outset to think about how the design process can be more humanized, can be more effective to solve people's problems so that your products really delight customers instead of just get the job done. CHAD: Is there something you can point to that triggered or pushed along that turning point? ALICE: Well, not to be overly philosophical, but I would say the general sense in the U.S. and increasingly in other countries where we work is that human beings don't want to be cogs in a wheel. They don't want to just be bit parts in a system. When you talk to Gen Zers, they understand that they are complete human beings. And somehow, I think older generations bought into the idea that you have the same job for 40 years. You go to work at 8:00; you come home at 5:00. You repeat the next day. I think the sense in the economy is that people want to be fulfilled. If they're going to give that much time to a job, they want it to be meaningful and valuable. And they want it to solve some of the big problems. Frankly, big tech is not approaching the world in that way these days. And so I think younger people are looking for values-aligned opportunities. And the creative economy is a space where values tend to align with really reaching the full potential of each human being instead of just extracting their physical and occasionally mental labor toward building a capitalist system. And so I think that zeitgeist has helped open the door. I also then think when you look at the kinds of technologies that are being utilized, they're still fundamentally about communicating ideas, and art, and inspiration. That's what Facebook is. That's what TikTok is. That's what even news channels are. And as more people come into the world of saying, "Oh, I can share my ideas, my art, my jokes, my music, my whatever," they see themselves as creatives, and they go, "I wonder how I could get paid for that?" I mean, there are a multitude of factors weaving together to shift. I also think, quite frankly, the SaaS investment area has become so saturated. I mean, if you walk down the street in San Francisco, if you don't bump into three venture capitalists who are SaaS investors, it's like, what are you doing? And so I think other types of investors with a different background maybe are saying, hmm, what about this area over here? How could we make money? So that would be another thread I would say is helping drive. CHAD: It strikes me that what you've shared sort of creates a self-fulfilling cycle too. ALICE: Yes. CHAD: Because once creatives have examples of other creatives that have done this, it becomes an aspirational thing that they understand that they, too, could do themselves. ALICE: Yeah, 100%. So our goal when we started the startup accelerator...we launched the first accelerator for creative founders in 2013 in the world. And we said to ourselves, if we get one company that becomes the poster child for this creative movement and demonstrating that you can be, as we like to say, weird and wonderful and build a company, then we will unleash a flood of people who now see themselves in that light. We were very fortunate in that we got that one poster child, and that has really helped us paint a picture that's clear for a lot of people where they see themselves as entrepreneurs, even though they're a tattoo artist or they're a hard rock Navajo metal band from the reservation or whatever their background is. Now they look and go, "Oh yeah, I could do that," and they certainly could. Being an entrepreneur is really hard but not intellectually challenging; it's more heart-challenging. CHAD: Oh, that's really interesting, more heart challenging. ALICE: Yeah. I mean, you're an entrepreneur. You guys have built a business, so you know that being an entrepreneur is more about being able to just sort of stay calm in the waves than it is about building the world's best boat and being able to steer toward that destination no matter how the winds blow. CHAD: Yeah, I've often referred to it almost as grit, like the ability to, no matter what happened yesterday, get up and do it again. ALICE: Get up, yeah. And unfortunately, I think there's a myth, maybe at least in the U.S., that what drives most people to get up and go, again, is money. And I don't think that's true at all. I think what drives people to get up and go again is their love of customers or end users. And their feeling they're just irrefutable despite there being no evidence feeling that this is going to work. This is going to make a difference in people's lives. And that's why the sort of slog. And there are days when...one of the things we always start a Creative Startup's program with is find your tribe. Cling to the people who believe in you. Ignore the naysayers. The naysayers are ten to one. Blow them off and cling to the people who say, "Wow, dude, that sounds cool. I bet you could do that." Yes, do another coffee meeting with that person. [laughs] Because sometimes you just need people who can say, "You got this. You got this. Just do another day, man." What do you guys do? Let me ask, what do you guys do when things get really rocky for you? How do you guys collect that internal okay, I'm going to get back in the saddle. CHAD: I've talked about this with people before, and I actually think that this is going to be a non-answer, but I'll do my best. I actually don't know exactly what does this for me. But I do know a side effect is I also don't celebrate the wins as much as other people wish that I did. And I think it's because I just move on very quickly from things. I don't dwell on the downs as much. I also don't dwell on the highs as much. And so I don't know if it's just something about me that does it or I just trained myself to do that. But it does have some downsides to it. ALICE: That was a real answer. That wasn't a non-answer at all. CHAD: [laughs] ALICE: Victoria, what about you? VICTORIA: I think to add on to what Chad said is kind of that thoughtbot mentality of viewing things as an experiment. And so if you come in with that mentality, like, this is the experiment. We'll see if it works or it doesn't. And if it doesn't work, there are some lessons to be learned, and we can grow from that and do better next time. And if it does work, great; [chuckles] this is cool. And I actually like to celebrate the wins a lot. I like to really dwell in those moments and feel like we did something right. We should remember this and learn from that as well and then try to repeat it, right? ALICE: Yeah. Oh, I love that. CHAD: You mentioned that when you were first starting Creative Startups, you hoped to get one win, and you did. Which one was it? ALICE: To be clear, as a mom, we don't have favorite children, okay? [laughter] And there are different companies that have had enormous impact in different ways, so let me tick some off. Let me name first Etkie. It's a design company built by a woman named Sydney, who grew up in rural New Mexico with a passion for working with indigenous communities. Her design company makes spectacular handmade bracelets, average price point around 250 bucks. And she sells in about 100 different high-end galleries around the world. She creates 40 jobs for Navajo women on the reservation at twice the annual pay that they would receive if they worked any other job there. Pretty astounding, pretty astounding. Those women have gone on to reinvest their money in things like rebuilding the school, putting in wells for family. The Navajo Nation lacks drinking water all over the place. So really fundamentally shifting the economic and social trajectory of that community. She designs every single bracelet with a woman, and you'll see they're named after the women. And they just do a recollection process where the woman recalls something from her childhood, and they weave a story around that. And then, they create the bracelet design. They're beautiful, Etkie, E-T-K-I-E. The next one I would say that has really inspired me is founded by another woman who does...now she's doing more XR AR, But they started as a virtual reality company doing films for medical providers who needed to better understand the disease experience of their patients in order to come up with not just solutions to their lived experience but actual medical procedures, and technologies, and pharmaceuticals that could shape the outcomes of that patient. So that company is called Embodied Labs, founded by a woman named Carrie and her team out of LA. And they're now selling to hospital systems across California and increasingly in the Midwest, et cetera, changing thousands of lives. And then the one that most people do point to us and say, "Hey, good job," is a company called Meow Wolf. We were their first investor back in 2014. They've gone on to raise upwards of $250 million. They're kind of a competitor now to Disney. So they're in the immersive art and experience realm. They had a million visitors in their Denver spot. So far this year, they've had about a million visitors in their Las Vegas spot. They were founded here in Santa Fe, our hometown. And we didn't even know they existed. They didn't know we existed. [chuckles] The night before our application was to close, somebody wandered into a meeting they were having where they were talking about dissolving the art collective. And somebody said, "Oh before you guys make a decision, you should check out this thing." [laughs] So in some ways, it was angels on our shoulders in that it's a homegrown company, and Santa Fe is a small city. We needed a shift here around our creative economy. And they needed somebody to believe in them. They had gone to every business support organization they could find and had been told, "Well, you're probably trying to start an arts nonprofit." And they thought, "That's not really our vision. That's not...we want to build a company. We think art is something people will pay for if it's put forward in a way that blows your mind," and Meow certainly blows your mind. CHAD: That's really interesting. I mean, I totally get why people would say that just because...but that's like saying...when Disney was getting started [chuckles] people saying "It sounds like you're trying to create an arts nonprofit." ALICE: Yes. And I'm guessing a lot of people did. The future happens when we're all looking backwards, and very few people are looking forwards. And so I think it's important for entrepreneurs to keep in mind you're probably just statistically talking to somebody who's looking backwards because human beings tend to do that more than they look forward. And so better to find people early on who say, "You know, I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about because you're the expert in your startup, and I'm not. But let me ask you this, how could I be helpful?" That's the right question. If they give you an answer and they don't even know what you're talking about, you probably don't need their help. And that's hard for entrepreneurs because there are so many doubters out there that you have to kind of keep plucking through to find the one or two people who say, "That's really interesting. That seems like it might work. How could I help?" Did you guys have somebody at thoughtbot early on who you can remember sort of said, "Huh, that's interesting. How could I help?" CHAD: I think it was our early clients who most did that. ALICE: Oooh, yeah. CHAD: Because we're a consulting company, because we're an agency, finding clients who believed in us and wanted to work with us in part because they liked us was an important aspect to that. If it wasn't for those early clients, no amount of passion would have kept us going because we needed to support ourselves. ALICE: What a great insight, honestly. I think the sort of rhetoric around passion is really abused. Because there's now this sense that, well, if you have passion, you can build a business, and that's just not true. That's not true. I hate to say it, and people are always stunned when I say it because they think that I lead Creative Startups; I must be the core passion champion. But here's what I would say is if you have a passion for solving your client or your customers' problems, then you might have a business. [laughs] There's a huge difference there. There's a difference between well; this is what I want to make. This is what I love doing. That is not necessarily going to answer the question is anybody paying you to do that? And I like to encourage people to think about if you have passion for doing something, you probably have a hobby. If you do stuff that people want to pay you to do, you might have a business. And crossing that bridge is an analytical and a heart-wrenching process. Because usually, what you end up with is I mostly get to do what I love to do. But I do a lot of stuff I don't want to do because that's what building a business is, just like being a parent or any other really amazing, wonderful thing in life. Running a business is not just about doing what you love doing all day; it's mostly about doing what people want to pay you to do. And if you're doing what people want to pay you to do and you love it, that is beautiful. That is a blessed position to be in. It's rare. And you have to ask yourself very real questions and be brutally honest with yourself, or you could waste your retirement savings. You could spend a year or two away from your family before you figure that out, not to be depressing. [laughs] But we always say from our programs we look...not from our more advanced accelerator programs, but we also provide programs that are more; how do you figure out this idea? You have this idea, or you have what we call lucky revenue. A lot of creatives get lucky revenue where their friend sees them doing something, and they go, "Man, would you do one for me?" And then somebody else wants one, and now they have lucky revenue. And they're ready to say, "I think this might be a business." And those people we say you have three outcomes from our programs. One, you realize this is not a business. It's just not going to make any money. The business model does not pan out. Two, this might be a business if I do it differently, and now I need to figure out if I want to do it differently. And three is, yeah, I'm on track. Now I got to go grow it. And all three are valid outcomes. Because we've worked with people who came to us late, took out a loan. And we said, "Well, what's your plan for paying it back?" "Well, we don't know." That's bad. That's really dangerous. That can ruin families' economic futures. And so we're much happier to catch people before that happens so they can ask those critical questions about is this really a market opportunity? Is this a business I want to build? Is this, therefore, a business opportunity for me? And those questions are deceptively simple. In our more advanced programs, we focus on, okay, you've got revenue, you've got traction. You're ready to start maybe thinking about what's the next three years? Where are your cash flow gaps? Where's your, as people like to call it, the valley of death that you have to cross as you grow? What kind of financing can you go raise to help cross that valley? How do you get to 10 million in revenue, 50 million in revenue? People are at different stages of growing a business. MID-ROLL AD: Are you an entrepreneur or start-up founder looking to gain confidence in the way forward for your idea? At thoughtbot, we know you’re tight on time and investment, which is why we’ve created targeted 1-hour remote workshops to help you develop a concrete plan for your product’s next steps. Over four interactive sessions, we work with you on research, product design sprint, critical path, and presentation prep so that you and your team are better equipped with the skills and knowledge for success. Find out how we can help you move the needle at: tbot.io/entrepreneurs. CHAD: How much judgment do you pass as an investor as people who are reading applications about who gets into the accelerator program? How much judgment do you pass, and how do you strike that balance? ALICE: That's kind of a peek behind the curtain; how do people really pick companies? Different people do it differently. For us, we really hue toward weird and wonderful. We actually prefer...and this goes against what people say you should do, [laughs] but we kind of go against the grain in general. And it's worked out. We prefer to look at things that we don't totally understand partly because often creatives don't speak business speak. So I'm pretty turned off by (I'm going to make something up.) the Harvard Business School grad who has a music-sharing platform and doesn't play music. I'm like, how would you know about a music-sharing platform? Whereas a musician who comes with their garage band and they happen to have a computer science degree from the college down the road and they've invented this thing and all of a sudden, it's taking off, and they're not even sure why. I'm listening, and I'm like, oh, that's really interesting. A lot of creatives tend to pick up on opportunities in the market, and they don't frame it so much as a business opportunity because that's just not the language that they've learned to speak yet. But they have an insight into a particular sector or a need that people who are not really in that space... It feels like a lot of the startup world has been overtaken by people who want to be startup founders but don't necessarily have their hands dirty in a particular sector where they know how to really solve a problem that either a lot of people have, or that very few people have but that a lot of people have in the future if you build the market. And that's where you make a lot of money is if you build a market. So we look for things like that. So what does that mean when we're reading applications? We don't ask for financial statements. We ask, how much money did you make last year, and where do you think most of that money came from? We're more interested in are they interested in analyzing their business so they understand where growth could come from next? Instead of, what is your financial statements? Most of the entrepreneurs who come through our programs don't have financial statements. They might not even have a cash flow projection, which is really exciting. We have entrepreneurs who come to us who...I'll tell you a story. We had an entrepreneur come to us who ran underground music clubs in old houses in Denver. And he was like, "I think this is a business, but I don't know anything about business. I just started hosting these a few years ago." And I said, "Well, how many people...like, if you took an average year..." and I said, "You don't charge anything?" And he said, "No, people just hear about it." And I'm thinking, okay, so you get a couple thousand. "How many people in an average year come to your basement music club thing?" "50,000." [laughs] Yeah, I think you might have a business. I mean, those are the kinds of things that you think, wow, why did that take off? What is going on there? That's really interesting. Let's talk. And he had a mohawk. He played in a metal band. Business was not his deal. And so that wasn't the lens he was applying. I think a lot of designers and a lot of people who invent products and solutions start with; I'm doing this for myself, wouldn't this be rad? Without even knowing that, they touched a nerve in the market that now is kind of catching on fire. Those are really exciting entrepreneurs for us to work with. They do have to turn a corner on I'm building a business now. I'm not just doing something that's cool with my friends. And that can be a difficult place because it means you have to cross a bridge into the world of finance, and you're probably going to have to hire product managers. And now you go hire that Harvard Business School grad and they work for you. And a lot of people frankly don't want to turn that corner. And I get it because when you come back to that topic of, is this values-aligned? A lot of that world is not yet totally values-aligned. That's shifting, more impact investors, more investors who want to see more different types of people starting companies, but we're not there yet. And so there's this cultural clash. When creatives walk toward that space, they go, ew, I've been fighting against the man my whole life. And now you want me to get in the car and go on a long road trip with them? No thanks. [laughs] And I'm sitting there with the Doritos going, yeah, man, but I got all the good munchies, let's go. It often does work out. But I also understand why people say, "You know, that's just not my deal now." VICTORIA: Yeah. And you have a tremendous amount of diversity in your alumni. ALICE: We do, yeah. VICTORIA: And so do you find that there are some challenges in bringing in that group to the rest of the accelerator world? ALICE: Yeah, you know, funny, I was thinking about that yesterday. So about 70% of our alumni, and this has been true across the board from day one, are people of color or women. At one point, it was around 30% were women of color. I haven't looked at that number in a while. We've worked with about 550 companies worldwide. In the Middle East, half of our alumni are women-led companies. In the U.S., we are fortunate to be able to work with a lot of indigenous communities. New Mexico is home to a large indigenous population. And it's a lot of the reason our culture is so dynamic and beautiful. So for us, that was always a no-brainer that that was where a lot of the interesting creativity would come from and that that was where the rising markets were. We, for example, accelerated and were the first investor in a company called Native Realities, which is a comic book. And they founded the first indigenous Comic Con, which is now called Indigenous Pop X worldwide. And they saw obviously before even Black Panther, and it became kind of like people said, "Oh yeah, superheroes come from all communities." They saw that that market was rising. There are 300 million indigenous people worldwide. There are two comic book companies. Let that sink in. [laughs] It's like, oh my God, what is the possibility then not just around comic books, but gaming, animation, all kinds of creative tools, film, music? That's a huge market that has not been served at all. And we understood early on that that was an area where people want to tell their own stories. People want to understand the stories of other people. And then people want to build new stories together across those cultural or geographic boundaries. And the technology had shifted such that that was possible. In 1980, that wasn't really possible. The distribution channels of film were such that you had to raise money in Hollywood and have Tom Hanks and whatever. That's just not true anymore. So we saw that early on, and that has helped attract a lot of entrepreneurs who share our passion for really telling those stories. However, I would say for people who want to support rising entrepreneurs out of what I'm going to call distressed communities or communities that have been literally discouraged from becoming their own economic leaders is that the burden that most of the people bear who are building businesses, for example, from Black communities, or native communities, or women in the Middle East, those people tend to bear a larger burden than someone from a more privileged background like myself. They're often the person in their family and for their community who is helping to ensure that people get the health care they need, that that kid was able to visit the college that they wanted to apply to. They become that sort of anchor of support for more people than in situations where we have more support and more what I call margin. They have really little margin. And so to ask them to, for example, join an accelerator full-time for 12 weeks that just doesn't work. Because the decision that they're making, you know, from a very privileged position, we can say, "Well, either you're dedicated to your business, or you're not." But really, what we're saying to them is, well, either you do your business, or you love your family and your culture. That's the question we're asking them, and that's a totally unfair question. That's a ridiculous question. Every single one of us would say, "I love my family. Thanks, see ya." CHAD: So how do you balance that? ALICE: Well, it's tough. I mean, first of all, we have adopted in the programs where it's more for early-stage entrepreneurs, and we're opening doors to entrepreneurship. And we are being first and foremost patient, patient with they're crossing that threshold. We understand that our core outcome is that people come always saying, "I'm an entrepreneur. I'm ready for the journey." That means we do things like, first of all, we do all online. If possible, we do a meeting upfront, so everybody meets each other in person because that kind of sets a tone of just it's a lot of fun. We have food and drink, and we have a good time. And then we do 6 to 12 weeks online, and then we do a gathering at the end. And we build a community first and foremost of people who are understanding how they can help one another. So Creative Startups is a little different in how we do accelerators. We do not ever have people stand at the front of the room and tell people what they should do with their business partly because we're educators first and foremost, and we understand...I have a Ph.D. in entrepreneurship. I understand that entrepreneurs tend to be experiential learners, not all but many. And we're not going to be there in a year building their business. They're going to be building their business. We have to build their self-confidence. We have to build their ability to say, "I know how to row the boat. You're along for the ride." I'm just along for the ride. [laughs] That requires us to do things like, okay, so let's work on your business model and really carefully chunk out here's one piece of that. Let's go deeply into understanding that. Let's tackle the vocabulary. Let's look at how people talk about it online. Let's open that door culturally so that you can take that into your experiences and say, "Oh, I already kind of do that. I just use a different language," which is what a lot of designers do. A lot of designers, whatever your background, already do entrepreneurial processes. They use different language, and it's just a translation. It's literally just vocabulary. So we help people understand that the best way to figure out your client's needs are by listening; all people know that. If you want to understand someone else, listen, and unpacking that into then business speak a little bit, and then giving them opportunities to go do that in the real world. And being patient with how they might do that or why they couldn't get it done this week. Or maybe they want to come back with a different way of describing it than maybe a White person like me might describe what they experienced. And just giving a lot of latitude to people to have that own experience themselves. That honestly...I know that sounds very philosophical. But it breaks down into tactical things that we do in an accelerator that opens the door to a lot more entrepreneurs. And our Net Promoter Score is 9. Over 90% of people would recommend our program. People love our programs. And 70% of our alumni are still in business. So I think it's working. We have a lot of learning to do. We're doing an indigenous accelerator right now, and it's a lot of learning for me. It's very eye-opening. CHAD: As an accelerator specific to indigenous peoples, what made you decide to do that? Some people I know, thoughtbot included, sometimes hesitate to do things like that because we don't want...there's some hesitation around doing something like that. ALICE: So we share all of those hesitations, and we think they're spot on. We are doing this in partnership with a group called Creative Nations out of Colorado. They are all indigenous people. They're a new group. And we envision Creative Startups moving more toward a place of being kind of like the intel, you know, the old intel inside. We are inside, and we're an engine within another organization. So here in Santa Fe, we partnered with Vital Spaces, which serves Black and Brown creative entrepreneurs and artists. And our goal is to help build their capacity to be able to keep doing programs as they see fit for entrepreneurs. And we're standing by as they would like us to help. So we took that same approach with working with Creative Nations. It's been a fantastic partnership. The lead working with us is a woman named Kelly Holmes. She is Lakota Sioux. She's from the Cheyenne River Reservation. And she founded Native Max Media, which publishes Native Max Magazine, the world's first fashion magazine for indigenous entrepreneurs. She is a brilliant, creative entrepreneur. She is self-taught. She eked it out. She has been around ten years now. It's astounding. And you see the magazine, and it's spectacular. It is high glamour, beautiful. And it is reshaping the way not only indigenous people see themselves but how White people see indigenous people. And those reframed stories are so important to building a more equitable society. So I was over the moon to partner with her. Then I learned her mom is one of the few Lakota language teachers. So Lakota is her first language. Her mother teaches Lakota and teaches teachers how to teach Lakota. So she grew up with an educator. So she has taken to building this, again, patient, very exploratory online environment for indigenous entrepreneurs. And then I bring sometimes the more technical like, oh, you're asking a specific question about how to do structured interviews with customers. Sure, let me talk a little bit about that. But as we started out this conversation, you guys, entrepreneurship is not an intellectual challenge usually; it's a heart challenge. I don't mean that in a way to disparage how important it is to be really strategic and smart about your business. But I think at the outset especially, you just have to be able to hang in there and keep doing it. And then, as you grow into that opportunity, you start to see that the intellectual challenges unfold because your opportunities become more complex. But at this outset with Kelly, it's been a conversation with people who are frankly reframing themselves as business leaders, people who own businesses and have employees based on their creative output. And that's a really exciting space to work in. We wouldn't work in this space if we didn't have a partner who shared our vision and who wanted to be that native leader of a program like this. It just wouldn't really feel exciting. CHAD: I think that that's great advice and a framing that helps me think about the things that we've tried to do in the past and the things that we hope to do in the future and realizing that really genuinely partnering with someone in the actual community that we're trying to serve or to have an impact with is sometimes an important missing component that we need to incorporate. That'll help solve a lot of the hesitations that we might have around doing something. ALICE: Yeah, yeah. VICTORIA: Right. And we've all heard before that culture eats strategy for breakfast, which I think -- [laughs] ALICE: That's my favorite line, Victoria. You nailed it. VICTORIA: It makes sense that the more connected you are to your culture and to your community, that's where you'll be the most successful when your heart is in it. ALICE: Yeah. And I want to give sort of a plug for stepping outside of the zone of the way...I went to business school. I have an MBA. I'm really well-versed in that whole world. I'm married to a venture capitalist. He teaches how to do venture capital at Stanford. That whole world is very familiar to me. And it seems to not be helping us solve the problems that we have now as a society. And so one of the reasons I encourage people to go to those partners, go to those places where you're like, I don't fit in here; I don't understand what's going on here; these people speak a different cultural language, form, way of doing things, I encourage that because I think that for people who want to build a different world, we have to stop looking to the world that we already have. And we have to say, "Well, who does things differently? What could we learn?" One of the most beautiful things about working with the entrepreneurs in the cohort right now, the indigenous cohort, is they first talk about taking care of their people, that's first. And it's like, wow, if that's your entire frame, you start to make really different decisions in business. If you're talking about well, I want to take care of the people in my community; I want people to be healthy and happy and be able to pursue their own dreams; that's a really different frame of mind for a baseline for decision making. The other thing that Kelly talks about that I love (I'm stealing it from her.) is she talks about fighting for her business, fighting for her business. And that, to me, is such a great way to feel like, okay, if I'm fighting for my business, I know how much Creative Startups has achieved. I'm not fighting for myself. It's not my ego. It's none of that. It's fighting for my business so my business can keep having the impact. Everything that I think about now in terms of working with indigenous entrepreneurs is this has nothing to do with me. Their frame is very much my community, my people, my business, which is over there. And it's a humble way of understanding one's place. And that is a really exciting reframe for me to think about how we can solve problems like the climate crisis, like the disparity between rich and poor, like the disintegration of our democracy. What if we had a different frame? How could we solve problems differently, maybe better? So for us, these partnerships unlock a whole vast area of new thinking, new ways of doing business, new ways of taking care of other people. And at the end of the day, that's what gets me back in the rowboat [laughs] is this idea of, wow, we are having an impact on other people. And doing it with people who have a different starting point has really shaped a lot of the work that we do. CHAD: Well, I'm sorry that we have to wrap up. Otherwise, we could keep on going and solve the climate crisis and unraveling of our democracy, but -- [laughs] ALICE: Yeah, I have an appointment at 2:00 where I'm doing climate crisis. So I'll let you know how it goes. CHAD: Okay, wonderful. ALICE: [laughs] CHAD: Alice, thank you so much for joining the show and sharing everything with us. We really appreciate it. ALICE: Yeah, I was delighted to be with you guys and hope to continue the conversation. CHAD: You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. VICTORIA: And if you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. CHAD: You can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. VICTORIA: And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHAD: Thanks for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Alice Loy.
Alice Loy is a Founding Partner at DaVinci Ventures and the Co-Founder and CEO of Creative Startups, the leading global startup accelerator and company builder for design, food, immersive, and creative companies. Victoria and Chad talk with Alice about what she means by creative companies, how much judgment she must pass as an investor with a love for the "weird and wonderful," and some of the challenges faced in bringing diversity to the rest of the accelerator world. DaVinci Ventures (https://www.davinciventures.co/) Creative Startups (https://www.creativestartups.org/) Follow Creative Startups on Twitter (https://twitter.com/createstartups), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/createstartups/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/createstartups/), Substack (https://creativestartups.substack.com/), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1SCTGPWdes6ArrYJU0YJ-g), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/global-center-for-cultural-entrepreneurship/). Follow Alice on Twitter (https://twitter.com/aliceloy) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/aliceloy/). Alice's Blog (http://www.aliceloy.com/) Etkie (https://etkie.com/) Embodied Labs (https://www.embodiedlabs.com/) Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. VICTORIA: And I'm your other host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Alice Loy, Founding Partner at DaVinci Ventures and the Co-Founder and CEO of Creative Startups, the leading global startup accelerator and company builder for design, food, immersive, and creative companies. CHAD: Alice, thank you so much for joining us. ALICE: Thanks for having me. CHAD: Can you tell us a little bit more about Creative Startups in general but also what you mean by creative companies specifically? Like, isn't every company creative? [laughs] ALICE: Yeah, it's so funny. That's often the first question. And sometimes people I can feel their sense of indignation in thinking maybe I think they're not creative. CHAD: [laughs] ALICE: First of all, the creative industries are pretty well defined globally by the World Bank and entities like that. I'll come back to that. Yes, all human beings are creative. I like to joke that that's what got us out of caves in the first place. But more importantly, all entrepreneurs are very creative regardless of what sector you're operating in. So when we're talking about creative, we're just referencing the set of industries that are measured as the quote, "creative industries." They include film, our museums, design certainly is a core element of that. Increasingly, we're seeing more and more people move toward the creative industries as mechanized labor takes over things like building cars or even running data analysis. CHAD: Has getting support and funding and that kind of thing traditionally been easy in the creative space or hard? ALICE: No. I know you know the answer to that question because you're a designer. [laughs] CHAD: I usually don't ask questions that I don't know the answers to, so... [laughs] ALICE: But it's a great question because actually what it uncovers, you guys, is that it has changed dramatically for people who I call creatives or creators in the last two or three years. It's a little tough to measure with the pandemic, but we know at least $2 billion have gone into platforms that support creators, businesses led by creators. The creative industry has really turned a corner. So when we started this work 15-16 years ago, I co-founded the organization with a gentleman named Tom, who is now in his 80s. But he had come out of what's called the cultural economy, which was the precursor to the creative economy. And, of course, now we're all living in the creator economy. So like every other industry, it evolves. And one turn in this evolution is that creatives are now understood as economic drivers, not just people who add nice flourishes to things at the end. When you're building new products, people think about engineers, but it's really a creative process. And people increasingly bring in creatives from the outset to think about how the design process can be more humanized, can be more effective to solve people's problems so that your products really delight customers instead of just get the job done. CHAD: Is there something you can point to that triggered or pushed along that turning point? ALICE: Well, not to be overly philosophical, but I would say the general sense in the U.S. and increasingly in other countries where we work is that human beings don't want to be cogs in a wheel. They don't want to just be bit parts in a system. When you talk to Gen Zers, they understand that they are complete human beings. And somehow, I think older generations bought into the idea that you have the same job for 40 years. You go to work at 8:00; you come home at 5:00. You repeat the next day. I think the sense in the economy is that people want to be fulfilled. If they're going to give that much time to a job, they want it to be meaningful and valuable. And they want it to solve some of the big problems. Frankly, big tech is not approaching the world in that way these days. And so I think younger people are looking for values-aligned opportunities. And the creative economy is a space where values tend to align with really reaching the full potential of each human being instead of just extracting their physical and occasionally mental labor toward building a capitalist system. And so I think that zeitgeist has helped open the door. I also then think when you look at the kinds of technologies that are being utilized, they're still fundamentally about communicating ideas, and art, and inspiration. That's what Facebook is. That's what TikTok is. That's what even news channels are. And as more people come into the world of saying, "Oh, I can share my ideas, my art, my jokes, my music, my whatever," they see themselves as creatives, and they go, "I wonder how I could get paid for that?" I mean, there are a multitude of factors weaving together to shift. I also think, quite frankly, the SaaS investment area has become so saturated. I mean, if you walk down the street in San Francisco, if you don't bump into three venture capitalists who are SaaS investors, it's like, what are you doing? And so I think other types of investors with a different background maybe are saying, hmm, what about this area over here? How could we make money? So that would be another thread I would say is helping drive. CHAD: It strikes me that what you've shared sort of creates a self-fulfilling cycle too. ALICE: Yes. CHAD: Because once creatives have examples of other creatives that have done this, it becomes an aspirational thing that they understand that they, too, could do themselves. ALICE: Yeah, 100%. So our goal when we started the startup accelerator...we launched the first accelerator for creative founders in 2013 in the world. And we said to ourselves, if we get one company that becomes the poster child for this creative movement and demonstrating that you can be, as we like to say, weird and wonderful and build a company, then we will unleash a flood of people who now see themselves in that light. We were very fortunate in that we got that one poster child, and that has really helped us paint a picture that's clear for a lot of people where they see themselves as entrepreneurs, even though they're a tattoo artist or they're a hard rock Navajo metal band from the reservation or whatever their background is. Now they look and go, "Oh yeah, I could do that," and they certainly could. Being an entrepreneur is really hard but not intellectually challenging; it's more heart-challenging. CHAD: Oh, that's really interesting, more heart challenging. ALICE: Yeah. I mean, you're an entrepreneur. You guys have built a business, so you know that being an entrepreneur is more about being able to just sort of stay calm in the waves than it is about building the world's best boat and being able to steer toward that destination no matter how the winds blow. CHAD: Yeah, I've often referred to it almost as grit, like the ability to, no matter what happened yesterday, get up and do it again. ALICE: Get up, yeah. And unfortunately, I think there's a myth, maybe at least in the U.S., that what drives most people to get up and go, again, is money. And I don't think that's true at all. I think what drives people to get up and go again is their love of customers or end users. And their feeling they're just irrefutable despite there being no evidence feeling that this is going to work. This is going to make a difference in people's lives. And that's why the sort of slog. And there are days when...one of the things we always start a Creative Startup's program with is find your tribe. Cling to the people who believe in you. Ignore the naysayers. The naysayers are ten to one. Blow them off and cling to the people who say, "Wow, dude, that sounds cool. I bet you could do that." Yes, do another coffee meeting with that person. [laughs] Because sometimes you just need people who can say, "You got this. You got this. Just do another day, man." What do you guys do? Let me ask, what do you guys do when things get really rocky for you? How do you guys collect that internal okay, I'm going to get back in the saddle. CHAD: I've talked about this with people before, and I actually think that this is going to be a non-answer, but I'll do my best. I actually don't know exactly what does this for me. But I do know a side effect is I also don't celebrate the wins as much as other people wish that I did. And I think it's because I just move on very quickly from things. I don't dwell on the downs as much. I also don't dwell on the highs as much. And so I don't know if it's just something about me that does it or I just trained myself to do that. But it does have some downsides to it. ALICE: That was a real answer. That wasn't a non-answer at all. CHAD: [laughs] ALICE: Victoria, what about you? VICTORIA: I think to add on to what Chad said is kind of that thoughtbot mentality of viewing things as an experiment. And so if you come in with that mentality, like, this is the experiment. We'll see if it works or it doesn't. And if it doesn't work, there are some lessons to be learned, and we can grow from that and do better next time. And if it does work, great; [chuckles] this is cool. And I actually like to celebrate the wins a lot. I like to really dwell in those moments and feel like we did something right. We should remember this and learn from that as well and then try to repeat it, right? ALICE: Yeah. Oh, I love that. CHAD: You mentioned that when you were first starting Creative Startups, you hoped to get one win, and you did. Which one was it? ALICE: To be clear, as a mom, we don't have favorite children, okay? [laughter] And there are different companies that have had enormous impact in different ways, so let me tick some off. Let me name first Etkie. It's a design company built by a woman named Sydney, who grew up in rural New Mexico with a passion for working with indigenous communities. Her design company makes spectacular handmade bracelets, average price point around 250 bucks. And she sells in about 100 different high-end galleries around the world. She creates 40 jobs for Navajo women on the reservation at twice the annual pay that they would receive if they worked any other job there. Pretty astounding, pretty astounding. Those women have gone on to reinvest their money in things like rebuilding the school, putting in wells for family. The Navajo Nation lacks drinking water all over the place. So really fundamentally shifting the economic and social trajectory of that community. She designs every single bracelet with a woman, and you'll see they're named after the women. And they just do a recollection process where the woman recalls something from her childhood, and they weave a story around that. And then, they create the bracelet design. They're beautiful, Etkie, E-T-K-I-E. The next one I would say that has really inspired me is founded by another woman who does...now she's doing more XR AR, But they started as a virtual reality company doing films for medical providers who needed to better understand the disease experience of their patients in order to come up with not just solutions to their lived experience but actual medical procedures, and technologies, and pharmaceuticals that could shape the outcomes of that patient. So that company is called Embodied Labs, founded by a woman named Carrie and her team out of LA. And they're now selling to hospital systems across California and increasingly in the Midwest, et cetera, changing thousands of lives. And then the one that most people do point to us and say, "Hey, good job," is a company called Meow Wolf. We were their first investor back in 2014. They've gone on to raise upwards of $250 million. They're kind of a competitor now to Disney. So they're in the immersive art and experience realm. They had a million visitors in their Denver spot. So far this year, they've had about a million visitors in their Las Vegas spot. They were founded here in Santa Fe, our hometown. And we didn't even know they existed. They didn't know we existed. [chuckles] The night before our application was to close, somebody wandered into a meeting they were having where they were talking about dissolving the art collective. And somebody said, "Oh before you guys make a decision, you should check out this thing." [laughs] So in some ways, it was angels on our shoulders in that it's a homegrown company, and Santa Fe is a small city. We needed a shift here around our creative economy. And they needed somebody to believe in them. They had gone to every business support organization they could find and had been told, "Well, you're probably trying to start an arts nonprofit." And they thought, "That's not really our vision. That's not...we want to build a company. We think art is something people will pay for if it's put forward in a way that blows your mind," and Meow certainly blows your mind. CHAD: That's really interesting. I mean, I totally get why people would say that just because...but that's like saying...when Disney was getting started [chuckles] people saying "It sounds like you're trying to create an arts nonprofit." ALICE: Yes. And I'm guessing a lot of people did. The future happens when we're all looking backwards, and very few people are looking forwards. And so I think it's important for entrepreneurs to keep in mind you're probably just statistically talking to somebody who's looking backwards because human beings tend to do that more than they look forward. And so better to find people early on who say, "You know, I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about because you're the expert in your startup, and I'm not. But let me ask you this, how could I be helpful?" That's the right question. If they give you an answer and they don't even know what you're talking about, you probably don't need their help. And that's hard for entrepreneurs because there are so many doubters out there that you have to kind of keep plucking through to find the one or two people who say, "That's really interesting. That seems like it might work. How could I help?" Did you guys have somebody at thoughtbot early on who you can remember sort of said, "Huh, that's interesting. How could I help?" CHAD: I think it was our early clients who most did that. ALICE: Oooh, yeah. CHAD: Because we're a consulting company, because we're an agency, finding clients who believed in us and wanted to work with us in part because they liked us was an important aspect to that. If it wasn't for those early clients, no amount of passion would have kept us going because we needed to support ourselves. ALICE: What a great insight, honestly. I think the sort of rhetoric around passion is really abused. Because there's now this sense that, well, if you have passion, you can build a business, and that's just not true. That's not true. I hate to say it, and people are always stunned when I say it because they think that I lead Creative Startups; I must be the core passion champion. But here's what I would say is if you have a passion for solving your client or your customers' problems, then you might have a business. [laughs] There's a huge difference there. There's a difference between well; this is what I want to make. This is what I love doing. That is not necessarily going to answer the question is anybody paying you to do that? And I like to encourage people to think about if you have passion for doing something, you probably have a hobby. If you do stuff that people want to pay you to do, you might have a business. And crossing that bridge is an analytical and a heart-wrenching process. Because usually, what you end up with is I mostly get to do what I love to do. But I do a lot of stuff I don't want to do because that's what building a business is, just like being a parent or any other really amazing, wonderful thing in life. Running a business is not just about doing what you love doing all day; it's mostly about doing what people want to pay you to do. And if you're doing what people want to pay you to do and you love it, that is beautiful. That is a blessed position to be in. It's rare. And you have to ask yourself very real questions and be brutally honest with yourself, or you could waste your retirement savings. You could spend a year or two away from your family before you figure that out, not to be depressing. [laughs] But we always say from our programs we look...not from our more advanced accelerator programs, but we also provide programs that are more; how do you figure out this idea? You have this idea, or you have what we call lucky revenue. A lot of creatives get lucky revenue where their friend sees them doing something, and they go, "Man, would you do one for me?" And then somebody else wants one, and now they have lucky revenue. And they're ready to say, "I think this might be a business." And those people we say you have three outcomes from our programs. One, you realize this is not a business. It's just not going to make any money. The business model does not pan out. Two, this might be a business if I do it differently, and now I need to figure out if I want to do it differently. And three is, yeah, I'm on track. Now I got to go grow it. And all three are valid outcomes. Because we've worked with people who came to us late, took out a loan. And we said, "Well, what's your plan for paying it back?" "Well, we don't know." That's bad. That's really dangerous. That can ruin families' economic futures. And so we're much happier to catch people before that happens so they can ask those critical questions about is this really a market opportunity? Is this a business I want to build? Is this, therefore, a business opportunity for me? And those questions are deceptively simple. In our more advanced programs, we focus on, okay, you've got revenue, you've got traction. You're ready to start maybe thinking about what's the next three years? Where are your cash flow gaps? Where's your, as people like to call it, the valley of death that you have to cross as you grow? What kind of financing can you go raise to help cross that valley? How do you get to 10 million in revenue, 50 million in revenue? People are at different stages of growing a business. MID-ROLL AD: Are you an entrepreneur or start-up founder looking to gain confidence in the way forward for your idea? At thoughtbot, we know you’re tight on time and investment, which is why we’ve created targeted 1-hour remote workshops to help you develop a concrete plan for your product’s next steps. Over four interactive sessions, we work with you on research, product design sprint, critical path, and presentation prep so that you and your team are better equipped with the skills and knowledge for success. Find out how we can help you move the needle at: tbot.io/entrepreneurs. CHAD: How much judgment do you pass as an investor as people who are reading applications about who gets into the accelerator program? How much judgment do you pass, and how do you strike that balance? ALICE: That's kind of a peek behind the curtain; how do people really pick companies? Different people do it differently. For us, we really hue toward weird and wonderful. We actually prefer...and this goes against what people say you should do, [laughs] but we kind of go against the grain in general. And it's worked out. We prefer to look at things that we don't totally understand partly because often creatives don't speak business speak. So I'm pretty turned off by (I'm going to make something up.) the Harvard Business School grad who has a music-sharing platform and doesn't play music. I'm like, how would you know about a music-sharing platform? Whereas a musician who comes with their garage band and they happen to have a computer science degree from the college down the road and they've invented this thing and all of a sudden, it's taking off, and they're not even sure why. I'm listening, and I'm like, oh, that's really interesting. A lot of creatives tend to pick up on opportunities in the market, and they don't frame it so much as a business opportunity because that's just not the language that they've learned to speak yet. But they have an insight into a particular sector or a need that people who are not really in that space... It feels like a lot of the startup world has been overtaken by people who want to be startup founders but don't necessarily have their hands dirty in a particular sector where they know how to really solve a problem that either a lot of people have, or that very few people have but that a lot of people have in the future if you build the market. And that's where you make a lot of money is if you build a market. So we look for things like that. So what does that mean when we're reading applications? We don't ask for financial statements. We ask, how much money did you make last year, and where do you think most of that money came from? We're more interested in are they interested in analyzing their business so they understand where growth could come from next? Instead of, what is your financial statements? Most of the entrepreneurs who come through our programs don't have financial statements. They might not even have a cash flow projection, which is really exciting. We have entrepreneurs who come to us who...I'll tell you a story. We had an entrepreneur come to us who ran underground music clubs in old houses in Denver. And he was like, "I think this is a business, but I don't know anything about business. I just started hosting these a few years ago." And I said, "Well, how many people...like, if you took an average year..." and I said, "You don't charge anything?" And he said, "No, people just hear about it." And I'm thinking, okay, so you get a couple thousand. "How many people in an average year come to your basement music club thing?" "50,000." [laughs] Yeah, I think you might have a business. I mean, those are the kinds of things that you think, wow, why did that take off? What is going on there? That's really interesting. Let's talk. And he had a mohawk. He played in a metal band. Business was not his deal. And so that wasn't the lens he was applying. I think a lot of designers and a lot of people who invent products and solutions start with; I'm doing this for myself, wouldn't this be rad? Without even knowing that, they touched a nerve in the market that now is kind of catching on fire. Those are really exciting entrepreneurs for us to work with. They do have to turn a corner on I'm building a business now. I'm not just doing something that's cool with my friends. And that can be a difficult place because it means you have to cross a bridge into the world of finance, and you're probably going to have to hire product managers. And now you go hire that Harvard Business School grad and they work for you. And a lot of people frankly don't want to turn that corner. And I get it because when you come back to that topic of, is this values-aligned? A lot of that world is not yet totally values-aligned. That's shifting, more impact investors, more investors who want to see more different types of people starting companies, but we're not there yet. And so there's this cultural clash. When creatives walk toward that space, they go, ew, I've been fighting against the man my whole life. And now you want me to get in the car and go on a long road trip with them? No thanks. [laughs] And I'm sitting there with the Doritos going, yeah, man, but I got all the good munchies, let's go. It often does work out. But I also understand why people say, "You know, that's just not my deal now." VICTORIA: Yeah. And you have a tremendous amount of diversity in your alumni. ALICE: We do, yeah. VICTORIA: And so do you find that there are some challenges in bringing in that group to the rest of the accelerator world? ALICE: Yeah, you know, funny, I was thinking about that yesterday. So about 70% of our alumni, and this has been true across the board from day one, are people of color or women. At one point, it was around 30% were women of color. I haven't looked at that number in a while. We've worked with about 550 companies worldwide. In the Middle East, half of our alumni are women-led companies. In the U.S., we are fortunate to be able to work with a lot of indigenous communities. New Mexico is home to a large indigenous population. And it's a lot of the reason our culture is so dynamic and beautiful. So for us, that was always a no-brainer that that was where a lot of the interesting creativity would come from and that that was where the rising markets were. We, for example, accelerated and were the first investor in a company called Native Realities, which is a comic book. And they founded the first indigenous Comic Con, which is now called Indigenous Pop X worldwide. And they saw obviously before even Black Panther, and it became kind of like people said, "Oh yeah, superheroes come from all communities." They saw that that market was rising. There are 300 million indigenous people worldwide. There are two comic book companies. Let that sink in. [laughs] It's like, oh my God, what is the possibility then not just around comic books, but gaming, animation, all kinds of creative tools, film, music? That's a huge market that has not been served at all. And we understood early on that that was an area where people want to tell their own stories. People want to understand the stories of other people. And then people want to build new stories together across those cultural or geographic boundaries. And the technology had shifted such that that was possible. In 1980, that wasn't really possible. The distribution channels of film were such that you had to raise money in Hollywood and have Tom Hanks and whatever. That's just not true anymore. So we saw that early on, and that has helped attract a lot of entrepreneurs who share our passion for really telling those stories. However, I would say for people who want to support rising entrepreneurs out of what I'm going to call distressed communities or communities that have been literally discouraged from becoming their own economic leaders is that the burden that most of the people bear who are building businesses, for example, from Black communities, or native communities, or women in the Middle East, those people tend to bear a larger burden than someone from a more privileged background like myself. They're often the person in their family and for their community who is helping to ensure that people get the health care they need, that that kid was able to visit the college that they wanted to apply to. They become that sort of anchor of support for more people than in situations where we have more support and more what I call margin. They have really little margin. And so to ask them to, for example, join an accelerator full-time for 12 weeks that just doesn't work. Because the decision that they're making, you know, from a very privileged position, we can say, "Well, either you're dedicated to your business, or you're not." But really, what we're saying to them is, well, either you do your business, or you love your family and your culture. That's the question we're asking them, and that's a totally unfair question. That's a ridiculous question. Every single one of us would say, "I love my family. Thanks, see ya." CHAD: So how do you balance that? ALICE: Well, it's tough. I mean, first of all, we have adopted in the programs where it's more for early-stage entrepreneurs, and we're opening doors to entrepreneurship. And we are being first and foremost patient, patient with they're crossing that threshold. We understand that our core outcome is that people come always saying, "I'm an entrepreneur. I'm ready for the journey." That means we do things like, first of all, we do all online. If possible, we do a meeting upfront, so everybody meets each other in person because that kind of sets a tone of just it's a lot of fun. We have food and drink, and we have a good time. And then we do 6 to 12 weeks online, and then we do a gathering at the end. And we build a community first and foremost of people who are understanding how they can help one another. So Creative Startups is a little different in how we do accelerators. We do not ever have people stand at the front of the room and tell people what they should do with their business partly because we're educators first and foremost, and we understand...I have a Ph.D. in entrepreneurship. I understand that entrepreneurs tend to be experiential learners, not all but many. And we're not going to be there in a year building their business. They're going to be building their business. We have to build their self-confidence. We have to build their ability to say, "I know how to row the boat. You're along for the ride." I'm just along for the ride. [laughs] That requires us to do things like, okay, so let's work on your business model and really carefully chunk out here's one piece of that. Let's go deeply into understanding that. Let's tackle the vocabulary. Let's look at how people talk about it online. Let's open that door culturally so that you can take that into your experiences and say, "Oh, I already kind of do that. I just use a different language," which is what a lot of designers do. A lot of designers, whatever your background, already do entrepreneurial processes. They use different language, and it's just a translation. It's literally just vocabulary. So we help people understand that the best way to figure out your client's needs are by listening; all people know that. If you want to understand someone else, listen, and unpacking that into then business speak a little bit, and then giving them opportunities to go do that in the real world. And being patient with how they might do that or why they couldn't get it done this week. Or maybe they want to come back with a different way of describing it than maybe a White person like me might describe what they experienced. And just giving a lot of latitude to people to have that own experience themselves. That honestly...I know that sounds very philosophical. But it breaks down into tactical things that we do in an accelerator that opens the door to a lot more entrepreneurs. And our Net Promoter Score is 9. Over 90% of people would recommend our program. People love our programs. And 70% of our alumni are still in business. So I think it's working. We have a lot of learning to do. We're doing an indigenous accelerator right now, and it's a lot of learning for me. It's very eye-opening. CHAD: As an accelerator specific to indigenous peoples, what made you decide to do that? Some people I know, thoughtbot included, sometimes hesitate to do things like that because we don't want...there's some hesitation around doing something like that. ALICE: So we share all of those hesitations, and we think they're spot on. We are doing this in partnership with a group called Creative Nations out of Colorado. They are all indigenous people. They're a new group. And we envision Creative Startups moving more toward a place of being kind of like the intel, you know, the old intel inside. We are inside, and we're an engine within another organization. So here in Santa Fe, we partnered with Vital Spaces, which serves Black and Brown creative entrepreneurs and artists. And our goal is to help build their capacity to be able to keep doing programs as they see fit for entrepreneurs. And we're standing by as they would like us to help. So we took that same approach with working with Creative Nations. It's been a fantastic partnership. The lead working with us is a woman named Kelly Holmes. She is Lakota Sioux. She's from the Cheyenne River Reservation. And she founded Native Max Media, which publishes Native Max Magazine, the world's first fashion magazine for indigenous entrepreneurs. She is a brilliant, creative entrepreneur. She is self-taught. She eked it out. She has been around ten years now. It's astounding. And you see the magazine, and it's spectacular. It is high glamour, beautiful. And it is reshaping the way not only indigenous people see themselves but how White people see indigenous people. And those reframed stories are so important to building a more equitable society. So I was over the moon to partner with her. Then I learned her mom is one of the few Lakota language teachers. So Lakota is her first language. Her mother teaches Lakota and teaches teachers how to teach Lakota. So she grew up with an educator. So she has taken to building this, again, patient, very exploratory online environment for indigenous entrepreneurs. And then I bring sometimes the more technical like, oh, you're asking a specific question about how to do structured interviews with customers. Sure, let me talk a little bit about that. But as we started out this conversation, you guys, entrepreneurship is not an intellectual challenge usually; it's a heart challenge. I don't mean that in a way to disparage how important it is to be really strategic and smart about your business. But I think at the outset especially, you just have to be able to hang in there and keep doing it. And then, as you grow into that opportunity, you start to see that the intellectual challenges unfold because your opportunities become more complex. But at this outset with Kelly, it's been a conversation with people who are frankly reframing themselves as business leaders, people who own businesses and have employees based on their creative output. And that's a really exciting space to work in. We wouldn't work in this space if we didn't have a partner who shared our vision and who wanted to be that native leader of a program like this. It just wouldn't really feel exciting. CHAD: I think that that's great advice and a framing that helps me think about the things that we've tried to do in the past and the things that we hope to do in the future and realizing that really genuinely partnering with someone in the actual community that we're trying to serve or to have an impact with is sometimes an important missing component that we need to incorporate. That'll help solve a lot of the hesitations that we might have around doing something. ALICE: Yeah, yeah. VICTORIA: Right. And we've all heard before that culture eats strategy for breakfast, which I think -- [laughs] ALICE: That's my favorite line, Victoria. You nailed it. VICTORIA: It makes sense that the more connected you are to your culture and to your community, that's where you'll be the most successful when your heart is in it. ALICE: Yeah. And I want to give sort of a plug for stepping outside of the zone of the way...I went to business school. I have an MBA. I'm really well-versed in that whole world. I'm married to a venture capitalist. He teaches how to do venture capital at Stanford. That whole world is very familiar to me. And it seems to not be helping us solve the problems that we have now as a society. And so one of the reasons I encourage people to go to those partners, go to those places where you're like, I don't fit in here; I don't understand what's going on here; these people speak a different cultural language, form, way of doing things, I encourage that because I think that for people who want to build a different world, we have to stop looking to the world that we already have. And we have to say, "Well, who does things differently? What could we learn?" One of the most beautiful things about working with the entrepreneurs in the cohort right now, the indigenous cohort, is they first talk about taking care of their people, that's first. And it's like, wow, if that's your entire frame, you start to make really different decisions in business. If you're talking about well, I want to take care of the people in my community; I want people to be healthy and happy and be able to pursue their own dreams; that's a really different frame of mind for a baseline for decision making. The other thing that Kelly talks about that I love (I'm stealing it from her.) is she talks about fighting for her business, fighting for her business. And that, to me, is such a great way to feel like, okay, if I'm fighting for my business, I know how much Creative Startups has achieved. I'm not fighting for myself. It's not my ego. It's none of that. It's fighting for my business so my business can keep having the impact. Everything that I think about now in terms of working with indigenous entrepreneurs is this has nothing to do with me. Their frame is very much my community, my people, my business, which is over there. And it's a humble way of understanding one's place. And that is a really exciting reframe for me to think about how we can solve problems like the climate crisis, like the disparity between rich and poor, like the disintegration of our democracy. What if we had a different frame? How could we solve problems differently, maybe better? So for us, these partnerships unlock a whole vast area of new thinking, new ways of doing business, new ways of taking care of other people. And at the end of the day, that's what gets me back in the rowboat [laughs] is this idea of, wow, we are having an impact on other people. And doing it with people who have a different starting point has really shaped a lot of the work that we do. CHAD: Well, I'm sorry that we have to wrap up. Otherwise, we could keep on going and solve the climate crisis and unraveling of our democracy, but -- [laughs] ALICE: Yeah, I have an appointment at 2:00 where I'm doing climate crisis. So I'll let you know how it goes. CHAD: Okay, wonderful. ALICE: [laughs] CHAD: Alice, thank you so much for joining the show and sharing everything with us. We really appreciate it. ALICE: Yeah, I was delighted to be with you guys and hope to continue the conversation. CHAD: You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. VICTORIA: And if you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. CHAD: You can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. VICTORIA: And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHAD: Thanks for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Alice Loy.
Alice Loy is a Founding Partner at DaVinci Ventures and the Co-Founder and CEO of Creative Startups, the leading global startup accelerator and company builder for design, food, immersive, and creative companies. Victoria and Chad talk with Alice about what she means by creative companies, how much judgment she must pass as an investor with a love for the "weird and wonderful," and some of the challenges faced in bringing diversity to the rest of the accelerator world. DaVinci Ventures (https://www.davinciventures.co/) Creative Startups (https://www.creativestartups.org/) Follow Creative Startups on Twitter (https://twitter.com/createstartups), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/createstartups/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/createstartups/), Substack (https://creativestartups.substack.com/), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1SCTGPWdes6ArrYJU0YJ-g), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/global-center-for-cultural-entrepreneurship/). Follow Alice on Twitter (https://twitter.com/aliceloy) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/aliceloy/). Alice's Blog (http://www.aliceloy.com/) Etkie (https://etkie.com/) Embodied Labs (https://www.embodiedlabs.com/) Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. VICTORIA: And I'm your other host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Alice Loy, Founding Partner at DaVinci Ventures and the Co-Founder and CEO of Creative Startups, the leading global startup accelerator and company builder for design, food, immersive, and creative companies. CHAD: Alice, thank you so much for joining us. ALICE: Thanks for having me. CHAD: Can you tell us a little bit more about Creative Startups in general but also what you mean by creative companies specifically? Like, isn't every company creative? [laughs] ALICE: Yeah, it's so funny. That's often the first question. And sometimes people I can feel their sense of indignation in thinking maybe I think they're not creative. CHAD: [laughs] ALICE: First of all, the creative industries are pretty well defined globally by the World Bank and entities like that. I'll come back to that. Yes, all human beings are creative. I like to joke that that's what got us out of caves in the first place. But more importantly, all entrepreneurs are very creative regardless of what sector you're operating in. So when we're talking about creative, we're just referencing the set of industries that are measured as the quote, "creative industries." They include film, our museums, design certainly is a core element of that. Increasingly, we're seeing more and more people move toward the creative industries as mechanized labor takes over things like building cars or even running data analysis. CHAD: Has getting support and funding and that kind of thing traditionally been easy in the creative space or hard? ALICE: No. I know you know the answer to that question because you're a designer. [laughs] CHAD: I usually don't ask questions that I don't know the answers to, so... [laughs] ALICE: But it's a great question because actually what it uncovers, you guys, is that it has changed dramatically for people who I call creatives or creators in the last two or three years. It's a little tough to measure with the pandemic, but we know at least $2 billion have gone into platforms that support creators, businesses led by creators. The creative industry has really turned a corner. So when we started this work 15-16 years ago, I co-founded the organization with a gentleman named Tom, who is now in his 80s. But he had come out of what's called the cultural economy, which was the precursor to the creative economy. And, of course, now we're all living in the creator economy. So like every other industry, it evolves. And one turn in this evolution is that creatives are now understood as economic drivers, not just people who add nice flourishes to things at the end. When you're building new products, people think about engineers, but it's really a creative process. And people increasingly bring in creatives from the outset to think about how the design process can be more humanized, can be more effective to solve people's problems so that your products really delight customers instead of just get the job done. CHAD: Is there something you can point to that triggered or pushed along that turning point? ALICE: Well, not to be overly philosophical, but I would say the general sense in the U.S. and increasingly in other countries where we work is that human beings don't want to be cogs in a wheel. They don't want to just be bit parts in a system. When you talk to Gen Zers, they understand that they are complete human beings. And somehow, I think older generations bought into the idea that you have the same job for 40 years. You go to work at 8:00; you come home at 5:00. You repeat the next day. I think the sense in the economy is that people want to be fulfilled. If they're going to give that much time to a job, they want it to be meaningful and valuable. And they want it to solve some of the big problems. Frankly, big tech is not approaching the world in that way these days. And so I think younger people are looking for values-aligned opportunities. And the creative economy is a space where values tend to align with really reaching the full potential of each human being instead of just extracting their physical and occasionally mental labor toward building a capitalist system. And so I think that zeitgeist has helped open the door. I also then think when you look at the kinds of technologies that are being utilized, they're still fundamentally about communicating ideas, and art, and inspiration. That's what Facebook is. That's what TikTok is. That's what even news channels are. And as more people come into the world of saying, "Oh, I can share my ideas, my art, my jokes, my music, my whatever," they see themselves as creatives, and they go, "I wonder how I could get paid for that?" I mean, there are a multitude of factors weaving together to shift. I also think, quite frankly, the SaaS investment area has become so saturated. I mean, if you walk down the street in San Francisco, if you don't bump into three venture capitalists who are SaaS investors, it's like, what are you doing? And so I think other types of investors with a different background maybe are saying, hmm, what about this area over here? How could we make money? So that would be another thread I would say is helping drive. CHAD: It strikes me that what you've shared sort of creates a self-fulfilling cycle too. ALICE: Yes. CHAD: Because once creatives have examples of other creatives that have done this, it becomes an aspirational thing that they understand that they, too, could do themselves. ALICE: Yeah, 100%. So our goal when we started the startup accelerator...we launched the first accelerator for creative founders in 2013 in the world. And we said to ourselves, if we get one company that becomes the poster child for this creative movement and demonstrating that you can be, as we like to say, weird and wonderful and build a company, then we will unleash a flood of people who now see themselves in that light. We were very fortunate in that we got that one poster child, and that has really helped us paint a picture that's clear for a lot of people where they see themselves as entrepreneurs, even though they're a tattoo artist or they're a hard rock Navajo metal band from the reservation or whatever their background is. Now they look and go, "Oh yeah, I could do that," and they certainly could. Being an entrepreneur is really hard but not intellectually challenging; it's more heart-challenging. CHAD: Oh, that's really interesting, more heart challenging. ALICE: Yeah. I mean, you're an entrepreneur. You guys have built a business, so you know that being an entrepreneur is more about being able to just sort of stay calm in the waves than it is about building the world's best boat and being able to steer toward that destination no matter how the winds blow. CHAD: Yeah, I've often referred to it almost as grit, like the ability to, no matter what happened yesterday, get up and do it again. ALICE: Get up, yeah. And unfortunately, I think there's a myth, maybe at least in the U.S., that what drives most people to get up and go, again, is money. And I don't think that's true at all. I think what drives people to get up and go again is their love of customers or end users. And their feeling they're just irrefutable despite there being no evidence feeling that this is going to work. This is going to make a difference in people's lives. And that's why the sort of slog. And there are days when...one of the things we always start a Creative Startup's program with is find your tribe. Cling to the people who believe in you. Ignore the naysayers. The naysayers are ten to one. Blow them off and cling to the people who say, "Wow, dude, that sounds cool. I bet you could do that." Yes, do another coffee meeting with that person. [laughs] Because sometimes you just need people who can say, "You got this. You got this. Just do another day, man." What do you guys do? Let me ask, what do you guys do when things get really rocky for you? How do you guys collect that internal okay, I'm going to get back in the saddle. CHAD: I've talked about this with people before, and I actually think that this is going to be a non-answer, but I'll do my best. I actually don't know exactly what does this for me. But I do know a side effect is I also don't celebrate the wins as much as other people wish that I did. And I think it's because I just move on very quickly from things. I don't dwell on the downs as much. I also don't dwell on the highs as much. And so I don't know if it's just something about me that does it or I just trained myself to do that. But it does have some downsides to it. ALICE: That was a real answer. That wasn't a non-answer at all. CHAD: [laughs] ALICE: Victoria, what about you? VICTORIA: I think to add on to what Chad said is kind of that thoughtbot mentality of viewing things as an experiment. And so if you come in with that mentality, like, this is the experiment. We'll see if it works or it doesn't. And if it doesn't work, there are some lessons to be learned, and we can grow from that and do better next time. And if it does work, great; [chuckles] this is cool. And I actually like to celebrate the wins a lot. I like to really dwell in those moments and feel like we did something right. We should remember this and learn from that as well and then try to repeat it, right? ALICE: Yeah. Oh, I love that. CHAD: You mentioned that when you were first starting Creative Startups, you hoped to get one win, and you did. Which one was it? ALICE: To be clear, as a mom, we don't have favorite children, okay? [laughter] And there are different companies that have had enormous impact in different ways, so let me tick some off. Let me name first Etkie. It's a design company built by a woman named Sydney, who grew up in rural New Mexico with a passion for working with indigenous communities. Her design company makes spectacular handmade bracelets, average price point around 250 bucks. And she sells in about 100 different high-end galleries around the world. She creates 40 jobs for Navajo women on the reservation at twice the annual pay that they would receive if they worked any other job there. Pretty astounding, pretty astounding. Those women have gone on to reinvest their money in things like rebuilding the school, putting in wells for family. The Navajo Nation lacks drinking water all over the place. So really fundamentally shifting the economic and social trajectory of that community. She designs every single bracelet with a woman, and you'll see they're named after the women. And they just do a recollection process where the woman recalls something from her childhood, and they weave a story around that. And then, they create the bracelet design. They're beautiful, Etkie, E-T-K-I-E. The next one I would say that has really inspired me is founded by another woman who does...now she's doing more XR AR, But they started as a virtual reality company doing films for medical providers who needed to better understand the disease experience of their patients in order to come up with not just solutions to their lived experience but actual medical procedures, and technologies, and pharmaceuticals that could shape the outcomes of that patient. So that company is called Embodied Labs, founded by a woman named Carrie and her team out of LA. And they're now selling to hospital systems across California and increasingly in the Midwest, et cetera, changing thousands of lives. And then the one that most people do point to us and say, "Hey, good job," is a company called Meow Wolf. We were their first investor back in 2014. They've gone on to raise upwards of $250 million. They're kind of a competitor now to Disney. So they're in the immersive art and experience realm. They had a million visitors in their Denver spot. So far this year, they've had about a million visitors in their Las Vegas spot. They were founded here in Santa Fe, our hometown. And we didn't even know they existed. They didn't know we existed. [chuckles] The night before our application was to close, somebody wandered into a meeting they were having where they were talking about dissolving the art collective. And somebody said, "Oh before you guys make a decision, you should check out this thing." [laughs] So in some ways, it was angels on our shoulders in that it's a homegrown company, and Santa Fe is a small city. We needed a shift here around our creative economy. And they needed somebody to believe in them. They had gone to every business support organization they could find and had been told, "Well, you're probably trying to start an arts nonprofit." And they thought, "That's not really our vision. That's not...we want to build a company. We think art is something people will pay for if it's put forward in a way that blows your mind," and Meow certainly blows your mind. CHAD: That's really interesting. I mean, I totally get why people would say that just because...but that's like saying...when Disney was getting started [chuckles] people saying "It sounds like you're trying to create an arts nonprofit." ALICE: Yes. And I'm guessing a lot of people did. The future happens when we're all looking backwards, and very few people are looking forwards. And so I think it's important for entrepreneurs to keep in mind you're probably just statistically talking to somebody who's looking backwards because human beings tend to do that more than they look forward. And so better to find people early on who say, "You know, I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about because you're the expert in your startup, and I'm not. But let me ask you this, how could I be helpful?" That's the right question. If they give you an answer and they don't even know what you're talking about, you probably don't need their help. And that's hard for entrepreneurs because there are so many doubters out there that you have to kind of keep plucking through to find the one or two people who say, "That's really interesting. That seems like it might work. How could I help?" Did you guys have somebody at thoughtbot early on who you can remember sort of said, "Huh, that's interesting. How could I help?" CHAD: I think it was our early clients who most did that. ALICE: Oooh, yeah. CHAD: Because we're a consulting company, because we're an agency, finding clients who believed in us and wanted to work with us in part because they liked us was an important aspect to that. If it wasn't for those early clients, no amount of passion would have kept us going because we needed to support ourselves. ALICE: What a great insight, honestly. I think the sort of rhetoric around passion is really abused. Because there's now this sense that, well, if you have passion, you can build a business, and that's just not true. That's not true. I hate to say it, and people are always stunned when I say it because they think that I lead Creative Startups; I must be the core passion champion. But here's what I would say is if you have a passion for solving your client or your customers' problems, then you might have a business. [laughs] There's a huge difference there. There's a difference between well; this is what I want to make. This is what I love doing. That is not necessarily going to answer the question is anybody paying you to do that? And I like to encourage people to think about if you have passion for doing something, you probably have a hobby. If you do stuff that people want to pay you to do, you might have a business. And crossing that bridge is an analytical and a heart-wrenching process. Because usually, what you end up with is I mostly get to do what I love to do. But I do a lot of stuff I don't want to do because that's what building a business is, just like being a parent or any other really amazing, wonderful thing in life. Running a business is not just about doing what you love doing all day; it's mostly about doing what people want to pay you to do. And if you're doing what people want to pay you to do and you love it, that is beautiful. That is a blessed position to be in. It's rare. And you have to ask yourself very real questions and be brutally honest with yourself, or you could waste your retirement savings. You could spend a year or two away from your family before you figure that out, not to be depressing. [laughs] But we always say from our programs we look...not from our more advanced accelerator programs, but we also provide programs that are more; how do you figure out this idea? You have this idea, or you have what we call lucky revenue. A lot of creatives get lucky revenue where their friend sees them doing something, and they go, "Man, would you do one for me?" And then somebody else wants one, and now they have lucky revenue. And they're ready to say, "I think this might be a business." And those people we say you have three outcomes from our programs. One, you realize this is not a business. It's just not going to make any money. The business model does not pan out. Two, this might be a business if I do it differently, and now I need to figure out if I want to do it differently. And three is, yeah, I'm on track. Now I got to go grow it. And all three are valid outcomes. Because we've worked with people who came to us late, took out a loan. And we said, "Well, what's your plan for paying it back?" "Well, we don't know." That's bad. That's really dangerous. That can ruin families' economic futures. And so we're much happier to catch people before that happens so they can ask those critical questions about is this really a market opportunity? Is this a business I want to build? Is this, therefore, a business opportunity for me? And those questions are deceptively simple. In our more advanced programs, we focus on, okay, you've got revenue, you've got traction. You're ready to start maybe thinking about what's the next three years? Where are your cash flow gaps? Where's your, as people like to call it, the valley of death that you have to cross as you grow? What kind of financing can you go raise to help cross that valley? How do you get to 10 million in revenue, 50 million in revenue? People are at different stages of growing a business. MID-ROLL AD: Are you an entrepreneur or start-up founder looking to gain confidence in the way forward for your idea? At thoughtbot, we know you’re tight on time and investment, which is why we’ve created targeted 1-hour remote workshops to help you develop a concrete plan for your product’s next steps. Over four interactive sessions, we work with you on research, product design sprint, critical path, and presentation prep so that you and your team are better equipped with the skills and knowledge for success. Find out how we can help you move the needle at: tbot.io/entrepreneurs. CHAD: How much judgment do you pass as an investor as people who are reading applications about who gets into the accelerator program? How much judgment do you pass, and how do you strike that balance? ALICE: That's kind of a peek behind the curtain; how do people really pick companies? Different people do it differently. For us, we really hue toward weird and wonderful. We actually prefer...and this goes against what people say you should do, [laughs] but we kind of go against the grain in general. And it's worked out. We prefer to look at things that we don't totally understand partly because often creatives don't speak business speak. So I'm pretty turned off by (I'm going to make something up.) the Harvard Business School grad who has a music-sharing platform and doesn't play music. I'm like, how would you know about a music-sharing platform? Whereas a musician who comes with their garage band and they happen to have a computer science degree from the college down the road and they've invented this thing and all of a sudden, it's taking off, and they're not even sure why. I'm listening, and I'm like, oh, that's really interesting. A lot of creatives tend to pick up on opportunities in the market, and they don't frame it so much as a business opportunity because that's just not the language that they've learned to speak yet. But they have an insight into a particular sector or a need that people who are not really in that space... It feels like a lot of the startup world has been overtaken by people who want to be startup founders but don't necessarily have their hands dirty in a particular sector where they know how to really solve a problem that either a lot of people have, or that very few people have but that a lot of people have in the future if you build the market. And that's where you make a lot of money is if you build a market. So we look for things like that. So what does that mean when we're reading applications? We don't ask for financial statements. We ask, how much money did you make last year, and where do you think most of that money came from? We're more interested in are they interested in analyzing their business so they understand where growth could come from next? Instead of, what is your financial statements? Most of the entrepreneurs who come through our programs don't have financial statements. They might not even have a cash flow projection, which is really exciting. We have entrepreneurs who come to us who...I'll tell you a story. We had an entrepreneur come to us who ran underground music clubs in old houses in Denver. And he was like, "I think this is a business, but I don't know anything about business. I just started hosting these a few years ago." And I said, "Well, how many people...like, if you took an average year..." and I said, "You don't charge anything?" And he said, "No, people just hear about it." And I'm thinking, okay, so you get a couple thousand. "How many people in an average year come to your basement music club thing?" "50,000." [laughs] Yeah, I think you might have a business. I mean, those are the kinds of things that you think, wow, why did that take off? What is going on there? That's really interesting. Let's talk. And he had a mohawk. He played in a metal band. Business was not his deal. And so that wasn't the lens he was applying. I think a lot of designers and a lot of people who invent products and solutions start with; I'm doing this for myself, wouldn't this be rad? Without even knowing that, they touched a nerve in the market that now is kind of catching on fire. Those are really exciting entrepreneurs for us to work with. They do have to turn a corner on I'm building a business now. I'm not just doing something that's cool with my friends. And that can be a difficult place because it means you have to cross a bridge into the world of finance, and you're probably going to have to hire product managers. And now you go hire that Harvard Business School grad and they work for you. And a lot of people frankly don't want to turn that corner. And I get it because when you come back to that topic of, is this values-aligned? A lot of that world is not yet totally values-aligned. That's shifting, more impact investors, more investors who want to see more different types of people starting companies, but we're not there yet. And so there's this cultural clash. When creatives walk toward that space, they go, ew, I've been fighting against the man my whole life. And now you want me to get in the car and go on a long road trip with them? No thanks. [laughs] And I'm sitting there with the Doritos going, yeah, man, but I got all the good munchies, let's go. It often does work out. But I also understand why people say, "You know, that's just not my deal now." VICTORIA: Yeah. And you have a tremendous amount of diversity in your alumni. ALICE: We do, yeah. VICTORIA: And so do you find that there are some challenges in bringing in that group to the rest of the accelerator world? ALICE: Yeah, you know, funny, I was thinking about that yesterday. So about 70% of our alumni, and this has been true across the board from day one, are people of color or women. At one point, it was around 30% were women of color. I haven't looked at that number in a while. We've worked with about 550 companies worldwide. In the Middle East, half of our alumni are women-led companies. In the U.S., we are fortunate to be able to work with a lot of indigenous communities. New Mexico is home to a large indigenous population. And it's a lot of the reason our culture is so dynamic and beautiful. So for us, that was always a no-brainer that that was where a lot of the interesting creativity would come from and that that was where the rising markets were. We, for example, accelerated and were the first investor in a company called Native Realities, which is a comic book. And they founded the first indigenous Comic Con, which is now called Indigenous Pop X worldwide. And they saw obviously before even Black Panther, and it became kind of like people said, "Oh yeah, superheroes come from all communities." They saw that that market was rising. There are 300 million indigenous people worldwide. There are two comic book companies. Let that sink in. [laughs] It's like, oh my God, what is the possibility then not just around comic books, but gaming, animation, all kinds of creative tools, film, music? That's a huge market that has not been served at all. And we understood early on that that was an area where people want to tell their own stories. People want to understand the stories of other people. And then people want to build new stories together across those cultural or geographic boundaries. And the technology had shifted such that that was possible. In 1980, that wasn't really possible. The distribution channels of film were such that you had to raise money in Hollywood and have Tom Hanks and whatever. That's just not true anymore. So we saw that early on, and that has helped attract a lot of entrepreneurs who share our passion for really telling those stories. However, I would say for people who want to support rising entrepreneurs out of what I'm going to call distressed communities or communities that have been literally discouraged from becoming their own economic leaders is that the burden that most of the people bear who are building businesses, for example, from Black communities, or native communities, or women in the Middle East, those people tend to bear a larger burden than someone from a more privileged background like myself. They're often the person in their family and for their community who is helping to ensure that people get the health care they need, that that kid was able to visit the college that they wanted to apply to. They become that sort of anchor of support for more people than in situations where we have more support and more what I call margin. They have really little margin. And so to ask them to, for example, join an accelerator full-time for 12 weeks that just doesn't work. Because the decision that they're making, you know, from a very privileged position, we can say, "Well, either you're dedicated to your business, or you're not." But really, what we're saying to them is, well, either you do your business, or you love your family and your culture. That's the question we're asking them, and that's a totally unfair question. That's a ridiculous question. Every single one of us would say, "I love my family. Thanks, see ya." CHAD: So how do you balance that? ALICE: Well, it's tough. I mean, first of all, we have adopted in the programs where it's more for early-stage entrepreneurs, and we're opening doors to entrepreneurship. And we are being first and foremost patient, patient with they're crossing that threshold. We understand that our core outcome is that people come always saying, "I'm an entrepreneur. I'm ready for the journey." That means we do things like, first of all, we do all online. If possible, we do a meeting upfront, so everybody meets each other in person because that kind of sets a tone of just it's a lot of fun. We have food and drink, and we have a good time. And then we do 6 to 12 weeks online, and then we do a gathering at the end. And we build a community first and foremost of people who are understanding how they can help one another. So Creative Startups is a little different in how we do accelerators. We do not ever have people stand at the front of the room and tell people what they should do with their business partly because we're educators first and foremost, and we understand...I have a Ph.D. in entrepreneurship. I understand that entrepreneurs tend to be experiential learners, not all but many. And we're not going to be there in a year building their business. They're going to be building their business. We have to build their self-confidence. We have to build their ability to say, "I know how to row the boat. You're along for the ride." I'm just along for the ride. [laughs] That requires us to do things like, okay, so let's work on your business model and really carefully chunk out here's one piece of that. Let's go deeply into understanding that. Let's tackle the vocabulary. Let's look at how people talk about it online. Let's open that door culturally so that you can take that into your experiences and say, "Oh, I already kind of do that. I just use a different language," which is what a lot of designers do. A lot of designers, whatever your background, already do entrepreneurial processes. They use different language, and it's just a translation. It's literally just vocabulary. So we help people understand that the best way to figure out your client's needs are by listening; all people know that. If you want to understand someone else, listen, and unpacking that into then business speak a little bit, and then giving them opportunities to go do that in the real world. And being patient with how they might do that or why they couldn't get it done this week. Or maybe they want to come back with a different way of describing it than maybe a White person like me might describe what they experienced. And just giving a lot of latitude to people to have that own experience themselves. That honestly...I know that sounds very philosophical. But it breaks down into tactical things that we do in an accelerator that opens the door to a lot more entrepreneurs. And our Net Promoter Score is 9. Over 90% of people would recommend our program. People love our programs. And 70% of our alumni are still in business. So I think it's working. We have a lot of learning to do. We're doing an indigenous accelerator right now, and it's a lot of learning for me. It's very eye-opening. CHAD: As an accelerator specific to indigenous peoples, what made you decide to do that? Some people I know, thoughtbot included, sometimes hesitate to do things like that because we don't want...there's some hesitation around doing something like that. ALICE: So we share all of those hesitations, and we think they're spot on. We are doing this in partnership with a group called Creative Nations out of Colorado. They are all indigenous people. They're a new group. And we envision Creative Startups moving more toward a place of being kind of like the intel, you know, the old intel inside. We are inside, and we're an engine within another organization. So here in Santa Fe, we partnered with Vital Spaces, which serves Black and Brown creative entrepreneurs and artists. And our goal is to help build their capacity to be able to keep doing programs as they see fit for entrepreneurs. And we're standing by as they would like us to help. So we took that same approach with working with Creative Nations. It's been a fantastic partnership. The lead working with us is a woman named Kelly Holmes. She is Lakota Sioux. She's from the Cheyenne River Reservation. And she founded Native Max Media, which publishes Native Max Magazine, the world's first fashion magazine for indigenous entrepreneurs. She is a brilliant, creative entrepreneur. She is self-taught. She eked it out. She has been around ten years now. It's astounding. And you see the magazine, and it's spectacular. It is high glamour, beautiful. And it is reshaping the way not only indigenous people see themselves but how White people see indigenous people. And those reframed stories are so important to building a more equitable society. So I was over the moon to partner with her. Then I learned her mom is one of the few Lakota language teachers. So Lakota is her first language. Her mother teaches Lakota and teaches teachers how to teach Lakota. So she grew up with an educator. So she has taken to building this, again, patient, very exploratory online environment for indigenous entrepreneurs. And then I bring sometimes the more technical like, oh, you're asking a specific question about how to do structured interviews with customers. Sure, let me talk a little bit about that. But as we started out this conversation, you guys, entrepreneurship is not an intellectual challenge usually; it's a heart challenge. I don't mean that in a way to disparage how important it is to be really strategic and smart about your business. But I think at the outset especially, you just have to be able to hang in there and keep doing it. And then, as you grow into that opportunity, you start to see that the intellectual challenges unfold because your opportunities become more complex. But at this outset with Kelly, it's been a conversation with people who are frankly reframing themselves as business leaders, people who own businesses and have employees based on their creative output. And that's a really exciting space to work in. We wouldn't work in this space if we didn't have a partner who shared our vision and who wanted to be that native leader of a program like this. It just wouldn't really feel exciting. CHAD: I think that that's great advice and a framing that helps me think about the things that we've tried to do in the past and the things that we hope to do in the future and realizing that really genuinely partnering with someone in the actual community that we're trying to serve or to have an impact with is sometimes an important missing component that we need to incorporate. That'll help solve a lot of the hesitations that we might have around doing something. ALICE: Yeah, yeah. VICTORIA: Right. And we've all heard before that culture eats strategy for breakfast, which I think -- [laughs] ALICE: That's my favorite line, Victoria. You nailed it. VICTORIA: It makes sense that the more connected you are to your culture and to your community, that's where you'll be the most successful when your heart is in it. ALICE: Yeah. And I want to give sort of a plug for stepping outside of the zone of the way...I went to business school. I have an MBA. I'm really well-versed in that whole world. I'm married to a venture capitalist. He teaches how to do venture capital at Stanford. That whole world is very familiar to me. And it seems to not be helping us solve the problems that we have now as a society. And so one of the reasons I encourage people to go to those partners, go to those places where you're like, I don't fit in here; I don't understand what's going on here; these people speak a different cultural language, form, way of doing things, I encourage that because I think that for people who want to build a different world, we have to stop looking to the world that we already have. And we have to say, "Well, who does things differently? What could we learn?" One of the most beautiful things about working with the entrepreneurs in the cohort right now, the indigenous cohort, is they first talk about taking care of their people, that's first. And it's like, wow, if that's your entire frame, you start to make really different decisions in business. If you're talking about well, I want to take care of the people in my community; I want people to be healthy and happy and be able to pursue their own dreams; that's a really different frame of mind for a baseline for decision making. The other thing that Kelly talks about that I love (I'm stealing it from her.) is she talks about fighting for her business, fighting for her business. And that, to me, is such a great way to feel like, okay, if I'm fighting for my business, I know how much Creative Startups has achieved. I'm not fighting for myself. It's not my ego. It's none of that. It's fighting for my business so my business can keep having the impact. Everything that I think about now in terms of working with indigenous entrepreneurs is this has nothing to do with me. Their frame is very much my community, my people, my business, which is over there. And it's a humble way of understanding one's place. And that is a really exciting reframe for me to think about how we can solve problems like the climate crisis, like the disparity between rich and poor, like the disintegration of our democracy. What if we had a different frame? How could we solve problems differently, maybe better? So for us, these partnerships unlock a whole vast area of new thinking, new ways of doing business, new ways of taking care of other people. And at the end of the day, that's what gets me back in the rowboat [laughs] is this idea of, wow, we are having an impact on other people. And doing it with people who have a different starting point has really shaped a lot of the work that we do. CHAD: Well, I'm sorry that we have to wrap up. Otherwise, we could keep on going and solve the climate crisis and unraveling of our democracy, but -- [laughs] ALICE: Yeah, I have an appointment at 2:00 where I'm doing climate crisis. So I'll let you know how it goes. CHAD: Okay, wonderful. ALICE: [laughs] CHAD: Alice, thank you so much for joining the show and sharing everything with us. We really appreciate it. ALICE: Yeah, I was delighted to be with you guys and hope to continue the conversation. CHAD: You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. VICTORIA: And if you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. CHAD: You can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. VICTORIA: And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHAD: Thanks for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Alice Loy.
Joe Barb is Executive Director and Founder of LGBTQ+ Family Connections Center. They have a mission to strengthen and empower all youth, however they identify, to overcome obstacles by providing housing, supportive counseling, community education, and advocacy. Victoria and Chad talk with Joe about identifying needs for the center, his own lived experience and connection to the LGBTQ+ community, and deciding what services to provide and evaluating which are most impactful. LGBTQ+ Family Connections Center (https://lgbtqfamilyconnectionscenter.net/) Follow the LGBTQ+ Family Connections Center on Twitter (https://twitter.com/center_lgbtq), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/lgbtqfamilyconnectionscenter/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/LGBTQFamilyConnectionCenter), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/lgbtq-family-connections-center/). Follow Joe on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/joe-barb-978ba0204/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is The Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. VICTORIA: And I'm your other host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Joe Barb, Executive Director and Founder of LGBTQ+ Family Connections Center, with a mission to strengthen and empower all youth however they identify to overcome obstacles by providing housing, supportive counseling, community education, and advocacy. Joe, thank you for joining us. JOE: Thank you. I appreciate it. VICTORIA: Wonderful. So you started the center over two years ago. If you could go back in time and give yourself advice to when you were first starting out, what would you tell yourself? JOE: Wow, very similar to for-profit companies, having the tenacity to keep knocking on doors, never accepting no for an answer, and understanding that tenacity is everything. Nothing happens without continuing the fight every day. VICTORIA: Great. And how did you first identify that need for the center? JOE: A million years ago, when I was a late teenager, my parents had a pastor in their church suggest to them that in order to bring me back to God and back to their church, that they should cut me off financially, you know, I was a young freshman in college prod me in that direction. So my parents took the advice, and I found myself in my second semester of college with no funding. The check for the second semester had been canceled from my family, and I didn't know what to do. So I called a friend in South Dakota that we had met on vacation. And she said, "You know what? I have an apartment building here. I just had an apartment become vacant. Why don't you move to South Dakota, and then we'll work on everything else?" So that lived experience kind of proded the whole thing. And then meeting the youth who had been displaced from home for being a trans youth caused the rest. CHAD: Well, I'm really sorry for that personal experience that you had. But it's pretty powerful and that you've gone on to help others in similar situations is really admirable. JOE: Yeah, it's been quite a journey. And my lived experience, honestly, I was with stability within 24 hours. The more I became comfortable and complacent in my life and then met somebody who wasn't; it brought me back to that. And then just looking at statistics, looking at how youth end up in a houseless situation created something in me that I had to address. VICTORIA: So you had your own lived experience and that connection to your community which helped you identify that need and start out on the center. Did you find there were a lot of resources for building nonprofits? JOE: There isn't. And it's really something that when you go into it, you believe that when you create a nonprofit and you finish that application, you send it into the IRS, and you get approval, that you put a great idea out there and that the community will respond and that everyone will immediately jump on it and say, "You know what? You're right. This is needed. We need housing. We need to make sure that youth are safe." And that's not the way it works. It doesn't work that way at all. It's a lot of connections and community and getting involved and putting the statistics and the numbers out there so that people are aware of it. But it's mostly connecting the stories. The more youth that I've met and worked with and connected them to a story and told their story, the more people respond. VICTORIA: Right. And so, what have you found to be the most impactful in sharing that story and in managing that content to get to the right people who can help you with this need? JOE: The most impactful part is people just aren't aware. We all know that there's a homeless population. No matter where you live, there's a homeless population, and it impacts communities. But what we aren't aware of is we all typically believe that the government is funding these things and it's being taken care of and that maybe those people just chose homelessness and don't realize that the resources are very limited. Until those resources are able to show a data of need, that person may not be counted that you saw on the corner. CHAD: You're pretty active socially online. I think where I first saw you was through a mutual connection on LinkedIn, and your posts started to be in my feed, and I liked and subscribed, I guess. How much of the awareness that you're putting out there is coming from social networks and online versus in-person and local communities? JOE: I'd say it's probably a good mixture of both. Locally, obviously, I'm deeply involved with other service providers, and I'm involved with local government. I'm on any kind of board that you can think of that impacts youth homelessness. So there's that within my community but having those LinkedIn...just this weekend, we had our pride, and at our pride, someone walked over to me, started talking at our booth. And he said, "Well, I know you from LinkedIn. CHAD: [chuckles] JOE: I noticed your picture with Sylvan Lake behind you from your LinkedIn, and I just had to come over to meet you and say hi." And I thought, how impactful is social media that someone who lives in Florida happened to be in South Dakota came to pride and recognized me from a picture? VICTORIA: Wow. Yeah, it makes our world feel a little smaller sometimes, doesn't it? JOE: Absolutely. VICTORIA: And the problem of youth homelessness and LGBTQ+ homelessness is very complex. And I think other nonprofit founders might be interested in how you decide what services you're going to provide and how you evaluate to see which ones are the most impactful. JOE: We did things kind of backwards. So I formed the board of directors, and typically what happens with the board of directors is they want to become your advisors. And I thought these people have great professional experience. We have doctors; we have PhDs, we have scientists literally on our board. And those people don't have the lived experience. So I thought, who do we go to to develop programming and support for people that are in need? And the answer was glaringly clear; it had to be the people who were in need. So I formed a Youth Action Board with the State Continuum of Care. And it comprises of youth ages 13 to 24 who have lived experience. We keep it at 66% have to have lived experience. And technically, most of them have even much more than that. But we connect with them through service providers who assist youth. And those were the people that we used to formulate what they needed, decide what was most beneficial to help them during vulnerable points, and then help them get out of situations. VICTORIA: Right. And I think that user experience, that experience bringing that into the products and services that you're creating, just makes a lot of sense for us, and that's what we bring into our design as well. JOE: Yeah, I mean, we do it in almost every industry. Whatever you create, whatever product you create, whether it's something tangible that you hold or whether it's a service, you bring in a test group. And that test group typically is people that you're seeking to utilize or buy your service or your product. And in doing that, we end up developing a better product. It's the same thing with a nonprofit. We had to get the voice of those who we would be serving in order to make sure that we were doing what they needed, not what we thought as professional people or personal opinions was the way forward. CHAD: Was there something as you were talking to people and learning that surprised you? JOE: Probably the same thing that everyone develops is an opinion of homelessness. We all think that people that experience homelessness it's typically through some self-inflicted issue; typically, drugs and alcohol come to mind and some type of cause that brought you there that you had influence on. And I've learned that most of the kids that we serve had no influence on their homelessness other than to be born where they were or to who they were born. A lot of our youth are coming from, oh, they've lived in shelters, or foster care, or aged out of foster care. It just changed my dichotomy of thinking that we would be serving people that had addiction problems or alcohol problems when in case of the youth...currently we're at, I think 68 youth served. I've only met one youth that had a previous addiction. CHAD: It's really just that lack of a safety net. And all it takes is your family not supporting you and not having a safety net. JOE: Absolutely. And that's just it. You said it very well. Most of us, when we have an incident in our life that we need some help because there's a vulnerability, we have people around us that we go back to. We have either family or close friends that we can say, "You know what? I lost my job. I need a little bit of help here," or "This medical incident happened, and could you assist us?" And we get a response from our family or friends that typically is supportive and helps us find a way. A lot of youth, especially youth that experience homelessness, don't have that connection to family. So that's where we need to bring in community to support them. VICTORIA: Right. And do you find there are unique challenges to supporting youth experiencing homelessness in the Midwest in South Dakota where you are versus in more urban areas? JOE: Absolutely. Carl Siciliano is my TA advisor. He created the Ali Forney Center in New York, which is the largest housing support for homeless youth for...they specifically only target LGBTQ youth in the United States. And in talking to him and in looking at our demographics, it was very different. For them, people in larger cities will just seek out their services. They learn about it word of mouth. They find out that there's a shelter in place. Here, our homeless population is much more hidden. And typically, what happens here is youth will gather together. And it'll be six or eight of them who will become friendly, and they will try to support each other by one of them will get a hotel, and then six or eight of them will live together. Or they're doubled up in one person's apartment, six or eight people live in somebody else's apartment, which truly isn't housed because it's not their place. And they try to support each other. So they're very hidden in our communities. CHAD: It's unfortunate there's a lot of stuff happening in the U.S. and worldwide with legislation being passed now anti-transgender. I think South Dakota was the first state in the country to pass an anti-transgender bill this year. Are there particular challenges to doing the work that you do in today's climate? JOE: Accessing mental health services, we had to overcome that obstacle by forming relationships with counseling services so that we could make sure that any youth, whether they were insured or underinsured, or uninsured, could immediately access mental health. And that took quite a bit of work on our part in order to make that happen. It should be easy. It should be easy to access mental health. And that's probably one of the biggest challenges because I can stabilize anyone tomorrow with either a hotel, or a house, or an apartment. But if you don't have mental health to help with what got you there, you're still living in trauma. If you're living in trauma, how can you focus on things like going back to school or having a career or what even tomorrow means for you? Because you're living in trauma today. So, absolutely, to answer your question, mental health. CHAD: And is that a matter of providers not wanting to provide services or not being able to pay for it? JOE: Not being able to pay for it. There are things that you can access if you're uninsured or underinsured if you meet the guidelines to get into mental health access. The problem with that is if you need to help today, that's a process. We wanted to skip the process. We wanted to make sure that if you walked into our drop-in center today that this afternoon I can have you with a therapist of your choice. MID-ROLL AD: Now that you have funding, it's time to design, build, and ship the most impactful MVP that wows customers now, and can scale in the future. thoughtbot Liftoff brings you the most reliable cross-functional team of product experts to mitigate risk and set you up for long-term success. As your trusted, experienced technical partner, we'll help launch your new product and guide you into a future-forward business that takes advantage of today's new technologies and agile best practices. Make the right decisions for tomorrow today. Get in touch at thoughtbot.com/liftoff. CHAD: You have a website. You collect donations online. And we definitely want to link all of that stuff in the show notes. It will be there, and I hope people contribute. But when it comes to the tactical stuff on the product and business side, are there particular tools or resources you were able to draw upon to put together online donations, the website, that kind of thing? JOE: As far as platforms, is that what you're asking? CHAD: Yeah. JOE: There are some great platforms that have been built specifically for nonprofits in order to help get the word out and help fundraise. That for us hasn't been the primary. In this type of nonprofit, typically, most of our donations are not donations or grants. They're things that we...like, I just spent two years on a grant that is quite substantial. But it was two years of work, literally 40 hours a week for two years. So there are those tools, there's the GoFundMe, and there are all kinds of tools for sharing on social media in order to get people to donate. They're great, but you have to have a large circle in order to utilize those. And you have to have people that are willing to do that as well. So I don't think we have the tool that's the best tool yet socially. CHAD: What would something that was better look like for you? JOE: It's more getting corporations and businesses and private companies involved in what a lot of companies are already doing. They will seek from their employees giving initiatives. And they will seek information to what does the company want to support as a community? Because that's what their employees care about. I think those things have a more sustainable development and a more sustainable footprint for nonprofits that when organizations get involved that are private and then offer to their employees a way to donate, that works best. CHAD: Yeah. For thoughtbot, to honor Pride Month, we collected a series of donations that we were going to make. And there was team suggestion...because we have teams all over the place, we wanted to have a local impact. And then when it came to actually doing those donations, I think we had 10 to 20 organizations that we wanted to donate, not a huge amount of money to each one but hopefully, it makes a difference. And the way that we needed to do that a person at thoughtbot needed to go and either find the donate link, the place to do it, and some of them didn't even have it. And we wanted to, you know, maybe it's a place in Brazil or something, and we need to get them the money somehow, wiring it or something. And so that was a fair amount of manual work to figure that out and then to make the payments. JOE: And I think because it goes along with we're learning as organizations that we have to take care of the social and emotional part of employees just as well as we do the work environment. It's part of the work environment. So I think that that kind of goes back to HR, which is my background. HR should look at those things in advance and find local nonprofits to support local ideas and then maybe some national ones as well. We all know of The Trevor Project and some of the great broader campaigns that do a lot of really good work. And have that ready so that when somebody joins your company you can show them and say, "Hey, by the way, these are some local organizations that we can do a payroll deduction for if you like, or we can buy annual contributions," and let the employees see that the company cares about the local area and also cares about things on a national platform that impact employees. VICTORIA: I love that. I think that's a great way to involve corporations in giving back and connecting employees to their local communities and the local groups that need support. Is there anything else that you want to tell our listeners in order to support the LGBTQ+ Center or in general? JOE: The majority of our youth are LGBTQ+. And that's because statistically, across the United States, the majority of youth seeking housing services unaccompanied are LGBTQ+, up to 40%. But we don't turn away any youth. It doesn't matter how they identify. It doesn't matter what their circumstances are. The only thing that we ask is if you're telling us you're homeless, then we're going to assist in that. We do have age criteria of 16 to 24 because that matches the federal guidelines for the programming that we're in through federal dollars. So other than that, I mean, we still would help anyone of any age, but that's the big thing to know is that we help any youth however they identify. And what could listeners do? Obviously, on our website or look into your community as well and see what is a support in your area and find something that you can contribute to. VICTORIA: That sounds great. Thank you so much. Do you have any questions for me or Chad? JOE: I think that what you're doing is great. I like that you are thinking of nonprofits as a company as well because a lot of people view it differently when it's actually a company. You have to figure out a way to sustain funding and bring money in just like any other organization in order to do the work. CHAD: Yeah, I think that's a common misconception that people have. And I'm sure it's not the case with you and your organization. But I like to remind people that nonprofit really just means that it can't show a profit. So there are lots of nonprofits out there that just end up spending all of the money that they have. That is really also technically what it means sometimes. JOE: And you bring up a great point. There's an IRS website to look up any nonprofit organization, and you can look at how they spend their money. I do that all the time before I make a donation. Because we've all heard those stories of CEOs, who make 30 million a year or whatever crazy number. You can always look up any organization and see how they spend their money. CHAD: Yeah, that's a really good tip for people to do before you get involved with an organization with donations or your time and really making sure it matches your values and that kind of thing. VICTORIA: Great. All right. I think we're about at time. So with that, I will wrap us up and let everyone know you can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. CHAD: If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. VICTORIA: And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHAD: Thanks for listening and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Joe Barb.
Joe Barb is Executive Director and Founder of LGBTQ+ Family Connections Center. They have a mission to strengthen and empower all youth, however they identify, to overcome obstacles by providing housing, supportive counseling, community education, and advocacy. Victoria and Chad talk with Joe about identifying needs for the center, his own lived experience and connection to the LGBTQ+ community, and deciding what services to provide and evaluating which are most impactful. LGBTQ+ Family Connections Center (https://lgbtqfamilyconnectionscenter.net/) Follow the LGBTQ+ Family Connections Center on Twitter (https://twitter.com/center_lgbtq), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/lgbtqfamilyconnectionscenter/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/LGBTQFamilyConnectionCenter), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/lgbtq-family-connections-center/). Follow Joe on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/joe-barb-978ba0204/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is The Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. VICTORIA: And I'm your other host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Joe Barb, Executive Director and Founder of LGBTQ+ Family Connections Center, with a mission to strengthen and empower all youth however they identify to overcome obstacles by providing housing, supportive counseling, community education, and advocacy. Joe, thank you for joining us. JOE: Thank you. I appreciate it. VICTORIA: Wonderful. So you started the center over two years ago. If you could go back in time and give yourself advice to when you were first starting out, what would you tell yourself? JOE: Wow, very similar to for-profit companies, having the tenacity to keep knocking on doors, never accepting no for an answer, and understanding that tenacity is everything. Nothing happens without continuing the fight every day. VICTORIA: Great. And how did you first identify that need for the center? JOE: A million years ago, when I was a late teenager, my parents had a pastor in their church suggest to them that in order to bring me back to God and back to their church, that they should cut me off financially, you know, I was a young freshman in college prod me in that direction. So my parents took the advice, and I found myself in my second semester of college with no funding. The check for the second semester had been canceled from my family, and I didn't know what to do. So I called a friend in South Dakota that we had met on vacation. And she said, "You know what? I have an apartment building here. I just had an apartment become vacant. Why don't you move to South Dakota, and then we'll work on everything else?" So that lived experience kind of proded the whole thing. And then meeting the youth who had been displaced from home for being a trans youth caused the rest. CHAD: Well, I'm really sorry for that personal experience that you had. But it's pretty powerful and that you've gone on to help others in similar situations is really admirable. JOE: Yeah, it's been quite a journey. And my lived experience, honestly, I was with stability within 24 hours. The more I became comfortable and complacent in my life and then met somebody who wasn't; it brought me back to that. And then just looking at statistics, looking at how youth end up in a houseless situation created something in me that I had to address. VICTORIA: So you had your own lived experience and that connection to your community which helped you identify that need and start out on the center. Did you find there were a lot of resources for building nonprofits? JOE: There isn't. And it's really something that when you go into it, you believe that when you create a nonprofit and you finish that application, you send it into the IRS, and you get approval, that you put a great idea out there and that the community will respond and that everyone will immediately jump on it and say, "You know what? You're right. This is needed. We need housing. We need to make sure that youth are safe." And that's not the way it works. It doesn't work that way at all. It's a lot of connections and community and getting involved and putting the statistics and the numbers out there so that people are aware of it. But it's mostly connecting the stories. The more youth that I've met and worked with and connected them to a story and told their story, the more people respond. VICTORIA: Right. And so, what have you found to be the most impactful in sharing that story and in managing that content to get to the right people who can help you with this need? JOE: The most impactful part is people just aren't aware. We all know that there's a homeless population. No matter where you live, there's a homeless population, and it impacts communities. But what we aren't aware of is we all typically believe that the government is funding these things and it's being taken care of and that maybe those people just chose homelessness and don't realize that the resources are very limited. Until those resources are able to show a data of need, that person may not be counted that you saw on the corner. CHAD: You're pretty active socially online. I think where I first saw you was through a mutual connection on LinkedIn, and your posts started to be in my feed, and I liked and subscribed, I guess. How much of the awareness that you're putting out there is coming from social networks and online versus in-person and local communities? JOE: I'd say it's probably a good mixture of both. Locally, obviously, I'm deeply involved with other service providers, and I'm involved with local government. I'm on any kind of board that you can think of that impacts youth homelessness. So there's that within my community but having those LinkedIn...just this weekend, we had our pride, and at our pride, someone walked over to me, started talking at our booth. And he said, "Well, I know you from LinkedIn. CHAD: [chuckles] JOE: I noticed your picture with Sylvan Lake behind you from your LinkedIn, and I just had to come over to meet you and say hi." And I thought, how impactful is social media that someone who lives in Florida happened to be in South Dakota came to pride and recognized me from a picture? VICTORIA: Wow. Yeah, it makes our world feel a little smaller sometimes, doesn't it? JOE: Absolutely. VICTORIA: And the problem of youth homelessness and LGBTQ+ homelessness is very complex. And I think other nonprofit founders might be interested in how you decide what services you're going to provide and how you evaluate to see which ones are the most impactful. JOE: We did things kind of backwards. So I formed the board of directors, and typically what happens with the board of directors is they want to become your advisors. And I thought these people have great professional experience. We have doctors; we have PhDs, we have scientists literally on our board. And those people don't have the lived experience. So I thought, who do we go to to develop programming and support for people that are in need? And the answer was glaringly clear; it had to be the people who were in need. So I formed a Youth Action Board with the State Continuum of Care. And it comprises of youth ages 13 to 24 who have lived experience. We keep it at 66% have to have lived experience. And technically, most of them have even much more than that. But we connect with them through service providers who assist youth. And those were the people that we used to formulate what they needed, decide what was most beneficial to help them during vulnerable points, and then help them get out of situations. VICTORIA: Right. And I think that user experience, that experience bringing that into the products and services that you're creating, just makes a lot of sense for us, and that's what we bring into our design as well. JOE: Yeah, I mean, we do it in almost every industry. Whatever you create, whatever product you create, whether it's something tangible that you hold or whether it's a service, you bring in a test group. And that test group typically is people that you're seeking to utilize or buy your service or your product. And in doing that, we end up developing a better product. It's the same thing with a nonprofit. We had to get the voice of those who we would be serving in order to make sure that we were doing what they needed, not what we thought as professional people or personal opinions was the way forward. CHAD: Was there something as you were talking to people and learning that surprised you? JOE: Probably the same thing that everyone develops is an opinion of homelessness. We all think that people that experience homelessness it's typically through some self-inflicted issue; typically, drugs and alcohol come to mind and some type of cause that brought you there that you had influence on. And I've learned that most of the kids that we serve had no influence on their homelessness other than to be born where they were or to who they were born. A lot of our youth are coming from, oh, they've lived in shelters, or foster care, or aged out of foster care. It just changed my dichotomy of thinking that we would be serving people that had addiction problems or alcohol problems when in case of the youth...currently we're at, I think 68 youth served. I've only met one youth that had a previous addiction. CHAD: It's really just that lack of a safety net. And all it takes is your family not supporting you and not having a safety net. JOE: Absolutely. And that's just it. You said it very well. Most of us, when we have an incident in our life that we need some help because there's a vulnerability, we have people around us that we go back to. We have either family or close friends that we can say, "You know what? I lost my job. I need a little bit of help here," or "This medical incident happened, and could you assist us?" And we get a response from our family or friends that typically is supportive and helps us find a way. A lot of youth, especially youth that experience homelessness, don't have that connection to family. So that's where we need to bring in community to support them. VICTORIA: Right. And do you find there are unique challenges to supporting youth experiencing homelessness in the Midwest in South Dakota where you are versus in more urban areas? JOE: Absolutely. Carl Siciliano is my TA advisor. He created the Ali Forney Center in New York, which is the largest housing support for homeless youth for...they specifically only target LGBTQ youth in the United States. And in talking to him and in looking at our demographics, it was very different. For them, people in larger cities will just seek out their services. They learn about it word of mouth. They find out that there's a shelter in place. Here, our homeless population is much more hidden. And typically, what happens here is youth will gather together. And it'll be six or eight of them who will become friendly, and they will try to support each other by one of them will get a hotel, and then six or eight of them will live together. Or they're doubled up in one person's apartment, six or eight people live in somebody else's apartment, which truly isn't housed because it's not their place. And they try to support each other. So they're very hidden in our communities. CHAD: It's unfortunate there's a lot of stuff happening in the U.S. and worldwide with legislation being passed now anti-transgender. I think South Dakota was the first state in the country to pass an anti-transgender bill this year. Are there particular challenges to doing the work that you do in today's climate? JOE: Accessing mental health services, we had to overcome that obstacle by forming relationships with counseling services so that we could make sure that any youth, whether they were insured or underinsured, or uninsured, could immediately access mental health. And that took quite a bit of work on our part in order to make that happen. It should be easy. It should be easy to access mental health. And that's probably one of the biggest challenges because I can stabilize anyone tomorrow with either a hotel, or a house, or an apartment. But if you don't have mental health to help with what got you there, you're still living in trauma. If you're living in trauma, how can you focus on things like going back to school or having a career or what even tomorrow means for you? Because you're living in trauma today. So, absolutely, to answer your question, mental health. CHAD: And is that a matter of providers not wanting to provide services or not being able to pay for it? JOE: Not being able to pay for it. There are things that you can access if you're uninsured or underinsured if you meet the guidelines to get into mental health access. The problem with that is if you need to help today, that's a process. We wanted to skip the process. We wanted to make sure that if you walked into our drop-in center today that this afternoon I can have you with a therapist of your choice. MID-ROLL AD: Now that you have funding, it's time to design, build, and ship the most impactful MVP that wows customers now, and can scale in the future. thoughtbot Liftoff brings you the most reliable cross-functional team of product experts to mitigate risk and set you up for long-term success. As your trusted, experienced technical partner, we'll help launch your new product and guide you into a future-forward business that takes advantage of today's new technologies and agile best practices. Make the right decisions for tomorrow today. Get in touch at thoughtbot.com/liftoff. CHAD: You have a website. You collect donations online. And we definitely want to link all of that stuff in the show notes. It will be there, and I hope people contribute. But when it comes to the tactical stuff on the product and business side, are there particular tools or resources you were able to draw upon to put together online donations, the website, that kind of thing? JOE: As far as platforms, is that what you're asking? CHAD: Yeah. JOE: There are some great platforms that have been built specifically for nonprofits in order to help get the word out and help fundraise. That for us hasn't been the primary. In this type of nonprofit, typically, most of our donations are not donations or grants. They're things that we...like, I just spent two years on a grant that is quite substantial. But it was two years of work, literally 40 hours a week for two years. So there are those tools, there's the GoFundMe, and there are all kinds of tools for sharing on social media in order to get people to donate. They're great, but you have to have a large circle in order to utilize those. And you have to have people that are willing to do that as well. So I don't think we have the tool that's the best tool yet socially. CHAD: What would something that was better look like for you? JOE: It's more getting corporations and businesses and private companies involved in what a lot of companies are already doing. They will seek from their employees giving initiatives. And they will seek information to what does the company want to support as a community? Because that's what their employees care about. I think those things have a more sustainable development and a more sustainable footprint for nonprofits that when organizations get involved that are private and then offer to their employees a way to donate, that works best. CHAD: Yeah. For thoughtbot, to honor Pride Month, we collected a series of donations that we were going to make. And there was team suggestion...because we have teams all over the place, we wanted to have a local impact. And then when it came to actually doing those donations, I think we had 10 to 20 organizations that we wanted to donate, not a huge amount of money to each one but hopefully, it makes a difference. And the way that we needed to do that a person at thoughtbot needed to go and either find the donate link, the place to do it, and some of them didn't even have it. And we wanted to, you know, maybe it's a place in Brazil or something, and we need to get them the money somehow, wiring it or something. And so that was a fair amount of manual work to figure that out and then to make the payments. JOE: And I think because it goes along with we're learning as organizations that we have to take care of the social and emotional part of employees just as well as we do the work environment. It's part of the work environment. So I think that that kind of goes back to HR, which is my background. HR should look at those things in advance and find local nonprofits to support local ideas and then maybe some national ones as well. We all know of The Trevor Project and some of the great broader campaigns that do a lot of really good work. And have that ready so that when somebody joins your company you can show them and say, "Hey, by the way, these are some local organizations that we can do a payroll deduction for if you like, or we can buy annual contributions," and let the employees see that the company cares about the local area and also cares about things on a national platform that impact employees. VICTORIA: I love that. I think that's a great way to involve corporations in giving back and connecting employees to their local communities and the local groups that need support. Is there anything else that you want to tell our listeners in order to support the LGBTQ+ Center or in general? JOE: The majority of our youth are LGBTQ+. And that's because statistically, across the United States, the majority of youth seeking housing services unaccompanied are LGBTQ+, up to 40%. But we don't turn away any youth. It doesn't matter how they identify. It doesn't matter what their circumstances are. The only thing that we ask is if you're telling us you're homeless, then we're going to assist in that. We do have age criteria of 16 to 24 because that matches the federal guidelines for the programming that we're in through federal dollars. So other than that, I mean, we still would help anyone of any age, but that's the big thing to know is that we help any youth however they identify. And what could listeners do? Obviously, on our website or look into your community as well and see what is a support in your area and find something that you can contribute to. VICTORIA: That sounds great. Thank you so much. Do you have any questions for me or Chad? JOE: I think that what you're doing is great. I like that you are thinking of nonprofits as a company as well because a lot of people view it differently when it's actually a company. You have to figure out a way to sustain funding and bring money in just like any other organization in order to do the work. CHAD: Yeah, I think that's a common misconception that people have. And I'm sure it's not the case with you and your organization. But I like to remind people that nonprofit really just means that it can't show a profit. So there are lots of nonprofits out there that just end up spending all of the money that they have. That is really also technically what it means sometimes. JOE: And you bring up a great point. There's an IRS website to look up any nonprofit organization, and you can look at how they spend their money. I do that all the time before I make a donation. Because we've all heard those stories of CEOs, who make 30 million a year or whatever crazy number. You can always look up any organization and see how they spend their money. CHAD: Yeah, that's a really good tip for people to do before you get involved with an organization with donations or your time and really making sure it matches your values and that kind of thing. VICTORIA: Great. All right. I think we're about at time. So with that, I will wrap us up and let everyone know you can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. CHAD: If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. VICTORIA: And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHAD: Thanks for listening and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Joe Barb.
Joe Barb is Executive Director and Founder of LGBTQ+ Family Connections Center. They have a mission to strengthen and empower all youth, however they identify, to overcome obstacles by providing housing, supportive counseling, community education, and advocacy. Victoria and Chad talk with Joe about identifying needs for the center, his own lived experience and connection to the LGBTQ+ community, and deciding what services to provide and evaluating which are most impactful. LGBTQ+ Family Connections Center (https://lgbtqfamilyconnectionscenter.net/) Follow the LGBTQ+ Family Connections Center on Twitter (https://twitter.com/center_lgbtq), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/lgbtqfamilyconnectionscenter/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/LGBTQFamilyConnectionCenter), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/lgbtq-family-connections-center/). Follow Joe on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/joe-barb-978ba0204/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is The Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. VICTORIA: And I'm your other host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Joe Barb, Executive Director and Founder of LGBTQ+ Family Connections Center, with a mission to strengthen and empower all youth however they identify to overcome obstacles by providing housing, supportive counseling, community education, and advocacy. Joe, thank you for joining us. JOE: Thank you. I appreciate it. VICTORIA: Wonderful. So you started the center over two years ago. If you could go back in time and give yourself advice to when you were first starting out, what would you tell yourself? JOE: Wow, very similar to for-profit companies, having the tenacity to keep knocking on doors, never accepting no for an answer, and understanding that tenacity is everything. Nothing happens without continuing the fight every day. VICTORIA: Great. And how did you first identify that need for the center? JOE: A million years ago, when I was a late teenager, my parents had a pastor in their church suggest to them that in order to bring me back to God and back to their church, that they should cut me off financially, you know, I was a young freshman in college prod me in that direction. So my parents took the advice, and I found myself in my second semester of college with no funding. The check for the second semester had been canceled from my family, and I didn't know what to do. So I called a friend in South Dakota that we had met on vacation. And she said, "You know what? I have an apartment building here. I just had an apartment become vacant. Why don't you move to South Dakota, and then we'll work on everything else?" So that lived experience kind of proded the whole thing. And then meeting the youth who had been displaced from home for being a trans youth caused the rest. CHAD: Well, I'm really sorry for that personal experience that you had. But it's pretty powerful and that you've gone on to help others in similar situations is really admirable. JOE: Yeah, it's been quite a journey. And my lived experience, honestly, I was with stability within 24 hours. The more I became comfortable and complacent in my life and then met somebody who wasn't; it brought me back to that. And then just looking at statistics, looking at how youth end up in a houseless situation created something in me that I had to address. VICTORIA: So you had your own lived experience and that connection to your community which helped you identify that need and start out on the center. Did you find there were a lot of resources for building nonprofits? JOE: There isn't. And it's really something that when you go into it, you believe that when you create a nonprofit and you finish that application, you send it into the IRS, and you get approval, that you put a great idea out there and that the community will respond and that everyone will immediately jump on it and say, "You know what? You're right. This is needed. We need housing. We need to make sure that youth are safe." And that's not the way it works. It doesn't work that way at all. It's a lot of connections and community and getting involved and putting the statistics and the numbers out there so that people are aware of it. But it's mostly connecting the stories. The more youth that I've met and worked with and connected them to a story and told their story, the more people respond. VICTORIA: Right. And so, what have you found to be the most impactful in sharing that story and in managing that content to get to the right people who can help you with this need? JOE: The most impactful part is people just aren't aware. We all know that there's a homeless population. No matter where you live, there's a homeless population, and it impacts communities. But what we aren't aware of is we all typically believe that the government is funding these things and it's being taken care of and that maybe those people just chose homelessness and don't realize that the resources are very limited. Until those resources are able to show a data of need, that person may not be counted that you saw on the corner. CHAD: You're pretty active socially online. I think where I first saw you was through a mutual connection on LinkedIn, and your posts started to be in my feed, and I liked and subscribed, I guess. How much of the awareness that you're putting out there is coming from social networks and online versus in-person and local communities? JOE: I'd say it's probably a good mixture of both. Locally, obviously, I'm deeply involved with other service providers, and I'm involved with local government. I'm on any kind of board that you can think of that impacts youth homelessness. So there's that within my community but having those LinkedIn...just this weekend, we had our pride, and at our pride, someone walked over to me, started talking at our booth. And he said, "Well, I know you from LinkedIn. CHAD: [chuckles] JOE: I noticed your picture with Sylvan Lake behind you from your LinkedIn, and I just had to come over to meet you and say hi." And I thought, how impactful is social media that someone who lives in Florida happened to be in South Dakota came to pride and recognized me from a picture? VICTORIA: Wow. Yeah, it makes our world feel a little smaller sometimes, doesn't it? JOE: Absolutely. VICTORIA: And the problem of youth homelessness and LGBTQ+ homelessness is very complex. And I think other nonprofit founders might be interested in how you decide what services you're going to provide and how you evaluate to see which ones are the most impactful. JOE: We did things kind of backwards. So I formed the board of directors, and typically what happens with the board of directors is they want to become your advisors. And I thought these people have great professional experience. We have doctors; we have PhDs, we have scientists literally on our board. And those people don't have the lived experience. So I thought, who do we go to to develop programming and support for people that are in need? And the answer was glaringly clear; it had to be the people who were in need. So I formed a Youth Action Board with the State Continuum of Care. And it comprises of youth ages 13 to 24 who have lived experience. We keep it at 66% have to have lived experience. And technically, most of them have even much more than that. But we connect with them through service providers who assist youth. And those were the people that we used to formulate what they needed, decide what was most beneficial to help them during vulnerable points, and then help them get out of situations. VICTORIA: Right. And I think that user experience, that experience bringing that into the products and services that you're creating, just makes a lot of sense for us, and that's what we bring into our design as well. JOE: Yeah, I mean, we do it in almost every industry. Whatever you create, whatever product you create, whether it's something tangible that you hold or whether it's a service, you bring in a test group. And that test group typically is people that you're seeking to utilize or buy your service or your product. And in doing that, we end up developing a better product. It's the same thing with a nonprofit. We had to get the voice of those who we would be serving in order to make sure that we were doing what they needed, not what we thought as professional people or personal opinions was the way forward. CHAD: Was there something as you were talking to people and learning that surprised you? JOE: Probably the same thing that everyone develops is an opinion of homelessness. We all think that people that experience homelessness it's typically through some self-inflicted issue; typically, drugs and alcohol come to mind and some type of cause that brought you there that you had influence on. And I've learned that most of the kids that we serve had no influence on their homelessness other than to be born where they were or to who they were born. A lot of our youth are coming from, oh, they've lived in shelters, or foster care, or aged out of foster care. It just changed my dichotomy of thinking that we would be serving people that had addiction problems or alcohol problems when in case of the youth...currently we're at, I think 68 youth served. I've only met one youth that had a previous addiction. CHAD: It's really just that lack of a safety net. And all it takes is your family not supporting you and not having a safety net. JOE: Absolutely. And that's just it. You said it very well. Most of us, when we have an incident in our life that we need some help because there's a vulnerability, we have people around us that we go back to. We have either family or close friends that we can say, "You know what? I lost my job. I need a little bit of help here," or "This medical incident happened, and could you assist us?" And we get a response from our family or friends that typically is supportive and helps us find a way. A lot of youth, especially youth that experience homelessness, don't have that connection to family. So that's where we need to bring in community to support them. VICTORIA: Right. And do you find there are unique challenges to supporting youth experiencing homelessness in the Midwest in South Dakota where you are versus in more urban areas? JOE: Absolutely. Carl Siciliano is my TA advisor. He created the Ali Forney Center in New York, which is the largest housing support for homeless youth for...they specifically only target LGBTQ youth in the United States. And in talking to him and in looking at our demographics, it was very different. For them, people in larger cities will just seek out their services. They learn about it word of mouth. They find out that there's a shelter in place. Here, our homeless population is much more hidden. And typically, what happens here is youth will gather together. And it'll be six or eight of them who will become friendly, and they will try to support each other by one of them will get a hotel, and then six or eight of them will live together. Or they're doubled up in one person's apartment, six or eight people live in somebody else's apartment, which truly isn't housed because it's not their place. And they try to support each other. So they're very hidden in our communities. CHAD: It's unfortunate there's a lot of stuff happening in the U.S. and worldwide with legislation being passed now anti-transgender. I think South Dakota was the first state in the country to pass an anti-transgender bill this year. Are there particular challenges to doing the work that you do in today's climate? JOE: Accessing mental health services, we had to overcome that obstacle by forming relationships with counseling services so that we could make sure that any youth, whether they were insured or underinsured, or uninsured, could immediately access mental health. And that took quite a bit of work on our part in order to make that happen. It should be easy. It should be easy to access mental health. And that's probably one of the biggest challenges because I can stabilize anyone tomorrow with either a hotel, or a house, or an apartment. But if you don't have mental health to help with what got you there, you're still living in trauma. If you're living in trauma, how can you focus on things like going back to school or having a career or what even tomorrow means for you? Because you're living in trauma today. So, absolutely, to answer your question, mental health. CHAD: And is that a matter of providers not wanting to provide services or not being able to pay for it? JOE: Not being able to pay for it. There are things that you can access if you're uninsured or underinsured if you meet the guidelines to get into mental health access. The problem with that is if you need to help today, that's a process. We wanted to skip the process. We wanted to make sure that if you walked into our drop-in center today that this afternoon I can have you with a therapist of your choice. MID-ROLL AD: Now that you have funding, it's time to design, build, and ship the most impactful MVP that wows customers now, and can scale in the future. thoughtbot Liftoff brings you the most reliable cross-functional team of product experts to mitigate risk and set you up for long-term success. As your trusted, experienced technical partner, we'll help launch your new product and guide you into a future-forward business that takes advantage of today's new technologies and agile best practices. Make the right decisions for tomorrow today. Get in touch at thoughtbot.com/liftoff. CHAD: You have a website. You collect donations online. And we definitely want to link all of that stuff in the show notes. It will be there, and I hope people contribute. But when it comes to the tactical stuff on the product and business side, are there particular tools or resources you were able to draw upon to put together online donations, the website, that kind of thing? JOE: As far as platforms, is that what you're asking? CHAD: Yeah. JOE: There are some great platforms that have been built specifically for nonprofits in order to help get the word out and help fundraise. That for us hasn't been the primary. In this type of nonprofit, typically, most of our donations are not donations or grants. They're things that we...like, I just spent two years on a grant that is quite substantial. But it was two years of work, literally 40 hours a week for two years. So there are those tools, there's the GoFundMe, and there are all kinds of tools for sharing on social media in order to get people to donate. They're great, but you have to have a large circle in order to utilize those. And you have to have people that are willing to do that as well. So I don't think we have the tool that's the best tool yet socially. CHAD: What would something that was better look like for you? JOE: It's more getting corporations and businesses and private companies involved in what a lot of companies are already doing. They will seek from their employees giving initiatives. And they will seek information to what does the company want to support as a community? Because that's what their employees care about. I think those things have a more sustainable development and a more sustainable footprint for nonprofits that when organizations get involved that are private and then offer to their employees a way to donate, that works best. CHAD: Yeah. For thoughtbot, to honor Pride Month, we collected a series of donations that we were going to make. And there was team suggestion...because we have teams all over the place, we wanted to have a local impact. And then when it came to actually doing those donations, I think we had 10 to 20 organizations that we wanted to donate, not a huge amount of money to each one but hopefully, it makes a difference. And the way that we needed to do that a person at thoughtbot needed to go and either find the donate link, the place to do it, and some of them didn't even have it. And we wanted to, you know, maybe it's a place in Brazil or something, and we need to get them the money somehow, wiring it or something. And so that was a fair amount of manual work to figure that out and then to make the payments. JOE: And I think because it goes along with we're learning as organizations that we have to take care of the social and emotional part of employees just as well as we do the work environment. It's part of the work environment. So I think that that kind of goes back to HR, which is my background. HR should look at those things in advance and find local nonprofits to support local ideas and then maybe some national ones as well. We all know of The Trevor Project and some of the great broader campaigns that do a lot of really good work. And have that ready so that when somebody joins your company you can show them and say, "Hey, by the way, these are some local organizations that we can do a payroll deduction for if you like, or we can buy annual contributions," and let the employees see that the company cares about the local area and also cares about things on a national platform that impact employees. VICTORIA: I love that. I think that's a great way to involve corporations in giving back and connecting employees to their local communities and the local groups that need support. Is there anything else that you want to tell our listeners in order to support the LGBTQ+ Center or in general? JOE: The majority of our youth are LGBTQ+. And that's because statistically, across the United States, the majority of youth seeking housing services unaccompanied are LGBTQ+, up to 40%. But we don't turn away any youth. It doesn't matter how they identify. It doesn't matter what their circumstances are. The only thing that we ask is if you're telling us you're homeless, then we're going to assist in that. We do have age criteria of 16 to 24 because that matches the federal guidelines for the programming that we're in through federal dollars. So other than that, I mean, we still would help anyone of any age, but that's the big thing to know is that we help any youth however they identify. And what could listeners do? Obviously, on our website or look into your community as well and see what is a support in your area and find something that you can contribute to. VICTORIA: That sounds great. Thank you so much. Do you have any questions for me or Chad? JOE: I think that what you're doing is great. I like that you are thinking of nonprofits as a company as well because a lot of people view it differently when it's actually a company. You have to figure out a way to sustain funding and bring money in just like any other organization in order to do the work. CHAD: Yeah, I think that's a common misconception that people have. And I'm sure it's not the case with you and your organization. But I like to remind people that nonprofit really just means that it can't show a profit. So there are lots of nonprofits out there that just end up spending all of the money that they have. That is really also technically what it means sometimes. JOE: And you bring up a great point. There's an IRS website to look up any nonprofit organization, and you can look at how they spend their money. I do that all the time before I make a donation. Because we've all heard those stories of CEOs, who make 30 million a year or whatever crazy number. You can always look up any organization and see how they spend their money. CHAD: Yeah, that's a really good tip for people to do before you get involved with an organization with donations or your time and really making sure it matches your values and that kind of thing. VICTORIA: Great. All right. I think we're about at time. So with that, I will wrap us up and let everyone know you can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. CHAD: If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. VICTORIA: And you can find me on Twitter @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHAD: Thanks for listening and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Joe Barb.
Lucy Hall is the Co-Founder of LOANHOOD, an online fashion rental platform and community that allows users to loan inclusive, diverse, and creative styles for an affordable price. Chad talks with Lucy about being a peer-to-peer fashion rental app, building a community, and reducing the impacts of the fashion industry on the planet and people by helping to create a sustainable future. LOANHOOD (https://www.loanhood.com/) Follow LOANHOOD on Twitter (https://twitter.com/loanhoodlondon), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/loanhood/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/loanhood), TikTok (https://www.tiktok.com/@loanhood), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzWBlASKUfH1OsdPEJOKxg), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/loanhood/). Follow Lucy on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/lucy-hall-616b1614/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Lucy Hall, the Co-Founder of LOANHOOD, who are changing the face of fashion. Lucy, thank you so much for joining me. LUCY: Thank you so much for having me, Chad. CHAD: How are some of the ways that LOANHOOD is changing the face of fashion? LUCY: So we're starting off with a peer-to-peer fashion rental app, which we just launched ten days ago now. CHAD: Congratulations on the launch. LUCY: It's been a long time in the making. And, like I said, we're starting with a fashion rental app. But there are so many different ways that we want to change the face of fashion. It definitely needs a facelift. CHAD: What caused you to start with the rental platform? LUCY: It was something that we were really passionate about. So my co-founders and I actually worked in the fashion industry for the majority of our careers. So we could see first-hand how it was changing, how it's developing. And sustainability started coming into our lives, and we could see that things had to change. And we know that the fashion industry is quite archaic. Big fashion businesses are like these huge ships. It's so hard for them to change their course and to actually implement sustainability into their supply chains or their values. And we knew that we could do it quicker and better and faster than them. So we started testing the idea of circular fashion by doing clothes swaps which is a kind of an entry-level way to circulate fashion for free or relatively cheaply. And we started getting this amazing feedback from people like, "Oh, we would love to do this again. And have you thought about monetizing it?" And, of course, that was our...to get to scale, we knew that we had to monetize this sharing of clothes. And that's how our peer-to-peer fashion rental app grew and was born. CHAD: That's great. So you have two co-founders. LUCY: I do. CHAD: Jade and Jen. Were the three of you working together at the time? LUCY: Funny story, Jade and I are actually best friends. And Jade was my model back in the day. So Jade has been a fashion model for 12-plus years. And she was on Britain's Next Top Model. And I was a model agent. She came into my agency as one of the runner-uppers, and we forged a lifelong friendship from there. And we've both been passionate about fashion. And then, as I said, our career paths, we could see the detrimental effect of the planet. And Jade decided to go back to university and start studying. She did her master's in fashion futures at London College of Fashion. And that's where she started seeing sustainability. And the idea of a peer-to-peer rental came from that course. She was studying the future of fashion, and she knew that this was the only way we can move forward. And Jen was a friend of Jade and is a graphic designer by trade and is an amazing brand builder and amazing designer. So we were asking her for some advice. And she came on as a co-founder at the beginning because she just knew this was the right path for her. CHAD: You started with these swaps. Were you doing the swaps as friends because you felt it was the right thing to do? Or did you have an eye towards this could be something more? LUCY: Well, we knew from the beginning that we wanted to do something big. We knew we'd got to a certain point in our careers where we were like, right, let's use our skills to really make a change. But we were also working, and we all had jobs, so we were kind of doing it as a side hustle, just testing the idea and going, "Oh yeah, we'll do this." And then it started picking up, and we got a contract with a local council. And we were like, wow, people are really interested in this. Let's keep going, and then the pandemic hit. CHAD: How did the pandemic affect you? LUCY: [chuckles] Well, as you can imagine, people weren't really doing clothes swaps or renting or even thinking about those things at the beginning of the pandemic anyhow. So we kind of just put it on hold and did what everyone did in the pandemic, hunkered down. And we started learning as much as we could about the circular economy, about sharing economy, trust economy, marketing, product, really teaching ourselves from the bottom up what it takes to make a global brand. So we were quite lucky in the respect that we had that time away to really hone our skills and focus on what we wanted in the long term. So post-pandemic, when we came out of the lockdowns, although there were multiple back and forth, as you know, it was definitely a stop-start for us, but we knew that it actually...it just allowed us that time to really focus our minds on what we wanted and a long-term plan, not just like, oh, let's try this out. We know what we want for the next 5 to 10 years, basically. CHAD: At what point did you decide, okay, we have to make an app? LUCY: It was a difficult one because we thought Shopify, Sharetribe there are all these amazing platforms. You can just get a business at the click of your fingers. However, for peer-to-peer fashion rental, it's a much more complex model. Even Sharetribe, which is supposed to be for those kinds of models it's not as detailed as we needed it to be. So we tried to build a website from scratch. And, again, we just knew that we're very much focused on Gen Z. And when we were talking to our audience, we knew that they wanted an app. So we just scrapped it and said let's just go for it. But having no technical background was a real difficult decision for us because we had no funding. We'd all just left our jobs. The pandemic had happened, so we didn't have any savings really. So we had some money from the clothes swaps. And we did a rewards-based Crowdfunder, and we raised £14,000 from friends and family in our community that were buying free rentals for the future and just believed in the mission that we were on. And we were able to get that £14,000 and put it into the start of building an app. And as you're aware, apps cost a lot of money. CHAD: [laughs] LUCY: We didn't get that far. And we learned a lot of lessons with the build because we tried to project manage it ourselves. Having no technical background, that was tricky. And we offshored it to a team in India who were lovely and amazing but not as skilled as we needed them to be. Because we had no technical background, we really needed somebody to lead that for us. So we had a starting point, but we knew that we had to actually get a technical lead on board pretty soon. And we were lucky enough to find a partner in a company called ON, who are based in the UK. And with them on board, they led the tech from there on. CHAD: Continuing to work with that team in India, or did they actually provide the entire team at that point? LUCY: We switched to another offshore team because it costs so much money here in the UK. CHAD: So when was this all happening? LUCY: Last year, mainly. 2021. CHAD: To give folks an idea, you make the decision to start building an app. You start doing that in 2021. You just launched. But your business is more than just the app. Were you right up to the wire with the app being ready? LUCY: Like you said, we're building a community. And what we learned from the pandemic is that you can't rely on one part of your business to help you succeed. You need multiple things. And what we're passionate about more than anything is community. And what we found with the fashion industry is that it can be quite elitist. And if you want to work in the fashion industry, you have to move to London or New York or Paris, and you have to probably know somebody in the fashion industry, and we wanted to change that. We wanted you to be able to start your own fashion journey wherever you are based. And what we also saw was that all this money that people were spending on fashion was going to big fashion businesses and to probably one guy at the top of that chain, whereas, with peer-to-peer rental, you can actually circulate that money within communities. You're lifting communities up so they can create their own sustainable fashion future. So what was really important to us was to have community as one of our main pillars going forward. CHAD: And how have you gone about building that community? LUCY: Organically so far, which has been really nice. And again, the events that we do have been part of that. But to scale, we really need to start building out ambassador programs, referral systems that can help us hit those kinds of network effects. CHAD: So I know you're only in the UK. LUCY: Correct. CHAD: What are the limiting factors to expansion beyond the UK? LUCY: Money, obviously. CHAD: [laughs] Okay. LUCY: We’re on a funding journey at the moment, and that's a ride for sure. So we kind of use the Depop playbook. Do you know Depop? You're probably over 25, so that's probably why you don't know it. CHAD: [laughs] Yes. LUCY: A third of 16 to 25-year-olds are on Depop in the UK. It's the 10th most-searched-for resale platform in the U.S. And they started off in the UK, and they organically grew into the U.S., which is nuts. We probably won't do that, of course, but we plan to go to the U.S. potentially next. But it depends on investment, on what our audience is saying, where they're based. What we find with our audiences, the universities that we partner with we have a lot of international students. So they're taking that idea back to their hometowns, which is really interesting. But on a tech front, going into the U.S. is easier because it's an English-speaking country. Going into Europe is a bit more complex because you have lots of different languages, although you have one single currency, which is helpful. CHAD: Since your model is peer-to-peer, individuals are sending the rented item directly to the person who's renting it, right? LUCY: That's correct, yeah. CHAD: And so I suppose one potential barrier is you don't need to be able to receive centrally or to handle things in the United States. But you need enough people in the U.S. to make it worthwhile for individuals to be sending each other things to have enough rentals and activity. LUCY: Always, the problem with the marketplace is the cold start problem. There is a great book by Andrew Chen called The Cold Start Problem. And we really need to build both the supply side, which we call the loaner, and the demand side, which we call the borrower. So we have been working really hard in the UK to get as many of the supply side on board because we know the people that we want to be on the platform, so emerging designers, young makers, and creators. And because we have our fashion backgrounds, we can identify those people quite quickly. And we've done things that are totally not scalable, like messaging them on Instagram and scouting people in the streets. But as a small startup, you kind of have to do those scrappy things as well just to kind of build the supply side. CHAD: Right. And I think that's why so many marketplaces end up focusing on particular geographies even if they could expand because that focus helps you do those unscalable things that you need to do in the early days to bootstrap that community that you need for the marketplace. It hadn't occurred to me until you just said it that I've been thinking that this would totally be individuals, but for an emerging fashion designer to be on your community offering up their clothing for rental, that hadn't even occurred to me as a possibility. LUCY: Something that we're passionate about, especially post-pandemic, a lot of young people that are either at university and didn't get the real university experience had to make some extra money started these side hustles of teaching themselves to crochet or teaching themselves to knit. And now they have these amazing pieces, and they're open to renting them out as well as doing their retail side of it. And what we found from the resale people, so the Depopers or people on Vinted, was that they'd get this kind of seller's remorse. So they'd upload the item, take amazing pictures, and they'd sell it once. But with rental, you upload it, and you can rent it out over and over and over again. And you still get to keep it and wear it yourself, so a bit of a no-brainer. CHAD: Yeah. So you went on the journey of creating the app, creating the community. You've just launched. So are you actively fundraising? LUCY: We are actively fundraising. We're just closing our pre-seed round. And we were very lucky to have an incredible lead investor come on board. He just got the idea instantly. What we found difficult is being female founders who don't have tech backgrounds; it's definitely a couple of negatives against us. [laughs] But we're going to use it to our advantage, and the people that are on the journey with us now 100% are behind us and believe in what we're doing. Because we're an impact business as well as we want to have profit alongside people and planet, that's what's important to us to make impact socially, environmentally, and through the industry. So the next step of our fundraising journey will be a crowdfund, an equity-based crowdfund. So we did the rewards-based crowdfunder last year. This year, it's going to be equity-based because we really believe that we're building this platform for our community, our audience. So they should be able to invest in us and come on that journey with us. And hopefully, the business grows to huge proportions, and that they can get some money back out of that later in their lives. CHAD: Are you going to be using a platform to do that? LUCY: We are undecided, although I'm leaning over to between one and another. There are only two platforms really in the UK, so Seedrs and Crowdcube. And I've spoken to some other founders that have done both platforms. And I've spoken to both the companies. I've looked at articles trying to find which one's the best fit for us. One interesting thing that we had with the Crowdfunder was we were deciding between Kickstarter and Crowdfunder UK. And Kickstarter is very much more focused on men, more sports, definitely a male demographic, so that's why we went with Crowdfunder. With Seedrs and Crowdcube, they don't have that; it's a very equal split. So it's just on the feedback that we've had from other people that have used those platforms. So I'm leaning towards one, but I won't say yet because I haven't fully decided. CHAD: So you're only allowed to do that with people in the UK? LUCY: I think it can be global, actually. CHAD: Are you planning on having it be global? LUCY: We have friends and family all across the world. I spoke to somebody today in Lithuania. I spoke to somebody the other day in Australia. I speak to people in the U.S. all the time that are like, "When are you coming to us?" [chuckles] CHAD: Yeah, that'll be interesting; the fact that you're able to do the equity crowdfund anywhere, but people won't be able to actually use the product right away. You know, it's sort of a catch-22; you've got to have one before you can have the other. And so, hopefully, people go along on the journey. LUCY: Chicken and the egg. We need the money to build the tech, to build the audience. But we need the audience and the tech to show the investors that we've got engagement and traction. And yeah, there's always something. I think we're doing pretty good. MID-ROLL AD: As life moves online, brick-and-mortar businesses are having to adapt to survive. With over 18 years of experience building reliable web products and services, thoughtbot is the technology partner you can trust. We provide the technical expertise to enable your business to adapt and thrive in a changing environment. We start by understanding what’s important to your customers to help you transition to intuitive digital services your customers will trust. We take the time to understand what makes your business great and work fast yet thoroughly to build, test, and validate ideas, helping you discover new customers. Take your business online with design‑driven digital acceleration. Find out more at tbot.io/acceleration or click the link in the show notes for this episode. CHAD: You mentioned that your three female founders have faced some bias, it sounds like, especially in talking with potential investors and seeking to grow your community. How has that been for you? LUCY: You know, I don't want to put it down to being a female founder. I actually think the statistics tell us that, unfortunately. But I think what's the problem is that most of the people that I speak to in investment, either VCs or angels are guys, middle-aged guys between, say, late 30s to the 60s, and they are investing in businesses that they get. They don't generally get a peer-to-peer fashion rental app for Gen Z. They're like, "Oh, they're going to want to ship things to each other, and like, what about the packaging?" And they've never heard of Depop. It just got bought by Etsy for $1.62 billion. It's a huge industry, and rental is just an evolution of resale. And they're like, "Oh, okay, kind of get it," but they don't really. We have to hand-hold them a lot through the pitch deck and get them excited. But that's, the problem is that we don't have enough women in the investment space or ex-founders. I know in the U.S., it's a lot different. They have a lot more ex-founders investing, especially angel investors, which is great because they get the journey. Whereas if you have somebody with a financial services background, all they care about is the math of it. And it's like, you know what? Startups don't always just succeed on the math; it's the vision, it's the idea, it's the network effects, it's the audience. There are so many different things at play here. And if you've never started a business yourself, you just don't get that. CHAD: There's a lot that goes into creating a company. And it may not be the fact that your female founders directly contribute to it but in an environment where they're looking for a reason not to invest. LUCY: Exactly. CHAD: That bias can creep into all of the excuses or differences that someone might point to and say, "Oh, this isn't going to work," or "I don't get this." LUCY: 100%. If you've got a good business idea and you've got a strong pitch deck and a strong financial model, then that business will do well, for sure. However, there are so many other factors at play. And when there are so many great businesses competing against one another, they unbiasedly go with one over the other. CHAD: So you also mentioned you have another excuse that people might use is you just don't have a technical founder on the founding team. LUCY: That's definitely a struggle. We will be bringing in a CTO later in the year, which will be really exciting because it's definitely the missing piece to the puzzle. We have domain expertise in fashion. We have that side of it down. But yeah, the technical side of things, I think all the founders that I have spoken to that do have a CTO in the founding team or even have brought their technical team in-house just say it's a game changer. When somebody is invested in your company, and they're using the platform every single day, they can see the bugs. I mean, Chaz from Fat Llama, which is a great rental app, said that his developers would pull out a laptop in the pub and be like, "Oh, I just saw a bug. Let me quickly fix it." I mean, wow, that would be insane. Our developers finish at a certain time, and that's it; they're gone. So if we have a problem on an evening or even because they are in India they have a different time, we can't get hold of them. It's so frustrating. CHAD: So when you start to build a team, will you be doing it based in the UK? LUCY: Or based in Europe, at least. I think another thing to come out of the pandemic is this remote work, and I think that's great. I think there's so much talent across Europe, across the world. But for the timezone issue, I think Europe is definitely a better fit for us because we don't want to be having the same issues that we're having now with the time differences with India. But yeah, there's so much talent across the whole of Europe. CHAD: Yeah, that's what we do at thoughtbot. We are all throughout the Americas, all throughout Europe, Middle East, and Africa. We've built our team. But we're grouped in by timezone. So people work with clients and with each other. And there, it's based on the timezone that they're in. And so that does make a big difference around how communication can work and how a part of the team you're able to feel because you're online at the same time as each other. LUCY: Yeah. Definitely, that's a great show. CHAD: But I definitely recommend casting as wide as possible. It definitely allows you to hire the best person for the job. LUCY: Yeah, I think we need to find somebody that's passionate about the mission and who understands working with three co-founders that don't have a tech background that we probably do need a little bit more hand-holding than another founder would. We're learning so much as we go. Hopefully, we'll be coders one day. [laughter] CHAD: I actually don't think that. Some people might say, "Oh, you really should learn to code yourself." And I think that that does a disservice to what you are bringing to the table with your domain expertise and with your ability to really understand the industry and know what needs to happen from a business perspective. LUCY: Yeah, I would totally agree. You can't be an expert in every part of the field. You can't be an accountant; you can't be a CTO. You need to be good at exactly what you do. And I'm the CEO, so I have an overview of everything. And that's what I love is kind of have a little finger on each little project that's going on and really get an understanding of across the board. But you need those people that are drilling into, like, we have my co-founder, Jen, who's a graphic designer by trade, but she's our Chief Creative Officer. And she really drills down into the creative side of things. And she knows what she's talking about. And she is the expert in that, and that's so valuable. CHAD: And I think that that's the important thing to founders to do early on is to really understand what their product and business are. You don't necessarily need to learn how to code. But I do think it's a mistake when early founders start stepping away from the product too early. LUCY: Yeah, you need to be super close to the product. And you need good communication across all different divisions. So marketing and product have to talk to each other all the time, so we can tell our audience what's happening in the product, and then we can build the features that we need to grow from the marketing side of things. It's all about communication. And it's so hard as a startup because there are so many different things going on and so many people pulling you from left to right. There are metrics to hit; there are bills to pay, there's audience, the community to keep happy. And it's like, oh, you can't drop the ball on anything. You really have to just do as much as you can. But if you communicate to each of those stakeholders, we're doing our best. I mean, we had a mail-out the other day that said this is a business built by hands. It's built by people. I know we're a tech company, but there are real developers there hammering on their laptops. We're all here writing the copy and doing everything that we can to make this the most successful business so we can make real impact on the climate change and communities. CHAD: I want to talk about that impact, but before we do, I'm curious, so you're all in the same general London area? LUCY: No, we're not, actually. So Jade and Jen are based in London. And I actually moved out of London a couple of years ago, and I live in New York in the north of England. CHAD: Oh, okay. LUCY: See, definitely a different dynamic. And another reason why I'm passionate about bringing the fashion industry outside of London is because I travel up and down all the time, and I'm lucky it's like an hour 50 on the train. But that becomes expensive, and it's difficult to travel all the time. CHAD: So, are you meeting in person with each other? LUCY: We try. I just saw the girls last week. I'm seeing them again at the weekend. We speak every single day on Slack, WhatsApp. We have weekly calls, and we jump on pretty much video calls to each other every day. And that's, again, another thing from the pandemic that's been a game changer. Because when I actually left, it was just before the pandemic. We were like, oh my God, how is this going to work? But I knew that it was the right decision for me. And then the pandemic hit, and everyone was on video calls. And we were like, oh, this is so easy. This is great. [laughs] CHAD: Yeah, it really opened that up to everyone's expectations. LUCY: Yeah, and I think it's great. I think it's much more flexible. And we will get an office for sure. But I would love to have an office here and an office in London so we can have teams across the nation. Because I think we don't all have to go and live in a capital city to get the same out of the fashion industry. CHAD: Yeah. So let's talk about sustainability, the environment, and climate change. I am somewhat aware that an enormous amount of resources goes into creating new items of clothing. LUCY: It's crazy. So the fashion industry accounts for 10% of the global greenhouse gas emissions at the moment. And if nothing changes by 2050, it will use a quarter of the world's carbon budget. It is insane, and it affects not only the planet but people. The garment workers are paid nothing. They're treated badly. And this is all part of the supply chains of fashion businesses. And like I said, when I started in the fashion industry, e-commerce really was only just starting, and Jade, who is the model, was working for Asos, which is a big fashion brand and big fast fashion brand. So when she started working for them, she was shooting like 10-15 items, 20 items a day, and when she left, so five years later, they were shooting like 70 items per day. They were just churning out more and more fashion, more options. And you can imagine most of the clothes are made...well, we have this whole disconnect about clothes. So I actually had a restaurant for three years in between my fashion career. And that's where I found sustainability because you have that connection with food. And you know that eating organic or eating locally and seasonally is better for you and better for the planet. But nobody thinks that your clothes come from the ground. They're made from plants. Or if they're not made from plants, they're made from oil. It's nuts that people don't have as much education around it. And that's partly because the fashion industry doesn't want people to know, and it's a lot of smoke and mirrors. It's a very opaque industry. We went to one university, and they said that they thought all clothes were made from machines. They had no idea that there was cotton and linen. And so, like, wow, this is crazy. CHAD: So given that it's the magnitude of the size of the problem but also the industry, there are two ways of looking at that, I'm sure, one is the potential for your impact is huge. The other is how do you get started? How can we have an impact there? So how are you tackling that? LUCY: I get asked a lot by people, like, how can I start my sustainability journey? I feel so much pressure to do things. I should be vegan, or I'm not recycling enough. I got a plastic bag, oh, I feel terrible. And it's like we are all on a journey. And you just have to start one day at a time and just be more conscious. So whether that's instead of buying one dress for a wedding that you are probably just going to stick in your wardrobe, why don't you rent it? Try one of the platforms that are out there, and you can rent a really cool dress, and that's probably someone else is going to rent it, and someone else is going to rent it. And by prolonging the life of an item, you can save so much energy and water. And those small things that we can each do will make a huge impact globally. There's a lot of mindset shifting and behavioral change that needs to come with rental. As we saw with Airbnb when they started, people were like, "Oh God, I don't want someone sleeping in my bed," and now I Airbnb in my house all the time. And it's a great source of secondary income, especially for a startup founder [chuckles] but also giving people the opportunity to have these experiences in small communities, which I love. And that's what we want to see with fashion is that people will start being more conscious. And how LOANHOOD is different to other more traditional rental systems is it's much more affordable. And it's much more accessible because you can meet in person. So how we see it growing is these hyperlocal communities where you can meet people in person, a bit like Facebook Marketplace. They've done super well in more of the suburban areas. You can drop off your dress to somebody around the corner. So you're reducing the cost of delivery and reducing the emissions by meeting in person. So those hyperlocal communities will be really important in helping people adopt this behavior. CHAD: Are you worried from a business perspective that if it's just renting to someone around the corner that they might not want to do it through LOANHOOD? LUCY: I think people will still do it through the platform because of the added value that we give, you know, rental protection. I could go and borrow people's clothes like my friends in the area. I wouldn't do that. I might do it once or twice. I think if it's not somebody that you're really friendly with, then you would definitely do it through the platform. CHAD: Yeah. And by rental protection, you mean if something gets damaged or that kind of thing, it's protected. LUCY: We don't have full insurance yet because, again, the sharing economy is a new economy. And, of course, insurers are very old school. And it's hard for them to grasp the fact that there's a new industry here, but that is changing. And as soon as we have more data, we'll be able to get full insurance for these items. But right now, we do it in-house and protect items, minor damage, or repairs. And if it isn't returned or damaged beyond repair by the person that's renting it, then they have to cover the retail price of it. CHAD: Yeah, makes sense. What's beyond rental platform in terms of this is where you decided to start, but your goal is to change the face of fashion? What's beyond? LUCY: There are lots of different verticals that we can do within rental or in fashion. So we're really passionate about digital fashion. Jade, my business partner, is actually doing her Ph.D. in digital transformation in the metaverse. So how can we bring sustainability and ethical practices into the metaverse with fashion is something that we're really passionate about and something that we're exploring, renting different things so femtech, or skiwear, activewear, all those kind of things and then just creating a space for our community to grow creatively. So entrepreneurship is really important to us as well, and giving people the opportunity to be...especially Gen Z they have this way that's called pay to create. So they're passionate about making money out of things that they can do themselves, whether that's creating content, renting out the things they own, upcycling. We want to expand on that and give them the tools to actually create their own career paths. You don't have to go down the traditional university routes. We see a world where there's a LOANHOOD campus where you can come and learn how to be content creators or all sorts of different things. It's a really exciting time. And our 10-year plan keeps getting more bigger and bigger. And we're like, oh God, it's just exciting. CHAD: Yet do you worry about spreading yourself too thin and compromising on the early steps? LUCY: We always come back to the point of why we're doing this and who we're doing this for because what's the point? Otherwise, we're doing this to reduce impacts of the fashion industry on the planet and people. And we are doing this for our community and to give them the options and give them the power back. As we've seen with governments around the world, people in leadership roles are not doing enough, and we can't rely on them. So if we want to create our own sustainable future, we have to do it ourselves. And we want to give people the tools to do that. CHAD: Well, I wish you the best of luck in that. I'm very confident that you're going to have the impact you're looking for along the way, and I wish you the best in that. Thank you for stopping by and sharing with us. I really appreciate it. LUCY: Thank you so much for having me. It was great to chat too. CHAD: If folks want to find out more or get in touch with you or follow along, where are all the different places that they can do that? LUCY: Check out our website, loanhood.com. If you are a founder and you want to talk about funding or building a product, marketing, you can email me lucy (L-U-C-Y) at lucy@loanhood.com. And we are on Instagram and TikTok @loanhood. CHAD: Wonderful. You can subscribe to the show and find notes which include a link to everything that Lucy just mentioned along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and I'll see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.
Lucy Hall is the Co-Founder of LOANHOOD, an online fashion rental platform and community that allows users to loan inclusive, diverse, and creative styles for an affordable price. Chad talks with Lucy about being a peer-to-peer fashion rental app, building a community, and reducing the impacts of the fashion industry on the planet and people by helping to create a sustainable future. LOANHOOD (https://www.loanhood.com/) Follow LOANHOOD on Twitter (https://twitter.com/loanhoodlondon), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/loanhood/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/loanhood), TikTok (https://www.tiktok.com/@loanhood), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzWBlASKUfH1OsdPEJOKxg), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/loanhood/). Follow Lucy on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/lucy-hall-616b1614/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Lucy Hall, the Co-Founder of LOANHOOD, who are changing the face of fashion. Lucy, thank you so much for joining me. LUCY: Thank you so much for having me, Chad. CHAD: How are some of the ways that LOANHOOD is changing the face of fashion? LUCY: So we're starting off with a peer-to-peer fashion rental app, which we just launched ten days ago now. CHAD: Congratulations on the launch. LUCY: It's been a long time in the making. And, like I said, we're starting with a fashion rental app. But there are so many different ways that we want to change the face of fashion. It definitely needs a facelift. CHAD: What caused you to start with the rental platform? LUCY: It was something that we were really passionate about. So my co-founders and I actually worked in the fashion industry for the majority of our careers. So we could see first-hand how it was changing, how it's developing. And sustainability started coming into our lives, and we could see that things had to change. And we know that the fashion industry is quite archaic. Big fashion businesses are like these huge ships. It's so hard for them to change their course and to actually implement sustainability into their supply chains or their values. And we knew that we could do it quicker and better and faster than them. So we started testing the idea of circular fashion by doing clothes swaps which is a kind of an entry-level way to circulate fashion for free or relatively cheaply. And we started getting this amazing feedback from people like, "Oh, we would love to do this again. And have you thought about monetizing it?" And, of course, that was our...to get to scale, we knew that we had to monetize this sharing of clothes. And that's how our peer-to-peer fashion rental app grew and was born. CHAD: That's great. So you have two co-founders. LUCY: I do. CHAD: Jade and Jen. Were the three of you working together at the time? LUCY: Funny story, Jade and I are actually best friends. And Jade was my model back in the day. So Jade has been a fashion model for 12-plus years. And she was on Britain's Next Top Model. And I was a model agent. She came into my agency as one of the runner-uppers, and we forged a lifelong friendship from there. And we've both been passionate about fashion. And then, as I said, our career paths, we could see the detrimental effect of the planet. And Jade decided to go back to university and start studying. She did her master's in fashion futures at London College of Fashion. And that's where she started seeing sustainability. And the idea of a peer-to-peer rental came from that course. She was studying the future of fashion, and she knew that this was the only way we can move forward. And Jen was a friend of Jade and is a graphic designer by trade and is an amazing brand builder and amazing designer. So we were asking her for some advice. And she came on as a co-founder at the beginning because she just knew this was the right path for her. CHAD: You started with these swaps. Were you doing the swaps as friends because you felt it was the right thing to do? Or did you have an eye towards this could be something more? LUCY: Well, we knew from the beginning that we wanted to do something big. We knew we'd got to a certain point in our careers where we were like, right, let's use our skills to really make a change. But we were also working, and we all had jobs, so we were kind of doing it as a side hustle, just testing the idea and going, "Oh yeah, we'll do this." And then it started picking up, and we got a contract with a local council. And we were like, wow, people are really interested in this. Let's keep going, and then the pandemic hit. CHAD: How did the pandemic affect you? LUCY: [chuckles] Well, as you can imagine, people weren't really doing clothes swaps or renting or even thinking about those things at the beginning of the pandemic anyhow. So we kind of just put it on hold and did what everyone did in the pandemic, hunkered down. And we started learning as much as we could about the circular economy, about sharing economy, trust economy, marketing, product, really teaching ourselves from the bottom up what it takes to make a global brand. So we were quite lucky in the respect that we had that time away to really hone our skills and focus on what we wanted in the long term. So post-pandemic, when we came out of the lockdowns, although there were multiple back and forth, as you know, it was definitely a stop-start for us, but we knew that it actually...it just allowed us that time to really focus our minds on what we wanted and a long-term plan, not just like, oh, let's try this out. We know what we want for the next 5 to 10 years, basically. CHAD: At what point did you decide, okay, we have to make an app? LUCY: It was a difficult one because we thought Shopify, Sharetribe there are all these amazing platforms. You can just get a business at the click of your fingers. However, for peer-to-peer fashion rental, it's a much more complex model. Even Sharetribe, which is supposed to be for those kinds of models it's not as detailed as we needed it to be. So we tried to build a website from scratch. And, again, we just knew that we're very much focused on Gen Z. And when we were talking to our audience, we knew that they wanted an app. So we just scrapped it and said let's just go for it. But having no technical background was a real difficult decision for us because we had no funding. We'd all just left our jobs. The pandemic had happened, so we didn't have any savings really. So we had some money from the clothes swaps. And we did a rewards-based Crowdfunder, and we raised £14,000 from friends and family in our community that were buying free rentals for the future and just believed in the mission that we were on. And we were able to get that £14,000 and put it into the start of building an app. And as you're aware, apps cost a lot of money. CHAD: [laughs] LUCY: We didn't get that far. And we learned a lot of lessons with the build because we tried to project manage it ourselves. Having no technical background, that was tricky. And we offshored it to a team in India who were lovely and amazing but not as skilled as we needed them to be. Because we had no technical background, we really needed somebody to lead that for us. So we had a starting point, but we knew that we had to actually get a technical lead on board pretty soon. And we were lucky enough to find a partner in a company called ON, who are based in the UK. And with them on board, they led the tech from there on. CHAD: Continuing to work with that team in India, or did they actually provide the entire team at that point? LUCY: We switched to another offshore team because it costs so much money here in the UK. CHAD: So when was this all happening? LUCY: Last year, mainly. 2021. CHAD: To give folks an idea, you make the decision to start building an app. You start doing that in 2021. You just launched. But your business is more than just the app. Were you right up to the wire with the app being ready? LUCY: Like you said, we're building a community. And what we learned from the pandemic is that you can't rely on one part of your business to help you succeed. You need multiple things. And what we're passionate about more than anything is community. And what we found with the fashion industry is that it can be quite elitist. And if you want to work in the fashion industry, you have to move to London or New York or Paris, and you have to probably know somebody in the fashion industry, and we wanted to change that. We wanted you to be able to start your own fashion journey wherever you are based. And what we also saw was that all this money that people were spending on fashion was going to big fashion businesses and to probably one guy at the top of that chain, whereas, with peer-to-peer rental, you can actually circulate that money within communities. You're lifting communities up so they can create their own sustainable fashion future. So what was really important to us was to have community as one of our main pillars going forward. CHAD: And how have you gone about building that community? LUCY: Organically so far, which has been really nice. And again, the events that we do have been part of that. But to scale, we really need to start building out ambassador programs, referral systems that can help us hit those kinds of network effects. CHAD: So I know you're only in the UK. LUCY: Correct. CHAD: What are the limiting factors to expansion beyond the UK? LUCY: Money, obviously. CHAD: [laughs] Okay. LUCY: We’re on a funding journey at the moment, and that's a ride for sure. So we kind of use the Depop playbook. Do you know Depop? You're probably over 25, so that's probably why you don't know it. CHAD: [laughs] Yes. LUCY: A third of 16 to 25-year-olds are on Depop in the UK. It's the 10th most-searched-for resale platform in the U.S. And they started off in the UK, and they organically grew into the U.S., which is nuts. We probably won't do that, of course, but we plan to go to the U.S. potentially next. But it depends on investment, on what our audience is saying, where they're based. What we find with our audiences, the universities that we partner with we have a lot of international students. So they're taking that idea back to their hometowns, which is really interesting. But on a tech front, going into the U.S. is easier because it's an English-speaking country. Going into Europe is a bit more complex because you have lots of different languages, although you have one single currency, which is helpful. CHAD: Since your model is peer-to-peer, individuals are sending the rented item directly to the person who's renting it, right? LUCY: That's correct, yeah. CHAD: And so I suppose one potential barrier is you don't need to be able to receive centrally or to handle things in the United States. But you need enough people in the U.S. to make it worthwhile for individuals to be sending each other things to have enough rentals and activity. LUCY: Always, the problem with the marketplace is the cold start problem. There is a great book by Andrew Chen called The Cold Start Problem. And we really need to build both the supply side, which we call the loaner, and the demand side, which we call the borrower. So we have been working really hard in the UK to get as many of the supply side on board because we know the people that we want to be on the platform, so emerging designers, young makers, and creators. And because we have our fashion backgrounds, we can identify those people quite quickly. And we've done things that are totally not scalable, like messaging them on Instagram and scouting people in the streets. But as a small startup, you kind of have to do those scrappy things as well just to kind of build the supply side. CHAD: Right. And I think that's why so many marketplaces end up focusing on particular geographies even if they could expand because that focus helps you do those unscalable things that you need to do in the early days to bootstrap that community that you need for the marketplace. It hadn't occurred to me until you just said it that I've been thinking that this would totally be individuals, but for an emerging fashion designer to be on your community offering up their clothing for rental, that hadn't even occurred to me as a possibility. LUCY: Something that we're passionate about, especially post-pandemic, a lot of young people that are either at university and didn't get the real university experience had to make some extra money started these side hustles of teaching themselves to crochet or teaching themselves to knit. And now they have these amazing pieces, and they're open to renting them out as well as doing their retail side of it. And what we found from the resale people, so the Depopers or people on Vinted, was that they'd get this kind of seller's remorse. So they'd upload the item, take amazing pictures, and they'd sell it once. But with rental, you upload it, and you can rent it out over and over and over again. And you still get to keep it and wear it yourself, so a bit of a no-brainer. CHAD: Yeah. So you went on the journey of creating the app, creating the community. You've just launched. So are you actively fundraising? LUCY: We are actively fundraising. We're just closing our pre-seed round. And we were very lucky to have an incredible lead investor come on board. He just got the idea instantly. What we found difficult is being female founders who don't have tech backgrounds; it's definitely a couple of negatives against us. [laughs] But we're going to use it to our advantage, and the people that are on the journey with us now 100% are behind us and believe in what we're doing. Because we're an impact business as well as we want to have profit alongside people and planet, that's what's important to us to make impact socially, environmentally, and through the industry. So the next step of our fundraising journey will be a crowdfund, an equity-based crowdfund. So we did the rewards-based crowdfunder last year. This year, it's going to be equity-based because we really believe that we're building this platform for our community, our audience. So they should be able to invest in us and come on that journey with us. And hopefully, the business grows to huge proportions, and that they can get some money back out of that later in their lives. CHAD: Are you going to be using a platform to do that? LUCY: We are undecided, although I'm leaning over to between one and another. There are only two platforms really in the UK, so Seedrs and Crowdcube. And I've spoken to some other founders that have done both platforms. And I've spoken to both the companies. I've looked at articles trying to find which one's the best fit for us. One interesting thing that we had with the Crowdfunder was we were deciding between Kickstarter and Crowdfunder UK. And Kickstarter is very much more focused on men, more sports, definitely a male demographic, so that's why we went with Crowdfunder. With Seedrs and Crowdcube, they don't have that; it's a very equal split. So it's just on the feedback that we've had from other people that have used those platforms. So I'm leaning towards one, but I won't say yet because I haven't fully decided. CHAD: So you're only allowed to do that with people in the UK? LUCY: I think it can be global, actually. CHAD: Are you planning on having it be global? LUCY: We have friends and family all across the world. I spoke to somebody today in Lithuania. I spoke to somebody the other day in Australia. I speak to people in the U.S. all the time that are like, "When are you coming to us?" [chuckles] CHAD: Yeah, that'll be interesting; the fact that you're able to do the equity crowdfund anywhere, but people won't be able to actually use the product right away. You know, it's sort of a catch-22; you've got to have one before you can have the other. And so, hopefully, people go along on the journey. LUCY: Chicken and the egg. We need the money to build the tech, to build the audience. But we need the audience and the tech to show the investors that we've got engagement and traction. And yeah, there's always something. I think we're doing pretty good. MID-ROLL AD: As life moves online, brick-and-mortar businesses are having to adapt to survive. With over 18 years of experience building reliable web products and services, thoughtbot is the technology partner you can trust. We provide the technical expertise to enable your business to adapt and thrive in a changing environment. We start by understanding what’s important to your customers to help you transition to intuitive digital services your customers will trust. We take the time to understand what makes your business great and work fast yet thoroughly to build, test, and validate ideas, helping you discover new customers. Take your business online with design‑driven digital acceleration. Find out more at tbot.io/acceleration or click the link in the show notes for this episode. CHAD: You mentioned that your three female founders have faced some bias, it sounds like, especially in talking with potential investors and seeking to grow your community. How has that been for you? LUCY: You know, I don't want to put it down to being a female founder. I actually think the statistics tell us that, unfortunately. But I think what's the problem is that most of the people that I speak to in investment, either VCs or angels are guys, middle-aged guys between, say, late 30s to the 60s, and they are investing in businesses that they get. They don't generally get a peer-to-peer fashion rental app for Gen Z. They're like, "Oh, they're going to want to ship things to each other, and like, what about the packaging?" And they've never heard of Depop. It just got bought by Etsy for $1.62 billion. It's a huge industry, and rental is just an evolution of resale. And they're like, "Oh, okay, kind of get it," but they don't really. We have to hand-hold them a lot through the pitch deck and get them excited. But that's, the problem is that we don't have enough women in the investment space or ex-founders. I know in the U.S., it's a lot different. They have a lot more ex-founders investing, especially angel investors, which is great because they get the journey. Whereas if you have somebody with a financial services background, all they care about is the math of it. And it's like, you know what? Startups don't always just succeed on the math; it's the vision, it's the idea, it's the network effects, it's the audience. There are so many different things at play here. And if you've never started a business yourself, you just don't get that. CHAD: There's a lot that goes into creating a company. And it may not be the fact that your female founders directly contribute to it but in an environment where they're looking for a reason not to invest. LUCY: Exactly. CHAD: That bias can creep into all of the excuses or differences that someone might point to and say, "Oh, this isn't going to work," or "I don't get this." LUCY: 100%. If you've got a good business idea and you've got a strong pitch deck and a strong financial model, then that business will do well, for sure. However, there are so many other factors at play. And when there are so many great businesses competing against one another, they unbiasedly go with one over the other. CHAD: So you also mentioned you have another excuse that people might use is you just don't have a technical founder on the founding team. LUCY: That's definitely a struggle. We will be bringing in a CTO later in the year, which will be really exciting because it's definitely the missing piece to the puzzle. We have domain expertise in fashion. We have that side of it down. But yeah, the technical side of things, I think all the founders that I have spoken to that do have a CTO in the founding team or even have brought their technical team in-house just say it's a game changer. When somebody is invested in your company, and they're using the platform every single day, they can see the bugs. I mean, Chaz from Fat Llama, which is a great rental app, said that his developers would pull out a laptop in the pub and be like, "Oh, I just saw a bug. Let me quickly fix it." I mean, wow, that would be insane. Our developers finish at a certain time, and that's it; they're gone. So if we have a problem on an evening or even because they are in India they have a different time, we can't get hold of them. It's so frustrating. CHAD: So when you start to build a team, will you be doing it based in the UK? LUCY: Or based in Europe, at least. I think another thing to come out of the pandemic is this remote work, and I think that's great. I think there's so much talent across Europe, across the world. But for the timezone issue, I think Europe is definitely a better fit for us because we don't want to be having the same issues that we're having now with the time differences with India. But yeah, there's so much talent across the whole of Europe. CHAD: Yeah, that's what we do at thoughtbot. We are all throughout the Americas, all throughout Europe, Middle East, and Africa. We've built our team. But we're grouped in by timezone. So people work with clients and with each other. And there, it's based on the timezone that they're in. And so that does make a big difference around how communication can work and how a part of the team you're able to feel because you're online at the same time as each other. LUCY: Yeah. Definitely, that's a great show. CHAD: But I definitely recommend casting as wide as possible. It definitely allows you to hire the best person for the job. LUCY: Yeah, I think we need to find somebody that's passionate about the mission and who understands working with three co-founders that don't have a tech background that we probably do need a little bit more hand-holding than another founder would. We're learning so much as we go. Hopefully, we'll be coders one day. [laughter] CHAD: I actually don't think that. Some people might say, "Oh, you really should learn to code yourself." And I think that that does a disservice to what you are bringing to the table with your domain expertise and with your ability to really understand the industry and know what needs to happen from a business perspective. LUCY: Yeah, I would totally agree. You can't be an expert in every part of the field. You can't be an accountant; you can't be a CTO. You need to be good at exactly what you do. And I'm the CEO, so I have an overview of everything. And that's what I love is kind of have a little finger on each little project that's going on and really get an understanding of across the board. But you need those people that are drilling into, like, we have my co-founder, Jen, who's a graphic designer by trade, but she's our Chief Creative Officer. And she really drills down into the creative side of things. And she knows what she's talking about. And she is the expert in that, and that's so valuable. CHAD: And I think that that's the important thing to founders to do early on is to really understand what their product and business are. You don't necessarily need to learn how to code. But I do think it's a mistake when early founders start stepping away from the product too early. LUCY: Yeah, you need to be super close to the product. And you need good communication across all different divisions. So marketing and product have to talk to each other all the time, so we can tell our audience what's happening in the product, and then we can build the features that we need to grow from the marketing side of things. It's all about communication. And it's so hard as a startup because there are so many different things going on and so many people pulling you from left to right. There are metrics to hit; there are bills to pay, there's audience, the community to keep happy. And it's like, oh, you can't drop the ball on anything. You really have to just do as much as you can. But if you communicate to each of those stakeholders, we're doing our best. I mean, we had a mail-out the other day that said this is a business built by hands. It's built by people. I know we're a tech company, but there are real developers there hammering on their laptops. We're all here writing the copy and doing everything that we can to make this the most successful business so we can make real impact on the climate change and communities. CHAD: I want to talk about that impact, but before we do, I'm curious, so you're all in the same general London area? LUCY: No, we're not, actually. So Jade and Jen are based in London. And I actually moved out of London a couple of years ago, and I live in New York in the north of England. CHAD: Oh, okay. LUCY: See, definitely a different dynamic. And another reason why I'm passionate about bringing the fashion industry outside of London is because I travel up and down all the time, and I'm lucky it's like an hour 50 on the train. But that becomes expensive, and it's difficult to travel all the time. CHAD: So, are you meeting in person with each other? LUCY: We try. I just saw the girls last week. I'm seeing them again at the weekend. We speak every single day on Slack, WhatsApp. We have weekly calls, and we jump on pretty much video calls to each other every day. And that's, again, another thing from the pandemic that's been a game changer. Because when I actually left, it was just before the pandemic. We were like, oh my God, how is this going to work? But I knew that it was the right decision for me. And then the pandemic hit, and everyone was on video calls. And we were like, oh, this is so easy. This is great. [laughs] CHAD: Yeah, it really opened that up to everyone's expectations. LUCY: Yeah, and I think it's great. I think it's much more flexible. And we will get an office for sure. But I would love to have an office here and an office in London so we can have teams across the nation. Because I think we don't all have to go and live in a capital city to get the same out of the fashion industry. CHAD: Yeah. So let's talk about sustainability, the environment, and climate change. I am somewhat aware that an enormous amount of resources goes into creating new items of clothing. LUCY: It's crazy. So the fashion industry accounts for 10% of the global greenhouse gas emissions at the moment. And if nothing changes by 2050, it will use a quarter of the world's carbon budget. It is insane, and it affects not only the planet but people. The garment workers are paid nothing. They're treated badly. And this is all part of the supply chains of fashion businesses. And like I said, when I started in the fashion industry, e-commerce really was only just starting, and Jade, who is the model, was working for Asos, which is a big fashion brand and big fast fashion brand. So when she started working for them, she was shooting like 10-15 items, 20 items a day, and when she left, so five years later, they were shooting like 70 items per day. They were just churning out more and more fashion, more options. And you can imagine most of the clothes are made...well, we have this whole disconnect about clothes. So I actually had a restaurant for three years in between my fashion career. And that's where I found sustainability because you have that connection with food. And you know that eating organic or eating locally and seasonally is better for you and better for the planet. But nobody thinks that your clothes come from the ground. They're made from plants. Or if they're not made from plants, they're made from oil. It's nuts that people don't have as much education around it. And that's partly because the fashion industry doesn't want people to know, and it's a lot of smoke and mirrors. It's a very opaque industry. We went to one university, and they said that they thought all clothes were made from machines. They had no idea that there was cotton and linen. And so, like, wow, this is crazy. CHAD: So given that it's the magnitude of the size of the problem but also the industry, there are two ways of looking at that, I'm sure, one is the potential for your impact is huge. The other is how do you get started? How can we have an impact there? So how are you tackling that? LUCY: I get asked a lot by people, like, how can I start my sustainability journey? I feel so much pressure to do things. I should be vegan, or I'm not recycling enough. I got a plastic bag, oh, I feel terrible. And it's like we are all on a journey. And you just have to start one day at a time and just be more conscious. So whether that's instead of buying one dress for a wedding that you are probably just going to stick in your wardrobe, why don't you rent it? Try one of the platforms that are out there, and you can rent a really cool dress, and that's probably someone else is going to rent it, and someone else is going to rent it. And by prolonging the life of an item, you can save so much energy and water. And those small things that we can each do will make a huge impact globally. There's a lot of mindset shifting and behavioral change that needs to come with rental. As we saw with Airbnb when they started, people were like, "Oh God, I don't want someone sleeping in my bed," and now I Airbnb in my house all the time. And it's a great source of secondary income, especially for a startup founder [chuckles] but also giving people the opportunity to have these experiences in small communities, which I love. And that's what we want to see with fashion is that people will start being more conscious. And how LOANHOOD is different to other more traditional rental systems is it's much more affordable. And it's much more accessible because you can meet in person. So how we see it growing is these hyperlocal communities where you can meet people in person, a bit like Facebook Marketplace. They've done super well in more of the suburban areas. You can drop off your dress to somebody around the corner. So you're reducing the cost of delivery and reducing the emissions by meeting in person. So those hyperlocal communities will be really important in helping people adopt this behavior. CHAD: Are you worried from a business perspective that if it's just renting to someone around the corner that they might not want to do it through LOANHOOD? LUCY: I think people will still do it through the platform because of the added value that we give, you know, rental protection. I could go and borrow people's clothes like my friends in the area. I wouldn't do that. I might do it once or twice. I think if it's not somebody that you're really friendly with, then you would definitely do it through the platform. CHAD: Yeah. And by rental protection, you mean if something gets damaged or that kind of thing, it's protected. LUCY: We don't have full insurance yet because, again, the sharing economy is a new economy. And, of course, insurers are very old school. And it's hard for them to grasp the fact that there's a new industry here, but that is changing. And as soon as we have more data, we'll be able to get full insurance for these items. But right now, we do it in-house and protect items, minor damage, or repairs. And if it isn't returned or damaged beyond repair by the person that's renting it, then they have to cover the retail price of it. CHAD: Yeah, makes sense. What's beyond rental platform in terms of this is where you decided to start, but your goal is to change the face of fashion? What's beyond? LUCY: There are lots of different verticals that we can do within rental or in fashion. So we're really passionate about digital fashion. Jade, my business partner, is actually doing her Ph.D. in digital transformation in the metaverse. So how can we bring sustainability and ethical practices into the metaverse with fashion is something that we're really passionate about and something that we're exploring, renting different things so femtech, or skiwear, activewear, all those kind of things and then just creating a space for our community to grow creatively. So entrepreneurship is really important to us as well, and giving people the opportunity to be...especially Gen Z they have this way that's called pay to create. So they're passionate about making money out of things that they can do themselves, whether that's creating content, renting out the things they own, upcycling. We want to expand on that and give them the tools to actually create their own career paths. You don't have to go down the traditional university routes. We see a world where there's a LOANHOOD campus where you can come and learn how to be content creators or all sorts of different things. It's a really exciting time. And our 10-year plan keeps getting more bigger and bigger. And we're like, oh God, it's just exciting. CHAD: Yet do you worry about spreading yourself too thin and compromising on the early steps? LUCY: We always come back to the point of why we're doing this and who we're doing this for because what's the point? Otherwise, we're doing this to reduce impacts of the fashion industry on the planet and people. And we are doing this for our community and to give them the options and give them the power back. As we've seen with governments around the world, people in leadership roles are not doing enough, and we can't rely on them. So if we want to create our own sustainable future, we have to do it ourselves. And we want to give people the tools to do that. CHAD: Well, I wish you the best of luck in that. I'm very confident that you're going to have the impact you're looking for along the way, and I wish you the best in that. Thank you for stopping by and sharing with us. I really appreciate it. LUCY: Thank you so much for having me. It was great to chat too. CHAD: If folks want to find out more or get in touch with you or follow along, where are all the different places that they can do that? LUCY: Check out our website, loanhood.com. If you are a founder and you want to talk about funding or building a product, marketing, you can email me lucy (L-U-C-Y) at lucy@loanhood.com. And we are on Instagram and TikTok @loanhood. CHAD: Wonderful. You can subscribe to the show and find notes which include a link to everything that Lucy just mentioned along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and I'll see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.
Lucy Hall is the Co-Founder of LOANHOOD, an online fashion rental platform and community that allows users to loan inclusive, diverse, and creative styles for an affordable price. Chad talks with Lucy about being a peer-to-peer fashion rental app, building a community, and reducing the impacts of the fashion industry on the planet and people by helping to create a sustainable future. LOANHOOD (https://www.loanhood.com/) Follow LOANHOOD on Twitter (https://twitter.com/loanhoodlondon), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/loanhood/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/loanhood), TikTok (https://www.tiktok.com/@loanhood), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzWBlASKUfH1OsdPEJOKxg), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/loanhood/). Follow Lucy on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/lucy-hall-616b1614/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Lucy Hall, the Co-Founder of LOANHOOD, who are changing the face of fashion. Lucy, thank you so much for joining me. LUCY: Thank you so much for having me, Chad. CHAD: How are some of the ways that LOANHOOD is changing the face of fashion? LUCY: So we're starting off with a peer-to-peer fashion rental app, which we just launched ten days ago now. CHAD: Congratulations on the launch. LUCY: It's been a long time in the making. And, like I said, we're starting with a fashion rental app. But there are so many different ways that we want to change the face of fashion. It definitely needs a facelift. CHAD: What caused you to start with the rental platform? LUCY: It was something that we were really passionate about. So my co-founders and I actually worked in the fashion industry for the majority of our careers. So we could see first-hand how it was changing, how it's developing. And sustainability started coming into our lives, and we could see that things had to change. And we know that the fashion industry is quite archaic. Big fashion businesses are like these huge ships. It's so hard for them to change their course and to actually implement sustainability into their supply chains or their values. And we knew that we could do it quicker and better and faster than them. So we started testing the idea of circular fashion by doing clothes swaps which is a kind of an entry-level way to circulate fashion for free or relatively cheaply. And we started getting this amazing feedback from people like, "Oh, we would love to do this again. And have you thought about monetizing it?" And, of course, that was our...to get to scale, we knew that we had to monetize this sharing of clothes. And that's how our peer-to-peer fashion rental app grew and was born. CHAD: That's great. So you have two co-founders. LUCY: I do. CHAD: Jade and Jen. Were the three of you working together at the time? LUCY: Funny story, Jade and I are actually best friends. And Jade was my model back in the day. So Jade has been a fashion model for 12-plus years. And she was on Britain's Next Top Model. And I was a model agent. She came into my agency as one of the runner-uppers, and we forged a lifelong friendship from there. And we've both been passionate about fashion. And then, as I said, our career paths, we could see the detrimental effect of the planet. And Jade decided to go back to university and start studying. She did her master's in fashion futures at London College of Fashion. And that's where she started seeing sustainability. And the idea of a peer-to-peer rental came from that course. She was studying the future of fashion, and she knew that this was the only way we can move forward. And Jen was a friend of Jade and is a graphic designer by trade and is an amazing brand builder and amazing designer. So we were asking her for some advice. And she came on as a co-founder at the beginning because she just knew this was the right path for her. CHAD: You started with these swaps. Were you doing the swaps as friends because you felt it was the right thing to do? Or did you have an eye towards this could be something more? LUCY: Well, we knew from the beginning that we wanted to do something big. We knew we'd got to a certain point in our careers where we were like, right, let's use our skills to really make a change. But we were also working, and we all had jobs, so we were kind of doing it as a side hustle, just testing the idea and going, "Oh yeah, we'll do this." And then it started picking up, and we got a contract with a local council. And we were like, wow, people are really interested in this. Let's keep going, and then the pandemic hit. CHAD: How did the pandemic affect you? LUCY: [chuckles] Well, as you can imagine, people weren't really doing clothes swaps or renting or even thinking about those things at the beginning of the pandemic anyhow. So we kind of just put it on hold and did what everyone did in the pandemic, hunkered down. And we started learning as much as we could about the circular economy, about sharing economy, trust economy, marketing, product, really teaching ourselves from the bottom up what it takes to make a global brand. So we were quite lucky in the respect that we had that time away to really hone our skills and focus on what we wanted in the long term. So post-pandemic, when we came out of the lockdowns, although there were multiple back and forth, as you know, it was definitely a stop-start for us, but we knew that it actually...it just allowed us that time to really focus our minds on what we wanted and a long-term plan, not just like, oh, let's try this out. We know what we want for the next 5 to 10 years, basically. CHAD: At what point did you decide, okay, we have to make an app? LUCY: It was a difficult one because we thought Shopify, Sharetribe there are all these amazing platforms. You can just get a business at the click of your fingers. However, for peer-to-peer fashion rental, it's a much more complex model. Even Sharetribe, which is supposed to be for those kinds of models it's not as detailed as we needed it to be. So we tried to build a website from scratch. And, again, we just knew that we're very much focused on Gen Z. And when we were talking to our audience, we knew that they wanted an app. So we just scrapped it and said let's just go for it. But having no technical background was a real difficult decision for us because we had no funding. We'd all just left our jobs. The pandemic had happened, so we didn't have any savings really. So we had some money from the clothes swaps. And we did a rewards-based Crowdfunder, and we raised £14,000 from friends and family in our community that were buying free rentals for the future and just believed in the mission that we were on. And we were able to get that £14,000 and put it into the start of building an app. And as you're aware, apps cost a lot of money. CHAD: [laughs] LUCY: We didn't get that far. And we learned a lot of lessons with the build because we tried to project manage it ourselves. Having no technical background, that was tricky. And we offshored it to a team in India who were lovely and amazing but not as skilled as we needed them to be. Because we had no technical background, we really needed somebody to lead that for us. So we had a starting point, but we knew that we had to actually get a technical lead on board pretty soon. And we were lucky enough to find a partner in a company called ON, who are based in the UK. And with them on board, they led the tech from there on. CHAD: Continuing to work with that team in India, or did they actually provide the entire team at that point? LUCY: We switched to another offshore team because it costs so much money here in the UK. CHAD: So when was this all happening? LUCY: Last year, mainly. 2021. CHAD: To give folks an idea, you make the decision to start building an app. You start doing that in 2021. You just launched. But your business is more than just the app. Were you right up to the wire with the app being ready? LUCY: Like you said, we're building a community. And what we learned from the pandemic is that you can't rely on one part of your business to help you succeed. You need multiple things. And what we're passionate about more than anything is community. And what we found with the fashion industry is that it can be quite elitist. And if you want to work in the fashion industry, you have to move to London or New York or Paris, and you have to probably know somebody in the fashion industry, and we wanted to change that. We wanted you to be able to start your own fashion journey wherever you are based. And what we also saw was that all this money that people were spending on fashion was going to big fashion businesses and to probably one guy at the top of that chain, whereas, with peer-to-peer rental, you can actually circulate that money within communities. You're lifting communities up so they can create their own sustainable fashion future. So what was really important to us was to have community as one of our main pillars going forward. CHAD: And how have you gone about building that community? LUCY: Organically so far, which has been really nice. And again, the events that we do have been part of that. But to scale, we really need to start building out ambassador programs, referral systems that can help us hit those kinds of network effects. CHAD: So I know you're only in the UK. LUCY: Correct. CHAD: What are the limiting factors to expansion beyond the UK? LUCY: Money, obviously. CHAD: [laughs] Okay. LUCY: We’re on a funding journey at the moment, and that's a ride for sure. So we kind of use the Depop playbook. Do you know Depop? You're probably over 25, so that's probably why you don't know it. CHAD: [laughs] Yes. LUCY: A third of 16 to 25-year-olds are on Depop in the UK. It's the 10th most-searched-for resale platform in the U.S. And they started off in the UK, and they organically grew into the U.S., which is nuts. We probably won't do that, of course, but we plan to go to the U.S. potentially next. But it depends on investment, on what our audience is saying, where they're based. What we find with our audiences, the universities that we partner with we have a lot of international students. So they're taking that idea back to their hometowns, which is really interesting. But on a tech front, going into the U.S. is easier because it's an English-speaking country. Going into Europe is a bit more complex because you have lots of different languages, although you have one single currency, which is helpful. CHAD: Since your model is peer-to-peer, individuals are sending the rented item directly to the person who's renting it, right? LUCY: That's correct, yeah. CHAD: And so I suppose one potential barrier is you don't need to be able to receive centrally or to handle things in the United States. But you need enough people in the U.S. to make it worthwhile for individuals to be sending each other things to have enough rentals and activity. LUCY: Always, the problem with the marketplace is the cold start problem. There is a great book by Andrew Chen called The Cold Start Problem. And we really need to build both the supply side, which we call the loaner, and the demand side, which we call the borrower. So we have been working really hard in the UK to get as many of the supply side on board because we know the people that we want to be on the platform, so emerging designers, young makers, and creators. And because we have our fashion backgrounds, we can identify those people quite quickly. And we've done things that are totally not scalable, like messaging them on Instagram and scouting people in the streets. But as a small startup, you kind of have to do those scrappy things as well just to kind of build the supply side. CHAD: Right. And I think that's why so many marketplaces end up focusing on particular geographies even if they could expand because that focus helps you do those unscalable things that you need to do in the early days to bootstrap that community that you need for the marketplace. It hadn't occurred to me until you just said it that I've been thinking that this would totally be individuals, but for an emerging fashion designer to be on your community offering up their clothing for rental, that hadn't even occurred to me as a possibility. LUCY: Something that we're passionate about, especially post-pandemic, a lot of young people that are either at university and didn't get the real university experience had to make some extra money started these side hustles of teaching themselves to crochet or teaching themselves to knit. And now they have these amazing pieces, and they're open to renting them out as well as doing their retail side of it. And what we found from the resale people, so the Depopers or people on Vinted, was that they'd get this kind of seller's remorse. So they'd upload the item, take amazing pictures, and they'd sell it once. But with rental, you upload it, and you can rent it out over and over and over again. And you still get to keep it and wear it yourself, so a bit of a no-brainer. CHAD: Yeah. So you went on the journey of creating the app, creating the community. You've just launched. So are you actively fundraising? LUCY: We are actively fundraising. We're just closing our pre-seed round. And we were very lucky to have an incredible lead investor come on board. He just got the idea instantly. What we found difficult is being female founders who don't have tech backgrounds; it's definitely a couple of negatives against us. [laughs] But we're going to use it to our advantage, and the people that are on the journey with us now 100% are behind us and believe in what we're doing. Because we're an impact business as well as we want to have profit alongside people and planet, that's what's important to us to make impact socially, environmentally, and through the industry. So the next step of our fundraising journey will be a crowdfund, an equity-based crowdfund. So we did the rewards-based crowdfunder last year. This year, it's going to be equity-based because we really believe that we're building this platform for our community, our audience. So they should be able to invest in us and come on that journey with us. And hopefully, the business grows to huge proportions, and that they can get some money back out of that later in their lives. CHAD: Are you going to be using a platform to do that? LUCY: We are undecided, although I'm leaning over to between one and another. There are only two platforms really in the UK, so Seedrs and Crowdcube. And I've spoken to some other founders that have done both platforms. And I've spoken to both the companies. I've looked at articles trying to find which one's the best fit for us. One interesting thing that we had with the Crowdfunder was we were deciding between Kickstarter and Crowdfunder UK. And Kickstarter is very much more focused on men, more sports, definitely a male demographic, so that's why we went with Crowdfunder. With Seedrs and Crowdcube, they don't have that; it's a very equal split. So it's just on the feedback that we've had from other people that have used those platforms. So I'm leaning towards one, but I won't say yet because I haven't fully decided. CHAD: So you're only allowed to do that with people in the UK? LUCY: I think it can be global, actually. CHAD: Are you planning on having it be global? LUCY: We have friends and family all across the world. I spoke to somebody today in Lithuania. I spoke to somebody the other day in Australia. I speak to people in the U.S. all the time that are like, "When are you coming to us?" [chuckles] CHAD: Yeah, that'll be interesting; the fact that you're able to do the equity crowdfund anywhere, but people won't be able to actually use the product right away. You know, it's sort of a catch-22; you've got to have one before you can have the other. And so, hopefully, people go along on the journey. LUCY: Chicken and the egg. We need the money to build the tech, to build the audience. But we need the audience and the tech to show the investors that we've got engagement and traction. And yeah, there's always something. I think we're doing pretty good. MID-ROLL AD: As life moves online, brick-and-mortar businesses are having to adapt to survive. With over 18 years of experience building reliable web products and services, thoughtbot is the technology partner you can trust. We provide the technical expertise to enable your business to adapt and thrive in a changing environment. We start by understanding what’s important to your customers to help you transition to intuitive digital services your customers will trust. We take the time to understand what makes your business great and work fast yet thoroughly to build, test, and validate ideas, helping you discover new customers. Take your business online with design‑driven digital acceleration. Find out more at tbot.io/acceleration or click the link in the show notes for this episode. CHAD: You mentioned that your three female founders have faced some bias, it sounds like, especially in talking with potential investors and seeking to grow your community. How has that been for you? LUCY: You know, I don't want to put it down to being a female founder. I actually think the statistics tell us that, unfortunately. But I think what's the problem is that most of the people that I speak to in investment, either VCs or angels are guys, middle-aged guys between, say, late 30s to the 60s, and they are investing in businesses that they get. They don't generally get a peer-to-peer fashion rental app for Gen Z. They're like, "Oh, they're going to want to ship things to each other, and like, what about the packaging?" And they've never heard of Depop. It just got bought by Etsy for $1.62 billion. It's a huge industry, and rental is just an evolution of resale. And they're like, "Oh, okay, kind of get it," but they don't really. We have to hand-hold them a lot through the pitch deck and get them excited. But that's, the problem is that we don't have enough women in the investment space or ex-founders. I know in the U.S., it's a lot different. They have a lot more ex-founders investing, especially angel investors, which is great because they get the journey. Whereas if you have somebody with a financial services background, all they care about is the math of it. And it's like, you know what? Startups don't always just succeed on the math; it's the vision, it's the idea, it's the network effects, it's the audience. There are so many different things at play here. And if you've never started a business yourself, you just don't get that. CHAD: There's a lot that goes into creating a company. And it may not be the fact that your female founders directly contribute to it but in an environment where they're looking for a reason not to invest. LUCY: Exactly. CHAD: That bias can creep into all of the excuses or differences that someone might point to and say, "Oh, this isn't going to work," or "I don't get this." LUCY: 100%. If you've got a good business idea and you've got a strong pitch deck and a strong financial model, then that business will do well, for sure. However, there are so many other factors at play. And when there are so many great businesses competing against one another, they unbiasedly go with one over the other. CHAD: So you also mentioned you have another excuse that people might use is you just don't have a technical founder on the founding team. LUCY: That's definitely a struggle. We will be bringing in a CTO later in the year, which will be really exciting because it's definitely the missing piece to the puzzle. We have domain expertise in fashion. We have that side of it down. But yeah, the technical side of things, I think all the founders that I have spoken to that do have a CTO in the founding team or even have brought their technical team in-house just say it's a game changer. When somebody is invested in your company, and they're using the platform every single day, they can see the bugs. I mean, Chaz from Fat Llama, which is a great rental app, said that his developers would pull out a laptop in the pub and be like, "Oh, I just saw a bug. Let me quickly fix it." I mean, wow, that would be insane. Our developers finish at a certain time, and that's it; they're gone. So if we have a problem on an evening or even because they are in India they have a different time, we can't get hold of them. It's so frustrating. CHAD: So when you start to build a team, will you be doing it based in the UK? LUCY: Or based in Europe, at least. I think another thing to come out of the pandemic is this remote work, and I think that's great. I think there's so much talent across Europe, across the world. But for the timezone issue, I think Europe is definitely a better fit for us because we don't want to be having the same issues that we're having now with the time differences with India. But yeah, there's so much talent across the whole of Europe. CHAD: Yeah, that's what we do at thoughtbot. We are all throughout the Americas, all throughout Europe, Middle East, and Africa. We've built our team. But we're grouped in by timezone. So people work with clients and with each other. And there, it's based on the timezone that they're in. And so that does make a big difference around how communication can work and how a part of the team you're able to feel because you're online at the same time as each other. LUCY: Yeah. Definitely, that's a great show. CHAD: But I definitely recommend casting as wide as possible. It definitely allows you to hire the best person for the job. LUCY: Yeah, I think we need to find somebody that's passionate about the mission and who understands working with three co-founders that don't have a tech background that we probably do need a little bit more hand-holding than another founder would. We're learning so much as we go. Hopefully, we'll be coders one day. [laughter] CHAD: I actually don't think that. Some people might say, "Oh, you really should learn to code yourself." And I think that that does a disservice to what you are bringing to the table with your domain expertise and with your ability to really understand the industry and know what needs to happen from a business perspective. LUCY: Yeah, I would totally agree. You can't be an expert in every part of the field. You can't be an accountant; you can't be a CTO. You need to be good at exactly what you do. And I'm the CEO, so I have an overview of everything. And that's what I love is kind of have a little finger on each little project that's going on and really get an understanding of across the board. But you need those people that are drilling into, like, we have my co-founder, Jen, who's a graphic designer by trade, but she's our Chief Creative Officer. And she really drills down into the creative side of things. And she knows what she's talking about. And she is the expert in that, and that's so valuable. CHAD: And I think that that's the important thing to founders to do early on is to really understand what their product and business are. You don't necessarily need to learn how to code. But I do think it's a mistake when early founders start stepping away from the product too early. LUCY: Yeah, you need to be super close to the product. And you need good communication across all different divisions. So marketing and product have to talk to each other all the time, so we can tell our audience what's happening in the product, and then we can build the features that we need to grow from the marketing side of things. It's all about communication. And it's so hard as a startup because there are so many different things going on and so many people pulling you from left to right. There are metrics to hit; there are bills to pay, there's audience, the community to keep happy. And it's like, oh, you can't drop the ball on anything. You really have to just do as much as you can. But if you communicate to each of those stakeholders, we're doing our best. I mean, we had a mail-out the other day that said this is a business built by hands. It's built by people. I know we're a tech company, but there are real developers there hammering on their laptops. We're all here writing the copy and doing everything that we can to make this the most successful business so we can make real impact on the climate change and communities. CHAD: I want to talk about that impact, but before we do, I'm curious, so you're all in the same general London area? LUCY: No, we're not, actually. So Jade and Jen are based in London. And I actually moved out of London a couple of years ago, and I live in New York in the north of England. CHAD: Oh, okay. LUCY: See, definitely a different dynamic. And another reason why I'm passionate about bringing the fashion industry outside of London is because I travel up and down all the time, and I'm lucky it's like an hour 50 on the train. But that becomes expensive, and it's difficult to travel all the time. CHAD: So, are you meeting in person with each other? LUCY: We try. I just saw the girls last week. I'm seeing them again at the weekend. We speak every single day on Slack, WhatsApp. We have weekly calls, and we jump on pretty much video calls to each other every day. And that's, again, another thing from the pandemic that's been a game changer. Because when I actually left, it was just before the pandemic. We were like, oh my God, how is this going to work? But I knew that it was the right decision for me. And then the pandemic hit, and everyone was on video calls. And we were like, oh, this is so easy. This is great. [laughs] CHAD: Yeah, it really opened that up to everyone's expectations. LUCY: Yeah, and I think it's great. I think it's much more flexible. And we will get an office for sure. But I would love to have an office here and an office in London so we can have teams across the nation. Because I think we don't all have to go and live in a capital city to get the same out of the fashion industry. CHAD: Yeah. So let's talk about sustainability, the environment, and climate change. I am somewhat aware that an enormous amount of resources goes into creating new items of clothing. LUCY: It's crazy. So the fashion industry accounts for 10% of the global greenhouse gas emissions at the moment. And if nothing changes by 2050, it will use a quarter of the world's carbon budget. It is insane, and it affects not only the planet but people. The garment workers are paid nothing. They're treated badly. And this is all part of the supply chains of fashion businesses. And like I said, when I started in the fashion industry, e-commerce really was only just starting, and Jade, who is the model, was working for Asos, which is a big fashion brand and big fast fashion brand. So when she started working for them, she was shooting like 10-15 items, 20 items a day, and when she left, so five years later, they were shooting like 70 items per day. They were just churning out more and more fashion, more options. And you can imagine most of the clothes are made...well, we have this whole disconnect about clothes. So I actually had a restaurant for three years in between my fashion career. And that's where I found sustainability because you have that connection with food. And you know that eating organic or eating locally and seasonally is better for you and better for the planet. But nobody thinks that your clothes come from the ground. They're made from plants. Or if they're not made from plants, they're made from oil. It's nuts that people don't have as much education around it. And that's partly because the fashion industry doesn't want people to know, and it's a lot of smoke and mirrors. It's a very opaque industry. We went to one university, and they said that they thought all clothes were made from machines. They had no idea that there was cotton and linen. And so, like, wow, this is crazy. CHAD: So given that it's the magnitude of the size of the problem but also the industry, there are two ways of looking at that, I'm sure, one is the potential for your impact is huge. The other is how do you get started? How can we have an impact there? So how are you tackling that? LUCY: I get asked a lot by people, like, how can I start my sustainability journey? I feel so much pressure to do things. I should be vegan, or I'm not recycling enough. I got a plastic bag, oh, I feel terrible. And it's like we are all on a journey. And you just have to start one day at a time and just be more conscious. So whether that's instead of buying one dress for a wedding that you are probably just going to stick in your wardrobe, why don't you rent it? Try one of the platforms that are out there, and you can rent a really cool dress, and that's probably someone else is going to rent it, and someone else is going to rent it. And by prolonging the life of an item, you can save so much energy and water. And those small things that we can each do will make a huge impact globally. There's a lot of mindset shifting and behavioral change that needs to come with rental. As we saw with Airbnb when they started, people were like, "Oh God, I don't want someone sleeping in my bed," and now I Airbnb in my house all the time. And it's a great source of secondary income, especially for a startup founder [chuckles] but also giving people the opportunity to have these experiences in small communities, which I love. And that's what we want to see with fashion is that people will start being more conscious. And how LOANHOOD is different to other more traditional rental systems is it's much more affordable. And it's much more accessible because you can meet in person. So how we see it growing is these hyperlocal communities where you can meet people in person, a bit like Facebook Marketplace. They've done super well in more of the suburban areas. You can drop off your dress to somebody around the corner. So you're reducing the cost of delivery and reducing the emissions by meeting in person. So those hyperlocal communities will be really important in helping people adopt this behavior. CHAD: Are you worried from a business perspective that if it's just renting to someone around the corner that they might not want to do it through LOANHOOD? LUCY: I think people will still do it through the platform because of the added value that we give, you know, rental protection. I could go and borrow people's clothes like my friends in the area. I wouldn't do that. I might do it once or twice. I think if it's not somebody that you're really friendly with, then you would definitely do it through the platform. CHAD: Yeah. And by rental protection, you mean if something gets damaged or that kind of thing, it's protected. LUCY: We don't have full insurance yet because, again, the sharing economy is a new economy. And, of course, insurers are very old school. And it's hard for them to grasp the fact that there's a new industry here, but that is changing. And as soon as we have more data, we'll be able to get full insurance for these items. But right now, we do it in-house and protect items, minor damage, or repairs. And if it isn't returned or damaged beyond repair by the person that's renting it, then they have to cover the retail price of it. CHAD: Yeah, makes sense. What's beyond rental platform in terms of this is where you decided to start, but your goal is to change the face of fashion? What's beyond? LUCY: There are lots of different verticals that we can do within rental or in fashion. So we're really passionate about digital fashion. Jade, my business partner, is actually doing her Ph.D. in digital transformation in the metaverse. So how can we bring sustainability and ethical practices into the metaverse with fashion is something that we're really passionate about and something that we're exploring, renting different things so femtech, or skiwear, activewear, all those kind of things and then just creating a space for our community to grow creatively. So entrepreneurship is really important to us as well, and giving people the opportunity to be...especially Gen Z they have this way that's called pay to create. So they're passionate about making money out of things that they can do themselves, whether that's creating content, renting out the things they own, upcycling. We want to expand on that and give them the tools to actually create their own career paths. You don't have to go down the traditional university routes. We see a world where there's a LOANHOOD campus where you can come and learn how to be content creators or all sorts of different things. It's a really exciting time. And our 10-year plan keeps getting more bigger and bigger. And we're like, oh God, it's just exciting. CHAD: Yet do you worry about spreading yourself too thin and compromising on the early steps? LUCY: We always come back to the point of why we're doing this and who we're doing this for because what's the point? Otherwise, we're doing this to reduce impacts of the fashion industry on the planet and people. And we are doing this for our community and to give them the options and give them the power back. As we've seen with governments around the world, people in leadership roles are not doing enough, and we can't rely on them. So if we want to create our own sustainable future, we have to do it ourselves. And we want to give people the tools to do that. CHAD: Well, I wish you the best of luck in that. I'm very confident that you're going to have the impact you're looking for along the way, and I wish you the best in that. Thank you for stopping by and sharing with us. I really appreciate it. LUCY: Thank you so much for having me. It was great to chat too. CHAD: If folks want to find out more or get in touch with you or follow along, where are all the different places that they can do that? LUCY: Check out our website, loanhood.com. If you are a founder and you want to talk about funding or building a product, marketing, you can email me lucy (L-U-C-Y) at lucy@loanhood.com. And we are on Instagram and TikTok @loanhood. CHAD: Wonderful. You can subscribe to the show and find notes which include a link to everything that Lucy just mentioned along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and I'll see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.
Lenore Champagne Beirne is Founder and Managing Partner at Bright Ventures, a groundbreaking space for transformation in people, companies, and industries with coaching, capital, and community. Chad talks with Lenore about being at the intersection of all three of those services, providing support for diverse entrepreneurs, and staying intentional about the kind of company and culture they're creating. Bright Ventures (https://www.brightventures.io/) Follow Bright Ventures on Twitter (https://twitter.com/brightventures2), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/brightventuresnyc/), Medium (https://brightventures.medium.com/about), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/bright-ventures-io/). Follow Lenore on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/lenorechampagnebeirne/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Lenore Champagne Beirne, Founder and Managing Partner at Bright Ventures, a groundbreaking space for transformation in people, companies, and industries with coaching, capital, and community. Lenore, thank you so much for joining me. LENORE: Absolutely. Thanks for having me, Chad. CHAD: Bright Ventures, I love the three things: coaching, capital, and community. Would you say at the core you are a venture capital firm? Or is it really the intersection of all three of those services? LENORE: It is truly the intersection of all three of those services. In fact, I started Bright Ventures because of a gap that I saw in the capital markets. But the first thing that we came to market with was coaching. And we learned so much from coaching diverse entrepreneurs and investors, and operators that we saw ways to add value to those groups and ultimately built the accelerator and venture capital fund and a number of other programs. CHAD: Like most companies, I think what you have is relatively unique. Most companies are a coaching company or a venture capital fund. Do you get pushback, or are there concerns about doing too much? LENORE: We've heard that question, although I don't know that the same question would be posed, at least in the same way, to a man, especially if it were a White man. But that aside, the reason we get the question is because I personally have led the launch of each new phase of the company. And what has really given our investors and also our partners comfort is that as we've expanded, we've also massively expanded the leadership and the skill set of the Bright Ventures team. So I would say at our heart, we are a transformation company. We make inclusive innovation possible. We define that as building a future that works for all of us together. We make that possible. And we know that because that's a huge, gnarly, complex, nuanced issue, you have to have a multipronged solution. And so, for us, the combination of individual and systems transformation through coaching, community where we can practice and learn, and capital that actually shifts how businesses can operate is the right set of interventions. CHAD: So one of the things venture capitalists often give feedback to their clients about is either doing too much or mixing business models. So like, oh, you shouldn't do consulting because what you have is a product company. They are different revenue streams, and different ways of working, and different ways of generating money. How do you balance those different business models that are within your organization? LENORE: Well, I think, as I mentioned, the business models that we have inside of Bright Ventures are intended to solve the same really big problem in different ways through different angles. So what we have found is that there are a lot of early-stage ventures that would benefit from the kind of coaching that we offer. But coaching is typically a really high-dollar item, only available to kind of an exclusive few. And so, it became clear to us that building a community with more scalable programs could meet the need of the stakeholder that we're interested in. And that has driven, time and time again, the business models that drive and organize our work at Bright Ventures. CHAD: Yeah, I realize part of what's on my mind is say you're working with a founder and you invest in that founder or a founding team and a founding company, do they no longer become a coaching client that's actually paying you money for coaching? Or do they get it for free? LENORE: Mm-hmm. So founders in our venture portfolio have access to the full suite of our services. And obviously, it's in the Bright Ventures entities' best interest to see those companies win and to give them all the resources and support that they need. You're asking these questions about business models. One thing I should clarify is that we don't have just a single business operating entity at Bright Ventures. The venture fund entity is a traditional GP LP structure that exists to invest in, yes, maybe some of the companies that we serve through our services business, but also a broad swath of companies across the U.S. at early stage. There's then a pretty straightforward consulting firm that we have that also goes by the name Bright Ventures but is a different legal and operational entity. So there's no proprietary information shared across those lines that are different management teams. What unites the Bright Ventures entities is a commitment to inclusive innovation and a set of frameworks that we have seen now proven to drive inclusive outcomes as a competitive advantage in venture. CHAD: Oh, that's awesome clarification. One of the things that we've struggled with a little bit at thoughtbot is we do a lot at thoughtbot. It's probably one of the reasons why I'm asking these questions about balancing. And sometimes, I do think, oh, it could benefit us if they were separate entities. LENORE: How have you all thought about that so far? CHAD: For the most part, what we do is we run separate P&Ls for the different business lines or the different offerings, but it's all actually one entity as long as it doesn't cross country boundaries. We have a different entity for Europe. LENORE: Got it. I asked because I'm curious because, at some point in the next couple of years, we'll probably do one more entity. And we're talking internally now about the moment that that will be the right thing to do, not yet. But good to hear that you're thinking about that as well. CHAD: Yeah. What was the part of your journey where...you mentioned you started to see this need. How did that need or seeing that need jump from that to I'm starting out; this is a real thing? LENORE: It's blurry. The lines are blurry for me, particularly as the founder of Bright, because I have been working on effectively pulling the same threads as long as I can remember, even before Bright Ventures had a name and was an entity. And so, for as long as I can remember, I've been confounded, frustrated [laughs] by and working on the inequity of access to capital and to opportunity in entrepreneurship and in many other expressions of wealth creation. I've also, for as long as I can remember, thought a lot about how people think, and how they relate to themselves, and how they relate to other people. And truly, I can remember experimenting with these ideas when I was really young, maybe even less than ten years old. I then remember experimenting with them in college and trying to create a major for myself because I was trying to understand the intersections of these questions. Officially, it was in 2014 that I launched Bright Ventures as the strategic advisory firm that I mentioned we came to market with. And that was because I had just come off of a really important career experience. I was living and working in Haiti on a program funded by the U.S. government to invest in and then provide support for entrepreneur organizations so like small businesses, social enterprises in Haiti. And I loved that work. It was super challenging, really rewarding, really interesting. But it also opened up in me this question about what entrepreneurs actually needed for support and how to support other investors and seeing potential where I saw it but that the markets might be missing it. And so, in 2014, I had enough of an idea about some of what was missing to get started. And to the point of the line or, like, okay, I'm going do this now, that's when that happened. CHAD: I've had a whole bunch of guests on who talk about issues of inclusion, and particularly access or being excluded from funding and opportunity. And I'm curious, from your perspective, what kind of support do founders who are typically excluded or underrepresented most need, especially on day one? LENORE: Well, one thing that I have found really fascinating about support for diverse entrepreneurs is that we often, as a whole, I'm speaking like we in a very big sense, tend to assume that there is a homogenous set of supports that are required. And this gets to that question about business models and how we make sure that we actually have at Bright Ventures a diversity of ways to help people. What we've learned is that diverse entrepreneurs are not a particularly homogenous bunch. And there are a couple of things that seem to be consistent for certain groups that we have worked hard to build frameworks and models for. One of those things is mindset shift and personal leadership development. That was executive coaching for us. We developed a specialty in helping people who are systematically in out-of-power positions move into in-power positions, and that was through a series of coaching frameworks and leadership frameworks that we would deliver. We also learned that in order to do that durably and sustainably, you also had to go and coach and train the people who might be excluding those entrepreneurs. So we started to develop expertise in working directly with investors and helping them see the brilliance and maybe overlooked opportunity in diverse entrepreneurs. Those were two. We also have some skill-based programming where we help people inside large organizations and also brand new ones think about how to tactically build inclusion into the way that they run their day-to-day. And we finally, of course, have some capital programs where we invest directly in diverse entrepreneurs, which we know are vastly underrepresented in the capital markets. CHAD: You use the word tactical, which I think is a really interesting one because a lot of times, especially on the show, we might talk about strategic things, which is different than tactical. So what does tactical inclusion mean to you? LENORE: So it does start with the strategy. There has to be a business model that makes inclusion possible. Otherwise, we're kind of putting a Band-Aid on a really big open wound. But if there's a business model that makes it possible to take reasonable care of your employees and leave your customers better off than they were before they met you, then tactical inclusion is things like understanding how to delegate, how to give feedback, how to hold meetings in ways that actually bring out the best in your team, and how to collect product feedback that's truly representative of the full swath of people who not only use your product today but maybe are impacted by it throughout your value chain, or might use it tomorrow if you made some innovative choices in product design and development. And so we say tactical, and we highlight that because what we have found is that much of the conversation about inclusion and certainly about diversity lives at this very theoretical level. It ends up being like an ideology, an aspiration, and we don't think that's sufficient. We think you have to actually make it how you behave. And so that tends to be where we focus both in our training and in our evaluation of inclusion in other companies. CHAD: One of the problems that we sometimes see, and we see it in our clients, too, is not everybody responds to training in the same way, particularly if it's like, watch this video. Sometimes there will be not very much participation in that at all. Or even if you're just watching it, maybe you're not giving it your full attention. What does the training that you give actually look like? LENORE: What you just said is exactly why we looked for other things to name what we do because training gets such a bad rap. CHAD: [laughs] Yeah. LENORE: But what we learned about training is, I mean, this seems so obvious, Chad, but it has to actually be a skill that the person will obviously benefit from implementing immediately. So the first thing is like, do you need to and want to and recognize the need to learn this? We only go in with training when we can see that there's general consensus that it'll provide real value, business value, personal value, cultural value in the company. The second thing is that we recognize that people's attention spans are shorter on average. And so what we do with training is make it highly experiential. We'll introduce a concept and then show you a way to practice it right away, as in, within the same 20-minute span. We also then give folks an opportunity to practice live and get feedback. And we only apply training to real-life decisions that managers or leaders are thinking about right in that moment. So for us, again, you asked about this word tactical. It really comes down to how deeply we can tie the training to the person's motivation and their ability to apply it. Mid-Roll Ad: Are your engineers spending too much time on DevOps and maintenance issues when you need them on new features? We know maintaining your own servers can be costly and that it’s easy for spending creep to sneak in when your team isn’t looking. By delegating server management, maintenance, and security to thoughtbot and our network of service partners, you can get 24x7 support from our team of experts, all for less than the cost of one in-house engineer. Save time and money with our DevOps and Maintenance service. Find out more at: tbot.io/devops CHAD: Another pressure I see in the startup world, in general, is this idea of we don't have time to stop. We've got to go. We've got to do this. We've got to do that. And taking the time to actually be really intentional about the kind of company and the kind of culture you're creating when you may be so focused on the business you're creating or the product you're creating sometimes goes by the wayside. Do you spend time trying to fix that problem? Or do you seek out people who are ready for what you have? LENORE: We do an assessment in the beginning, at Bright Ventures, we called it culture audit, to determine the readiness of a culture for the depth of work that we can bring. And we have different ways of engaging depending on where the company is today. We also ask companies to self-identify. Like, how deep are you really interested in going? What kind of outcomes are important to you? And so there's a bit of we've built our frameworks in a modular way so that we can mix and match them to the environment, the strategy, the leadership, the goals of each of our clients. CHAD: I'm curious, from an investor standpoint then, what makes pre-seed, seed companies potential when you have your investor hat on the right kind of companies for Bright Ventures? LENORE: Yeah, we're really excited about companies that have an early signal of building inclusion into the fabric of the business model. And you can usually see that based on the way that the founder is building a team. It's not always...sometimes it's so few people that it's just not enough people to really assess diversity, as is sometimes the case. But you can tell how a founder thinks about divergent opinions, about different perspectives, and about the pipeline of people that they're seeking out to build a company with. The other way that we look for inclusion in the pre-seed and seed stage is really in the business model. And again, the word tactical, like, is this product or service...who is it designed to serve? And how is it designed to leave them? Are the questions that we tend to ask. And what we have found is that if you invest for inclusion, 85% of the time, that is overlapped with investing in diverse founders, but it's not 100% of the time. And again, our lens on that is that inclusion is a behavior, not an identity. And so we're looking for any founder who's building inside of the paradigms I mentioned earlier, irrespective of demographics. And we particularly get excited; in the next ten years, we think there's a lot to be built in digital health and in FinTech, in the broadest sense, Web3 and Web2 FinTech for I think a lot of inclusive business models to emerge there. Also really excited about future of work as a place where I think inclusion will be a massive competitive advantage. CHAD: So many companies are starting remote or are fully remote. Is the training that you give or the advice you're providing in terms of tactical inclusion does it differ for in-person versus remote companies? LENORE: There's a consistent framework or set of questions that you can answer those questions in lots of ways. So if I ask the question like, how does your team get to know one another? The answer to that could be very different if your company sits together every day and actually you unwind on Fridays together. Versus if you're a fully remote company in multiple time zones, sometimes even multiple languages, the answer can be different, but we still know that the team feeling cohesive is a key ingredient for inclusion. And so we're looking for how your company does it and that your company does it, not that it does it in a certain way. So we try to help our clients see their companies as systems in the way that we do so that they can see how is the fact that your team feels cohesive related to the way your team generates new ideas or brings new products to market? And then, we trust management and leadership to design the right specific ways to have that expressed in that company. CHAD: What advice...someone who is just getting started and is just getting started out maybe has an idea, maybe it's a founding team, a team of co-founders. They're very early stage. Are there some things that you would recommend that they either do or avoid doing in order to lay a good groundwork for an inclusive team and company? LENORE: Yeah, absolutely. The building block, like the fundamental input for inclusion, is listening, and so we have done a ton of resources on how to practice listening, how to know if you are listening. But you can't build a system that dynamically includes other groups without really understanding those groups. Listening is really important. Another thing is I find that it helps people build more inclusively when they go through the exercise of seeking out opinions that really differ from their own. And beyond, I think what people typically mean when they say playing devil's advocate, really trying to understand like, why does that work? So one of the things that founders who have built inclusively have really interrogated is who their target market is. And I have found that it's really useful to go through the exercise of making it incredibly narrow, like very exclusive, so you understand your assumptions around who your target market is. And then asking yourself, what does that group, that very narrowly defined group, have in common with other groups that I've crossed off the list? Looking through the lens of what unites diverse cohorts of people tends to net new insights about how to build an inclusive company. CHAD: That's really interesting. Can you give an example? LENORE: Let's say there's a haircare company, and the founder of a haircare company really wants to build and sell shampoo for people with blue hair. Exciting, great. This founder has quit their job to build this blue haircare shampoo company. When we meet that founder, we ask them to, again, narrowly define a target market, people with blue hair, and then go through the inclusion assumption exercise of saying, well, what is it about those people with blue hair that's going to make them come and buy your product time and time and time and time again? And what is so motivating about this problem that you are willing to quit your job to build this company? What we have often found is that the founder gets to the place of saying, "Oh, it's actually not that it's blue hair. It's that the person is really proud of the color of their hair. It's a pride in hair color that has me buy this particular shampoo. And it is the sense of community and affinity with other people who have made non-traditional hair choices." Cool. That's a way bigger target market than just people with blue hair. How do we build that company? And so that's the pivot from we want a narrowly defined target market because it shows you what you already know. And then challenge your assumptions by digging even deeper and seeing how actually people with blue hair and people with orange hair might have something really interesting in common that we may have overlooked historically and might have left a lot of value on the table. CHAD: I think that's a great example. It's also an example for me of the kind of benefit that having someone external can bring to you, whether it be a coach or a mentor and even someone like yourself who will be brought in to explicitly do it. Sometimes, especially founders, have a hard time really thinking critically about what it is they're trying to build. And having an outside perspective, in my experience, can be really helpful. LENORE: Yeah, I if I could give one gift to every founder, it would be to have a coach. I think so many founders are brilliant at their business. And it is so helpful to have an external perspective because we all have blind spots. And having a person looking for your blind spots, supporting you in seeing them, and then practicing living in them, so they're no longer blind spots is, I think, a really transformative experience personally and professionally. CHAD: You've been growing Bright for several years now. As you look ahead into the future for yourself and for the company, what are some of the things that you're excited about? LENORE: I am so incredibly proud of the team that has been building Bright with me. And we have some additions to that team coming that I'm over the moon about, so I'm really excited about that. And by extension, we're growing the Bright Ventures community. So we used to do almost exclusively in-person work in New York City, where I live. But like many groups, through the pandemic, we started to experiment with digital formats for delivering some of our frameworks, and programs, and insights. And we found some things that really resonate. So we're now expanding the Bright Ventures community to allow many, many, many more people, even globally, to build an inclusive economy with us. The community has well-being events, which is a critical part of building inclusively. If we're not well, it's hard to include others. It also will have skill-based trainings like some of the ones we described. And we think a huge opportunity is to help people build connections across networks that they wouldn't necessarily have access to otherwise, so that I'm really proud of, really looking forward to. And then finally, always excited to see the portfolio founders that we back grow and fully express their ideas and bring their, in some cases, finally first bring their companies to market publicly. CHAD: Is that community something that people listening might be able to sign up for now? LENORE: Absolutely. I would say if you're even inclusion curious, like, you just want to understand what inclusion actually means and why it's not a boring thing that you have to sit through a mandated training on, or why even if you're already in the streets marching you should get involved in understanding how inclusion shows up in tech, we would love to have you. And it's a low or even no commitment experience. Drop in, see what resonates, provide us some feedback. We'd love to have folks participate. CHAD: Yeah, we'll link it in the show notes. But can you tell people where folks go to sign up? LENORE: Yeah, we'll link a waitlist. We're inviting people in in segments to make sure that everyone has a really good experience. So we will provide that waitlist link. I actually don't know the URL. CHAD: [laughs] That's fair enough. Fair enough. Well, on that note, if folks want to get in touch with you, or follow along, or find out more about Bright, where are all the different places that they can do that? LENORE: The best place is LinkedIn. My name Lenore Champagne Beirne is really easy to find. I'm the only one. And I'd love to have you all connect there. You can also submit...if you have a startup idea or an existing company that you're interested in bringing into Bright Venture's view, please feel free to submit that on our website, which is www.brightventures.io. And you could technically find me on Twitter, but I won't really be there. [laughs] So I hesitate to suggest it as a place to communicate with me. CHAD: We're going to link all of that in the show notes as well, along with a complete transcript for this episode. You can find all of that at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can technically find me on Twitter as well at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening. Lenore, thank you so much for joining me. I really appreciate it. LENORE: So great to be here. Thanks again, Chad, for the questions. CHAD: And see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Lenore Champagne Beirne.
Sarabeth Jaffe is CTO and Co-Founder at HelloPrenup, the digital prenup platform designed to get couples on the same page. Chad talks with Sarabeth about dogfooding her own product, completely starting over from a technical perspective using Bubble, a low-code/no-code platform, and appearing on the ABC hit series Shark Tank. Hello Prenup (https://helloprenup.com/) Follow Hello Prenup on Twitter (https://twitter.com/HelloPrenup), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/helloprenup/), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqe-NOs0xV7yEebsg8om27A), Pinterest (https://www.pinterest.com/HelloPrenup/), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/helloprenup/). Follow Sarabeth on Twitter (https://twitter.com/sarabethjaffe) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/sarabethjaffe/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Sarabeth Jaffe, CTO, and Co-Founder at HelloPrenup, the digital prenup platform designed to get couples on the same page. Sarabeth, thank you so much for joining me. SARABETH: Thank you so much for having me. CHAD: I can't say that I was aware of your...or that I wanted to think about prenups and seeking out a product around prenups. But it's super interesting to me. And I'm sure that that's part of both the challenge and opportunity with HelloPrenup. So, tell us a little bit about the product. SARABETH: So, as you mentioned, HelloPrenup is really the first of its kind. It's a digital platform that allows couples to create a prenuptial agreement that they're both happy with completely online and for a fraction of the cost of going to an attorney. So why is that interesting for folks these days? Really it's because couples are talking about their finances a lot more before they go into marriage. People are getting married later in life, so they have more assets to protect, or in many couples' cases, they have a lot of existing student loans or other liabilities that they can actually protect their partner from. So I think a lot of couples are becoming more open to prenuptial agreements as a way to kind of start off their marriage with a clean slate. And I can actually speak to our customers because I actually built HelloPrenup after I got engaged. And I was looking into getting a prenup. My fiancé and I we've been together for over seven years; we've known each other for over ten years. And we've always been really transparent about everything and especially our finances. And I love being financially savvy, looking at my investment portfolio, and being really frugal and everything. So to me, getting a prenup was always just the smart move. Being kind of a realistic person whose parents are actually divorced now, I view marriage as a partnership that, if it's working, when it's working, that's amazing. But if things don't work out, I think there should be a different path that you're able to take seamlessly. So when we did get engaged, I started looking into how to get a prenup, and it was a really confusing process. If you want to get a prenup without using HelloPrenup, you have to contact a divorce attorney before you're even married, which kind of starts the precedent of your marital journey off kind of a little weird. And also, hiring a divorce attorney for your prenup can cost a lot of money. The average cost is like $300 an hour. So it kind of depends on how complex your prenup is. But if you're planning your wedding, buying an engagement ring, maybe trying to buy a house soon, you're going to put a prenup on the back burner because of the costs, even though it's a really important financial planning tool. So that's why I came up with the idea. I'm a software engineer. This is something that I think I could build is a platform for couples who want to get a prenup done really conveniently and for a fraction of the cost. So I started working on HelloPrenup on my own in February of 2021, so a little bit over a year ago. And of course, I quickly found out that I don't know all the laws required, [chuckles] and I don't know how to write a good prenup contract. So I need either a legal advisor or an attorney to really help me figure these things out, especially because the law per state actually is different. CHAD: Just so I understand the timeline, did you start it before you got married? Or did you end up doing a prenup through an attorney for yourself? SARABETH: Ah, yes. So actually, we're getting married this Saturday. CHAD: Wow. Okay. Congratulations. SARABETH: Thank you so much. And we are HelloPrenup users. CHAD: Okay, wow. SARABETH: So we did our prenup with our platform. CHAD: So you managed to get the product done before you got married so that you could use it? SARABETH: Yes, yes. I wasn't going to get married without the prenup and going through an attorney. [laughs] I gotta...what is the expression? Like, reap what you sow or something like that. CHAD: Yeah, or eat your own dog food is another one. SARABETH: Yes. Dogfooding our own product has been amazingly beneficial for our team. So that's kind of where I left off in our story so far. I needed to find an attorney. CHAD: I'm curious, you know, I'm a software developer too. I think we all have ideas. How did it become just from an idea to a thing you were really going to do? Where was that sort of switch? When did that switch get flipped? SARABETH: When I came up with the idea for a digital prenup platform, I was actually unemployed. So this was kind of in the middle of the pandemic. I was previously working at a really awesome startup based in Seattle, Washington. But unfortunately, I was actually going through a lot of depression, and I felt really disconnected from my work. So I ended up quitting that job in November. So I took about three months off to recenter myself and figure out what I wanted to do next. So when I thought of the idea for a prenup platform, I had the mental capacity to dig into the problem. And when I figured that it would probably be a profitable business, that's when I started to work on it full time. And I didn't have another job, so I was able to jump into it. CHAD: Okay, so you then needed to find an attorney. You realized that was something you lacked. SARABETH: Yeah, so I started doing some Googling while I was deciding whether this was something I definitely wanted to commit to, to see if there were competitor platforms. And I actually found HelloPrenup at that time. Of course, I wasn't involved with it. And so my co-founder now her name is Julia Rodgers Esquire. So she is a divorce attorney based out of Massachusetts. She actually had been building this product, which was completely aligned with my envisioning of what I was going to build. But of course, she had the legal background of it. So I found her platform, and I noticed when I tried to sign up for the platform that the system was under maintenance. So I was like, huh, maybe they need technical help. So I actually ended up cold emailing her to see whether she needed any software help with the hopes that we could team up. And the next day, we just hopped on a Zoom. It's interesting talking to someone who you've never met before about possibly teaming up on something or potentially being a competitor to them. I made it very clear that I would much rather team up with her rather than try to figure this out on my own. CHAD: That sort of sounds like a threat. [laughter] SARABETH: Oh my God. CHAD: I'd much rather team up with you than have to do this on my own. [laughs] SARABETH: Well, I really respected what she had built at that point. So she had put a lot of time into actually writing a lot of content and blogs around prenuptial agreements. So she had a really good base for the business. But it was really the software that she was running into issues with. So she had been struggling and working with overseas developers. So as an attorney, she didn't have a lot of experience project managing a software project like that. And especially with contract developers, you can't say, "I want this to be built in a sustainable, scalable fashion." So there were a lot of bugs with the platform. The way I saw it was like, hey, she kind of has this MVP. And she's an attorney, so I think we would make an amazing team. I was also really excited at the prospect of being able to work with another woman entrepreneur. And we hit it off really quickly on our Zoom call. And yeah, so we've been working together since about March of 2021. CHAD: Did you end up keeping what she already had from a technical perspective, or did you start over? SARABETH: We completely started over. I tried to salvage the codebase that they had used. It was like Angular, which I actually despise Angular framework in general. I tried my best to clean it up, but they had no tests. They had a bunch of copy and pasted code. It was just kind of a mess. So that's when I really decided that Bubble would be a great option for us. CHAD: Well, for those who don't know, Bubble is like a low-code/no-code platform. SARABETH: Yes. So it's called Bubble.io. It is, as Chad just said, you know, it's a low-code platform which allows you to actually build full-stack web applications. So unlike other website builders like Squarespace or Wix, you actually have a database or a back-end component to your application. And of course, for the majority of applications, that's really a requirement to build something actually useful for people. So I'd been playing around with Bubble.io before we scrapped the codebase. And it was a good starting point because I'm still currently the only full-time developer on our team. And because we are using a low-code platform, we're able to move a lot faster with a lot of our feature development because there are a lot of things that had been done for us. So there are a lot of drag and drop features that we can leverage via different plugins. CHAD: It's an interesting choice to me, not because I don't think it makes sense, but I think a lot of developers...you are a developer; you know how to code. SARABETH: [chuckles] CHAD: And I think a lot of developers, when faced with that choice, can't resist writing custom software. SARABETH: Yeah. [chuckles] You know, I've always been torn between the development and the product world. And for a while, that was really a struggle for me deciding whether I wanted to be a product manager or a software engineer. So I settled on being a product-driven software engineer. So to me, the use case of like, I could write the traditional code, but it'll be a lot slower, or I could build the product a lot faster by using this tooling. That's where I land most of the time, like, the more time-efficient way to do things. CHAD: From deciding to work together and starting to work together to okay, I'm going to rewrite this in Bubble; what point were you back online with the new version? How long did that take? SARABETH: Yeah, so that took us about three months to get it relaunched, and so I was pretty happy with that. I mean, of course, there's still a ton of work that we're doing to build out the product, but to really get it back up and running and also in a more scalable way so that we actually can provide prenups across multiple different states now. So it's a lot more flexible in the way that it was built. So it took about three months to get it relaunched. CHAD: So at what point then did you go on Shark Tank? [laughs] SARABETH: So [chuckles] there were a lot of variables in play. And so, I was really thankful that we chose to use Bubble because the speed at which I needed to develop this was even more reduced. So we started talking to producers pretty quickly after we decided to team up together. It's a really unusual entrepreneur journey, I would say. I knew that it would make a good story because prenups are kind of taboo, as you mentioned. Television loves something a little spicy, a little bit dramatic. So we started talking to producers, I want to say, in June or July, maybe even in May. And at that point, we hadn't relaunched the product. So we were really just pitching the idea. And we were pitching ourselves as founders to the producers and the exciting concept of how will the American public perceive a product that is a little bit taboo talking about prenuptial agreements before you get married? If you're familiar with Shark Tank, you probably see that they have a lot of wedding-related companies that go on. But we were kind of flipping the script on that. So while I was rewriting the entire software, we were also going through the auditioning process of Shark Tank. CHAD: I can imagine that's pretty intense. SARABETH: Yes. CHAD: I think the closest thing I can think of is when you enter into an accelerator or something like that. You might be in it for three months. You're going to have demo day at the end. But with that, you're presenting to a group of people. It's not broadcast on national television. SARABETH: Yes. [laughs] CHAD: It's probably a little bit of a different thing, and there are no producers involved, that kind of thing. SARABETH: Yeah, yeah, exactly. By the time we had gotten on the set of Shark Tank to pitch our products, we'd only really been relaunched for about a month and a half. [laughs] So we were flying...I'm so bad at expressions. CHAD: [laughs] SARABETH: We were pitching... CHAD: By the seat of your pants. SARABETH: Yes, that one. Thank you so much. [laughter] So we were really pitching the potential of our product. And we were just so ecstatic to be there. Mid-Roll Ad: When starting a new project, we understand that you want to make the right choices in technology, features, and investment but that you don’t have all year to do extended research. In just a few weeks, thoughtbot’s Discovery Sprints deliver a user-centered product journey, a clickable prototype or Proof of Concept, and key market insights from focused user research. We’ll help you to identify the primary user flow, decide which framework should be used to bring it to life, and set a firm estimate on future development efforts. Maximize impact and minimize risk with a validated roadmap for your new product. Get started at: tbot.io/sprint CHAD: When you went on Shark Tank, how much of what you said and those kinds of things was all you, or how much is it put together for the show? SARABETH: Really, the only thing that is heavily vetted by producers is your pitch. So when you walk into the tank, and you give your 30-second to 2-minute spiel that's a bit more theatrical, you practice that over and over and over again. And it was really a fascinating experience. Because as a fellow software engineer, you know we're kind of more chill people, [laughs] more realistic. But they kept saying, "Bring more energy to it. Do big movements, maybe even do a dance or something." [laughter] I'm kind of living this double life where I'm writing software, and then I'm -- CHAD: In between rehearsals, you're opening your laptop and making another thing happen on the app, I'm sure. SARABETH: Exactly. It's like, oh, okay, we have pitch practice tonight, and now I'm going to work on this core feature. Without it, we literally don't have a product. So the producers are very involved in your initial pitch. But then when you jump into the Q&A, when the Sharks start asking you questions, that's all you. CHAD: That's really cool. So are you happy that you went on Shark Tank? SARABETH: Yes, I'm so happy that we went on. I've always been a Shark Tank fan. I think it's been on for over ten years. Shark Tank has been something that's kind of kept me interested in being an entrepreneur. When I started learning how to code, I knew that I always wanted to start a business. And just seeing the number of ideas and the variety of businesses that people are able to build and putting that on a show is just a fascinating concept. So I was really happy to go on the show. And, of course, the impact on our business has been tremendous. Really, it changed the trajectory of our business. We gain most of our customers through organic search. So most of our customers come in through Google saying like, how do I get an online prenup? By getting on national television, we are really thankful that news stations were now interested in talking to us. So by linking to our website, that helped boost our search engine optimization rankings. And so now we're actually a profitable business due to Shark Tank. CHAD: That's awesome. So is the tech team still just you? SARABETH: The tech team is me. And I have started working with another Bubble developer on a contract basis. But calling out to any software engineers or low-code developers, if you're interested in joining a legal tech company that's growing a lot, feel free to reach out to me. So I really do need to be hiring another developer. At this point, I am really the main developer working on things for a variety of reasons. The first reason is that Bubble, while it is very quick to develop a product on your own from a technical perspective, it is lacking in features when it comes to collaboration with other developers. So with traditional code, you'll do code reviews on GitHub, and you'll just do like a diff. But the branching and the version control is definitely a little bit lacking. So I'm trying to wait out the Bubble team. They have some stuff coming down the pipeline that will make it easier to do collaboration. But for that reason, it is a little bit easier as an entrepreneur using a low-code platform to be the sole developer because you kind of know exactly how everything works. And then also, developers are really expensive. So we are actually a completely self-funded company at this point. So we're bootstrapped. We haven't actually accepted any investment at this point. We're a really conservative team. If we hire a developer, we want to make sure that we're able to provide them with a competitive salary and competitive package. And we're able to do that now. It's just a matter of finding the right person, which is actually a really interesting space because low-code developers are still on the up and up right now. CHAD: I know you can't see the future. But do you foresee a point where either Bubble doesn't take you where you want to go, or you need to start augmenting it in some way? SARABETH: I would like to push Bubble as far as I can. I think now that Bubble is getting a lot more recognition...and they just got another round of funding that was pretty substantial. I think that they're going to be improving a lot of things, especially when it comes to, like I mentioned, collaborating with other developers on the platform and performance. A lot of pushback that people give with low-code platforms is like, oh, the page won't load as quickly as if I wrote it with pure React or something like that. So I want to try and stay on the platform as long as possible. If we really continue to grow, I would be willing to move back to traditional code. And we'd actually be set up for success in that way because we would have a fully functioning product, and half of development is figuring out what feature to build next. So we'd kind of say, all right, here's how it works. And then, while we're kind of maintaining our Bubble application, we can have a development team build it within our own platform. Does that make sense? CHAD: It does. And I think with Bubble, it doesn't need to be all or nothing, right? SARABETH: Mm-hmm. CHAD: You can use APIs. Or you can basically extend it with custom code if you really needed to using webhooks and that kind of thing, right? SARABETH: Exactly. And that's the way that we've done it. So actually, the contract generation is written in Node.js JavaScript. And the reason I did that is because it's easier to process data in a sequential order with traditional code versus Bubble. And you can also hook into other APIs, like for us, we do a conversion of the HTML of the contract into a Word doc. So we're able to call into a conversion API and then save it on AWS with traditional code, and you can do all that with Bubble. But it's a little bit more straightforward when you know what you're doing with just like JavaScript; you know a few lines here and there. Does that make sense? CHAD: It does, yeah. I'll be super interested to see how far you're able to push it and what those things you need to do outside of Bubble are. SARABETH: Yeah, I'm really excited to try to push Bubble as an option for entrepreneurs. We were actually the first low-code platform to be shown on Shark Tank. So every Bubble developer on Twitter was really excited about it. CHAD: [laughs] SARABETH: So I think it's a really interesting spot to be in right now. CHAD: Yeah, from a technology perspective, I think that that's one thing we've talked about. And you addressed the other thing that sometimes people say is a promise. Like, it is a commercial platform. It's not an open-source platform, and you're building entirely on top of it. And so that presents a certain amount of risk that like, they might go out of business. You know, they're a VC-backed company, and maybe they'll go out of business. And then where would you be? The fact that they've just raised a significant additional round of funding mitigates that somewhat, but it's still a concern, right? SARABETH: Yeah, it's definitely a concern. And it's something that, as a software engineer, it's terrifying to know that you're relying on someone else for your livelihood and now the livelihood of multiple people on our team. So it is really scary. You cannot export your code from Bubble. But I believe they have said that if for some reason they go out of business, they will allow you to do that. I'm sure whatever code you export from it is not going to be very pretty to look at. So it probably makes sense to write it from scratch. But I think at this point, I'm really happy with where we're at. I like remaining a really lean team. And using different tools in simple ways and trying to keep our product as simple as possible has really helped us grow. CHAD: What's next for HelloPrenup? Where are you setting your sights on? What's keeping you up at night now? SARABETH: Ooh, so many things. We do have an exciting investor coming on. I can't say exactly who, but they were really involved in building one of the largest legal tech platforms out there today. So we're really excited to be partnering with them and be building out our network across all 50 states. Right now, we're actually in, I believe, 32 states. You can use our platform to create your prenuptial agreement. And so, we're excited to be starting to onboard attorneys to the platform. So that's one of the things. Another thing that's on our radar is keeping up with, you know, it's hard to say the trends of what's going on with Web3. But we do have some things that are related to Web3 that we'll be tackling in the next probably a year or a couple of years when it comes to financial data. Yeah, so those things are kind of on our radar of our product. And then, on the near term, we are doing a lot of work to try and normalize the entire conversation around prenuptial agreements. We partnered with The Knot, which is one of the largest online wedding registry websites. And we've been writing a lot of blogs on their website that talk about the educational side of prenups. And we're actually going to be launching gift cards. CHAD: [chuckles] SARABETH: So you can list a prenuptial agreement on your wedding registry, and people can help support it. So there are a lot of initiatives that we're going to be doing on the product development side and then also kind of on the marketing education side of the business. As we start to grow, I'm trying to pull my attention away from those things. But sometimes, it's really hard because some parts of the business that aren't technical are fun to get involved in. And I'm sure you run into that or when you were scaling thoughtbot getting distracted by other parts of the business because they were just interesting. But there's a lot going on right now. CHAD: That's exciting. You mentioned earlier that you hadn't taken investors yet. And so is it about that scale that's causing you to take one on now, or what's going on there? SARABETH: So we're profitable. We don't need an investor, which is we're so thankful for that. So it's really a strategic partnership for us. CHAD: Well, that's really cool. I'm excited to hear everything you have going on. And I really wish you luck in everything that you're doing. SARABETH: Thank you so much. CHAD: So if folks want to find out more about HelloPrenup, follow along with you, get in touch with you; where are all the best places for them to do that? SARABETH: You can check us out on helloprenup.com. And we're on Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn. Just tweet at us @HelloPrenup, and one of us will respond. It'll probably be myself or Julia. So you're able to get into contact with us if you have any questions. And of course, if you are a developer who is looking to join a really fun, women-led legal tech company, hit me up. CHAD: Awesome. You can subscribe to the show and find notes with links for everything that Sarabeth just mentioned, along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments for me, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thank you so much for joining me, Sarabeth. I really appreciate it. SARABETH: Thank you so much. CHAD: And thank you for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Sarabeth Jaffe.
thoughtbot is hosting a discussion August 23rd from 1 - 2 PM Eastern. Our team and client will speak to their experience creating TrueVisa, an attorney-guided tech solution for applying for US Citizenship. We navigated multiple stages including idea validation, customer research, technical feasibility analysis and go-to-market planning. If you are a product leader, looking to learn from a new technology initiative, we hope you'll join us. If you can't join live, registrants will receive the record. Register at: tbot.io/truevisa-event (https://thoughtbot.com/events/truevisa-event) __ Victoria Guido is the new Associate Director of Business Development and DevOps Strategy at thoughtbot. Chad talks with Victoria about getting involved in DevOps work, transitioning to agile, moving away from her old community which was based on geography, and tips for people onboarding into a new role. Follow Victoria on Twitter (https://twitter.com/victori_ousg) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/victorialguido/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Victoria Guido, the new Associate Director of Business Development and DevOps Strategy at thoughtbot, and wait for it, the new co-host of this very podcast with me. Victoria, thank you for joining me on the show for this episode, for joining me at thoughtbot, and now for joining me as the co-host of the show. VICTORIA: You're welcome. Thank you for having me. CHAD: You do all of those things, right? [laughs] VICTORIA: Yes, yes. CHAD: So I'm hoping that we can introduce folks to you. I'm excited to have you on the show and for the audience to get to know you. Let's start with your role at thoughtbot. I think maybe you have the esteem of having the longest title at thoughtbot right now. [chuckles] VICTORIA: Yes, I love it, Associate Director of Business Development and DevOps Strategy. So I'm not only doing business development but also planning our DevOps services and how we do that at thoughtbot. CHAD: And you're on the Mission Control team, which for folks who follow along or want to go back and listen, we had Joe, who is the CTO of thoughtbot and the interim Managing Director of the Mission Control team, which is our new DevOps team and Site Reliability Engineering team, that's Episode 403. So I will link that in the show notes, but it's at giantrobots.fm/403 as well. So, how did you get involved in DevOps work? VICTORIA: Right. So I first went to my first DevOps meetup in 2017 when I was living in Washington, D.C. I had been working in IT and operations for about 5 or 10 years at that point. And I went to a DevOps meetup and met some really nice guys, and they were very...what I liked about it was that it was both the technology side and about culture. And it was about how do we break down silos between different groups, and then bring in the automation and start to do next level type of operations? So that's how I started to get involved. And I started attending the meetups regularly and then became an organizer for the meetup and for the conference series. And that's when I became like the biggest DevOps person in D.C. probably. [laughs] CHAD: Did you end up moving from the general IT work that you were doing into more DevOps focus work along that way? VICTORIA: Yeah, at that time, that was when as a federal contractor, you know, agile had been around for quite a while. And I had been through several agile transformations with large program teams. And now DevOps was becoming more of a thing. And the project that I was on at the time was managing a large set of federal websites and was managing the build pipeline and process for how they got their code into the public's view and how they managed the servers and all the other back-end services that supported those applications. So DevOps was both top of mind for the government. [laughs] They were trying to now be able to deploy as frequently as they were able to build new features. And it was part of the work that I was performing as well. CHAD: You mentioned you were doing government work at the time. What was that like? What kind of work was it? VICTORIA: Yeah, actually, my first job after college, my first full-time job, was at Citizenship and Immigration Services. And it was about a 200-person program. Some of the applications were actually written in Siebel. And so we had just a variety of different applications from Siebel to Java. And they had just transitioned to agile. And so that was taking a team that was managing Oracle releases and bringing them into a kanban style workflow and figuring out how do we be agile when we're in maintenance mode, and bring the team along with me? And I worked my way up from a process engineer to project management and did a little bit of testing and a little bit of development in between. So it was interesting because it was a major transformational shift for that agency and still getting steeped in ITIL processes and how to do unit testing, acceptance testing, and all of those other kinds of critical processes for building applications. It was good. CHAD: What does transitioning to agile mean when you talk about groups that size? You're talking about unit tests and that kind of thing, which can be part of agile, but I assume isn't the only aspect of it. VICTORIA: Yeah, I think for that group, it was about changing the way we planned and managed work and figuring out what processes could we automate. So is there testing that we could automate or test data creation we could automate? And I think there are some concepts from agile that helped our planning, for example, making a physical board to manage which environments has which versions of Oracle in it. Those types of concepts of just kind of stepping away from your computer and getting together with the group every day to talk about what issues they're running into that's kind of what it was. But there was still, of course, documentation requirements, big documentation requirements, and everything like that. So it was an interesting sort of half transition or tailored approach to doing agile with that type of team. CHAD: And then from there, you moved into ongoing sort of consulting companies that worked with government. VICTORIA: Yes, I worked for two pseudo-government financial organizations, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation and Fannie Mae, so my next two roles as a project manager and system engineer. So at Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, I got exposed to more system engineering and security engineering, working with their mobile device management policy, and actually designing the mobile device management to match DISA STIG. Sorry, I'm doing a lot of acronyms out here. [laughter] You can stop me if I use too many. But that was really interesting and also upgrading their system, they were using to manage change for the organization so their ITIL services management tool. Going through the process of upgrading that project and coordinating across all the teams who delivered software at the agency was fascinating. I went on to Fannie Mae, where I started to really build knowledge bases and start to build out actually using SharePoint at the time. [laughs] But figuring out ways to share knowledge across large teams and other large production support services teams, and how to get them collaborating so they could improve themselves and do continuous improvement, and learn what other groups are doing. CHAD: That's one area where I honestly don't have a ton of experience. Most of my professional experience has been at thoughtbot or other smaller organizations. How do you manage that, or what are the big differences between large organizations like that and something at the thoughtbot size or smaller? VICTORIA: The biggest difference between a large organization like that and a small one like thoughtbot would be I think of how change gets generated and started. In a small organization with a culture like thoughtbot, change can come from anywhere and very quickly have permeated the entire organization. With a larger organization, you can have leaders try to force change from the top down. And you'll see individuals some will be 100% on board. Others will figure out how to qualify what they're already doing to fit that change. And some others will just be full-on resistance and just kind of be waiting for the next leader to come in so they can switch into whatever they were doing before. And there is also that organic change that comes from individuals and then pushes up to the rest of the organization. But I think it's much harder, and you have to have a lot of will and a lot of support from leadership that they're accepting of those types of ideas. CHAD: I think it's the nature of groups and companies to want to grow. Do you think that there's any way to preserve that smaller culture as an organization grows? VICTORIA: I think so. I think it's possible if you integrate it into part of your core values, and that becomes a part of how you interview, and how you do performance reviews, and how you build your culture as a company. I think you can build it on those tenets. I think in some organizations, there's usually some form of acquisition where you acquired a team from a contracting company, or you acquired a team of federal employees from another agency when you restructured. So it makes it a little bit more challenging to really integrate that part of your culture into every step, but it is possible. And you also have to accept that not everyone might be on board all the time. CHAD: Well, I think that that is probably the biggest challenge is even in a larger organization, if you foster a culture where change can happen from anywhere, it's not necessarily top down. Transferring that knowledge or that practice throughout the whole organization is really difficult. Like if it's thousands or tens of thousands of people, adopting a change seems really difficult to me. So even if things are really organic coming from all levels of the company, you could end up in a scenario where everything is being done differently, everywhere. VICTORIA: Yeah, and I think, too, when you're in a larger organization, there's more context for every unit. And so you can think this is a change we're going to do. This is going to be great. But then, once you actually see the way that people work, that change might not actually help them that much. And so I think that if people have autonomy to be able to make changes that make sense for them, that's more likely to be effective than if we tried to push change from the top down necessarily. And being in my position as a contractor, I really don't have authority to make a lot of changes. CHAD: [chuckles] Right. VICTORIA: So either I have someone backing me up, or I really get to know the individuals that I'm working with. And I can demonstrate and show them that there's a better way of doing it and do it in a way that gives it to them as an option so they can choose to adopt it. And that's usually the only option I have to give anyway, [laughs] so that's been effective because people do want to be better at their jobs or be more efficient. But a lot of times, I think the changes aren't really addressing their problem, and so it can be easy to push it aside. Mid-Roll Ad: Are you an entrepreneur or start-up founder looking to gain confidence in the way forward for your idea? At thoughtbot, we know you’re tight on time and investment, which is why we’ve created targeted 1-hour remote workshops to help you develop a concrete plan for your product’s next steps. Over four interactive sessions, we work with you on research, product design sprint, critical path, and presentation prep so that you and your team are better equipped with the skills and knowledge for success. Find out how we can help you move the needle at: tbot.io/entrepreneurs CHAD: So you mentioned you got involved in DevOps DC and then as an organizer. I know you also started to work with Women Who Code. Why did you get involved in the organization of DevOps DC and that kind of thing? Was there a business or a personal reason to do it? VICTORIA: It was both. It made sense from a networking perspective, both in potential customers or clients and in recruiting. But also, I think it made sense. For me personally, the people who were showing up regularly were my kind of people, you know, [laughs] people who cared about blameless post mortems or feeling open or making me feel welcome when I came to the meetup. That was a big reason why I got involved. And it just made sense for me, too, because I was coming from an operations background. I'm like, oh, DevOps, this is the way that we're supposed to be doing things. [laughs] CHAD: So you were really involved in the D.C. community and had been there for a while. But you recently moved to California. VICTORIA: Yes, yeah. I've been in San Diego for almost two years, about a year and a half at this point. Yeah, big moves. CHAD: What was it like to move away from your old community, which was so based on geography? VICTORIA: Yeah, it was sad, but it was interesting how it worked out with the pandemic because when we found out we were going to move, was when everything shut down, and we went slowly remote anyways. And so I continued running DevOps DC remotely and some Women Who Code events for about a year afterwards. And then, when I decided it was time to really shift away and actually be more present in the San Diego community, especially when the other meetups started going back to in-person meetups, that was actually really hard to say goodbye and to say that I wasn't going to be organizing anymore. And I really miss all my past organizers and people who would come to the events. CHAD: Has it been difficult to form a new community locally given the pandemic? VICTORIA: Yeah, I've looked at quite a few meetups. There are a number of good meetups here in San Diego, and LA has a great scene as well. But yeah, it's been hard for myself to just get out of the house and to find similar groups that have those same interests. That's been a challenge, but I think it's coming along, and we'll get there. CHAD: And along the way, you joined thoughtbot. I'm curious, what were the things, in particular, that attracted you to the role or to thoughtbot? What were you looking for personally? VICTORIA: Personally, I knew that business development was an area that fit my skill sets really well, and the things I like to do like going out, and networking, and talking to people. And this role, in particular with the DevOps strategy in there, really excited me because I could use all of these hours and hours I've spent in meetups and conferences to good use to help develop services within thoughtbot that are really tailored to our specific user groups and needs. And to work with highly skilled, highly regarded engineers and developers on developing these products I thought was really exciting. And then thoughtbot as a company, in particular, I found the interview process to be really well thought out with, for example, I knew that it was going to be a long interview process. So there is a compensation that you can receive just for interviewing. And I thought that was something that was really nice [laughs] and also just showed that approach of being aware of the candidate's experience and wanting to have that be a good experience and a worthwhile endeavor. So that was part of why I liked thoughtbot. Open source was a big consideration for me. I wanted to work somewhere where they were passionate about giving back to the open-source community, and all that together brought me here and made the most sense. CHAD: Cool. Do you have any tips for people onboarding into a new role? Or maybe even if it's not tips, was there something that you did intentionally when day one or day minus one you're thinking about, okay, tomorrow I'm getting started? How did you approach that? VICTORIA: One of the biggest advice I give to people who are starting a new role is to schedule one on ones with members of your team and get to know them as individuals, especially in remote environment since you don't necessarily have a chance to go out for coffee, [chuckles] just to have a quick one on one and get to know them a little bit more in your role and figure out where you can start to add value. I think that's a great way to start. And then to just develop your list of ideas for where you think you can add value, some outstanding questions for where you need to understand more. And I think the other advice would be to engage in the social channels. I think my first day, I posted a picture of my dog on the dogs' channel. [laughter] And just like, let your personality show a little bit. And don't be afraid to post in a large channel, especially if you know the culture of the company is open to that kind of collaboration. And then people start to see your face and get to know you a little bit more, and you feel more connected to your company. CHAD: Were you nervous when you joined on your first day? VICTORIA: Yeah, a little nervous. And I'm also aware of just having been a federal contractor that some people might hear that and have an impression of my style or the way I like to work. And so I'm a little aware of like, oh, I definitely don't want to wear a blazer. I don't want to look too corporate. [laughter] CHAD: That's funny. Yeah, one time, we were meeting in sales meetings with clients, and we wanted to establish that we were not a typical consulting company. And so intentionally going to a sales meeting wearing a t-shirt or something like that was a statement, like an intentional choice we were making to subtly communicate what kind of company we are. So that resonates with me. VICTORIA: Right. [laughs] CHAD: So now that you've been here for...oh, geez, how long has it been? [chuckles] VICTORIA: It's almost a month. CHAD: Almost a month. Was there anything that surprised you? VICTORIA: There have been a few small things that I'm probably way too happy about. One is just the actual page count in contracts is just way lower than what I've had to work with in the past, [laughter] which is very exciting for me. I was really happy to see...I went to go add a custom Slack emoji, and there were already like 2,000-plus Slack emojis. So that was really exciting for me. [laughs] Surprising...the part that's interesting is, in some cases, as a consulting company, it is the same problems that we're trying to solve for. So, in that case, it's almost expected, but it's interesting. So to see some things like what thoughtbot has, a playbook in GitHub, and anyone can edit it. And that was something I was really trying to work on at my last position. And you're 5 or 10 years down the road where you've solved some of the issues where you have a nice editor so that people can go in and edit pages without using Markdown or pull requests. But it's still difficult. So it's interesting to see that some challenges have progressed a little and have still some different issues. CHAD: Yeah, it's always interesting to get a new person's perspective with fresh eyes. I've been doing this for a long time, and joining a new company remotely is different. Back when you were joining a Boston team or a San Francisco team, you could go into the office. And your first day, you'd be sitting right next to somebody and going to lunch with them. And that kind of thing is clearly very different now than it was then. VICTORIA: Right. And I did get to see everyone at Summit for one night. So that's exciting. CHAD: Yeah, that was exciting. So we happened to...I think the week before you started, or maybe two weeks before you started, we were having our company-wide in-person get-together in the United Kingdom. And you happened to be going to Germany for a wedding, right? VICTORIA: Mm-hmm. CHAD: So we tacked on to that trip and stole you for a day, and we were able to see each other in person. That was exciting. VICTORIA: It was really cool. Although I had a lot of FOMO once, I saw the next day was like D&D and a bunch of games and hanging out. I was like, wow, I'd really like to stay longer. [laughs] CHAD: Yeah, yeah. Well, we'll do it again next year. [laughs] VICTORIA: Yeah, that's true. CHAD: Mission control is the one team at thoughtbot that works on clients that is cross time zone, so most of the teams overlap with clients 100% with time zone. So it'll be people in the Americas work with clients in the Americas. But the Mission Control so that we could provide a wide swath of time zone coverage for that infrastructure work, for that support that we do, crosses the teams. So one person on your team is in Nigeria, and you're all the way in San Diego. What's that like? How do you manage that? VICTORIA: Yes, well, everyone on the team makes sure to update their availability in their calendars so that we aren't accidentally scheduling meetings really late in the day for folks who are on that UK time zone. It's been all right, though. I'm used to asynchronous communication, and so is the team. So I think that we're really good at being able to use Jira and Confluence and Slack to communicate. And we are open with each other on where we're flexible if we need to make meetings a little bit later. And everyone's been really supportive of not trying to have meetings too early with me, which I appreciate, [laughter] 8:00 o'clock is totally fine, though. It's actually been good. I'm used to the asynchronous communication. I actually would even be open to more meetings that are done just over Slack and just when people wake up. CHAD: I think there are different philosophies here. But I'm very much in the camp of assuming we want to work a sustainable pace, which we do, then you can't build a culture around synchronous meetings where everyone needs to be on the meeting together because it's basically impossible. Those two things are at odds. Someone will be outside of their regular work hours, and that's really hard to continue on sustainably. So I'm very much in the camp of having a culture of asynchronous communication. And that doesn't mean that you never talk. [laughs] It doesn't mean that you don't work with each other. But maybe those times should be focused on what can't be replicated asynchronously, which is sometimes the social connections, the cultural connections of the team. VICTORIA: Yeah, and I think we get a kick out of saying like, "Good morning, Victoria, and good evening, Olamide." [laughs] CHAD: Cool. Well, I'm sure folks will get to know you more over the course of the next episodes. I really appreciate you joining the show. If folks want to follow along with you or get in touch with you, where are the best places for them to do that? VICTORIA: I'm more active on Twitter, and so you can follow me there. And I tend to like and retweet a bunch of DevOps-related events and Women Who Code events. And I'm also on LinkedIn. CHAD: So what's that Twitter handle? VICTORIA: It's @victori_ousg. CHAD: Okay. We'll include a link to that in the show notes. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with an entire transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And I'm so excited it's not just going to be me on that email list anymore. So definitely send an email. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening. Victoria, thank you again. VICTORIA: Thank you CHAD: And see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.
Adam Kenney is Chief Product Officer at Numerated, which helps banks and credit unions transform how they lend to businesses. Chad talks with Adam about what institutional banks and credit unions are like as a market and customers and what sales cycles look like, going from 17 to more than 130 customers quickly, and the scaling challenges they faced, and how the pandemic affected them as a company. Numerated (https://www.numerated.com/) Follow Numerated on Twitter (https://twitter.com/numeratedgt), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4igz9AZqOXJlZxtXUBO-1Q), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/numerated/). Follow Adam on Twitter (https://twitter.com/ademski) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/adam-kenney-ab-cmu/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel, and with me, today is Adam Kenney, Chief Product Officer at Numerated, which helps banks and credit unions transform how they lend to businesses. Adam, thanks so much for joining me. ADAM: Thank you, Chad. Thanks for having me. CHAD: Let's dive into Numerated a little bit more. How do you help banks and credit unions lend to businesses? ADAM: I think we're in the middle of what is a pretty meaningful transformation in terms of how businesses are expecting to get access to credit. Really what they want is something that is fast, easy, convenient, largely driven off of the change that has happened in the retail space over the last 10 to 15 years. And in many ways, business lending is still catching up to that, and so our focus is doing that. It's helping the banks and credit unions really change how they interact with their business customers. We use a combination of data and great experiences to make that process as seamless as possible. We've been noted to, using the combination of data and technology, help banks increase the number of loans that they can do with their existing staff by as much as fourfold. We are also noted for inventing what we like to refer to as the three-minute business loan. It's one of the things we were written up on in the Wall Street Journal back in our days in Eastern Labs, where we've been able to get businesses from the point of application all the way to a funded loan in less than three minutes. And that's a process that historically has taken as long as three weeks. And so really excited by the ways that we're able to really help change how banks themselves can look at their operations. But more than anything, it's how banks are able to rethink and change how they interact with businesses and help the businesses in your communities grow and get access to the credit that they need. CHAD: So from a digital product perspective, there's a piece of a product there that banks are actually taking on and white-labeling that provides a lending experience for their clients, right? ADAM: That's correct. I mean, we're a cloud-based SaaS system. But you're right; they branded as their own. And so if you're going to Eastern Bank's website and clicking through and ultimately going through the application process with us, it's going to look and feel like it's just Eastern's website. And all of the interactions that you have with Eastern or any of our customers are going to feel that way as well. So yes, it is a white-label solution that we sell to the banks, and they provide to their customers. CHAD: The actual banking industry is not one that I've had a lot of experience in. And so I'm curious what institutional banks, credit unions, that kind of thing what they're like as a market or as customers and what the sales cycle looks like and those kinds of things. ADAM: It's about as varied as an industry can get, I'll tell you that. [laughs] You have to remember that banks and credit unions can be as small as having a few hundred million dollars in assets, maybe as small as 100 million. And in some of our customers' cases, they're de novo banks, and they're just getting started. And they range up to multiple billions of dollars in assets. And so, these are organizations that scale dramatically. Each of them have their own problems. They're also going to be made up of very different tech-minded individuals. You're going to have some smaller institutions that are basically managing a book of business that's been a book of business for close to a century and are interested in how technology can make them more efficient. But they are not the technologists that you and I would be used to working with on a day-to-day basis. And then, of course, you have people like ourselves who are really trying to, from inside the bank, change what banking is to their customers. And so, it's a very diverse industry in terms of what they're looking to accomplish. We've even come up with recently this framework around how we think about and really talk to our customers about how they transform and the levels of transformation that they can go through. And for us, it's essentially a four-level transformation starting with very small and pointed technology innovations that allow them to drive innovation in very fragmented bits and pieces, for lack of a better term, up to and including they're going to transform everything or become a digital bank. And you can imagine there are lots of stops along the way in terms of where a bank is and where they want to end up as part of their strategy. CHAD: From a product perspective and managing change, do you get a lot of custom features from individual, either clients or potential clients? And how do you manage that if you do? ADAM: The way I think about it is that we certainly get a lot of requests from our customers, and every customer likes to think that they are different and unique. In reality, there's a strong theme to almost all of the requests that we get. And personally, I think that's part of what our job is as a product leader is to really understand how to create themes out of the individual requests and provide a platform back to the market that addresses as many of those in a more holistic way and drives value across not just the individual asks but across all of the customers. And so yeah, there's some uniqueness. And certainly, we need to provide a platform that allows for that. So as an example, every bank has a slightly different view into how they want their credit policy to work and be implemented, but the framework around how you make credit decisions, how I get data into the platform. How do I create a credit matrix? And how do I then decide the exact offer terms to drive out of that? Like, that's a standard capability. And so we're innovating on that based on the individual features, but it's really not with an eye towards providing a specific custom feature to individual customers. It's more providing a flexible platform that allows them to configure the nuance but in a general theme that's going to help them be a better business. CHAD: So in the U.S., we had a specific program launched, PPP loans, in the pandemic to help support businesses. And I know thoughtbot we participated in that and went through that process. I don't think our bank was using Numerated. But I know that the bank really maybe...because they weren't using Numerated, [laughs] they needed to bring together an entirely new application interface very, very quickly in order to be able to take our application to that. And I think that Numerated was right there at the start of that. ADAM: Yes. CHAD: Talk about something custom maybe quickly. ADAM: [laughs] CHAD: What did pulling that together look like? ADAM: So maybe to take a step back if I could first and just paint a picture for you because you're right, it was kind of a unique and incredible period of time. We were fortunate in our line of work because we are all about helping banks transform how they lend to businesses. We had the base platform already built and established that allowed businesses to apply for loans on our platform. Even before the pandemic, we were one of the leading technology platforms for processing SBA loans. So we were uniquely positioned for the opportunity as it results to PPP. At the start of the pandemic, we had approximately 17 customers using our platform. Fast forward six months later, we had 135. And so, to your point around there were a large number of institutions looking for a new application solution overnight, I think that shows you how aggressively banks needed a solution. And there was an opportunity for us to offer our platform to be that. I think the other thing to recognize as part of the backdrop anyway is this was a crazy time if you think back to where we were in the pandemic. No one knew what life was going to look like in a week. And most businesses, especially smaller ones, didn't know if they were going to have a business. And so for us, that also provided the opportunity and maybe a little bit of the confidence in saying, "You know, we have nothing to lose. We're well-positioned. And what else are we going to do? Because it's not like people are making other loans for the next couple of months. Let's just go own this". And so I think it was the combination of us making that recognition, having a really good base platform that had familiarity with the SBA, had familiarity with business lending, and with a team that then could really acutely focus on solving this one problem for as many customers as possible. And by the way, have the emotional impact of not only helping banks but knowing that we're basically helping hundreds of thousands of businesses stay afloat through probably the craziest time in our country's history. And so that's really what got us going. And then there was a ton of work to your point around customization around building out the platform. But the one thing we've tried to do from the beginning is hold true to some of the foundational vision that I mentioned earlier. Like, we don't want to be in the business of custom software. That's not a winning proposition for us or our customers. And so, as much as it was maybe hard at times, throughout PPP, we were always thinking about okay, so we have to make these changes to support this crazy never-before-seen lending program. But how can we do it in a way that's going to set us up to serve the businesses in a year or two when this whole pandemic thing is over? Because PPP is not going to last forever, but our customers are. The businesses are still going to need credit. So whatever we're doing as much as possible, let's be building a foundation that gets us well beyond PPP. And so we were using it as really a catalyst to build a bigger business even while we were helping customers through the pandemic. CHAD: One of the things that I really appreciated, and I have an outside perspective on it, but I really...and people can always do better. ADAM: Yes. [laughs] CHAD: But I thought it was one of the rare circumstances where everyone realized the urgency of the situation: government, banks, everybody. And there was a real willingness to realize, well, we've got to do something. If we try to figure it out all right now, it's going to take too long. So let's just do something, and we'll work out the details later. And so I think there was a willingness, and from a product perspective, my guess would be that allowed you to work iteratively too. ADAM: It did. It was [laughs], I think in some ways a blessing and a curse. CHAD: [laughs] ADAM: Because I can tell you that the number of times my team would get a set of new capabilities, which listen, were great for the customers. It made everything better for the businesses that needed help, so I would never want it any other way. But the number of times that those new capabilities were announced by the SBA on a Friday night and were expected to be live on Monday morning, let's just say it was more frequent than I would ever like to relive. [laughs] And I can remember, especially going into the second round of PPP, it just so happened that all that was happening between Thanksgiving and Christmas in a year where all families wanted to do was spend time with each other after a crazy year had gone by. But we didn't get that luxury, unfortunately. We had a job to do, and that was to make sure that we were ready for the next round. And so it did come with a lot of cost in terms of we had to work really hard to make it happen. But to your point, it allowed us to iterate. And I give the government credit, too, particularly the SBA. They could have, for example, just launched the program and then launched more money into it and stood still, but they didn't do that. To your comment, they had to get live as quick as possible. And so that first round of PPP, there were more technology hiccups. The SBA had some volume constraints. They couldn't really handle the performance. We ended up having to govern our application submissions because otherwise, the SBA couldn't handle it. There were other challenges in terms of how we were validating data. But that got better month by month. And certainly, by the time we got to the forgiveness part of the process and then the next round of PPP the following winter, they actually invested in completely ripping out their legacy API and providing us in the tech community a modern RESTful interface that was much easier, much more performant. And so, even though the volume got even crazier as we went through the program, it actually became easier for us to deliver. The first round, we were literally working around the clock because the SBA was having issues. We couldn't get enough documents through DocuSign and whatever else. We did, I want to say, close to 3 times the volume in the next round a year later but at about 15% of the energy because we had just improved that much in less than a year. And it wasn't just Numerated; it was Numerated working with our partners in government and elsewhere to just get the process that much smoother for our customers. CHAD: Were there things that you needed to do at Numerated? I mean, to go from 17 customers to more than 130 that quickly, I assume that there were some scaling challenges for you along the way. ADAM: There was. And I will say this: we were blessed to have a really good technical infrastructure in place that allowed us to scale on the infrastructure side without a ton of problems. We were able to essentially stand up new environments in our infrastructure relatively quickly and easily and even handle the peak volume of PPP, which was exponentially higher than anything we had ever done on the platform. That was not a problem for us. Where we had to scale is in two areas, one from a technical standpoint was how we were interacting with our technical partners. I mentioned already the need to govern how we were submitting applications to the SBA. We worked very closely with DocuSign to essentially put rate caps on how many documents we were generating at any given time and essentially spread the volume because none of us had dealt with that or dealt with that kind of volume before. And that's where we had technical challenges were in the interfaces and working with partners to make sure everything lined up well. So that was one area, got through it pretty well. And ultimately, like I said, for the second round, we were smooth sailing. The other area to your point around standing up all the banks was how we implemented the customers. Our typical implementation cycles going into the pandemic were multiple months. We had to stand up all over the PPP banks in less than two weeks. And so that took a combination of...I'll call it technical delivery. So we essentially created a cookie-cutter deployment and then used a deployment strategy to push that to all of the new customers all at once that we didn't have before. And we were able to create that relatively quickly. The other was we had to take a much harder stance with our customers than we had ever done around look; everyone's getting the same thing. It's government-mandated anyway, but it's going to be exactly the same. And other than the white-labeling that we, of course, gave everybody, you might want slightly different process around the workflow, around the approval. You're going to have to take the same thing that everybody else is because we just don't have time to configure the nuance across 100 banks. And so luckily, to your earlier comment around, everybody just realized we were in this unique time, we do what we have to do, and we got through it. Our banks were very willing to do that. But that was the other change we had to do to really see this scale through. Mid-Roll Ad: Now that you have funding, it’s time to design, build and ship the most impactful MVP that wows customers now and can scale in the future. thoughtbot Lift Off brings you the most reliable cross-functional team of product experts to mitigate risk and set you up for long-term success. As your trusted, experienced technical partner, we’ll help launch your new product and guide you into a future-forward business that takes advantage of today’s new technologies and agile best practices. Make the right decisions for tomorrow, today. Get in touch at: thoughtbot.com/liftoff CHAD: If you're comfortable talking about architecture a little bit, do you have a shared sort of platform that everyone is on? Or, for each of the customers you have, do they have their own instance? ADAM: So we've made the decision, mostly because of our regulated industry; we felt like it was safer, so each customer gets their own database. We do keep everyone's data completely isolated to protect their information and give them the utmost confidence that it is protected. But we have a shared application layer. And so, our web servers are shared multi-tenant instances. And so it's essentially a combined environment where we're both sharing some resources but then also deploying individual databases and then the configuration because outside of PPP, it is unique bank by bank. And so, the configuration gets deployed within each bank's individual environment. CHAD: Cool. I've worked on systems like that before, and they can certainly present...especially when you need to scale them quickly, and you've got a lot of new customers being added. You better hope that it's been automated. [laughs] ADAM: Yes. And luckily, we had a good amount of automation in place during PPP or even going into it, I should say, but of course, PPP stretched that. And so we've just continued to get better and better as a couple of years have gone by. CHAD: So the second PPP came through. It's in the forgiveness period now, so that's winding down. So Numerated were at that point you alluded to earlier, which is when you were doing PPP, you realized it's not going to be around forever. Let's lay the groundwork now to help customers in the future. We're sort of at that point now, right? ADAM: Yes. CHAD: So what does that look like for you? ADAM: So it's essentially expanding the portfolio of loans that our customers can leverage our platform to execute. And maybe to say that better, if you look back prior to PPP, we got our start with small small business lending. And what I mean by that is loans under $250,000 that can be highly automated. That's where Numerated got its start working with Eastern first 15 customers, saw the value in getting extreme efficiency and delivering essentially capital to their businesses in a number of days instead of weeks. That's what we were great at, very similar to what PPP was, by the way, which was getting money to people in a number of hours in some cases. But we knew that that was never the vision for what we wanted to be or what our banks needed in the business banking segment. Ultimately, they want that same level of use efficiency experience for all of their business loans. But in order to support that, there are a number of capabilities that we needed to build into our platform to handle that. Underwriting gets increasingly complicated when you are underwriting loans at 500,000, a million, or $5 million. The businesses get more complicated. The collateral gets more complicated. The entire process just becomes more sophisticated. But that's what banks want, and by the way, that's what businesses want. They don't want to have a great experience when they're a little bit smaller, and they've taken out a $100,000 loan and then have the experience be crap two years later when they come back, and they've taken out a million-dollar loan. And so, that has always been our vision. We've had the fortune of being able to do really well on PPP and essentially just accelerate that vision. And so that's what we're working on right now is really building a loan origination system that allows our customers to transform how they lend to businesses in entirety. We have been building out all of the sophistication I mentioned around underwriting. We have recently acquired a company called Fincura based out of the Boston area. They automate spreading. If you're not familiar with what spreading is, it basically takes either paper or PDF versions of a bank's financial statements, and it turns them into really critical financial ratios that help banks understand the creditworthiness and the risk associated with the business. So you can imagine what that is. It's taking OCR, technology, AI, and basically taking what were PDFs and converting them into scores that can then be used to automate and drive efficiency in the credit decision, again, all part of being able to then really transform how banks are doing all of their business lending. But that's what we're working on now, converting all of the PPP customers to use the non-PPP, for lack of a better phrase, parts of the platform and really helping them change how their businesses look at them in terms of the opportunity to access credit. CHAD: So I think it's probably worth noting you made the decision to join Numerated right before the pandemic hit. ADAM: That's correct. CHAD: And so you joined when? ADAM: My last day at my previous company happened to be the day we closed the office due to the pandemic. I had obviously made the decision prior to that. But then, my first day on the job at Numerated was the second day of PPP. So essentially, you know, call it a week after everybody had gone home for what became the better part of the next year to two years. CHAD: So I assume making a decision to join a new company, you're going to be the chief product officer. You've had a lot of conversations about what the vision is and what you're going to do. And you're going into a business where hey, there are 17 customers, and we're going to scale. But you probably didn't guess what was going to happen ended up happening. ADAM: No. [laughs] CHAD: So I imagine like part of your vision for what you were going to do both as a company and as an individual must have gotten put on hold. ADAM: It's funny, yes and no. So I will say no to your lead in there. There were certainly times before I started where I was calling Dan our founder and CEO. And I was probing him and pushing him like, is this still a thing? [laughs] Are we really going to go do this? Not realizing what PPP was and really what it was going to mean for our business. So there was that period of time where I wasn't sure. I knew it was going to be different, but I didn't know what that meant yet. Once I understood what was happening and what we were doing, I actually never felt like it was putting anything on hold. And I can come back to the fact that it put some elements of our business on hold. But for me and why I joined and the vision I had, I was coming to help the team really expand what the platform could do for banks and their business customers and to accelerate the number of ways we could help. I have prior experience working at Capital One and Pegasystems with a lot of the systems and the processes that we were helping to reinvent at Numerated. And so, my vision was always to come and build off of those past experiences and accelerate what we were doing in this specific small business segment. PPP, in a lot of ways, just accelerated that. It took what would have probably been three to five years’ worth of market adoption in terms of understanding what digital transformation was going to look like, getting customers fully comfortable with a more digital experience, getting comfortable with a more data-driven approach to decision-making. And the pandemic forced all of that to happen in weeks. CHAD: Well, people couldn't even go into the bank to turn in their paperwork. It had to be done remotely. The staff wasn't there either. ADAM: And the staff no longer could look at paper financial statements because they couldn't get paper financial statements. And so everything changed overnight. One of our customers has told us at multiple customer events since he's like, "You guys, you let the rabbit out of the hat, and it's not going back." It just changed overnight what was happening in the industry. And then, for us, it gave us all of this extra opportunity to invest and invest more in what we wanted to go do. Our team, when I joined, was about 40 to 45 people. Our team now is 145 people. And our engineering team went from a little over 20 to just under 60. So we have exponentially changed the rate in which we're innovating and going after things. And so, for me, it's just accelerated and made things more exciting. The one other comment I'll make in terms of putting things on hold it did put some elements of the business on hold because every one of our customers stopped thinking about what I'll call traditional business lending and focused 100% for the better part of 18 months on getting through the pandemic. And even once PPP was done, there was another six to nine months where banks were trying to figure out, are we really out of the pandemic? Are we ready to start lending the way we used to? Do we need to rethink risk? Because these businesses are all different now than they were two years ago. The things that made a business risky two years ago are different now. And so there was also a little bit of a hangover as our customers internalized within their own walls what it meant to get back into lending. And so, it did put some elements of that on hold. We were fortunate, though, that we grew so much through PPP. And we actually kept adding what I'll call core customers, not just PPP customers, during that period that our growth actually accelerated. And it's been really good for us. CHAD: That's great. You mentioned the team growth that you've had. Different companies are organized in different ways. As Chief Product Officer, where do you sit within the organization and relative to the engineering team? ADAM: So at Numerated, my responsibility includes all of the product management as well as the engineering organization. So I'm responsible with my teams for everything from initial product strategy, the product design. I have all of the UX and design team as well as then all of the execution, the delivery of the platform as well. CHAD: So does that mean that there's VP of engineering in your organization or some sort of person like that that's working closely with you? ADAM: Sort of. So I have...basically, it divides more at the director level. So I have a couple of VPs that work for me that have a combination of product and engineering, both experience, expertise, and responsibility. But then their teams have product managers, and then we have directors of engineering that then manage their individuals from teams. I also have a group of former bankers. They're product managers but act as consultants to those organizations. And that's where we get all of our industry expertise. They've worked with the SBA. They've worked in credit offices, and they really help to influence the product roadmap across those teams as well. CHAD: So the entire engineering structure also being under the chief Product Officer, I would say that and correct me if I'm wrong, I think that's probably not how the majority of companies organize it. Do you agree with that? ADAM: I have seen both, but I would agree that it is not the majority. CHAD: I would say if there is a majority, and I agree, I've seen both too, but you might have a CTO and then VP of engineering. And so, the engineering organization goes all the way up to the C-level. And then there's a Chief Product Officer. And here's the product management and product underneath them. Was this an intentional choice from the beginning as you scaled out the team for you to have it all live under you? ADAM: It was intentional. I will give my personal view on it. I think that as we continue to evolve as technology companies, one of the hardest things for us to achieve is alignment around vision and purpose. And that drives a level of focus that I think maximizes the ability to move the business forward. And based on that premise, the places where I've seen things work the best is when there is a focal point across product and engineering within specialization underneath. Because it drives, I think, the best alignment across the organization. I will acknowledge, however, that finding leaders that can actually operate effectively in that combined role is extremely difficult because you need people that have a high degree of engineering experience so that they actually know how to build for quality, build for scale, even for things that don't immediately impact the bottom line while having enough business acumen to understand the demands of the business and how to balance those priorities against what we need to grow the business at the same time. And so, it does create a little bit of a snowflake challenge. I cannot find or replace those roles as we grow and scale nearly as quickly as I can in a divided organization. But I have found that it does help me drive clarity of priorities and purpose and ultimately focus in the organization versus the places I've worked where that hasn't been the case. CHAD: So I guess given that, then I assume you're hiring. [laughs] ADAM: We are always hiring. [laughs] We are definitely in growth mode. And we are looking for great people that can help us to build a platform and really transform how our customers are thinking about how they lend to their businesses. CHAD: Well, I agree. I think there are different structures then that can achieve it. And also, a lot of it comes down to the people but that alignment and that understanding of design, and product, and development or engineering. And ideally, people and all of those skill sets and all those teams who get it and can balance those different priorities with the business is really important, and that alignment of vision. And so there are probably different structures to get it, but that's what you're aiming for. And I think that the structure that you've set up is one which is very helpful to getting that alignment. ADAM: Agreed. Agreed. I think that while we're on the topic of the team and the culture we're trying to build out, I'll maybe use that as a way to share a few more things that we're really driving towards. You can imagine a company that has scaled the way we have and continues to grow. That presents some other organizational challenges as well. One of my firm beliefs is the fastest way to scale is to create really strong, empowered, decentralized teams. That, again, gets back to the whole vision and focus thing. They have to be rowing in the same direction. But they have to be really independent in the day-to-day. And so we've really spent a lot of time over the last, I would say, year and a half shifting to that kind of a model to where each of the teams is really embracing what their individual accountabilities are. They are really focused on how they're delivering success for the business and are able to make a lot of the day-to-day decisions. But then it falls to management, leadership, myself to make sure that when they make those decisions, they understand the context in which we're trying to drive the business so that we can do as much as we can as fast as we can but in a way that's high quality and delivers value. CHAD: Awesome. Well, I sincerely wish you all the best in that. I really appreciate you stopping by and sharing. Thank you. ADAM: Yeah, my pleasure. I appreciate the time, and good to get to know you a little bit, Chad. CHAD: If folks want to find out more, maybe apply, follow along with you; where are all the places that they can do that? ADAM: Yeah, sure. So numerated.com is where they can go and learn more about the business, and they can learn more about where we're hiring. People should check me out on LinkedIn. That's probably where I'm the most active these days. And feel free to message me as well. I'll also give you my email address if anybody wants to reach out. It's pretty simple. It's adam@numerated.com. Whether it's opinions, thoughts, or reactions to anything that I've shared today, or you just want to build a relationship, I'd love to hear from people and get to know you a little bit better. CHAD: Wonderful. You can find links to all those things, probably not Adam’s email address, in the show notes. ADAM: [laughs] CHAD: We want to protect him from those spam crawlers. But you can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for the episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Adam Kenney.
Susanna Twarog is Co-Founder and Co-CEO of SOS, which is transforming wellness on the go through a network of smart vending machines that deliver just-in-time necessities where and when you need the most. Chad talks with Susanna about wellness on the go, the unique business that they're building and what SOS can offer brands, and the biggest hurdles to overcome to get 10,000 machines up and running. SOS (https://www.worldofsos.com/) Follow SOS on TikTok (https://www.tiktok.com/@world_of_sos), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzJ_tp6e-M39_6I53xKTu8A), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/world_of_sos/) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/world-of-sos/). Follow Susanna on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/susanna-twarog-2b483ab/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Susanna Twarog, Co-Founder and Co-CEO of SOS, which is transforming wellness on the go through a network of smart vending machines that deliver just-in-time necessities where and when you need the most. Susanna, thank you for joining me. SUSANNA: Thank you, Chad. It's great to be here. CHAD: So, what makes the vending machines from SOS smart? SUSANNA: So what makes our vending machines smart? Well, I think smart and vending are typically not words that go together. And I think when we founded the company, the machines that we were looking at were outdated and old and out of stock. And to be honest, first and foremost, payment methods that are accepted by most vending machines are completely not in line with the modern consumer. So we were looking at vending machines that take quarters and cash. And as two working women on the trading floor, nobody has quarters or coins or even cash anymore. So first and foremost, we are a cashless, modern vending machine that accepts contactless and modern forms of payment. CHAD: Let's level-set a little bit about wellness on the go, what that means. What I hear when I look at...which I took a look at the product on the website, which I encourage people to do, and it's worldofsos.com. I think it gives a much better sense of this. But correct me if I'm wrong that what we're talking about here is the vending machines that might typically be in a men's or women's restroom. Is that right? SUSANNA: Absolutely. So the problem that we are in a mission to solve is to transform outdated, completely broken, ugly hardware that's existed to distribute wellness essentials like menstrual care and other wellness products in public spaces. So those old machines that look like steel box drops [chuckles] that is the business or the distribution channel that we're looking to disrupt. And so, by introducing beautiful design-first tech-enabled hardware into this space, we're completely transforming a distribution channel that has not worked or served anyone for decades at this point. CHAD: I don't even use those vending machines. But it seems to me like they're often broken, dirty, not even stocked. Is there market reasons why that's the case? SUSANNA: So, to be quite honest, I think Robina and I, when we founded the company, started to explore why hasn't this problem been solved? And the fact of the matter is the built world, and a lot of commercial real estate is designed and developed by a group of people who don't necessarily menstruate or need these products that are everyday health and wellness essentials for actually what is over half of the world's population. But the folks who design and plan these spaces are not necessarily coming at the design with a perspective of these needs. And so, honestly, Robina and I set out on a mission to say when we think about inclusive space and the world that we want to live in, we want to live in a world where not just among certain people but all people have access to health and wellness products that they need when they're not at home. So you may have everything that you need and want from the brands that you love and the ingredients that you trust in your own cabinet. But when you're on the go, and you're at work or you're traveling or entertaining, or spending time in other physical spaces that aren't your home, typically, those products aren't available, and they're very hard to access. So it's a major area for us to innovate and introduce a world that we want to live in where you can access the products you need from brands you already know and love or want to discover and try. CHAD: So building really any hardware, and I have a lot of guests who have done hardware in the past, can be a challenge, especially starting out. What you talk about in the startup industry is often like starting out small, figuring out the minimum viable product, bringing that to market to early customers, and then learning and refining. And that can be difficult to do when you're shipping something physical. So how did you approach that? SUSANNA: Robina and I approached this with a lot of intention and a lot of thought. We came from finance, business development, and sales backgrounds. Neither of us are engineers. So when we decided that we were going to found SOS and started to literally sketch out renderings for the type of hardware and design that we wanted to see in the world, initially, we were faced by a lot of people telling us to white-label products that already existed. You know, maybe don't invest in proprietary hardware or designing it yourselves. Try something that already exists. See if there's a product-market fit. And ultimately, we actually invested in and began to work with an industrial design firm from the beginning. We have seven global design patents on the hardware because we knew that without an elevated design-first piece of hardware, the network would not be well-received, would not be able to grow and exist in the places we knew it needed to be, so to be in grade A commercial real estate where hundreds of millions of dollars are spent on designing and innovating into the built world to make these spaces cutting edge and tech-enabled. And yet, if we didn't do the same with our hardware, this would just be another vending machine that got relegated to the basement or the back room, and that is not the company that we set out to build. We want to be a piece of integrated, exciting, engaging hardware and tech-enabled experience in these spaces. And so, to do that, we had to forge the path of bringing in and working with and basically investing our own money into designing a proprietary piece of hardware that could deliver the experience we knew was so integral to driving value for the company. CHAD: I assume that wasn't easy or cheap. Did you fundraise at that point to do it? Or when you say your own money, were you literally the two of you investing yourselves? SUSANNA: Absolutely. A big point of pride for me and Robina is that from the moment we founded the company through, to be quite honest, I would say the first 18 months of work, we invested our own personal savings. And this wasn't trust fund money that we'd inherited. This was truly just personal savings as young women in finance that we'd put aside, and it was the most money that either of us had ever spent on anything, was investing in ourselves and our own company. So we started...our first investments were in legal work and doing the patent search, and generating ultimately what has now been granted as seven patents for the company. So patent work was the first money we spent, and then also engaging with an industrial design firm to get our concept into CAD rendering and identify the first contract manufacturer that we worked with on the prototype. So we were able to get pretty far prior to fundraising with our own investment. And trust me, it was a big commitment from both of us. And I think the fact that as co-founders being totally in lockstep with taking some of the biggest financial risks that either of us had ever taken and doing it together, and really having equal passion and commitment and belief in what we were going to build was an exceptional part of our founding story. CHAD: I imagine you were probably a little nervous, the two of you. [chuckles] SUSANNA: You know, it felt just like we had to do it. And I think it's kind of like lightning struck in the sense that we had this moment. And from literally the moment that we stepped aside and started to map out the business, there hasn't really been a pause or self-doubt in the sense that we've really known we're going to take this as far as we possibly can. So scary, yes, but it felt like we had the conviction from the very beginning, which I know is rare and not everyone's founding story. But for us, it really was 100% the right thing to do at the time, which was we're going to make this happen. CHAD: So where did you and Robina meet? SUSANNA: So we met as colleagues first and foremost. So we were two, I would say at the time, young women working in finance, and she was my counterpart. So she had a role in London, and I was in Boston. And we worked on our basically sales and business development pipelines together as colleagues first. And ultimately, Robina relocated back to the U.S, and we became friends on the same trading floor. So really, it was a friendship that grew out of a business relationship. CHAD: Do you remember when and where this idea first came from? SUSANNA: Sure do. [chuckles] It's very close to my heart. I was in the middle of a workday faced with a frustration and inconvenient situation where I couldn't find products that I needed when I needed them at work. And it was interrupting my day for the millionth time. And you know those moments when you have a friend, and you choose the person that you run to when you are, I guess, pissed off for lack of a better word? [laughs] And we just took that moment of me saying, "This is insane. How am I dealing with this? I can't get a tampon when I need one." And our eyes lit up. And we said, "Ah, well, this is a common problem for a very important segment of the world. And we need to do something about it." CHAD: Now, it's a big leap to go from that frustration to founding a company together and actually working on it. So, how did that happen? SUSANNA: So we had that moment, and we stepped aside and said, "This is completely insane. I'm too valuable to be wasting my time worrying about this on a daily basis." And the other fun part of our relationship is that we're also two young women with disposable income. We love products; we love travel, we love entertainment. We like to have fun. We work hard; we play hard. I'm taking those two perspectives, which is like this frustration and universal need combined with consumerism. And this desire to make money, spend money is like combining the two and saying we have an opportunity to capitalize on this need and this consumer at the same time to deliver on a mission and drive value and consumer value for brands at the same time. And that really, I would say, sparked a tremendous amount of excitement and interest from Robina and myself. How incredible to have an opportunity to build a company that is really driving good, and changing the world, and elevating access to these essential products while also tapping into this consumer interest of ours in products, and brands, and emerging indie brands, and digital content, and tech. And combining them all into one company and doing so with a lot of, I would say, excitement, and optimism, and win-win-win. Making the world a better place fulfilling a passion and interest of ours at the same time and driving value, and building a company. CHAD: How far along were you in the idea stages, the legwork stages, before you both quit and started working on it full time? SUSANNA: Took the leap. Yeah, that was a really critical decision and part of our journey. We were very intentional about taking the business as far as we could while protecting our personal financial interests in the sense that, you know, retaining benefits, positioning ourselves so that the company would have the most ability to succeed. And so we actually got through to basically 2020 when we were launching our first machines before we quit and ultimately joined our Techstars Boston 2020 program. So we were, I would say, nights and weekends absolutely killing ourselves with work. We were able to raise our seed round, our pre-seed round technically, while still employed at the bank. And I would encourage others who are thinking about starting companies to maybe...in some cases; I'd say do what we did. And in other cases, I'd say it might kill you. CHAD: [laughs] SUSANNA: But I feel like whether we liked it or not, it put us in a position where we had achieved a tremendous amount of traction. We had our prototypes built and ready to be installed. And they were literally going into some of the most prestigious physical, commercial real estate locations in Boston as we were quitting. So I would say we were taking quite a bit of risk still. But we'd done everything we could to protect the company and make sure that we could get SOS where it needed to be before joining and coming on full-time. CHAD: How did you find those first places where the machines were going to be installed? SUSANNA: From the beginning, it was one of the areas of the company that we invested the most of our time in, which was that we had extensive contacts and relationships in financial services; that was our background. We had to start from scratch networking, and telling our story, and telling our vision with commercial real estate partners. So pre-product, first slide decks, first cold calls, and warm introductions all really focused on commercial real estate. So we gave ourselves a crash course in real estate owner-managers, who the national players were, and started to network a ton, which was just LinkedIn, asking for introductions, having some meetings that were successes, having others that weren't. But really, I think Robina and I had a and have a very, I guess, strong sense of salesmanship, I would say. That's a strength of ours. And so we were able to really get people excited and to believe in us and not to say sell smoke and mirrors, but we were waiting on a physical product prototype to arrive. And we were able to get believers and commitments before we actually had the product ready to demo in the market. Mid-Roll Ad: As life moves online, bricks-and-mortar businesses are having to adapt to survive. With over 18 years of experience building reliable web products and services, thoughtbot is the technology partner you can trust. We provide the technical expertise to enable your business to adapt and thrive in a changing environment. We start by understanding what’s important to your customers to help you transition to intuitive digital services your customers will trust. We take the time to understand what makes your business great and work fast yet thoroughly to build, test, and validate ideas, helping you discover new customers. Take your business online with design‑driven digital acceleration. Find out more at: url tbot.io/acceleration or click the link in the show notes for this episode. CHAD: So you already said at the beginning of the show your product is targeted or primarily for people who menstruate, and not a lot of property, commercial real estate developers, that kind of thing, are those people. So was that a struggle early on to get people excited or to find the right people? SUSANNA: It will always be a struggle, or maybe not always, but it continues to be a struggle. I do also want to make sure I share what we have built. And we have a mission to elevate access to menstrual care products, but our product is for everyone. So our actual physical network and machines we actually carry wellness essentials for everyone. So by solving this mission-based problem of access to menstrual care, we're actually building a product that serves everyone. We have products that everybody uses and needs every day. And what we see in the marketplace is that SOS really is for everyone. But to your point, I think a lot of conversations, particularly early days and even now, still is a lot of educating and educating decision-makers about the need for this amenity in inclusive space and diversity and inclusion goals. And how can you expect or corporations expect to deliver on these important metrics that their leadership teams are being asked when these essential everyday products aren't even available in their space? So there is a huge education. There are some uncomfortable conversations. Robina and I have gotten very, very good at having these direct conversations with a lot of people who maybe aren't comfortable talking about the products, but it's an important conversation that needs to happen. And if we don't have the conversation, then we're never going to get anywhere, and we're not going to be making progress. So our goal is to try to make the conversation exciting and engaging and show these leaders or decision-makers that there is a lot of brand equity that can go alongside thinking about the people in their space, what they need, and what can make their experience in physical spaces better. So that's kind of like leading leadership to a place where being part of what we're building is exciting. And it's an exciting opportunity to deliver an experience that's been long overlooked and is in need of a refresh. And so I think when we find folks who get that and are comfortable and excited to be part of the story, then that's usually where we find our best fit. CHAD: So you're now a little ways on from that period of time. So what stage would you say you're at from a company and a product perspective and a market perspective? SUSANNA: We closed our seed round fall of 2021. And that put us in a position, and that capital has taken us to a place where we're a team of 12, and that's across sort of all categories, which is sales, product, marketing, operations. And we're operating in three markets so New York, Boston, and South Florida. We are going to be doubling our network from just over 40 machines to over 100 by the end of summer. And then we'll be looking to get to closer to between 300 and 400 by the end of 2023. So we are in a phase where our prototypes went from three machines in Boston to, like I mentioned, over 40 machines on walls now across corporate locations, transit, retail, sports, and entertainment. And we are and have been investing in and developing and evolving our tech stack and our product. So we've made some changes to our hardware since our prototypes, of course, and then invested quite a bit in our tech stack on the product side. So we will continue to bring in new best-in-class software partners where appropriate and then also invest in-house in continuing to evolve our product and features that we release to the network. CHAD: Do you have a sense of, you know, currently the biggest number you mentioned is the 300 to 400 machine target. I imagine that the total possible number of machines that you could have, even just with moderate growth, is actually huge. SUSANNA: Absolutely huge. So when we talk about our five year-projection, the number that we use is like 10,000 machines. So really, we want SOS to be ubiquitous. We want SOS to be everywhere you go, and so it's a brand that you associate and you trust to deliver just-in-time necessities from brands you love when you're not at home. So that would be across, you know, as people return to offices being an enterprise amenity and being in all leading real estate locations across the categories that I mentioned and really having a connected network. So I would say, in general, vending is usually associated with white-label machines or mom-and-pop operations with snack machines, and that is really not the goal. We want to deliver an elevated experience as a brand and as a company across all of these locations so that you recognize the SOS machine. You know the experience that you're going to get. You know the perks of interacting and engaging with us as a brand and that there's a real trust and brand awareness that comes with the network as it grows. CHAD: I totally get that you're trying to do something different in this space. But what are the numbers of those traditional vending machine suppliers like? Is there a big player in this space, or is it a lot of local companies white-labeling? SUSANNA: It's a lot of local companies. And I think probably a good opportunity for me to highlight probably the biggest component of our business has to do with the media network that we're driving. So our machines are 32-inch touch screens serving interactive digital media when not being used as a point of sale. So, in addition to obviously having contact with cashless payment for the actual transactions and retail at the machines, we are serving direct campaigns and programmatic advertising across the network. And in terms of the value and the drivers behind what we're building, experiential marketing which can be a combination of digital media and physical retail distribution and sampling. And we have abilities to deliver value to brands looking for both. And in some cases, brands are looking to execute both at the same time. Others will be just looking at SOS as a unique way to drive impressions and brand awareness in spaces, and locations, and audiences that they haven't had access to in the past in this way. CHAD: What might that look like? That might be a company like an exercise equipment company or something wanting to spread awareness but not necessarily having a product to offer in the vending machine. SUSANNA: Exactly. It could be fitness, financial services, direct-to-consumer brands where the consumer matches the audience that we're reaching, but the product doesn't belong in the machine at the distribution point. So the digital media and impressions that we can drive in addition to the product type, which is we have touch screens. So we have first-party data collection opportunities, interactive campaigns, and surveys that run on our screens that are different than, for instance, a billboard that you drive by because this is a physical, interactive network. And with Instagram and Facebook advertising and first-party data being a very hot topic right now, having opt-in first-party data collection mechanisms for brands to offer sampling in a new channel is very valuable right now to a lot of the executives and CPG brands that we're talking to. CHAD: I assume that from a business perspective, that is pretty attractive to you because the business of physical goods looks like one thing, but the business of advertising is a completely different model. And the combination of those two could be pretty attractive. SUSANNA: Exactly. It's really unique about the business that we're building and what SOS can offer brands. So in order to, for instance, stand up a sampling campaign with SOS versus potentially having a street marketing team sampling, the cost and the data that we're able to collect by sampling through our network is much more valuable than potentially hiring folks to stand around and pass out product. CHAD: Yeah, there might even be some brands that aren't necessarily comfortable doing it depending on what it is, a street campaign, or consumers that might not be comfortable taking something from somebody on the street that in the privacy of a restaurant might go over a little better. SUSANNA: Absolutely. I think there's discretion in this automated retail experience for actual interaction with the physical product. And our machines and the network are, in some cases, in restrooms. In other cases, we're actually public access, and we're in amenity spaces. So these machines and the distribution channel is available in a whole host of appropriate locations and spaces. CHAD: Cool. So what's your biggest hurdle to getting to 10,000 machines? SUSANNA: Well, right now, we have a ton of demand, and the hardware is capital intensive. I'm sure there'll be people listening to this who are scared of hardware. And I would say, in general, that is certainly an obstacle to growing a hardware business. CHAD: Putting a machine in a new location is not immediately profitable. There's an expense to creating that machine and then a timeline for it to pay itself back. SUSANNA: I would say certainly. At a high level, SOS is a B2B2C business. So it’s a B2B sales lifecycle for you're building relationships selling into institutions in commercial real estate and corporations. That is the first I would say challenge, and funding the hardware and lead times with supply chain and hardware right now. It's a very hot topic, certainly hasn't been easy. So the lead times on the hardware and then funding the hardware, so exactly if it's going to be a three or four-month potential lead time on hardware and orders. Funding that order before machines are on walls and revenue can be generated on media, and our product sales or amenity fees kick in. The timing of all of that makes, I would say, our business but hardware businesses in general potentially either less attractive to investors who are looking at SaaS companies all day long and have a very different profile in terms of the company. But we're excited to be in a position where we have a very, very hot pipeline, a lot of inbound interest. I would say we're getting inbounds from best-in-class partners that we could only dream of doing business with. And they're reaching out to us to bring in the amenity. So it's an exciting position as a founder to be in to be opening your inbox and having multiple grade A inbounds a day. That's fantastic. And moving towards a place where we're happy to report that we have signed and committed machine financing in place for this next period of growth. So that opens up a lot of doors. And in terms of our journey, initially investing our own cash into getting the prototypes ready for installation in 2020 to being in a position now where we have our first machine financing vehicle in place to actually protect our equity as we grow the network, which is what we're looking to do for the remainder of this year and next. I don't know if I answered that accurately. [chuckles] But the challenges of running and operating and funding a hardware capex–intensive business is probably the biggest. CHAD: Is there a point in time where it really is that or something close to that that's holding you back, and you end up just doing this huge financing round or something in order to completely blow out the scale? SUSANNA: I think we have, and we're very keenly aware of first-mover advantage in the sense that we have, and COVID and other global macro-economic barriers have basically made it hard for a lot of companies to grow really fast right now in certain industries. So we do have a first-mover advantage right now. And I think we want to look at the next; I would say year to year and a half to get the company to a network size where we're operating profitably and then go to our Series A and really crank on the growth and get the network humming and growing really rapidly after our Series A. CHAD: So your goal would be to be operating profitably before getting to that next phase of growth. SUSANNA: We expect to right now based on what we're seeing. So the business and our performance indicates that with this equity, this next...we're basically entering a bridge round, but with this machine financing and a bridge round, we should be in good shape to do so. CHAD: Yeah, I think there are lots of different ways of doing things. But that seems to be what investors are wanting to see today. But also, I think not only is it from the market, but I think they're a little bit more...not to dwell on specific examples that I don't know too much about, but like, for example, scaling Blue Apron and a lot of the other meal box companies they were doing that when they weren't profitable. So they had never really shown that they could actually be profitable, but there were real costs to scale as well like you have. SUSANNA: I think for many reasons, it makes sense for us, I think, to get the business to profitability. And a lot of it is selfish, you know, thinking about the company and our current equity stakeholders. But we don't want to be in a position where we dilute ourselves out of the business effectively with growth capital when we haven't proven or made the company profitable. So, anyway, that's our goal. And I think we're feeling pretty optimistic about it right now despite the fact that I know the market and the world feels like it's falling apart [chuckles] for a million different reasons. But we actually, surprisingly and shockingly, feel pretty optimistic right now. CHAD: Well, I really wish you the best with that, and I look forward to following along and seeing all the good news along the way. If folks want to find out more about SOS or get in touch with you, where are the best places for them to do that? SUSANNA: So definitely, I think you mentioned our website, that's worldofsos.com. And you can feel free to email us at hello@worldofsos.com. CHAD: Awesome. Thanks so much for stopping by and sharing your story and your wisdom with us. I really appreciate it. SUSANNA: Great. Thank you so much for having me. CHAD: You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Susanna Twarog.
Anna Spearman is the Founder of Techie Staffing, which connects high-quality technology talent with high-caliber clients. Chad talks with Anna about founding and growing the company, immediately after graduating college, during a pandemic, reputation building, and facing skepticism around her lack of track record in recruiting, and finding and providing talent for clients as a white-glove service. Techie Staffing (https://techiestaffing.com/) Follow Techie Staffing on Twitter (https://twitter.com/StaffingTechie), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/techiestaffing), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/techiestaffing/) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/techie-staffing/). Follow Anna on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/annaspearman/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Anna Spearman, the Founder of Techie Staffing, which connects high-quality technology talent with high-caliber clients. Anna, thanks so much for joining me. ANNA: Thank you so much for inviting me, Chad. CHAD: In theory, at the surface level, Techie Staffing is probably fairly straightforward in terms of what you do. But I'm curious how you got started. ANNA: Yes, of course. So I can't believe I'm saying this, but it's been two years. Two years ago, I was, during that time, attending the University of Virginia, where I was majoring in computer science with a minor in entrepreneurship. And in the spring of 2020, I was planning on coming back home to...I was born and raised in Los Angeles, and I was planning to come back home for spring break. And I was finishing out my second semester of senior year. So I was planning my [chuckles] victory lap of going back home, taking a little bit of a rest time, and then coming back to UVA to finish my degree, graduate, and move on to a new job in Los Angeles. But unfortunately, as my plane was landing in Los Angeles, we kept hearing about COVID. And so the pandemic hit in the middle of my spring break. And during that time, I had to finish my second semester of senior year remote. It was very stressful, but when I finished the degree, I was so fulfilled. But unfortunately, there was a rapid dwindling of entry-level tech and product roles. I initially either wanted to be a software engineer or a product manager or be a software engineer that transitioned into a technical product manager. But unfortunately, once the pandemic hit, companies weren't willing to ramp up entry-level talent. Companies didn't really know what was going to happen in the future, and everybody was remote. So it was just a really confusing time. But while I was searching through different job boards trying to find new opportunities, especially entry-level opportunities, I found just a wealth of senior tech jobs, specifically with companies that were thriving due to the pandemic. During that time, companies like Peloton, Discord, Zoom, they were all soaring due to the pandemic. So I had heard about contingent recruiting in the past. My biggest dream for a new opportunity for myself graduating out of college was just to learn something new every day because I've always had a very much an interdisciplinary background. I've never been able to stay in one area. I've always loved to try different things. So with a little bit of a background recruiting at a past summer internship as well as wanting to utilize my entrepreneurship minor...I'm actually a fourth-generation woman entrepreneur. So definitely, growing up, creating my own business was my dream. So really, that was my main goal. I thought I was going to transition from a current role into entrepreneurship, but I had my back against the wall. So I just thought, why not start now? So I created Techie Staffing, a technology staffing agency specializing in direct hire placements nationwide. I basically had my virtual graduation; then I took a week. And then, I got started creating the website, establishing the business paperwork, as well as developing strategic partnerships with senior technical recruiters that had full candidate pipelines to fill incoming job requisitions. And I basically started off with nothing. I had no contacts, no network, just nothing at all. And I was really starting just fresh. So I really had to really spend a lot of time networking and developing relationships as well as just learning and mastering full lifecycle recruiting, especially with engineering since there's such a supply and demand issue for software engineers. So you're just consistently following up and contacting people that could potentially be interested in your companies. But it really blew up. As I was establishing everything in 2020 from summer to the end of 2020, it was 2021 when it really blew up where I contacted this founder during the time they had raised a Series B 50 million, which was amazing, and they were going through a hiring sprint. So we got connected fairly quickly. And with just great team synergy, we were actually able to place five people in one month, and it was frontend, backend, and full-stack developers. So that really jump-started Techie Staffing. And then after that, we worked with...we're now working with Fortune 500 companies as well as high-growth startups and really building a diversified portfolio, and we’re also a certified woman-owned business which I'm so proud of because there aren't really a lot of women or even just women of color that are founders. So I was really happy to get that certification, really proud of that as well. I always say all the time to everybody it's super stressful, but it's so rewarding at the same time. And I do believe that it's honestly, you know, I know the pandemic has been super hard on people. And it's been such a change and such a shift. But there is still a part of me that is so grateful for making that pivot because I really found something that I feel like I really enjoy doing every day. CHAD: That's great. I really commend you on everything you've done so far. And I'm excited about what you're going to do in the future. You now have grown where you're multiple people on your team. ANNA: Yeah, so we actually hired two new people fairly recently. I did have one direct hire recruiter working with me. So now it's officially a team of four. I did develop the strategic part. I do still have some strategic partnerships as well because on that part, at first, I was partnering with recruiters that were independent, so who were a little bit more entrepreneurial so that we could split the placement fee. But it's still better to just have full-time employees. I'm so excited to have two new additional hires, and it's still new for me. So I'm really looking forward to growing together in terms of growing Techie Staffing and growing into being a full life cycle recruiter because it wasn't that long ago when I was in that same exact spot. And it's so amazing. It still blows my mind to this day how two years ago, thinking about interviewing candidates or selling to clients, and now what I've evolved in. It's been absolutely amazing. So I'm so happy to see their journey and seeing them transition into being technical recruiters and also making a pivot in their career as well, which that's still blowing my mind a little bit. I'm sure you know founding thoughtbot and really building that from the ground up. So it's just amazing seeing that infrastructure. It just really brings a brighter future as well. CHAD: So what kind of people do you look for when you're looking to add to your team? Are you bringing on people who have experience with recruiting? Or are you bringing on people who are transitioning into it? ANNA: I would say for Q1 and Q2 of 2022 and even a little bit beforehand, since there was a surge in demand for everything and tech companies were just scaling like crazy, there was very much a competitive market for recruiters, specifically technical recruiters. Because that's what companies were really looking for to scale their engineering and product teams. So it was very, very competitive to recruit for a technical recruiter. So now you see agencies now who are hiring people who can have the DNA for a technical recruiter but not necessarily have direct experience, which I think can be really, really cool. Because like I said, like two years ago, I knew absolutely nothing, and now I feel very much confident in the full life cycle. So I think that's really cool to have people be able to pivot into a really cool industry where you're really learning something new every day, and you're speaking to really interesting people. We specialize in senior up until C-suite, so yeah, learning from people who are senior all the way up to Director, VP. So it's really interesting. So when I was approaching hiring, I really wanted to find someone who had that DNA that can potentially transition to being a technical recruiter. And that DNA would be, you know, it doesn't have to be personality but just really interacting with engineers, just maybe being a self-starter. I would say great communication, and lastly, I would say just really hungry. Yes, I would say hungry. Because if you're really hungry and you're really willing to learn and be open, so openness as well, then you can really understand the rules or just the lifecycle and the process of being a recruiter, and then you can change people's lives. I actually had one...It was about a year ago, I was working with a Fortune 500 company, and I recruited this guy, and I led him through the process. And it was about maybe a month later when he told me I had basically changed his life. Him and his family were now moving to Atlanta, and it was a new role, and it was just a fresh start. And he was just telling me how appreciative he was of me, and so that really hit home. So I think for those two new hires, I'm so excited to have them get super engaged and be able to change other people's lives as well under the Techie Staffing name, of course. CHAD: You mentioned early on that you're contingent recruiting. So correct me if I'm wrong, but that means that you get paid when you place somebody, when someone gets hired from the company that hires them. ANNA: Yes. CHAD: But then you also mentioned that these people who you're bringing onto your team are full-time. So how does the compensation structure typically work for them? ANNA: Oh, compensation, we have them on salary, but they do have commission. So we wanted to really give; like I said, I want us to grow together. So I do provide commission for each placement they'll place just to really provide incentive. Like I said, it's so early. I want us to think of each other just as teammates and a team because we're all building towards the same goal. So just really wanted to provide incentives where they're really feeling like they're almost owning it full life cycle as well. Because like I said, it's early on, and these can be really strong pillars in the future. So there is salary, but there's also that commission as well to just really provide that incentive. And I know for me personally, incentive can be awesome, so definitely trying to provide that motivation and having them really feel like they're an integral part. CHAD: What's the harder part of your business? Or are they equally hard, finding new clients versus finding people who want to work with you on the candidate side? ANNA: On the business development side, I would say it was harder perhaps in the beginning because I just so was starting with nothing, really. I had just graduated from college. And a lot of agency owners they previously have maybe worked at a really cool tech startup, or maybe they've been working on their agencies for the past 5 or 10 years. They have previous years of experience, but I didn't have that. So I had to convey another method of just really networking, really meeting people, and just really knowing my stuff and having a handle on it. I know maybe a lot of people say, like, just fake it until you make it because then once you make it, and then you get that experience, then you can transfer that experience to new experiences as well. So at first, it was really just building myself up and building the Techie Staffing brand so that we could acquire those clients. In terms of the candidate side, I would say Techie Staffing, and one of the things and part of our brand that we love to portray is that we are the agency that has the companies with the best employer branding. Because like I said, with the supply and demand issue for the software engineers, it is so competitive to attract them to new opportunities. There are just so many companies that are contacting them multiple times a day. So there has to be at least a little bit of a shine or a little bit of a differentiator for companies that you're recruiting for. So we actually specialize in companies that are Series B and above that do have that established employer branding where engineers are really interested in joining that company, so that's just the thing. It's like really having companies that have strong employer branding and being able to follow up. Follow-ups are really, really important when it comes to engaging engineers because, like I said, it's just a super competitive market and just trying to provide them a great white-glove experience. There are some agencies that fall a little bit too close to the client-side where the client is always right. And there are some that fall too much to the candidate side where the candidate is right, but we really want to be a balanced middleman where we're just trying to find the compromise and find the best solution for everybody. So that's the real important part of it of just really providing them with a great experience and showing them that we care and that we're rooting for them. Because it sometimes does surprise me when candidates can be a little...maybe this is a part of me being new. But that's kind of an advantage, too, because I'm still paying attention to detail. That's where my computer science major comes in. It's like constantly trying to stay in tune with candidates and what they need, so just trying to provide a great experience in general. And I'm sure you feel that way with your clients. You're a consultancy as well where you're trying to be B2B and contact these different companies. So how do you conduct business development and really differentiate yourself? CHAD: We focused a lot on reputation building, so blogging, creating open source so that we don't need, fortunately, to cold contact people. And when we do, we're fortunate enough that they might already know about us. And so it's an easier conversation to have because they may already be reading our blog, or they may already be using some of our open source in their product. And so it becomes an easier conversation to have. But the majority of our clients actually come to us when they have a need because we're fortunate enough to have worked to be at the top of the list. ANNA: Definitely, yeah. And I'm still doing that, just reputation building. With one of our Fortune 500, we're doing incredibly well with them to the point where we're filling their pipelines, and we have majority of our candidates in their pipeline. So that's what we're really working on right now is just consistently...and I know like with any business, you have to just constantly build that reputation. So I especially just try to provide a great experience for candidates because they can also be hiring managers as well, so just really providing that white-glove experience. And also, a cool differentiator we always like to showcase is like, I'm a computer science major. And actually, the two people that I just hired have a tech background. So it's not like tech is entirely foreign to us. We've engaged with programming languages. We've coded projects. So we do have some form of understanding when it comes to certain technologies or certain projects that certain engineers are working on. And that's what really gets me excited to speak with engineers because it's so cool and interesting hearing about them working on their projects and working on projects that directly affect me and the products that I'm interacting with. So it's so cool to hear about their...I can understand a bit. And so that's another thing we have with Techie Staffing is really finding people who have a bit of a tech background so at least they have a little bit of knowledge or an understanding of what projects and can be able to really share and convey that to clients that are looking for this talent. CHAD: You mentioned it's a really competitive market now. And as a company who probably has multiple clients, how do you minimize or how do you deal with the potential competition for the limited supply among your own clients? ANNA: Among my own clients, I will say that right now we don't have...for the roles that we're working on for each client, they're not very similar or too, too similar, which is a good thing. We would like it in the future where we could have the same role, but we can understand how that can be a little tricky as well. CHAD: And how do they differ then? Are they differing by the technology experience that they're looking for or the sort of level of the role? How are they different? ANNA: It could be technology, difference of the role. So, for example, for a Fortune 500 company that we're working with, we'll work more with UX, data science, data science roles, as well as...so UX, data science. And then for high-growth startups, mostly with them, they're really looking for back-end engineers, but overall just engineering so frontend, backend, DevOps. We are working potentially to do engineering or more engineering-heavy for our Fortune 500 companies. We have recently been working on a VP of engineering. So for Fortune 500 for now, we've been working more with leadership roles especially, and for high-growth, it's been more engineering IC. But we would like to transition that in the future to have it kind of...or have roles that maybe some candidates could go to this company, and some candidates can go to that startup. And then another differentiator could be or what makes our clientele different from each other is for high-growth startups, especially for engineering ICs, they're really looking for candidates that come from high-growth startups who just understand the current company where they are, and how they're scaling during that period of time around that series B and series C. That's the time to really scale. And Fortune 500 companies they can be open to startups, but for the most part, especially sometimes for leaders who need to have a certain amount of direct reports, they're more looking for people from larger companies. So that would be one way to kind of separate it and so we're not having candidates almost be where they have to compete with candidates within our own company. Because with the difference in the leveling of companies, there's just a difference in what kind of candidates that they're looking for. Mid-Roll Ad: Are your engineers spending too much time on DevOps and maintenance issues when you need them on new features? We know maintaining your own servers can be costly and that it’s easy for spending creep to sneak in when your team isn’t looking. By delegating server management, maintenance, and security to thoughtbot and our network of service partners, you can get 24x7 support from our team of experts, all for less than the cost of one in-house engineer. Save time and money with our DevOps and Maintenance service. Find out more at: url tbot.io/devops CHAD: When I was first starting thoughtbot, I really felt like I needed to take every client that we could get because we were just starting out. We needed to make money. We needed to build a reputation. And so, I felt like we needed to say yes to every client. Over the years, I learned that that was actually watering us down, and it made us less successful. And the more we were clear about who we were, and what we did, and what clients we were best for, the more successful we were. Have you gotten to the point where you needed to turn down clients? ANNA: Because I do such targeted biz dev, we will contact companies that we personally want to work with. But I will say in the beginning, there were some companies that were a lot smaller that, just like you said, you just felt the need to want to rack up a client list. And you just are ready to go and wanting to work with someone. It really motivated me to really take a look and really go deep into the type of clients that we want. So, for example, really, really early-stage companies can have a really, really hard time hiring because, like I said, employer branding is so, so important. And so usually what they'll have is maybe like mission, but they won't really have salary. Or they won't really have the employer branding of the company of candidates either knowing about the company or being able to search the company really quickly and seeing the platform that the company is building and seeing how strong it is. So it's really, really hard to recruit for those stages. I mean, it is possible, but it's just really hard. And then at the same time for these early-stage companies, they really want to, which I totally understand, you know, when you're having your probably 8th, 9th, or 10th engineer and being on the founding team, you really want a strong engineer because that's your platform, that's your baby. You don't want anybody that, you know, it could potentially maybe cause problems, or they really want somebody there they can trust. And so it's hard, you know like I said -- CHAD: But they might not be able to afford that. [laughs] ANNA: Yes, they might either not be able to afford it, or they also cannot interview fast enough in order to just get the offer in their hands. Because I understand they really want to have them speak to the entire team and have them have an in-depth process because it's very much an important role. But these candidates and startups are moving so fast right now where I will speak to a candidate one day, and he or she or they'll probably say, "Oh, you know, I'm passively looking. I'm not really actively looking." And maybe a week and a half to two weeks later, they're like, "Oh, I actually have two offers in hand." So it goes really, really fast versus earlier stage; it can just go a little bit slower because they're just really taking the time to go more in-depth and see if this prospective candidate is the right fit, which is totally understandable. But it was just really hard for us as contingent trying to find that candidate, that perfect candidate for them as well as trying to keep candidates warm and keep them interested when some companies just have like mission. So now, in the future, I've just really, like I said, Techie Staffing, we specialize from Series B and above. And I really just make sure during business development exploratory chats that I'm really going in-depth and making sure I understand the roles that they're prioritizing their time to hire. So if they have a long, long interview process and a really, really low salary in terms of the competitive market, then I may not be as interested in that startup as opposed to another startup whose interview process timeline could be about a week and a half to two weeks. And it doesn't have to be absolutely amazingly competitive base salary but just a fairly competitive salary with a great timeline for time to hire. So that's been my way of just condensing or just being a little bit more pickier in terms of clients in the future. Were there any certain clients for you where you started working with them, and you were like, "Oh, maybe I shouldn't have," that's now caused you to be a little bit more pickier for clients in the future? CHAD: Part of it was the kind of work. So we really wanted to be writing software. But just starting out, I also had a background in sort of IT support. And so, when I was reaching out, particularly to past clients, they might say, "You built our website. Now can you help us with purchasing a computer or setting up a computer network in our office?" I felt compelled to say, "Yes," because I felt like we needed all the work we could get. But by doing that work that wasn't really what we wanted to be doing, we were not only less happy in our work, but it was taking time and attention away from the work that we really wanted to be doing. The other was values and practices, which took a little bit longer to form a real understanding of what our values were and the practices that we believe in. But now there's a pretty clear list of the kinds of companies that...what we say at thoughtbot is that we want to work on things that deserve to exist in the world. And so there's a whole bunch of industries that they might not even be actively doing harm in the world, but they are the ones that we wouldn't work in. But even if it's just not a positive contribution to the world, it's probably not going to be something that we're excited to work on. ANNA: That's been an exciting trend, actually, to speak with engineers about. I've started seeing that trend where engineers are saying, "I don't want to create anything evil," or "I just want to do good." And that's been a really awesome selling point for some teams. It definitely is a cherry on top where engineers are really looking for social impact. And the cool part is they have so many opportunities that are coming towards them that they can really pick and choose which one. So to find people who are really looking for social good and just really mission-driven products is amazing to see. And I'm really happy with the work...I'm actually working with a data science team for AI ethics. And that's been really interesting hearing some people talk about their projects and hearing about how data can really not only just strengthen bias but also can just really produce results that can harm certain groups of people, which is so interesting. And it can be something so, so small that I haven't even noticed at all, but that can lead to a big difference. CHAD: Yeah, we've had several episodes about that. ANNA: And it's amazing. And it really is just a huge difference with something so small. And as a woman of color, I'm always aware of what's going on in terms of just ethical practices or just fairness and seeing bias. But in terms of data, seeing something so so small can affect just a whole group of underrepresented people is just amazing to see. But it's also amazing that people or data scientists are now aware of it, and now they're changing it so that it no longer...at least they'll be able to alleviate that bias. CHAD: I want to ask a little bit more about that, and then I want to talk about some market trends. But if you're comfortable, I'm curious; you already mentioned you were just out of college when you were getting started. So there was skepticism around your lack of track record in recruiting. And you've mentioned that you are a woman of color. And so I think as engineers, as people in the market, we probably have this image in our head of what a typical recruiter looks like in terms of attitude, and values, and demographics. And you don't fit that mold in almost any way, basically. Is this actually a positive for you now, or is it actually still hard? Are there companies that are actively seeking out to work with you because they want that different approach? Or are you still facing that skepticism? ANNA: I'm still facing that skepticism. I actually created Techie Staffing around the time of summer 2020, where Black Lives Matter, where George Floyd happened. And it was really interesting because I was entering the corporate workplace. I went to a really wealthy private school in Los Angeles. And I went to the University of Virginia. So I survived two PWIs which means predominantly White institutions. So I thought I had not seen it all, but I thought I had maybe experienced those experiences of bias and understood it a little bit more. But when I went to the corporate workplace and the diversity inclusion campaigns were happening, it was just really confusing because it's hard specifically for engineering and product specifically because it's so new that there is a really, really hard time to find diverse talent. That's why I honestly believe that it's just really trying to educate underrepresented communities to understanding all of the different diverse types of roles and opportunities that you can encounter in the tech industry so, for example, like UX, UX design, UX research, data science, machine learning, all of that. So I think I was more contacted or maybe was engaged in business development companies who were looking for me to do diversity which I think it kind of...and I am such a huge proponent for diversity. But it also kind of had my heart drop a little bit because I just felt like people were contacting me because of who I am instead of just thinking like if it was just any other agency, would I be contacted specifically for that? It was more just for exclusive searches, which can be very, very hard for products and engineering. I think in diversity and inclusion, we really need to focus on different departments and the different problems that underrepresented communities encounter with different departments. So it was just really hard, but in terms of companies contacting me because I am a woman of color owning an agency, no, that didn't really...and it's never really helped. I do wear it as a badge of honor because, like I said, I started out with nothing. So to start out with nothing and have to fight through everything to sit at the table and create something is amazing. My background didn't really help me. It was really just me, just constantly contacting people. And I was prepared for this because, in my entrepreneurship minor, they said, "You're going to encounter a lot of nos," and so I did. I encountered so many nos, but eventually, I was able to turn those nos into yeses. So now that I turned some of those nos into yeses...and I'm still encountering nos, but I still keep going and still building and building. And now I do feel a sense of pride now two years later where it is like, wow, I really did have to fight through to make it, and that's where I hold just a huge sense of pride. But no, it was not my background that really...the only thing that my background was maybe appealing was thinking like, oh, okay, I think you can do diversity and inclusion, which I don't want to be profiled in that way. I just want to be a founder who happens to be a Black woman instead of a Black woman founder. And so, I don't want to be contacted to feel like my race is a part of it. And that was interesting in the corporate workplace, especially when I was trying to navigate different, you know, how to speak, how to build rapport, or how to navigate corporate workplace conversations. And that's very hard to do with diversity and inclusion because you're fighting with, like, that's racism and misogyny. That's something really deep-rooted, and that has been here for years and years. So it's a really heavy, heavy topic. And that's not some really, really heavy topic that you really want to bring or a lot of people don't really want to bring into the workplace. So that was just hard to encounter. But overall, I so, so support diversity and inclusion. And the cool part is because I have this awareness and I know that diverse teams are better teams, whenever I'm sourcing, or one of my recruiters is sourcing, I'm just making sure that they have that in the front of their mind, and they're just trying to diversify their candidate pipeline as much as possible. CHAD: Well, taking it from the candidate side of things, I, unfortunately, I'm of the belief that the hiring process is really ripe for extreme, subtle unconscious biases or conscious ones even to have an impact on the hiring process. So, how have you navigated that on the candidate side? I'm sure you don't want to say anything negative about any of your clients. It's not about, oh, this company is racist. But I think do you agree with the premise that the hiring process at a lot of companies is ripe for some bias to creep in? ANNA: Of course. I mean, all of the time. And the part that's so, I would say, scary about it is that bias is something that you feel. It's not really tangible. You can't really grab it. I mean, it can be in writing, and [laughs] there has been stuff in writing. But it's very much kind of yeah; it's non-tangible. So it's hard to really call it out specifically of like, hmm, this candidate I don't know why all of a sudden nice to haves become must-haves. Why is there a shift? Like I said, there are different problems with different departments, but there are also different problems in terms of leveling systems, so leadership roles versus individual contributor roles. There can be a little bit more, you know, maybe there's a little bit more openness on the IC side, but with leadership, it can get a little interesting sometimes. But the hard part is it's not really tangible. So I really have to give it to diversity like DEI specialists because to have to navigate those conversations and really articulate a non-tangible thing is so, so complicated. So there are tangible things you can do, like having a diverse panel. But what happens if the company doesn't even have the numbers for diversity to have that diverse panel in the first place? So it can get really complicated in terms of trying to navigate the bias within the interview process, and we do try to do our best there, just trying to provide on our side because that's all we can do. It's really up to the companies in terms of their interview processes and how they are going to change it or maintain some stages. But for us, we're just trying to just submit diverse talent and really just try to provide that white-glove service for them and hope that that bias doesn't seep in. But like I said, it's such a heavy topic. And like I said, with corporate workplace politics, it can be so fragile and really interesting. So it's just hard to really take that and understand where it comes from or being able to even verbalize it. So that's where it gets really interesting. And so, I do hope that in the future, interview processes are changed where there is able to be a diverse panel, or there is a way to really be able to understand that bias. Because like I said, it's very complicated. And we don't want to claim that any company is specifically racist, but it's just understanding bias and maybe why there's a difference for one candidate versus another candidate, which can be really interesting. CHAD: I think the first part is recognizing that everybody has biases, and it could be anything. It could be, well, what happens when you come across a resume of someone that went to the same school that you did? What happens to that resume, then? And does that subtly influence how you review that resume? It has nothing to do with their race or the color of their skin or anything. So those biases can creep in, and you need to decide as a company is this something that actually matters to success at the company? Is this something that we want to be using when we make hiring decisions about who gets that first interview or who continues on in the interview process? For us, we've decided it's not, so we have a completely anonymous screening process where we don't even show the names of schools. We don't show the names of the companies that you worked at previously. We only show the positions that you held at those companies because we've decided that whether you have a degree or not doesn't matter, and the companies that you worked at previously don't matter. It's what you were actually able to do with that experience. ANNA: Oh yeah. I think that's actually amazing. That's a really great way of doing it. I always just try to tell hiring managers also to just open that candidate pipeline as much as possible because the number one way to really understand someone isn't really through just a piece of paper. Yes, we want to make sure that the resume is at least a bit aligned. And they have, if it's an engineering role, for example, the right tech stack or maybe the right technologies or the right kind of projects that they've worked on. But other than that, you'll be so amazed what can happen when people just hop on a call with each other. You can really find just that hidden genius in people. So usually, when it comes to just diversity, it's like just hopping on a quick call with someone, anybody. Like you said, there are so many biases, but just being able to talk to them and see them as a human being can really just surprise you and surprise everybody. So really just, I always say just find that hidden genius through engaging with someone. CHAD: Yeah. So you've mentioned time to hire is a really important thing moving quickly in today's market when candidates have a lot of opportunity. What are some other ways, either trends or things that are happening in the market or things that you see changing? ANNA: Well, honey, I'm sure, as you know, there's been a huge amount of layoffs that have happened. Like, recently, about 17,000 workers were laid off from more than 70 tech startups globally in May, and that's been about a 350% jump from April. So I will say it's just due to inflation as well as just the slowing of demand. Startups right now are just really trying to just cut corners and just really trying to just hone in on their runway and their burn rate. CHAD: Are the candidates that are being laid off finding new work quickly? ANNA: I'm not sure because it depends on the departments. We're working with engineering mostly in product. So it's really funny because as we are tracking the layoffs, we will contact candidates to see if they're interested in another opportunity. Because fortunately, for our client list, we haven't had anyone have a massive amount of layoffs which has been...we're so happy about that, fortunately. But we've actually contacted engineers. And it's amazing how strong the engineering department is. It does not seem like they really are...that's not a department where there's like significant layoffs because they just have to uphold that platform. So yeah, so it still is in terms of engineering surprising with all these layoffs. It still is just very much competitive because even the people who have or the companies that have encountered a large amount of layoffs those engineers are still wanting to stay or don't...there are some that may feel the need to depart at a certain point. But for the most part, they are staying. But in terms of how quickly, I'm not entirely sure in terms of for people that are laid off how quickly they are being hired because this is also within early-stage startups or not early-stage; they also have Fortune 500s too. But yeah, I'm not sure about that part. But in terms of engineering specifically, the jobs are still just growing. The projected growth rate for software engineers is like 22%, and data scientists is 22%, as well as web developers is 13%. So fortunately for us, as an agency who primarily specializes in engineering, there hasn't been a huge difference. But like I said, specifically with engineering, that time to hire is still super important because these candidates are still encountering offers quickly. And it's just a way to be competitive because if you're just the first offer, you're the first offer in their face instead of, let's say, they have two offers from another company and you're like at the last offer. It's such a big difference there. CHAD: Are you seeing a lot of remote positions versus in-person positions? ANNA: Yes, remote is still going strong. I have seen that now there is a little bit of a trend of some startups or companies where you know because I research companies every day...I'll go on Crunchbase, Morning Brew, VentureBeat, TechCrunch, Built-In. I'll go on all of the websites, and I'm seeing who got a fresh new round of funding or who's highly growing, or any new products that companies are offering. CHAD: You're seeing some companies say that they're hiring hybrid or in person. ANNA: I am seeing that on startups and companies' career pages, once they've acquired a new round of funding or they're scaling, that on the job boards, you'll start seeing only the headquarters, so just San Francisco or just maybe Boston instead of remote. So it's been a little bit more of a quiet transition because I remember when bigger companies were announcing it like, oh, we're going to transition in the office in February of 2022 or December of 2021, then there would all of a sudden be a mass exodus of people who were seeking remote opportunities. But I do still feel that remote is still going strong, especially for high-growth startups, you know, yeah, still going strong. There is the option of hybrid. With these engineers that do have these choices, 100% remote is really becoming a great selling point. I mean, I don't even know if it's really a selling point but just standard now. CHAD: So that's what you're hearing from candidates. Candidates want that. ANNA: Definitely, candidates want. There's been plenty of candidates that we've interviewed where they've said in terms of their...because we'll ask them what would be their motivation for considering other opportunities and potentially leaving, and then they'll say, "X company is anticipating us to transition into the office, and I just don't want to do that." Their commute may be an hour, and that can be two even maybe three hours out of your day where you're spending your morning driving and then spending your evening driving. So people just prefer to be remote. Or people are located now in the Midwest. They're going back to their hometowns where they're able to instead of like these big metropolitan cities where now it's really hard to afford a house, so they're going back home and being able to enjoy their family there. So definitely it is a standard and people are really interested in it. And for companies that are having employees transition back into the office, we've consistently heard that there's just a mass exodus of people leaving. CHAD: What have you seen compensation do over the last year-plus? ANNA: I would say for compensation, I mean, in my personal opinion, when it was super competitive, it was definitely increasing. Now I feel like we're working with a Fortune 500 company, so compensation hasn't really been too, too much of a problem. So yeah, it hasn't been as competitive. But I do remember when it was maybe around Q1 and Q2 2021 where there was almost this great rehire. And everybody was scaling, and demand was soaring where the salaries were just like, it just increased or were just consistently increasing. We were just so shocked at what some software engineers were making. But now, it seems to have potentially tamed a little bit. It's not as high as it probably used to be because we were working with that series B Company and their salaries were pretty good, pretty competitive. But all of a sudden, with the demand soaring and these engineers, it started getting even more competitive. Then that's when all of a sudden, you know, the first few placements were fine. And then, all of a sudden, each candidate, like I said, they would say they were passively looking and then the next week... And this startup their time to hire was actually really great. But even with this competitive market, it was still hard because, like I said, a week later, they would already have an offer. And their salary would probably increase like 20,000-30,000 from their initial target base that they were seeking to now what they were being hired from other companies. So it would definitely increase. But I haven't seen that recently as much. CHAD: Yeah. I think also the trend to remote changed compensation, too, because it leveled it out. There were people who if you were trying to find a job in Kansas and you were going in an office, that market is very different than the U.S.-wide hiring market. But now, candidates are on the U.S.-wide hiring market. And I think that that brought up the lower end of salaries. ANNA: Oh yes. Because at first, it was like okay, we can look for...it was 100% remote, which was great, and so they were like, we can look for people in the Midwest. But during that time, companies were paying San Francisco and New York salaries, and they were offering those salaries to people who were located in Kansas and Iowa. So you would have engineers who were deep, deep in the Midwest who were asking for in terms of target for those metropolitan city salary budgets. And they would get it, which I think is great as well, just they are doing the same work as someone who is located in San Francisco or in New York but maybe with less overhead, of course. But it definitely was a little bit more of a challenge. And you can no longer assume that somebody located in the Midwest that may have lower salary bands aren't at those metropolitan city salary budgets now. CHAD: Anna, thanks much for stopping by and sharing with us. I really I'm impressed by what you've accomplished so far. And I'm excited about what you're going to be able to do in the future. ANNA: Thank you. Thank you so much, again, for inviting me. I had a great time speaking with you, and it was so interesting hearing about your time being a consultancy. Because I know being an external vendor, it's really interesting interacting with clients when you're not internal. So that was really interesting hearing about the difference of clients that you're encountering at first versus now. CHAD: Yeah. If folks want to get in touch with Techie Staffing or get in touch with you, where are the best places for them to do that? ANNA: So in terms of contacting me, I'll say the best way would be either our website so www.techiestaffing.com. Or you can contact me on LinkedIn; my name is Anna Spearman, A-N-N-A S-P-E-A-R-M-A-N. I'm always active on LinkedIn. So if you're seeking a new opportunity either on the candidate side or either meeting, help and engaging Techie Staffing as a scaling company to fill your engineering, design, UX, and product roles, you can contact me on LinkedIn as well as filling out the forms on the Techie Staffing website. And we also are on Twitter @StaffingTechie. So definitely contact us, and we'd be happy to hear from you. CHAD: Wonderful. You can subscribe to the show and find notes and a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Anna Spearman.
Chelinde Edouard is Co-Founder and CEO of MustWatch, which connects people through television. Chad talks with Che about creating a social and user engagement platform that allows people to come back and constantly use an app without interrupting TV-watching experiences, how they use data to improve user experience, and fundraising and giving investors opportunities to help build out the app, increase marketing, and potentially build an Android version. MustWatch (https://mustwatch.com/) Follow MustWatch on Twitter (https://twitter.com/realmustwatch) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/realmustwatch/). Follow Che on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/che-edouard-10013964/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel, and with me today is Che Edouard, Co-Founder and CEO of MustWatch, which connects people through television. Che, thank you for joining me. CHELINDE: Thank you for having me. I appreciate it. CHAD: So astute listeners of the show will note maybe that name sounds familiar. And that's because you and MustWatch were mentioned on Episode 419, which was about the GK Fund with Michael Benezra. And I asked him for examples of the kinds of companies that he was excited about that they had given their grants to. And you're the one he called out, and so that jumped out at me. And thanks for joining the show. CHELINDE: Thank you for having me. Really appreciate it. And I definitely want to shout out the GK Fund. They've definitely been a huge support to us since giving us the grant. And they're definitely leading the charge in this new avenue of racial inequality and helping startups in that fashion in Boston. CHAD: So I'm curious; before we get too far down the road of where you're at today and how you got there, let's take a step back and just remind people what MustWatch is. CHELINDE: Absolutely. MustWatch is an app that's on the App Store now. So even if you have an iPhone, you can download it. And it's an app that's revolving around TV. So it allows you to see what shows your friends watch, chat with them about them, and send recommendations all in one place. So we think of it as like a social hub for all of your TV needs. CHAD: I think people who hear this might be like, oh, does this exist already? That kind of thing. And there are a couple of things a little bit like this, but it doesn't seem like there's really anything that's quite like this, right? CHELINDE: Exactly. So a lot of the social TV apps and other services today focus on one feature, for example, chat or recommendations, or giving reviews about shows, or having a list of them. But our app, we do all of it in one place. So on our app, it can show which shows you like. You can also share with your friends directly; hey, you should go watch this show because I think you should like it. We also have this feature called watchlist, which is our natural social recommendations of here are all the shows that your friends are watching that you don't watch. And so it's a way to give people a way to find new shows without getting the same recommendations from Netflix and Hulu that are not really accurate today. CHAD: How did you hit upon this idea? CHELINDE: Actually, one of my high school friends, we were all brainstorming and coming up with ideas for companies. And then one day, he was at work, and he was trying to talk about Game of Thrones, but his boss wouldn't let him because he wasn't caught up on the season. He wasn't there. CHAD: [laughs] CHELINDE: So he was like, how do I find someone or talk to someone who's caught up to where I'm at so I can actually have a conversation? And so we brainstormed, and we tried to solve the problem of let's just create a spoiler-free chat kind of solution that would allow people to talk about shows that they're caught up on. And then that we've iterated and evolved, and that's kind of led to where we're at today. CHAD: And when was that? CHELINDE: That was, I want to say, 2014. That was when I graduated from BU. So in the summer of 2014, that's when we first had the idea. And then from there, we just brainstormed, had a bunch of meetings, and then just took a year in stealth mode trying to figure out how we wanted to create a business plan. And then, from there, we hit the ground running. CHAD: You and your friend, what were your sort of core competencies, the two of you? CHELINDE: I'm the tech background, so to speak, because, as I mentioned, I went to BU. My degree is in management information systems, which is basically business IT. So I was trying to leverage all my technology skills there and also my business skills to say how do we, one, build the app and two, create a business that can actually support it for the long term? And he had more of the idea on the customer side of how can we create an experience or a user engagement platform that allows people to constantly come back and constantly want to find more reason to use our app? Because as we know, people watch the show on TV, but the app is a conduit to that. And so, we want to figure out a way to get people to constantly use our app but also not interrupt their TV-watching experience. CHAD: So you said you're trying to figure out a business plan. You're refining the concept. At what point do you start making the leap to actually writing an app? CHELINDE: With all apps, you start with this concept called wireframes, and so we built out a bunch of wireframes. Two of my friends from high school we all built the app together. And then one of them went to Miami, and his friend from Miami he's the one that actually helped us develop the app and code. And so we worked with him to actually say, "Hey, these are our wireframes. We're trying to make this into an app. Can you build it out?" And so, we worked with him over a year to make that a reality. CHAD: And it took about a year to get to launch. CHELINDE: We actually started on Android, and we were trying to create an MVP or prototype. And so we took that idea like I said, we were working for a year, to this company called Netcapital, which is a crowdfunding platform for startups and companies. And we launched on Netcapital in May of 2020. With that idea, we raised 50k in almost three months. And with that money, we actually built the app from there. And so the app you see in the App Store now is from the money that we've raised on Netcapital. CHAD: Did you throw away that original version and start over? CHELINDE: I wouldn't say throw away. We kind of used it as a launching point. But we don't have any Android version right now. We're strictly in iOS. CHAD: Yeah, that was notable to me. Tell me more about that. CHELINDE: So going from Android to iOS it was really a business decision there because our developer had knowledge in Android but didn't have the iOS background. And so when we went on Netcapital, we used that money to actually hire a real development team. That's who's building our app now. So we work with them to build our app. And going to iOS has allowed us to, at least in the meantime, expand in the U.S. market a lot quicker. CHAD: Now, are they building it in first-party frameworks only for iOS, or are they using something that is going to allow you to go expand to Android in the future? CHELINDE: So right now, we're strictly iOS only. We would like to move to a React Native or a tool that allows us to promote to both. When we first started, we wanted to just focus on iOS, given our costs. CHAD: These are common problems that a lot of startups or common decisions that a lot of startups have to make. And it's not always straightforward. Were you worried about this? CHELINDE: Yes. Because that's one of the things now it's we would love to have an Android version. But for me, being more of a purist, I didn't want the code to work in one system and not another. And given that we only had...in my mind, it's like you have one shot to make an impression. And when you go out and launch it on the App Store, I didn't want it to be half-baked in one and half-baked in the other. I'd rather have one be exactly how we want it to look, and then we can adapt as we grow. CHAD: How has it been working for you, then? CHELINDE: So far, so good. We're actually in the process of releasing some new features later this month, and so like I said, the watchlist feature, which allows you to add shows that you're going to watch in the future. We also have the ability to create chats through the chat functionality because previously, you had to create a new chat every single time. So we've made it easier for people to start chats, and also you can do group chats as well. So it's not just individuals. You can have a whole group of people in one conversation. CHAD: So some of these features there must be a backend server powering all of this, right? CHELINDE: Yes. So we use the Google Cloud Firestore for our backend. And another cool part about our app is we have a lot of analytics about what people are watching. And that's where we take their data from our cloud, the Google Cloud Firestore, and we send it to the BigQuery, also a Google platform. And then we use the Google Analytics that we have on the app to then do our reports around who's watching what, top 10 shows for the past month, the top 10 shows based on if you're male or female, based on what age group. So we have all the analytics on the viewing habits from the data that we've collected. CHAD: Can you tell me how many users you have now? CHELINDE: As of right now, we are at 820. We are looking to obviously get a little bit over to that 1,000 users mark, and then we can have a better sense of what kind of insights we can glean from there. CHAD: Well, hopefully, coming on this show will help you do that. So if you're listening and this sounds interesting to you, where are the best places...so people can search for MustWatch on the App Store, the iOS App Store? CHELINDE: Yep. And we also have a website mustwatch.com if people want to check that out as well. CHAD: Yeah, so let's do it. Let's push them over the top and get those numbers up. I'm curious about usage patterns. Are you able to see any patterns in terms of what causes people to either keep using the app or not? CHELINDE: Yeah. So the main thing that keeps people using the app is having chat groups with people and then also getting recommendations. Like I mentioned before, we have the social recommendations of people just showing you what shows people watch. But there's also direct one-to-one. If you're on the app, I could send you a recommendation. And that's what drives a lot of people to go on the app and find new shows. Another thing that we see is a lot of people just searching, just looking up the shows that are on the app because our database of shows is actually pretty robust. I was talking to someone yesterday; he's Korean. And he was using his phone to type in a show. And he was using a Korean keyboard, and the show came up. And he was like, "Oh wow, I didn't even know you guys support multiple languages." And I was like, "Yes, we support." Our database of shows is very expansive. So if you're in Korea, if you're in Japan, if you like anime, if you like telenovelas, we have all types of shows on our app as well. CHAD: Do you get that database from somewhere? CHELINDE: Yeah, so there's actually a TV show API called TMDB, which pretty much is an open-source, free database that you can pull from. So we use that as our source for shows. CHAD: That's cool. Speaking of shows, I noticed on the MustWatch website, on the team page, you all list your favorite shows and what you're currently watching. I think you and I have different tastes in shows. [laughter] I have heard of the shows that are your favorite, but I have not watched any of them. CHELINDE: Oh wow. [laughs] What are your favorite shows? CHAD: I think actually my shows match the shows listed by Rob, your CFO. CHELINDE: Oh wow. [laughs] CHAD: And my all-time favorite show is, I think, The Leftovers. CHELINDE: Okay. So yeah, and that's the cool thing about this app is like, if you're on the app, you would see Rob's shows on the app too. Because if you download the app, you become friends with all of us immediately, so you have friends on there to start. CHAD: Oh, that's a cool idea. CHELINDE: So it gives you a way to just see what the app can look like before...because if you're on there by yourself as one person, it's a social app. It's meant to be with people. It doesn't really give you that clarity. So I bring that up because that's the one cool thing about the app is you always are surprised by what shows people watch, even if they're your friend. It's like, oh, I didn't know you would like that show. Or oh, I liked that show, and you don't like that show. And it's a very cool icebreaker or just a social connection that you can make because everyone's putting shows on the app. And one way, actually...I was talking to someone the other day thinking about how like Spotify, you put all your playlists and all your shows. This app is kind of like a Spotify but for TV shows and also for movies. So it's not just shows, movies as well. CHAD: And the cool things that Spotify does in terms of the reports that they release annually to each individual person and everything. Like, that's all stuff you can do too. CHELINDE: Yep. CHAD: Yeah, it's cool. So your background actually is in sort of business intelligence, data analysis, and analyst, right? CHELINDE: Yes, that's correct. For my day job...I just want to back up. I also have a day job while also doing this. And I've primarily been the past couple of years a BI analyst. So previously, I was at HarbourVest, which is a private equity firm here in Boston. And then, I recently joined Liberty Mutual Investments also as BI data analyst. So I've been very involved in the financial services side of data analytics, which has allowed me to just get other insights on how technology works and just also getting exposure to the whole industry as well. CHAD: So you basically have two reasons why you want to get the number of users up. One is from a co-founder perspective and founder perspective; you want to get the number of users up. But from a data perspective, you want to get the users up so that you have more data to play with. CHELINDE: Exactly, exactly. The more users we have, the more data we can collect. And then data we can glean insights, and then provide value to our customers as well. Because our app users, if we can know which shows they are liking, we can also then tell them about shows that they also might like. Because once you find commonalities in shows that people are liking, you can then give them better recommendations. And we think that the social aspect of our app, the fact that we have all of your friends on there and they're giving you recommendations, it's better than just, oh, you've watched this show in the past three years, and it's on Netflix's algorithm of watched shows. That, to us, doesn't really seem as insightful and helpful to people. Mid-Roll Ad: When starting a new project, we understand that you want to make the right choices in technology, features, and investment, but that you don’t have all year to do extended research. In just a few weeks, thoughtbot’s Discovery Sprints deliver a user-centered product journey, a clickable prototype or Proof of Concept, and key market insights from focused user research. We’ll help you to identify the primary user flow, decide which framework should be used to bring it to life, and set a firm estimate on future development efforts. Maximize impact and minimize risk with a validated roadmap for your new product. Get started at: url tbot.io/sprint CHAD: So you mentioned you have another job in addition to all this work you've been doing on MustWatch. How has that been? You know, starting a company, working on it while also having a full-time job elsewhere? CHELINDE: Yeah, it's definitely been, I guess, one of the challenging things I would say. It's definitely been rewarding. It takes a lot of time management, I would say, because you have to balance your day job and manage something on the side. I think the biggest hurdle I had was when we were first launching the app on the App Store, meeting with developers, and trying to fundraise all at the same time because I was just pressed for time. Because of the COVID, COVID happened right when we were launching. So working from home all day everyday kind of helped because I didn't have an hour commute anymore. So I got two hours back in my day. So I could, instead of going to work and just commuting, I had an hour in the morning and an hour after. I could use that time for MustWatch. But I had to definitely sacrifice some of my social life to make that happen. [laughter] CHAD: I assume that you have the plans that you would hope that things with MustWatch get to the point where you could do it full time. CHELINDE: Yes. The goal is to get MustWatch to a point where we can pay our employees and have salaries, and everyone can just be working from the company. But as everyone knows, if you're in a startup, you got to just not pay yourself and make sure everything goes into the company. How I see it is you can't pay yourself until everything else is working. CHAD: Yeah, I mean, people hear the startup stories of raising a whole bunch of money, working exclusively on it, having more than enough. I think that that's actually not necessarily the norm; that's the outlier. I think it's more common, more widespread to do what you're doing, to have an idea, and to be working on it and growing it while also holding down another job. CHELINDE: Because as we all know, the bills need to be paid, [laughs] and those don't go away. But I didn't want to give up on the dream. So if you want to make it happen, you can make it happen because while I was at HarbourVest, I also was at Babson getting my master's degree in business analytics. So at one point in time, I was working full-time at grad school and doing MustWatch. To me, that was probably the most busiest period of my life, but I did get through it. [laughs] But definitely took a lot, but now we're here. And we've gotten support from the GK Fund, and I couldn't be happier with where the future lies ahead. CHAD: One of the things about the GK Fund is that it's a grant. It's not an investment where you're giving up part of your company in order to do it, which I think is really important, especially for very early-stage companies, not to have to give away a significant portion of their company just to get some angel investment or that startup fund. I assume that's one of the reasons why it's been a big impact for you. CHELINDE: Absolutely. I mean, one, having it not be an investment was a lifesaver for us. At the time, we were still trying to figure out how to just get cash to get to the next stage. And so, for us, a grant was literally the blessing or a miracle at the perfect timing because it allowed us to...it gave us a little kickstart. Because I mean, as everyone knows, if you're a startup, you're always low on cash. And you're always trying to decide what's the best way to move the company forward? And that just gave us that breathing room without having to worry about paying it back, or a timetable to now let us actually grow and do what we can do best. CHAD: Do you hope to take a more traditional investment in the future? CHELINDE: Yes. So we're actually planning to do another fundraising on Netcapital. This time we're planning to raise $450,000. And that's going to help us build out the app, increase our marketing, and then potentially also build an Android version. CHAD: So I'm not sure that everyone who's listening will know what Netcapital actually is. CHELINDE: Yep. So Netcapital is a crowdfunding equity platform which allows retail investors to directly invest in startups. So if you're looking for another way to get into early-stage companies, Netcapital is a great place to do that. It's similar to if you've heard of StartEngine. It's a similar concept to that. And it's mainly you pretty much buy shares in a company, and then that company will then take that money to then use it for the funds that they have set in their offering. And you actually get an equity stake in the company. And so, for us, it's great because typically, those types of fundraising opportunities don't come for us. You need to have VC-backed or some kind of angel investor to get to that level. But having it be open to everybody, there's a larger pool of retail investors that allow you to get to where you need to go. Because if you can get a couple of your family, friends around to give you like a hundred or a couple thousand, it's definitely a better avenue than just going the VC route or just getting a loan from a grant or a startup, an SBA loan, something like that. CHAD: Traditionally, something like Netcapital was not really possible. But my understanding is that in 2016, the laws changed to allow smaller investments and get actual equity and for companies to offer it in such a way that wasn't possible before. CHELINDE: Yes, I believe it's called a Reg CF, Regulation Crowdfunding, and that was the law that was passed in 2016. And that is crucial to us being able to have an offering on Netcapital. CHAD: So it's not like Kickstarter where, you know, in Kickstarter, you're offering a new product or something, and people aren't becoming investors in your actual company. Netcapital is they are actual investors. And so, as an entrepreneur, as a company, what do your obligations to those investors look like? CHELINDE: So because they're investors, we have to give them quarterly updates. We have to file our annual report. We have to disclose any conflict of interest. There's a whole SEC team that has to approve and review any offering that goes on the platform to make sure that we are following all SEC guidelines. And then also, we are liable because they're investors. So they can email us. They can reach out to us, and we will respond because they are our shareholders. [chuckles] And so we need to make sure they're happy as well. CHAD: Yeah, with one of the things that Netcapital does is it sort of works like Kickstarter in that if you don't meet the goals that you've set, it doesn't actually happen. CHELINDE: Yep, there's a minimum investment threshold, so it depends on how much money you're raising. So last time, when we raised 50k, the minimum was 10k. So if we didn't get over $10,000, all the investors would get their money back. But if we got over that threshold, then that's the money that we would be able to use for our company. CHAD: 450,000 is significantly more than 50,000. What do you feel like you need to do in order to make sure that you hit the goal? CHELINDE: So one thing is going on podcasts like this to make sure that people know about it. [laughter] Secondly, we're actually going to be partnering with the GK Fund to do some more media exposure there. And then we're also partnering with Silicon Valley Bank because they're actually our partners on the banking side. And so, I'm going to be partnering with their network to leverage their connections as well. And then we're also going to be just doing the classic social media, posting on Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, friends, or family. All avenues of media we will be pushing out MustWatch. CHAD: When do you expect to open up that listing? CHELINDE: We're targeting mid-July right now. So that's when we're planning on going live on Netcapital pending the compliance review and all the other legal stuff, but that's when we plan to go live. CHAD: Okay, well, if you're listening to this episode, it's going to be going live in a couple of weeks. And so definitely follow along and check it out. Cool. Well, what are your goals for that next funding round? What do you expect to use it for? CHELINDE: We expect to use our funding round on improving the iOS experience, so adding more features because we've gotten some customer feedback. And we have a laundry list or a backlog of items we want to add but obviously limited by cash constraints. So once we have the money, we can do what we want to do. And then we also would like to improve our marketing. So we want to have a real marketing team and improve our SEO. And then we also have a connection with Hollywood. So the writer for Ford and Ferrari, his name is Jason Keller is on our team. And we want to see how we can get our foot in the door with Hollywood as well. CHAD: That's really cool. What would that look like in your ideal scenario? CHELINDE: Ideally, we'd have some celebrities or Hollywood A-listers on the app using MustWatch and then promoting their shows or promoting our app in one of their media engagements as well. CHAD: Or chatting with people about the episode that just came out and that kind of thing. That'd be really cool. CHELINDE: Yeah, exactly. We want to get people to just engage on the app with celebrities as well. That's definitely one of the avenues we were thinking as well. CHAD: One of the big trends right now is TV companies making companion podcasts to the shows that they make. I can totally see them doing this kind of thing as well. CHELINDE: As we all know, user engagement and fan engagement is crucial for these companies, and MustWatch would be a crucial way for a lot of companies to connect easily. CHAD: This is a little bit of an aside, but I was sort of surprised that you were able to get mustwatch.com. CHELINDE: It was not cheap. [laughter] I think for some people who were following us for a while, when we first launched, our name was WatchParty. And that's how we originally started our company. But as we evolved, Facebook released a watch party feature; Hulu, Amazon all have these watch party features, and they weren't exactly like our company. And we didn't want to get any confusion in branding. And so we had a long discussion around what name do we change to, and how do we still convey the right feel for the app, and what we want to do? Because on our app, you're not watching the show on our app, I want to make that very clear. It's all about finding a new show, chatting, and connecting with people, but you're not watching on the app. And so it's tough to...not tough, but we wanted to make sure that people knew that the app was for finding new shows. But also, it has to be like a must-watch. Like, I need to go watch this right now because it's something really good. And so that's how we came across this name. CHAD: You mentioned earlier on that expenses are tight when you're working on something new. How worried were you about spending money on a domain name? CHELINDE: So this is also where our partnership with Netcapital came into play because they helped us in terms of getting us off the ground. And we work with them on the business side as well. And this is one of the avenues where they helped support us. CHAD: Oh, wow. Wow. It's great that you're able to pull together these different resources and get that support. CHELINDE: Yeah, to us, it's been crucial because, without the support, it's very tough to get your name out there. It's very tough to promote the idea. And so, with Netcapital and the GK Fund, it definitely puts us in a better light than usual. CHAD: Well, Che, I really wish you the best and MustWatch the best and your whole team. And good luck over the next few weeks as you open up this round on Netcapital. I ask everybody, again, go check out the app. Sometimes we talk to companies of all different stages on the show. And I especially think it's important when we have someone that's just getting started really trying to hit these user numbers that if people could go check it out, that'd be great. CHELINDE: Really appreciate it. CHAD: If folks want to follow along with you, get in touch with you, that kind of thing, where are all the different places where they can do that? CHELINDE: Reach out to me on LinkedIn. I'm on LinkedIn, Che Edouard. You can reach out to us on mustwatch.com. We have a contact us email there. You can also email me at che@mustwatch.com if you want to reach out. I am available on all platforms. CHAD: Wonderful. And you can subscribe to the show and find notes and a complete transcript for the episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.
Geronda Wollack-Spiller is the DEI Program Manager at thoughtbot. Chad talks with Geronda about implementing a successful Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion program at the company by providing a culture of belonging, the challenges, in particular, the tech industry faces, and acknowledging that many of us work in spaces where when we're bringing someone onto a team who has underrepresented identities, they might be the only one. How do we create a space that's as inclusive as possible? Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion at thoughtbot (https://thoughtbot.com/playbook/our-company/diversity-equity-and-inclusion) Follow Geronda on Twitter (https://twitter.com/gerondaws) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/gerondawollack/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Geronda Wollack-Spiller, the DEI Program Manager at thoughtbot. Geronda, thank you so much for joining me. GERONDA: Thank you for having me. I appreciate it. CHAD: In honor of Pride Month, we're doing something extra special for this episode in addition to just having you as an extra special guest. We're recording live in front of thoughtbot remotely. We've got a whole bunch of people watching. I can hear them cheering off in the distance for you as you make your debut on the podcast. GERONDA: [laughs] CHAD: Thanks for joining me. GERONDA: Thank you. Nice. [laughs] CHAD: So you joined thoughtbot as our first ever DEI program manager back...when was it? GERONDA: Oh, April, yeah, April fourth. CHAD: It's been a whirlwind few months. Thank you already for all of the contributions that you've made to the company already. GERONDA: Oh, thank you. No problem. CHAD: Tell us a little bit about your role. And then I can provide some fill-in terms of what we were thinking when we added this. But let's start with sharing a little bit about your role. GERONDA: A lot of my role is about...so it's a lot of understanding the processes that we have, people operations processes, and really thinking about how do we provide more of a...or improve our ability to provide a culture of belonging. And so a lot of what I do is I will partner across with people operations, and I'll look at things like promotions, and who are we promoting? Who are we hiring? Improvements to performance management processes. How are we giving feedback? Who are our managers? And a lot of what I'll do, too, is execute against the goals that were set by our DEI Council before I had joined, which the council is great. And I'll look to see are there different ways that we should be looking at goals? So one of the things that I'm doing right now is I'm building out a multi-year roadmap for DEI. And I'm incorporating a lot of the goals that the council has already put together, which has been super great. And I want to create a space that feels like a safer or brave space for anyone to come to me with concerns, questions, suggestions. And I partner a lot with different groups to be able to understand their needs and make sure that we are voicing and amplifying historically marginalized groups but also providing a lot of the education around what DEI means and how we can do that in our everyday jobs. So I am co-chair of the DEI Council. I support that council to take on different projects, build out task force, work with everyone across the company to contribute, and infuse diversity, equity, and inclusion within the company. So that's a lot of what I do. [laughs] Other things involved, but that gives you kind of a high level of my role. CHAD: Yeah, that's great. I've talked before on the show about the DEI Council in a few different episodes, mostly in passing. And overall, when we started on...the concept of a council came from some consultants that we had worked with previously to do an audit. They provided us with a few different suggestions about how we could continue on from that audit and take action. And one of the things, especially with our geographic studios, the way that we used to be organized the idea of one person from each of those studios coming together on a council to work together and then bring the work back to their studios for action really resonated with us as a structure that could work pretty well for us given the structure. We've obviously since gone completely remote. And the council is no longer specifically tied to those individual teams or those offices that we no longer have. But the council is still that, a group of people from a wide array across the company who come together and focus on and organize our work around diversity, equity, and inclusion. And we saw the opportunity in your role to have someone provide continuity and organization and experience to the council to help make it even more effective at thoughtbot. And I think we're just getting started with that. But I think it's been very positive overall, your addition, and like I said at the top of the show, thank you again for your contribution so far. GERONDA: [laughs] No problem. Thank you for hiring me. Thanks. CHAD: [laughs] Well, speaking of hiring, you've done a few different things over the years. And I'm curious; you started in more general human resources roles. Was it a goal from the beginning of your career to move into a DEI role, or did that evolve along the way? GERONDA: Ooh, interesting question. Yeah, it actually evolved along the way. I thought I would be an HR project manager and I would be leading projects across global companies. And when I started in my career, I was an HR operations analyst, and I was doing a lot of the HR product management. But what I discovered is every single time that I would be in a role, I kept looking at things from a DEI lens without realizing that I was. And then, as I started continuing to do that, I fell in love with it. And I was like, okay, this is my place of where I want to be. So even though I was doing projects related to HR, if I would do recruiting operations, I would look at okay, well, who are we actually targeting, and who are we hiring? And what are the opportunities and gaps? Then I worked in the education space, and I would look at, well, how are we actually...like, what types of demographics are we bringing to the schools? So I would do things in my role that were very diversity, equity, inclusion-focused even though I was an HR product manager or in operations. And I started realizing I really loved more of the diversity, equity, and inclusion side of things. So instead of continuing to get roles in HR, I was like, I have to get a role in DEI because that's where my passion lended itself more so. I made that decision from my last company that the next role I have, I will not take it unless it's DEI-focused. So it developed and evolved over time. CHAD: Some people might have the thought...I have to confess sometimes I've also had this thought as like, why can't just DEI be weaved through everything HR does or through everything everybody thinks about all of the time? Why do you need a specific DEI person at a company? And I've come to understand that it's hard to do that. [laughter] But I'm curious if you have any thoughts on that. GERONDA: It is challenging because you also have to think of it as everybody is in a different place with diversity, equity, and inclusion, which is not necessarily a bad thing. But there are some people who are incredibly passionate about it. And then there are others that are aware of it, but they may want to just kind of focus on their job. Or they might think, well, we just need to treat everybody the same. Like, why is that so hard? So because everyone's in different places in their level of understanding and the importance of it, it does get tricky to think of things in that lens, especially in your day-to-day job. Your priorities change consistently. So you might be working on a project here. But then you're now shifting to a new team, and you're shifting to all these different places. And it does become challenging to keep it top of mind for a lot of people in the company. And so I think that the overall almost resolution to that is the more that you start to continue to talk about it, the more that you have accountability. And you're training people like leadership and managers and everyone to be aware of what it means, and what the language is, and how you can think of these things. It takes time, but then it slowly starts to get easier. Sometimes there is an understandable fear of I don't know where to begin, and I don't know what I don't know. I don't want to make a mistake. I don't know how to look at this. And should I be looking at this? But I think that when there is a lot of the understanding from the leadership level, and it goes down to managers, and you start to infuse it across different spaces, it does come a little bit easier. So I'll say what I like a lot of what thoughtbot does is there's a lot of open communication and transparency around things like goals, around hiring, and trainings that we maybe want to offer. So I do think it can be hard. I don't think that you can also get every single person involved in an expertise level. And you shouldn't expect anyone to be an expert, but starting to think about their job and how this could impact themselves or others, it does take some time. CHAD: And I already alluded to this earlier, but I think we have an additional challenge which is because the majority of us are all on client work all the time and consultants, that through-line, that continuity of when we identify something, really having someone who can be that continuous force, an organization as people rotate through the council or as people's workload with client work or attention ebbs and flows. I think that that is one of the additional challenges that we have that you help with. GERONDA: Yeah. And the rotations on the council are super helpful as well and then creating a space for anyone to come to you with questions. I like that we have this anonymous forum where you can submit a question if you're not comfortable asking it publicly, whether it's you want to learn more or something's going on that you want to talk through. I think that's also very, very helpful. And just continuously educating and giving the space for the practical implementation of what you're trying and what you're doing will also give you a little bit more of that comfortability rather than learning about something and then hoping that you're doing it well. So it's challenging, but we'll get there, and it's worth it. [laughs] And every company has these types of challenges, so it's not unique. CHAD: So you didn't originally start off working in the tech space. And so I'm curious what you've learned or seen that either is good or bad about the tech space in particular, what challenges this industry has. And it is Pride Month, so I guess there's a lens, particularly of LGBTQ+ challenges. Is tech particularly challenging? GERONDA: Yeah, I think as an industry, it's particularly challenging. So I worked in education, as I mentioned. I worked in the optometry industry, which I will say has very significant challenges just for the industry itself. But tech is challenging. I think there are moves that are being made in tech. But what I'm starting to notice in terms of challenges for the LGBTQ+ community is a lot of things where there is this sometimes perception, depending on how visible you may be, that you are qualified and not qualified. And what I mean by that is for the trans community or the transgender community, in particular, it can be very challenging because you may not what they call pass as the gender that you are looking to reassign yourself to. So if you are male, and I hear this a lot from other people, is if I'm male and I want to transition to female, I may still be going through the process. So when somebody looks at me, I might still present masculine features. And there is this misconception or this uncomfortability that I may not be qualified to do a job. So in the tech space as well, it's really hard during the hiring process sometimes to be taken seriously because of how you might look or how you might present yourself. I will say that in a lot of spaces, the culture in a company in tech what I've noticed is it has this generally casual feeling to it and a sense of you can come in, and you'll be taken seriously. And you can meet with different groups. But I think what I've noticed is when you're trying to get into tech, there are not a lot of people that are similar to you. And it's really hard to find those types of people because not everyone's going to be out. There are assumptions that are made that if a woman's hair is short, she must be lesbian. So we misgender people. And when going into the tech space, I think that there's a hesitation because you don't necessarily see a customer base similar to you or other team members similar to you. There could be those things like mental health challenges because you don't know if you can come out in a space, or you don't know if you're going to come out, and that could affect your role. So a lot of times, you'll hear and what I've been hearing in the tech space, is those who are transgender are usually the only ones on a team that are transgender. If you look at also for the LGBTQ+ community, you have to also consider the varying identities that come with a person. So an experience for a Black woman who is queer could be very different than a white male who is gay. So there are those different identities. So the vulnerability piece, and in the hiring process, and going into tech, you already hear what's going on and the challenges that are happening for the community. So you may be hesitant or might be a little bit fearful of what that would look like. I think in the tech space as well, a lot of executive leaders or managers are predominantly cis-gendered white males. So when you see that, and there's not as much representation at the top, you kind of have that sense, and you wonder, is this a place that I feel like I can belong and have a generally safe experience? And then the skill set, too, I think what I've been hearing, and what I've been reading and just researching, and what I've been noticing just speaking to other people is the promotion opportunity for those in the community feels like you have to work much harder to get known and be visible because a lot of times, you may want to promote people that are similar to you. So if you have teams that are more cisgendered White males, you may find that those teams are not as diverse. And the industry itself, I do feel like it is becoming more diverse. I think Lesbians Who Tech, for example, was a conference that I'm so glad that you let me attend because -- [laughter] CHAD: I didn't let you. That's not permission, or rather I encouraged you to attend. [laughter] GERONDA: Better wording. Thank you, Chad. You encouraged me to attend, and you're encouraging me to attend the one in October. But just seeing in my experience and looking at the tech space, I wasn't sure what the demographic would look like. But going to that conference and then going to the one...I'm in Seattle, Washington, and there was a local one in Seattle, Washington. There were hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of gay men, lesbians, transgender, and I didn't even realize that there were so many of us in the community in that space. And it was fantastic and amazing to see. But I think visibility is another piece that we're struggling with because you want to be able to amplify those voices and give those opportunities. So that's what I'm seeing a lot in the tech space. I do think that we're improving in those areas. But those are the challenges that I see in that space. CHAD: To go back to one thing that you said, this idea of being the only one puts people in a difficult position. And I think because tech as an industry is not that diverse, to begin with, you end up with that in a lot of different identities, not just LGBTQ+. If you are historically underrepresented or have historically underrepresented identities, it's really likely that you're going to be the only one and especially the intersection of your identities. If you have multiple underrepresented identities, then it's very likely that you might be the only one. Mid-Roll Ad: Are you an entrepreneur or start-up founder looking to gain confidence in the way forward for your idea? At thoughtbot, we know you’re tight on time and investment, which is why we’ve created targeted 1-hour remote workshops to help you develop a concrete plan for your product’s next steps. Over four interactive sessions, we work with you on research, product design sprint, critical path, and presentation prep so that you and your team are better equipped with the skills and knowledge for success. Find out how we can help you move the needle at: tbot.io/entrepreneurs CHAD: As leaders, as companies, as a community that wants to do better, let's solve it all right now, Geronda. GERONDA: [laughs] CHAD: No, we're not going to solve it all now. But what are some ways...like acknowledging that many of us work in spaces where we might not have...or when we're bringing someone onto the team who has underrepresented identities, they might be the only one. How do we make a space that's as inclusive as possible for that person? GERONDA: The big thing that I always like to say is try not to put all of the work on that person to solve it for themselves. And when they come in, I think what's really great and what I've seen work well is having that initial conversation with that person who's joining, get to know them first, and give them an opportunity to say, "If there's anything that you would love to have here or anything that you find challenging, I want you to feel that you can come to me. You can go to HR or DEI program manager, whoever." So it's providing that space to say if you need support in feeling comfortable, whether it's in your job or just you as an individual, I want to offer that. And so please be as open as you can with me. And it's providing those different spaces to amplify the voice of that person. So, in meetings, if you're noticing maybe that they are more reserved or hesitant to speak, ask for their opinion if they're okay with that. Recognizing the great work that they've done, giving a lot of that recognition, and then also offering different ways that they can get the community that they want. So what I love is that we have Slack, and we've started ERGs. And so that gives you a lot of opportunity. We have a Slack channel for the LGBTQ+ ERG. But we also have a private channel for LGBTQ so that we can talk about things that are working, not working, working well. And definitely getting their experience and looking for ways that you can involve them and recognize them and continuing to check in with them. So regular one-on-one checking could just be how are things going? How are you feeling being a part of this team? What are some things that we can do differently to make you feel welcome? And that's a question that you can ask everybody so that it's not feeling like you're just targeting that one person. So asking those questions and checking in with that person is really helpful. And then, considering the people that are coming in, how are things like benefits being provided? So things like if somebody who's transgender comes in or an employee decides they want to transition, are we providing gender-affirming care as part of benefits? So those are different ways that we can have them be included and offering up the things that we provide that could potentially be a community like Slack, like the DEI Council, like having those different conversations. And when you start to do things like this, like us doing this pride event, that is pretty significant. We didn't just slap a logo on LinkedIn and just say, "Oh, okay, Happy Pride." We had lightning talks. We get education. We learned about the community. You're having me on here to talk more about it. We're doing a big celebration. And so that in itself is a pretty critical step. But it is checking in and learning about the person and asking pretty frequently their experience, how they're feeling, their needs, and then looking to increase that diversity over time on that team so that you're not feeling tokenized as that person and always being the only. So those are things that I would suggest. CHAD: One maybe misconception or feeling that people might have...and I think it starts in the hiring process because you're not supposed to talk about these things in the hiring process. You're not allowed, at least in the United States, to ask someone their sexual orientation during the hiring process. Or if someone was transgender and you're interviewing them, it certainly should be a topic that you as a hiring manager don't bring up during the interview. So my sense is, and speaking personally but also broadly, it can then feel like you're not supposed to talk about those things once the person joins either. Why is that wrong? [laughter] GERONDA: So a couple of things I'll say about that is so if somebody brings it up, that can open up the conversation. I'm very open at the fact that I have a wife and that I'm lesbian. And I purposely do that, personally, to see what the reaction is going to be and what the company is going to offer. So I can determine if I feel like this is going to be a good space for me. I think that when you're having an interview, it's just like for anyone who may not be in the community. You don't really necessarily ask someone if they're married or "Are you having children?" You don't necessarily ask like, "Do you fall in this community?" or "Talk about transgender." Because a lot of times, there is this feeling of I have no idea what this space is going to feel like for me. I'm not going to out myself, and you may even out somebody who may not be out in their professional or their personal life yet. And you want to provide that comfortable space. But you don't want to do that either because then that person and across other interviewing spectrums bias can amplify a lot. And you can mislabel someone's gender. You might use the wrong pronouns, and pronouns are always optional. So I always say look at the person for their experience and what you want to learn more about relating to the job. Of course, you want to learn about them a little bit more personally as well. But it is more harm to try to identify their identity because that could lead to bias and could ultimately lead to discrimination because you don't know what that person's view is in the interview process either. CHAD: But once someone joins your team and assuming that they're open about their identities, and this applies to all identities, I think, then quote, unquote "treating everybody the same or ignoring people's identities actually does the reverse of what people intend." It makes an environment where people feel like they don't belong, that the identities that they have or what are important to them aren't recognized. And so you're not recognizing the person's full self, and you're not accommodating it and trying to build an inclusive environment. It could actually backfire if you intentionally ignore people's identities, right? GERONDA: Yes. So it can backfire if you ignore the identities, especially the identities that have been shared openly. So if I'm going to fill out a survey, let's say where identify myself as part of our hiring process, as a manager, I may not say, "Hey, I noticed that you checked off that you're transgender. How can I support you?" But it is going through the onboarding process and other areas to say here's what we offer from ERGs to benefits, to how we work, how we work as a team. And if that person does disclose that they're transgender, or they're in the LGBTQ+ community, or they mention their culture or what have you, you can then direct them in the right places to say, "Oh, we actually do have this LGBTQ+ ERG if you're interested. I know you may be talked about it in the onboarding process. If you're open to it, you can definitely join us, and here's how." And then, over time, it is really thinking about you may not know the identities of your team but taking time to do things in practice that would touch upon all identities. So when you're thinking about having team conversations, there may be somebody on your team who is neurodiverse. They might have autism, or they might have ADHD. And how you're communicating...then you start to think about meetings. Do you just do Google Meet meetings? Do you just do Typeform meetings? You have to think about different learning styles and for different identities. Like it's Pride Month right now, just saying Happy Pride Month to everybody. And they may then be open to sharing more about their identity and sharing the activities that are happening in Pride Month, and encouraging them to do things on the council. So you want to make decisions that could think about different identities, even if you may not know what those identities are. And I also think it's being proactive and being ready that you might have those identities. So things like I had mentioned where you might be providing gender-affirming care, or you might look at your parental leave policies and other things that you have available for that. So I would say without knowing the identity, I think over time, as you build trust that [inaudible 28:24] start to develop and come out. But it's also if somebody's coming to you in confidence with something, really taking that very, very seriously. If I, God forbid, came to you, Chad, and was like, "Chad, I'm coming out to you. I am lesbian, but I'm not comfortable with sharing with everybody else." I would trust that you wouldn't share that amongst other people. So that's another piece to that as well. CHAD: Yeah, that's a really good point. I think as people in that position, in management positions, we need proper training around those kinds of situations to ensure that we handle them well. I think training is an important part of being a manager but also just DEI in general training and equipping everybody. GERONDA: Yes. Having a common language across the board and a common understanding across the board is very important. Because when you think of diversity, equity, and inclusion, everybody may have varying understandings of what those mean. Some people may not know what those mean, and so having that common language across the board and understanding. And then yes, training, of course, and opportunities for you to then practice that training in spaces and getting feedback along the way. CHAD: So I imagine that there are a lot of people listening who this is really important to them. It's an important topic or a place where they want to make improvement for themselves or their company. They might not have a lot of support or resources at their company. There might not be a DEI Council already. And I know every company is different. Every team is different. But are there some things that individuals or leaders might start thinking about or doing specifically if they're just getting started with this? GERONDA: So if you're just getting started, I always say there are a lot of great resources out there for you to consider. So whether that's a book...LinkedIn has really great training on just understanding DEI and how to be an inclusive leader or work in an inclusive environment. But I would say a really great place to start is if you don't have this already, think about what your demographic looks like. And what are some things that other companies may be doing? So joining different channels and saying, "We're at the beginning stages. What are some things that we can do?" But I think what's most helpful to start is you have to gauge where you are as a company and understand your people and the demographic and do something that allows for an open discussion and open forum to get perspectives from other people. So I know things like listening tours where you might talk to different departments or different teams. Or if a company is small enough like our company, you can meet with each person and then think about what are some common themes that you're seeing? That can also create a great space for that. I'd also say you can put out a survey to see what the experience is. So if you are doing things like engagement surveys, you can absolutely include things in there about what do you think we're missing? What would you hope to see? But I think a lot of it is you have to understand your people and what you have available to you at the company and provide an opportunity for everyone to share their ideas and perspectives to that. So what I've seen work really well is one, when you start to understand there has to also be this communication and this accountability at the leadership level to say, "This is why we're focusing on this. This is why we think it's important. We want to hear from you." And something that I thought was really unique and helpful is if your company is small enough or even if it's big enough, a lot of companies what they'll do is they'll have the CEO, or they'll have managers host these kinds of forums where you can meet with them, and you can share. You can ask them a ton of questions. You can share your ideas. You can share what you hope to achieve from this and just starting to get perspectives first. And that may, over time, start to evolve into a council or people wanting to do an ERG. But really get as much as you can from people and then learn a lot from that as well. CHAD: That's great. I asked that question, and then it turns out it was one of the ones that someone submitted in the chat from a thoughtbot person. GERONDA: [laughs] CHAD: So I wanted to acknowledge that even though we overlapped the question, that question technically comes from Amy Wall, a developer at thoughtbot. Another question from Fernando is how can other employees support DEI people like you from a daily perspective? GERONDA: Just take over my job. [laughter] No, I'm just kidding. So it's always helpful for me to have transparent conversations of where you are. If you want to help me, it's helpful to learn about your experience and come to me with things that you're seeing or ask me questions. Also, don't be afraid either to say, "I really don't know what this means or what this is. Can you help me?" And it's also bringing learning as well because I'm not a developer, and I'm not a designer. [chuckles] I think that the work that our team does is fantastic. And they're super smart. And when I look at a lot of the things that are happening, like coding and conversations, although I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, it's really amazing to see. But from your perspective, there may be things that I am suggesting, like, oh, maybe we need to increase accessibility, and we do need to do these things. But be okay to challenge me and say, "I actually don't know that that's going to work well or not." But I think to support me in my role, the more that I know of the challenges, and the more that I know about you individually, and the more that you continue to bring these things up from a DEI perspective is super helpful. So what I've noticed and what I've really loved about working here is we have those opportunities to have those very open, transparent conversations. And we can post about issues, and we can post about things that we want to change in our handbook. And sometimes people come to me with questions. And I love that people come to me and say, "This is what I want to work on more. Do you have any suggestions?" That really helps me in my role because as much as I would love to know everything that's happening with every single person, it can be challenging. So be honest with me and just share what's going on and be willing to learn and share resources with me too. Yes, I'm a DEI practitioner, but that doesn't mean I know everything. I know it's very surprising to a lot of people right now that I don't know everything. CHAD: [laughs] GERONDA: But share things you're reading. Share things that you've noticed. That helps me a ton. So that's how I say you can help me. And thank you for that question, Fernando. I appreciate that. CHAD: A thing I would add is recognizing that there are, especially at thoughtbot, multiple levels of ways that you can support and contribute to our efforts. So we try to identify on the council okay, this is the thing we want to work on. The council isn't intended to do everything. But so what we'll often do is we'll say, okay, we're going to gather a group of people in a task force, and we're going to work on this. I think that's another level of contribution. So showing up for those participating in them when they arrive, and frankly, not signing on to too much because you spread yourself too thin and then can't do a good job doing everything that you want to do. So yeah, those are some tips that I would add. Geronda, thank you so much for joining me on the show. I really appreciate it. GERONDA: Thank you for having me. I appreciate that. CHAD: Happy Pride. [laughs] GERONDA: Yes. Happy Pride. I'm so excited. I feel like I'm a little biased, but this is like my favorite month of the year. [laughter] Lots of fun celebrations. And of course, I recognize other holidays, and I think they are very important. But this one is generally very close to my heart. So thank you. CHAD: Well, if folks want to follow along with you, get in touch with you, find out more, where are all the places that they can do that? GERONDA: Yes. Follow me on LinkedIn, Geronda Wollack-Spiller. I'm on Twitter at @gerondaws. And I think those are the two best places to follow me. I'm most active on LinkedIn. And I usually respond there pretty heavily. CHAD: We'll include those links in the show notes, which you can find attached to this episode. And you can subscribe to the show, find all those notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. And thanks to all the thoughtbot people who were in the chat, and with the questions, and paid attention and listened to this episode. And see you next time. GERONDA: Yes. [laughs] ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Geronda Wollack-Spiller.
Panos Siozos is Co-Founder and CEO of LearnWorlds, an online course platform for creating, selling, and promoting online courses. Chad talks with Panos about building e-learning platforms dating back to 1999, providing rich feature sets and catering to customers located in lots of different places, and deciding to stop bootstrapping and take investor money. LearnWorlds (https://www.learnworlds.com/) Follow LearnWorlds on Twitter (https://twitter.com/learnworlds), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/learnWorldsCo?fref=ts), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/learnworlds/), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/user/learnWorlds), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/learnworlds/). Follow Panos on Twitter (https://twitter.com/psiozos) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/siozos/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giants Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel and with me today is Panos Siozos, Co-Founder and CEO of LearnWorlds, an online course platform for creating, selling, and promoting online courses. Panos, thank you so much for joining me. PANOS: Hi, Chad, and thanks for hosting me. CHAD: You have been working on LearnWorlds for a while now. Where did the idea come from? PANOS: I guess this has been brewing in our minds, mine and my co-founder's, for many years. We built our very first e-learning platform back in 1999, right after completing our studies in computer science. And we started postgraduate studies in educational technology. So in an academic setting, though, we had built many, many e-learning products, platforms, and authoring tools. And we were always exploring the state of the art. And we always had it in the back of our minds the possibility and our obligation, I guess, to create a commercial product at some point and try to get the state of the art of e-learning that we were exploring in the academia and put it at the hands of actual trainers, and teachers, and give them the tools to create the best possible online courses that they could. That was always at the back of our minds. And after completing our Ph.D. studies, after working in different jobs and different roles, we got back together at some point in 2012. And at that point, the conditions for e-learning were very, very mature. It was like bandwidth was in abundance. It was easy to create videos. It was easy to distribute videos. Cloud computing made it even easier to create software as a service platforms. And we understood that it was the perfect moment to come together, take our expertise, and try to put it in an amazing product that would be commercial and help all those people out there that wanted to create online courses. CHAD: So I think you launched in 2014. PANOS: Yes, we spent a couple of years. We started building the platform in 2012 in stealth mode. We were, I guess, traditional engineers. We had this build it, and they will come mentality. CHAD: [chuckles] PANOS: We had done almost like in the first year almost zero research on customer development and business development. We just had in mind to create the best possible platform that we could, and then obviously, people would just buy it because it's the best. Obviously, things don't always work that way. So we created the platform then we started talking with potential customers. We launched commercially in 2014. And this is when we had our very first customers, people who had the online courses. They had the online content. They had audiences, but they didn't have a platform. It seemed a huge burden and a huge task to create an actual platform to deliver and sell their courses. And this is where we came in and started providing our tool as a software as a service solution. CHAD: So in 2014, I'm sure that there were other competing products on the market. Today, there are probably even more. What makes LearnWorlds different from all of those or better from those? PANOS: In 2014, it was very early, I guess, in online courses. Most people were going to marketplaces like Udemy or Coursera. It was very difficult back then to create your own online school, to own the website. We had people who were either using traditional clunky Jurassic; I would say, learning management systems. CHAD: [chuckles] PANOS: And they were trying to adapt them for e-commerce and all the stuff, and it was always very difficult to do. Others were trying to duct tape together WordPress sites and plugins and custom codes. And that was something that wasn't scaling very gracefully. I would say after a couple of 100 users, it was almost impossible to maintain sites like that. Others were trying to create their own platforms, write code internally or hire a couple of developers. And then a few months or a couple of years and after having spent a couple hundred thousand dollars, they were realizing that this is very difficult to develop a tool like that unless you've done that in the past and you know what you're doing. So it was very timely to bring to the market a product like that. What differentiated us from the others and what still differentiates us is that we have an obsessive focus on the learner experience. We're probably the only, I don't want to sound presumptuous, but we're probably the only course platform creators or, let's say, founders or co-founders of a course platform who have actually studied that. And we have PhDs in edtech. So we are bringing lots of our academic background into the platform. And we know that initially, this was even detrimental to growing the platform because, in some ways, the platform was even too complex for what people were expecting and could absorb back then in terms of features. But as the years passed by, we managed to find an excellent balance between how powerful the platform can be in terms of amazing design, offering great, interactive, engaging learning experiences, and also offering the ease of use and all the commercial features that users would expect. So we have a deep product with lots of offering affordances. For example, people can create amazing interactive videos very easily, just like editing a PowerPoint, I would say. You can just upload a normal video that you shot yourself, perhaps using a mobile phone, and you can convert it into an amazing interactive experience. And this is something very important for the students, the customers that will actually, at the end, consume the content. So to this day, the platform is very innovative. We're still participating in research projects, and we're seeing what is the state of the art of e-learning? And we're trying to implement that into the platform, obviously, now with amazing feedback from thousands of customers and millions of end-users. So it's an amazing opportunity to give to the people the things that they actually need and use to create the best possible online courses and sell as many of them as possible. CHAD: One of the things, and it speaks right to the value proposition of the product that you use, is that there are so many features that you can have. And so, if you embark on the journey of creating your own platform, it's really easy to look at the surface level of what that looks like and say, "Oh, that's easy." PANOS: Yes. CHAD: But then, when it comes to other features, you have the ability to make mobile applications on LearnWorlds and those kinds of things. Like, that's a rich feature set that is really difficult to deliver on your own, right? PANOS: It's very difficult to deliver on your own, and some things look deceptively simple. And when you actually see what is under the hood, it is very, very complicated to deliver a super user-friendly and easy tool or platform or authoring environment. So the platform is very powerful because people have all these different needs. We're talking here this is a platform that can support both the, I don't know, the nice, old lady that wants to sell some knitting courses, and she has a community of a couple of dozen people who follow her and consume her courses, all the way to online schools that run with more than 300,000 users. It's extremely difficult to be able to scale a school to a size like that. And in many cases, people might start simple. They might even create a nice, simple user interface with a couple of videos. This is something that everybody believes that they can do. And they can do it initially, but once they have a couple of hundred users, or a couple of thousand users, their success becomes problematic. They cannot keep up with all the demands for something like that. And then they need more features. They need more features for doing their marketing. They need analytics. They need the scale and the reliability that a platform that serves a few thousand users requires. There are all sorts of things that people miss. So we believe that you don't necessarily have to reinvent the wheel, especially when there are amazing ready-made wheels out there, white-labeled wheels where you can just go to a platform like ours. And in a couple of days, you can have an amazing online school customized and optimized for your own case study, for your own audience, for your own language, for your own design. The settings that you need to power your own business model, whether it's selling courses on their own, selling memberships, selling subscriptions, bundles of courses, all those different things that look simple on the outside but they require lots of precision to work great and delivering in scale. CHAD: So, given the rich feature set, I'm sure that you have a lot of customers located in lots of different places. I'm sure they have different needs, too, different profiles. How do you as a company go about deciding what to work on? And how does the workflow through your organization? PANOS: This is always a very interesting task, something that we are doing almost every month. We update our roadmap on a quarterly basis. But every month, we go out and check again the feature requests, and the trends in the market and the industry, and all the things that are happening. We receive hundreds of feature requests from our existing customers every week, and these are being organized and prioritized. And we always try, obviously, to help our own existing customer base. But we work with many partners and other platforms as well to create integrations and to deliver features, and uncover needs that people have today. And in the past couple of years, as you can imagine, with COVID, we had to adapt many changes to the new business models and the new ways that people started creating, delivering, and consuming online courses. For example, when COVID started, almost overnight, there was a huge demand for creating and delivering live courses with no pre-recorded videos. That's something that used to be quite frequent feature requests, let's say. Before COVID, we had it in our roadmap. Once we understood what COVID would mean for the industry, almost overnight, we stopped other things that we were doing and started working hard on delivering, let's say, our Zoom integration. So in just a matter of a few short weeks, it was super easy for anybody who wanted to teach. You imagine how the situation was amidst the lockdowns. People their businesses were shutting down. They couldn't reach their audiences, their customers. Their revenue streams had ran out. So we brought to the market this integration, and it was super easy for a photography teacher, a yoga teacher, a coach from anywhere to just create an online course, plug in their Zoom account, and be able to deliver courses, either one-on-one, to a small group or even to hundreds of students. So we had to adapt as the market was adapting, and the same comes when it comes about business models, ways of getting paid, different payment methods. For example, some European countries...as a European company, we're also very attuned to what our European customers need. In several European countries, credit cards, traditional credit cards like Visa and MasterCard are not the most frequently used methods of digital payments. So we have to work with local payment gateways to provide these kinds of solutions. Also, for taxes, taxes in Europe are way more when you're selling from one country to the other. They’re much more difficult and complex than in the U.S., So we have to adapt to the demands from customers and offer solutions like that. So it's always anticipating, seeing what the actual users need but also keeping a large chunk, I would say, space for innovating, bringing to the product things that people don't actually ask for because they don't even know that they could exist and that they could be helpful. And this is where our expertise, I would say, comes into play. Our team is constantly researching trends and other platforms and how people interact with platforms and other tools. And we try to stay ahead of the curve, not just follow what others are doing but be the leaders in this kind of chase. And rightly, you mentioned there are dozens of platforms out there. It's great to see so much innovation in so many different platforms. Especially after COVID, I can say that it seems like there is a viral spread of new platforms. We almost see one new platform every week. And it's nice because it seems that the industry is very hot. And there is lots of demand for these kinds of solutions. We do have a head start, and we will continue to improve the product and bring an amazing solution to people who want to use something like that. MID-ROLL AD: Now that you have funding, it’s time to design, build and ship the most impactful MVP that wows customers now and can scale in the future. thoughtbot Lift Off brings you the most reliable cross-functional team of product experts to mitigate risk and set you up for long-term success. As your trusted, experienced technical partner, we’ll help launch your new product and guide you into a future-forward business that takes advantage of today’s new technologies and agile best practices. Make the right decisions for tomorrow, today. Get in touch at: thoughtbot.com/liftoff (https://thoughtbot.com/liftoff) CHAD: One of the features that you have is localization, being able to have your content in lots of different languages. How early on did you add that feature? PANOS: This is something that we had to do very early on. The first iteration of the platform, before even founding the company when we were just a side project, was built for the Greek market and the Greek language. So that was in a very difficult situation back in 2013, 2014. There was a huge financial crisis in Greece back then. So once we had the product ready, we realized that nobody wanted to invest in e-learning. It was a very tough situation to be in. So that's probably one of the best things that happened to us. Because almost overnight, like in day two, we had to go to an existing mature market, which was the U.S. market, where people were willing to test a new platform. They really liked what the platform could do. They were ready to risk a product, a new product that was brought into market by a small ragtag team from the other side of the world. And so we had to adapt to a new language. So that was something that came in very early on and was very helpful in dealing with different markets and different localizations, working with different payment gateways, and becoming an international product from very early on. So right now, we have customers in more than 110 countries; even though U.S. is by far our biggest market, almost half of our market is based in the U.S. But we are very willing and able to work with new markets and help them and help people bring their own localizations and their own translations into the platform. CHAD: Yeah, that jumped out at me because I've seen other products that don't have that feature. And I think it's in part because a new company started in the United States knows that they have a fairly big addressable market just within the U.S., and they don't necessarily need to support multiple languages. And I thought that, and that's what I heard, was that the fact that you were not in the U.S. compelled you to have localization really early on. You've also mentioned a few other ways in which that has influenced you. How do you think being in Greece and being a European startup has influenced you as a company overall? PANOS: This is the DNA and the blueprint of how the company eventually grew. For example, we started in Greece amidst a dire financial crisis. We were, from day one, a remote company because of the conditions of the co-founders. So we happened to be in three different cities, two different countries. And we just wanted to work together. We didn't have any long-term plans of how a company would evolve. So from day one, we became a remote company. So as you can imagine, in the next few years, that gave us...and even when COVID came, that gave us an immense advantage because that's the way we had been working. We knew that full remote was an option from day one. The second thing that really also influenced us is that because we were growing in a situation...amidst this financial crisis, we were a bootstrapped company. We didn't have access to any external funding, which obviously made things much more difficult at the beginning. We couldn't get access to funds and invest in marketing very early on and push the platform heavily. On the other end, as a bootstrapped company, we developed a mentality of being very resource-efficient, cash-efficient, paying great attention to all of our KPIs and our unit economics, doing lots of unscalable things, as Paul Graham would say, you know, wearing lots of hats, investing a lot in people who didn't have the credentials, let's say, or the experience that one would expect from to hire in a U.S-founded startup. So we had to invest in the local people, in the local skills, amazing youth. We're talking here back in 2013, 2014. Youth unemployment in Greece was about 70%. So it was a terrible situation. It's like this meme where people were asked to have experience, but nobody was giving them a chance to develop this work experience. So we invested in people like that. And that's the best thing we did. So we're talking about a remote bootstrapped startup with a can-do mentality with access to amazing people, not specialized or skilled, let's say, or experienced in this particular software as a service role but very smart and willing to work and excel and do better for themselves and for the company. So I think that was the recipe that helped the business grow. And also, coming from a small market, we had to adapt to a fragmented European market. Europe is a huge market of about 500 million people, a few less now, a few million less now, barring UK. But this is a fragmented market. You don't have a unified market of one language. One currency may be, yes, in most countries, but we're talking different languages, and different tax regimes, and all the staff and different mentality even. So we had to adapt. This is difficult. But also, it gives you the resilience and the flexibility to adapt to all these different cases. And then going international was very natural to us. It's not that we started in a small market, and then we're trying to create a foothold in a second market or the third market. From day one, we had to look outward to find the people who would use and dare to use a platform like ours and try to be our best selves and try to give them an amazing product. CHAD: Yeah, that's great. You mentioned that you initially bootstrapped. Have you taken investment since then? PANOS: Yes, we have. We did a small seed round of about $1.1 million in 2019 with a small local VC. And then last year, about a year ago, we closed a Series A funding round of $32 million with Insight Partners. CHAD: That's great. Congratulations. What caused you to make the decision to stop bootstrapping and take an investment in that seed round? PANOS: That was the point when we realized that we needed the extra fuel in order to push the pedal. We were seeing that we already had a great product. We were on to something. It would have been too slow to continue working in a bootstrapped mode with a few resources that we had. We wanted to accelerate. We wanted to accelerate hiring, product development, and all this stuff. So we didn't actually need the money back then for the viability of the company, which is actually, I guess, the best reason to raise money and the best time when we don't actually need it. So that's how we started. That gave us the extra confidence. It allowed us to bring in a few extra people. We started investing more in hiring professionals that had already done that, who had already experience in SaaS businesses and international businesses. And that gave us a lot more certainty and trust in ourselves to keep growing the product and going further. And this last round with Insight Partners...Insight Partners is one of the top VCs in the private equity funds. They also bring in an amazing team of operators who can always jump in and help in case we need something. So it helps us expand our horizons, be more aggressive in our hiring, much more confident about what we can do. And that also has given a great boost to the business and the team. CHAD: This idea of acceleration and going faster is an interesting one. I've seen it in our clients as well where, especially if you're in a competitive market, you could have a good growing reasonable business, but if everyone else around you is raising money, raising capital, and accelerating, that can put you back especially if you don't realize it. Do you feel like that was part of what was causing you to want to accelerate? PANOS: Yes, yes, definitely. So e-learning is a complex industry, let's say. What we're doing is very competitive because the market is always changing. People demand more. New business models require new features, and everybody wants an all-in-one platform that will keep doing more and more. So you cannot just stand still. It's not like a micro SaaS where you can have a feature the same working for five years, and you can still have people signing up and using that. You have to be ahead. You have to adapt. This is a very fast pacing industry. And now there are so many different players from all different industries who look at online courses and content delivery in general in new ways and start approaching from different angles, whether they are marketing tools, or video hosting providers, or email marketing providers, or traditional learning management systems. So there are many people around this online course industry. So you need to have a war chest. You need to bring in experts. You need to keep investing in R&D and improving the product and also customer success, making sure that your amazing customers can perform even better, and they can take advantage of all the features in the platform. So you cannot just stand still; that's not an option. You can perhaps get away with it for two to three years. But eventually, the product will fizzle out. We will not be able to compete with what is happening. You mentioned all these different platforms coming into the market. You have to stay ahead. And luckily, now, with the recent funding and obviously with the help of our customers, we have all the resources that we needed to implement the vision that we have for the product. All the things that we couldn't do in the past because we were constrained in terms of resources, and time and money, now we are able to innovate much faster, bring many more new features to the platform and to the market, and help people create the best possible online courses. CHAD: You mentioned that when you raised that initial seed round, you did it with a local investment company. Was that intentional? I took a peek; the company is Marathon Venture Capital. And they specifically say on their website that they day one partner to Greek tech founders, so they're very focused. [laughs] PANOS: Yes, they're very focused. There is a huge network obviously of Greek founders almost everywhere in the world. So they have a deep pool of people to reach out to and a huge network. It was definitely; also there was a parameter of convenience, you know, them being close, being able to communicate easily, having the same kind of mentality and the same kind of experiences. This obviously makes things much more easier. I guess at that point; it would be much more difficult to go from a bootstrapped remote ragtag team to a fully funded company with a traditional, let's say, Silicon Valley-based VC. Even explaining back then in 2019 that you are a remote company wasn't easy. It's something that made some people wonder about how serious you are about that. What are your plans going forward? How are you going to hire? How are you going to compete? How are you going to hire people if you don't have these amazing startup offices with the pool tables and all the stuff? But we were saying that it's feasible. You can do it. I mean, you can find the people who want this kind of lifestyle who appreciate this flexibility, who want to be close to their families and work from their small cities somewhere in Greece or in other countries and be close, let's say, online with another team. We weren't crazy back then. So it was much easier to make these kinds of propositions to a local team. I guess it was convenient, and we had a good match. But already, this investment prepared us a lot in terms of organizing the business, due diligence, taking care of our finance and reporting, and all the stuff, and legal and made us ready to go for a bigger investment later when we needed it and when the time was right. CHAD: So from three co-founders in 2014, how large is your team now? PANOS: I think with the recent hires, we're about 120 people right now. We are still fully remote. In fact, in the next few weeks, we will just open a small co-working space in Athens where about half of our staff resides. But this is going to be more of a co-working space kind of experience. I think right now; we have people in our team from 16 different nationalities in 11 different countries. But still, the majority of the people are based in Greece, so here are the roots of the company. But we are internationalizing fast, getting people everywhere we can find them. People that fit the business, we're happy to bring them on board, and these kinds of remote-first flexible environment that we have is very fitting for some amazing people from all over the world. And they prefer that actually than returning back to an office. CHAD: For yourself as a leader, how have you needed to grow or change as your team has scaled so much? PANOS: We're still doing that. CHAD: [laughs] PANOS: It's not just me. It's my co-founders as well, my two co-founders, Fanis and Giorgos. I wouldn't have been able, obviously, to do anything alone, neither any one of us, without having the others. Still to this day, we're very hands-on. We're involved in all the projects. In some cases, we were a bit more reluctant to delegate. But still, the team really appreciates that we're still in the trenches with them, learning, solving problems every day, trying to not give solutions from both ad hoc but be with them, solve problems with them. That's something that they appreciate a lot. And obviously, we are still...every day we are transitioning. We started as a team of three people on a side project that was just taking a few hours of our time per week. And this business came to be the biggest part of our lives, spending 12-plus hours every day and more, and weekends, and everything else with a growing team amidst some very difficult conditions like COVID where things were, you know, in our families and our cities, things were blowing up. And we had to stay close to our teams and keep delivering a product that was skyrocketing in terms of demand. So we are still learning; that's our motto here in LearnWorlds, getting better every single day, trying to enable our team be more enablers now and better project managers, inspire people in order to help them deliver the best that they can. We are lucky to be in a great industry with amazing customers, all of them creative people who create great content. They love their products. They love their own customers. So this is something that helps us have a great mission that our employees also share. So they see that it's not just about the numbers or about getting the MRR or getting the sale or whatever. But they really enjoy helping our customers and helping them create amazing little, online businesses and get their products online. Every day we get amazing feedback from our customers, and that really makes people around here very happy. At the end of the day, they go home, and they know that they helped launch another business or two and help people, in some cases, realize their dream of becoming independent, you know, escaping nine-to-five, or helping a coach or a trainer get some amazing reward for the fruit of their labor and the content that they have created with so much work. So this is a great thing to watch. And it's great being around people who enjoy this kind of business and this kind of environment. CHAD: Is there anything that when you were starting the company based on your prior experiences, both good or bad, at the other companies that you had worked at along the way in your career or your co-founders’ careers when you said okay, we're starting LearnWorlds. We're starting our own company. We specifically want to not make this mistake or instill this value in our culture that you were very intentional about? PANOS: There are probably a lot of things. I'm not sure if I can name one in particular, but we always wanted to create a business that we would love being employees of. So we wanted to be in an environment that we would enjoy being ourselves. That's probably kind of egocentric, like, it was about us. But I think there were some unspoken values in some cases or cases where we would see that no, this is bad; we shouldn't go down that path. We didn't want to replicate ourselves and create a company of people who'd look like us and react to the same things that we would. But we always wanted to have an environment that we would feel happy, and we would love to be part of. So far, at that scale of 120, we have managed, I guess, to do that. In many cases, this is also our number one priority. Features come and go. People come and go. Customers come and go. But we know that the biggest strength of this company is the minds of the people who work for us. We want them to be happy. We want them to come to work happy every day and bring their best. That is our major priority. And especially in times like that, their mental and physical well-being as well it's a major priority for us. And we believe that if we create these conditions of safety and trust, the empowerment and learning as well of constant improvement, we will achieve our goal, and we will have a team that will be working for a product that is going to be better every day and every week. And this shows, at the end of the day, this is something that customers can appreciate, either by seeing a new feature in the platform that they love or by receiving some amazing help from one of our customer support reps or an amazing demo from one of our salespeople. This is something that we are lucky still to show everywhere in the company. This is the mentality of the entire company. Hopefully, we'll be able to preserve these kinds of values and attitude as we scale. CHAD: That's great. I really wish that for you. Good luck and congratulations on all the success. Thank you so much for coming on the show and sharing your story and your wisdom about scaling the company. If folks want to learn more about LearnWorlds or get in touch with you or follow along, where are all the places that they can do that? PANOS: You can always come to our website www.learnworlds.com. Our platform offers a 30-day free trial, no credit cards, no strings attached. If you have any questions around online courses or any ideas about what you could build yourself for your business, come to our website. Join us, and we will be happy to help you out and show you what is possible today. CHAD: Great. And you can subscribe to the show and find notes and a full transcript of this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Panos Siozos.
Tarush Aggarwal is the Founder and CEO of 5X, the modern data stack as a managed service that enables companies to answer business questions without having to worry about building data infrastructure or bringing in the right data engineering team. Chad talks with Tarush about the modern data stack movement, choosing things that make sense on behalf of their customers, and building a team culture at a company with a fairly large time zone distribution. 5x (https://5x.co/) Follow 5x on Twitter (https://twitter.com/DataWith5x), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/DataWith5x), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/datawith5x/), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyOHdgLesV3FesXXl9-8V_w), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/datawith5x). Follow Tarush on Twitter (https://twitter.com/tarush) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/tarushaggarwal/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Tarush Aggarwal, the Founder and CEO of 5X, the modern data stack as a managed service that enables companies to answer business questions without having to worry about building data infrastructure or bringing in the right data engineering team. Tarush, thank you for joining me. TARUSH: Chad, thank you so much for having me on the show. Really looking forward to being here and hopefully adding some value for your listeners. CHAD: Yes, I'm sure that they will. I think many companies are either thinking about how they build their data infrastructure or thinking about how they leverage data for their business now. So 5X provides a path for them to do that, and I'd love to dive in. How does 5X, like I said in the intro, enable companies to get started without having to worry about building this infrastructure themselves or this team themselves? TARUSH: Yeah, totally. It's a great question. Just to kind of zoom out for a quick second, the data space has been really hot for a few years now, and there's this area often called the modern data stack, which is really led by a few vendors mainly around this concept of the data warehouse, reporting tools, and modeling, and ingestion. And this is really a new area for the data space, which has really become popular. So you also have, you know, ten years ago, you had Hadoop and Spark, and all of these different data tools, which in general have become less popular, and the modern data stack movement is one of the big movements happening. So at a macro level, we have this new movement. If you zoom in, this movement happens to be one of the most fragmented movements. So what that means is for each different layer, you have different vendors. And so, even if you want to do something today as simple as building dashboards, you have to first ingest this data. In your average company, you've got [inaudible] at different sources. You need to put it in. You need to then store it, you need to model it, and then you can build a dashboard. CHAD: You also need to make all the different choices about which ones you're going to choose at every level. TARUSH: Exactly. At each of these levels, you have multiple billion-dollar companies today competing. So the thing about fragmentation of the space and, you know, I think data along with maybe DevOps and security are probably the most fragmented spaces. The thing about fragmented spaces is that they are great for extremely savvy customers; think of large tech companies who have 100% data teams. But for 90% of businesses, if you want to get value from data, it makes it much harder because you have to sign multiple contracts with these vendors, architecture, set up security. So what 5X very, very fundamentally is doing is we're business-focused. We allow you, you know, in a month or two, you better go to 5x.co and add your credit card, and you will have business analytics out of the box. And we can help you make some of these decisions as to what are the best vendors for your price points, for your use cases and give you an end-to-end platform so that you aren't worrying about signing these bills and sort of setting it up. You're focused on your business outcome and your business use cases. CHAD: Where did...I happen to know, but because I did my research for the episode. [laughs] But you were at WeWork leading data at WeWork, right? TARUSH: Yes. CHAD: So I imagine you faced this problem and saw this problem firsthand, right? TARUSH: You know, I've been fortunate that I've spent my career in the data space. So back in the day at Salesforce and now and most recently at WeWork. And companies like this, in general, are aggressively hiring and aggressively growing these teams. So at WeWork, we had 50 people working on stitching together the platform and finding the best vendors, and being involved in that. So at WeWork, we were really focused on building our own version of the platform. I think what's interesting is ever since I left and especially over the last 24 months, where the sort of startup space has become so active, I'm still getting pinged on LinkedIn like every day or two with companies looking to get started. And over a period of time, you see the trends that everyone is reinventing the wheel. What do I do first? What's the first use case? What infrastructure do I need? How do I set this up? So the idea of this really came less from WeWork, where we had the team and the expertise. It came more from the other 90% of the companies that don't have the resources that WeWork had, at least at that time. CHAD: So what do your customers of 5X typically look like then? Are there particular industries or data needs? Or on the tech side, on the development side, what do their development teams look like interacting with 5X? TARUSH: That's a great question. And again, at a macro level, data is a global phenomenon. It's not industry-specific. Now, different industries have different requirements. So obviously, as a consumer, what you need to collect, the tools and infrastructure you need are quite different from a B2B business. So there is this concept that for each vertical, what stack makes sense, and that's, again, something which we can do. Typically, our customers have found some sort of a product-market fit. They have a business, and now they're looking to go scale the business to get to either entering growth phase, or an optimization phase, or a profitability phase. And in each of these phases, data plays a vital role. So they are at this point where they know that they want to get value from it. They might even have a data team with 4,5,10 people. And they really might have figured out their first use cases and had the basic dashboards. And, inevitably, they come to this question of what now? What do we do now? So that's one large sort of vertical. And then the other one is they want to go do it. They want to go invest in data, but they have no idea how to do it. And in that case, they're looking at us not just the platform, but we also have this concept of on-demand talent. Today, we're interviewing thousands of data engineers a week. We get to hire the top 1%, and we pre-train them on different stacks. And then, companies can integrate these lead engineers at a weekly level or completely on-demand and use that to go build out the dashboards. We have never thought of replacing data teams for companies. But it's really interesting to see that some of the early-stage companies are using our platform and our on-demand talent to literally do end-to-end data as a service. CHAD: So at 5X, you're actually providing those team members, those consulting services? TARUSH: Yeah, so we look at it less from the consultant point of view, you know, a consultant typically you would go, and you have your statement of work, and that's going to be a three-month project, and it might be a fixed price. And sort of inevitably, they're looking to...they don't work with hundreds of thousands of companies, a few of them might, but in general, we work a little bit differently. So we have this concept of on-demand talent. So we have these engineers who we hire, and we pre-train them and essentially build software to basically allow people to add these engineers on top of the platform and sort of use them. So they work in one-week sprint cycles. It's fully on-demand. So you can have a group of engineers for one week and the next week not have that. And typically, consultants don't work in that way. And we don't really do the statements of work, and here's what's going to happen. These engineers are sort of put into these things what we call pods, and pods are three engineers and a product manager. And they operate on these one-week sprints. You can use this end-to-end team or these engineering pods to go build out your use cases, which is similar to what a consultant on the services model does, but we do it in more of a platform-first approach. CHAD: That's really interesting. I've had some guests on before where they talk about doing consulting or doing services on top of the recurring revenue platform that they've built or not doing it because it's not interesting to them or that their investors say like, "Don't get into that TNM business time and materials business. You want to focus on recurring revenue." How have you balanced that in your business? TARUSH: The reality is that it doesn't matter which vendor you are in the modern data stack space. You might be Snowflake, or you might be Tableau, or you might be Fivetran or DBT. These are just some of the popular ones. Each of these vendors is just one small part of the stack. And what that means is that they don't have a services model and [inaudible] investors happy. But in reality, it's because they don't have end-to-end stack exposure; you know, there's no company today which knows what their stack looks like. Snowflake doesn't know what their entire stack looks like. I mean, Snowflake [inaudible] its success in engagement because they just want [inaudible] And what 5X is is, you know, we've had to spin these stacks up from scratch for mid-market companies. You'll be able to map your stack. So you might have a few pieces. We can help you see what's missing. But again, because we have visibility end-to-end, having that services model, if you want to call it, makes a lot of sense because, ultimately, we're focused on adding business value. And no one's doing data for the sake of doing data. And no one is doing it to build a 50-person data team. They're doing it ultimately to enable the business. So given that we have this end-to-end scope, we look at our on-demand talent as a massive value-add of using the 5X platform is that you have this ability to get engineers end-to-end that are pre-trained on the platform. So we like it a lot. And we think it's a competitive advantage for us. CHAD: How opinionated is the 5X stack, the default stack? Can you make a lot of choices within it? Are you using lots of different things? You already mentioned Snowflake, Tableau. So it sounds like you're choosing the things that make sense on behalf of your customers. TARUSH: Yeah, so for launch, we're focused on the core BI stack, which is ingestion, storage, monitoring, reporting, and in this stack, also we have picked the best-in-class vendors so Fivetran, Snowflake, DBT, Preset. In some ways, the usual suspects which you think of as you're looking at the stack. Now our goal and really what we're building is this program called the Certified 5X Program, and that's for vendors. And that program allows us to integrate with different partners and do things like account provisioning, configuration, user management, our billing agreement, workflow setup. And as we integrate with more and more vendors, the idea is to really have a single form for the modern data stack. So, in ingestion, for now, we might be using Fivetran since they're the [inaudible], but the idea is we're also talking to Plausible, and Airbyte, and Stitch, and all of the other vendors. So at some point, we really kind of pick and choose between any of them. So the idea is, again, there could be a set of different stuff for a company, which is extremely budget-conscious, and if you're looking more for enterprise capability to use a different vendor in that same category. So ultimately, we're enabling customer freedom in the next few months. At launch, we'll have a smaller selection. But as we get into Q4 and as we get into the next year, we have the next 10-15 vendors lined up who are going to be part of the certified 5X program, and that allows us to add more and more optionality in terms of existing categories. And then, we also will focus on adding new categories like reverse ETL, or data lineage, or augmented analytics. CHAD: I love the idea of being focused for launch, saying these are the biggest things that we need to hit. How long did it take you to get to launch? When did you start working in earnest on 5X and get to a public launch? TARUSH: We've been working on this since last June. So we're 11 months old now. What we really did initially is go build relationships with these vendors. And the first thing we did is we started off more as a services business where we sort of built this automatic interview process where we were interviewing hundreds of engineers a week and adding these engineers and training them on the platform. We would go set up the platform for the customer in a semi-automatic manner. So we have been operational. We're probably working with 15-20 customers at this point, but we did it in a sort of semi-automated way. And over the last few months, as we understood more and more what their needs are, we are transitioning to a platform-first company instead of a services-first company. CHAD: So that means that you were able to be public and start getting customers fairly early on in your journey. It's only been 11 months since you started. And when did you get your first customer? TARUSH: 11 months ago. CHAD: [laughs] So at what point did you find investors and raise money and start to build a team? TARUSH: We've been fortunate enough that we were producing revenue on day one just looking at the services aspect of the business. So we needed a very tiny fundraise back in October, a very small amount. And now that we're getting closer to the platform launch, we might be announcing something soon. CHAD: What did you take money for if you were revenue-generating? Was there something specific that caused you to take it and that it was for? TARUSH: So if you kind of zoom out again and look at this whole concept of building out, you know, I think if we focused on services and focused on growing that part of the business organically, there's no real need for that. But the idea now is we're having a 20-person platform team, building out these integrations, building up software for even things like board management, hiring. The main task today is sort of engineering. So we raised capital to double down on the platform vision and become a platform first. Mid-Roll Ad: I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: So, when it comes to building a team, we're talking today, and you're in Bali. Is that where you spend most of your time now? TARUSH: I wish I could spend more time here. CHAD: [laughs] TARUSH: I'm pretty nomadic, which I really like. And I think we were born in COVID...a fun story; I got stuck in Bali for two years. I came here for vacation, and we were locked up. And it's not the worst place in the world to be stuck, and I felt very lucky that it was not somewhere else. So, in general, we started building the pilot while we were still remote. We have folks in 11 countries now. I spent six months of the year around America. That's where our clients are. About 80% of our business is from American companies today, and then I spend some time in India, where our engineering teams are aggressively growing in the Southeast Asian market. And 5X is a Singapore company. So we spend time in Singapore, and if I have some time, I come back to Bali. But in general, we are pretty nomadic. And I think as part of our culture, and how we attract people, one of our core values is what we call the hammock value where if I can build it or if you can build it while lying on a hammock in some part of the world, we're not interested in going back to an office. CHAD: With a fairly large time zone distribution of the team, how do you build a culture? How do people work together? Are people shifting their hours? Or do you build a culture of working asynchronously? TARUSH: We mostly work asynchronously. In general, the engineering teams are based out of India. So engineers who are working on the platform are in the same time zone. In terms of our pods, what's really cool is today, we hire in South America, we hire in Africa, we hire in Southeast Asia, so three distinct time zones. So you have Europe, you have the Americas, and you have the Asian time zone. And when we assemble these pods, and a pod has got three engineers and a technical project manager, we try and have at least two different time zones in a pod. So at least two of the engineers are in separate time zones, which means that for our customers, they have more around-the-clock support. They have more hours where they can get work done, which is great for productivity. So, what that means on our side is that we're really good at being able to communicate asynchronously. We have all this flexibility, and with that, in terms of accountability, the way we do it is we have daily updates. Again, it's asynchronous, so you can send that here's what you did, you know, [inaudible] by. At the end of the week, we do Loom videos really sharing what you've done. We sort focus a lot on like agenda -- CHAD: And Loom is an asynchronous video sharing. People can record videos and share it with everybody. Is that what Loom is? TARUSH: Yeah, sorry, I should mention. Loom is a great video platform that allows you to screen share, and it's just a really cool screen-sharing tool that we record these asynchronous videos and really ingraining it inside our culture. Everyone at 5X knows the importance of sending these updates and agenda before a call and summaries in a Zoom video. So that's how we are able to do it. CHAD: One of the things that we've not struggled with but dealt with at thoughtbot is we've started hiring all throughout the Americas, all throughout Europe, Middle East, and Africa. And we've got team members all over the place. And we want to treat people as employees and give them full benefits. And a lot of people want to work for a local entity and have employment laws and everything. But it's a challenge to do that. We don't necessarily want to set up entities in every country. So one strategy is contracting, another is to work with an international PEO or employer of record. How have you managed that? TARUSH: We use an international agency which allows us to hire in any country. I'm not sure the name of the platform we're using. Karan, our CFO, would know that. CHAD: [laughs] TARUSH: But it allows us on a macro level to be able to hire in all these countries as employees, you know, ask if you have the stock program. And it's also allowing us to give healthcare benefits and things like that, which we really want to have for everyone. And when it comes to the engineers on our network, at the moment, we're hiring them full-time as contractors, but again, we want to extend benefits to them and really, in some ways, give them that flexibility. Do you want to be inside a local jurisdiction where you can have more healthcare benefits and integrations with local governments, you know, employee programs and things like that? Or do you want to take advantage of our culture and be more nomadic? And these are exciting things which we're sort of figuring out now as we [inaudible] some economies of scale around, you know, having this [inaudible] CHAD: Yeah, that's great. And for what it's worth, that's the route that we've taken as well is to work with an international employer of record who actually employs people locally. And many people don't realize, like, you highlighted health benefits. A lot of countries have national health care. But it's really common, especially in white-collar or tech industry employment there, to augment that with supplemental insurance, which is not very expensive, but it is expected and oftentimes necessary to get the kind of coverage that you want to have. TARUSH: I think the world is changing. We're becoming remote-first as well. And the two areas which I believe it's going to affect the most is number one, employment and number two, education. It's just a no-brainer that more and more companies are going to emerge in this space, making it easier to hire remotely and provide benefits and, in some ways, build that operating system for remote entrepreneurs. So I'm not sure if the tools today are great. I think they solve the problem for now. But I expect there to be a lot of innovation in this space over the next few years. CHAD: Well, and I think that the pandemic has pushed that, accelerated that. There are companies now that existed before, but the scale at which they're able to operate now because so many companies have started to go remote and want to employ people everywhere; it's really driving that growth and investment in that area too. And as a result of that, there's going to be a lot of data [laughs] that these companies generate and need to get a handle on. So maybe they'll become customers of 5X, or maybe they already are. TARUSH: Yeah. If you look in the last ten years, I think the last ten years were all about digital marketing with social and sort of advertising, making it very obvious that if you don't have a web presence, if you don't care about your customers think, and if you don't find ways to attract customers, you're not going to exist. So ten years later and all those companies which didn't set up websites and they didn't figure out customer acquisition online probably don't exist anymore. In the next five years or in the next ten years, a lot of these will get a lot more sophisticated. And certainly, data comes in as a competitive advantage. So if you're not focusing on how a customer is using your product and how you personalize and being able to compare the way of spending money in terms of your lead acquisition and really, really optimize at it, what you'll face is that it will become difficult to compete because your competition is getting more and more sophisticated. So a lot of the investment in this is really predicated on becoming more efficient at these core groups of things like go-to-market strategy, engagement, optimizing internal operations as a way to find efficiencies which is typically what technology has enabled. CHAD: Especially small businesses or businesses that are just getting started, if you don't have experience with that, it can feel really overwhelming. And we talked about how 5X by coming to the table with a stack, with a team that can help do that, that's great. And it helps solve that problem. Say that I'm a founder or a CEO, maybe non-technical, and I really am just getting started, but I have a big need; how do I engage with 5X? What's the best way to think about that? And are there things that I might do as a founder that you would recommend, hey, I recognize you can't do everything, but do this, and you'll avoid some pain later on. TARUSH: We have some customers today who use us pre-product. They don't have a product. They don't have any customers. They have no data. But they use us because when they launch, they want to have the right tracking and visibility and reports and metrics. So I would have never thought someone that [inaudible] 5X. But it kind of makes sense that you want to have the right [inaudible] knowledge. You have pros and cons. I think the pros of it is instilling the data culture from day one. Data acts as a bridge between engineering and the business, Chad. It just connects the products from like the business goals. So there is an upside in bringing this on earlier on and building that and instilling that into your culture. I think the flip side of it is that if you don't have product-market fit, if you're shooting darts and seeing what works. And in general, companies at that point are running more on intuition and trying different things to see what sticks. And having systems in place at that scale, very frankly, could also be unnecessary. And at that point, if you're spending $100, you probably want to spend 80-90 of them on bringing out your product and the design that you've got. And I think they'll want to sign to be able to acquire customers, and that sort of shifts then you see the data spending increase. So again, we're obviously happy to help, and our technical product managers have a lot of experience. They're the ones who have been data leaders that are growing companies and businesses like Uber, WeWork, Alibaba, top tech companies. They've already been data team members, so they've always been part of that growth. So they're good people, the on-demand talent. You have expertise over there from someone who's seen this before. And a few of our early-stage companies leverage these people more and more, but the flipside of it is focusing on actually building a product first. CHAD: I love that. I think that that's great advice. And so I assume that there are people who come and to your team or you start talking with them, and you say, "You're not ready for us yet." TARUSH: Yeah, we sort of have done that. We have told folks, you know, Google this, this, and this, and once you have this in place and you're about to go to market, that's the right time to come engage. But at this point, honestly, it might not be the best time for you to start thinking about [inaudible] CHAD: Focus on improving your user experience, getting new users, making the best product you can. That's really great advice. TARUSH: On the flip side of that, I think the problem, not the problem, I don't know if it's the word. I think the mistake a lot of companies make is that they actually get into it too late. The typical fallacy is that the founders are sitting in this gold mine of data. We're just going to have a data scientist come, and he or she is going to start generating all these insights, and we're going to be a data-driven company. And the reality of everything in life is that things take time. You can have the stack from day one, and you can have amazing engineers. But it takes time for you to really understand what's happening in your business. And initially, your data model that's sort of changing because the understanding of the business is changing. Visibility in your data leads to asking better questions. And with asking better questions, you start changing the mental models of what's happening. It takes three iterations before your data model starts to stabilize. And what that means very, very often is that the founder is expecting in three months that the data is going to have a positive ROI and the output the business is getting from the data team is going to be positive. And that's not really how it works. It takes six to nine months. You'd have reporting in the first month and the first two months. But as you move from reporting to visibility and to actually optimization and using that data as an insight, we think of that as a three-quarter project. So number one, I think companies don't know that, and they expect that it happens much sooner. And number two is also the mindset around I'm looking at data to provide positive ROI within a small duration, which is also, in reality, not how it is. CHAD: Tarush, that's really great advice, and I hope people take it to heart. If folks want to get in touch with you or follow along with you or learn more about 5X, where are all the places that they can do that? TARUSH: So our website is 5x.co. Again, that's 5x.co. You can reach out to me at tarush@5x.co. We're also doing a lot of stuff on YouTube. We're doing a lot of podcasts to educate on the data space. We make weekly videos on different topics on our YouTube channel. I'm sure you can just search for 5X. That's another great way to engage with us. CHAD: Wonderful. You can subscribe to this show and find notes for this episode along with a complete transcript at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Tarush Aggarwal.
Deborah Levine is the Director of LGBT YouthLink at CenterLink, which supports, strengthens, and connects LGBT centers. Chad talks with Deborah about working on something new called imi: a free digital research-backed mental health tool intended to support and help LGBTQ+ teens explore and affirm their identity and learn practical ways to cope with their sexual and gender minority stress, founding Q Chat Space, a digital LGBTQ+ center where teens join live-chat, professionally facilitated, online support groups, and how over the time that she's been doing work in LGBTQ+ spaces products and online interaction have changed and evolved. CenterLink (https://www.lgbtcenters.org/) Follow CenterLink on Twitter (https://twitter.com/CenterLink), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/CenterLink), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/lgbtcenterlink/), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPvnzC7fGKBYKj9p4YlMGNw), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/2129279/). LGBT YouthLink (https://www.lgbtcenters.org/Programs/YouthLink) Q Chat Space (https://www.qchatspace.org/) HopeLab (https://hopelab.org/) Follow Deborah on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/deborah-s-levine/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel, and with me, today is Deborah Levine, Director of LGBT YouthLink at CenterLink, which supports, strengthens, and connects LGBT centers. Deborah, thank you so much for joining me. DEBORAH: Thanks, Chad. I appreciate you inviting me. CHAD: So I was first introduced to you and to CenterLink through the Q Chat Space product. And that's still going, right? DEBORAH: Yeah. CHAD: But you're working on something new called imi. DEBORAH: Mm-hmm. We actually just launched imi on June 1st. CHAD: Congratulations on the launch. DEBORAH: Thank you. Yes, it went pretty smoothly. [laughs] CHAD: That's good. So, what is imi? DEBORAH: So imi is a free digital research-backed mental health tool. It was developed by Hopelab in partnership with CenterLink, and the It Gets Better Project, as well as hundreds of LGBTQ+ young people across the U.S. It's a little hard to describe, to be perfectly honest. It really is intended to support and help LGBTQ+ teens explore and affirm their identity and learn practical ways to cope with their sexual and gender minority stress. And we really hope that the tool is helpful, relevant, inclusive, and joyful. It is a web app, but it operates...it's not a lot of reading. It's listening, and doing, and thinking, and really giving youth an opportunity to explore and consider ways that they might help support themselves. CHAD: That's great. And I suppose it's even a compliment to your prior work at CenterLink and with Q Chat Space, which is an online support community. DEBORAH: Yes. CHAD: People can use both. DEBORAH: Exactly. We actually engaged in a partnership with Hopelab because we recognize that though youths were really excited about and engaged in the support groups that Q Chat Space provides, those are synchronous, and they happen once or twice a day. They last for an hour and a half, but that's all there is. So if you come to the website when a chat isn't happening, then there's not much to do. And we wanted to be able to provide youth with something else, and imi really fills that gap. CHAD: So when it comes to the product itself, how long was it in development for? DEBORAH: Great question. Of course, there was the pandemic, so there were some delays related to that. But it was about two and a half years from when Hopelab first approached CenterLink until the actual launch date. CHAD: That's a fairly significant amount of time. DEBORAH: It is for when you're working, I think if we were only tech firms, but both Hopelab and CenterLink are nonprofits. And the process included a lot of steps. So we actually had a prototype pretty early. But because we wanted to make sure that we did put something out into the world that actually had the impact we were seeking, we did a randomized controlled trial. We had 270 youth, half of them using a similar-looking website with just resources and the other half using imi. And we did that randomized controlled trial as well as a test of marketing. Those were both pieces that extended our timeline. And then ultimately, we also wanted to launch during Pride Month, so we timed it for that. CHAD: This idea of a randomized control trial is pretty incredible to me. A lot of product people wouldn't necessarily do that; maybe certain companies do. Why do you think you went in that direction? DEBORAH: So our goal is not to make money. And ultimately, if that was the goal, then we put something out, we see if people are using it and using it at the rate and the ways...I'm a social worker, so my business lingo is going to be limited. [chuckles] But that's the way to test it. And if youths use it but don't have any impact or potentially even harms them, which is not the case usually; it's just neutral, but if it doesn't have any impact, it's not worth our time. And so, a randomized controlled trial really allows us to see whether or not it's working and then to make changes if it's not. We're testing not only whether it works in terms of the impact but also whether or not youths were interested and wanted to use it. And those are important elements for us before we're going to go out with something. CHAD: That's great. That's what I was thinking you [chuckles] would probably say. In your work, correct me if I'm wrong, but your main demographic that you work with is youth. DEBORAH: Yes. CHAD: You alluded to this earlier, but how do you make sure that you're building products and things that they want to use? DEBORAH: For sure. So it's really about involving them in the process. Going back in time to Q Chat Space, the idea for Q Chat Space actually came from focus groups we did with youth. It wasn't an adult who thought this is a good thing to do for youth. We really went to them to see what it was about and then kept youth involved in the process. We had youth involved in the design process. We had youth involved in the conceptualization and design and continue to this day to have a Youth Advisory Board who participate in Q Chat Space chat and give us feedback. And when we want to change something, we look to them. And similarly, with imi but we have even more resources. We have, over time, including the randomized controlled trial, involved over 600 youth in the production and creation of imi. And really, the process was so deeply embedded with the youth that we used the language of co-creation and really make sure that youth are saying exactly what it is that they want and need and that they'll be willing to do. So we did qualitative research in 2019 with over 350 youth initially all across the United States, all the way to Anchorage, Alaska, and to Birmingham, Alabama, and a bunch of places in between. And of those interviewed, 61% identified as racial and ethnic minorities. We really did want to make sure that this reached those youth as well as trans and non-binary and gender-nonconforming youth. So we always oversampled or over-included those youth. And we also engaged with organizations that serve youth and know youth in a daily way, a lot of LGBT centers, and other organizations as well. And really, again, focused on organizations that are made by and are focused on QTBIPOC or queer and trans youth of color. CHAD: Over the time that you've been doing this work, has expectations around online interaction, what products are, how youth will use them, has that changed? Has it been evolving? DEBORAH: It certainly has been evolving. I mean, I think it's an interesting question. I'm not sure of the timeframe that you're asking. In terms of the work that I've done, I started doing digital health education in 2007. And I remember very well because the person who interviewed me and became my boss said, "You don't have to even know anything about technology. Don't worry; we'll figure that out." CHAD: [laughs] DEBORAH: They didn't expect, and to be honest, I say to people all the time that if somebody came to me now with a resume that I had in 2007 for one of the jobs that I did then, I would not have hired them. Things have changed dramatically. I mean, that's obviously 15 years we're talking about. Things have changed so very dramatically in the last 15 years. But even I would say thinking about Q Chat Space, because Q Chat Space launched as a pilot in 2018 and then launched nationally in the summer of 2019, and then the pandemic hit 7-8 months later. And the concept of a digital support group we had to explain that to people at Q Chat Space. And now, post-pandemic, we don't have to explain that anymore. And if anything, we have to differentiate ourselves in ways that we never had to. The irony of Q Chat Space, in particular, is that it was started both because youth identified the need but also our member centers, the LGBT centers, often had inquiries from youth who couldn't access them in person, and many of them started satellite programs, but still, you know, a 13-year-old you could live next door and not be able to get. There are other barriers besides location and distance. And so, at that point, centers really wanted to do something digitally, but they couldn't because they didn't have the resources. They didn't know how to do it, or they were concerned that it would start and then youth from all over the place would be contacting them. But in a matter of weeks, maybe months, once the pandemic set in and the kids were...just like school figured out how to do things, the LGBT centers did as well. And so now Q Chat Space is one of many virtual programs with many different mechanisms. But I think it's really shifted, and youth are more open to it. Not that they weren't before, they definitely were, but they know more. There are less questions about what's this? What's going on here? I think there's a broader definition of what a virtual experience can look like because youth have been participating in synchronous and asynchronous and in text-only and video, and it's just there are so many ways. In terms of imi in the last couple of years, all over the pandemic, but imi itself, I think, actually, the landscape for imi hasn't changed. But interestingly enough, Hopelab actually came to us with another product that they had already developed and they were hoping to use as the backend, which was a chatbot. They had created something called Vivibot, and it was helping young cancer survivors build resilience. And we know that resilience is an important quality for any person, but particularly: youth, it's important to develop it. And when someone's young, it's easier, not that it's easy. [laughter] And they thought that they would be able to use that technology, but ultimately the testing with young people really revealed that they didn't want a chatbot. If you check out imi, which is imi. guide, you can see that there are actually several chat experiences within that are the last remnants of that initial chatbot that we started with. But youth weren't interested in a chatbot, and I think that's one thing that's changed is that they have much higher expectations for automated communication. I formerly worked at Planned Parenthood. They have a great product called Roo, that's a chatbot. We talked about it before I left there. I wasn't there when it was started. But there are high expectations for what a chatbot can do. And I think there's also just an understanding, oh, this is a bot, and that's okay. Versus a few years ago, maybe people wanted to pretend that it was a real person. And now it's like, no, it's fine that's it's a bot. I understand, and it's okay that this kind of conversation can happen with a chatbot. So there are a few things that I think have changed, but I'm also not a trend person. [laughter] CHAD: No, that's okay. That's great. So when it comes to...we talked a little bit about the timeline and the process you went through to arrive and launch imi. With multiple parties all bringing things to the table, how do you tend to manage the products that you work on? DEBORAH: Sure. So Hopelab, really, I give almost all credit to Hopelab. I mean, I was really pleased to partner with them. And I definitely feel that CenterLink and It Gets Better bring a lot to the table. But ultimately, Hopelab did something I haven't seen happen very often, which is really helping nonprofits work together in a collaborative manner. It's a struggle. I think nonprofits are competing for funds and donors. And it's a little bit more difficult to collaborate. But Hopelab really led this process and took us all through it and made sure to really put youth at the center, which I think is the force that we all have to remember when we do have conflicts between nonprofits is that we're all in the same missions, and missions that match each other in terms of helping the community. Mid-Roll Ad: I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: Do you have people...when it comes to a project like this, are you hiring people? Is it a full-time team working on it? How does it tend to usually shape up? DEBORAH: No. [laughs] It doesn't shape up like that. At this point with imi, Hopelab really focused on what our current capacity was. They're continuing to support us in a lot of ways. And they do have a full team. But the product that they're handing over to me, me as a non-techie social worker, I can manage it. It's on Squarespace. There are a lot of integrations, but they have made sure that those are things that I can really manage. I mean, I'm not a non-techie, really. I'm underestimating myself. I'm under-selling myself. But ultimately, I am going to manage that with...I have a staff person who works full-time on Q Chat Space, not a technical person. They're really there to support facilitators and the youth as an administrator and manager, and that person will help me with promotion. But otherwise, imi is a tool that is out there and doesn't...I mean, we'll update it and make changes. But ultimately, it's not a team once it's launched. But the development, yes, it was about 14 people more or less throughout the last two years. CHAD: I think that that's great and really important. Software isn't cheap. It's not easy. And if you're put in a position where you're putting...I don't know the right word; burden comes to mind. Like, the burden of future work and maintenance and investment in an organization that maybe isn't set up to do that that could be a problem. DEBORAH: Right. Now talk to me in six months or a year, and I'll know more. [laughter] But that said, even with Q Chat Space, I, with hundreds of people, including folks at thoughtbot and other places, volunteers, and donors, and supporters, really made Q Chat Space a reality, but I was the lead on it. And again, I used, you know, off-the-shelf products, basically. And I have a developer for the website. But besides that developer, who is a part-time person, we manage. We figure things out ourselves. We get help from volunteers. We bring in a consultant here and there. But we try to keep the technology slim, trim, easy, user-friendly, whatever language we want to use. So that really serves the purpose of the youth. We don't need to be using anything fancy per se. CHAD: I could be misremembering, but I think when we were first talking, one of the first conversations we had this came up with Q Chat Space. Because if you look at what it does and the problem set, and particularly the market, I think there could be a tendency for someone looking at that especially, I'm a programmer, and so I want to solve problems by programming things. You could say, "We should really build something specific for this. DEBORAH: [laughs] CHAD: It's not that difficult. It's just a chat thing. There are lots of these things out there." And I'm right in terms of the actual core functionality. You could bang that out in a little while. But doing that would create a burden then to you have a custom piece of software that you need to constantly evolve, maintain, and those kinds of things. And so I think this was a discussion we had about what was out there in the ecosystem, what open source or other things you could pull together so that we weren't creating that burden. DEBORAH: Exactly. And interestingly, my developer has said to me many times, "I could just build something for you." [laughter] And I say, "No, like, I don't need that." And ultimately, we did end up going with an open-sourced product; it's Rocket.Chat. We picked Rocket.Chat. This was in 2017, I think. We looked at 30 different products. And there were that many products on the market already, and today, I think there'll be even more. But ultimately, we just took Rocket.Chat because it's highly customizable. For those of you who aren't familiar with Rocket.Chat, it's like Discord. It's actually the same code, from what I understand. It's sort of like Slack. But in the end, we were able to...because there's a lot of like, turn this on, turn this off, turn this on, turn this off, just a lot of different features, we were able to just make it into what we needed. We're using it in a way that very few people are using Rocket.Chat because we opened up a channel just for that hour and a half, and then it's gone. It's not an ongoing conversation. But Rocket.Chat has been a great supporter. They give us a fabulous nonprofit rate and really appreciate the unusual use case that we have for their product. CHAD: Yeah, that's great. I think one of the things that hopefully motivates a lot of people is having a positive impact on the world. This is Pride Month. You alluded to it already. And I think it's important that we celebrate Pride. I think you have a great organization that I hope people will get involved in and pay attention to even outside of Pride Month. How has it been for you? And sometimes, it's hard for me to judge are things better or worse in terms of really supporting LGBTQ+ youth today? DEBORAH: Both. [laughs] It's better, it's worse. There's no question to how far are we going to go back? But there's so much more media representation, and more schools have GSAs, and more people know someone who's LGBTQ. And I think it's different for lesbian, gay, and bisexual folks than it is for trans and non-binary and gender non-conforming folks. There's more acceptance of sexual orientation differences than there are gender differences. But I think culturally, that's changing, and as a result, there is currently quite a large...the word coming to me is flashback, but that's not the right word. Backlash, push back, exactly. And we are seeing alarming numbers of legislative efforts to particularly limit what transgender and gender nonconforming and non-binary youth can do and what their parents can do. And that is very alarming and certainly highly regressive. But I do think that it comes out of the fact that we have moved forward in so many ways. So for any young person who's listening or any of you who are listening, you can say this to the young people in your lives like, "You deserve to be yourself. You deserve to be able to be yourself and open. And you deserve a good and strong and mentally healthy life." And that message is really what imi certainly gives, a joyful life. It is about pride. We are proud to be LGBTQ. There's nothing to be ashamed of. And yet there are many forces in our culture and government who do make young people and adults feel shameful about it. So that's really what we're trying to counter. CHAD: And that's one of the great things I think about when it comes to online tools is because you could be in an environment where you're not supported, where you don't see that support or people like you, or it could be very isolating. And the ability to reach beyond your family boundaries and geographic boundaries and connect with people who can support you is really great. DEBORAH: It is. And to know ultimately, the tools are really designed to acknowledge that some young people have to keep it a secret or private. They're not ready to come out. Both websites have a quick exit, so a young person can click on that and go right to Google. imi also times out after 10 minutes. And it's an interesting thing because the folks who are regressive, going back to our last bit, those folks jump on that and say, "Look, they're keeping it a secret from their parents." And we're like, well, if the parents are going to be abusive, then yes, we're going to keep it a secret from their parents. But if the parents want to figure out how to be affirming, we are with them. We want to help them be affirming. So it really does allow youth...both tools really reach youth who may feel as if they have no one around them. And imi, in particular, provides community in a way youth don't even have to talk to anybody else. But they're going to hear the voices and see the faces of other young people dealing with similar things. imi is rich with those stories as well as other activities. And then on Q Chat Space, they can connect to a real other teenager who's dealing with similar things but maybe in a different state or a different country even. CHAD: I guess that's another...I think the conversation I was having was very U.S.-centric, too. And you think things are bad here; they're even worse in a lot of other places in terms of LGBTQ rights and support. DEBORAH: They are. CHAD: And I guess that's another benefit of online. It really crosses those boundaries too. DEBORAH: It does. And we have enabled that on Q Chat Space and imi. Both are accessible from anywhere in the world. We have heard from youths in 149 other countries, I believe [laughs] on Q Chat Space. CHAD: Wow. DEBORAH: And we just launched imi, so we don't have that data yet, but it is available. Unfortunately, right now, imi is only in English. Q Chat Space, we do have a weekly chat in Spanish. So we welcome any youth who prefer to chat in Spanish on Monday nights. But imi from now is just in English. But other than that, I mean, the reality of colonization is that a lot of youth speak English, even if it was not their first language. So we have had chatters from Korea, Vietnam, Australia, UK, and everywhere in between. CHAD: That's great. If folks want to get involved, where are the best places for them to do that? DEBORAH: Sure. So anybody who feels like they can help in any way, whether it's tech help, or with financial support, they can connect with us through the websites. And we will happily figure out ways to get engaged. In terms of your more traditional volunteer situation, I recommend folks go to the LGBT Center Directory that we have on CenterLink's website; CenterLink's website is lgbtcenters.org, and find your local LGBT center. They have many opportunities for volunteers as well as support and tech help. If you check out their website and you think it doesn't look so great, [laughter] offer help with their website. So there are a lot of ways to get involved in the LGBTQ community between these two products, as well as just the LGBT centers that the two products are really meant to serve. I didn't really mention that, but we have 300+ LGBT centers that are part of the CenterLink network that we work to support, strengthen, and connect. And imi really is a product that none of them would be able to develop on their own. And this way, they're all able to use it as if it was their own. That's one of the beauties that, of course, the greatest impact is for youth. But for our centers to be able to have that kind of resource available to them, we owe a huge thanks to Hopelab for doing that for CenterLink and all of our members. CHAD: We're going to include links in the show notes for all of the things that you just mentioned. DEBORAH: Awesome. CHAD: I really encourage people to if you want to reach out with your time and get involved, that's great. You can also, as Deborah said, go there and donate. If you can't donate your time, but you can donate some money, that'd be great. Deborah, thank you so much for stopping by and sharing with us. I really appreciate it, and I appreciate all the work you do. DEBORAH: Absolutely. It was a pleasure. Thanks so much. CHAD: You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Deborah Levine.
Johanna Mikkola is the Co-Founder and CEO of Wyncode Academy, recently acquired by BrainStation, whose project-based programs have helped over 100,000 professionals launch new careers in the tech industry. Chad talks with Johanna about creating a digital skills training bootcamp, the hiring and training market and challenges, and prioritizing inclusion and diversity in the student population. BrainStation (https://brainstation.io/) Follow BrainStation on Twitter (https://twitter.com/brainstation), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/BrainStation), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/brainstation/), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/school/brainstation/). Follow Johanna on Twitter (https://twitter.com/JoMikkola) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/johanna-mikkola/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. And with me today is Jo Mikkola, the Co-Founder, and CEO of Wyncode Academy, recently acquired by BrainStation, whose project-based programs have helped over 100,000 professionals launch new careers in the tech industry. Jo, thank you for joining me. JOHANNA: So excited to be here. Thank you. CHAD: I actually think that the weather we're calling from today might not be so different. It's very warm and sunny, and everything in Boston. So I'm pretty happy today. How are things where you are? JOHANNA: That's great. We're coming to you live from the 305 in Miami, and it's turning into summertime here, which means it's pretty hot and sticky. But I'm originally from Finland, so I can't complain. CHAD: [laughs] JOHANNA: The novelty after eight years of living here has not worn off on me. I do enjoy the sunshine and the palm trees. CHAD: That's great. So we'll definitely circle back and talk about Miami and the tech industry there and everything. But before we do that, I'm curious; you have recently been acquired by BrainStation. Let's rewind a little bit to getting started with Wyncode and what brought you to creating a digital skills training bootcamp. JOHANNA: It's been quite the journey. It all started back in 2013, and at the time living in Toronto. I, at that point, had been working at the National Hockey League in Toronto for eight years and had just joined the management there on the hockey operations officiating team, which was an amazing chapter of my professional journey, and I love all the individuals that I worked with there. But I got to a point in that career where I didn't quite know what the next step would be professionally, and I was looking at getting an MBA. But at the same time, while I was working at the NHL, I was helping lead an internal software build project. And it kept coming to the forefront for me that wow, hockey is being disrupted by technology or technology is being very integrated into something I thought, you know, I didn't think I would see that happen. And at the same time, my co-founder, who's also my husband, we're both from Finland. His name is Juha. He was an entrepreneur in the e-commerce sporting goods space, and he actually had joined a coding bootcamp in Toronto, an early one. And as he was going through the process, we were both kind of at this inflection point professionally about what we were going to do. And so everything he was learning, the transformation of individuals he was witnessing first-hand, him experiencing that himself, and me being a non-technical business person leading a technical project at the NHL, we were like, wow, we're on the cusp of some serious change in the world, and we want to be part of that wave. So we were like, where can we go and be first to market to provide this life-changing, career-changing education and, in turn, really dive into not only education but also the technology space? And ultimately, we landed on Miami. We had actually looked at Austin, Texas, and Los Angeles as options as well. But we arrived here in Miami, and it was very like a Hollywood thing. We were sitting at the coolest cafe in Miami at the time. We were here on Christmas holiday. And we, on a napkin, started writing ideas and brainstorming. You know, founders get very excited about logos and brainstorming names, or at least I do. CHAD: [laughs] JOHANNA: And it all came together really quickly. That was December 2013. We attended a startup meet-up here. We met four key players in this ecosystem, some of which are major drivers today, like the Knight Foundation and Endeavor. We heard their vision, and what they were doing, and how much funding was being put at the time into building a tech ecosystem in Miami. And we were like, wow, we want in. So we went from concept to launch in three months’ time. And it was a pretty exciting ride. I mean, so much happened in that time [laughs], and obviously, the acquisition came early last year. And so we've kind of seen it go full circle. And for me professionally, I went from being a startup founder working very regionally, being somewhat nationally known but being a strong regional player, to being a global player overnight with BrainStation. So that also has been really exciting. CHAD: At thoughtbot, we helped create a web development bootcamp around the same time actually. JOHANNA: Love that. CHAD: And that was for Kaplan, and they ended up purchasing Dev Bootcamp and then shutting it down. So I have some experience, and not only that, but thoughtbot has hired a lot of people from bootcamps into our apprentice program. JOHANNA: Love that. CHAD: So, from a hiring and training perspective, I think it's great. From a business perspective, it seems to have been a very challenging market. How did you weather that? JOHANNA: Oh yeah. I mean persistence, unwavering commitment to the people we worked with, and the people we were helping gain these skills to change their careers. And like with any startup, there are moments where it's like, wow, you know, this is a big challenge. How are we going to overcome this? But we've always had the mentality of if there is a will, there is a way. And don't get me wrong, it doesn't always work out. But fortunately, now that I have hindsight, I can say that that mentality resulted in where we are today, and it was very positive. And I have the really fortunate position of looking back on those stressful moments and seeing the lessons now, which is such a gift and maybe also alludes to me being old, I don't know. [laughter] But it really was a great journey. And I mean, the challenges started in the beginning for us, which is turns out it was a federal offense to operate without a license in the state of Florida, you know, lots of details to talk about there. But come full circle, we ended up being the first coding bootcamp to be licensed by a State Department of Education in the entire country. So even though other people were operating in their states, it was different statutes, different legal requirements. And so, we were the first to be licensed. And as a result, we actually helped advise some of those other big names that we all see in the coding landscape to explain how it worked for us. And shout out to the Florida Department of Education and Commission for Independent Education for working with us to make it all come together. But it started off with a very exciting beginning getting that letter, which was essentially telling us to shut down before we had even begun. [laughter] And it all worked out. And we have a great relationship with them. And we learned a lot there. And I will say just in the coding landscape, what ended up happening and what's happened with a lot of for-profit education is there was a huge opportunity, and there still is. People really genuinely need these skills. They really need this vocational training, and the companies hiring really need this talent, as you know firsthand. And so a lot of people jumped in and saw that there was money to be made because professionals and maybe also people who can afford it...there are a lot of financing companies that came in. And so the thing that started wavering is the quality in terms of the training. And that's one of the things that you just, you know, one of the things we were unwilling to compromise at Wyncode and also why BrainStation, I like to say, is our soulmate because they feel the same way. To go from zero to software engineer or zero to UX designer (We also teach data science and digital marketing.), it really takes high-quality education, high-quality educators, and a high-quality network to do that at the level that we want to do that. And then the other thing that a lot of people fell into is this desire to scale really quickly, so take in too many students which quality goes down, open too many locations, quality goes down. And to be the best, you got to learn from the best, and that means learning from software engineers, product designers, individuals who are really highly sought after right now. So, in the same way that software companies are facing talent issues, for us, that was also a key piece for us to solve and work out. We're really fortunate that in the space of education, this is such rewarding work. We build such amazing relationships with the people coming through the programs and, in turn, are contributing so much to our local ecosystems that it hasn't been that hard to attract amazing talent to be our educators because it is so rewarding. They're getting an opportunity to apply their craft to something they love and really shape the minds of future technologists. And it's just a wonderful thing to watch and be part of, so really fortunate to be in that space. CHAD: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's one of the things that has made the space challenging is you come into it with the desire to have that really high quality, but there's a cost to that. And if you don't scale the number of students, you might have trouble covering that cost. How did you balance that? JOHANNA: In the early days of Wyncode, it was easy because we were self-funded, and we were growing organically. So we were quite conservative about how we scaled and how many people we took on, and we stayed very true to that. And honestly, we stayed very focused on the state of Florida. So at one point, we actually had three locations; we had Miami Beach, Fort Lauderdale, and Miami, and we scaled them down to have a large HQ in Miami. Because we saw that when the team was together, and the community was together, the overall experience from network to learning was better because we were self-funded. And then, later, when we had partners who were committed to quality, we were able to make decisions for the sake of quality instead of profitability. And then now with BrainStation, I mean, BrainStation is an incredible company. It's been around for ten years. It has been very successful. And right now, what we've been able to do is invest. BrainStation is in a position where we're investing in different pilots to see what things will make learning even better than it already is, although I will say it's at a really high quality right now. And so we're in a fortunate position where, of course, it still needs to make sense. The unit economics needs to make sense. But we're also doing everything we can to continually iterate and make it a great environment for people to learn in. And I think that has come with taking the approach that we're in a long-term marathon. We're not in a sprint with what we're building right now. And I think a lot of the companies in this space that ran into issues were really sprinting to a certain scale, which is a way of operating that we haven't operated. CHAD: Well, so based on what you've said so far, I can make certain assumptions about how you answer this next question. JOHANNA: [laughs] CHAD: But I think it's an important topic, and so I want to make sure even if it's obvious that we talk about it and that's how to bring in students, how to scale the business while still prioritizing inclusion and diversity in the student population, in your organization. What sort of attention did you put on that? JOHANNA: Yeah, so this is a really key one. I mean, in the early days of Wyncode, we were able to do things in a different way than we are now with BrainStation. But I would say Miami is naturally a very diverse and international ecosystem. And so, from the beginning, we really wanted to see that reflected in the people who were in our programs because I knew that would, in the long term, provide so much value to building a great ecosystem. And so, in the beginning, we partnered...we worked very hard to partner with The Knight Foundation to launch what was called The Future Leaders of Tech Fellowship. This is an example of something we did with different groups throughout all the years and continue to do today, but I'll use Knight as the example, which essentially was a full-ride scholarship for underrepresented individuals in technology. So the first iteration we ran of that was a full-ride scholarship because we thought that was the main barrier. Then we realized that a lot of these individuals who hadn't had the means before and didn't necessarily have the educational training needed a little extra training, and they needed to start working right away. So what we created was a pre-program for them. It was a full-ride scholarship, and then it was a guaranteed three-month paid internship at a tech company. And of all the people who went through that program, the majority transitioned, with the exception of two, transitioned into full-time salaried roles. And those are incredible stories that are truly life-changing. But I think the important thing there and what we learned over time is people need support, financial and educational, and they need time. So obviously, in an accelerated learning program, you want things to go as quickly as possible but through the help of partners and making it work for certain communities, we were able to do that. We also partnered with the YMW...it's the Women's...YMCA for women. I cannot remember the acronym right now. CHAD: WYMCA. JOHANNA: Thank you. Thank you. We provided a program in-house for them specifically. CHAD: No, it would be the YWCA. [laughter] JOHANNA: Yeah. CHAD: Sorry to interrupt you. JOHANNA: I'm sorry. I'm not doing you all a good service here. But it's an amazing organization here in Miami. And that was geared specifically towards women from disadvantaged backgrounds, giving them the education they needed. And with that group, we had actually a 70% success rate, which was wonderful. Those are individuals who had no options for any type of white-collar position, many of whom we still keep in touch with today. So, in the beginning, with diversity and inclusion, we were doing things at a smaller scale, very specialized, and very catered to make sure that they were successful in the hope of eventually building more momentum to do this. And the work very much continues. So BrainStation, larger company, we have a lot more firepower in terms of what we're able to do. So we've partnered with companies like Ernst & Young, Shutterstock, Microsoft with our Impact Scholarship, which is also full-ride scholarships for the underrepresented communities in technology, and that's been really successful as well. And, again, education is really rewarding, but it's also really rewarding to see, in particular, those success stories. CHAD: Yeah, one of the things when I speak at bootcamps or when I talk to apprentices who are joining us, I often reinforce or remind them that they bring something to the table, which is really special. I started programming when I was in middle school. I went to school for computer science. Aside from a brief stint as a dishwasher and a checkout person at a grocery store, this is all I've ever done. And I recognize that that has pros and cons. Like, I just don't have the same perspective and diversity of experience, let alone actual demographic diversity that many of our team members bring to the table. And there's something special in that, whether it be from your experience working in another industry like hospitality or something like that. You bring a perspective. There are so many hospitality startups, for example, that would love to bring a new developer onto their team who actually has industry experience. It makes it very powerful for people. JOHANNA: Yeah, absolutely. And I think oftentimes, people in anything when you're transitioning a career, there's maybe a little bit of imposter syndrome or a lack of confidence. And I see oftentimes not only minority groups but everyone shying away from their previous professional backgrounds. But technology is built for us, for humans who are very diverse in background experience and the products and services that we need. And so we really try to emphasize at Wyncode and at BrainStation to lean into your past profession. Because if you can bring that through and really focus on the things you learn there, you can provide so much firepower to what you're building with technology, and it’s super important. And I will say healthtech is big in South Florida. And so we have had various people with some type of health background, whether they were an assistant or worked in a medical office, or we've had a few doctors go through the program. They were, as you can imagine, really sought after for the healthtech companies because not only do they bring technology skills, but they have this understanding that no one else does. So it's really unique. CHAD: You're part of the tech industry now. [laughter] How has that diversity of background...you mentioned at the beginning, at the top of the episode that you were originally at the NHL, to starting to lead software projects there. How have you leveraged that for yourself and for your business? JOHANNA: Oh yeah, 100%. So we do an exercise at BrainStation where you have a chart, and you plot out your past professions, and you look at the things that you learned, and the mistakes you made, and the things you didn't like, to start to build a thread of what are things carrying over? And for me, the thing that has come to the forefront is technology or not...and I feel like anyone investing is also saying this all the time, and maybe founders say it too. But it always comes down to people and relationships and how you are listening and taking in the information to then digest it and deliver something. And so, I think my ability to connect with people and mobilize people around common goals is something that has been a common thread throughout my career. It's interesting. I'll say some of the best things I learned as a founder came from engineers, the first being agile. Like, we weren't operating like an agile company in the beginning because we weren't a software company. And our very first hire was a guy named Ed Toro, an MIT graduate. Shout out to Ed. It's actually his birthday. CHAD: [laughs] JOHANNA: Incredible, incredible engineer originally from Boston. He was our lead educator for software for so long. And he just brought so much knowledge to us about how software is built and works. And we integrated that into how we operated as business people and organized the company. I mean, it's amazing. I actually don't remember what it's like to not be organized in that manner anymore. Although I can tell you going from the NHL to Wyncode was a huge jump because NHL, even though we were using and leveraging technology, was still organized very traditionally. And so I'll give you a simple thing, some software teams...I know a lot of software engineers appreciate transparency. So, in addition to organizing in a very agile method in terms of how we operated the business, we also pivoted to be extremely transparent as a team as well in terms of how the company is doing, which is something that is not common in a multibillion-dollar industry like the NHL. Although you see that more and more with tech companies, which is interesting. CHAD: How long ago did you join up with BrainStation? JOHANNA: So we were introduced to the founders and owners of BrainStation really because they were potentially looking at coming to Florida. And a mutual friend, a mutual business person, had said, "Hey, you know, if you guys are looking at Florida, probably you guys should meet Jo and Juha. They built something called Wyncode. You're going to get to know them anyway." And so I would say a little bit over a year and a half ago, we started chatting. And we realized that we had a lot in common in terms of how we had built the businesses, where we wanted to see the business go. And the rest isn't history because we're a year and a half in. CHAD: [laughs] JOHANNA: So you know what happened. It all worked out. It's really great but also really excited for the future. Because now with the BrainStation acquisition comes a lot of firepower in terms of experience on the team, much larger team, capital, reach of team. We have students in over 100 countries. So I'm very excited for what we're going to do in the future as well because we can have so much more impact, and that is really exciting as well. Mid-Roll Ad: I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: You mentioned before you had a very Florida-specific focus previously. Is part of this next stage to be working across BrainStation and really working more globally? JOHANNA: Yeah, so working regionally with a focus on South Florida but with the know-how and the resources of a global team for sure. And being on the senior leadership team here, I am still 100% focused on Florida, but I get to have perspective from all the other markets. We have five campuses in New York, Toronto, Vancouver, London, and now Miami. So that's very interesting. And I have to say, when we were running Wyncode, we were always like, man, I wonder, how it's going in New York? CHAD: [laughs] JOHANNA: Or I wonder how it's going in Vancouver. Well, now I know. So it is really interesting because it also gives you not only a perspective in terms of bootcamps and how that's going but also a perspective on those ecosystems and how the tech companies there are growing and hiring. Because we're at that really interesting spot where we always know everyone's closed a round of funding because they go on a hiring spree. And then we see the bigger companies who are continually hiring. So we always kind of have a little bit of a pulse on what's going on in all of the ecosystems. And also really, before, we were primarily American students in the southeast, but now as BrainStation, I mean, it's global. So seeing how different everyone is but also still so similar in terms of their end goals and collaborative, it's really special. And yeah, it's been great. CHAD: So you have the campuses, the geographic locations, and then you have the global students. Are they in different silos, or do the two groups of students interact with each other at all? JOHANNA: Yeah, great question. So we do execute our..., and we call them diploma programs for the bootcamp programs, both online and in person. So as you can imagine, students in over 100 countries we're executing in all the time zones because of online delivery. But much of that, if they're outside of the geographic region of one of our campuses, they're likely an online student. CHAD: Are they being taught by an instructor in one of the campuses, or is it a separate thing? JOHANNA: Yeah, our educators are located in our campuses geographically. CHAD: How did the pandemic change or not change the experience of students, and what you needed to offer? JOHANNA: Wyncode, at the time, we were still Wyncode when the pandemic hit. I'll never forget having an all-hands meeting in our conference room and being like, hey...it was a Thursday. We're like, come Monday; we're going fully remote. We weren't a remote educator at that time. Everybody needs special permissions and licenses to also have remote teaching, which most governments made exceptions for because of the pandemic. So we were all good there. But we were thinking at the time, oh, maybe it'll be a month. Well, two years later, we're just about to have our grand reopening of the space in Miami. Our other campuses have already opened. And it was pretty exciting. When the pandemic hit, there was definitely an oh no moment. Like, people paused their enrollments, understandably. That was March. But as we got into early summer, we actually saw enrollment skyrocket. So huge success was pivoting to go remote. We were very fortunate that we had a pretty seasoned senior team on our software and UX side. And they had been through the world of remote learning and just being on tech, you know, Yahoo, Google. They had worked at Yahoo, Google, so they knew remote, and they were able to help us and bring that expertise. So the transition to remote was easy. And then we got all these students. And actually, that started a wave which has continued to this day of really people having an appetite for online learning and continuing to want to pivot careers into technology, both out of individuals' interests for technology but also because of the demand. So the pandemic was terrible. Business-wise for sure, there have been challenges, but there have, I would say, been a lot more successes and opportunities as a result of the pandemic. And for me personally as an entrepreneur, the pandemic got us, you know, we were doing well and having a lot of success, so the pandemic also got us on the radar for BrainStation. We started that conversation, and that was really exciting. And, again, here we are as a global educator now. CHAD: I've talked to a lot of people and seen it in our applications as well, like, it was really two things: people losing their jobs because of the pandemic and then getting that opportunity to take a look around and say, you know what? I'm not going back to that industry, and I want to learn to code. And then a lot of other people saying, you know, sort of the great resignation kind of stuff saying like, I want to change and actively switching as well. And you can see it in our applications the number of switchers, the number of people who have taken the last year, year and a half to do a remote bootcamp and make a career transition. It was always high. It's even higher now. JOHANNA: Yeah, totally agree, like, very respective of what we see as well. And we've had a great relationship with CareerSource South Florida as well. And they fund workforce transformation. And so initially in the pandemic...we're not seeing those layoffs now, but initially, a lot of those people who were getting laid off many of them were able to qualify for CareerSource as well, which also really fueled people's ability to take part in this education. And South Florida is interesting. I think 65% of the workforce before the pandemic...a lot has changed. Tech has moved in, a lot of big names have moved in. But before the pandemic, 65% of people professionally here were working in hospitality or real estate so it was definitely a big pivot for some people to go into the direction of technology. CHAD: That's great to hear that they were able to be helped by that because that can be a big impediment to this. I believe that the cost of an average bootcamp for what you actually get and for the impact it can have on your salary or your compensation is worth it. But if you can't afford the tuition, then it's a non-starter. JOHANNA: Yeah, yeah, exactly. And then it goes without saying, but there are some people...there are a lot of opportunities. There are a lot of jobs. There are a lot of ways to get in, but it doesn't mean that it's for everyone. And I think for us, some of the work that's required to get into the program in our admissions process and our advisors who spend a lot of time with people considering this are also helping people guide this thought process of what they go into and what they're going to do to decide if it's the right direction for them. And I think ultimately, the large majority who come in have done good research and good work and have really thought it through, and it's a good fit. But again, it's not for everyone. So it goes without saying it's good to go online, do some coding. Download Figma if you're going to go into UX. Tinker around with some stuff. Ask some people, go to some meetups, and then start looking into the education piece. CHAD: Yeah. Are there ways in which you're exploring how either through partnerships or that kind of thing like it sounds like you've done to make it more accessible to people? JOHANNA: Yeah, so we put, again, Wyncode and BrainStation now puts a lot of importance on building a diverse, inclusive environment. And the most important thing is just collaborating also with organizations in our various regions that serve communities that are underrepresented in tech so that we can provide certain pathways to this. And one of the key things that we're doing with our Impact Scholarships, I think we've committed over $1.2 million just as BrainStation to giving those pathways. The other thing that we're piloting right now is what we're calling Tuition Free. So we piloted in London. Miami is the only other city we're testing it with in-person learning, not online, but it being completely tuition-free for the individual coming into the program, which we're calling a trainee. And then working with some amazing partners here in South Florida, in London who essentially, if they opt to hire someone for the program, are going to be paying a percentage training fee for hiring that individual. So we're really excited to be piloting what's called a reverse model. But more so, training people in a very specific skill set that companies need, eliminating financial barriers as much as possible, and then also providing a very robust, rapid pathway for this incredible talent to then join companies. And maybe we'll do a synopsis in about a year, and I'll let you know how it all went. CHAD: [laughs] That'd be great. That'd be great. So a common thread throughout this conversation has been Miami, and it's come on my radar recently in terms of the ecosystem there and how it's expanded and grown significantly over the last several years. You mentioned you picked up and moved there because you identified it as a great market. What has it been like for you? JOHANNA: It's been a whirlwind. I mean, #Miamitechisonfire, literally. CHAD: [laughs] JOHANNA: It's a pretty exciting time to be here. I got to say, when we moved in 2014, our campus was and still is based in Wynwood, which is a wonderful creative space but also mixed in with tech companies. CHAD: Is that why it's called what it's called, Wyncode? JOHANNA: Yeah, that's right. [laughs] Wyncode and Wynwood, yep. So the landlords knew they really had all the leverage, right? But we have had, and I've always had, an amazing space here. And when we first opened, the biggest complaint we got from people who took the program was there were not enough places to eat. And for anyone who's listening who's from Miami and spent time in Wynwood, that sounds crazy because now all the hottest restaurants are here in Wynwood. And that's happened in the span of, you know, I know we've been here for eight years, but that's happened like in the last five years. So a lot has changed. Wynwood is kind of an analogy to what's happened in the rest of Miami. It was kind of like a little bit quiet and slow, known for hospitality, awesome partying, real estate, not really known for all of this other stuff. The pandemic, again, was horrible from a business standpoint, terrible for some people, amazing for others. It was amazing for Miami. The state of Florida remained relatively open throughout the pandemic. So that attracted people here. The tax situation, no income tax, has also been very appealing, particularly for anyone who's made a lot of money in tech and crypto, in particular from Miami. And then we have this incredible Mayor, Mayor Francis Suarez, who, long before what's happening now, has been an advocate and supporter of the tech ecosystem and startup founders here, which I've personally had experience with. He's been amazing. You know, in Silicon Valley, there was some social media going on for anyone who saw it on Twitter, and he tweeted back, and he said, "Hey, Miami would love to have you, guys. How can we help?" And so there's this tagline in Miami which is how can we help? Trying to be an ecosystem that's here to help that's open to all. And that's been going on now for almost two years. And as a result, there's been a huge number of people in technology in particular who have moved here, both big names like Jon Oringer, Founder of Shutterstock, Keith Rabois, Founders Fund. There are so many people to name down to founders who are like; I'm starting a new startup. I don't want to do it in New York or Silicon Valley. I want to do it in Miami. So that's really exciting. I can tell you; there's more going on here than I could...before I could keep an Easy Calendar, I knew everyone. I knew what events were going on when and now it's just...there are multiple events, meetups, multiple companies to meet. So it's really, really an exciting time. I think Mayor Francis Suarez has said this, too but definitely making a play to be the capital of crypto. So there's a lot going on in the crypto space here, a lot going on in Web3. Like Web3 being at the beginning, this is still at the beginning. This is a moment that we're hoping to turn into a movement, and I think it's really, really exciting. I don't think everyone is going to stay here. I don't think Miami is going to be the next Silicon Valley or New York. It has its own character. It has its own vibe. It has its own way of functioning, and that's what it is. Its original kind of environment is also what's attracting people. So it's an evolution right now. It's going to change. The people who have come here and who have been here are all in the process of evolving to what the next chapter of Miami tech is. But it's definitely an exciting time. It was a place for me where I came to professionally reinvent myself as well and really be a part of building an ecosystem. And that's very much true today for anybody who is coming here. And I think that type of opportunity is really, really exciting. There's definitely an energy, yeah. CHAD: The state of Florida has passed laws like the Woke Act recently, which can present a challenge to employers strictly speaking. You're not allowed to ask certain questions around diversity or inclusion in interviews now. And that can be uncomfortable or difficult to do business in or to say, "Hey, we're the most welcoming company. Come here. Come to Miami." Is that something that's, you know, I'm not there. So is it a challenge on the ground, or does it not really affect people day-to-day? JOHANNA: I mean, that's a really good question. I would say I haven't encountered it personally or even on the professional side with how we've been hiring. So it's hard to say from my perspective. I think certainly there are some things going on in Florida that Florida and California are very different. I myself I'm not an American. I'm not as involved in the politics. But it'll be interesting to see what happens in the future and how these things shape. I will say that employers have a lot of power because they're the ones who are bringing in a lot of money into a state. They're hiring people. And so some of the responsibility is also on the companies and employers who are in their respective areas to advocate for the things that they want to see. And one of those things is diversity, inclusion, which not everybody has made that a number one priority. And the one thing that I've said in the past is creating an inclusive and diverse ecosystem is the opportunity I think that Miami has because it is a less established tech ecosystem. The canvas isn't fully painted over, so we have an opportunity to be unique and be different and to try to avoid maybe some of the biases that have existed in other tech ecosystems. But at this point, while there has been progress made and there are some amazing individuals doing amazing things like Leigh-Ann Buchanan leading Tech Equity Miami and JPMorgan Chase coming in to support that in a really big way and Knight Foundation, we're still at a state where the minorities are advocating for the minorities. And that's something I hope to one, personally contribute to changing but as an ecosystem as a whole hope to see that happen. Because, like I said, Miami is attracting people for a certain reason, and that's great. And I think if we could build a diverse ecosystem, that would also attract certain people and retain certain people. And I am a firm believer, and, I mean, there are also stats to back it up, but the best products are built by the most diverse teams. So it goes without saying that the most diverse ecosystem is going to result in the best companies, best environment, et cetera. And I think that's the big opportunity for Miami, but we still have a lot of work to do to get there. CHAD: Yeah. Well, if folks want to follow along with you or get in touch with you or learn more about BrainStation, where are all the places that they can do that? JOHANNA: Yeah. I would love to connect with everyone. On LinkedIn, we have all of our respective social handles just at BrainStation. Even our Wyncode handles are still alive, so that's great. My parting words would be if you know someone amazing, a professional who wants to pivot careers and learn in person, now is an amazing opportunity to apply to BrainStation for incredible education and network. And I'm really looking forward to seeing amazing professionals come through the program. CHAD: And I assume if you're in a position where you're hiring talent that you should also check out BrainStation. JOHANNA: Yes, thank you, Chad. We 100% the thing we take the most pride in is connecting this amazing talent with awesome companies. I always like to tell everyone to keep a very wide lens on the type of talent you're hiring for your technology teams because some of the best individuals have very non-traditional tech backgrounds but bring so, so much to the table. Our team does a lot of work in terms of once we get to know a partner, which I would love for you all to reach out and join; we do a lot of work to make sure that we are connecting curated talent to companies. And if you go to brainstation.io/hiring-partners, you'll be able to sign up there. CHAD: Wonderful. Jo, thank you so much for joining me. I really appreciate it. JOHANNA: Great. Thank you so much. Great to be on. CHAD: You can subscribe to the show and find notes and a transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks so much for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Johanna Mikkola.
Jeni Barcelos is the Co-Founder and CEO of Marvelous, the world's most beautiful all-in-one teaching platform. Chad talks with Jeni about what makes Marvelous different from other teaching platforms out there, the importance of elevating women to leadership positions, and why applying for and getting accepted into an accelerator program was the right path for the company. Marvelous (https://www.heymarvelous.com/) Follow Marvelous on YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJZ_kWoBcXJuSKP1iofXsAw), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/heymarvelous/), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/marvelous-software/). Follow Jeni on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/jenibarcelos/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Jeni Barcelos, the Co-Founder, and CEO of Marvelous, the world's most beautiful all-in-one teaching platform. Jeni, thank you so much for joining me. JENI: Thank you for having me, Chad. I'm excited to be here and excited for our conversation. CHAD: So I'm really excited to dig into more about Marvelous as well. So why don't we start there? What makes Marvelous different than other teaching platforms that are out there? JENI: Marvelous is different in that we prioritize design, I would say more than any other competitive platform. And we also prioritize live events in a way that I think is pretty unique. So we started in the wellness space. We primarily are serving wellness creators, although all kinds of other creators use our tool as well. So we specifically built Marvelous with the goal of serving their unique needs, which involves a lot of teaching live classes and having a really great community space where students and clients can build relationships with each other. And then, because our audience has a particular design aesthetic and is non-technical, we've created the tool in a way that makes it really easy to make something look beautiful very quickly and simply. CHAD: So what caused you to differentiate yourself based on design? JENI: I think just personal preference and aesthetic, to be honest. As we were building the platform, I realized very quickly that people were choosing us...one of the big reasons people were choosing us was because of the simple nature of the user interface and because of the design that it produced. And so we decided really early to prioritize that. And I would say it's also just I care deeply about design, and I don't like the idea of using tools that make that an afterthought. And so I thought if I'm going to use it, and I do, I mean, we definitely dogfood our own platform and teach our own courses, we run our own communities there, I want it to look beautiful. [laughs] I want it to be a place that people enjoy spending time. We all spend more time, I think, than we want looking at screens. And so when you are going to engage in that practice and engage with other people on the internet, I think it's really nice to do it in a space that feels welcoming, and gentle, and beautiful. CHAD: So you have a co-founder, Sandy. Are either of you designers or have a background in design? JENI: Nope, not at all. Although I was one course away from minoring in art history in school. [laughter] No, I'm a lawyer. So I'm the opposite of a designer, although I think there's a part of me that thinks of myself as an artist. I wish that were my identity. CHAD: So, given the importance of design that you discovered, how did you go about executing on that? JENI: Hiring really great people, I would say, and having a really critical eye. And so, there's a tremendous amount of feedback that goes into our process. And now we have a head of brand in our company, and she can hold space for that design across both marketing and within product. So that hire, I think, has been critical for us to be able to maintain that as a priority. CHAD: Where were you in the product life-cycle and business stage where you were able to hire really great people? JENI: I would say within the last two years. So we are one of these startups that was in the right place at the right time when COVID hit. So luckily and unluckily, maybe we grew really fast in the wake of the pandemic, the beginning of the pandemic. And so that positioned us to hire pretty rapidly over the last two years. And that's when we really had the resources and the capacity to bring in that level of talent. I'll say our creative director was working with us for many years before that but just in a part-time capacity so, you know, running her own agency. And we were hiring her out as we could because we were bootstrapped. And so it wasn't until we reached a certain level of growth where we could bring her on as a permanent fixture in the company. CHAD: Yeah, that's often a way that I hear from founders to help get things off the grounds, particularly if you know of someone and would love to work with them and you know what they can produce, but you just can't afford to bring them on full-time as a member of the team at that point. Contracting with them, working with them part-time can be a great way to get that started. So let's rewind even further and tell me about the fateful day where you and Sandy first met each other. JENI: Yeah, so we first met in Colorado Springs at an entrepreneurship event. And it was for an online program we had both been in that was teaching us how to start a SaaS company. And we are two of the only people that had actually done it and gotten to paying customers within six months, which was a pretty audacious goal, I would say to go from being non-technical and having no experience in the startup world to having a product or at least an MVP with paying customers within six months and no funding. So we were 2 of maybe 5 or 6 people out of 550 in the program who did that. So we automatically kind of gravitated towards each other. And we were two of the only women also in the program. So we met at that event and got to know each other over the course of a number of days and retreated together. And then we just started really being accountability partners to one another as we were each building our own companies independently. And then that went on for another year, year and a half before Sandy joined my company. CHAD: Okay, so you were already working on Marvelous? JENI: Yeah. It had a different name at the time, but yes, I was six months into it when I met her. CHAD: How did you convince her to do that? JENI: We were actually growing...for a solo founder, we were growing to the point that I couldn't manage the company really on my own anymore. And so I applied to an accelerator just because I felt like I had other kinds of career experience but had, again, zero background in tech startups. And so, I came from teaching at a law school and building and scaling a nonprofit. And my background was in politics prior to that. So I had no idea what I was doing. Like, I didn't know what I didn't know, and so that thought scared me. And I just wanted to go immerse myself in an environment where I could ask a lot of questions and have access to resources and mentorships. So anyway, I applied to an accelerator and got accepted contingent on having a team and having co-founders. And I was like, [laughs] well, that's why I need to come here because I don't know how to do that. Like, I don't know how I would do that. And so I reached out to Sandy because I mean, she had been more closely involved in the company than anyone else because we were constantly working together online and going on Zoom and helping each other build our companies. She knew more than anyone else really what was involved. And she was always commenting how she wished she had started [chuckles] a company like this because it's just in the sector. Her background is in clinical wellness, and Marvelous really was serving yoga and wellness teachers. And so I said, "Well, why don't you come on board? I need to have at least one co-founder." Well, I was told I needed to have two, but I convinced them actually to accept me into the program with just one. So Sandy and I went into the accelerator together. CHAD: I feel like that's a great sign that you were able to convince them to bend the rule. [laughs] JENI: Yeah, I mean, I think that's actually my MO in life. So I also applied and got into graduate school at Yale without taking the GRE. So I have a history of these kinds of convincing arguments, I guess. CHAD: [laughs] JENI: And I'm a lawyer, right? So I was made for this. [chuckles] CHAD: Yes. You sound like a very enjoyable person, though. So I find it hard to believe that you're... [laughs] No, I'm kidding. JENI: I'm a human rights lawyer. So the only person I've ever represented in court was a pod of killer whales. So I'm a human rights and environmental attorney. So I'm not a corporate attorney by any means. CHAD: So some people might describe going after things, bending the rules as ambition. And I was reading some of the things that you've written, so I'm not pulling this out of thin air. But I know that you talked before about how sometimes ambition, particularly from female-identifying people, can be seen as a problem. Why is that? JENI: I mean, the short answer to that is the patriarchy of which we're all a part. Both men and women and non-binary people are all impacted greatly by the patriarchy. I mean, I think it's how girls are socialized. So that's a whole, I think, a whole other podcast conversation to have. But I mean, just even recently, I have a young daughter, and she was told not to raise her hand as much in school because she was so eager and raises her hand for every question that's asked. And that's unacceptable to me. But I was also told those things. And I think just men and women are judged very differently in our culture, and that's just a fact of life. I mean, just look at, I mean, this is maybe opening up a can of worms. But if you just look at the way the Elizabeth Holmes trial played out versus so many other startup stories, and yes, there are differences, but it's really common in our culture to villainize female ambition and to look at it as problematic. CHAD: Yeah, you're absolutely right that this is a whole podcast topic in and of itself, but I think it's an important one. But I'm curious; it can feel angering and powerless when something like that happens at school or in a system where it's very hard to control it or change it. But when it comes to your own company, you are in charge. So what have you done to try to make this different at Marvelous? JENI: Well, I would say elevating women to leadership positions to the extent that we've been able, I mean, we're definitely a female-run company. We make decisions. Also, just even the way we provide benefits and salaries, it's in my mind done from a more holistic standpoint than I would say a lot of other small startups are doing. We prioritize people and their families and try to treat people like human beings versus just kind of pawns in our scheme to build a company, I would say. It's not perfect. But I really think that so much of what goes on around kind of the women in tech stories so much of that and the women in fundraising stories has to do with women or non-binary people really having to prove themselves to a degree that is unrealistic in order to have the same treatment or the same opportunities as white men. So we are obviously very acutely aware of that. And so, in our own company, we're still very small but always trying to elevate the opportunities that women and people of color have in our company. CHAD: And as you said, this permeates. It's systemic. And so, what might you do when you have a male manager with the best of intentions in a female-led company? I'm of the opinion that it's not enough to just assume that, oh, well, in that environment, this stuff won't happen because it is so ingrained. So are there other things that we can do as founders, as people, and leaders, as a company to create an environment where it's better for everybody? JENI: I definitely don't have all the answers for this. But I would say we've put a lot of attention into coming up with core values that we really strongly affirm and reaffirm in the company and make sure that everyone is aware of those. I also just I'm constantly watching what's going on and noticing subtle cues when people start to pull back from contributing or some voices are much louder than others; just trying to notice that and not wait for something to be brought to my attention. I think so much of it is also the culture, and it's hard in a situation like ours where we're a fully remote team with people across the world with their own different, you know, they're bringing their own cultures and their own values to the company. I mean, it's definitely hard. It's harder than I ever would have expected to get people on the same page. And, I don't know, I don't have really good advice other than to say the founders should really agree on the core values. And then, those core values should be shared constantly. And I think it starts with the founder or the co-founder and the leadership team holding everyone to those values and standards. CHAD: So as someone who, like you said earlier, you're not a software developer, you're not a designer, yet you are working on this idea and bringing it out into the world. How did you manage to do that? What did the very early steps look like for you? JENI: So I started a company when I was essentially on maternity leave. I naively thought that that would be like a fun, little hobby project for me to start a tech company. Partly because I was spinning off what had really been a research project that was funded and incubated at a major university. I was spinning that off into a nonprofit with another co-founder, another lawyer. And I spent a great deal of time and energy fundraising and was constantly going and having meetings or drinks or dinner with people or even flying out to different foundations and meeting with donors. And I was like, this is for me who...I have a body of work and have developed expertise as a climate change expert. And that word is problematic but, you know, someone who knows quite a lot about climate change in the law, edited one of the major textbooks in the area, taught some of the first curriculum on energy and the environment. I was constantly having to just go out and raise money all the time and mostly from people who had cashed out of tech companies. So I was in Seattle at the time, you know, Microsoft and Amazon. There are a lot of people with significant wealth, and those are the people that are donating to organizations. And so I just thought I'm as smart and capable as these people. Like, why don't I have a revenue source that helps to fund the work that I want to do in the world? Which was a lot of human rights law and environmental law that's really underfunded really at that intersection of climate change and human rights. And so I thought, well, I'm on maternity leave. I'm really interested in the wellness industry. I see it really being broken. I had gone through yoga teacher training like right at the tail end of law school just for my own mental health and wellbeing. And I just saw all of these friends and colleagues of mine struggling, and I just thought something wasn't quite right. So the first thing I did was I decided I'm going to try to build something to help them. And I set out to interview 75 yoga studio owners or managers in North America and did some research on the biggest markets at the time. CHAD: Why 75? JENI: Because I just thought that was a good number. If I talked to 75 people, I'd be able to have some good information. And I will say I had just come off of a couple of major projects where I had put together a big international conference in my field in climate justice. And I had also put together sort of a retreat of leaders in the field of scenario planning around that. So I had really learned a lot and elevated my real career at the time by reaching out to people who I thought were thought leaders and experts in the field across different disciplines and having really honest, frank conversations and interviews with them. And I had been able to essentially tease out an entire field of work for myself from doing that. So I brought my research and academic skills to bear, which was like, if I talk to enough people, I'm going to start to find some patterns. And I was curious, like, I couldn't quite understand. This wellness industry had been growing for over a decade at that point. It was this massive industry, and yet no one I knew who worked in the industry made any money. And I thought that was really weird. And I'm like, why is all the money going to apparel companies or a couple of big brands? Something is really broken in this model. I don't think the technology...tech hadn't really arrived to wellness at that point. I came up with the idea to start doing this at the end of 2013, and so it was a long time ago. So I was just like, I'm going to talk to as many people as I can who are running businesses in the major metropolitan areas that are big yoga centers and just see what I can figure out. And so that's what really started it. And then, the idea for what was then called Namastream and is now called Marvelous came from those conversations. And it wasn't long; it was maybe six weeks into the research that I really started to...like, there were three or four ideas that I thought, well, here are product ideas that could really make a difference. And so what I did is I sent out about 200 cold emails, and I had 74 interviews from that. And then I agreed to create a report like a white paper because, again, this is what I knew how to do as an academic is like I'm going to do a bunch of interviews, and then I'm going to write a report about it. And I'm going to share it with people. So I agreed to share the research with everyone who agreed to an interview. And so I think that's part of why they agreed to talk to me. So yeah, so that's where the idea came from. And then again, I had no background in tech. I watched some trainings on how to do UX design, I think, like YouTube videos and stuff, and then I just did it. And I made the first prototype like a clickable prototype in Keynote because I knew how to use Keynote. CHAD: Yeah, that's so great. Talking to people, using whatever tool you're comfortable with, Keynote, PowerPoint, that kind of thing to do clickable prototypes that's the exact kind of thing I encourage, we encourage our thoughtbot early-stage founders to do. So you were spot on. I don't know if you realized it at the time. But that's really great. What problem did those 74 or some strong subset of them have that streaming helped them with? JENI: It was really interesting because there were a couple of studios. There were two studios at the time in Southern California that were doing this, and the bigger studios in these other major cities knew that. And so because there were so few, they were very well known way back. I mean, most of those conversations were in 2014 that I was having. Some of the studios, I mean, one of them is still a major company now. You know, most studios had like 2,000 members. Like, a studio that I would interview had 2,000 customers on their list, like, possible customers. Some of those were people who were drop-ins or punch cards or whatever. And then the studios that were streaming had like 30,000 customers. And so that was starting to be known. And people had no idea how to do any of that themselves. And so the problem that we are solving was when I would interview studios in the Boston area because that was one of the metropolitan areas I targeted; there were certain days out of the year that for snow closures like the studio would just lose all their revenue that day. In the south, there were studios that were impacted by hurricanes that were trying to figure out...and I'm a climate change lawyer, so I see this trend. I was looking at it from a disaster response scenario planning lens which was this is only going to get worse. I had no idea about the pandemic. CHAD: Little did you know. [laughs] JENI: Right? [laughs] I just thought like, wow, okay, the hurricanes are increasing in severity and duration. That's not going to change. Sea level rise is happening. Storms are becoming more unpredictable. Like, places that are cold are getting colder and have more snow on average. So all these people were complaining about lost revenue for these cataclysmic weather events. I just thought that as being a huge opportunity for a solution. So that was one reason why this idea really stood out to me. And then also just knowing that...this actually goes back again to my own story. I used to work for Al Gore. I was one of the people that led his environmental outreach on his presidential campaign when I was a teenager. And then I ended up being one of the first people trained to give the climate presentation that he made famous in An Inconvenient Truth. And so, I had been developing presentation materials in my legal and academic career that I was sharing with that organization. And I had to figure out how to record myself and then try to get it on a thumb drive and then send it to Nashville so they could watch it and learn how to present the slides that I was making. And so I actually had this very different use case where I was like, it was really hard. I was on the board of another nonprofit that was bringing together environmental leaders once a year to learn new training materials and then go back out across the world to disseminate them. Again, the same thing. I was like; there is going to be such a need for some kind of streaming tool that's accessible by whoever wants to use it to be able to share knowledge and information. So both as a business tool, but it also kind of scratched this other itch that I had seen in my previous career, like, the career I thought I was taking a short break from. And so I just was like, this is the future. And I had moved during this time across the country for my husband's job and had a new baby. And I missed my own yoga teacher. And so I thought, like, wow, I'm in North Carolina in this small town, and I really miss the Seattle community. And I miss my teachers there. I wish I could take these classes. So for all of those reasons, I saw this as being a trend that wasn't going away, and that was only going to be more in need. And it was really early adopters at that point, like definitely not 74 studios telling me they needed this. But it was a big enough chunk of early adopters that I thought this is when you get to make something new that changes the industry. Mid-Roll Ad: I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: So you have the clickable prototype, and you feel like this is something here. What was the next step for you? JENI: So I went back to everyone that had validated that idea, and I tried to sell it to them. [laughs] I had people PayPal.Me money in order to build it. I said, "You can become a founding customer, and you'll get access for a year included and with a payment." I think I was charging people; I don't know, a couple of thousand dollars. I don't even remember. It was a long time ago. It was under $2,000. "So you can get in now. You'll have a 20% discount on anything we make forever. If you want to participate, you can be in this founding member circle with me. And as it's getting developed, you can provide feedback and help to shape exactly what it becomes." So I had enough people throw some money into the pot PayPal.Me money. I also had no idea how to take money from anyone. It was sort of like pre-Stripe being a normal thing. So I just had random people PayPal.Me money. And I took the money, and I hired a developer to build a prototype. CHAD: How did you find that developer? JENI: That was hard. So through this entrepreneurship course that I ended up meeting Sandy in, there was somebody who was a classmate, sort of like a mentor-level classmate who had done the course before who was an engineer at Microsoft. So I asked him to help me. I reached out and asked him to. And if I hadn't reached out to him, I would have reached out to other developers that I knew, just people in my extended circle of friends and stuff. CHAD: So how long did it take from that point to get a product that people could actually use for their classes? JENI: Early use, I would say like four months. So it was very, very, very beta. It's humiliating what it was. CHAD: It should be. It should be humiliating. JENI: Yeah, it should be. So it was like kind of a WordPress plugin. It was basically a glorified WordPress plugin, and that took about four months. And so I onboarded our early adopters who had given me the money, the checks, the PayPal money. That was the beginning of the summer that year. And I said, "You're the only people that are going to have access to it for the first three months," and that was part of the deal. So I really worked around the clock helping them, working with my developer to solve any problems that were coming up, making changes. And then, in September, about three months later, I just figured out how to run Facebook ads. [laughs] So I just made up Facebook ads that ran to a one-on-one demo and let people book one-on-one demos with me through Facebook ads. CHAD: So in those early days, if you had to do it over again, is there a lesson you learned that you might do it differently? JENI: I don't think so, honestly. I feel like that first year; I feel pretty good about everything that I did. I mean, obviously, it would have been great to have someone like Sandy come in early on. But, I mean, I needed to figure some stuff out that I didn't need another person around to figure out, I guess. And I guess now, in like 2022, we're having this conversation. I wish I had dumped money into Facebook ads to have more demos because they were so cheap. [laughter] CHAD: Right. Right. JENI: It was so cheap for me to run ads. It was the golden days of online advertising, I guess. So I was probably paying like 40 cents a lead or something. [laughs] So yeah, maybe that. Because I was very much not wanting to put my own money into it. Like, once I raised the money to fund the prototype, I think I maybe in that first year put in like seven grand or something, but by the end of the year, I paid myself back. CHAD: That's great. JENI: I could have maybe put in a little more money. But I didn't know if it was going to work. Like, I wasn't really willing for...again, I wanted something that was very validated. And I expected fully to be going back to my career as soon as I got this thing launched. I was like, oh, this is just like a side hustle. This is going to be passive income. I did not understand that building a software company was not at all passive. I think I really bought into this idea that, like, oh, it's the internet. It will be passive income. CHAD: When did it become clear to you that it wasn't? JENI: Oh, I mean, I would say, you know, so I had a moment to go back to work, not my exact same job but to do work in my field between one month and two months after I launched and started running ads. I turned down a really incredible job offer, and I think that's when I knew it. I was like, if I take a job, if I go back to work full-time...and I have the kind of career that's all-encompassing, and I sort of, whatever, I'm going to give 150% to whatever I'm doing. And so I knew that this thing would kind of die, but it was taking off. And so, I think I knew at that point I had to make a choice. CHAD: And is that when you decided to apply to the accelerator? JENI: No, it was like another nine months of growing it on my own before I applied to the accelerator. And I just kept doing what I was doing, and it was working. But I was doing things that didn't scale, so that was the problem. And so I didn't know, I mean, there's only so many one-on-one demos that the founder can do before you start to realize [laughs] you need to make some changes because I was doing them around the clock. And then, at some point, I switched to webinars. I taught myself how to do webinars. And so then I was trying to do demos to multiple people at a time, but also, I didn't understand email marketing. I didn't understand copywriting. I was figuring everything out myself as I went, and I was burning out. So that's when I decided, like, oh, not everyone does this. I can't grow Microsoft or Amazon by doing this. I can't become that company. So obviously, I need to figure out how to scale. So that was when I decided to apply to the accelerator. CHAD: Why apply to an accelerator as opposed to start fundraising, for example? JENI: Oh my God. Well, so the whole reason I did this was so that I didn't have to go out for drinks with people and ask them for money. [laughter] I mean, I was not interested in that at all. And then I soon realized that that's what happens when you join an accelerator [laughs] is you basically just start learning to fundraise. But I didn't know that. I knew nothing. And so, I knew nothing about startups. I knew nothing about anything like this. I literally had no idea. So the idea of going and sending emails to wealthy people to go have a drink with them was actually the last thing I was willing to do. And I don't think any VC fund would have met with me. I didn't even really know what that was. Like, I had no idea. So it didn't strike me as something that there was a lot of money that somebody would pour into it. That, honestly, wasn't even an option to me in my mind at that time. CHAD: How did the accelerator help you? JENI: It helped me bring on a co-founder, which I would say was invaluable. [chuckles] And I learned a lot. I mean, I'm a person who's super curious and asks lots of questions. And so there was always somebody I could ask questions to, which was great, saved me a lot of time. And I also got to be in a cohort with other founders and see how they were growing their companies. So if you've never been around that stuff before, it's super helpful, I think, to just learn what other people are doing, like what other models there are, what other teams look like. And I also realized, like, we were one of the only companies that had any revenue. I had no idea how we compared to anything else. And so I realized, oh, we're growing, and we're making money, and we're profitable. And it's really different than what a lot of other people are doing. So I knew that there was something to it also. I knew that we were really onto something. And then I will also say that fast forward a number of years, and our leader, one of the directors of our accelerator, I ended up hiring him to be our Chief Product Officer. So that was also very fortuitous [chuckles] and really an amazing story and outcome as well. CHAD: Did you end up raising money coming out of the accelerator? JENI: Nope. We soft circled around and had an opportunity to take an additional tranche from the accelerator, and we walked away from that at the time. And it was a really hard decision. Mostly because Sandy is Canadian, I don't know if that was made obvious, and I'm American. And we never envisioned wanting...like, building a remote company still in 2016 was not normal. And there was no way we were going to be in the same place. And the potential investors we were talking to, one of them in particular, was pretty adamant that we needed to be in person and have an actual office set up. And that was not negotiable for us. And so we had been doing this fine. I mean, we were fine building a company together. And our first developer was in Asia, and then our designer at the time was in another part of the United States. So I was like, why would we do that? Why would we spend money and have to buy things like a fax machine and chairs? Why would we do that? CHAD: [laughs] JENI: That doesn't make any sense. And so that was one kind of red flag for me. And then also in the accelerator, I pitched to tons of people because you're sort of pitching, but also it's kind of practice. And I don't know how much of that was actual pitching. And I don't know how many of those investors were actually considering making investments, or they were just being nice and giving you their time and feedback. But I pitched a ton, and the only people that we had soft circled were women. And I just had some negative experiences with some of the investors that we had pitched to, which that's also another podcast episode. And I was really bothered by, in particular, one conversation that I had. It was like a situation where someone said something really inappropriate to me, and I just absolutely did not want to do that. So that all factored in. CHAD: Have you ever taken any investment? JENI: Yeah. So this year, we have...because we have a situation where it makes sense to pour fuel on our...it made sense from a marketing standpoint to pour some money in. So we've just taken a small investment from angels, and we may take a little more as well. We're open-minded, I would say, right now about fundraising. I have, in the last two years, taken a lot of meetings. So I've talked to lots of firms and lots of angels and get emails every day and so take a number of those meetings. So I've just tried to be really open-minded about it. So yeah, I would say I don't have such a negative association as what I had before. But I also would say my company is in a really different position now, and fundraising means something else to us. CHAD: It sounds like you're in a little bit more control over the situation. And by working with individual angels probably, you're able to maintain that, I would guess. JENI: Yeah. And it's definitely something where I think that there are...you know, I don't think it's helpful to be closed off to fundraising because I see that there are absolutely opportunities especially to go into new markets where being bootstrapped isn't practical because of the cost to go into those markets. And so, if it's something that's heavily regulated, for example, it's not a feasible option. So allowing us to have options and actually to be able to think through those options is important to me. CHAD: So now that you've done that, what's next for Marvelous? What's the next challenge you're ready to tackle? JENI: I would say we had this tremendous growth early in the pandemic, which really kind of unearthed, not really unearthed, I mean, I knew it was there [laughs] but really publicly unearthed a lot of technical debt. And that's, I think, normal for bootstrapped companies as well who are growing slowly and up to a point that they're not anymore. And so we spent a solid 18 months, I would say. Up until the end of 2021, there was a solid 18 months of really rebuilding the platform from the ground up. And so we've done that, and now we're in growth mode. We're focusing on letting people know that we exist because I think we're quite well known in the wellness industry and in the yoga space in particular, but we're not as well known outside of that in other creator niches. And so it's about brand awareness. It's about really showing up as thought leaders in the space as well. We do a lot of writing and a lot of blogging and podcasting. And in particular, we serve women and non-binary creators in a way that I think no one else does. And so it's about disseminating the information that we have and the teachings that we have and letting people know we exist, and we're a resource for them. CHAD: Yeah. Well, like you said, you have a strong reputation, and you have those roots in the wellness space, but you've expanded beyond that. If someone's out there listening, what would make them a potential customer or an ideal customer for Marvelous? JENI: So anyone who's teaching, training, or coaching online, the software is really industry agnostic. And so we're just, again, not as well known yet in those other spaces. But especially someone who's integrating any cohort-based learning, or really heavily integrating coaching and live streaming, or group programs, or one-on-ones into an online course or a membership, for example, Marvelous is really second to none with all of that. Because again, live streaming and the integration of live teaching with on-demand content was what we started with and what we are known for. And so it's not an afterthought the way that I think a lot of online teaching platforms and edtech companies have slapped on live streaming as like, oh, now you can integrate with Zoom or whatever. And for us, we have an integration with Zoom that's not like anything else. And then we have other WebRTC-based live streaming options, and everything is very well thought out and makes it really easy for the end-user so for the students and clients to be able to use the tool, which I think our audience really cares about that it's easy for their clients. CHAD: I'd be remiss, and since this is a podcast, if I didn't mention that you and Sandy have a podcast. JENI: We sure do, yeah. Thank you so much. laughs] CHAD: It's called the And She Spoke Podcast, and where can folks find it? JENI: So obviously anywhere that they listen to podcasts, but our website for the podcast is andshe.co. So I would love it if you're interested in conversations about women in tech, female founders, women, money and power, online business resources, and training. And that's mostly what we talk about. We're doing a crypto series right now, sort of like exploring crypto and the intersection of women and crypto, so that's going to be coming out shortly as well. CHAD: Cool. If folks want to try out Marvelous or find out more or get in touch with you, where are all the places that they can do that? JENI: So our website is heymarvelous.com. And we are @heymarvelous on Instagram. That's where we hang out the most. But we're also on TikTok, and Pinterest, and Facebook, and pretty much everywhere else as well. But Instagram, I would say, is the best place. CHAD: That's great. Jeni, thanks so much for joining me and sharing your story and your advice. I'm sure people will really appreciate it. JENI: Yeah, thank you so much for your time, Chad. I appreciate you having me. CHAD: And you can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode along with a complete transcript at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Jeni Barcelos.
Owen McGab Enaohwo is the CEO and Co-Founder of SweetProcess, a business process management software that helps management teams and employees easily document procedures, implement processes, and manage tasks. Chad talks with Owen about taking specific root issues and building software around them, overcoming resistance to the core idea of documenting processes, and the importance of having the freedom and ability to be empowered to make changes to organizational documents that outline how you do your work. SweetProcess (https://www.sweetprocess.com/) Follow SweetProcess on Twitter (https://twitter.com/SweetProcess), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/SweetProcess), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/sweetprocess/). Follow Owen on Twitter (https://twitter.com/HYVAssistant) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/owenmcgabenaohwo/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel and with me today is Owen McGab Enaohwo, the CEO and Co-Founder of SweetProcess, a business process management software that helps management teams as well as employees easily document procedures, implement processes, and manage tasks. Owen, thank you so much for joining me. OWEN: Thanks for having me. I really appreciate you inviting me as a guest on here. CHAD: I could only return the favor as I recently went on one of the podcasts that you run over at the SweetProcess. I'm happy to have you on the show. OWEN: Great, great. CHAD: Let's dive in a little bit to SweetProcess. You know, it's a tool for documenting process. And I'm curious what led you to founding SweetProcess and creating this product? OWEN: That's a great question. So what happened was SweetProcess was actually founded in, I think, the fourth quarter of 2013. And before then, I had an agency where I would provide entrepreneurs in the U.S., so small to medium-sized business owners, with back-office support, basically, people in the Philippines doing back-office support for them here in the U.S. And so people had read these books that were very popular at that time, The 4-Hour Workweek, or the World Is Flat. And then suddenly they realize that being able to hire people abroad and outsource work was not limited to only the larger companies like the telecoms and all that that would go and hire like 150 or more people in these countries working at their phone support 24/7 and all that. So these books exposed small business owners to the idea that even they themselves can do it on a smaller scale and outsource a lot of their work. And so that's what I was doing. But the issues that I ran into was that first of all; they were coming to me with this idea that the moment they hire that immediately the person will hit the ground running and start doing the work magically, not realizing that for that to happen, there needs to have been documentation in place. Because first of all, the person you're hiring is in a different country, different culture and all that. There's that that you have going against you. But then also, they're not even with you physically where you can say you can teach them by talking to them while they're next to you. So they're in a whole different location. So the more clear your instructions are in terms of having standard operating procedures in front of them, the more easier and quickly they're going to deliver the results you want, and so that was the first thing. The second thing was they were very busy wearing so many hats. They didn't have time to document these procedures that we needed to do the work for them. So we came up with this strategy where we would meet with our clients at the time online on Zoom, not Zoom; Zoom wasn't the thing at the time. It was...what was it called? Skype. CHAD: Skype. OWEN: Yeah. So we would meet with them online, and we'd have recorded sessions with them where they would walk us through what they were doing then record those conversations. And then, someone else on my team would take this conversation and document standard operating procedure step by step from what they told us. Now, on the backend, the issue we had was to do this documentation and have tools in place so that people can actually have one place where they could go and find all these documents for our clients. It was either we were using enterprise-level tools that were first of all hard to use for my team talk less of the clients. So these tools were not even built for small to medium-sized businesses. Or we were basically hacking to get a bunch of free tools to achieve that purpose of documentation and having one place where people can go find stuff. So in the back of my mind, I was like, man, there has to be a better tool that does this. And so fast forward, I was invited as a guest on to Mixergy. It's another very popular podcast for tech startups. I don't know if you know of him. His name is Andrew Warner. And so, he has two versions of the podcast. The first version is the one where people go in there and talk about the biography of their business or themselves and how they were able to build a tech startup that sold for millions or whatever. And then the other version of the podcast was one that was behind a paid subscription where people come on; they're experts, come on there and talk about specific topics like very concrete-sized topics that people are paying him to learn from. So people could come on here to learn about sales, marketing. In my case, I was brought on there to teach the listeners how they can basically document procedures and processes so that you can hand over work and no longer be the bottleneck in their business. Lo and behold, my co-founder, Jervis, who is a programmer and now my co-founder and CTO for SweetProcess, listened to that course that I did for Mixergy. He reached out to me and said he has an idea he is working on similar to what I was talking about, the whole way of simplifying documentation. And he just had some questions about this idea he had in his head. And being the kind of person I am, open to conversation, I said, "Okay. Let's go ahead. Let's meet." So we had a conversation. And after our conversation, I was like, "Dude; I'm running into the same issue that you're talking about right now because we do this for our customers. We do the documentation for them. But the tools are not the way they should be. Instead of me just giving you ideas on how to do that, and then you go from here, would you be interested if we go ahead and work together and build this software together and build this as a company together?" And he was excited. He was like, "Okay, let's do it." And then I said, "Okay, instead of jumping ahead to build the software, one of the things I want to do is avoid a situation where the software ends up being hard to use and feature-bloated like the other software that we are running into right now. Why don't we spend some time having conversations with potential customers to totally understand this problem of documenting procedures and having one place where employees can go to find stuff and how employees can collaborate together to improve stuff?" So I wanted to really understand the problem by talking to people. So we spent like about a month or so. I spoke to more than 30 different people running different companies just to get the ideas of the problems they were having with this very specific topic. And we came back, we analyzed all the conversations, and we were able to put down a list of root-specific problems that people were having. Because people will suggest features of what they want, but if you drill down and ask them deeper and deeper like, "Why this?" You know, just going into the problem they have and try to get to the root why behind it, then you will end up having a situation where you find a bunch of specific things that are similar between all the different people you spoke to, but they are not saying the same features. So we took those specific root issues that we were coming across, and we were able to now go ahead and build our software based on that as opposed to launching a software where at the time with a lot of competitors has not as much features as they had. But we focused on simplicity. We focused on solving the root issues and getting rid of a lot of the complex stuff. Like, for instance, some of the software were focused on having some kind of feature and technology sets where it was focused on the business consultant or the expert person on the company who's going to come and document stuff. But we said, "No, the owners of the business don't care about that. It's really more about how does this help them. They don't care about the terminologies and all that." So we got rid of all the bloat and all the stuff and just focused on simplicity based on having these conversations that we had with the people that I spoke of earlier and also based on my own experience using these harder-to-use software. CHAD: Well, I really appreciate and commend that because it's a common pitfall. I'm a big believer in building software for yourself that you really understand and a product that you yourself are going to use. But some founders, when faced with that, they'll be like, "Well, I don't need to talk to anybody. I'm the customer. I know everything that is needed. And let's just do what I know we need to do." So to be in a position where you were able to take a step back from that and talk to some other people and make sure you were on the right track, that's really great. OWEN: And besides the fact of talking to people to help us streamline and simplify the software, another thing we did was open my eyes to the idea that this problem we're solving basically run across multiple different verticals or industries besides the industry I was in. The industry I was in was basically the outsourcing industry, trying to help people outsource their back-office support. But I realized that the problem was even people that actually want to use the software for documenting didn't really care so much about outsourcing work. It was more about employees they have internally being able to do work predictably and at the scale they wanted it, delivering results that they wanted, and hence they needed that documentation. So without having these conversations, you don't get to see these things that you didn't know going in. CHAD: Actually, that touches on one of the things I was wondering about, which is the market for your product is essentially every company in the entire world. [laughter] So, with such a huge potential market, are there things you've identified as who your ideal customers are or what kinds of customers come to SweetProcess on their own, what stage they're at, those kinds of things? OWEN: Great question. So what we've realized is from the customers who stay 24 months or more with us typically are the much larger companies that have over 20 employees based on the data we have. So what we found is the smaller companies, we encourage them to use SweetProcess because we always want people to start early in the process of documenting procedures. But what you realize is that these smaller companies...let me backtrack. So the software solves that problem of having documentation in place and collaborating together to improve these documents over time. And that's really because they are trying to make sure that from a production standpoint of delivering the results to their customers, they have all these instructions. And so their employees can carry out those tasks that they cannot automate. Those tasks that need to be done by human beings, employees can carry it out predictably. Now, that's them trying to deliver output to their customers. When a company is less than five employees or even less than ten employees, they don't have so much issues or worries with production. Their main biggest issue is how to get customers, how to get sales in the first place. So their focus initially is more on okay; let me figure out a system for sales. Let me figure out a system for marketing and all that. But on the other hand, when you already have 20 or more employees, to a large extent, you have figured out your sales pipeline, your marketing pipeline, and all that. And now you really want to make sure that the people you've hired can hit the ground running and do work predictably and deliver the results you want. So that's why it makes sense that these companies that have more employees tend to be the ones that have the need for the software, for what we do. CHAD: Who ends up often finding and championing SweetProcess within an organization? Is it typically someone in a leadership position like a CEO? OWEN: Great question. So it breaks down based on the size of the company. And now I'm giving you all the juice because my competitors are listening to this now. CHAD: [laughs] OWEN: But anyway, it is based on the size of the company. It's like if it's between 20 or let's say between 10 to 20-30 employees, most likely it's the CEO who has this pressure that, hey, I need to make sure that employees can go to one single place and find step by step instructions on how to do their work. I need to make sure the onboarding can be done faster. I need to make sure that if anybody leaves this company, we're not scrambling to figure out how work is done. So they start looking for a tool like SweetProcess. Now, beyond that, let's say 30 to maybe 100 employees, it's now like the CEO, not the CEO but the Chief Operating Officer, someone who the CEO has hired onboard as the person in charge of operations at the company. Now, once we get beyond that 100 to, let's say, 1,000 employee kind of thing, we're now looking at someone that is a level below the COO, the Chief Operating Officer, and those usually are the operations manager. So that's how it works; it's based on the size of the companies. It's either the CEO that's reaching out to us or the Chief Operating Officer or someone who's an operations manager at the larger companies looking to...and especially with the operations manager thing, it's usually they're trying to bring in SweetProcess to start in their department or whatever and then usually to scale-out besides their department to other parts of the company. CHAD: How do you reach those people? OWEN: So you mentioned something that the fact that the problem we solve cuts across the board, different verticals. It's not industry-specific. So that's a good and bad problem to have. Because if you're only selling to a specific industry, all you got to do is basically be everywhere anyone who is in that industry is at, all the podcasts, all the trades, and everything, just basically be there, and that's it. But because the software we sell cuts across different industries, it's kind of harder to do that. So what we decided to do is focus more on creating content around the problem itself so that when people are looking for how to solve their problem, they're able to find us regardless of the industry they are in. Mid-Roll Ad: I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: Do you find that there's resistance to the core idea of documenting process? OWEN: Oh yes. There's resistance in different levels. Sometimes people think it has to be, you know, robotic, and sometimes they think it has to be complicated. Then it's also "I don't have time to handle the documentation." I hope that I also get to share some cheat codes on how to actually do that on this podcast. I don't want to leave the listeners just hearing about the history of the company but also giving them in case they're in that stage in their company how to go about it. CHAD: Well, that's exactly what I was going to ask you about, so yes. OWEN: Good, good. So, first of all, if you think about it, you only need to document procedures only at a time when you're trying to document how a task that you do on a repetitive basis, recurring basis. Because if a task is a one-time thing that you're never going to do ever again, well, there's really no need to document it. So we're now left with only recurring tasks. Now, people might just want to get excited and start documenting just because it's based on a recurring task. But I say, no, hold your brakes. First of all, let's have this conversation with the employees and managers or whatever and say, "I know we've been doing this over and over again. But is this task necessary?" Because it might just be tribal knowledge thing where we've always done this, so let's keep doing it. No. But if you have that critical conversation and say, "Okay, is this very thing that we've always done, is it necessary or not?" If the answer is not necessary, okay, simply and quickly eliminate it. There's no need to start documenting how that task is done. If it's not necessarily, eliminate it. If it's a situation where you already have procedures or processes in place, and they are already existing, and you're trying to come into a software like SweetProcess, even before you start importing those documents, I want you to take a look at those documents and say, "Are these things documenting tasks that are even necessary in the first place?" And if they are not, eliminate them. So now, let's say we are at the point where you've eliminated stuff that is not necessary. The recurring task left you have no choice, but you need to do them. Now let's break those two tasks into two categories. The first category is revenue-generating tasks, basically, tasks that bring in money to the company. And the other one is, you know, they're not necessarily revenue-generating, but they're necessary and more of the operation side of things. You need to do them. They don't bring in revenues, per se, but you need to do them to produce whatever stuff that you've promised the customer. So people might be excited to want to jump in and start documenting the tasks that bring in revenue. But I say don't do that because if you start that and you document those tasks that bring in revenue, you're also going to be tempted to say, "Okay, let me go find employees or new employees or sales whatever to come and start doing those activities that bring in revenue that I just documented." Now you're going to get more people or more customers coming into the chaos that is already in there because there are a lot of bottlenecks. So I say focus on these bottleneck tasks first. Find the biggest bottleneck that takes the most of your time. Start from there first. And then, once you've documented how that task is done, you find the next biggest bottleneck, you document that, and you move to the next one. Before you know, you've eventually documented all the big bottlenecks in your day and the time of your manager and all that stuff. And you guys are now freeing up time to focus on these nice income-generating activities. So the next question is okay; I've figured out a big bottleneck task to focus on. How do I document it? Does it have to be an encyclopedia? The answer is no. I want you to do one thing, install that mindset of continuous improvement in your mind, install that mindset of continuous improvement in the mindset of your managers as well as your ground-level employees. Once you have that mindset in place, it basically gives you the permission to say, "Okay, we're going to start from version 1.0 today, which is going to be rudimentary and not have that much in there." But we're telling ourselves since this is continuous improvement, it's going to keep improving as we go. So the first thing you do is document what I call a minimum viable procedure, which is just a fancy way of saying a procedure that has the title of the procedure and the title of each of the steps. That's the first thing. And the best time to even do such a thing is while you're doing the task itself because at that point, it's highest and best in your memory so it's easy to just, you know, whether you're using a tool like SweetProcess or using whatever tool, that's the best time to actually document that minimum viable procedure. So title of the procedure, title of each of the steps. And that's it. What do you do next? How do you get more details filled in? First of all, I don't want you to think it's only you that will be responsible for filling in the details. It needs to be a collaborative thing. So get your employees involved, anybody who you've trained verbally on the task before on how to do it. It could be a manager or some ground-level employee who you've trained verbally on how to do the task. Say, "Okay, I just documented this procedure. Here are the steps for the procedure. You've already done the task before. Come and collaborate with me to fill out the details." So now the employee goes in there and starts step number one, starts entering the details in there. And also, let them know that the details they're going to each step doesn't have to be 100% perfect. It just needs to be enough instructions in there, be it text, be it screenshots, or whatever, that at least someone else can take these details that they've put in there and at least get started. Again, the goal is not to be 100% perfect with the end results of each procedure. At least if someone can take a procedure and get 60% of the way towards the output, that's a good place to be so because, again, we've installed that mindset of continuous improvement. Besides collaborating together to fill out the details of the document, how do you then continuously improve the document? This is the cheat code there for this one now is anytime an employee is carrying out a task, you need to make sure that they are also looking at that procedure that you guys have built together because a lot of the insight that comes around improving a document comes when they are actually doing the work; it's not from when they are documenting how the work is done. But when they are doing the work is where the aha and all these things comes to them. So let's say a document or a procedure has ten steps. Now the employee is doing the work, and the procedure is right in front of them. They are now able to say, "Okay, why do we need ten steps for this? I just found a better way. We probably just only need four steps." Now they can now take that input; hopefully, it's a proactive employee that we all want; they can take that input and pass it back to you. And that document can be improved based on that feedback. Or they might come across some new way that was not even encountered for or discussed in the document, and now that feedback can as well be passed to you so that you can improve that document based on the feedback. But you see how all these things I've talked about, if you don't have the right software in place, it might be a little bit tricky. And that's why when we built SweetProcess, we made sure that it has everything in one place where the documentation side of things and how to collaborate together with the team to document is in one place, as well as the actual aspect of getting work done, which is assigning tasks. So, for instance, in SweetProcess, you cannot assign a task to someone that is not based...every task you assign to someone must be based on an underlying procedure you've already documented. So when the employee is actually getting the work done, the instruction is right there in front of them as they are getting the work done in real-time. And if they come across any changes or anything, they can pass that back to you, the manager, who you can make changes on their behalf. Or, if they are the proactive employee, they can literally click a button to edit the underlying procedure and make the changes while giving you the management oversight. So all these insights that I've shared about how to do it regardless of whether you use SweetProcess was based on our initial finding when we had all these conversations, and we put it in together and packaged it into our software. CHAD: I'm glad that you touch on this idea of continuous improvement, one, because it's one of our core values at thoughtbot is continuous improvement. And I think it's one of the challenges that we have despite it being one of our values. We've been around for 19 years now. We have a very robust internal documentation handbook, procedures, and the way a lot of things are done. And I think it's very easy for someone to show up in that environment and even have all of the best intentions about practicing continuous improvement. But when so much is already laid out for you, it can become easy to fall into the trap of saying, "Well, the answer to everything is here, and I don't need to worry about improving it because clearly..." I don't know; it just builds up this culture of like, we've got things figured out. And it's easy to just fall into the mindset I think of just blindly following the things there and not actually looking at them critically while you do it. OWEN: Well, I think that is the wrong way to think about stuff because maybe people are thinking, oh, documenting might make the employees robotic, and maybe they don't have a say in what's going on because maybe the instruction has been passed on to them, and that's it. But the way we want people to think about this and the way we built the software is that it needs to be a collaborative thing where it's not just one person that does it. So that's why in this software and in our software, we allow even the ground-level employee who has been assigned tasks based on the underlying document they are empowered to literally go in there and click the edit button and make the changes to it, knowing that yes, the manager or the owner of the company still has management oversight to approve the changes. But then, even deeper than that, from a cultural standpoint, what other way can you have your voice heard in a company than when you have a tangible role in the actual improvement of how the work is done? Because that's what the procedures are, right? Your document procedures for how work is done. Guess who is doing the work? You. And if you have the ability to, and you are empowered to make changes to the documents that outline how you do your work, that is you literally having your voice heard. On top of that, I think documenting procedures allows you to be more creative. So imagine if you're a manager and there's a specific task you do maybe every three months, and you don't have a document for it. Now, at the time it comes when you need to do this task three months from now, you're going to have to start context switching, remembering okay, how do I do this? Spending all this time trying to figure out how to do something and then when you figure it out, now you're going to spend time doing it. But imagine if, on the other hand, you had the instructions right there in front of you. You don't have to spend one single minute remembering anything. The instructions are right there in front of you. You get started on doing the task; what does that allow you to do? First of all, it allows you to get the task done faster, but then it also frees up your mind to start asking yourself the question like, how can I make this be done better? How can I improve this stuff? How can I get rid of some of these steps? That's where the creativity comes in. And you start thinking of new and better ways to get things done. Because remember, documenting procedures is all about, okay, creating steps and instructions for how those tasks that you cannot automate that will be done by human beings are done the right way. But eventually, they get to certain points wherein parts of the task, you can figure out certain things to automate, and you get rid of the manual aspect of human beings doing it. So this is where this whole creativity comes into the whole thing of documenting. That's the way to think about it. CHAD: Yeah, that's great. One of the tools, additionally, or techniques that we use a thoughtbot too is there are times where you might have a sense that something isn't quite working right or be improved, or maybe a non-technical person is the one doing the task. And they have a sense that it could be better, but they don't necessarily have the skills to know how to automate it or something like that. To have people come together in what we call a retrospective format where you're identifying things that might be better or could be improved. You're talking about them and coming up with action items for improving them. It's is a nice forum that we have for talking about maybe the more vague feeling that someone has that something could be better and then coming up with a way to improve it as a team. Is that something that you do at SweetProcess? OWEN: Well, yeah. So we have a bunch of different tasks that we do. And every now and then, we get to a point where we asked ourselves, is there a way we can automate this so that we don't have to do…? I'll give you an example. Every time...before we automated this when someone signs up for SweetProcess, a lot of our customers come through us creating content that addresses these questions all around documenting and how do you scale the operations of your company and so on and so forth. So a lot of people come through our content. And as a result of coming through our content, they get into our email automation. We use ActiveCampaign, and they get into our email automation. And before, in the past, before we automated this when someone came in, they get into our email list, and then eventually, they sign up for a trial of our software. And then, we will get this email about it, and we will have to manually go into the tool that we use for our email automation and change their status so that they don't keep getting emails from us as if they were not trial. That became a thing where we were doing too much. And we said, you know, "Hey, let's get some engineering on this," and basically got API integration built directly with our software so that when someone signs up for trial, it looks to see is this person already in the email list as someone who's not a trial user? Yes. So let's move them in a different...tag them the right tags and put them in a different category so that now they receive a whole bunch of different emails. But the signal for us to decide that we needed to automate that stuff was doing it manually. Although we had step-by-step instructions on how to do it, it was still taking time. And so we said, "Okay, can we automate this?" And so we got to the level where we automated the stuff, and now it's not a thing that we have to even worry about or have someone do. It's just automated. CHAD: You have a degree in computer science, right? OWEN: Yes. CHAD: Do you wonder or…because I sort of have this theory about myself too because I have a degree in computer science as well. But I'm now still doing some development but in operations as well. And sort of this systemized thinking or systems thinking, do you think it comes from our technical backgrounds, your technical background? OWEN: I think you can say part of it was enhanced by this, but I've always had this mindset of when I see things like maybe if I go to a company and I see how customer service is happening or how they produce things, I've always been fascinated with how things move around within the different parts of a company to end up with the outcome that I'm trying to achieve. Like, people might be having fun watching music videos, but I don't mind sitting down and watching a manufacturing plant like a video showing how they...because I've always been fascinated with how things come together to make the output. And so then you throw in the computer science degree there, and that also enhances that thinking. So I think from my own standpoint, it was just me personally always wanting to know the ingredients that you put together to make something happen. I'm always fascinated by stuff like that. So I'm always thinking systems-wise. CHAD: That's great. If folks want to get in touch with you or try out SweetProcess, where are the different places that they can do that? OWEN: So obviously, they can go to sweetprocess.com. And you'll be welcome to try out a free 14-day trial of the software. But one of the things I want to leave with you as a gift is I've shared with you how to go about documenting procedures. But you might also want to have templates in front of you so that you're not starting from a blank screen. You have a bunch of… What I'm offering is about 52 standard operating procedure templates that you can download right after this interview. You can go to sweetprocess.com/giantrobots, and you'll be able to download it. And that's sweet like candy, process like process, forward slash giant robots just like the name of this podcast or sweetprocess.com/giantrobots. And you'll be able to get a PDF that contains 52 standard operating procedures, and from there, you can tweak it and build upon the templates. CHAD: That's awesome. I'll make sure that we link that in the notes, which will be right in people's podcast player too. OWEN: Thanks for having me on the call. I really appreciate it. CHAD: Yeah, if folks want to get in touch with you, where are the places where they might do that? OWEN: owen@sweetprocess.com, very easy. CHAD: Awesome. Thank you so much for joining me. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.
Matt Danna is the Co-Founder and CEO of Boulevard, which powers next-gen salons and spas. Its mission is to modernize the technology while improving the daily lives of professionals and the clients they serve. Chad talks with Matt about discovering a problem and then making the jump to working on it, overcoming hurdles in terms of continued growth, and deciding to invest in building their own hardware by creating Boulevard Duo: a point of sale credit card reader. Boulevard (https://www.joinblvd.com/) Boulevard Duo (https://shop.joinblvd.com/products/duo) Follow Boulevard on Twitter (https://twitter.com/joinblvd), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/joinblvd/), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/joinblvd/), LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/boulevard/), or YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCo9FyMtvqrDGHFl797iOhww). Follow Matt on Twitter (https://twitter.com/mattdanna) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/mattdanna/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Matt Danna, the Co-Founder and CEO of Boulevard, which powers next-gen salons and spas. Matt, thank you so much for joining me. MATT: Thanks so much for having me, Chad. Great to be here. CHAD: One of the things that I was interested in learning about Boulevard is it's a large product that does a lot for salons and spas. And so, I'm interested in talking with you about the process of getting to where you are today. But why don't we get started by giving folks an overview of everything that Boulevard does for salons and spas? MATT: Yeah, absolutely. So Boulevard offers what we think is the first and really only business management platform that's really focused around the client experience. We work with businesses that help all of us look and feel our best. And it's a really special industry to be powering where there's a really close sense of that human touch and that human element. We try to use technology to help automate and relieve the day-to-day operations as much as we can for these businesses so that they can focus on providing that world-class client experience and deepening relationships with their clients. CHAD: And tactically, that's online booking, scheduling, payments, schedule management, all that kind of stuff that goes into running. MATT: Yeah, absolutely. So it goes all the way from, like you said, scheduling to we are a fully integrated payments solution to even have time clock kind of commission reporting. And so it really goes from managing everything front of house all the way through back of house. And happy to share more about how we ended up building such a wide and deep product because it's definitely an interesting story. CHAD: So you were not in the salon industry prior to Boulevard, is that right? MATT: That's correct. CHAD: So, how did you end up getting brought into this industry? MATT: So the founding story...so my background is in software engineering, but I ended up turning much more into a designer over time. So I've been naturally drawn to building technology for creative individuals. And so, at my last startup, which was called Fullscreen, it was a startup here in LA. We were helping YouTube creators make better content online, helping them monetize on YouTube, understand their audience. And this was in the days where YouTubers couldn't monetize directly. They needed to go through a network. And so, we created this proprietary technology offering that really helped them understand how to build their audience and further monetize. So the original founding story was that I met my co-founder of Boulevard at Fullscreen. His name is Sean Stavropoulos. And I was the VP of Product. He was the VP of Engineering. And the kind of inception moment was that there was this week where Sean's hair was a complete disaster. CHAD: [chuckles] MATT: And as a great colleague, I was making fun of him [laughs] and telling him like, "Dude, you need to go get a haircut." And he said to me that he kept forgetting to call his salon during the day to make an appointment, and at night when he remembered to do those types of things, the salon is obviously closed. And we were just thinking how much friction there was as a client of these businesses in the booking process and that we didn't understand why you had to do basically so much work in order to be a client. It just was incongruent with what was going on in other industries and kind of restaurants and everything going through this digital transformation. Our hypothesis was that they must still be on pen and paper; they haven't adopted technology yet, and that's why you need to call to make an appointment. And we started thinking a lot about this problem and started obsessing over it. [laughs] And there was a weekend that we were hanging out, and we ended up walking into a few different salons and spas in a neighborhood that we were hanging out. And we did a bunch of research and asked them a lot of questions. We said we were UCLA students working on a research project. CHAD: [laughs] MATT: Which was a pretty smart move because everyone loves talking to students, and we weren't trying to sell them anything. We were trying to learn more. And so, a good research tip is just to state you're always a student. And we ended up learning. And we were super surprised that they were all using technology. All the technology that these businesses were using were also capable of online booking. And so we were like, "Okay, none of this makes sense. Like, you're making your customers call you, but you have these capabilities." We were like, "Do you need help embedding it into your website? Like, why don't you use online booking" And their answer would be, "We absolutely cannot use online booking, no way," which made us even more curious. And so what we ended up learning was that self-care businesses, you know, salons, spas, nail salons, you name it, they're generally running on pretty thin profit margins like in the 5% to 10% neighborhood because their labor costs are so high relative to their sales. And the other important piece that we learned was that the front desk has outsized control over the revenue that the business makes simply by how they place appointments on the calendar. And so when you call to make an appointment, they're looking up to see if you have a client file, to see if you've been there before, what services did you get? Who were they with? How long exactly did they take? They're also looking to see when they could fit you in. And they're doing double booking, triple booking whenever possible so that staff can be with multiple clients at once and double up. And then they're also making sure there are no gaps between appointments. And so they're doing basically this yield optimization, schedule optimization on the fly. And none of that was taken into account if customers self-booked using any of the solutions available on the market. And so we thought that seems like a straight-up technology problem to solve that these businesses needed an online booking solution so customers can have that convenience and self-booking whenever they want. But it also needs to take into account some of that business logic that the front desk follows so that they don't get gaps in the day and have a really sub-optimal and inefficient calendar. And so that's where we thought we could provide some particular value that would be unique in the industry. And that was what we focused our MVP on, was that very thing, having an intelligent scheduling solution. CHAD: It seems like it's a pretty big leap for the director of product and director of engineering at a startup to discover a problem like this and then actually make the jump to working on it [laughs] and making it real. Was there something in particular that happened? Why did you do that? [laughs] MATT: Yeah, I mean, we had a, you know, being executives at the startup and really loving the team, loving what we were doing, our mission. But I think one of the motivators and catalysts was when we were doing this field research. And we ended up going out to a couple of hundred businesses over the course of several weekends to learn even more about this problem area. But one of the things that was so evident and clear was that all of the technology in the market that these customers, these businesses were using, they were negative NPS scores. They were like, "Oh, we use, you know, X, Y, or Z solution, and we really don't like it. It's so hard to use." You would see the red in their eyes when they would talk about this technology." And we're like, "There's something very powerful here." And we weren't exactly sure at the time was it legacy technology not keeping up with modern needs of these businesses and the growing expectations from end consumers, or was it user error problems? And we had come to the conclusion that it was really a lack of innovation in the market from existing vendors. And that got us particularly excited, and we formed a lot of conviction, so much conviction that we made the leap to start working on this. So we transitioned out of our full-time executive day jobs, and we ended up doing a little bit of consulting work while we were doing a lot of product discovery. So for about six months, we were doing three days a week on Boulevard and a couple of days a week on consulting. So it was a nice little part-time way to keep paying the bills but also then be able to spend a significant amount of our brain space thinking about this opportunity and what problems we wanted to solve. CHAD: So maybe I'm just off base here. And I'm not trying to get you to say that something was wrong at Fullscreen. But it strikes me there needed to be something going on, in my mind, maybe I'm off base, for you to even before deciding to make that leap, though, to spend your weekends going to salons and doing interviews. MATT: Yeah, I think this is how most companies are started is by founders who are trying to solve a problem that they're exposed to. So everyone is always trying to build companies that are solutions for problems that they have. And we just, I think, got excited by this problem. And my background being in building technology for the creative individuals, like, I got really, really excited. And Sean took some convincing that this was worth it and that this could be a thing. CHAD: Was it an aspiration for you to find something that you could use to found your own company? MATT: No, no. CHAD: And then why were you doing it? [laughs] MATT: I think it felt like the right thing to do. I never considered myself an entrepreneur, and I really still don't. I think of myself as a builder, and I love building things. And this was in a way for us to think about, like, oh, let's build a company and turn this into a massive business. We saw that there was a particular pain point that was experienced from both consumers and businesses and that we could provide something special. It felt like it was something that only we saw, which I think made it feel even more compelling to work on. And so we didn't know if we were crazy at first. We always had this question of like, why hasn't anyone figured this out? This seems so obvious. I still don't know why we're the only ones that have any type of kind of logic on top of the schedule in that sense. But we saw it as a unique opportunity to build something really special and provide a lot of value to consumers and businesses. CHAD: Well, that's super interesting. So once you decided and you started working on Boulevard, how did you decide what to focus on first? And how did you set your market for what the first version was going to be or a target for what the first version was going to be? MATT: So, we focused on the businesses that had a front desk. So those are generally the ones that really struggled with getting the most out of every minute possible in the day. And so we focused on what were typically mid to upper market single locations to start, and we got introduced to a salon owner through a mutual friend. They were based in New York, and it was just a two-person salon. And so, we built our MVP to be able to support their day-to-day functions. And they were using some other system, so we kind of had to get to a place where there was general feature parity to support them. So we built up the features that we needed, and then we launched them, transitioned them off their previous solution. And then we did all this in person and then hung out with them for about a week or two after to babysit the system, make sure there weren't problems. We were iterating in real-time. Sean and I were releasing code. And from there, we got an intro to our second customer through another mutual friend. CHAD: How long did it take you from when you started to when it was live in that first salon? MATT: It took about nine months. CHAD: And were you self-funding that based on the consulting that you mentioned? MATT: Yeah, self-funding. And then, after we launched with the first business, Sean and I actually both liquidated our 401Ks. And we didn't have the time to continue to consult. So we bootstrapped the company and put our life savings into it once we had traction from our first couple of customers. And that's when we started to hire our first employees to help us continue to accelerate development and that kind of thing. CHAD: So again, liquidating your 401k is a pretty big step. MATT: Yep. CHAD: Did you try to do external fundraising before doing that? MATT: No. At that point, not yet. We wanted to really validate the concept on our own dime. And then, when we had paying customers and a decent customer base, we did a friends and family round. And then, once we achieved a certain milestone, we joined an accelerator, which is based in Los Angeles called Luma Launch. And we were part of that accelerator for about six months. And then we raised our series seed following that. We went from liquidating our savings, living like college students, ramen noodle budget-type to once we felt good about the value we were providing, had the case studies and the customer feedback, and had a pretty awesome MVP to show to investors; that's when we decided to fundraise. CHAD: How nervous were the two of you? MATT: Very nervous. [laughter] I mean, it's one of those both of us come from really, really humble families, and there was no safety net. And so we were all in. And I think often from when there's a lot of constraints; you have to find creativity. We were all in. We were working all the time on this, really gave it everything we had. And in hindsight, it was a good decision. But it could have easily been a terrible decision. [laughs] CHAD: I mean, this is one of the things with founding stories is we talk to the people who are successful. [laughs] So, would you recommend this path to other people? MATT: I think if it's something where you could see providing unique value to the world and that you have lots of validation from real people, not just your friends but from prospective customers...it was when we were talking to real businesses where they would say, "This is something we would use and pay for." And so, after hearing that dozens and dozens of times, that matched with the negative NPS scores with their current solutions. That's where we were like, "This can be something pretty special." So I wouldn't recommend building in isolation and making that leap of faith without really doing your diligence on the opportunity. But yeah, I think everyone, at some point, if they have an idea or a problem they want to solve, should give it a go. Mid-Roll Ad: I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: That first customer that you were building the replacement for, were you charging them? MATT: No, we were not. CHAD: Are they paying now? MATT: They are, they are, very little. CHAD: Okay. [chuckles] MATT: They're a small business and have been staying super successful. And so, in the earliest days, the learnings and feedback matter a lot more than revenue, and so you optimize for that as opposed to the economics. And so for us going and working on location at these businesses and they're paying us essentially in the learnings and teachings of helping us understand and absorb ourselves in this industry, and working as front desk and doing the jobs that all these professionals have to do. And so that's where we were able to build and get to a place where our product is really, really authentic. And it was from that first direct observation. CHAD: I've worked on products before where they're currently being done by people. They might have technology solutions in place, and they feel like there's no technology that will do this; we need to have a person being the one to do it. Because like you said, there's something special about a person doing it. And so sometimes those businesses, when they have a solution, even if they've properly solved it, there's a lot of resistance from customers who are very skeptical that the technology is going to be able to do it the right way. Have you encountered that? MATT: Absolutely. CHAD: How do you combat that? MATT: We iterated on, essentially, the objections. So the first objection was that "People can't book online because it's going to mess up my day." And so we created this what we call precision scheduling, where it does the optimization on the calendar. And then the next issue was that we started seeing some no-shows coming because I think there's this mental analog of if you miss an OpenTable reservation not as big of a deal. But in our industry that we're serving, if you miss a two-hour appointment, that professional is out a significant amount of their income for the week. And so that's where we actually started dipping our toes in payments, and we started requiring a credit card at the time of booking just to authorize the card and to hold the appointment. And so that objection of no shows we solved there. There was a lot of concern of like, "Hey, our customers are not going to know the right thing to book." And we have learned that customers actually are very savvy and that the clients deserve more credit than the professionals are giving them that if a woman gets a balayage, she knows it's a balayage. And so, usually, the way that we overcame that objection was we'd work with them and have best practices on menu design. But that they also then, when they're giving a service that they discuss what they actually did in that service so that the customer knows what to book next time if they want the same thing. And so that was kind of the pattern is like, build something, learn, iterate, and do it on location with these businesses so that we could see it firsthand in an unbiased way. And so that's really how we were able to build such a product with this amount of scale and overcome some of those initial objections. CHAD: Is it easier now that you have 2000-plus customers, some social capital out there? They can ask other people, "Is this working for you?" Is that easier now? MATT: Absolutely. Absolutely. One of the ways...we didn't have a sales team for a long time in our company, and we were actually under the radar. We were stealth, didn't announce anything about ourselves for the first three or four years. And so we were just very much focused on product development and building something that was incredible. And then we were really fed off of referrals and that word of mouth. So it's I think when you get a product that people love, they're going to tell their friends about it. And for us, that really helped accelerate our growth. CHAD: So yeah, so this was all taking place in what year? MATT: So we transitioned out of our last company and started doing part-time work in summer of 2015. And then, we officially launched our first customer in spring of 2016. CHAD: Cool. And I think that that is, you know, you didn't get to 2,000 customers overnight, right? You've been at this for a while. MATT: Yeah, the barrier to entry is very high in the market, and VCs called our type of opportunity a brownfield opportunity where there are a lot of legacy solutions in the market. And we compete with some companies that were actually started before I was born. CHAD: [chuckles] MATT: And so they've had many decades to build functionality into their platform that we need to get to some level of feature parity with in order to seamlessly transition them off of their previous solution to our platform. And it did take a significant upfront investment with product in order to get to be able to pay the price of admission and to be able to actually compete in the market. CHAD: So one of the things I'm curious about is, do you have a sense of what does the overall market looks like? I feel like there are probably lots of salons, spas, haircutting places. There are a lot of them all over the world. MATT: There are, yeah. So we believe that there are about 500,000 self-care businesses in the United States. CHAD: Just in the United States. MATT: Yeah, just in the United States. And the employee base in the labor market is about two to two and a half million professionals across all those businesses. CHAD: So, where do you think the hurdles in terms of continued growth are for you? MATT: So one of the areas that we focus on is...so all of these self-care businesses are about 90% similar in how they operate. And so we started in the hair salon vertical and then have expanded into many adjacent verticals over the course of the past few years. We really tried to make sure that we had really, really strong product-market fit in the hair salons, which is the biggest self-care market, and before we expanded into, say, nail salons. When expanding into adjacent verticals, there's some functionality that is unique to those verticals. And so, for example, one of our recent verticals that we expanded into is med spas. And the way that med spas charge for their services is generally based on the products that are used, and so if you buy 100 units of Botox, they charge a per-unit fee. And so that was something that was pretty unique to the medspa market that doesn't exist in other self-care markets. And so vertical expansion is a vector of growth for us and then segment expansion. So we started with the single location, very small businesses. And then we have worked our way up to enterprise where we're powering chains and franchises of hundreds of locations. And then the other aspects kind of the third vector of growth is the different product sets and functionality that we are releasing to our customers. So continuing to develop the platform but also look at different opportunities where we can provide outsized value by developing it ourselves. CHAD: So we could literally talk all day, and I could talk to you about scaling and product and everything. But one thing I'm interested in before we wrap up is I think it's really special to found a company with a designer, a product person, and an engineer. And I can tell even just by looking at the site and the product that you very highly value design and creating a product that people love to use. MATT: Absolutely. CHAD: How does that lead you to creating Duo, which is a point of sale card reader? MATT: One of the things that we saw in the market was this real importance in service design so what information is showing when to the users of our technology. So there's that aspect of what's the overall experience? Then there's the product design; how easy is it to use? And how quickly can new employees, new front desk staff, how quickly can they get ramped up and start using the system? Do they need two weeks of training? And for us, we try to make it as intuitive and as familiar as possible. And then we look to see how else can we extend design? And one of the complaints that we always received from customers was that hardware options were always pretty ugly, that all of them look dated like the kind of hardware that you use at a supermarket. And they wanted something that was more sleek and that they weren't ashamed to have on their countertop for checkout. And so that's where we decided to invest in building our own hardware. And that was particularly exciting for us. So it's been really, really well-received from our customers. And it was a really fun project to work on. Getting into the hardware space is always challenging. But as a designer, it was super cool to build something that became physical for the first time in my life. CHAD: Does the logic that led to you creating Duo eventually lead you to creating an entire hardware point of sale system? MATT: We're assessing all opportunities. There's this interesting moment happening in the payments space where like Apple, you know, announced that I think they're piloting now that you won't need hardware in order to accept credit card payments on the iPhone. CHAD: You'll just be able to do it right against an iPad. MATT: Exactly. So I think there's a real question as to what is the...and I'm sure this is something that folks like Square are thinking about, that have really best in class hardware is like what does the future of hardware look for fintech companies? And is it just going to fold into the actual devices, or will you continue to need standalone readers? That's something that we're constantly thinking about and keeping smart on the latest developments in that. But our expertise and what we love is building incredible software. Hardware was that area that we saw that we could provide unique value, but our goal is to always be a software company. You generally don't make much money off of the hardware piece in this business. CHAD: Now, how personally involved were you in the hardware project? MATT: I was very involved, potentially too involved. [laughs] CHAD: As a founder, when new projects come up like this that maybe you're interested in, how do you either hold yourself back or not hold yourself back from being involved in them? MATT: I think when the company is venturing into new territory, entirely new like uncharted waters, that's when it's valuable for me or any founder to get really, really smart on what's the opportunity, what's the risks, all that kind of stuff. In this case, my experience working at our initial customers for the first couple of years of our business was really, really impactful. And so our Duo captures...and the reason why it's called Duo is because it's a countertop, but also you can take the top off, and you can do an in chair checkout. So you could bring it over to the customer, and they can check out right while they're in the chair as an express checkout. And so those types of things I learned while being on location working at these businesses. And so I was providing a lot of the guidance and conceptualizing how we could think about what the hardware offering would be that would be unique to us, and collaborated with our head of design and then an industrial designer to get the proof of concept there. CHAD: And you said, "Potentially too involved," so why did you say that? [laughs] MATT: I think as a founder, you are always trying to figure out what altitude are you flying at. And there are some things that you will need to dive in and be very hands-on. And then there are other times just to guide and support and coach. And I think for this because it was a new project, I was particularly excited to be able to get into hardware because that was a first for me that I was involved in all aspects of it. But it was a lot of fun. CHAD: Awesome. Well, Matt, thank you so much for stopping by and sharing with us. I really appreciate it. I'm sure the listeners do too. If folks want to find out more about Boulevard, about joining the team, about becoming a customer, or just to get in touch with you, where are all the different places that they can do that? MATT: Yeah, absolutely. I think the best place is just on our website. We are hiring across all levels and all functions, especially on the product design and engineering side. And so our website is joinblvd.com, J-O-I-N-B-L-V-D.com. There's the about page, and it links out to my LinkedIn. So if anyone wants to connect and get acquainted, that's probably the easiest way to do it. CHAD: Awesome. Well, thanks again for joining me. I really appreciate it. MATT: Yeah, thanks so much. This was a pleasure. CHAD: You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with links for everything that Matt just mentioned and including a complete transcript of the episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening, and I'll see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Matt Danna.
Monique Idlett is the Founder of Reign Ventures, a seed-stage investment firm, and previously the Co-Founder and CEO of Mosley Brands and Mosley Music Group, home to a multiplatinum roster of artists. Chad talks with Monique about how the music industry is like the startup venture capital industry, understanding that representation matters, having a data-forward approach, and appearing on the TV show Undercover Billionaire, where entrepreneurs are given 90-days and nothing but 100 dollars to go undercover and build a thriving million-dollar business for a small town in the US. Reign Ventures (https://www.reignvc.com/) Follow Reign Ventures on Twitter (https://twitter.com/ReignVc), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/reign_ventures/), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/reign-ventures/). Follow Monique on Twitter (https://twitter.com/Monique_Mosley_) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/monique-idlett-mosley-41353b15/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Monique Idlett, the Founder of Reign Ventures, a seed-stage investment firm, and previously the Co-Founder and CEO of Mosley Brands and Mosley Music Group, home to a multiplatinum roster of artists. Monique, thank you so much for joining me. Now, you left Mosley Music Group about three years ago to focus exclusively on Reign Ventures. How is the music industry like the startup venture capital industry? MONIQUE: There is no difference in the way I see a pipeline of amazing talented founders. We're truly looking for those exceptional founders that we can help develop, put up that bumper system. The end product in the music industry was the music we were consuming, the experiences through the live art form. And in the startup world, that end product is the success and the ability to scale a real solution that this company has solved with amazing, talented people. So to me, it was a nice, easy transition, and it made sense. CHAD: Are there ways in which it's different? MONIQUE: Oh my goodness, yes, lots of ways that it's different. The difference is that music is an art form. For me, music is the universal language. I believe that I've traveled the world. And I've been to places where there were language barriers, but when a song, a popular song, came on, the language barrier was gone. In the startup world, there may be several people trying to create and penetrate a problem area in a vertical or a category. And we may not have the ability in the startup world to have several of the same sounding things from a business model. They may not all work. And so you're dealing with the emotional capacity on the music side. And on the tech side of things you're truly dealing with, can you really solve this problem? We're solving problems, not just emotional connections from the music industry perspective. And also, it's a lot slower moving. We have a project in the music industry, and it may have a cycle. And now it's an even shorter cycle with technology. You may be able to create an entire project in just a couple of weeks. In the startup world, in the business side of things, you may not see the development for two to three years. So the patience is definitely...I've had to apply a lot more patience and understanding of being able to scale a business versus just a project-driven entity. So it's a little different, but the end result is all the same. Creating real great solutions for real problems, whether it's through an art form or whether it's through a business model, is all similar to me. CHAD: So, do you have a particular investment strategy or focus at Reign? MONIQUE: We do. Erica and I currently we are the largest two female Black-owned VC fund. So one of the things that we felt ten and a half years ago when we started investing together is investing has just been done...venture has been done wrong. There's a reason why less than 3% of funding collectively was...still to this day; it's about 3.2. But over ten years ago, when we started, only less than 3% of funding from VC was going to women, all women, and Black and Brown founders. And so literally, we were like, the problem is that we're not having enough investment or a lens on women and people of color. And we want to do it the way it should have always been done: investing inclusively. We are proud to say that we invest in all founders, all exceptional founders. And yes, we have a lens on women and people of color because they've been under-capitalized and under-resourced and under-everything. And so the reality is that we want to set the tone of how it should always look and the world is inclusive. Diversity is not an issue; the equity and inclusion side is an issue. And we want to keep being that example. CHAD: That's great. Do you feel like, or in your experience, have you found that these founders were already out there and they just were being passed over? Or were the problems so systemic that they weren't even getting the opportunity to even be out there? MONIQUE: I think there are always exceptional people out there; that's number one. And I think it's a two-prong problem: yes, the pipeline, the access. So there's the lack of access for these types of founders that has absolutely been an issue, the lack of resources, the lack of access. But the other side of it is that they have just been overlooked and not allowed into the rooms. There are exceptional people in this world that don't only look like one type of person. And the reality is that we have access to them. And so yes, both of those are an issue, okay. But the reality is that we have exceptional founders of all types of people. There are amazing people in this world. When you sit behind a computer, and you run an algorithm, and you only go to only your network of what looks like you and comfortable, then you are what we call missing out on a ton of opportunity. So Erica and I are founder-friendly. We go where the founders are. CHAD: I've come to learn and understand representation really matters. Being able to see yourself is really important. And it's something that because I look like what I look like, I had the privilege to not realize how important that is because there are so many people in power that look like me. I can imagine it's super refreshing to a lot of the founders that you work with to be talking with you and sitting across the table from you and seeing that and talking to someone that understands them. MONIQUE: Yes. I think that having someone to relate to on all levels, personal, professional is a very important concept. And I remember starting my career at USA Today; not only was I different in age because most of my colleagues were 40-plus, and I was in my young 20s, they were mostly male and definitely particularly only Caucasian. I was the first African American executive on the marketing and sales side. And I remember feeling very isolated and very lost and not knowing who I could turn to that would understand some of the things I was actually going through. And so yes, founders, it eases the founder's mind when they can talk to me and know that hey, I didn't always look like this from this perspective. I grew up in income-based housing in New Jersey. I understand where you come from. Yes, I understand what it's like to be a Black woman; I am one. But also the other side of it is that when we have founders who are Caucasian male. We like to have conversations of inclusion from the ground up with them. "Did you think about this consumer base? Do you know that you might have to message different?" These are things and conversations that people are not having if you're only talking to one type of person. And so, I think that what Reign Ventures is doing is allowing for comfortable conversation and then execution. CHAD: That's great. You started with a $25 million fund in Reign, and you're well beyond that now, right? MONIQUE: Yes, yes. So our current fund is a $50 million fund, and then our next fund will be...we're going for the stars and trying to raise $100 million. CHAD: Wow. I've talked to a few people who are either interested in starting VC or who have done it before. And what do you use to judge how much or how large of a fund you'll be building? MONIQUE: So we like to think of what we want the outcome to be. And so, the long-term goal of Reign Ventures is to have a billion-dollar under asset management. That has not been done by two Black females before. And so we understand if we do that, if we look at the long-term goal, if we do that and count backwards, here's what it will take to get to that billion dollars under asset management. So yes, the size of the fund will have to increase. But we also know that that means we're creating amazing companies and supporting amazing founders with Reign Ventures. And so we look at the size as our ability to have a larger stake and the ability to have follow-on capital for all of the companies that are doing amazing. I would tell anyone who is looking to start a venture fund that Erica and I (Erica is my business partner.) she and I started and wrote our thesis over ten years ago. And we actually deployed our personal capital for the first nine years so that we could create a data room and so that we could understand what it meant and felt like to have skin in the game so that we can learn truly where we sat well with a thesis. And it ended up being we do really well with consumer tech and SaaS, you know, B2B SaaS software. And so, I would say that it's not an easy journey to start a venture fund. Truly understand what you want your thesis to be. Truly understand that you're going to hear the word No way more than you will hear the word Yes. This is someone else's investment. This is accountability. And try it and understand it before you just start raising money. CHAD: You sort of alluded to this earlier; you said increasing the size of the fund is going to allow you to make bigger investments and follow-on investments. So do you also see you investing in more companies? MONIQUE: So we like to have a 20 to 25 cap strategy per fund. And what we do is we take 25% of the capital for the earliest investment, and then we save 75% of it for the follow-on round so that we maintain our equity stake. Because we're founder-friendly, so we always want to be in that board room. We always want to roll up our sleeves with the founders and so maintaining whichever early equity we have, which is usually the way the fund is structured, between around 10%. It allows us to not just do more companies; it actually allows us to really double down on the portfolio itself and make sure that we're staying and growing with the founders. CHAD: How involved are you? Are you personally involved? Do you split the portfolio up, and each person takes a few? Or how do you typically do it? MONIQUE: We truly, truly do take my 25-plus years in the music industry. We take that very bumper system approach of we're here to help develop the raw talent and, on the tech side of things, the actual founding team and the evolution of the company. And so I usually take the board seats. Erica, she comes from finance, and she's been doing finance banking for over 25 years. She's been doing early-stage investing for 16 of those years. And so, she helps with the finance cap strategies. How do we get you from your seed stage to your A in 12 months? How do we get you from your A to your B? So she's very, very involved with the financial models and running several of those and working with the founders on who's on your cap table? Okay, so intentionally and strategically, who's missing from your cap table? Let's work on that. And then I'm always the one working on taking the board seat. I'm the one working with the vision, the strategy. I'm an operator, so I have a most extensive network. And so I'm the one aligning them with our resources, our network. And you know, yeah, we're very, very involved. And I think that when you're dealing with seed-stage because that's the stage we're in, it's the riskiest. We try to de-risk the company, the founder, the founding team as much as possible. So we are as involved as the founder wants us to be. We do not make founders feel guilty for not having the largest team. We're like, "Okay, what do you need? Let's get you that." And that's where we like to play. We don't see ourselves going into anything past the seed stage. CHAD: Is there a limit to how many companies that you're able to personally work with? And how do you scale, Monique? MONIQUE: So the cool thing about our fund is that all of the companies are intentional. Half of our companies are consumer tech. So they mostly need pretty much the same type of things, even if they're in different verticals. The other half is SaaS. And so the reality is that they're in different stages. They're growing at different stages. And we, first and foremost, create a founder community that supports each other. That's number one. Then we have an LP community that supports not just Erica and I but our founder community. So we look at investing as from a holistic community. We drive community, and that is the way that we're able to actually still have a sustainable business model with Erica and I. And we have a team. We don't do anything by ourselves. We have an entire team dedicated to the growth of our portfolio companies. CHAD: Speaking of that team, what does that team look like now in terms of the different roles on it? And how big is it? MONIQUE: So currently, right now, we have about four full-time. And then, we have a couple of interns who work on the data science side. And then we also have in-house from just Monique from my particular business model side; we have an HR. We have financial operators, and then we have contractors and partners. And so, at the end of the day, there isn't anything that our founders need that we can't source for them internally or externally. CHAD: Who was the first person you brought onto the Reign team, and why? MONIQUE: Her name is Naya, and she actually has worked for me on my foundation side for a few years. She's was an engineering student at University of Miami. And once she graduated, she was now getting her Master's in Data Science. And we felt like being able to report properly on our founders, the companies that were applying that we actually could not invest in but were investable, we'd like to keep track of that. And so, we felt like having someone who could really handle the data side of Reign Ventures was one of the more important hires. And then, we also hired a full-time social media person who handles the content. We have a monthly podcast called The Series A. They oversee that so all communications on our portfolio companies and Reign Ventures as a whole. So those were the first two hires. And we're currently prepping to hire for the summer a full-time associate that will be out of the New York office. We have offices here in Miami, across from the University of Miami, and then we have offices in New York. CHAD: That's cool. The data aspect of that is super interesting to me because I think that I talk to a lot of people, and a modern VC firm is certainly doing that. But there are still ones out there that don't have that data-forward approach that it sounds like you do. MONIQUE: Well, we need to make sense of all of this. So we need to make sense of the idea of how many founders are applying? What is the demographic makeup of them? Who is this founder? Where are they coming from? What markets are they coming from? Because we do invest just only in the United States. And we pretty much invest in all markets here. We'd like to keep that data. And most importantly, we are over-communicators with our LPs. So we're sending them monthly updates. Carta is updated every, you know, they have access to that. So we'd like for them to understand what our day is looking like. How are we spending our time? What type of founders are coming to us? Hey, you all don't necessarily have access to these founders, here's why we do. And so all of this information is important. You have to make sense of who your audience is. And for us, our audience are the founders. Mid-Roll Ad: I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: You mentioned that you invest in people in some ways as much or more than you do the idea that they have and really work with them. How far along will people typically be with their product when you start working with them and investing in them? MONIQUE: The way that the investment cycle is, you know, your family and friends, then your angels, and then sometimes even your super angels will come in after that. Then you have your pre-seed, which is usually where you're testing product-market fit, et cetera. And then we step in at the seed stage, which is founder market fit, you know, product-market fit, a billion-dollar addressable market. You understand your operational strategy, where you're going to raise less than 50 million, and if you're not, you have that strategy of why? And definitely more than just an idea at that point. Now you just need to raise this round, to hire on more team, and then scale. So for us, that's how our due diligence works. And if you make it through that due diligence, then it becomes about who is this founding team? Will they be able to deal with adversity? Because you're going to have it. Are they coachable? What is their leadership style? Is it an inclusive environment? You can't be creating an equity company, and then all the team looks the same. So these are the things that we're looking at. What is your personality type? We like to spend time with our founders. How will you deal with the stress because the stress will come. Is your mindset the glass is half full or is it half empty? All of these things are important at the seed stage because it's not the growth stage where it's automatic it's happening. The seed stage boils down to can you deal with adversity? CHAD: I imagine you reject a lot of people. MONIQUE: Ooh, I would say that we use a different term. We are not dream killers. CHAD: Okay. [chuckles] MONIQUE: Here's what we say: we have an open-door policy with founders. We allow founders, even the ones that are not ready for investment or that we've actually had to pass on investment. And the thing is that we can only do 20 companies. That is where we'd like to sit, 20 companies per fund. And if for some reason, it's not a company that we invest in, we still give them access to our resources. We still give them access to our network. We still will spend…I mean, every Friday is our Founder Friday, and it fills up very quickly. Erica and I get on with founders who are not in our portfolio because just because they weren't a good fit for Reign Ventures or it was something that we could not do, maybe it did not fit the fund's structure; we also try to align them with investors that might fit them more properly. And so I don't feel like we reject; we just redirect. CHAD: So given that then, I imagine that you are often pretty open with the companies that you're not able to invest in the reasons why and hopefully, it helps them. MONIQUE: Oh, absolutely. We get founders all the time that say, "Listen, this was the best thing. Prior to coming to you all, we weren't able to raise $1. You didn't invest in us, but you taught us how to be investable, and now we've raised money." That's what we want to hear. None of us win if there's really a great company with a great solution that can really have some traction if they never get up and running. CHAD: That's great. And maybe you get the opportunity to invest in them later, right? MONIQUE: Yep. Absolutely. Absolutely. There are a couple of companies that that has happened. And one of them is now back in our due diligence and probably will make it through. CHAD: Yeah. Are there any companies in your portfolio that you particularly want to give a shout-out to? MONIQUE: Oh, we love all of our portfolio companies. CHAD: [laughs] MONIQUE: You know, Sharebite, Dormify, SoLo Funds. SoLo Funds is one of my favorite companies from the perspective of dealing and disrupting predatory lending. As a person who grew up in a neighborhood that liquor stores and cash checking were like every other block, if not on the same block, we truly do know the long-term effect it has on those communities, right? The underserved communities get so taken advantage of. If you don't have $200 and then you go to a predatory lender, and you're paying them $2,000, how do you ever advance? And so SoLo Funds really, really the only Black-owned B Corp in the United States. CHAD: That's awesome. MONIQUE: This narrative is so important, Chad. CHAD: Yeah. And, you know, not only is it important from a social perspective, but that is a huge business. It's a huge market opportunity for the right company with the right values to come in and be able to have a significant business, too, right? MONIQUE: Listen, they're making the whole ecosystem better. For the lenders, listen; they feel good. They're having a positive social impact. And oh, by the way, I'm getting a return. For the borrowers, they are getting financial literacy. They are getting higher social credit scores, which is then impacting their personal credit score. I mean, listen, by the way, when this company was created, over 76% of Americans, if they were hit with a $200 bill, they were not going to be able to pay it. So this is not just about one type of community. This is about the American concept. CHAD: So when you work with a company like that, were they a B Corp when you started working with them? MONIQUE: No. True story, I was literally personally the second investor in and then the third before there was ever even...So Rodney Williams is the Co-Founder of SoLo Funds. And I'm on his board for LISNR. We were one of the first investors in LISNR, which is the data over audio company. And he shared this idea with me, and I loved it because we all come from a neighborhood where we know and we were the ones who quote, unquote, "were doing better" in our families. So we were always getting the daily calls like, "Oh, my car broke down. Oh, this." And when he said this to me, I'm like, "Oh my goodness, this makes so much sense. I'm in." And see, this is where investing in people comes to play. Rodney had proved his ability as a founder with LISNR. So the trust was there, the relationship was there. Travis comes from banking, super, super intellectual, really quality guy, and not only is he the co-founder, but he's the CEO. And he's doing an amazing job. So no, it was not a B Corp; it is now one. And they will be the largest neobank for this community. And so growing and seeing the cycle of it is what, for me, personally, is what makes me happy. All of our companies in our fund have a social impact perspective. CHAD: Had you been involved in a B Corp before? It's something that I'm really interested in, but I have not been directly involved in one before. And I'm actually really interested in it for thoughtbot too. MONIQUE: No, I had not. No. CHAD: Is it difficult? [laughs] MONIQUE: So was it difficult for them? Absolutely. But they made it through. They made it through. And I think that we now have two men who are great human beings who happen to be Black men, but they are just great human beings who went through the process and can now help educate and share that experience with other people that look like them and are trying to do the same thing as them, create great companies with a great social impact to just have a better world. CHAD: From an investor perspective, when your portfolio companies want to embark on something like becoming a B Corp, which, you know, some investors might look at and say, "That might be a distraction from what you need to do now," how do you look at those things? MONIQUE: I mean, listen, if you want to become a B Corp, you actually are trying to have more of an impact, and I wish more companies were. When we actually are only focusing on the dollar side, the stakeholders of the dollar side, how are we truly making sure that we're impacting the world in a positive way? There's a lot of conflict usually. So we encourage that type of behavior; we encourage founders to think beyond their dollar sign and their stakeholders' dollar sign. The good thing is that they had an amazing team supporting them. They had an amazing A series lead investor, ACME, that really drove it with them. And so they did this. We didn't do this. They did it. This was their mission, and they did it. CHAD: That's great. And it's definitely something that's on my list to dig into more, like I said, for thoughtbot as well. So was it 2021 that you were on Undercover Billionaire? Was it last year? MONIQUE: Oh my goodness. CHAD: Or was it the end of 2020? MONIQUE: So it was the end of 2020, yes. [laughs] Tacoma, Washington. CHAD: Yeah. So for folks who don't know, Undercover Billionaire is a TV show where you give up all of your resources, and you're planted in a city, and you start a business from scratch. And you have what? Ninety days to bring it to a million-dollar business? MONIQUE: Yes. So technically, the premise of the show is you literally get a new identity. And you do not know where you're being dropped literally until you're dropped there. And so, I had no idea I would be dropped into Tacoma, Washington. And one, they give you $100, literally, a phone with no contacts in it, and a used vehicle, and you have 90 days to turn that into a million-dollar valuation. CHAD: It must have been a wild experience. MONIQUE: I have to tell you, the emotional connection that has to happen and then also by the way you're lying to everyone, it was a very intense thing. And most of the time, 99% of time, you're running on adrenaline. And to be completely honest, when I first got there, you're focused on the goal. The goal is can you make this valuation? The goal is I can't be the example that didn't make it right. Then when you get there, it becomes less and less about the goal. You actually get to a point where you don't even care if you make the goal. You care about the community that you've been dropped into. And you just want to see them win, and you want to see them become better. And Tacoma, Washington, everything from the mayor, down to now to one T'wina Nobles, who is now the Senator, the youngest senator in the state of Washington, these amazing people were a part of my journey. So it became all about, wow, at the end of that experience, that last show, and I look at the room of all those people, it was the most inclusive experience naturally. That's what the win was for me personally. And I also got to learn about myself. But I will tell you that it was one of the hardest things I've ever done in life outside of having children and raising them to be healthy adults. [laughter] CHAD: Not only to build the business, you mean, but that experience of -- MONIQUE: Just the entire experience. CHAD: I watched the episode where you told everybody who you really were. MONIQUE: Yes. CHAD: And I could see that it had really affected you. MONIQUE: I was lying to people every single day. And these people were so amazing. They donated their time, their resources, their ability to me because that company could not happen without them and without the community. And so, what we all walked away with was a shared experience of how powerful community actually is. And that even when you don't know how to figure something out, if you use your voice, someone will actually help you and you end up all helping each other. For me, that's what was so beautiful about the experience. CHAD: I imagine it's pretty intense. How quickly did you force yourself to settle on the business you were actually going to build? MONIQUE: It's so interesting because I have been asked like, "Did you create the concept before you went?" And I said, "Actually, no," literally, I went into it with a blank mind of wherever I end up, I want to see what they need, and we'll create a business model around that. So I think it was like day four of being in Tacoma. And I was in an area that was a food desert for the most part. And I'm like, listen, I'm talking to people, and they're like, "Oh yeah, we have to order juice shots. They have to get shipped. Or we get the ones that are, you know, sitting in the grocery store, and that's not a lot of options." And I'm like, wow, this is a problem. And I'm like, let's reimagine the ice cream truck. Everyone would like to think that the wealth gap...that if you make money, you care about your health, if you don't make money, you don't care about your health, actually, no. [laughs] I grew up in a natural home, and we lived in income-based housing growing up. And so the reality is that everyone wants to be healthy. People need more access to healthier options at an affordable rate, and people will buy it. So the question was, oh, Monique, you can't sell juice shots for $5. Yes, we can. You think a community just because they're underserved won't pay for their health? They absolutely will if you give them the option to. We always sold out in the communities that they said would never sell. CHAD: So up against a ticking clock, what did you do to sort of validate the idea and really run with it, or did you just know? MONIQUE: No, you don't just know, right? CHAD: Yeah. [chuckles] MONIQUE: You're literally working on adrenaline. Listen, there was nothing normal. We all know this as business owners; there's nothing normal about this concept. You can't create a successful business in 90 days. So you're literally in overdrive: no sleep, multitasking, doing all types of things. Here was the thing; first of all, I talked to the community. I asked them what did they need? What were they missing? If they had access to something, would they utilize it? That was number one. Number two was testing it. So I started making samples. And I went out to the community again and started testing it. Three was of the test that did good; let's run with that and package that up. And you have to understand, Chad, it was the height of the pandemic. Everything was shut down. You know, I live in Florida, so we weren't like that. But going to Tacoma, Washington, nothing was open. So I had to think, how do I get to people because they're not coming and cannot come to a brick and mortar? So the only thing that was pretty much open was the farmers' market. So that's what I did. I'm like, let's get to the farmers market. And also, let's see how we become mobile, oh, the ice cream truck treats. Let's teach people that healthy treats are actually what they crave. CHAD: I think even though it was accelerated, intense, the things you're talking about doing in terms of validating the idea, actually talking to customers, testing things out, those are things I think people want to do in any situation. MONIQUE: It is absolutely true. We talk to founders all the time, and it's the I, I, I. And we tell them, "Well, have you talked to your customer?" Sometimes we're so close to our ideas because we hold them, and we're trying to solve a problem maybe that we experience. That's step one. But step two is, is it something that other people want and need? So you definitely have to go out there and do market research. CHAD: Are there other things that you counsel founders on doing? Particularly with the seed stage, you know, on the verge of significant growth and scaling, what are some things that are maybe common plays or common pitfalls of companies at that stage? MONIQUE: So some of the things that we see, especially with solo founders, is them having this idea that only they can do everything and not understanding that you actually have to have a founding team. And that does require you to give some equity. We see founders wanting to hold on to everything. And then it becomes do you want 100% of something that's very restricted, or do you want to share it and make it something really special and a part of a billion-dollar concept? So that's one. Two would be founders in need happen to take money without understanding that it is a debt that even if it's fundraising and you're raising institutional capital, these are your investors. These are your partners. And is it a good partnership? We have seen a lot of founders in contractual and legal documents because they went and took money from the wrong type of investor. We see that -- CHAD: And they did that because they were desperate at the time? MONIQUE: They were desperate. They were desperate. They were desperate and for just really crazy, contractual things. They don't have attorneys look at the paperwork. We see a lot of these mistakes. And so we tell founders you have to have a step back from your business. You have to look at all types of options. Have you applied for grants and particular grants in areas of the problem that you're solving? Have you tried for Small Business Association grants? Have you tried to get a credit line versus an investor who's now going to have equity? These are all the things. And if you do need investors, don't take all the same types of investors. If every investor in your cap table is a bean counter and the numbers aren't playing out well for them, what type of board meeting is that going to be? So make sure you have an operator who's on your board. Make sure you have a financial person, investor on your board. You have to be very strategic and intentional. And if you're in a desperate moment, I can guarantee that is not when you want to take the money that you actually need to do a deeper dive and step back from the company to really see what the company needs. CHAD: Monique, I feel like that's great advice. The level of experience and passion that you have for the work is obvious in listening to you. It makes me want to work with you. [laughs] MONIQUE: Oh, thank you, Chad. Yes, I'm very impressed with what you have built. And I'm very impressed with you understanding the ability to give access to information to your audience. Here's the thing, we are products of an environment of capitalism. And there's nothing wrong with capitalism, but it just needs to be a lot more conscious. And it needs to have a much better impact for all. The problem with from our childhood age of education is we've been taught that there's only one, there can only be one winner. There's only one first place. We have to take that mindset back and really step into the power and the power that we truly have, which is abundance. There's enough for us all. We just have to give that power back to it. And the reality is that we all need each other, and we all need to build together. And people just need access to information. Most founders tell us, "I was embarrassed to ask that. I was made to feel like I was supposed to know this, so I just went ahead and pretended like I knew it." It's okay that we don't know everything. In fact, I like to sit in that space of student and say, "You know what? I like to be in the room that I actually don't know anything because then that means I'm learning, and it's okay. We better keep learning." One of my favorite quotes is, "We delight in the beauty of the butterfly but rarely admit the changes it has gone through to achieve that beauty." And Maya Angelou wrote that, and she understood the human spirit needs to understand that no matter what career path we're on, Founder, CEO, employee, employer, no matter what that is, it is a constant evolution of self. And sometimes we'll feel like a butterfly, and sometimes we will have to be in that learning and growth and uncomfortable stage. But the beauty of uncomfort means you're growing, and we have to make more people feel comfortable with that. CHAD: That's beautiful. Monique, thank you so much for coming on the show and sharing with all of us. MONIQUE: No, thank you, Chad, for having me. CHAD: If folks want to get in touch with you or find out more about Reign, where are all the different places that they can do that? MONIQUE: So if they want to contact me, they can email me at monique@reignvc.com, which is R-E-I-G-N-V-C.com. We're on LinkedIn; we're on Twitter; we're on Instagram. And if they want to learn more about Reign VC, they could just go to reignvc.com. And if they have any questions, they can submit it, and we'll get back to them. CHAD: Wonderful. And you can subscribe to the show and find notes and a full transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm, and you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Monique Idlett.
Joseph Mocanu is Co-founder and Managing Director of Verge HealthTech Fund, which invests globally in seed-stage healthcare technology startups relevant to emerging Asia that focus on disease prevention and management, digital therapies, and health system efficiency. Chad talks with Joseph about the healthcare landscape in different places of the world, funding criteria for companies, and how the pandemic has changed prospects for the fund and the market in general. Verge HealthTech Fund (https://www.vergehc.com/) Follow Verge HealthTech Fund on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/verge-healthtech-fund-i/). Follow Joseph on Twitter (https://twitter.com/jmocanu) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/jmocanu/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel, and with me today is Joseph Mocanu, Co-founder and Managing Director of Verge HealthTech Fund, which invests globally in seed-stage healthcare technology startups relevant to emerging Asia that focus on disease prevention and management, digital therapies, and health system efficiency. Joseph, thank you for joining me. JOSEPH: Thanks so much, Chad, for having me. CHAD: So you have been focused on emerging Asia healthtech for a little while both at Verge HealthTech Fund, and prior to that, how did you get involved in this space? JOSEPH: I wish I had a really cool, deliberate story that made it sound like it was a smooth transition from point A to point B. But I simply have to owe it to an opportunity to transfer to the region through my old employer which is Oliver Wyman, a global management consultancy. So I joined this consultancy in 2011 after doing my Ph.D. and MBA really to understand how to be a better investor, which, again, sounds a little bit backwards. But I had worked at a hedge fund in China just after my MBA, and I learned that they use management consulting techniques to add value to their portfolio companies. And I thought that's a great skill to learn. And it'd be great to even learn it in English and doing it in healthcare 100% of the time. So I had joined Oliver Wyman in 2011 in Toronto office back home, where I spent a lot of my life. And they asked me one day if I wanted to transfer to the Singapore office to help start healthcare over there. And when I went to Singapore, of course, it's this futuristic city, really well planned. It's got a lot of fine names and a reputation globally of being a modern cosmopolitan place to do business. Some people refer to it as Asia-lite. But the surrounding areas have a lot of issues when it comes to their health systems. I knew this from an academic perspective, having studied about the region before moving to Singapore but seeing it firsthand was a completely different experience. At the time, I was working for primarily pharmaceutical clients, helping them with market access and other commercially relevant activities. And they were faced with a fundamental challenge of trying to sell their product, which was usually placed in the premium category to markets that had difficulty affording this. And not only did it have difficulty affording this, it had difficulty in delivering it as well as in using the product appropriately, making sure it gets to the patients when it's needed at the right time, at the right dose. And so they were looking for partners. They were looking for partners on the ground that could assist with this delivery education, the technology, and the financing around it as well. Now, there was a real shortage of said partners on the ground. At the same time, there were also insurance companies that wanted to expand their business. They also realized that the policies tended to be a bit simple, and they tended to resemble one another across competitors. And also, to manage increasing claims, they had a tendency to increase the premium that they charged. This was not possible to do indefinitely. And at some point, they needed to actually manage the medical conditions, which you're probably seeing more and more of in the U.S. and in Western markets, less so of in this part of the world. And then lastly, you had conglomerates and investors who said, "Hey, we hear healthcare is going to be a pretty hot field. How do we get started? How do we invest?" And all of this basically set me on a mission of target hunting. And during the course of this, well, I met a lot of interesting companies, a lot of them really, really early in their journey and really too small for any of my clients to find a meaningful way to engage with them. And unfortunately, they couldn't get to the point where they are relevant and large enough to engage with without a lot of capital. This is where, you know, you'd have a nice investment ecosystem coming in to fill in the gaps. This, unfortunately, did not really exist at the time. And I had the hubris of thinking that I could do something about it by being an angel investor and starting to support these founders directly, which, thankfully, seemed to work to a certain degree. It worked to the point where one day, I woke up, and I realized I had 13 angel investments, 9 of which were in healthcare technology, and not a lot of money left in my bank account to do other things with. CHAD: Uh-oh. [laughs] JOSEPH: Yeah. And at the same time, I also realized that the work that those founders are doing is a whole lot more impactful than me sitting up until 3:00 o'clock in the morning every night writing PowerPoint slides or begging analysts to write the PowerPoint slides that would more or less sit and collect dust on my clients' shelves for various reasons. So I came to the realization that I need to do this full time. I didn't have, you know, $10 million in my pocket as reference to spending all my money on angel investments. So I realized that I have to use other people's money, and the way to do that is to join a fund. Now, the problem with that idea is that there weren't any funds that were doing this, like really, really early investing in healthtech companies in the region that was really geared to helping solve some of these really big access challenges. So then I realized I had to start a VC fund that did this and only this. So that's really kind of a long-winded introduction as to how I got started with this. CHAD: Yeah, I want to come back to the process of actually starting a VC fund in a bit. But I'm curious, were the companies that you were doing angel investment in and now doing seed-stage investment in do they tend to be local companies, or do they tend to be international companies that are planning to solve a problem locally? JOSEPH: It's funny you ask that. At the beginning, they were local. Well, actually, if I really were to take a step back, the very first angel investment I made was for a mentee, and she was based in Toronto. But I'd say that the first true angel investment I made, you know, it was in Singapore, first and foremost, because I was there. And then I started branching out. I started making investments in the Philippines. I started looking at companies in Taiwan and other parts. And actually, that opened my eyes to the fact that there may be other companies around the world that are trying to solve a problem that may not necessarily be in my own backyard. So I started to, you know, cheekily, I sent my wife to tech conferences around the world. And she herself is an entrepreneur from the tech industry; hardware was her specialty. And we started identifying companies from all over the world. And the second angel investment where I was the very first investor was actually from a company in South Africa with similar challenges. So the things that we saw as major health system deficiencies or maybe shortages in infrastructure and human capital were very much true not just in Southeast Asia but in a lot of parts of the world. And we noticed that while there were different reasons for why they ended up in that position, the outcome was similar. CHAD: I'm not sure that everyone listening has a good sense of what the healthcare landscape actually looks like in these different places of the world. So let's take insurance, for example; what is the insurance landscape, generally speaking, in Southeast Asian countries? JOSEPH: So, in Southeast Asia, we do have insurers. I mean, private insurance is certainly there. But it's just not -- CHAD: Do most companies have public insurance, too, like universal healthcare? JOSEPH: That depends on which country you're in. Now, the one interesting thing about our entire region is that they've all committed to universal healthcare coverage. I would say that the implementation thereof has been heterogeneous; let's put it that way. Out of Southeast Asian countries that are not Singapore, I'd say that Thailand probably has the strongest public healthcare system. And in fact, they even do health technology assessments, which is really looking at the true cost-effectiveness of a new intervention versus what's currently done in practice to make decisions as to whether they're going to pay for it. And they cover a pretty high percentage of their population with this. And then there are other places where the financing mechanisms are in place, but you don't necessarily have the doctors or the hospitals where they need to be to address the needs of the population. Still, we are dealing with places that are not fully urbanized. And in fact, a good deal of the population is still working on the pharm, basically. One of the other complexities of our region is that just between the Philippines and Indonesia, which together has a combined population of 380 million at least, maybe it's 390 now, you've got 25,000 islands, and not all of those islands tend to hold major tier-one cities, even though they can hold a lot of people. And if there is one thing about healthcare that seems to be a universal truth is that highly skilled workers like to live in the rich cities. CHAD: And so what I'm hearing is that on an individual island, if there's not a major city there, the access to the actual healthcare might be really limited. JOSEPH: That is exactly it. CHAD: In these economies in these countries, it's typical to have private insurance layered on top. But the pharmas probably aren't doing that, right? JOSEPH: Oh, no, no, unfortunately not. There are some pilots of trying to do co-ops or collective insurance or micro-insurance policies. But again, when you look at the amount of premium that they could pay in, the kind of coverage they get is pretty basic. CHAD: So, how does that landscape influence the solutions that startups are creating? JOSEPH: Well, first and foremost, you've got to try to get some sort of mechanism by which you can seek care without having to travel too much. And I think that concept is extremely familiar to all of us thanks to the global pandemic that I hope we're coming out of right now, although there's always a new strain surprising us. The idea of basic telemedicine is one that can have a great deal of impact in these populations. But even before that, just understanding the importance of healthcare, like, what the concept of healthcare is, what the concept of the modern medical system is, is something that a fair number of people never really had awareness of. And I'll call out an example country, and I try not to call out too many examples. But Indonesia did a really good job of educating people about the concept of healthcare when they promoted their universal healthcare coverage. Even if they didn't have the ability to deliver it as well as they wanted to or as widespread as they wanted to, at least they got people paying attention to this concept called health. So awareness is really the first step. The second challenge is all right, so you know health exists. When do you know when you need it? Where are you going to find a doctor? How do you know if a doctor is even good? And how do you know that the products that you're going to get are appropriate? So there are so many challenges that you have to face when you are in a lack of access situation. CHAD: I assume you're getting pitched on a lot of ideas coming to your fund, a lot of startups. Correct me if that's wrong. [laughs] JOSEPH: No, no, that's absolutely true. So one of the blessings and curses of being one of the very few super early-stage healthtech venture funds out there is that there aren't many of us out there. And when we started...let's just put it this way, if I could find a fund that was doing what I wanted to do, I would have sent my CV in, and I couldn't. And starting a fund was basically the last thing I wanted to do, having never worked at a VC before or ever raised money in my life before. So I still think that we are the only truly global impact-oriented seed - I hate the term pre-seed, but I'll use it because of the audience's familiarity with it- investment fund out there right now for healthtech. So by virtue of that, we do see a lot of companies. CHAD: So what are some of the criteria? JOSEPH: So I'd say some of the criteria that we look for is number one, are you solving a real problem? And we define a real problem by the breadth of the problem, like, how many people are suffering from it or how systemic is this problem if it's an infrastructural one? And depth being how severe is this problem: is it life or death, or is it a minor inconvenience? So first and foremost, it's got to be solving a real problem. Second, it's really around the team. You need a lot of clinical, technical, and commercial experience in order to pull off a healthtech startup successfully. And even before that, we want to understand why are you doing this? Because this is not easy. I'd say on a scale of 1 to 10, doing a startup is like an eight, and then doing a healthtech startup is like an 11. It's slow; it's technical, it's regulated, it's super risky. And health systems are very pathway-dependent in the intent to not have many things in common with one another. So it is really, really hard. So we want to know the motivation. Are you going to stick through the thick and thin, or are you doing this healthtech startup because you think healthtech is cool or hot this particular period in the market cycle? So that's another criterion. Another criterion is, well, what's your edge? I mean, okay, you can have a great team, and I think that is definitely a prerequisite. You can solve a problem. But do you have something that could make sure that you are going to be competitive and remain competitive? CHAD: Given the barriers to market entry that you just outlined, do most of the companies that you're investing in have any sort of traction already in the market, or where are they in the product development or business development cycle? JOSEPH: I'm going to give the ultimate cop-out answer of it depends. CHAD: [laughs] Yeah. JOSEPH: But I will qualify that by saying it depends on whether it's hardware or software, and it depends whether it's regulated or non-regulated. So if you are a software company that's unregulated so, what does this mean? It could be like a marketplace. It could be health education. It could be some telemedicine in a loosely regulated market. We'd really like to see user traction. We'd really like to see revenue even. However, if you're a device company and you need to get FDA before you can earn a single dollar, we're okay with it being a science experiment or a prototype on the table as long as the science part of it has been de-risked. So if we know that the fundamental scientific principles are sound, then we're willing to take the productization and regulatory risk because we've been through this journey ourselves. CHAD: And also, you said a team is really important, so if it's a team that has never gone through that before, that's less attractive than a team that has done it before, I assume. JOSEPH: Yeah, absolutely. However, one of the challenges is that outside of the U.S., certain European markets in Israel, it's really difficult to find a team that's gone through the entire medical device development process before. So you are going to rely heavily on your professional service providers, consultants, advisors, other investors who've done this before. And as long as you have at least a path to getting to a point where you can unlock and utilize that expertise, that's okay. But if you don't, then that's a really, really big risk. Mid-Roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: Earlier, you said FDA. FDA is a United States thing. Do most countries in Southeast Asia have a local regulatory agency like the FDA that things need to be approved through? JOSEPH: Yep, every single one. The question is, what's the process to go through that? Generally speaking, the FDA, as well as the European equivalent, which is the CE Mark, are used as predicates in order to kind of shortcut the process, make it go a little bit faster. Because then you don't have to create a bunch of new work or get the local regulator to really try to do things that they're unfamiliar with. CHAD: You said it's fairly rare for teams to have concrete experience doing that in the local market. Does that mean that most of these markets have been served by, I don't know, large companies previously? JOSEPH: Yeah, and still are. A fair number of emerging markets don't even have the manufacturing capability to even do local production, so they require a lot of importation. I'd say that this is a different case when it comes to generic pharmaceuticals and maybe vaccines and some consumables. But complex devices and biologics are generally manufactured in more developed markets or larger economies. CHAD: Yeah. Well, you mentioned the pandemic, and I'm curious how the pandemic has changed either your prospects for the fund but also the market in general. JOSEPH: I would say, again, it's both a blessing and a curse. So during the start of the pandemic, there was a great deal of societal and economic uncertainty around where are we going to be as a species in six months? And I remember early 2020; it was kind of these Hollywood movies that would paint this kind of semi-apocalyptic picture of where we're going to end up. And as a consequence, people really puckered up and stopped investing in things. I would say that the other side of it is now much of the world understands what it's like to not have access to quality healthcare or even access to healthcare. You see people not going to the hospital for things that they ought to and then suffering the consequences at home, like, let's say, not going for that heart checkup, and then you having a heart attack at home and passing when you otherwise wouldn't have. Or even cancer patients having to delay their therapy because the hospital is just too full. So this concept of telemedicine which has always been resisted by both the payers and providers for being infeasible, or inaccurate, or impossible to fund properly, suddenly had to be done. And the concept of telemedicine is fairly old. I mean, how else would you treat your astronauts in space in the '60s if they got sick? So this is something that NASA thought of and invented and implemented, you know, decades and decades ago. And finally, this came forward. And I was pleasantly surprised to see...and again, I'll quote the U.S. here where The Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services or CMS actually reimbursed a bunch of remote procedure codes, which is pretty amazing. And I think that was opening Pandora's Box. There's no going back from that. So I think telemedicine is absolutely here to stay. And the real challenge now is really how to make it more user-friendly, how to improve it, how to improve the decisions that come from it. I really don't think it's going back. And as a consequence of this, it's really benefited a lot of our startups that were trying to build this remote-connected future anyway. CHAD: Has there also been an influx of those kinds of startups? JOSEPH: Absolutely. I would say that there has been a veritable Cambrian explosion of startups where everyone and their uncle is starting a healthtech startup as well as a healthtech fund. I see a lot of new funds coming up promising to invest in this space. So I think it's good in that there's going to be a lot of really new ideas, and hopefully, it's going to improve the standard of care for everyone around the world. But at the same time, it is creating a lot of noise, and it's becoming increasingly difficult to filter through that. CHAD: Do the solutions tend to be local? I guess the nature of my question was, you know, like messaging apps. [laughs] Different countries have different popular messaging apps. What do you see as the penetration of different telemedicine solutions in the different countries? Do you think it's going to be, oh, you know, this is popular in this country? Or do you think it's possible for one company to come in and really have a significant impact in the market across multiple markets? JOSEPH: Yeah, I think it's eventually going to be the latter. So at the start, you do see that you have your national champions. And like instant messaging apps, it's kind of like a 90-10 rule where the number 1 player takes 90% of the market, number 2 takes most of what's left, and then number 3 player caters to some niche or another. And I see two competing forces here; one is, yes, there may be a big player like Babylon or Crew who comes in and rolls up everything backed by heaps of capital. But the other thing could also be that all the health systems start saying, "You know what? Why are we working with an external company? Why don't we just develop all these capabilities ourselves and then keep the patient captive?" And you are starting to see middleware providers who are basically providing that telemedicine layer, white-labeling it, or giving API access to the providers themselves, the legacy providers themselves, and then allowing them to do that. And I actually saw this statistic...I don't know how accurate it was, but I saw a chart in the U.S. that white-labeled or internal telemedicine consults exceeded the number of Teladoc consultations, which is the largest platform in the U.S., at some point last year. CHAD: I'm wondering, do you know if Teladoc uses Twilio? JOSEPH: I really should know the answer to that question, but unfortunately, I do not. CHAD: Because my sense is the real winner in this game might be companies like Twilio because I think everyone is using them. [laughs] JOSEPH: That makes a ton of sense. So when we do look at some investments, we actually want to invest in middleware because why duke it out to be the platform when you're the utility provider? CHAD: So let's turn our attention to the actual creation of the fund. And I know you just opened your second fund last month, right? JOSEPH: Actually, this month. I mean, last month was the paperwork, but it takes time for stuff to get approved. CHAD: Yeah, fair enough. So you already said actually starting a fund was, I think you said, the last thing on earth that you wanted to do. Why was that the last thing you wanted to do? JOSEPH: Frankly, it was a whole lot more uncertainty than I was prepared to handle at the time. And I was either blessed or cursed with this momentary clarity of purpose where I knew with all my being that this is what I wanted to do with myself for, if not the rest of my life, a very long time. And the only alternative, or rather the only choice to pursue this at the time, was really starting a fund. So that's what I had to do, right? CHAD: And how large was the first fund? JOSEPH: It was pretty small; it was $7.6 million, which in local currency equates to a nice number of just above 10 million sings. CHAD: And where did you...I'm going to ask where that ended up coming from. But in terms of the mechanics of actually starting a fund, what did that look like? JOSEPH: Well, it depends on each market. But typically, what happens is you need to first have permission from the regulator in order to actually start and run a fund. So in Singapore, you need to apply for a venture capital fund management license from the Monetary Authority of Singapore. That's what had to be done first, and we got that approved in a pretty good time, actually. I think we might have captured a lull period because now, with all the funds coming out, I've heard the queue is months long in some cases. And then came the business of incorporating the fund itself and then starting to draft all the legal paperwork, the conditions, the private memorandum or prospectus, depending on which geography and how regulated you are, that you show around to investors once they've expressed interest in learning substantially more details about your fund beyond what a simple PowerPoint deck or a casual coffee conversation can yield. And then you start collecting commitments, and then you start collecting the money. And at some point, you have enough money to say, all right, we'll do a close or first close, and that then gives you permission to start deploying that money into investments. And some funds they'll only do one close, some funds will do a first close, and then a final close when they get the rest of the money in or some money committed and then calling the rest of it to come in. Or some will do multiple closes just so that they have the ability to keep deploying continuously while they're doing this fundraising process. And in our case, we were doing rolling closes. So we would close every few months, and we'd continue to deploy. And by the time we finished fundraising, we actually already had nine companies out of the 15 that we have in our portfolio done. So it really depends on all sorts of different factors, which we probably don't have that much time to get into. And I risk perhaps putting my foot in my mouth and misspeaking if I give too many examples. CHAD: [laughs] When it comes to starting a fund, how cookie-cutter is it? Or do you find yourself having to create everything from scratch, all the legal documents, whatever platform you might be...or access you might be giving to the people who are contributing to the fund? JOSEPH: I'd say, again, it depends where you are. I think in the U.S. and especially with the advent of great service providers platforms like AngelList and Assure, it is super cookie-cutter. In our part of the world, I still think it's somewhat cookie-cutter, but we got a little too cute. CHAD: [chuckles] JOSEPH: We thought, okay, it's our first time doing a fund. I've been an LP in other funds. What did I wish I had as an LP? And as a consequence, we introduced some hurdle rates of tiered carry, and even zero carry if we don't hit a certain return. And all that really did was just create more questions from the investors. So we should have probably done it as cookie-cutter as possible in hindsight. CHAD: So I often hear from founders who talk about how it's important to have a VC fund behind you that you agree with, and want to work with, and are excited about, and that can be value additive. Do you need, as someone raising a fund, do you need to consider things like that or other things when it comes to the people you're taking money from the fund? JOSEPH: Absolutely. Maybe knock on wood here, but our relative inexperience when starting a fund probably selected out all the folks who might not have gotten along with us anyway. And the fact that we're pretty straightforward and direct with what we want to do in our objectives probably helped with that selection process as well on the positive side. But I absolutely, absolutely can recommend having that alignment of values and mission with those who are on the journey with you for a good decade. It's like getting married, right? CHAD: Yeah. Well, so when you're planning a fund and thinking about time horizons, is a decade what you're thinking about? JOSEPH: Yeah, all things considered. So our fund lifetime was eight years from final close. But still, it takes time to raise the fund and plan the fund, and you have people that are on board even before the fund begins. So it is a decade-long relationship, at least. And then some of the larger funds because they want to have a longer investment period, will push that out even further where they're going to be a 10-year fund from final close. And if you have enough of your portfolio that hasn't exited yet but still has some value to be uncovered, you may ask your investors to extend the fund life even further. So this is a supremely long relationship that you have. And aside from evergreen funds that don't have a fund lifetime, I think this is about as long as it gets, although I have seen some people float the idea of a 20-year fund or a 50-year fund, but that's really not widely practiced. I think five years is the fastest I've seen, and ten seems to be the average. CHAD: Where did that first fund come from? How did you drum up the interest and decide who would be a part of it? JOSEPH: It's really the folks who have known me the longest or worked with me. So you know how they say when you're raising money for a startup, you get it from the three F's, Friends, Family, and Fools? For funds and for first-time fund managers, I think it's a pretty analogous group of people, although I don't think we have any fools. CHAD: [laughs] JOSEPH: And, unfortunately, don't have family either. So it's really all friends, old co-workers, old clients, and then the people that they introduced us to. There were some serendipitous moments where people liked what I said at a conference, or we asked a tough question. And people asked, "Well, how can you ask such a tough question?" Then they got to know us and then decide to invest from there. But majority of it was just introductions, warm introductions. We never did any cold emails. CHAD: Have there been any exits in the first fund? JOSEPH: Not just yet. We do come in as either the first or second investor in these companies. So there is quite a long journey that we expect before we, you know, see some exits. There may be some this year. But if I look back at my angel investments, there was only real serious talk of an exit at the six-year mark for one of the companies that's doing really well. And even that exit turned out to be just another, you know, the investor changed their mind, and instead of buying the company, they decided to just invest more money into it. So this is a long journey. CHAD: Yeah, definitely. Did that make putting together the second fund any harder, or is that what everyone expects? JOSEPH: I am cautiously optimistic because we're still so early in our journey that the only folks we've really spoken with are the ones who invested in our first fund or passed on our first fund because they don't back first-time fund managers. They come to expect that your second fund is built on the momentum of the first fund. And it's really your third fund that's built on the exit and actual realized track record of your first fund. CHAD: That makes sense. What do you think is next for Verge HealthTech? JOSEPH: Well, first things first, we got to get started with the second fund and see if we can build something to scale. I mean, the first fund was an experiment. It was a small fund, you know. Could we build the world's seed-stage global impact healthtech fund on basically a shoestring? And the second fund is now let's take everything that we wish we had for the first fund and scale it up so bigger initial ticket sizes because we want to own more, the ability to follow on properly, the ability to do more deals, which requires a much bigger team which we now have. As well as to go back and support the winners of our first fund as well as some of the companies that maybe we made a mistake on and passed but still have a strong enough relationship to revisit and get them on the next round or the round after that, or just new companies that the market has moved. You know, the area that we might have been really interested in at the seed stage is now a pre-A stage or an A stage. So that's really what we want to do with the second one. And it would be amazing to see where this goes. I'm thrilled that we actually have, well, I think, one of the best healthtech investment teams in the world; maybe I'm slightly biased with this. CHAD: [laughs] JOSEPH: And I'm excited to see what we can do together. CHAD: That's great. Well, I wish you the best. And I really appreciate you for stopping by and sharing with us. If folks want to follow along with you or get in touch with you, where are the best places for them to do that? JOSEPH: Probably LinkedIn is the best way to do it. Also, I have a blog on Medium, which I'm sure can be linked in the show notes. I've been really bad...I've been traveling intensely in the past half-year. But I promise my next blog post will be interesting. CHAD: [laughs] JOSEPH: Because I just got back from Rwanda and Saudi Arabia, which are two very, very different countries, however, with a great emphasis on improving healthcare, especially on the digital side. CHAD: Well, that's exciting. So folks definitely can find the links for that in the notes, which you can find the notes; you can subscribe to the show and a full transcript of the episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Joseph Mocanu.
Carlos F. Gaitan Ospina is the Founder and CEO of Benchmark Labs, which provides IoT-based weather forecasting solutions for the agriculture, energy, and insurance sectors worldwide using proprietary machine-learning software. Chad talks with Carlos about creating the company, the hardware they're producing and what it is doing, and where the machine learning comes into play. Benchmark Labs (https://www.benchmarklabs.com/) Follow Benchmark Labs on Twitter (https://twitter.com/labsbenchmark), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/benchmarklabs/), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/benchmark-labs-inc/). Follow Carlos on Twitter (https://twitter.com/cfgaitan) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/carlos-felipe-gaitan-ospina-3765808/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Carlos Gaitan, the Founder and CEO of Benchmark Labs, which provides IoT-based weather forecasting solutions for the agriculture, energy, and insurance sectors worldwide using proprietary machine-learning software. Carlos, thank you very much for joining me. CARLOS: Thank you for the invitation, Chad. It's a pleasure to join you here. CHAD: You work in a variety of different industries with weather forecasting solutions using machine learning. I'm really curious, at a high level, how did you get to where you created Benchmark Labs today? CARLOS: Oh, thank you, Chad. That's a great question. I think that in many ways, it's a combination of life experiences and lots of user feedback. As a background, my mum worked for 28 years in the National Federation of Coffee Growers in my native Columbia. And we experience basically the effects of weather, La Niña, El Niño, local conditions, pests on the coffee growers. I remember growing up looking at the price in The New York Stock Exchange if the pound of coffee was going to be more than $1 or not [laughs] and so on. So, you know, we had a very severe drought in Colombia, and Colombia was heavily dependent in hydropower at that time. And I remember that we even had to study with candlelight and move to a spring savings time for the first time in the country. The country is in the equator, so you can imagine moving the clock was unheard of. So since then, I was always passionate about hydrology, the water cycle, why this happened, how weather can affect the economy at that level that people have to change their working habits. I did civil engineering hydrology, then studied these new applications of machine learning technologies, hydroinformatics, did my studies there in Columbia, my bachelor's, my master's. Then I was fortunate to go to The University of British Columbia to study my Ph.D. in Atmospheric Sciences. And then, after I finished, I moved to The United States to work at the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton with close collaboration with the NOAA, the USGS. And that gave that perspective also of understanding how weather climate models were done at the Department of Commerce level but also to understand the users on how they interact with weather data or climate data and what were the needs that they were expecting from the National Weather Service and the Department of Commerce and NOAA that not necessarily were fulfilled with the current information. So then I moved to the private sector, joined a hardware company, and met my co-founder of Benchmark Labs there then moved to California to work on consultancy of climate change assessments. But since the time at the Department of Commerce, it became very clear that what farmers and what users wanted was weather information that was more actionable, that was tailored to their specific location, especially for specialty crops. Think about wineries, or coffee growers, orchids, stone fruits; they depend heavily on weather, and the information from the National Weather Services was just too coarse for them. And sometimes, there are huge errors in terms of temperatures that were recorded from their farm versus what the National Weather Service was doing. And that's why we decided to create Benchmark Labs to basically solve that problem, correct those errors, and give the information that the users needed when they needed it. CHAD: Did you ever just consider becoming a TV weather person? CARLOS: [laughs] CHAD: It seems it may be easier. CARLOS: [laughs] Nah. That's a very good point. CHAD: [laughs] CARLOS: And I have great respect with my colleagues that went into forecast meteorology and TV persons. I remember some of my lab mates practicing in front of a green screen when we were doing the Ph.D. CHAD: [laughs] CARLOS: That was an interesting scenario. [laughs] However, growing up in Colombia, the weather forecasts were not very, let's say, accurate to a certain extent, and we did the opposite than the weatherman suggested. CHAD: [laughs] CARLOS: So I guess that steered me towards following that path. [laughs] CHAD: So it totally resonates with me this idea that, you know, especially for...I've been on the West Coast before where you go over a hill and the weather it's like 20 degrees hotter and sunny and on one side of the hill, it was cold and foggy. We went on a great company trip many years ago to visit some Napa vineyards, and I was surprised by that. So I can imagine how that local information just doesn't match the global information that farmers might be getting. So what is the hardware that you're actually producing, and what is it doing? What does it look like? CARLOS: [laughs] Great question. So I will go back to your story about Napa and Sonoma, and the reality is that's exactly a problem that growers face; national weather agencies give averages over a big region. They divide the world in boxes, and everybody inside of a box receives exactly the same forecast. And if you are especially in the coast or you're in specialty agriculture, you understand that weather changes with elevation. Depending on which side of the mountain you are, you could receive all the rain or no rain at all. If you are near the shores, you could also get more wind, different types of clouds, all of those situations affect the conditions at the farm. And going back to the situation of Napa and Sonoma, Burgundy or the Mediterranean Basin, they all believe in the value of what they call the terroir, that is what makes also unique their products. They're indigenous, and they understand at a very fundamental point how the local conditions from the soil, from the vegetation, makes their farm unique. So what we do is we use IoT sensors, basically hardware sensors that monitor environmental variables. We refer to them in the atmospheric science world as weather stations. I had a talk with some users when I said the term weather station. They imagined a big construction or a building with a TV station on a radar or something. But in this case, there are IoT devices that are totally portable, the size of a Wi-Fi modem in some cases. And we use those sensors as ground truth that will basically tell us the local conditions. We use the information from the National Weather Services and the information from those IoT sensors and correct the forecast as they come. CHAD: And is that where the machine learning comes in because it's actually correcting the forecast being received? CARLOS: Exactly, our machine learning aspect of it is fully operational, non-linear correction of weather data as it comes in from the National Weather Services to correct it to the conditions that are experienced at the farm level, at the sensor level. And a farm could be also an agricultural farm, or it could be a solar farm, a wind farm. Or, as we talk with some users in ski resorts that actually they consider as snow farmers, it's also affected by microclimates. So at the end, it is about providing value to all these areas affected by microclimates that are not being resolved correctly by the current generation of forecast from the National Weather Services. CHAD: Are most customers able to get the coverage that they need with one weather station, or are they deploying multiple ones? CARLOS: So that's a great question, and the answer probably is it depends. Our customers, original customers, have thousands of stations over multiple fields under management. For specialty crops, it's common to have multiple IoT sensors in one acre. For other scenarios, they might have only one station or one sensor every 10 acres or so on, so it depends on the condition. It depends on how technologically inclined are the users if they already invested in these IoT sensors or if they are looking into buying IoT sensors and then scaling up the number of sensors in their farms. CHAD: How do all the sensors report their data back? CARLOS: That is a very interesting question because they are, let's say, tens of hardware manufacturers globally. We also created kind of a Rosetta Stone that puts all the sensors to communicate to our back-end systems. We integrate different languages of each hardware manufacturer. It has its own ways of naming the variables. So we do the translation in our end. We receive the data via an API. These IoT devices are Internet of Things in many ways because they transmit data via Wi-Fi, satellite internet, you know, cellular. CHAD: Cell, yeah. So different manufacturers might have different ways of actual communication, not just the protocol, but one box might be using Wi-Fi, and another one might be using a satellite. CARLOS: Exactly. And sometimes, many manufacturers give you the options of connecting even using Wi-Fi or Bluetooth for IoT sensors that are near, let's say, a farm that has internet connectivity. If they are on the field farther away, they might need to get access to a data plan from a cellular carrier, 3G usually or 5G. In some areas, there is limited coverage so far. And if it's a very remote area, there are options to get satellite coverage. CHAD: Now, I'm asking somewhat naive questions based on my understanding. And so if I start butting up against proprietary information, just tell me, "No." That's totally fine. CARLOS: [laughs] CHAD: So when we're thinking about the amount of data coming in from all of these different weather stations that your customers have, is it a lot of data? Is it a lot of data points? CARLOS: [laughs] It's a great question. So in many ways, yeah, each weather station communicates at different frequency. Sometimes what we are offering now is hourly transmission rates, but we also have access to government stations that sometimes only refresh once per day. So yes, it's a lot of data coming in, most of the data from the weather stations. Fortunately, it can be transmitted as a txt file, or it's only for one location. So the files are not big, but they are many per day. And so, we have probably done millions of operations already to assimilate data and provide the forecast. While on the other hand, The National Weather Service provides one forecast for the globe, let's say every...some models are every hour, other models are every six hours, and so on. So that is more, let's say, a bigger data set because it's a global data set that then you have to query to extract the information locally that is relevant for your servers, for your users. CHAD: Yeah. And I think it's neat how this is all happening centrally from all the data coming in, right? CARLOS: Yeah, exactly. We get data coming in for each specific location. We do the corrections, and we provide the forecasts. So there are lots of operations involved in the data handling activities, pre-processing, post-processing, but it's very rewarding at the end to provide the forecasts that are tailored to specific locations. And we had seen users that they basically told us, "Okay, we are using provider B or C; can you beat them? Show us that you can beat them, and the contract will be yours." So we showed them, and then they are like, "Yeah, that's fantastic. This is exactly what we have been looking for, information that is more accurate for our farms," so yeah. CHAD: Now, does your system correct itself based on what actually happened in an area after the modified forecast goes out? CARLOS: That's not a very relevant question because some of the models are static. I used my experience when I did an internship in Environment Canada, and I found that they were adjusting their models, let's say four times per, at least the operational models they had, four times per year. They kind of tweaked them to the local, let's say, spring, summer, fall, winter conditions. In our case, we make our models to correct themselves as more data comes in so they can adjust to weather events and have short-term memory, let's say, of what they will wait heavily on and forget the distant past. CHAD: I mean, it seems obvious, not necessarily easy but obvious, that you've made a prediction about what the weather is going to be, and you have all the data coming in from the stations to confirm whether your prediction was correct or not. So I'm sure it's not easy to adjust the model based on that. CARLOS: [laughs] CHAD: That seems obvious to me. CARLOS: Yeah, it's just a different approach in many ways. As you said, it's obvious because the users usually care about a specific location, at least our users. We understand that for national security or aviation, they require a model that provides coverage over a wider area, like sometimes continents. But for agricultural users, they care about their farms, and the farms will not move in space. So -- CHAD: Well, technically, they are moving in space; it's just the weather goes along with it. CARLOS: [laughs] So yeah, I guess that it's just a different way of tackling the problem. We focus on doing these forecasts to each specific location instead of having a forecast done for the whole globe that could be used in many different locations or for many different industries, but it's not necessarily tailored to any industry-specific or location-specific. CHAD: Yeah, that's great. Mid-Roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: So have you managed to bring it full circle now, and are there coffee growers in Colombia that are using your solution? CARLOS: [laughs] I hope so. We have talked with coffee growers for sure. They care about temperature gradients. And I really think that going to Colombia as we scale will make the whole platform easier to use. I think that we can go full circle soon, sooner rather than later, into Colombia. We got support from the World Trade Center here in San Diego to do commercialization assistance to translate our solution from English to other languages. So we will be tackling Spanish, French, Italian in the very near future because it's important to offer the forecast also in a way that they could interact natively without having to have the limitation of using an English language platform into their day-to-day life. But yeah, full circle probably we’ll be going full circle soon. CHAD: So language is one barrier to scaling and to adoption. Are there other ones that are typical barriers of adoption for your customers? CARLOS: We are very competitive here in the North American market, the European markets. Our prices are in dollars. But that by itself is a problem for emerging economies; for example, you know, $100 here is not the same thing as $100 in other countries. We have to take into consideration exchange rates or the amount of disposable income that they will have for their operations. CHAD: And I'm not super educated about it, but I know that there are certain industries in agriculture where the growers are particularly pressed for margins, and coffee is one of them, right? CARLOS: Exactly. So, fortunately, in many ways, for the bigger crops, specialty crops they are traded, and the prices are linked to U.S. dollars so that can be translated, our services can be absorbed, let's say. For the smaller crops that are not traded or that just stay locally, the price is not linked to the U.S. exchange; then it's definitely a bigger barrier for them. But hopefully, we will get to a point if we have a sufficiently large adoption in North America and the developed world; these technologies could be subsidized or made more accessible in other economies. CHAD: What are some of the concerns that growers have? Take the specialty crops, for example, is it a matter of are they doing this because they want to make the best product possible, or is it because they want to prevent crop loss? CARLOS: It is both, actually. The uses of weather information in agriculture varies, as you said. There are many different applications; one is to get more actionable alerts. For example, we saw what happened in Burgundy last year where a substantial part of their region lost their crops, close to 80% maybe. I don't remember the number, but it was definitely substantial. And so, having more accurate forecasts and alerts gives them an opportunity to adapt better, to get cover, protect their fields to a certain extent. Weather information affects also pests and disease models, so application of fertilizer with spraying is also affected by local conditions. In many ways, for the operations that are very, let's say, sophisticated, some of them even link the sugar content on the fruit to weather conditions. And understanding how these weather conditions affect sugars could tell them when is the optimal time for them to, let's say, harvest? And the difference in the sugar content might determine the difference between higher margins or so-so margins [laughs] for their yield. So yeah, it's a combination of quality of the product. It's a combination of preventing loss of the product. And it's also labor scheduling and activities, for example, that are regulated by OSHA that prevent farm operations to maybe don't, let's say if they are like temperatures above 95 Fahrenheit or 100 Fahrenheit. So having that extra information in alerts will also help them with farm management operations. CHAD: So can you give me a sense of the stage you're at or the scale you're at now with the business and where you see your next stages of growth being? CARLOS: Thank you. Yeah, great. So we are fortunate to have scaled this solution beyond California. We are now a global platform. We are providing forecast to Spain. Recently, we got contacted by some growers in South America, so we are testing for avocado growers in Brazil and Colombia, for example. So I'm not serving yet coffee growers in Colombia, but the avocado growers in Colombia, it seems that they got a hold on what we do, [laughs] so it is getting there. And now we have the resources, the ability to go global and offer this anywhere in the world that is connected with an IoT device. So it's fully operational. And we are now in the midst of fundraising to scale the team, provide the customer success operations, and to support growers in different geographies, to support growers of different crops. And I think that if we are going to be successful globally, it starts with customer support, customer success, and understanding your users' needs, so they don't feel that, again, they will receive a one size fits all vanilla-like solution and that we really care about why specialty crops are special. CHAD: So when you were just starting out, who was the first team member that you added to the team? CARLOS: Oh, it was great. So in many ways, I thank the Economic Development Council of San Diego for funding a set of interns in data science, weather analytics, and business development. So our first hires, in many ways, were supported thanks to the Economic Development Council. We were the two founders, and then we got support in business development to understand which, for example, specialty crops really care about weather. Then some data science interns, data scientists that helped us with grants that we did for the National Science Foundation, and NASA that we got...we supported one of the grants. During COVID times, we participated in a very interesting opportunity to know the effect of COVID on forest fires, for example, and that was in collaboration with NASA. So first hires were interns, entry-level positions in data science, in back-end engineering, and then front-end business development. Now we are very excited to be expanding the team. We recently hired a Chief Product Officer with ten years of experience in Bloomberg, experience with visualizations, and talking to customers and users. So I think that for us, it's very important to, again, I reiterate, to have the ability to provide a great user experience, to provide meaningful information for specialty crops so they feel that they are special. CHAD: You mentioned that you got some business development help using those grants. But right now, is the actual sales work being done by the founding team? CARLOS: Yeah, at the beginning, as a founding team in a small startup, you have to wear multiple hats. So yeah, it's very common, and in many ways, I appreciate that we didn't rush to hire in terms of sales too early because it's important that the founding team understands the user perspectives, their needs, what they call the pain points to understand how to steer product into that direction. And then sales will follow once you have a solution that is highly needed, that users really like and that it can be shown that it can be scaled globally. So we are working on scaling, on accuracy of the forecasts. And yeah, next hires will be to get somebody that will help us in sales and can bring us to the next level. CHAD: What does the sales cycle look like for the kinds of customers you have now? Do they tend to be smaller, or do they tend to be larger enterprise customers? CARLOS: So, in the beginning, we worked with smaller enterprises to understand how to use the data, for example, connect the data from one or five sensors transmitted online. So dealing with smaller enterprises, farmers was optimal at that point as a company. And now, we are focusing more on businesses, farm managers, or management companies that have hundreds, sometimes thousands of sensors on their management. So we deal with more like business to business instead of going direct to grower at this stage because, as we were mentioning earlier, we're a small company, and going direct to grower requires lots of support and dedication in terms of dedicated agents and sales teams. CHAD: Do those companies tend to have long sales cycles? CARLOS: The bigger ones, yes. If you are talking about publicly traded companies, they will want to start with pilots then validate them. And you can move at different timescales with them that are not necessarily aligned with the startups at this stage. But there are some farm managers that have a way higher frequency of decision making. So their sale cycle could be one month, two months instead of having to build a relationship for years. CHAD: You mentioned the pilots, and you mentioned earlier telling the story about a customer that said, you know, "If you can provide us with better data," but I think companies as they scale or as they talk to potential customers, you also don't want to take on too much work that you should be charging for to be able to do that pilot. How do you strike that balance? CARLOS: It's a fascinating question. And I think that from a founding member perspective, let's say, it goes as a function of the stage of the company and what other, not necessarily monetary, benefits you can get from these pilots. We have been even recommended to not have unpaid pilots anymore, for example. I think that it's important at the beginning to get access to the information that you need to validate the technology with users that really care about what you're building. And sometimes, there are different ways that these pilots can be structured in a way that the final user might give you a reference or might spend time with you doing the quality control, quality check, saying what kind of features they like, so that's also very important as a young startup. As you grow, probably once you have that validation, there is no need necessarily to take into endeavors that will lead to unpaid pilots that you don’t know if there's a clear end to that. And you can move to a more structured pilot program that has clear deliverables, and at the end of window, a decision will be made depending on the set of topics that were agreed between the companies. CHAD: You might even be able to get away without pilots if you can make a strong case by showing other case studies that are relevant to that potential customer or where you explain, oh, you know, these people had a similar situation to you and here's how it's solved, and here's the success that they had. CARLOS: Totally. You nailed it. It's in many ways to sometimes build credibility, find analogues in the sector, or a use case that can be comparable to the pain point that another user might have. And it could be, let's start with the avocado growers in Brazil, and they have probably the same pain points that they have with avocado growers in Colombia. Once we have that sorted out, then we probably can go and talk with avocado growers here in California or Mexico, Central America and tell them, "Hey, this is the value that we've unlocked in Brazil. Do you have a similar problem?" CHAD: What I have found is that this is one of the important reasons why you have to have a good product which is part of what you've been saying all along, you know, you really wanted to focus on making sure the product was working and that it was good. Because when you do, then you can also use referrals, you know, not referrals, but like, hey, you want to talk to this avocado grower, and they'll be happy to talk with another potential customer because they're excited about what you've done for them and been able to do with them. CARLOS: Totally, totally. And agriculture is always open to new technologies, but they are traditional in many ways. And it's a small circle, and I think that it is very important to build products right and really care about what you're doing and your end-users. Build together. Don't come necessarily with assumptions saying, "Hey, here agricultural grower A, I have a solution that will change your life," without knowing necessarily where are they coming from and their life experiences, and how they interact with products before. So yeah, I totally see the benefit of referrals. Word of mouth is very big, going to conferences with agricultural growers. There are big networking events that could help us more than just going and doing a Google ad campaign, for example, at this stage. CHAD: I think that's probably an important lesson that not only applies in agriculture but in a lot of industries. And I really appreciate you stopping by to share with us. And I really wish you the best of luck as you progress in your journey at Benchmark. CARLOS: Oh, thank you very much. I really appreciate it, and I hope that we can continue the conversation here. Just count with us anytime that you need to talk about weather, agriculture, IoT sensors. Happy to help the audience too, and always discuss what's out there to help the Giant Robots community. [laughs] CHAD: Carlos, if people want to get in touch with you or find out more about the company, where are the best places for them to do that? CARLOS: Go to benchmarklabs.com and then fill out a form there. And we will definitely be in touch with all of you. I will personally answer all the queries. I'm very, very happy to share our technology, share what we are building. And we are so excited because by having this technology, you can help save water, energy, and even pesticide use, and that's a huge contribution to the environment as we move forward. So yeah, thank you very much again for the invitation, and I'm here; count with me as a future resource. CHAD: Wonderful. And you can subscribe to the show and find notes and links along with an entire transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Carlos F. Gaitan Ospina.
Dize Hacioglu is the CTO of Chicago’s mRelief, which offers an easy-to-use platform that helps families connect to SNAP food benefits. Since it was founded in 2014, the non-profit mRelief has helped 2.8 million Americans unlock $1 billion in food stamp benefits. Chad talks with Dize about how the platform helps people navigate the often complicated food stamp benefits system, what her role as CTO looks like as a CTO who codes, and how she hopes to help facilitate the growth of the mRelief program and team. mRelief (https://www.mrelief.com/) Follow mRelief on Twitter (https://twitter.com/mRelief_form), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/mRelief/), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/m_relief/), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/mrelief.com/). Follow Dize on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/dizehacioglu/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Dize Hacioglu, the CTO of mRelief, an easy-to-use platform that helps families connect to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Since it was founded in 2014, the non-profit mRelief has helped 2.8 million Americans unlock $1 billion in food stamp benefits. Dize, thanks for joining me. DIZE: Yeah, thank you so much for having me. CHAD: And thank you for all of your work at mRelief. It's a big help to everybody. DIZE: It's my pleasure, and it's really an honor to be able to do the work that we do. CHAD: Speaking of that work, tell me a little bit more about what the platform actually does for people. DIZE: So mRelief is an easy to use platform that's accessible over text messaging or web that helps folks find out if they qualify for SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, and helps them apply in certain states or connect with community-based organizations who can help them apply if they'd like further assistance. CHAD: So it's a pretty focused product, right? [laughs] DIZE: Mm-hmm. CHAD: But I'm sure that there's a lot going behind the scenes in order to make that pretty focused product happen. Is that right? DIZE: Yeah, that's right. That's right. Yes, there are a lot of moving parts. CHAD: [laughs] So what's involved in figuring out whether someone is eligible or not? DIZE: So there are actually a few patterns that we've discovered as we've been expanding our work from just one state where we were just in California for a while and then expanding it nationwide. We found that eligibility typically falls into a couple of different buckets. So we've been able to turn that into code that helps guide people through the typical questions of eligibility and takes them through the flow based on their state's eligibility of requirements. CHAD: I guess my next question was going to be without mRelief; how difficult is this for folks? DIZE: So I think most folks typically apply hoping that they're eligible, and they'll only really find out after the application process has been complete. They may have wasted time at the office, time filling out the application, time waiting for a phone call from the office only to find out that they are not eligible. CHAD: So you mentioned you started just in California, and you've been expanding from there. You mentioned there are patterns that you found. How different are things state to state? And what does your growth trajectory look like throughout the United States? DIZE: The biggest differences between states are income limits, the threshold that a family has to fall under in terms of monthly gross income to be able to qualify. So that has been a big data collection research project that we've done to be able to expand to all 50 states. And from their past eligibility, applications also differ from state to state. There's no one platform where you can fill out the same questions that are asked. CHAD: I was just doing an onboarding call with some folks who are joining the thoughtbot team. And on the call, there was one person in the United States, three people who live in different countries in Africa; I think one other person in Europe. And sometimes, when I'm doing the onboarding calls with them, I have to explain how disjointed things are in the United States and which things are state by state because it surprises people. Well, one, it surprises people who aren't in the United States that we don't have certain standard benefits like sick time in the United States. And then it also surprises people how much is actually determined by the state that you live in, even with...because SNAP is a national program, right? DIZE: Correct. Yeah, it's federally funded. CHAD: Right. So even with a federally-funded program, it still comes down to certain things being different in certain states, which is often really daunting and surprising to people. DIZE: Yes, totally, totally. And it also gets even more complicated in some states like California and maybe even Texas, where it's county-administered, so each county has a different process. Sometimes they have different applications even between counties in the same state. CHAD: So is there a reason for this other than making it hard for people to get the benefit? [laughter] That might be a political question. I just totally exposed my -- [laughter] DIZE: I think that's a very valid question because I think we've seen instead of cutting benefits completely, administratives put up to dissuade people or make it more burdensome for people to access benefits as a way of keeping them from benefits nationwide, not just like any specific state. So I think that's a very valid question. CHAD: But it's possible that there are other reasons, right? So, for example, like, oh, it's administered locally, or income levels are different in different places, and so it needs to be...I was just curious whether there were other reasons. DIZE: Yeah, I'm actually not sure about the reasoning. CHAD: Yeah, fair enough. Fair enough. DIZE: [chuckles] CHAD: So you joined in 2017. DIZE: Yes, I did. CHAD: And Emily started in 2014. DIZE: That's right. CHAD: So what were things like when you joined? DIZE: Well, I joined a team of two, and the two folks that were already on the team were the co-founders, Rose Afriyie and Genevieve Nielsen, and I was also joined by another co-worker who was hired at the same time as me. And we were only doing work in California, helping folks find out if they're eligible, helping them apply for CalFresh, which is the name for SNAP in California, and helping them through the post-application process like interviewing, collecting documents, getting a Lift ride to the office to get their card. So we were really focused on the end-to-end process in one specific, again, county because it's county-administered in California. CHAD: So in just one county. DIZE: Yeah, in San Francisco. CHAD: And was there a tech platform at the time? DIZE: Yes, we had our screener, and we had our simplified application. CHAD: Had the founders created that? DIZE: Yes. CHAD: Okay. And how did they focus on...they're not in California, they're in Chicago, right? DIZE: Yeah, we're based in Chicago. CHAD: So why California and why that particular county? Do you know? DIZE: I think it was an amalgamation of things (I don't know if I used that word right.), but they attended Y Combinator early on in the development of mRelief. So through that, they were able to get connections to the San Francisco Human Services Agency, who was our first big contract and allowed us to really develop the end-to-end process. CHAD: So you joined as the third/fourth person on the team? DIZE: Yes. CHAD: And it may be obvious, but I'm going to ask the question anyway. What drew you to joining? DIZE: I've always loved coding. For a long time, I felt at a loss how to combine my love of coding and wanting to pursue coding as a career with my desire to try to make a positive social impact in the world. And I don't think back in 2017; I was really aware of the civic tech space. In perusing job descriptions nationwide, I stumbled across mRelief on Idealist, and it sounded like the perfect match. And I remember feeling like this is my dream job. I can't believe I get to do this work and code at the same time. CHAD: [laughs] So you joined as a software developer at the time. Did you have aspirations to be CTO when you joined? DIZE: No. [laughs] No, I remember looking at Genevieve, our former CTO and co-founder, and thinking I have no idea how she does her job and never thinking that I would find myself in this position. And it's been a massive learning experience and also a growth opportunity for me. CHAD: What are some of the things that you needed to grow into or to learn in order to get to that point? DIZE: I feel like most of the learning happened after. The biggest thing that I learned to prepare me to go into the CTO role was basically a very comprehensive understanding of our codebase. I think most of the skills or what I need to succeed in this role came after. CHAD: Well, actually, let me ask a related but different question. CTO actually differs in different organizations. So, what does your role as CTO actually look like? DIZE: It definitely does. And I think my role has even changed a bit in the year and a half or a year and three months that I've been in this role based on the growing team that we have at mRelief. But my day-to-day basically looks like working with our product team to plan for new features. I like to code, so I try to do some coding at least every day and also general oversight and, I guess, strategic thinking. CHAD: One way in that description that stands out to me, you know, some other CTO might describe their role as very much not working on the code, very much not even really working with the team or product, and more focused on the executive level of the company or the needs of fundraising or something like that. So it sounds like you're very much still product-focused and oriented towards working on the product. DIZE: Yeah, I think that's driven by a selfish desire to keep coding. [laughter] CHAD: You're talking to someone who is in the exact same spot. There are times where I feel guilty about that. DIZE: Yeah. [laughs] CHAD: Here's my justification, [laughter], and I'll be curious in terms of your justification. I've done this for 19 years now. And I'm pretty confident that I would have burned out a long time ago if I didn't spend time coding. It's part of what I find rejuvenating and what I love to do. It doesn't mean that I can always afford to work on something for four hours straight, but it's part of what has made me be able to enjoy this work for so long. DIZE: Yeah, I completely relate to that. If I wasn't coding, I don't know how long I could sustain myself [laughs] with so much responsibility. How do you find that balance? CHAD: Well, I think part of it is freeing yourself up to not feel guilty so being really clear with others. Like, if someone asks for something from me, being like, yep, totally, I can do that. I can get it done by this day and pretty aggressively planning out my work or time, blocking my calendar and making it clear when I'm going to be able to have that thing for them. And if that timeline doesn't work, then they can tell me that, and I can adjust. But that goes a long way towards when I am having a coding session that lasts half a day or something like that; I cannot worry or feel guilty that someone's waiting on me for something or that it's not what I should be spending time on. DIZE: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. CHAD: What about you? Have you found things that work for you? DIZE: I have been trying different things. I've been doing a lot of YouTube deep dives on productivity blogs, just different ways of thinking about prioritizing work and making sure that things get done. But I really like your point about allowing yourself not to feel guilty. And I do like to remind myself that I don't want to take the fun out of my job. I want that for other folks on the team, and I also want that for myself. CHAD: The other thing that is on my mind when I'm doing something is there's this stereotype of the CTO who codes and makes a mess of things that the other people have to clean up. DIZE: [laughs] Oh no. I didn't know about that. CHAD: You know what I'm talking about? DIZE: No. [laughs] CHAD: Oh, no, no? It's like, oh, the CTO made commits at 9:00 p.m. last night. I guess I have to...and the build is broken. DIZE: Oh no. CHAD: I guess I have to...[laughs] so, does that describe you or no? [laughs] DIZE: Oh my gosh. I'm definitely seeing myself in that description a little bit. [laughs] CHAD: Oh no. [laughs] DIZE: Literally, I was up last night pushing code to production, but I think it's okay. [laughter] I mean, I hope that that's not me. [laughs] CHAD: I try to avoid that because, you know, I want to feel like my work is useful and valued and not creating more work for other people. DIZE: Yeah, definitely. I agree. [laughter] CHAD: Tell me more about the tech stack for mRelief. DIZE: So we use React and Rails. We're hosted on Heroku. Yeah, very basic. CHAD: I heard that you use some thoughtbot stuff, so I assumed that it was Rails. DIZE: [laughs] Yes. Yeah. CHAD: That's great to hear. DIZE: Yeah, I was messing with Paperclip this morning, actually. [laughs] CHAD: Oh, well, Paperclip is deprecated. I'm sorry to tell you. [laughs] DIZE: I know. [laughter] I had to fork it this morning to make a change. CHAD: I still stand by that decision. I think it's important as sort of a community contributor that we signal overall direction and coalesce behind what's built into Rails once it was there. DIZE: Okay, that makes a lot of sense. CHAD: But yeah, was Rails in use when you joined? DIZE: Yeah, we're using the same stack. CHAD: How much has it grown over time, the codebase? DIZE: I don't really know. CHAD: That's interesting that you don't know. [laughs] DIZE: When you say grown, like, I guess how is that measured? CHAD: Oh yeah. I mean, is it more complex now than it was when you joined? DIZE: Yes, definitely. Yeah, we've added new products that had never existed, and the fact that we've expanded to more states and our screener is nationwide that's added a lot of complexity. CHAD: So, do you have ways that you manage that complexity, either in the code or in the business? DIZE: What would that look like? [laughter] How would you manage that complexity? CHAD: Well, I think it's a little dependent on where the complexity is coming from. So, for example, the screener is nationwide, you said, and so does the screener change based on where you're located once you start to fill it out? DIZE: Yes, yes. The first question we ask is zip code. CHAD: And then how does all of that branching work in the state-specific logic work? Is it all one big jumble of if statements and code, or is it factored out in some way to help keep that as clean as possible? And if the answer is it's all one big jumble of if statements, that's totally fine. [laughs] DIZE: I was actually going to say both. [laughs] Because I think because of the patterns that we were able to establish, and the eligibility logic between all states, there's definitely some if branching, but there are enough shared concepts that we can keep it all in one to two files that are not too long. Mid-Roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: So you mentioned the team has grown quite a bit. It seems like the development and design team is quite a bit bigger than two people now. How big is it? DIZE: Well, the product team itself is eight people now, I think. And the team, the whole mRelief team, we just had two new folks start today, so I think we're at 20. CHAD: What does your onboarding process for bringing new team members on look like from a technical perspective? DIZE: So the first two weeks, folks are typically in a bunch of onboarding meetings just getting acquainted with the history of mRelief, our current processes, and stuff like that. But for our tech team, we like to jump in with them as soon as possible, get them set up obviously locally and have them contributing with some kind of low-hanging fruit tickets at first so that they have some code pushed up in the first week or two. CHAD: Are you facilitating that through pairing with someone existing on the team, or are folks doing that independently? DIZE: Depending on the complexity of the ticket, sometimes we pair. Mostly it's independent work. CHAD: Some companies and some teams have the goal of like, oh, you know, first commit to production on your first day. Do you have anything like that either with the code or with the processes like benchmarks that you use of, like we really want this to happen but on the first day or in the first week? DIZE: No, we don't have anything like that. CHAD: At the size, you're at now, some companies start to break into sub-teams or squads or focus areas. Are you starting to do anything like that? DIZE: I've thought about it here and there. But I think we all like sharing responsibility for all of the different products and getting our hands into all the different ways that we connect with users. So we haven't formalized anything like that. CHAD: So that means you have one backlog of everything that's slated to be worked on. DIZE: Yeah, that's right. CHAD: Is that overwhelming sometimes? DIZE: Yes. [laughter] Yeah. I don't know about your experience with backlogs, but I assume that they're always overwhelming. CHAD: Yeah, that's a really good way of putting it. I think that not having it requires very aggressive management that a lot of teams are not willing to do. And then when you have a team of 10 or 12 people all working across multiple apps or all on the same app doing a lot of different stuff, that's overwhelming on the other side of just the amount of stuff that's happening every day can sometimes be overwhelming. And people start to sort of step on each other. Oh, you know, we've got these two pull requests, and every time I go to make a change, something has merged into main that now my branch is behind. And if you're waiting for CI to pass and your CI is too long, something new has been merged in by the time your CI run finishes. Those are some of the challenges that I hear people facing. DIZE: Interesting. What are those aggressive management things that you were speaking of to avoid backlogs? CHAD: I think it basically means saying no to things. So I think when we talk about a backlog being overwhelming, one of the worst things that comes to mind mostly, and let me know if this is part of the problem you're feeling or not, but it's really long. And somewhere in there, there's like the bug that was created two years ago by someone that has never been addressed, or maybe it has been, and the ticket was never moved forward. And so you end up with 500-600 things and a long list that becomes then very difficult to ever really prioritize because it's not possible to prioritize that many issues. Does that resonate with you at all? DIZE: That does resonate. I was scrolling through our backlog today, and I was like, when is this going to end? [laughter] I guess I hope that was normal. [laughs] CHAD: It is normal, or I should say I think it's common. DIZE: Common, okay. [laughs] CHAD: I think it is a problem a lot of companies face. And like I was saying, I think one of the only solutions to that is basically, well, so either someone or a team that is very comfortable saying, "We don't need a ticket for that because we're just not going to get to it," or being able to delete something that you've not...or move it out that this was created two years ago. It's just not doing us any value to have it hanging around anymore. DIZE: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. That's helpful. CHAD: And some companies do it by policy basically. They have a philosophy or a policy that says, "This needs to be a thing that comes up." They have a product manager who's paying attention to what's going on and is like, okay, this is the third time that this has come up. Now we'll create a ticket for it because we're actually going to do it. And you only create tickets for things that are for the next four weeks, for the next six weeks, and that you use something else other than tickets. So one thing that I've found really works well for me, and I like this idea of the difference between a discussion or an idea and the work to be done is; for example, we often use Trello for project management and a Kanban board of the work that's actually happening in the backlog. But anything that's not a concrete item that we're going to actually prioritize and do is better off in a messaging system like Basecamp or another tool where it's more of like a discussion about what we might do, and we post designs and those kinds of things. And it's not until it's actually okay; we plan to do this three weeks from now that it gets a ticket created. And if you're really aggressive about that, that works pretty well. But you really need to stay on top of it. And if someone creates a ticket for something, and then it turns out that you're not going to do it in a reasonable timeframe, it moves out and becomes a discussion. DIZE: Oh, I really like that. That's a really great process. I feel like I'm using this as a [laughter] mentorship session. So thank you for that guidance. CHAD: My pleasure. It's funny that we've hit upon this because I think it is a common problem. And then the other thing is like, okay, great, Chad, that's wonderful. I have 600 things in the backlog; how can you...I don't have a great answer for that [laughs] other than basically one of the things that I've done and seen other teams do is...so what project management tool are you using now? DIZE: We're using Asana. CHAD: Asana. It's basically creating another project and taking everything that's not going to be done in the next two or three weeks and moving it to another project and then saying, okay, what our process from now is going to be is we have a biweekly planning meeting, or we have a weekly planning session. And what we're doing as part of that is taking things from the project where we moved everything to, and we're only moving the things over that we're actually prioritizing and going to do in the next X number of weeks. DIZE: Cool. That makes a lot of sense. Thank you. CHAD: I hope that's helpful. [laughs] DIZE: That is helpful. No, yeah, thank you so much. I'm still new, and I have so much to learn. [laughs] So this has been really, really informative. CHAD: So actually, this leads me to something I was wondering about based on this conversation and just in general, is as CTO, who are you actually leading? And is there a separate product manager or a team that actually doesn't report to you? DIZE: No. I basically lead the product team. We do have a product designer who takes on more of the management of the design part of the product team, but I don't think we've grown big enough to silo like that yet. CHAD: And I don't recommend it. I think it's great when you have an integrated design and development team working together. At a certain size, yeah, you need to create divisions, and you need to, you know, that kind of thing. But it's better when design and development work really closely together to create something great, in my opinion. DIZE: Yeah. I've also found that to be effective. CHAD: You have people on your team with different levels of experience. How, as a leader, do you attempt to...I think you're a great example of someone who joined at the level of software developer and grew in their career to be CTO. Like, how do you help others do that? DIZE: I think the biggest part of that is assessing how they see their career growing. I don't know if everybody wants to be a CTO, wants to be a manager, or just wants to continue to be an individual contributor at a higher level. So just trying to work with them to figure that out for themselves and then providing opportunities to gain that experience like leading a project, or taking on management responsibilities, providing more ownership, and leaving them to their own devices as much as they are comfortable. CHAD: The fact that mRelief is a non-profit, how much does that factor into your day-to-day or your ability to build a team and hire or anything like that? Is that something that you feel on a regular basis? DIZE: The biggest way that I feel it is hiring. I don't know if you're also experiencing this, but it's like, it's been a very competitive market, especially recently. And I know it's always been, but recently, I feel like it's turned up a lot. Trying to align compensation to the market has been a particular challenge. CHAD: Where does the funding for mRelief come from? DIZE: So we're funded in a couple of different ways, a couple of different streams. We are funded through grants, individual donations, and government contracts. CHAD: Hiring, especially in a world where you're competing to hire against companies that don't need to be sustainable or profitable, like, they've gotten millions of dollars, and they can just spend it, that is tough. And thoughtbot has existed in that environment forever basically because we're a consulting company which started from scratch without any investors or anything like that. And so we focused on being the kind of place that people want to work, having good benefits. We're not going to be able to compete against companies on compensation directly. And so we focus more on paying people fairly and what we can afford but being the kind of place that people actually want to work. DIZE: What have you found to be the most, I guess, successful exploration of that? CHAD: Well, it's evolved over time. There were a lot of things that we could put out there in terms of what it was like to work at thoughtbot versus what it was like to work at the typical startup company that made us special, and it wasn't anything radical. It was just like, you're going to work sustainably, and we're not going to approach deadlines in the same way. You're going to have agency over your work. You're going to work with a really great, smart team of people who are all sort of like...the analogy I use is like a professional sports team. They make it look easy. And it's not super stressful all the time because you don't need stress in order to do great things; you need people who are given the space to do great work. And I'll be honest; actually, we're one of the best places you can work if you want to do Rails work. Now, a lot of that stuff has evolved. I think startup culture is different than it was 15 years ago. And there are more companies where you can work in Rails that aren't as bad as they quite honestly used to be. We used to be able to point to companies and be like, you don't want to work there. And there are less companies that we can do that to now. DIZE: Oh wow. Okay, so folks have started to kind of simmer down on expectations and just the hassle of startup culture? CHAD: I think so. And then you have examples if you want to stay working in Ruby, then you have companies like GitHub and that sort of thing where they hire remotely. They've addressed a lot of the problems that they had in their culture. No company is perfect, but I think they've made it seemingly from the outside. And from the number of thoughtbot people that we've had join GitHub, they seem to have addressed some of those issues. We've needed to, in some ways, double down on some of them, like in terms of really recognizing we can have a culture where you can actually have an impact on who we are and what we do in a way that you can't in a big company. DIZE: Oh, yeah, yeah. That resonates for sure. CHAD: Is that part of what you've done? Obviously, you have a mission-driven impact-oriented thing which I think probably draws people who want to do that, right? DIZE: Yeah. And I think what we can offer that feels more unique is shared leadership. So like you said, having a lot of sway and impact on the way that the organization is run day-to-day because we really believe in distributing those responsibilities. CHAD: What's next for you and the mRelief team? DIZE: Well, we have some goals this year that mean expanding to a couple of more states. So we have our simplified application and also our assistance platform and about 12 partners, ten states, or something like that. And we want to expand to eight more states by June of 2023. So that's going to be a lot of our focus this next year. CHAD: So you talked about how hiring has been a challenge. So I presume that means you're trying to hire some new people to be able to accomplish these goals. DIZE: [laughs] Yes. Right now, we're looking for a full-stack dev experienced in React and Rails at least a year or two to help us with that expansion. CHAD: Oh, that's another thing that has helped us hire is having an apprentice program where the majority...we don't take people who are brand new and teach them. But it's sort of like one level up, taking intermediate people who wouldn't be able to bill at the level us and our clients need them to and getting them to that level in a three to a six-month timeframe where we don't bill their time. They're paired with mentors. They work one on one with a mentor, and it's a rotation program. So they rotate the mentors. That has been really helpful for us. DIZE: That's amazing. I would love to do something like that, and I would love to also even train folks from the ground up. I feel like that's like a pipe dream just based on capacity. But I think there are so many folks whose voices don't get to be in product development, and I'd love to foster that. CHAD: Do you think you have the space to be able to do that, or do you think that what you're saying about it's hard for your team to have the bandwidth to train those folks? DIZE: I think it's a problem of bandwidth, at least right now. Hopefully, it'll change. CHAD: That's one of the reasons why we don't work with people in the beginning stages but rather someone who can be an effective pair for a Rails developer. That's a good point because they can learn a lot, but they're an effective pair. They're not slowing anybody down, and we can teach them primarily through pairing. Whereas if someone doesn't even know HTML, that is an issue that we haven't been able to...we can train, but it's hard to balance that and have enough bandwidth to teach people that. DIZE: Yeah, that's brilliant. That makes a lot of sense. What kind of credentials do those folks usually have? Are they out of a bootcamp or self-taught? CHAD: Some of them are out of bootcamp, and we could take more out of bootcamp. Out of bootcamp is actually a very fine stage. The problem is that there just aren't a lot of opportunities like this. And so, for example, for our last quarter's apprenticeship, we had four apprentice positions, two designers and two developers. We got 1,033 applications. DIZE: Oh my God. Oh my God. Wow. CHAD: And we screen all of them, and we respond to everybody but as a result of that, what it means is the more experienced people are likely to take up and get the spot over someone with no experience at all, which I don't love, but it's difficult to not have that happen. DIZE: Got it. Very, very competitive. Wow. CHAD: Right. Right. Our people operations person likes to point out that it's more competitive than Harvard. DIZE: Oh my God. [laughs] What does that make the acceptance rate? CHAD: I don't know. [laughs] Four out of 1033; I don't know. DIZE: Dang. [laughs] CHAD: It's low. In order to balance that a little bit and to strike a balance and find the people who I like to call the top candidates, like, they're not the most qualified, but they're the top. And I'm still working on this term but basically focusing on things that aren't just what they can do for code or their coding experience. Like, the things that are important for consulting are like, do you have experience talking with people? Have you been a teacher? Have you been in retail? Even being in retail is a little bit of a plus over someone else necessarily who's just been a coder forever. DIZE: Yeah, yeah, some kind of diverse working background. CHAD: And at least I think it's really important that someone with a really strong background that lends themselves to being a good consultant is able to get an interview even if they don't have a lot of actual work experience. I think that that's really important, at least giving them the shot even if, after interviewing them, we think that we need to move forward this other candidate. I think it's really important that the initial screening not completely screen out people just based on, for example, years of experience. We don't look at degrees at all. That's not even a factor in normal thoughtbot hiring. It's not something that we look at. DIZE: Oh, good. That is such a cool program. I wish more places did that. [laughs] CHAD: Oh, me too. It would make our job easier because we wouldn't need to reject so many people. We could refer them to these other places. DIZE: [laughs] Oh my gosh. Yeah. CHAD: We're actually changing the program for 2022 because we know that there are tons of people, not a lot of opportunity. It used to be that we would do interviews, and then we'd be forced to say, "We're not taking you now, but we are moving forward in the process with these ten people and whittling it down to the 2." What we're doing now is we actually continue the interview process with everyone who passes the things that we're looking for. So we can get to the end of the process, and even if we only have two slots, we've identified the five people who would have been able to do it. And then what we do is we say, "We think you're a great fit. There are just not enough slots right now. So can we reconsider you or schedule you for a future slot?" That's what we're trying to do. DIZE: Interesting. Has it been helpful? CHAD: We're only in the second quarter of doing that. So we're still a little early with that change. But I can already anticipate the problem, which is there are too many people we would take. DIZE: Ooh, yeah. [laughs] CHAD: And so I carried forward 15 People from the last session, from the last quarter. And that 15 is more than...[laughs] and unless we're willing to then turn off applications so new people can't apply, we still get, you know, so the last quarter was 970 applications about. DIZE: Oh wow. CHAD: This quarter was 1,033. So one of the factors that has really helped with our hiring is we decided to go fully remote at the beginning of 2021, and that has really helped us expand to being able to hire a little bit more competitively by not competing against everyone in the places where we had offices previously. DIZE: That makes sense. CHAD: But I noticed that you're still a Chicago-based team, right? DIZE: We're still Chicago-based, but we're remote now, fully remote. Our headquarters are here. We do have a lot of team members here. We also have folks throughout the States. CHAD: On the development team too? DIZE: Yes, on the development team. CHAD: Oh, okay, great. So when did that...did that change with the pandemic, or did you have it before? DIZE: It changed with the pandemic. So before, we weren't remote at all; we were always in person. CHAD: Has that been a big change, or an easy change, or a hard change for your team? DIZE: I think a pretty easy change. I think we're all...well, I don't want to speak for everybody, but it seems like it went quite smoothly. We do offer a monthly stipend for Deskpass in case anyone wants a physical workspace and may sometimes meet up to co-work for a sense of community and camaraderie. But other than that, folks seem to really enjoy it. CHAD: Yeah, I think for us, it was also not a difficult transition when it came down to a lot of the work and that kind of thing. I think the biggest challenge for us has been we're bigger, and so there were people...and we very much we are local teams working with local clients. And so, there was a segment of the thoughtbot team that never opted in to a fully remote company. And so they've understood the transition, but they didn't necessarily choose it for themselves. And so they have their choice of...like you said, it's a competitive market. It is important for teams to be clear about who they are and how they work. And if someone at the end of that says, "You know what? I understand, and that's not for me," I think that's okay. DIZE: Yeah, definitely, like self-selection. [laughs] CHAD: Yeah. Well, thank you so much for stopping by and talking with me. I really appreciate it. DIZE: Yeah, thank you for having me. It was so lovely to chat. And thank you for all the great advice. CHAD: I wish you and the mRelief team all the best and keep in touch. DIZE: Thank you, you too. CHAD: Oh, wait, if people want to find out more, we got to say the website. [laughs] And if they want to get in touch with you, where are the best places for them to do that? DIZE: So our website is mRelief, so M as in mom, relief as in sigh of relief, mrelief.com. We're on some socials. Our name differs [laughs] based on the social, but we're on Twitter and, Instagram, TikTok soon. [laughs] CHAD: Oh, wow. DIZE: [laughs] Yeah, that's it. CHAD: And that's where people can find the job posting as well? DIZE: Yeah, on our website. CHAD: Awesome. Well, thank you again. DIZE: Yeah, thank you. CHAD: You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode along with an entire transcript of the episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Dize Hacioglu.
Michael Benezra is the Executive Director and Co-Founder of the GK Fund: a nonprofit social impact fund to support BIPOC-owned companies in Greater Boston. Michael also serves as the COO of Colette Phillips Communications, helping to lead the All Inclusive Boston (https://www.bostonusa.com/allinclusivebos/) tourism campaign, among other projects. Chad talks with Michael about being a BIPOC ally, disparities amongst the VC world, and how the GK Fund looks for the same things in BIPOC-owned companies that they look for in other companies because the innovation is there; it's just that the opportunity isn't. The GK Fund (https://www.thegkfund.org/) Follow The GK Fund on Twitter (https://twitter.com/GK_Fund) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/thegkfund/). Colette Phillips Communications (https://www.cpcglobal.com/) All Inclusive Boston (https://www.bostonusa.com/allinclusivebos/) Black Owned Bos. (https://www.blackownedbos.com/) Follow Michael on Twitter (https://twitter.com/MichaelBenezra) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelbenezra/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel, and with me today is Michael Benezra, Executive Director and Co-founder of the GK Fund, a non-profit social impact fund to support BIPOC-owned companies in Greater Boston. Michael is also the COO of Colette Phillips Communications, helping to lead the All Inclusive Boston Tourism Campaign, among other projects. Michael, thank you for joining me. MICHAEL: Thanks for having me. CHAD: I'm curious about the GK Fund. When did you start the Fund? MICHAEL: So, at the time, I was working for the Israeli Foreign Ministry, and I was working with venture capital firms, private equity firms. And I was representing over 200 Israeli companies in New England, most of them startups. And my wife is Black; my family is Black. I've been close to that community for a long time. And especially in the venture capital world, I started to see some real disparities amongst other disparities in general everyday life, but it was particularly bad in the VC world. And so Colette being a mentor and a friend of mine, Colette Phillips, I approached her, and I said, "Hey, what do you think about starting this fund, this non-profit fund?" And her and Andre Porter, who is our other co-founder who used to be the head of the state's business development agency in Massachusetts, we all decided to band together and start this non-profit. Now, we started the non-profit in December of 2019, so the pandemic hit right as we were creating this organization. And we had a decision to make, do we put this on hold, or do we move forward and accelerate? And we decided to just move forward. CHAD: Well, I'm glad you did. I'm glad you made that decision. Hopefully, you feel the same way. [laughs] MICHAEL: Yeah, I do. CHAD: You're absolutely right. There's a big need here. And I actually have had over the last two months or so a few different guests that are creating VC funds or funds of certain kind that address underrepresented communities, Black, another one was veterans. And there's such a big need. How did you decide what you were going to focus on or focus down into so, for example, focusing on Boston? MICHAEL: For Boston specifically, it had to do mostly with proximity. So I went to Harvard here for grad school. I worked for Governor Patrick. And so, for me, it was natural to stay local, especially during COVID. In my experience, there were a lot of BIPOC, particularly Black-owned startups, that were on paper akin to a lot of other startups in the Israeli world, which were very developed or also in the United States. I'll give you an example; there was a company that I worked with that had a $100 million valuation but had no products, no physical products. They had no revenue, but they had innovation. Now, you and I being very honest, do you think a Black-owned company could get away with that? CHAD: Yeah, no. MICHAEL: There is no way. I knew that; the other entrepreneurs that I've talked to know that. That is a terrible double standard that needs to be fixed. So we look for the same things in BIPOC companies that we look for in other companies because, for the most part, the innovation is there; it's just that the opportunity isn't. CHAD: Yeah. To dig into that a little bit more, I think one might say, well, if they had a founding team that had a proven track record, then maybe. And that's where you get to the fact that it's systemic, too, because if the headwinds are there where they can never get that experience, to begin with, they never get that opportunity, to begin with, then they're not going to have a founding team that has a track record that will be invested in based on just the team. MICHAEL: That is 100% accurate, but it's actually even worse. So we do not ask our founders in the application process for their educational background. But all six of the companies that got grants from us last November they all have their bachelor's, four out of six have masters or higher. And so the cream definitely rose to the top. We had a store owner she owns an online boutique who got an engineering degree from Purdue. And we also have an entrepreneur who was an attorney at State Street, a corporate attorney, and now he's created this startup. And so, in some cases, like in most other areas, these individuals are overqualified. CHAD: So, what is the funding model for GK on both sides of the equation? Where is the money coming from, and then how are you funding the companies? MICHAEL: So we raise money organically like any other non-profit does. So we apply for grants. We take corporate donations. We take individual contributions online. Most of our money so far has come in through corporate contributions. So PNC Bank has been with us since the beginning. They made a very large commitment to supporting racial equity, and they've really stuck to it. The Bar Foundation has been exceptional. And then we've also had a group of individual donors who were actually White women who have started their own non-profit now, and they've also banded together to give us money that we need to re-grant to the companies. We have over 100,000 from the State of Massachusetts to operate a grant program. So money is coming through a number of different avenues. We've issued six micro-grants so far at $10,000 each. We did that in November. We plan to do ten more in the next month. I said in the Boston Business Journal article you can give us money, but you can't park it with us like you could with a donor-advised fund and watch it accumulate interest for 15 years. We're going to take it, and we're going to give it to the people that need it the most. CHAD: And are they grants then? You're using the word grants, so I assume that they are. So you're not doing this in exchange for equity in the companies? MICHAEL: No, no equity in the companies, no convertible notes, just a straight capital grant directly to the company. So I send a message over to our fiscal sponsors at Philanthropy Massachusetts. They send the check directly over to the company. After that, we have the company fill out a survey letting us know what they plan to use it for, but we're not overly prescriptive. And that's actually the way that philanthropy is heading right now is, putting fewer restrictions and barriers in the way. And that's another thing I'll talk about as well is making it easier for companies to gain access. CHAD: So, did you ever consider more of a traditional VC fund model with this? MICHAEL: Yeah, originally, I did. Before the pandemic, actually, I did. So the original purpose or impetus of the fund was to take companies that were coming out of accelerator programs that were underfunded. You have some great accelerators, but you have companies leaving with a business plan and $2,000. In some cases, there are companies that have been through three accelerator programs. They're not getting as much out of it as they should. I wanted us to intervene, find the companies that have the most potential, and make investments. But after COVID hit, it was a crisis. And so, we needed to shift our focus to philanthropy. CHAD: The nice thing about that is then you can do those grants with basically no strings attached for the companies. Whereas if you were taking money from people who expect to get a return on that investment, you wouldn't be able to do that. MICHAEL: That's exactly right. There are organizations out there that say that they're making an impact when in reality they're just making, you know, loans which is not a not a bad thing. But they're issuing loans, or they're taking equity in the companies, that's fine, but it's not what we're doing. CHAD: What are your plans for, like, upcoming? Are you going to be continuing with micro-grants, or do you have bigger plans? MICHAEL: We have bigger plans. So I can't say too much right now because we have an announcement coming up. But I will say issues like legal services have come up. There's a constant need for attorneys for any company, whether it's contracts, or locking down real estate, or copyright and trademark, or IP. We are working with a very large prestigious law firm that's really making a generous commitment to our companies. And this would involve us even adding free legal services for an entire year to our grantees. So that's one thing that we're planning to do. And then the other is, and this another function of the fund, is we speak with organizations like Lyft who's donated like $5,000 in ride credits that we're giving to our grantees or Wix, which has given us like 75% off of websites. We work with partners who can also give us other services that we can provide to these companies to try to get them closer to where there's a gap. Giving them capital is not enough. The disparities are too significant. We also partnered with Berkshire Bank, so I can make direct referrals for loans if they need them. But the idea is to really narrow that gap and give these companies the same opportunities that their White counterparts have. CHAD: That's great. So you, as someone who's White doing this work, how do you find yourself in the community? How do you be an effective ally and advocate? MICHAEL: For me personally, my connection personally through my wife and also through my family and my boss. Colette is a pioneer. She's a Black woman in Boston who moved here not knowing anybody. And 30 years later, she's on The Power of 50 and 100 influential lists, but she did that through hard work. And she's worked much harder, I think, than she would have had to if she weren't a woman from Antigua who came here on her own. But ultimately, as an ally, it's my role; it's our role to step in between situations where there's inequity. So if there is a company, one of our companies, for instance, who's having a problem locking down real estate, (I think I use this in the article.), and they're saying, "Well, the real estate agent is telling us they can eliminate our lease at any time they prefer which I know is basically legal." I'll call them up and say, "Look, I'm with the fund. We're backing this company; we support them. What's the situation?" And unfortunately, most of the time, the outcome actually changes. So it's a matter of almost you got to be proactive, and you got to be intentional. You have to use your privilege in the best way that you can. So I think that's how you do it. And then, when it's time to shed a light on these companies, you take a step back, so it's not my role to go out there and promote myself. If anyone asks me, I'm always promoting the companies. So the best thing we can do is be advocates. You can be out front, but at the end of the day, it's about uplifting them, these companies in this case. CHAD: Yeah, that's great. Speaking of that, I was going to ask you, what are some of the companies that you have given the micro-grants to, and do you know how they use them? MICHAEL: Yeah, so we gave our grants to six companies. One is called MustWatch, and MustWatch is founded by Che, and Che, his family, is from Haiti. They are an app. You can actually find them on the App Store. But what they do is they allow you to log in, select which movies and television shows that you watch, and share them with your friends. And it sounds like a very simple concept, but there is actually nothing on the market that allows you to do this. And the idea is that you're collecting data while you're doing this as MustWatch. So at the end of the day, if you have a sample of like 20,000 users on the platform, you gain a lot of valuable insight and data. And that data can be useful for Nielsen or the television networks or movie production studios. I encourage people to sign up for MustWatch because if you spend as much time as I do looking for good movies, you're probably miserable. CHAD: [laughs] MICHAEL: [laughs] I spend so much time doing that. We also have a few online retailers. So we have B. Royal Boutique and So Zen Spa, both of them have doubled their revenue during COVID. They originally had stores. They pivoted during COVID, went online, and really were excellent when it comes to branding and marketing on social media and on other digital platforms. So they've been very successful. We have a company called Black Owned Bos., which is pretty well known here in Boston. They basically focus on organizing and running pop-up shops. And Jae'da, who's the head of the company, is just, I mean, she's a business mastermind. She's brilliant, always finding new ways to innovate. And then we have Our Village, which is focused on community development and housing. And finally, sySTEMic flow, which is a company that helps school districts, educators support Black women in STEM and STEAM fields. So we looked for companies that could pivot, basically. CHAD: And you mean in the face of the pandemic. MICHAEL: In the face of the pandemic, we looked for companies that had success and had a plan and also knew their audience. The main things that we look for…and I should say this too; our application process takes an average of seven minutes. And the way that I did that was I evaluated over 20 accelerator applications. I did a comparative analysis and identified the questions that were either irrelevant or unhelpful for us. And that gave us a very short application for our companies but one that's really efficient. And basically, what we're looking for is companies that have a good business model, have a very specific customer base and target market, and have a strong founder, and also has been undersupported. There are companies that we've identified for our next cohort that by this point in their development would have been venture funded in my experience, at least, had they not been people of color. Mid-Roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: What has been the most surprising use of one of the grants? MICHAEL: So B. Royal used the grant money to lock down a store in Assembly Square in Somerville. We kind of anticipated they might do that. So Zen Spa they improved their website. MustWatch actually really surprised us. So they went out and got a valuation of their company and then basically worked with a crowdfunding platform called Netcapital to raise more capital. They had a very specific plan, and they had disclosed that plan to us. I just didn't anticipate they would act so quickly on it. And based on the fact that we had given them a grant and all this mentoring and support, their valuation actually went up. CHAD: That's a really smart use of the funds to propel that into a larger fundraise. That's really smart. MICHAEL: I agree. CHAD: So you do this in addition to a day job. [laughs] MICHAEL: I mean, they're both day jobs; it's just, yeah. CHAD: So you mentioned Colette Phillips, the person, [laughs] how about Colette Phillips Communications? So The All Inclusive Campaign it really is historic. The genesis of the campaign is that back in 2020, Colette and I applied for an RFP from the City of Boston; it was for a tourism recovery campaign. All of the major cities in the country got this grant money through regional tourism agencies, you know, like they're a special interest niche. And they went to the Feds, and they're like, "Look, we're suffering, travel is suffering, we need a grant," so all these grants went out. The City of Boston actually said, "Look, we want to focus on diverse tourism." So that was perfect for us. We applied, we got the grant. And we brought on Proverb, which is an incredible digital marketing agency and creative design agency, and the Greater Boston Convention & Visitors Bureau. It was the largest contract ever to go to a minority-owned company by the City of Boston, ever, and it was about 1.5 million. CHAD: Which in and of itself for what the City of Boston probably spends on things [laughs] is a little ridiculous that that's the biggest one, but … get beyond that, I guess. MICHAEL: It's insane. It's very upsetting. And it was a long time overdue. In this case, that contract or that RFP was really only supposed to last like one quarter. So all these regional tourism agencies they get their influx of money, a million dollars or a few 100,000. And then from there, they do the campaign, they move on. We are now three mayor's into this. We are four million dollars into this. We submitted the campaign to the city 60 days after they contracted with us; 84% of the contractors on the project are minority-owned companies. And in that 60 days before delivering the campaign, we actually never met in person. So we did this whole campaign virtually from the start. We came in under budget. We came in ahead of time. This is what happens sometimes when you let minority-owned companies take the lead. CHAD: Yeah, that's great. How do you do a campaign like this? I mean, this is why they came to you, the experts, but I think it's important that this message seem authentic and not pandering. MICHAEL: Yeah, Colette is a visionary. She's been talking about diversity and inclusion for like 20 years. There's an article that came out, I think, in 1992 where she was talking about the importance of diversity in the business community. And now it's like microfilm; you can't even find it digitally online. CHAD: [laughs] MICHAEL: She's years ahead of her time. And she's constantly innovating, and All Inclusive was her idea, and she branded it. I think it was a long time coming, basically. This is a culmination of a message and campaign that she's been running her whole life. CHAD: Yeah, I think that that's very powerful. And I think it comes across in the campaign. It seems authentic. I think it would be easy for it to not seem that way. And so yeah, it comes from that place of this was already a thing. It was already brewing. It wasn't just -- MICHAEL: Do you want to hear a story? CHAD: Yeah, I'd love it. MICHAEL: So, most of the media coverage for this campaign was exceptionally positive. There are a few reasons for that. We included all small, locally-owned businesses in the campaign. So you won't find celebrities, no athletes, or anything like that; we may do that later. We also invested...we took 200,000 of the contract, which this was not even supposed to be in there. We actually did ad buys with 19 different local newspapers. In some cases, these newspapers would have actually closed down if we had not done that, and that was just a byproduct of something we felt was important. But amidst all of that, she got invited to do an interview on Bloomberg on the local Bloomberg station. She's on the phone, and some guy who was on the other line, and I won't go into it too much, said, "You know, as a White man, I'm really offended. I don't feel represented in this campaign." [laughs] And she's like, "I've had enough of this," hangs up the phone. [laughs] And this is another part of allyship I think is...naturally, you know, I said, "Look, I'm taking care of this." I wrote a letter to Bloomberg. I said, "This is unacceptable. You need to take him to task." I don't know if he still works there anymore. But that's kind of the role. You have a Black woman who's a pioneer. She just released a campaign. The first thing you should be saying to her is "Congratulations," instead of saying that, all you can tell her is about how being a White man is like, I don't know, a disadvantage? Which is crazy. There are tons of White people in the campaign. I'm White; I'm in the campaign. CHAD: It's so foolish. I don't even want to have to explain it, but the campaign is literally called All Inclusive. MICHAEL: [laughs] Exactly, exactly. It covers everybody, I mean, literally. And it's like, I don't know what you want from us. CHAD: Yeah. And it's not even...like you go to the site it talks about here's what you can do with families. Here's what you can do with kids, kid-friendly activities. MICHAEL: This campaign was also research-based. So we spent 100,000 on research with this incredible company called Heart + Mind. They did a lot of research, and they did a lot of surveying. And the words that came back when describing Boston were unwelcoming, masculine; I think Tom Brady, Ben Affleck, crime, you know, just this kind of machismo unwelcoming environment. And it kind of confirmed some of the assumptions we had, but it was really surprising to see it in the data. So we said, "All right, this is what we're working with. We have to come up with a narrative that counters that because Boston is a majority-minority city, 23 neighborhoods, 60% of the population speaks two languages or more. That ethos is really not accurate. So hopefully, we're doing a good job. CHAD: So if folks want to help, we already said GK Fund is a non-profit. It's coming up to tax season [laughs], so at the very least, even if you don't...hopefully, you care about the cause, but if you just want that tax write-off, I suppose that's another reason to donate. MICHAEL: Absolutely. CHAD: So where can folks do that if they want to learn more and donate? MICHAEL: Visit www.thegkfund.org. CHAD: And are you looking for help in other ways beyond monetary? How can people get involved? MICHAEL: Absolutely. So we're looking for mentors so individuals who feel like they have experience or skills to lend to these companies, and we'll try to deploy these individuals in the best way possible. Obviously, we're looking for partnerships. So if you have a company that you feel has something to contribute or is willing to make a contribution, not monetarily but either with your products or with a discount, we also want to give that benefit to the companies as well. And there are a number of different ways. CHAD: That's great. And if folks want to follow along with you or get in touch directly with you, how can they do that? MICHAEL: You can feel free to follow me on Twitter. It's just @MichaelBenezra, all one word on Twitter. I got a lot of positive messages after the Boston Business Journal article came out and in LinkedIn as well. CHAD: Great. And you can subscribe to the show and find notes and a full transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Michael, thanks so much for joining me. I really appreciate it. MICHAEL: Yeah, thank you for having me. CHAD: And thank you for listening. See you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Michael Benezra.
Christopher Nguyen is the CEO of Aitomatic, which provides knowledge-first AI for industrial automation. Chad talks with Christopher about why having a physical sciences background matters for this work, if we have artificial intelligence, why we still need people, and working in knowledge-first AI instead of knowledge-second, knowledge-third, or no knowledge at all. Data reflects the world. Aitomatic (https://www.aitomatic.com/) Follow Aitomatic on Twitter (https://twitter.com/aitomatic) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/aitomatic/). Follow Christopher on Twitter (https://twitter.com/pentagoniac) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/ctnguyen/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Christopher Nguyen, CEO of Aitomatic, which provides knowledge-first AI for industrial automation. Christopher, thanks for joining me. CHRISTOPHER: Thank you. CHAD: So I was prepping for this interview, and I noticed something that jumped out at me that we have in common, and that is your first computer was the TI-99C/4A. CHRISTOPHER: No kidding. CHAD: And that was also my first computer. CHRISTOPHER: Oh, okay. CHAD: [laughs] CHRISTOPHER: You got no storage, correct? CHAD: No storage; everything was off of the solid-state disks. And I remember I was a little late to it. My parents actually got it for me. I think I was 9 or 10. And my parents got it for me at a garage sale. And so all I had was the manual and the basic manual that came with it. And because it had no storage, I needed to type in the programs that were in the back of that book from scratch, and there was no way to save them. So you would type them in -- [laughs] CHRISTOPHER: Oh my God. Every single day the same code over and over again. And hopefully, you don't turn it off. CHAD: [laughs] Exactly. There definitely were times where it would just be on in my room because I didn't want to lose what I had spent all day typing in. CHRISTOPHER: Yeah, yeah, I remember my proudest moment was my sister walked into the living room...and there was no monitor, and you connected it directly to the TV. CHAD: To the TV, yeah. CHRISTOPHER: And younger people may not even know the term character graphics, which is you pick in your book the character space, and then you put them together into a graphic image. And I painstakingly, on graph paper, created a car and converted it to hex and then poked it into these characters and put them together. And my sister walked in like, "Oh my God, you made a car." [laughter] CHAD: That was a good time. It was difficult back then. I feel like I learned a lot in an environment where I see people learning. Today it's a lot more of a complicated environment. They're much higher up the stack than we were back then. And, I don't know, I feel like I actually sort of had it easy. CHRISTOPHER: Well, in many ways, that very abstraction to...you see jobs like to talk about higher software abstraction to make you more productive. I think it's absolutely that powerful. And Marc Andreessen, my friend, likes to talk about how software is eating the world. But it turns out there's one perspective where people have gone up the stack a little too far, too fast, and too much. We're still physical in the industry that I work in. You know, our previous company was acquired by Panasonic. And I've been working on industrial AI for the last four and a half years. And it's very hard for us to find people with the right physics or electro engineering background and the right science understanding to help automate and build some of these systems because everybody's in software now. CHAD: Why does physical sciences background matter for this work? CHRISTOPHER: Let me give you a couple of examples. One example is one of our customers is a very large global conglomerate doing marine navigation and marine sensors. And one of the products they do is fish finding so that amateurs like you and me would go hold one of these systems and shoot it down straight to the ocean. A sonar beam goes down, kind of like submarines. But hopefully, an image would come back. And so to build a system to convert all of that into something other than jumbled what they call echograms, maybe convert to a fish image, you have to build a lot of machine intelligence, AI, machine learning, and so on. But just to understand the data and make the right decisions about how to do that, you need to understand the physics of sound wave echoes in the ocean. If you can't do that and you got to work with another engineer to tell you how to do that, it really slows things down a lot. So knowing the equation but also having a physical intuition for how it all works can make or break the success of an engineer working on something like that. Another example is we worked on avionics. Don't blame me for this, but if you have had poor experience with Wi-Fi on a plane, we may be involved in one way or another, Panasonic Avionics. CHAD: [laughs] CHRISTOPHER: But the antenna array that sits on top of the plane to receive satellite signal and sends out a signal, so you can expect there's some kind of optimization involved. It's not just line of sight. If there's a cloud coming nearby, then there's some distortion, and there's some optimization needed to take place. Again, an understanding of...at least if you remember, if not an expert in college physics, about antenna radiation pattern and so on, which help tremendously a data scientist or an engineer working on that problem whereas somebody who's a pure computer scientist would struggle a lot and probably give up with that problem. CHAD: Yeah, this may be a little bit of a facetious question or leading question; I'm not sure which, but if we have artificial intelligence, why do we need people to do this stuff? CHRISTOPHER: [laughs] Well, I have a broader, you know, I've thought about that a lot. And I'll answer it in the broad sense, but I think you can specialize it. The problem with machine learning, at least today and I really think for a very long time for the rest of the century at least, is that it is trained on data. And data is past examples. And when I say past, I include the present. In other words, whatever it is that our algorithms learn, they learn the world as it is. Now, we're always trying to change the world in some way. We're always trying to change the world to what we wish it to be, not what it is. And so it's the humans that express that aspiration. I want my machine to behave better in some way. Or I want my algorithms not to have this built-in bias when it makes a decision that affects someone's life. If it's pure machine learning and data, it will indeed reflect all the decisions that have ever been made, and it'll have all those built-in biases. So there's a big topic there to unpack and who's responsible for doing what. But I think coming back to your question, we'll always need humans to express what it is that is the world that you want in the next minute, the next day, the next week, or the next 50 years. CHAD: So let's talk more about the ethics or the biases that can be baked into AI. How do you prevent that at Aitomatic? CHRISTOPHER: As I said, this is a big topic. But let me begin by saying that actually, most of us don't know what we mean when we say bias, or to put it more broadly, we don't agree on the meaning. The word bias in colloquial conversation always comes with a negative connotation on the one hand. On the other hand, in machine learning, bias is inherent. You cannot have machine work without bias. So clearly, those two words must mean something slightly different even though they reflect the same thing, the same underlying physics, if you will. So first, before people get into what they think is a very well-informed debate, they must first agree on a framework for terms that they're using. Now, of course, I can accommodate and say, okay, I think I know what you mean by that term. And so, let's take the colloquial meaning of bias. And when we say bias, we usually mean some built-in prejudice, it may be implicit, or it may be explicit that causes a human or machine to make a decision that discriminates against someone. And here's the thing, we've got to think about intent versus impact. Is it okay for the effect to be quote, unquote, "biased" if I didn't intend it, or it doesn't matter what my intent was, and it's only the impact that matters? That's another dimension that people have to agree or even agree to disagree on before they start going into these circular arguments. But let's focus on, for now, let's say it's the impact that matters. It doesn't matter what the intent is, particularly because machines, as of present, there is no intent. So, for example, when the Uber vehicle a number of years ago hit and killed a bicyclist, there was no traceable intent, certainly not in the system design to cause that to happen. But yet it happened, and the person did die. So coming back to your question, I know that I've neglected the question because I'm unpacking a lot of things that otherwise an answer would make no sense, or it would not have the sense meant. So coming back, how do we prevent bias as an effect from happening in our system? And an answer that I would propose is to stop thinking about it in terms of point answers; in other words, it's not that...people say...well, myself I even said earlier it's in the data. Well, if it's in the data, does that absolve the people who build the algorithms? And if it's in the algorithms, does that absolve the people who use it? I had a conversation with some friends from Europe, and they said, "In America, you guys are so obsessed with blaming the user." Guns don't kill people; people kill people. But I think to answer your question in a very thoughtful manner; we must first accept the responsibility throughout the entire chain and agree on what it is the outcome that we want to have, at least effect. And then the responsibility falls on all chains, all parts of the chain. And one day, it may be, hey, you got to tune the algorithm a certain way. Another day may be, hey, collect this kind of data. And another day, it might be make sure that when you finally help with the decision, that you tweak it a certain way to affect the outcome that you want. I think what I've described is the most intellectually honest statement. And somebody listening to this is going to have a perspective that disagrees vehemently with one of the things I just said because they don't want that responsibility. CHAD: I like it, though, because it recognizes that we're creating it. It may be a tool, and tools can be used for anything. But as the creators of that tool, we do have responsibility for...well, I think we have responsibility for what that is going to do, and if not us, then who? CHRISTOPHER: That's right. Yeah. But if you follow the debate, you will find that there are absolutists who say, "That's not my problem. That's the user, or the decision-maker, or the data provider. But my algorithms I have to optimize in this way, and it's going to output exactly what the data told it to. The rest is your problem." CHAD: So it strikes me in hearing you describe what's involved, especially at the state that machine learning is at now; it probably varies or what you are going to do specifically varies based on what you're trying to achieve. And maybe even the industry that it's in like avionics and what you need to do there may be different than energy. CHRISTOPHER: Yep, or more broadly, physical industries versus the plane falls out of the air, or a car hits somebody, somebody actually dies. If you get a particular algorithm wrong at Google, maybe you click on the wrong ad. So I really advocate thinking about the impact and not just the basic algorithms. CHAD: Yeah, so tell me more about the actual product or services that Aitomatic provides and also who the customers are. CHRISTOPHER: I think what we discussed is quite relevant to that. I think it does lead in a very real perspective directly into that. We do what's called knowledge-first AI. And that knowledge-first as opposed to knowledge-second and knowledge-third or no knowledge at all, there are very strong schools of thought that say, "With sufficient data, we can create AI to do everything." Data is reflecting the world. As I mentioned, it's in the past as it is, not as what we want it to be. When you apply it to some of the concrete things that we do, let's take a use case like predictive maintenance of equipment, you want to be able to save cost and even to save lives. You want to replace things, service things before they actually fail. Failure is very costly. It's far more costly than the equipment itself. Today, the state of the art is preventive maintenance, not predictive. Preventive means, let’s just every six months, every one year replace all the lights because it's too costly to replace them one by one when they fail. Lots of industries today still do what's called reactive maintenance, you know, fix it when it fails. So predictive maintenance is the state of the art. The challenge is how do you get data and train enough machine intelligence to essentially predict? And the prediction precisely means the following: can you tell me with some probability that this compressor for this HVAC system, this air conditioning system may fail within the next month? And it turns out machine learning cannot do that. CHAD: Oh, that's the twist. CHRISTOPHER: Exactly. [laughter] And I know a lot of people listening are going to sit up and say, "Christopher doesn't know what the hell he's talking about." CHAD: [laughs] CHRISTOPHER: But I really know. I really know what the hell I'm talking about because we've been part of an industrial giant. I'll tell you what machine learning can do and what it cannot do. What it can do is with the data that's available...the main punch line, the main reason here is that there are not enough past examples of actual failures of certain types. There's a lot of data. We're swimming in data, but we're not actually swimming in cleanly recorded failures that are well classified. And machine learning is about learning from past examples, except today, algorithms need a lot of past examples, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions of past examples, in order for it to discover those repeating patterns. So we have a lot of data at places like Panasonic, Samsung, Intel, GE, all the physical industries, but these are just sensor data that's recording mostly normal operation. When a failure happens, that tends to be rare. Hopefully, failures are rare, and then they're very specific. So it turns out that what's called the labeled data is insufficient for machine learning. So what machine learning can do is do what's called anomaly detection. And that is look at all the normal patterns, and then when something abnormal appears on the horizon to say, "Hey, something is weird. I haven't seen this before." But it cannot identify what it is, which is only half of predictive maintenance because you have to identify what the problem is so you can replace that compressor or that filter. And it turns out humans are very good. Human experts are very good at that second part. The first improvement might be to say let's get machine learning to detect anomalies and then let's get human experts to actually do fault prediction. And after you do this for a while, which is what we did at Panasonic in the last three, four years across the global AI units, we said, "Well, wait a minute. Why are we making these very expensive?" Human experts do this if we can somehow codify their domain expertise. And so that's what Aitomatic is. We have developed a bunch of techniques, algorithms, and systems that run as SaaS software to help people codify their domain expertise, combine it with machine learning, and then deploy the whole thing as a system. CHAD: The codified expertise, there's a word for that, right? CHRISTOPHER: Probably you're referring to expert systems. CHAD: Yes. Yes. CHRISTOPHER: Yeah. Expert systems is one way to codify domain expertise. At the very basic level, you and I wrote actual BASIC programs before. You can think of that as codifying your human knowledge. You're telling the computer exactly what to do. So expert systems of the past is one way to do so. But what I'm referring to is a more evolved and more advanced perspective on that, which is how do you codify it in such a way that you can seamlessly combine with machine learning? Expert systems and machine learning act like two islands that don't meet. But how do you do it in such a way that you can codify human knowledge and then benefit as more data comes in, absolutely move into this idea of asymptotically this world where data tells you everything? Which it never will. And so the way we do that, the naive way, as I mentioned, is simply to just write it down as a bunch of rules. And the problem is rules conflict with each other. We, humans, work on heuristics. Whatever it is you tell me to do, you could be an expert, and you start teaching me, and you say, "Okay, so here are the rules." And then once I learn the rules, you say, "Well, and there are some exceptions." [laughs] And then, can you tell me all the exceptions? No, you can't. You have to use judgment. Okay, well, what is that? So the way we codify it is you can think of that evolution. I'll give you one concrete example from the machine learning perspective so people that are machine learning experts can see how we do things that are different. There's something in the machine learning process called the loss function. Have you heard of that term? CHAD: No. Yeah. CHRISTOPHER: So it's very simple. Training, which I'm sure everybody has heard, is really about how do I tweak the parameters inside the algorithm so that eventually, it gives the correct answer? So this process is repeated millions of times or hundreds of thousands of times. But let's say the first time, it gives you a random answer, but you know what the right answer should be. These are training examples. So you compute an error. If you output a five and the answer is actually six, so I say, "Oh, you're off by one, positive one," and so on. So there's a loss function, and in this case, it's simply the subtraction of one. And then that signal, that number one, is somehow fed back into the training system that says, "Well, you were close, but you're off by one." And the next time, maybe you're off by 0.5, next time maybe you're off by -2, and so on and so forth. That value is computable, what's called a loss function. That's machine learning because you have all these examples. Well, human knowledge can be applied as a loss function too. A simple example is that you don't have all the data examples, but you have a physical equation. If you throw a ball in the air, it follows a parabolic pattern, and we can model that exactly, an elliptic equation. That is a way to produce the correct answer, but there's no resistance there. And so, we can apply that function back as a loss function to encode that human knowledge. Of course, things are not always as simple as a parabolic equation. But a human expert can say, "The temperature on this can never exceed 23. If it exceeds 23, life is going to end as we know it because you're going to have a disaster." You can put into the loss function an equation that says if your predictor is greater than 23, give it a very high loss. Give it a very strong signal that this cannot be. And so your machine learning function being trained can get that signal coming back and adjust the parameters appropriately. So that's just one example of how we codify human knowledge in a way that is more than just expert systems. CHAD: That's really cool. Now, is there a way, once you have the system up and running and it is making decisions, to then feedback into that cycle and improve the model itself? CHRISTOPHER: Oh, absolutely, yeah. I think there's a parallel to what I say during training to also while it's in production, both in real-time, meaning one example at a time, as well as in batch after you've done a bunch of these. In fact, the first successful predictive maintenance system we deployed when we were part of Panasonic employs a human being that they feedback at. So our system would try to learn as much as it can and then try to predict the probability of failure of some piece of equipment. And the human being at the other end would say, "Okay, yeah, that looks reasonable." But a lot of times, they would say, "Clearly wrong. Look at this sensor over here. The pressure is high, and you didn't take that into account." So that's a process that we use both to certainly improve the output itself but also the feedback to improve our predictive AI. Mid-Roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: So on the customer side, whether you can share specific customers or not, what kinds of companies are your customers? CHRISTOPHER: So I've mentioned in passing a number, so Panasonic is one of our customers. When I say Panasonic, Panasonic is a global giant, so it's run as individual companies. So, for example, avionics automotive coaching, how a fish gets from the ocean to your table, Panasonic has a big market share in making sure that everywhere in the chain that fish is refrigerated. So it's called the cold supply chain or cold chain. Supermarkets their refrigeration systems keep our food fresh, and if that goes down in an unplanned manner, then they lose entire days or weeks of sales. I mentioned the example of Furuno, F-U-R-U-N-O. If you go to some marina, say Half Moon Bay, California, you would see on the masts most of the navigation equipment is a Furuno, the white and blue logo. So we help them with those systems and fish finding systems. As well as off the coast of Japan, there's a practice called fixed-net fishing. What that is is miles and miles of netting. And large schools of fish would swim from different gates, A into B. And once they get to B, it's set in such a way that they cannot go back to A. But it's very large that they feel like they're swimming in the ocean still and eventually to trap C. And so Furuno is working on techniques to both detect what kind of fish is flowing through as well as actually count or estimate the number so the fishermen can determine exactly when to go and collect their catch. So I can go on. There are lots of these really interesting physics-related and physical use cases. CHAD: So is Aitomatic actually spun off from Panasonic? CHRISTOPHER: Spin-off, I think legally speaking, that is not the correct term because we're independent. Panasonic does not own shares. But in terms of our working relationship as customer and vendor, it's as good as it ever was. CHAD: What went into that decision-making process to do that? CHRISTOPHER: To do the so-called spin-off? CHAD: Yeah. CHRISTOPHER: Lots of things. CHAD: I'm sure it was a complicated decision. [laughs] CHRISTOPHER: Like we used to say at Google, to decide where to put a data center, lots of things have to intersect just the right way, including the alignment of the stars. In our case, it's a number of things. Number one, the business model just, as I said, at a very high level, it makes a lot of sense for us to be an independent company otherwise inside a...if we're a small unit inside a parent company, the business incentives are very different from if you're a startup, that's one. And the change is positive for both sides. Number two, in terms of venture capital, as you know, today, once you're an independent company, you can access a very large amount of scale in such a way that even a global giant doesn't have the same model to fund. Number three, certainly, the scope of the business we want to be able to apply...everything that I talk to you here is actually an open-source project. We have something called human-first AI rather than just knowledge-first, and so being able to put it out into the open-source and being able to have other people contribute to it is much easier as an independent startup than if it's a business unit. And then finally, of course, aspirations, myself and the rest of the team, we can move a lot faster. People are more passionate about the ownership of what they do. It's a much better setup as an independent company. CHAD: Were there things from Panasonic, either in culture or the way that the business works, that even though you had the opportunity to be independent, you said, "Hey, that was pretty good. Let's keep that going"? CHRISTOPHER: Well, I can comment on the culture of Panasonic itself. It's something that I was surprised by. This is 100 years old. The anniversary was in 2018. I gave a talk in Tokyo. So a 100-year old conglomerate. Japan might seem very stodgy, and, sorry to say, in many ways, it is. But I was very impressed. And I say this as a headline in cocktail conversation. I say the culture of engineering at Panasonic is far more like the Google that I knew than it is different; in other words, very little empire-building. People are very engineering-driven. There are a lot of cordial discussions and so on when people go into a meeting. I was very impressed by this. The Japanese engineers in Panasonic were always really well prepared. By the time they got to the meeting, even though they are in this context our customers, they will come with a slide deck like 30 slides talking through the entire use case. And they thought about this, they thought about that. And so I'm sitting there just absorbing it, just learning the whole thing. I really enjoyed that part of being part of Panasonic. And many of those folks are now lifelong friends of mine. CHAD: And so that's something that you've tried to maintain, that engineering-focused culture and great place. CHRISTOPHER: Well, when we were acquired by Panasonic, both Tsuga-san, the CEO, and Miyabe-san, the CTO, said the following, he said, "We want you to infect Panasonic, not the other way around." [laughs] From their perspective, we had this Silicon Valley setup. And they want this innovation, a fresh startup, not just the algorithms but also the culture. And they were true to their word. We kept an office, our own unit, kept their office in Downtown Mountain View. And folks were sent in to pick up our ways and means. What I enjoyed, the part that I just shared with you, is what I didn't expect to learn but what I did learn in retrospect. CHAD: As you set out on everything you want to achieve, what are you worried about? What do you think the biggest hurdles are going to be that you need to overcome to make a successful business, successful product? CHRISTOPHER: Well, I've done this multiple times. So people like to say, "You've seen this movie before," but of course, every movie is told differently, and the scenes are different, the actors are different, and so on. Of course, the times are different. So concretely, our immediate next hurdle you have to have proof points along the way. So we've got good revenues already. As a startup less than one-year-old, we have unusually good revenues but mainly because of our deep relationships in this particular industry. The next concrete proof point is a series of things, metrics that says we have a good product-market fit. And, of course, product-market fit means more than just a great product idea. It's a great product idea that is executed in a way that the market wants it in the next quarter, not ten years from now. So product-market fit is that iteration, and we're quite fortunate to have already customers what we call design partners that we work with. So hearing from that diverse set is pretty good confidence that if they want it, then other people will want it as well. And then after that, certainly after in timing but in the doing now, is scaling our sales efforts, our sales volume beyond just the founder-led volume that we currently have, so building the sales team and so on. But these are things that I will say are generally understood. But it does have to still be; you just got to sweat it. You got to do it. It doesn't happen automatically. I think the much bigger challenge that I see, and maybe it's an opportunity depending on how you think about it, is I'll call it a cultural barrier. Silicon Valley, in particular, the academic side of us...and you may know I used to be a professor, so when I say academic, I'm talking about myself as well. So any criticism is self-directed. CHAD: [laughs] CHRISTOPHER: We tend to be purists. The purism of today, if I can use that term, is data. And so, whenever I talk about knowledge-first AI, it offends the sensibilities of some people. They say, "You mean you're going back to expert systems. You mean you are not going to be extolling the virtues of machine learning and so on." And I have to explain data is nice if you have it, but 90% of the world doesn't have the data. And you do need to come up with these new techniques to combine human knowledge with machine learning. We look forward to being the Vanguard of that revolution, if you will, that say maybe it's a step backward. I think of it as a step forward of really harmoniously combining human knowledge and machine data to build what we call AI systems, these powerful systems that we're purporting to build. And that's almost directly at odds with the school of thought where people say, "Eventually, we'll have all the data." [laughs] And maybe, as you stated at the beginning, we don't need humans anymore. I will fight that battle. CHAD: The customers that you talked about, a lot of them seem to be pretty big enterprises. So as you talk about scaling sales beyond the founder-led sales that you're doing now, are you continuing to sell to enterprises? Or do you ultimately envision the product being accessible to any company? CHRISTOPHER: Well, I would say both. But I say that in a very careful sense because it's very important building businesses with a focus. And so let me break down what I mean by both, not just from some ambitious thing, you know, A and B. We will focus on enterprise as a matter of business. And the reason for that is A, that's where the money is but B, but more importantly, it's also where the readiness is. We've gone through...it's amazing. It's been a decade since that first New York Times, what I call the cats’ paper about the Google Brain Project. We've gone through a decade of the hype and everything, but this vast physical industry, the industrial of the world, is ready. When I say ready, it means that people are now sophisticated. They don't look at it with wide eyes and say, "Please sprinkle a little bit of AI on my system." So they have teams, and they can benefit from what we do at the scale of what I've just described. But the reason I say both is because, quite happily, it is an open-source project. Our roadmap is designed with our design partners, but once it's out there, the system can be contributed to by others. The nature of open source is such that people tend to use it more than contribute. That's fine. So I think a lot of the smaller companies and smaller teams, once they overcome this cultural barrier of applying knowledge as opposed to pure data, I think they can really take advantage of our technology. CHAD: I'm glad you segued there because I was going to bring us there, too, which is that that open source that you've made available was it ever a question whether you could build a business where you were also open-sourcing the software behind it? CHRISTOPHER: It was absolutely a question 10 years ago. The industry has evolved. And now you and I talked about the TI-99/4A. I was already writing what's called public domain software before the term open source. Ten years ago, CIOs would say, "Why would I do away with the relationship with a big company like a Microsoft or an Oracle in favor of this unreliable, unknown open source?" It turns out, as we now look back, it was nothing to do with the business model; it was the immaturity of open source. Today, it is the opposite. Today, people don't worry about the lock-in with a vendor whose source code that they don't have. But I think equally important, source code is no longer a competitive advantage. Let me say that again. Source code is no longer that intellectual property. CIOs today want to be able to have the peace of mind that if some company locks them out or the company becomes defunct, that the engineers still have access to that source code so that they can build it. But that is not the real value. Amazon, Microsoft Azure, and GCP, Google have proven that people are very willing to pay for some experts to run operationally these systems so that they can concentrate on what they do best. So every day today, you know, every month, we're sending checks to AWS. They're running something that my team can easily run but probably at a much higher cost. But even at cost parity, I would like my team members to be focused on knowledge-first AI rather than the running of an email system or the running of some compute. So likewise, the value that our customers get from us is not the source code. But they're very willing for us to run this big industrial AI system so that they can focus on the actual work of codifying their expert knowledge. And by the way, I probably gave too long an answer to that. Another way is simply to look at the public market; there are very well rewarded companies that are entirely open source. CHAD: Yeah. Well, thank you. That was great. Thank you for stopping by and sharing with me. I really appreciate it. If folks want to find out more about Aitomatic or get in touch with you or follow along, where are all the places that they can do that? CHRISTOPHER: I think the website, aitomatic.com And it's just like automatic, except that it starts with A-I-. So I think the website is a great place to start to contact us. CHAD: Wonderful. Thank you again. CHRISTOPHER: Awesome. Thank you. CHAD: You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Christopher Nguyen .
Dr. Alan Cowen is the Executive Director of The Hume Initiative (https://thehumeinitiative.org/), a non-profit dedicated to the responsible advancement of AI with empathy, and CEO of Hume AI (https://hume.ai/), an AI research lab and empathetic AI company that is hoping to pave the way for AI that improves our emotional well-being. Chad talks with Alan about forming clear ethical guidelines around how this technology should be used because there is a problem in that the public is skeptical about whether technology is used for good or bad. The Hume Initiative is intended to lay out what concrete use cases will be and what use cases shouldn't be supported. Hume AI is built for developers to construct empathic abilities into their applications. The Hume Initiative (https://thehumeinitiative.org/) Hume AI (https://hume.ai/) Follow Hume AI on Twitter (https://twitter.com/hume__ai) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/hume-ai/). Follow Alan on Twitter (https://twitter.com/AlanCowen) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/alan-cowen/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Dr. Alan Cowen, the Executive Director of The Hume Initiative, a non-profit dedicated to the responsible advancement of AI with empathy, and CEO of Hume AI, an AI research lab and empathetic AI company. Alan, thank you for joining me. DR. COWEN: Thanks for having me on. CHAD: That's a lot of words in that introduction. I'm glad I got through it in one take. Let's take a step back a little bit and talk about the two different things, The Hume Initiative and Hume AI. And what came first? DR. COWEN: So they were conceptualized at the same time. Practically speaking, Hume AI was started first only because it currently is the sole supporter of The Hume Initiative. But they were both conceptualized as this way to adjust two of the main problems that people have faced bringing empathic abilities to technology. Technology needs to have empathic abilities. If AI is going to get smart enough to make decisions on our behalf, it should understand whether those decisions are good or bad for our well-being. And a big part of that is understanding people's emotions because emotions are really what determine our well-being. The Hume Initiative addresses one of the challenges, which is the formation of clear ethical guidelines around how this technology should be used. And it's not because the companies pursuing this have bad intents; that's not the point at all. The problem is that the public is probably justifiably skeptical of whether this technology will be used for them or against them. And The Hume Initiative is intended as a way of laying out what the concrete use cases will be and what use cases shouldn't be supported. Hume AI is introducing solutions to the problem of how we build empathic AI algorithms. And the challenge there has been the data. So there have been a lot of attempts at building empathic AI or emotion AI, whatever you call it, basically ways of reading facial expression, emotion in the voice, and language. And there's been a few challenges, but most of them come down to the fact that the data tends to be based on outdated theories of emotion and/or it tends to be based on people's perceptual ratings of images largely from the internet or videos that are collected in more of an observational way without experimental control. And within those perceptual judgments, you see gender biases, sometimes racial biases, biases by what people are wearing, whether they're wearing sunglasses, for example, because people with sunglasses for some reason are perceived as being proud. [laughter] And the algorithms will always label people with sunglasses as being proud if you're training the algorithm that way. What you need basically is some way to control for people's identity, what they're wearing, get people's own self-reports as to what they're feeling or what they're expressing, and do it in a way that's somewhat randomized so that different people express a wide range of emotional behaviors in a wide range of contexts. And the contexts are somewhat randomized. So that's what we're doing with Hume AI is we're gathering that data, and it requires large-scale experiments to be run around the world. CHAD: In terms of the actual product that Hume AI is going to do, is it a standalone product? Or is it something that people building products will use? DR. COWEN: It's a developer product. It's built for developers to build empathic abilities into their applications. And so we are about to launch a developer portal, and we have a waitlist on our website on hume.ai for that. In the meantime, we've been licensing out the models that we're training and the data that we're using to train those models, which I actually kind of view as somewhat interchangeable. Models are basically descriptions of data. Some people have the resources to train those models on-premise; some people don't. But we're providing the solution to any developer who wants to build the ability to understand, for example, vocal expression into, say, a digital assistant. So can the digital assistant understand when you're frustrated and be able to change its response based on that information? And even potentially update the actual network, the neural network that's being used to generate that response, actually, backpropagate the fact that this was an unsatisfactory response and make the algorithm better. Is this something that you could use for health tech? So people are building out telehealth solutions that incorporate AI in various ways, one of which is can we get an objective classification of emotional behavior that can be used to help triage patients, send them to the right place, put them in touch with the right help? Can it be used to sub-diagnose disorders, diagnose disorders with more statistical power? Because you can incorporate more data and develop better treatments for those disorders, and that can be done in a wide range of contexts. CHAD: So you mentioned training AI models. I don't want to make the assumption that everyone knows what that means or looks like. Maybe if we could take a step back, if you don't mind, talk about what that maybe traditionally looks like and how Hume is actually different. DR. COWEN: Yeah, totally. When it comes to empathic AI, so this is an area where you're trying to train an algorithm to measure facial movements insofar as they have distinct meanings or measure inflections of the voice while people are speaking to understand the non-verbal indications of emotion in the voice. When you are training an algorithm to do that, you're taking in images, video, audio, and you're predicting people as attributions of emotion to themselves or to others and what people are feeling or what people say they're expressing or what other people say they hear in an expression. You need a lot of data for that. Traditionally, people have used smaller datasets and assumed that emotion can be reduced to a few categories. That's been one solution to this problem. And so basically, you'll have people pose facial expressions of anger, fear, happiness, sadness, disgust, and surprise, which are called the basic six emotions. And that was introduced by Paul Ekman in the 1970s. And there are whole datasets of people posing those six expressions or perhaps combinations of them. And usually, those facial expressions are front-lit and front-facing and meet certain constraints. And when you train a model on that data, it doesn't tend to generalize very well to naturalistic expressions that you encounter from day-to-day for a lot of different reasons; one is that the six basic emotions only capture about 30% of what people perceive in an expression. Another is that people in everyday situations have a wide range of lighting conditions, viewpoints, et cetera. And there's more diversity in age, gender than you see in these datasets and in ethnicity and so forth. And so, these algorithms don't generalize. Another approach is to get ratings of data from the internet. So there, you're not creating the dataset for this specific purpose. You're just scraping as many facial expressions or recordings of voices as you possibly can, maybe from YouTube. That's one way to scale up. That's one way to capture a much greater variety of naturalistic expressions. But then you're gathering ratings of these images. And those ratings are influenced not just by what somebody is expressing but also by somebody's gender, ethnicity, age, and what they're wearing, and so forth. CHAD: Well, in those scenarios, a person has also classified the image, to begin with, right? DR. COWEN: Yeah. CHAD: So someone is labeling that image as angry, for example. DR. COWEN: So typically, you're scraping a bunch of videos. You're giving them to raters typically from one country. And those raters are categorizing those images based on what they perceive to be the expression, and there are a lot of influences on that. If somebody is wearing a sporting outfit, and this is a hard bit of context to cut out, you can generally infer this person is likely to be expressing triumph or disappointments or all the different things people express when they're playing sports. And it's very different if somebody's wearing a suit. And so, these different biases seep into the algorithm. We did train probably the best version of this kind of algorithm when I was at Google. And we used it to study people's expressions in other videos from around the world, mostly home videos. And we found that people form expressions in characteristic contexts around the world. And the relationship between context and expression was largely preserved. We were looking at 16 facial expressions we were able to label accurately. And this was probably with the best version of an algorithm trained in this way. But we still only captured about half of the information people take away from expressions because we had to throw away a lot of the predictions due to these biases. So that's how algorithms are traditionally trained. Another way that you could go about it is by training a large model, like a large language model, if you're looking at an emotional language and query it in a special way. So let's say you take a GPT-3 kind of model, and you say, "Hey, what are the emotions associated with this sentence?" And there, you see exactly the same kind of biases as you'd see in perceptual ratings because typically, it's saying what is likely to be in that data. So it might say, "Well, pigeons are disgusting, and doves are beautiful," or something like that. And that's the kind of bias we don't care about. But you can imagine there are a lot of biases that we do care about in that data too. [laughs] And so, what's needed is experimental control. And I think this is actually when it comes to the things we really care about, something that people should consider more often in machine learning. What are the confounds that exist in the data that you're training an algorithm on? And if you really care about those confounds and you want to be scientific about it, about removing them, what's the solution? Well, the solution is to somehow randomize what somebody is expressing, for example. And that's what we do at Hume. We actually gather data with people reacting, for example, to very strongly evocative stimuli, which could be images, videos, paintings, et cetera, music. And we have balanced the set of stimuli in a way that makes it richly evocative of as many emotions as possible. And then what somebody is likely to be experiencing in a given setting is randomized relative to who they are since they see a random set of these stimuli or they undergo a random set of tasks. And so, to the extent possible, we've removed some of the relationships between ethnicity, gender, age, and what somebody is experiencing, or what they're expressing. And so we do this in a lot of different ways. And one thing you do is you can train on basically what is the stimulus that somebody was looking at instead of training on somebody's perception of an expression. CHAD: Hopefully, talking through this a little bit has helped people, one, I guess, understand why this is difficult. And that's where the need for a product by a company that specializes in it is important because it would be pretty difficult for a company just getting started to be able to do this in a scientifically controlled way. And in a sense, it's sort of like pooling the resources behind one product to do it well, and that can really do it well. You recently raised money pre-seed from investors. How obvious was the need to them, and how easy or hard was it for you to raise money? DR. COWEN: I had been basically in this world for a long time before I started Hume AI and The Hume Initiative. So during grad school, while I was publishing a lot of this science that was showing people's expressions were much more nuanced than a lot of these datasets and algorithms had considered before, I was getting inbounds from tech companies. And so, I worked a little bit with some startups. I worked with Facebook. I worked with Google. And I had seen this problem from a lot of different perspectives and viewpoints already. The need for data was very clear. The need for algorithms was clear because people literally had reached out to me and asked, "What are the best algorithms?" And I had to say, "Look, there are a few things, but all of them have problems. And they're mostly focused on the face, and you won't see much for the voice. And you won't see much for language." And what I had trained at Google was not something that was publicly available for facial expression. What is available for language probably the best one is another dataset that I helped put together at Google and algorithms trained on that called the GoEmotions dataset, which is used by Hugging Faces emotional language algorithm. And so I knew that there was this need, and a lot of people were looking for this kind of data, and so that's where it started. So talking to investors, it wasn't too hard to show them all the evidence that there was a need for this, a big market. And we raised a $5 million pre-seed. What we have spent a lot of that so far is in data collection. And that's made a huge difference in training algorithms for facial expression, voice, language, and so forth. And then what turns out to be more of a challenge is delivering those algorithms to people. And we're actually building a platform, an API platform, for that that will be really helpful in getting people started. CHAD: As you took on investors who, you know, they're trying to build a business. They want to create a business that gives them a return. And as you move towards a product in the marketplace, what are the things that you've encountered that are the biggest concerns in terms of the success? DR. COWEN: There's a scientific and sort of almost educational challenge. I think people have been fixated on a few ideas about emotion for a long time; these really sticky ideas like you can reduce emotion to six categories or two dimensions. So even when people take these really nuanced and accurate models that we've trained to distinguish 28 different kinds of facial expression, much broader array of facial expressions or 24 different kinds of vocal expression in vocal utterances like laughs, and cries, and screams, and sighs, and 16 different kinds of speech prosody, typically, people will take these, and they'll take out a few emotions, and they say, "Okay, well, this prediction is for the anger prediction, and that's the one I'm interested in." The challenge is in conceptualizing the phenomenon people are interested in classifying with these models and how they can relate that to what the model is predicting because typically, what constitutes anger is very different from one situation to another. Someone who's angry, who is maybe playing a sport, is going to be much more vocal about it than if you're on a customer service call. And that context is really important in going from an embedding that's general for different expressions, that can recognize 16 different emotional intonations in speech and fine-tuning it for that specific context. And I think that process can be difficult to understand if you're not fluent in the language of emotion science and particularly where it's gone over the last few years. And so part of what we're doing now is actually setting up ways to visualize the outputs of our models really smoothly and with any data so that people can navigate their data and actually see, okay, well, what this model is saying is an embedding of anger for what I'm interested in. Maybe it's customer service calls. Actually, it's a combination of a little bit of contempt and a little bit of disappointment in what people have labeled these expressions with. And now I can take this embedding, and I understand how to use it better. CHAD: Do you anticipate or hope for, and maybe those are the same, and maybe they're different, that you're going to have a few big customers or lots of small customers or something in between? DR. COWEN: We hope lots of small customers. [laughs] I want to get this into as many people's hands as possible. A lot of people are doing really innovative things in the startup world. There's also a huge need in big applications like digital assistants that are mostly in the hands of a few companies basically. We want to have an impact there as well. The difference, of course, will be the manner in which these solutions are delivered. The ease of providing people with APIs, subscribing to a pay-as-you-go model I think is really attractive for startups. And so that's how we're accessing that market. On the other hand, we do already have some big customers who are licensing the data or the models themselves. And I anticipate there will be a lot of that going forward as well. Mid-Roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: You said you've built up to this point. But how long have you been working at it so far in terms of creating the actual product that will go to market soon? DR. COWEN: The company is only a year old. And we actually just had our first year anniversary. CHAD: Congratulations. DR. COWEN: [laughs] Thank you. Thank you. We are just now about to launch our platform, which I think is going to be our main product going forward. We're also running machine learning competitions in the research community, which there will be involvement from lots of tech companies and researchers around the world. So in many ways, we're still just getting started. But we have already what I think are the best models for understanding facial expression, the best models for understanding vocal utterances or what we call vocal bursts, which is actually different than understanding speech prosody or emotional intonation and language more generally. And we need separate models for that. We have both of probably the best models for those two modalities and are building what we think will be the best model for emotional language as well. And so we have solutions. Part of the product is delivering them, and that's what we're launching now. So we're at the beginning of that. CHAD: So has to get to this point taken longer than you were anticipating, the time you were anticipating or shorter? Did it go faster? DR. COWEN: I think my estimates for actually training these models and beating the state of the art were about on point. [chuckles] I mean, when we got started, I was ready to start running these experiments pretty quickly. So I designed all the experiments myself and started running them around the world, recruiting participants through labs, through consulting agencies, through crowdsourcing websites, a lot of different ways. There were a few challenges along the way, like figuring out how you could adjust the consent form in ways that weren't really relevant to ethics. And we had IRB approval. We had a very robust consent process for people to understand how their data was going to be used but were relevant to figuring out how you come up with language that is consistent with data privacy laws and each individual jurisdiction where you're running data collection. That took a little longer than I thought. [laughs] But suffice to say, we had the data. We had the models pretty quickly. I was able to recruit some of the top AI researchers in this space pretty quickly. We hit the ground running. We were able to take the data and train state-of-the-art models pretty fast. What's taking longer is getting the models into people's hands in two ways. I mean, negotiating enterprise contracts is always a struggle that many people are aware of. And then figuring out we needed to have a really user-friendly platform basically to deliver the models through APIs, and that's taking a little bit longer than anticipated. CHAD: So The Hume Initiative is a group of people that have come together and established some guidelines that companies sign on to in terms of what their solutions are going to take into account and do and not do. Do I have that right? DR. COWEN: Yeah. So we put together a separate non-profit. And we brought together some of the leading AI researchers, ethicists, with emotion scientists, and cyber law experts to this very unique composition of domain knowledge to develop what are really the first concrete ethical guidelines for empathic AI. Let's say for this use case; we support it if you meet these requirements. These are our recommendations. And for this use case, we don't support it. And we actually get really concrete. I think generally, with AI principles efforts or AI ethics efforts, people focus on the broad principles and left it to, I don't know, it's unclear often who is going to decide whether a use case is admissible or not under these principles. Because let's say they're codified into law, then it'll end up being a judge who doesn't necessarily have any knowledge of AI or emotion science or any of these things to say this is a use case that's consistent with these principles or not. We wanted to avoid that. And I think particularly; I think that the public is skeptical too of broader principles where they don't really know whether a given use of their data is compliant with those principles or not. I mean, sometimes it's easier. There are really good policies regarding surveillance that I think most of the big tech companies ascribe to where they say they won't be using your data in ways that you expect to have privacy and you actually don't. So I think there are pretty good principles there. There haven't really been good principles or concrete guidelines for what people might consider manipulative. And I think some technology that incorporates cues of emotion can be deemed manipulative in a sense. In the sense that you might not want to be sucked into a comment thread because something really provocative was shown to you after clicking on a notification that was unrelated to that. But the algorithm may have figured out this is a way to keep you in the app. [laughs] So that can be considered manipulative in some kind of way. I mean, it's bad if the person is vulnerable at that time. If the algorithm is able to read cues of your emotions and maybe through interoperability across different applications or because it knows it or has this information, this data already, it can say this is a person who is vulnerable right now to being provoked because they're in a bad mood. Maybe I can see that they just ordered food, and it's late, and it was canceled, whatever is. It can be any number of things. Or the way that this person queried a digital assistant or a search engine revealed this kind of emotional state. We don't want the algorithm to use that to get us to do something we otherwise wouldn't want to do So the principles we've set up around that are really important. Whenever somebody's emotional behaviors are involved or cues to their emotional state, they should be used to make sure that the algorithm is not using these cues against somebody or using them as a means to an end. What they should be used to do is make sure the algorithm is improving our emotions or improving our emotional state over time on average across many different people so that we're less frustrated on average over time, and we have more instances where we're satisfied, or content, or happy, or all inspired or whatever your measures or indicators of well-being you have present through these behaviors might be. The algorithm should be using these behaviors to enhance your well-being fundamentally. And wherever they're entering into an algorithm, we should be privy to how the algorithm is using them. And so that's essentially what the principles codify and make very concrete, and they say, "In this use case, this is how you can make sure this is the case, you know, health and wellness, digital assistants, photo-taking, arts and culture applications, film, animation." There are all these different applications of empathic AI. So it's a very broadly applicable thing because it applies to any text, any video with people in it, any audio where you hear people's voices. This is just a part of the data that's untapped relatively, or to the extent that it's tapped by algorithms today; it's done in a way that we don't really see, or maybe the developers don't even realize. If we make explicit that these are cues to people's emotions, there's a huge number of applications where we can then have algorithms learn from people's emotional cues and decide whether to enhance certain emotions or use them in certain ways. So I think it's going to be really, really key to get this right. And it requires expertise in how these emotions operate in daily life, in emotion science, in what is the definition of privacy here? What's the definition of a biometric measure which involves cyber law? And how does this intersect with existing laws and so forth? It's something that requires AI research expertise. You have to know how these algorithms work. It's something that requires specific kinds of AI ethics expertise. What is the alignment problem? How do we consider the value alignment in this situation? Which I think really comes down to optimizing for people's well-being. And we have brought together exactly that composition of expertise in The Hume Initiative. CHAD: Hume AI has sort of signed off and said, "We're going to follow these guidelines of The Hume Initiative." Does that apply to every customer who is a customer of Hume AI? DR. COWEN: Exactly, yeah. So we actually require people on our terms of use to adhere to the guidelines. And so, for a lot of people, that won't be that difficult because they'll look through the guidelines. They'll see that their use case is supported, that they're already following the recommendations that are in the guidelines. And so they're good. They're good to go. Some people might [laughs] see that they're not compliant with the recommendations. And then they'll be able to make adjustments to their product so that they're compliant. And then others who are pursuing use cases that are not supported by the ethics guidelines can't use the platform, which is exactly what we want. We don't want people using this for mass surveillance, for example, and that's stated pretty clearly in the guidelines. So yeah, we do require all of our customers to adhere to these guidelines that we've now launched at thehumeinitiative.org. CHAD: How important to you was it to have The Hume Initiative and these guidelines? Was it a precondition of doing all of this? DR. COWEN: Yeah, it was important for two reasons; one is that I felt that this shouldn't be used to exacerbate a lot of the problems that we're going to run into with AI eventually, if not already, where AI could be using our emotional behaviors to optimize for an objective that could be misaligned potentially with our desires, what emotions we want to feel, or with our well-being. Even though when you're privy to these emotional behaviors, you have the opportunity to do what a human does and say, "I have empathy. Therefore, I can say this is probably not a good way to get people to spend more time on this app or to buy this thing because I know that it's exploitative in some way." And I don't think that's the norm. I think, by and large, these strategies that have been used to optimize AI algorithms today have been good proxies for our well-being. Like, engagement is not necessarily a bad proxy for whether we want to spend time on doing something, but it's not good in all cases. And I think there's a huge amount of room for improvement because we don't know in all cases how the AI is getting us to be more engaged. And many of the strategies it uses may not be consistent with our well-being. But particularly going forward, once AI is smart enough, and once it has more control points in the environment, whether there are robots or digital assistants that have control over Internet of Things devices, AI will have an increasing influence on the environment around us, and it'll be smarter and smarter. And before long, it will be very important to make sure that it's aligned with our values. This is the concept of the alignment problem. Eventually, if you have a really, really smart, all-powerful, not all-powerful, but similar [laughter] powerful robot in your house and it's written by AI, and you tell it, "Hey, robot. I'm hungry. Make me the most delicious meal that you can that's healthy for me and satisfies all of these parameters using ingredients that are available in my kitchen." And if your cat happens to be in your kitchen and it realizes that, hey, this is lean meat. I have a great sense of what this person likes, so this is going to be really tasty. And it cooks your cat. [laughs] That's a way of satisfying this objective that you don't like. And so if it understood something about what is it that makes people happy by learning from our emotional behaviors in everyday life, we're not often saying to this robot, "This is something that I don't want you to cook." But if the robot understood this is something that makes you happy in everyday life, that would be one proxy for it to be able to figure out this would be a negative on your well-being if it did this. And so that is ultimately the solution. So we're going from; first, we at least want to optimize our algorithms existing today for people to feel better or indications of their well-being. And then, later on, we just want to make sure that, increasingly, that is the objective of these algorithms. I think that's been really important to me. CHAD: Obviously, it's not like the other companies out there doing this want to create a robot that cooks your cat. DR. COWEN: No. [laughs] CHAD: But it is possible that other companies don't prioritize it in the same way that Hume might. How do you stay motivated in the face of maybe not everyone caring about creating this in the same way that you are? DR. COWEN: That brings me to the other main reason for doing things this way, which is that I think there's enough of an economic incentive that you can create a company that is more successful for having made ethical commitments than otherwise. And I think that's particularly true if your company wasn't going to do anything unethical anyway, [laughs] which we didn't plan on doing and most companies don't plan on doing. Because if your company is not going to do anything unethical anyway, then you might as well be able to explain to people how you made the decision about what's ethical and what isn't and be able to make guarantees to them that actually attract more customers. Because the customers are able to say, "Look, they've made a legal commitment to not doing this." I don't have to suspect that these things are being used against me or in a manipulative way or in a way that doesn't preserve the privacy that I thought I had. I don't have to be skeptical of any of these things because I can see clearly that the company has made this potentially legal commitment, at least that's something that they're committed to publicly." So in that sense, it's purely an advantage. And that's true for AI generally but specifically for empathic AI. I think there's been a hunger for those kinds of ethical guidelines, and you can see it in how people react to news of this technology. There is generally a skepticism in the air. I think it goes back also to maybe sometimes people's concerns about privacy are legitimate if the question is whether what the output is picking up on is going to wind up in the hands of people you don't want it to end up in. And those people are privy to things about your lifestyle, or they're able to use that against you in some way. That is a real privacy issue. It's not necessarily, to me, a privacy issue. If an algorithm is processing these things on device and the data never goes anywhere, and it's only used in a way in which you actually want it to be used, which is maybe to surface better music to you or to have you be taking better pictures on your phone, these are all great things for you. And that data doesn't necessarily go anywhere in the same way that any of the photo data you take doesn't necessarily go anywhere even though it's already processed by lots and lots of algorithms, or your search queries aren't necessarily not private. Just because they're processed by algorithms, maybe even algorithms that are good for the business, they're not necessarily being seen by humans. And so, it's not necessarily a privacy issue. But people have this skepticism about emotion AI, in particular, empathic AI, in particular, because I think there are certain instincts that it plays on, like the idea that you're being watched. Early in our species history and even before our species, it was very important to be very wary of predators watching you from the bushes or from the crevices and all that. And I think that instinct is involved whenever we're being recorded, whenever there's a camera. And that's not just an issue for empathic AI but also for things like facial identification, which brings up legitimate privacy concerns but also, sometimes there are uses that we don't care about at all, or they're clearly good. Like, I think facial identification for unlocking your phone that's a really good use. And that is basically what it's used for by some companies. Some big tech companies are just using it for that and not much else. And so, when you unpack what you're doing with this stuff, it makes it a lot easier for people to be comfortable with it. And that is what the ethics initiative is doing essentially. It's giving people all of these use cases and recipes and unpacking what this is being used for so that people can be more comfortable with it. And I think that's actually something that is in the business' interest. CHAD: That's great. Well, I really appreciate, you know, there are a lot of pushes and pulls when founders are creating new companies. So to put a stake in the ground in terms of what's important to you and the right way to build this product and to go through the effort of creating these guidelines and a whole initiative around it and everything is...well, I can see that not everyone does that because of the concern around oh, is this going to hurt my business? Is it going to make it harder for me to succeed? And so when principals and business case align, great, but even when they don't, I think it's important, and I commend you for making sure that you're leading with your principals. DR. COWEN: Thanks. I mean, there have certainly been challenges to it. But I think that even so, the pros have outweighed the cons both ethically and for our business for us so far. CHAD: Great. So if folks have enjoyed today's conversation and either want to dig in more, you have a podcast, right? DR. COWEN: That's right. We have a podcast called The Feelings Lab, where we explore different emotions that are of concern in everyday life, that guide our everyday lives, and that are changing as a consequence of changes in society and technology. In Season One, we focused mostly on one emotion per episode. We had guests like Fred Armisen talking about horror, which is a really funny perspective to have [laughs] because fear is not always bad, and sometimes we like to watch horror movies. [laughs] And in Season Two, we're focusing particularly on the technology. And so we had the CEO of Embodied Paolo Pirjanian, who has a robot called Moxie that's used to help kids in their emotional development, and it's a great toy. We had the CEO, one of the co-founders of Soul Machines, which was an avatar company. We had VP at Omniverse Platform Developments in NVIDIA talking about how AI is changing the abilities of artists and changing basically the way that film is made. And it's very interesting. So I'd encourage people to check that out. CHAD: Where can people find that? I assume by searching for Feelings Lab in the podcast player. But do you have a domain name too? DR. COWEN: Yeah, you can go to hume.ai, and then you can go to our content hub. That's one way to find it. And you can find the podcast on Apple, SoundCloud, pretty much wherever you get podcasts. And we also have a YouTube channel, The Feelings Lab. Actually, I think the YouTube channel is Hume AI, and then we post content on The Feelings Lab there as well. CHAD: And you mentioned people can sign up now to be on the list for the Hume AI. DR. COWEN: So yes, if you are interested in building an empathic AI technology of any kind and you would like access to our voice models or face models, emotional language models, easy access, one-line API call for streaming or for files, pretty much any use case you might have, you can sign up for the waitlist at hume.ai. And we will be releasing a beta version of the platform over the next few months. CHAD: Cool. Well, if folks want to get in touch with you or follow along with you, where are the places where they can do that? DR. COWEN: Folks who want to get in touch, you can email hello@hume.ai for information about our solutions, offerings, the company, or you can reach out to me personally alan@hume.ai CHAD: Awesome. Alan, thank you so much for joining me. I really appreciate it. DR. COWEN: Thanks for having me. CHAD: You can subscribe to the show and find notes and transcripts for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter at @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening, and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Alan Cowen.
James Oliver Jr. is the Founder and CEO of The ParentPreneur Foundation, which empowers Black ParentPreneurs so they can leave a legacy for their beautiful Black children. Chad talks with James about inspiring, encouraging, and supporting ParentPreneurs to lobby to try to close wealth inequality gaps, shoot their shot and send cold emails, and engage in a community that supports one another. Parents Making Profits (https://www.parentsmakingprofits.com/) The ParentPreneur Foundation (https://www.parentpreneurfoundation.org/) Follow The ParentPreneur Foundation on Twitter (https://twitter.com/ParentPreneurF), LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/parentpreneur-foundation/), or Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/parentpreneurfoundation/). Follow James on Twitter (https://twitter.com/jamesoliverjr) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/james-oliver-jr/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is James Oliver Jr., Founder, and CEO of the ParentPreneur Foundation, which empowers Black ParentPreneurs so they can leave a legacy for their beautiful Black children. James, thanks for joining me. JAMES: I'm super excited to be here. Thanks so much for having me. CHAD: So I just said, in a nutshell, the tagline for ParentPreneur Foundation. I know it's a community that brings people together, Black ParentPreneurs together. How did you get started and see the need for this, and how did you actually then make it happen? JAMES: Oh boy, that's a great question with a semi-long answer, so just hang in with me, but I think it's a really compelling story. So back in 2013, (I'm from Brooklyn, New York) at the time, I was living in Northeast Wisconsin. It started in 2011. I was trying to build a startup called WeMontage, which was the world's only website to let you turn your digital images into removable photo wallpaper. CHAD: If you haven't seen it, by the way, you should look at it. That description that you gave, even though it describes it perfectly, I didn't realize until I went to the website and looked at the pictures exactly what it is and how remarkable of a product it is. JAMES: Well, I'm delighted that you say that. Thank you so much. And that's part of the reason why [laughter] it failed. I mean, it's still around. And I know we have a bunch of designers in the community. So look, the website still works. The underlying collage editing software is still brilliant, but the UI UX needs a lot of love. It's a bit of a zombie with about $10,000-$15,000 of technical debt floating around over there. [laughs] But the product still works. And we still print, ship them sometimes. And we have tons of repeat customers. It's just one of those things. You build a great product, and they will always come. But the product is still brilliant still today. So back then, I was a non-technical founder. I was out of money. I cleaned out my savings and living in the middle of nowhere. There wasn't exactly a bastion of technology startups or diversity, even for that matter. And I was fortunate to get into Gener8tor's...I think we were the second cohort. Back then, it was super early. We went to Madison. And right now, Gener8tor is killing it. But I was out of money. I was thankful to get into their Madison cohort, which was a two-hour drive away. My ex-wife now was pregnant with our twins. The kids were supposed to be born end of March. Gener8tor ended early April. So I was like, okay, this timing works out brilliantly. But a day or two before the program started, I had to deliver, and we had to deliver the twins prematurely. Otherwise, my son would have died. CHAD: Wow. JAMES: His blood just started to circulate backwards. It was crazy. So we had to take them out. They weighed two pounds apiece. Every time I tell this story, it gives me agita, man. The accelerator was a two-hour drive each way back and forth to the NICU, waking up at 2:00 a.m. every morning because I couldn't sleep. I cried every day. I had a really talented developer on my team, but he had his personal demons. So he was really unreliable. But he was a brilliant guy. He was so smart, really talented. But anyway, I got through the accelerator. Right before I was going on stage for demo day, I got a call from this angel that we pitched. We were raising $250,000 at the time, which really, in retrospect, was not nearly enough money. But I got a call. He said, "Hey, we're going to fill your round." I don't know. What does that mean? I don't take anything for granted. [laughs] What do you mean? "We're going to give you $250,000." And then I just dropped to my knees. I thanked God. And I cried because I had sacrificed so much to get to that point. Thankfully, my daughter came home after six weeks, and my son came home after ten weeks. The kids are doing fine. They drive me crazy, but they're beautiful. CHAD: [laughs] How old are they now? JAMES: They just turned 9 in January. So after I launched WeMontage, I hired just a really remarkable technical co-founder and just a great guy. We still have a wonderful relationship. We got in there, and when I started out, I was like, well, I'm going to start a blog. I started a blog, and I was like, one of these days, I'm going to use the content from this blog to write a book. CHAD: Before you move on, so in those early days, you had just gotten into the accelerator. You had this thing you needed to deal with with your family and delivering the twins. And did you ever consider dropping out of the accelerator at that point? JAMES: I wasn't going to go, but I knew with that decision, WeMontage never would have come to light because I just didn't have the resources to make it happen. But as a family, we decided that I need to go do that and crush that, and so I made that choice. We raised money. In retrospect, we raised just enough money to fail because, look, the software was cute. We were running around pitching angels. It was cute to show look at what we can do, look at what we could do. When we turned the thing on, it was so unsustainable. It was a black box. And I was on the phone literally with customers holding their hand to get them to place an order, and that was clearly unsustainable. So we made the decision that we need to fix this thing. We need to pull it apart, make it modular, stabilize the code, build on it. And by the time we got done with that, we only had a couple of months' cash left. And I remember...man, if anybody has never told you this to your face, I promise you it's a hard thing to hear. They were like, "We're not going to throw good money after bad." I'm like, well, damn. Like, thanks. We have our first Today Show appearance coming up here next month. So thank you for that. Thanks. [laughs] Man. CHAD: So you actually did go on the Today Show. JAMES: Yeah, we got featured three times on the Today Show. I mean, on my own without a publicist, I got Today Show three times, Good Morning America, Money Magazine, DIY, Martha Stewart, on and on. CHAD: I'm curious, after making an appearance like that, do your sales go up? JAMES: They do. They did with the Today Show. So it was funny, like that first appearance, they didn't even put the graphic on the bottom with the name of the business. When Mario mentioned it, he said, "wemontage.com." Man, our freaking website went crazy. It crashed the website. [laughs] But we were kind of already prepared for it to crash. We had a little splash screen up and information. We got it back up in; I don't know, it was less than an hour. But I spent literally all day getting back to those people. We gave them a coupon code. And we did about $15,000 that month from that one segment, which was great. That was our best month to date. I mean, all total, I've probably done $75,000 to $80,000 in sales from the three times we appeared on The Today Show. CHAD: That's great. We've had clients, or I've known people who have done appearances like that, and it seems a little bit hit or miss. Sometimes it won't even result in a blip, and other times it's huge. And I'm not sure what the trend is when it matters and when it doesn't. JAMES: This is the point: we all love these vanity things. We want to get exposure, exposure. So I have a really great relationship with Seth Godin, and he's a big supporter of the work I'm doing at ParentPreneur Foundation. He gives us scholarships to his marketing seminar, and he comes to visit with us sometime. The last time he talked about...he said, "Stop trying to do things to get attention. Spend your time getting your customers to tell their friends about your business." And that's a whole fact. We love the vanity, but at the end of the day, PR does not necessarily equal cash flow. I had some hits. I got on Good Morning America, and that was not nearly as good as the Today Show. But that was by virtue of the last-minute change that they made in terms of how they were producing the segment. When they introduced my product, they had the camera on somebody else's product. They had people calling me about somebody else's stuff which is like, are you serious? But what are you going to do? You can't control that. So yeah, those things are good. I will say that having that stuff on the landing page is good for credibility. People feel more comfortable, especially if they can see it. So that stuff matters to a point, but I wouldn't be spending a lot of time. I certainly would not be wasting a penny on a PR professional if I was a founder. I just wouldn't do it. All that stuff I rattled off I did on my own. CHAD: Awesome. So you started to build a blog. [laughs] JAMES: Yes. So the intention of that was to use that content to write a book to inspire ParentPreneurs around the world because it's hard being a parent and entrepreneur, especially if you're like early-stage scraping to get some revenue. You can't even talk about product-market fit yet. Can we make some money? [laughs] Can we make a buck? CHAD: So I've done a few things in my life. Writing books is one of them, and I can't say that it's easy. I don't know how you found it. I was doing it with a traditional publisher the first few times around, and it was pretty difficult. How did you find it? JAMES: So I self-published that book. And because of the way I approached it, I already had a bunch of content on my blog. It's funny; I was actually out of town. I was in Midland, Texas, because I got flown out there. I was on CNBC's version of Shark Tank, West Texas Investors Club, horrible experience, by the way. I swear if I ever go on another one of those shows, I'm going to bring the drama. CHAD: [laughs] JAMES: Piece of advice, for any of you guys listening, if you go on Shark Tank or any of those shows, do not leave it up to the creative people to tell a story about you. This is just me; I'm a little crazy, crazy like a fox. But you give them the story. So this is me and you talking, just the two of us. [laughs] If I go on Shark Tank or something like that, I'm not taking those people's money. They're going to be like, "Oh, well, you're just here clearly for the exposure." I'm like, well, so are you. You're doing it too. Why should I give you 20% equity in my company for $200,000 or whatever it is? How much time are you actually going to spend helping me build my company? And by the way, the people who came before you from an investment standpoint already took a ton of risk off the table. So why should you get that money? And how many companies are in your portfolio? 50? So, okay, so are you really going to be helping me or nah? Nah? Right. No, I'm good. CHAD: That'll definitely air. The producers will love that drama. JAMES: That will air, right? See what I'm saying? And the people watching will be like, "Hell yeah, you tell them. Let me Google that real quick." [laughter] CHAD: That's funny. JAMES: But that's just me. But I have no intention of going back on any of those shows again because, at the end of the day, it was a bad experience for me. I only got about $6,000 in sales, but that's because nobody was watching that show. It was canceled. But at the end of the day, if you have a customer acquisition problem which is what we had at WeMontage, those things don't solve your problems. They just don't. Not necessarily. They could; you could get lucky. But it's probably not going to solve your problem. CHAD: So I'm curious. So you wrote the book, and you focused on the concept of ParentPreneurs, Black ParentPreneurs specifically. JAMES: No, actually, so the book was just for everybody who's a ParentPreneur. So the book's called The More You Hustle, The Luckier You Get: You CAN Be a Successful ParentPreneur. So Mario Armstrong, who's my guy from the Today Show, wrote the foreword to my book. We're really good friends. And it's on Amazon. Some people have regarded it as the realest book of entrepreneurship they've ever read. It's unlike anything you ever read. It's the story of my journey, some of those things I just told you, and the up and down the back and forth. It will make you laugh, make you cry, make you wonder. You put it down, come back to it. There are some hard questions that I ask myself, and people read the book. It's a superfast read too. CHAD: Awesome. At what point did you decide to focus on empowering Black ParentPreneurs? JAMES: So that's a great question. So after I wrote the book, I had this idea. I said one day I'm going to sell WeMontage. And maybe it will happen. I don't know; if God can intervene, something could happen. Who knows? [laughter] It's just not likely at this point, and that's okay. But I was like, I'm going to sell this business. I'm going to take a million dollars of my own money and start a foundation for parents who are entrepreneurs because it's really freaking hard. It's so hard. Unless you've been there, you have no idea how hard that is. It's really hard. So then, in early 2020, the whole world falls apart with George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor. I had my own Karen experience here in my backyard. I live in a really nice neighborhood in the suburbs of Atlanta. And I had to call the police on her. After the second experience, I filed a trespass warrant. Then I started looking at all the Federal Reserve wealth inequality data. And I was like, I'm starting this foundation for Black ParentPreneurs because we need the help the most. We have got to try to close this wealth inequality gap. It's a big problem. I'm doing that. So now to answer your question, prior to that decision, so when I was going to Gener8tor, I met David Cohen and Brad Feld. They just popped up on a Google Meet to meet us. And these guys are co-founders of Techstars, which is one of the preeminent global startup accelerators. And I just stayed in touch with them through their blogs. I didn't want anything from them. I remember I got an email from Brad a couple years back. And he's a voracious reader. He's a prolific writer. He sent me an email out of the blue. He said, "I just read your book. I effing loved it." [chuckles] He said, "I got to feature it on my blog." I was like, wow, okay, dope. So he did that. And we sold some books, which was great. But so I reached out to Brad and David. I was like, "Hey, guys, I'm thinking about starting this foundation for ParentPreneurs in general." And they were like, "Yeah, I'm game. We can go back and forth with you about it," and which is amazing at that level those guys would be willing to do that. I appreciated that. And they were both like, "Eh, foundations are hard. It's a constant fundraising grind, blah, blah, blah." And, look, they're not wrong. [laughs] They're not wrong. But here's the thing, though. For me, telling me something is hard doesn't land with me because I've had to scrap and scrape for every single blade of grass on the field of life. And quite frankly, it's hard being Black sometimes. If I had $1 every time somebody told me that WeMontage would have been successful if I had a white face out there instead of me type thing, it is very frustrating. So then I got an email from Brad Feld out the blue after George Floyd, which was just a subject that said, "Hey, you're game for a 30-minute Zoom?" There was nothing in the body of the email. And I'm just like, yeah, I could as well want to talk to Brad. He's top of the food chain. He's not just a VC and co-founder of Techstars with a portfolio valuation north of $200 billion. He's also a Limited Partner. LPs are the people who write the checks to the VCs who write the checks to people like me and you guys listening who are entrepreneurs. So I'm like, hell yeah, I want to talk to you for 30 minutes, Brad Feld. Who doesn't? I just didn't know what it was about. So he said, "I just want to know what two things you're working on addressing racial injustice, inequality I can put my time on or attention on." I'm like, Oh, hell yeah. Chad, I'm like, he has no idea what I just decided. So we get on to Zoom. And I say, "You know, Brad, you remember that foundation thing I was telling you about?" He was like, "Yeah." I said, "Well, now that's just what Black ParentPreneurs is." He goes, "I'm so glad you did that." And this is the part that knocks me out of my chair every time I say it. He goes, "What would a 12-month operating plan look like? I can throw it up in a Google Doc, and I'll co-create it with you." [laughs] CHAD: That's great. I mean, it is unfortunate that George Floyd being murdered and these other things have instigated people to want to make change and to get involved in ways that they haven't been able to before. That's super unfortunate, but something's got to wake people up. JAMES: Well, that will come up because he was like, "Look, I'm this rich, middle-aged white dude. I've been doing things to support Black entrepreneurs in the past," but he's like, "I got to do more. So I'm reaching out to my friends, and I consider you a friend." I was like, wow, like, I knew you liked me a little bit, but I didn't know you liked me like that. CHAD: [laughs] JAMES: But he is a friend. I have his phone number. I can call him. He's a friend. Him and David these guys are friends. So I got the 12-month operating plan right back to him. He said, "This is great. What would a six-month plan look like?" I got to write back. And he's like, "Assume three things, one of which is a $50 000 seed grant from my foundation to start the ParentPreneur Foundation." So Brad has given now, I don't know, north of $125,000. He got us into the Techstars Foundation, which has been phenomenal. My relationship with David has blossomed. I went on the Techstars Give First Podcast with David, and David's a friend as well. I just love those guys and how they move, and they've been super helpful. And so our foundation, at the heart of what we do, you mentioned this at the top, is we have a community of now almost 1,800 Black ParentPreneurs hosted on Mighty Networks, which is phenomenal because it's not on Facebook. That's the thing I love the most about it. [laughter] CHAD: I actually have some questions about Mighty Networks on my list. So we don't need to take a tangent in there right now. We can come back to it. I want to ask you about Mighty Networks. JAMES: Love it. Love it. Love Gina Bianchini. She's the CEO. I actually had her on my LinkedIn live show a couple of months ago. CHAD: Well, let's do it now then, actually. So as someone who has built software before to put together a company, did you ever consider that for this? And why not? And why use Mighty Networks? JAMES: To build a community platform? CHAD: [laughs] It's a very loaded question, James. JAMES: Yeah, why would I do that? Listen, by the time I got done with my prototype with that; these guys would be like two versions past where they are today, which would be infinitely better than my little stinky MVP, right? CHAD: Yeah. JAMES: And these people live, eat, and breathe community. Is Mighty Networks perfect? No, of course not. But they're constantly making improvements. I think I told you at the top I'm actually about to launch a new podcast. I just signed a national podcast distribution deal. So we're launching a podcast on the HubSpot Podcast Network. You guys have heard of HubSpot, right? CHAD: I have, yes. JAMES: So it's for ParentPreneurs in general, kind of like my book, to empower ParentPreneurs to be the best parent entrepreneur they can possibly be because being a ParentPreneur is hard. And we came upon this opportunity. I saw an article; maybe LinkedIn, I don't remember, talking about HubSpot launched a new podcast network last year. And I told you I got all these PR opportunities. And I got that because I'm not shy about shooting my shot. A lot of people are too scared to shoot their shot, or they don't know what to do, how to do it. But cold emails I'm really good at sending cold emails. So I sent a cold email to the CMO of HubSpot. He was mentioned in the article. I went on LinkedIn. I scraped his email address using my favorite email scraping tool, GetEmail.io. It works on LinkedIn. You get their email address. I sent him an awesome email. Of course, he didn't follow up right away; well, not, of course, sometimes they do. He didn't follow up right away. I sent a follow-up email. And when I send follow-up emails, I like to give some kind of update. So in my follow-up email, I wasn't just like, "Hey, did you get my email? Please respond." It wasn't that. It was like some other update. I can't remember what it was, but it was an update following up about my email. He got back, copied somebody on the team. They got back, copied somebody else. They were like, "Do you have a clip or an excerpt of an interview?" And it just so happened we did because we knew we needed to get ready. So we did an interview with Neil Sales-Griffin, who's the Techstar Chicago Managing Director, and so we sent them an excerpt. They were like, "This is great. Do you have a whole episode?" So we edited that thing down right here that day. It was a Friday, sent it to them. They were like, "Thanks for sending. We'll get back to you by Monday with the decision because, by the way, we have this new program, this emerging podcast voices program. There'll be six to eight podcasts in this program. And we'll listen to this and consider it." So they got back to us Sunday night at 11:00 o'clock. "This is amazing. You guys are pros." I'm like, that's not me. That's really Mario. I have no idea what I'm doing at all. CHAD: [laughs] JAMES: But thanks, Mario. "And you guys are stars. You can't teach stars." But I'm like, hey, all right. I've never done a podcast. But hey, glad somebody other than my mama likes me. This is awesome. And they were like, "We want to invite you to be one of the companies in this new cohort with a new podcast," and just a swoop in at the last minute like that all because I shot my shot. So if anybody's out there listening, don't be afraid to shoot your shot, man. It's a mindset. You got to know what to do, how to move. But you've got to first have the mindset like, yo, I am going to shoot my shot. CHAD: I think as long as you...and you already said this, but you're making it real. Like, when you're following up, you're not just saying, "Hey, did you get my email?" You're finding ways to make it real and authentic. You got to show that you're real and not some bot. JAMES: Yeah. So I will say in terms of the cold emails, I send them all the time. Cold emails is how I ended up collaborating with Nasdaq Entrepreneurial Center. We're big partners with them. We're part of this grant project with them with this major Wall Street Bank Foundation they're about to be announcing this year any day now. We got a grant tackling the problem of Black or Brown founders, underestimated founders not getting access to early-stage venture and angel funding. So we're part of that with my foundation all because I sent a cold email to some guy at Nasdaq. I don't even remember who it was, Western president. Sent him an email, he copied the executive director from Nasdaq Entrepreneurial Center. The rest is history. My last round of grants, they co-sponsored the last round of grants. They put in some money. Great relationship with Nasdaq. They got 30 of my people from our community featured in the Nasdaq Tower in Times Square, let that sink in, all because of a cold email. So if you're going to send a cold email, just a couple of tips off the top of my head. You need to have a compelling subject line. Keep the emojis to a minimum. [laughter] If you can use the person's name in the subject, I think that increases your open rate by like 20%. The email's got to be right to the point. Hey, my name is James Oliver, CEO of ParentPreneur Foundation. Put a link to the ParentPreneur Foundation in that instance. We got funded by Brad Feld, co-founder of Techstars, and put a link to Brad Feld's article. Establish credibility right away and get to the freaking point. Like, what do you want? Make an ask. What do you want? Get right to it. That's it. CHAD: And then when you don't hear back, and you should follow up? JAMES: Oh yeah. You absolutely got to follow up. I'll follow up a couple of times. I know Mario is like, "I just keep following up till they tell me to stop." [laughter] He's gangsta like that. I'll follow up three or four times. But after that, I know when people are pestering me. At that point, you're pestering. I'm not interested. If I was interested, I would have responded, so knock it off. But I also respect the hustle when people are coming to me with something that's legit. And I will respond because I am them sometimes too. I'm like, "Hey, thanks for reaching out. I really appreciate it. I'm just not interested," or "I'm not interested now. Ping me back in six months." CHAD: As someone who gets cold emails, I do the same thing when it's a legitimate...and you can tell. You can tell the ones where they're just blanket sending the same thing to a bunch of people. And you can tell when it's someone legitimately sending you a cold email. JAMES: Because if you mention something about what they do specifically and how that's relevant to your email or your ask, that increases your chances of getting a response. Hell, I sent a cold email to Mark Cuban, bro. CHAD: Awesome. JAMES: He said yes. I interviewed him on my blog. I don't write on my blog anymore. But he got right back to me, and I interviewed him on my blog. He was great. CHAD: So I don't know if everyone does this. Like you said, even if it's not a fit for me or I can't do it right now or whatever, if it's a legitimate thing, I will almost always actually respond to it eventually. Mid-roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. JAMES: So, if I may, I just want to talk a little bit about the impact in the ParentPreneur Foundation. CHAD: Yes. JAMES: Because we have 1,800 people now. This current round of grants makes $95,000 in the last 19 months since we launched. We do micro-grants of $1,000 apiece. I think I just tweeted this morning that it just seems like people look down their nose at a $1,000 grant. And I'm like; clearly, these people are not or never have been a super hustling, early-stage entrepreneur and definitely not one of those with kids. So $95,000, again, keep in mind, I don't know anything about a foundation, a non-profit. I've never done it before. I've never started a community, but I don't care; it doesn't matter. [laughs] You know what I'm saying? In this instance, there's a tremendous founder-market fit because I am them. And that shines through brilliantly in all the things that we do. And the thing that I'm most thankful for that we've done in the community is we've paid for 320 mental therapy sessions for our community members. And that's important because historically, mental health is stigmatized in the Black community. And there's this belief of epigenetics, which is basically you can pass trauma down through your DNA to your descendants. And if that's true, Black folks got a lot of trauma, and we need to get it worked out. And when we do it in our community, people jump right on it. So I'm so proud of those guys that they take it very seriously. And that's really legacy, and that's impact because we're creating a legacy of mental wealth for the people in our community that influences how they show up for themselves, for their businesses, for their partners and spouse, for their children, all of which impacts how their children show up in the world. So it matters a lot. CHAD: I think the therapy sessions are a great example of when you have an authentic, unique community, something is going to come out of that which is so specific to that community. The impact of that is huge but also, where did that idea come from? Was that you? You said, "Hey, this is a need we have to do this"? JAMES: Yes. CHAD: Did it come from the community itself? JAMES: No. And see, this is why I'm talking about the founder-market fit. I don't know all the things that my people need, which is why a lot of times I ask them, "What do you want? What do you need?" But a lot of things I already know they need before they even need them because I've been where a lot of those guys are, and some of them ain't been there yet. I already know what you're going to be looking at in six months, bro. You need to pay attention a little bit. So right from the beginning, we use betterhelp.com. We created a BetterHelp account. And it's so easy. We use Typeform. Typeform is another partner of ours. They've given us lots of free codes, and VideoAsk is a new Typeform company. We use that for our application process, which is just brilliant. I keep getting compliments about how amazingly seamless and elegant our application process is for the grants using VideoAsk. But we use Typeform and first come, first serve. It fills up, and then I just get the email addresses, and I just drop them right into Betterhelp's account. And they reach out to people in the community, and they get them set up. It's so easy. CHAD: That's great. What happens in the community? Is part of the value of the community just support from each other? JAMES: Well, that's a big part of it. So that's a great question. So one of the things in the Seth Godin marketing seminar is he talks about tension and why it's important in marketing and how it drives change and drives people to action. And the assignment around tension I couldn't think of like what the tension was for the ParentPreneur Foundation. But when he came to meet with us, and we were talking about it, he said, "If I'm on an airplane and we're sky jumping, and they're like, 'Well let's jump out,' and it's a perfectly good airplane," the tension for him is what if the parachute doesn't open? And the answer is like, "Well, don't worry. We have a backup chute for you." Okay, banzai, let's go. [laughs] But for the ParentPreneur Foundation, the tension is what if we fail on this rocky road? What if we fail in our journey to leave a legacy for our beautiful, Black children? He said, "It doesn't matter because we have each other's backs on this rocky road." So I'm like, yes, that's exactly right. We have each other's backs. And I'm telling you, man, I see it. A lot of stuff is taking place; I have no idea. But I hear about it from time to time, just organically. People are collaborating. It's just amazing, man. It's just great. So yeah, I know it's lonely being an entrepreneur, a lot of different challenges, unique challenges of being a Black entrepreneur. And it's just great to have a safe space for that. We do a lot of different things. We paid for virtual assistants. We paid for when kids were being virtual schooled. We paid for some virtual tutors for some of the children. Social capital is another thing that I talk about a lot. We pay for people to improve their LinkedIn profiles and understand how to move properly on LinkedIn and build and increase their social capital, which to me is as problematic as a dearth of financial capital because, without social capital, you can't even imagine what's possible. And it was Albert Einstein who said that imagination is more important than knowledge. And it's just so true. So we're doing all the things. CHAD: So, do you have a sense of what the split is between moms and dads in the community? JAMES: Yeah, just off the top of my head, I think it's around 75-25 moms and dads, and that's interesting. Women like to build community, men we don't. We're like the king of the jungle. We're all okay by ourselves. [laughs] We don't want to build community. But, man, women love to build community, and they hold down our community in a big way, and I'm just so thankful for them. CHAD: So you started in 2020. One thing that I've seen, and I think it makes your timing good, is that a lot of people either had change forced on them because of the pandemic, and they lost their jobs. Or they felt like they needed to make a change. And a lot of people faced with that decided to do something on their own and make something happen. So there has been a surge in entrepreneurship from my... And another thing there's been a surge in is people going to coding bootcamps feeling like yeah, I lost my job, or I no longer want to do this job that I can no longer do remotely. I want to make a change in my life and learn to code. Does that resonate with you as something you've seen in terms of people who have never been entrepreneurs before who had it forced on them or making a conscious choice to do it, joining the community? JAMES: Yeah, absolutely. To a certain extent, at the beginning of COVID, when everybody was freaking out, because I understand that within every crisis exists an opportunity, I was looking for that opportunity. I was like, all right, where's the opportunity here? I was asking the questions. And then, I had a chance coffee meeting with some acquaintances and told them my intention of starting the foundation one of these days. And they were like, well, what are you waiting for? Why don't you do it now? And I thought that was like the answer to my question. And I was like, oh damn, like, yeah, what am I waiting for? Let's do it now. So yeah, a lot of people are moving towards entrepreneurship. I think a quick Google search will bear that out. I don't know to what extent, but I know it's a lot. The application for new businesses are increasing over the last few years. So yeah, I get it. People kind of hate their corporate jobs. They hate going to the office. I get it. My goal in life is to never have to wear a suit and tie again. [laughs] CHAD: Even when you go on Good Morning America. JAMES: I might wear a suit, but I'm not wearing a tie. Knock it off. [laughs] CHAD: Well, I'm sure everything you mentioned that you've been fundraising all this stuff costs money. Does the majority of your funding come from bigger donors? I know that you have a link to donate, and I encourage people to do that. But how much time do you have to spend fundraising? What is the donor mix? And how can people help? JAMES: It's just weird. We get in our own heads. I used to say, man, I kind of suck at fundraising, but I don't. We raised almost $300,000 since I started this thing with no experience. That's not somebody who sucks at fundraising, right? CHAD: Yeah. JAMES: But in my mind, we should have a million dollars in the bank so I can hire an executive director, and we can ramp up the programs that we know, or I can scale this thing up and do some other things. I have some other things I want to do. I want to do a startup studio. I'm trying to partner with Techstars right now. With Techstars, I'm already talking to the right people. I want to do a pre-accelerator program with them for Black ParentPreneurs and putting like $20,000 in people's pockets. That's going to cost money. We need a sponsor for that. But to answer your question, you can visit parentpreneurfoundation.org click donate. And $25 a month it all helps. It all adds up. We have things that we have to do to keep the platforms going and tools and resources that we use to keep it all going. The big chunks have come from people like Brad Feld and David Cohen. And Fred Wilson even donated $10,000 one-time but yeah, we need more. I'm just biding my time. And the work we're doing matters so much. It's making a big impact. We are literally helping people raise money and get their businesses off the ground. And one woman who just went through the Techstars Founder Catalyst Program with JPMorgan Chase here in Atlanta she went because I introduced them on my show. And she got in, and she just raised $250,000. And then she just told me she got a commitment for another half a million dollars. And this other woman she got a $250,000 grant from Wells Fargo because of our relationship with Nasdaq. And another guy got a term sheet for half a million dollars because of the introductions we're making. So we're literally out here building capacity for the members of our community in so many ways. I'm thankful. I'm honored. I'm humbled to be in this position to do this work. But this is purpose work for me. This is my purpose, and I'm thankful to have found it. It's like Mark Twain says, "The two most important days in your life are the day you are born and the day you figure out why." I encourage people to go figure out why. CHAD: And if you are Black ParentPreneur hearing what we're talking about and saying, "Yeah, now I know about this. This is for me." You also go to parentpreneurfoundation.org and sign up there. JAMES: Yes, sir. Click the join community button. Absolutely. CHAD: Well, James, thanks for stopping by and sharing with me and all the listeners. I really appreciate it, and I wish you and everything that you're doing all the best. JAMES: Yes. And, Chad, thanks for reaching out, man. Look at you; you're on your hustle. It wasn't you that reached out to me. There was somebody else. CHAD: It was, yeah. Another member of my team. JAMES: How'd you find me, man? CHAD: I think she's very good at LinkedIn, and you're good at LinkedIn and so -- JAMES: [laughter] Well, I got a big [inaudible 36:11] show them the receipts, man. Show them the impact because that's what you got to do. CHAD: Are there other places where if folks want to get in touch with you or follow along with you? Where are the other places they can do that? JAMES: Yeah, they can do that on IG. We're parentpreneurfoundation on IG. I'm not super active there, but we're there. You can follow me on Twitter. I talk a lot on Twitter. I don't think anybody's listening, but I talk a lot on Twitter. CHAD: [laughs] JAMES: That thing doesn't come on until you actually earn those blue checkmark thingies, I swear. Because I will say something I think is really profound, and it's crickets. And I see somebody with a blue checkmark say the exact same thing, and I'm like, okay, I see how it is, but whatevs. [laughs] So I'm on Twitter @jamesoliverjr, jamesoliver-J-R. Follow me on Twitter. That'd be awesome. Shoot me a tweet. Tell me you heard about us, heard about me on The Giant Robots Show here. I would love to connect, engage, and build and learn with your audience. So thanks. CHAD: Awesome. And for all of you listeners, you can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode along with an entire transcript of the episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments for me, email me at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: James Oliver Jr..
JT Lidell is the Founder of Promenade, which seamlessly matches and connects military veterans to the resources, people, and organizations that matter to them. Chad talks with JT about being a mission-driven, bootstrapped organization, the problems that he's encountered and hopes that Promenade solves, and aggregating people, tools, resources, and funding to make it happen. Promenade (https://www.promenade.ai/) Follow JT on Twitter (https://twitter.com/promenadeactual) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/sam-zimmerman-35152a22/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel and with me today is JT Liddell, the Founder of Promenade, which seamlessly matches and connects military veterans to the resources, people, and organizations that matter to them. JT, thank you so much for joining me. JT: No, thank you for having me. Excited to talk to you about what we're building over here and having this conversation. So thank you so much for having me on today. CHAD: I love mission-driven organizations, and Promenade falls right into that. How did it come about for you? JT: Yeah, this has been...the inception of it really truly began many, many years ago when I first joined the military straight out of high school. So I went to The Naval Academy, actually, started there then went to the army. Fast forward 7, 8, 9, 10 years, and as I was getting out of the military and trying to join the civilian workforce, the civilian world, that's where a lot of the problems and challenges that I'm trying to solve through Promenade started. And then, working in the technology space in corporate America really allowed me to identify some of the solutions and tools that I'm working with now. But to answer your original question, the beginning of Promenade or the inception of Promenade really began with my entry into the military. CHAD: What were some of the problems that you encountered and that you hope that Promenade solves? JT: Back in 2000...I left the military officially in 2010 but went straight into defense contracting work from there and worked there for a few years. And it was, as I was leaving, I went literally from Afghanistan, and 30 days later, I was sitting in an MBA classroom. And leaving Afghanistan, I thought there was literally no problem, no challenge...after going through three deployments to Afghanistan and being deployed to other parts of the world, I was like, there's nothing that I'm going to come against that I won't be able to tackle. That was the furthest from the truth. So there are a number of issues when it came to relationships, when it came to navigating the workforce, when it came to just understanding how drastically different the civilian world was from being in the military and the defense industry. So those problems are umbrellas, and there are many, many things underneath those that I came up against. CHAD: What are some of the ways that, you know, I speak as someone not having served in the military. What are some of the big ways in which civilian employment is different? JT: It wasn't even necessarily...well, obviously, there are huge differences obviously from the military and civilian employment. But it was really even like, how do you get entry into the civilian workforce just from the very beginning? So, how do you craft a resume? It seems like a minor thing at this point in my life, but it's a huge one. When you leave the military, you have these 9, 10, 11-page resumes. And that's what you're supposed to do. You're supposed to put literally every single piece of experience that you have on this resume. But when you come to the civilian world, you have to somehow condense all of that down to one page, and there's a science to doing that, and that was one of the first huge hurdles. Because a resume is just your ticket into the door, it's a ticket to that interview. That's just literally the first step. And that was something that I didn't realize was something I was going to have to hone my skill at. CHAD: Do you think that a lot of companies overlook the value of military service? JT: Yeah, that's a tough one to answer. So it's hard to say overlook when as a military veteran just taking myself, for instance, you know, in a lot of ways, I was not communicating effectively what my experience was in relation to the value I could provide to that organization. So as a recruiter or a headhunter, whoever is doing that initial review, they're simply looking...for a large part, they don't have experience in the military. So they don't understand the jargon and what some of these different jobs really mean with the impact they had on their organization. So there's still a lot of meat in the middle here. So that individual needs to do a better job of communicating the exact value through a corporate sense how that value could contribute to corporate America or whatever type of organization they're trying to join. And organizations need to do a much better job of understanding that there's this untapped value in the military community and teaching and training their organizations or whoever is doing the intake process to look for the value that the military community can bring. So I don't think it's a one-sided thing. I think both sides need to come together and do a better job. CHAD: So I said in the intro that Promenade matches and connects veterans to the resources, people, and organizations that matter to them. What exactly does that look like in terms of the product today and what you're doing? JT: Yeah, absolutely. So this really began as a grassroots operation through my own ecosystem. Many, many years ago, when I was first getting in the military, and I was starting to get traction and understanding how to navigate the civilian world, I started to reach back. People would reach out to me, and I would reach back. And they would ask me, "How did you get here? How did you do that?" And I would just help people, review their resumes for them, get them connected to different jobs and career pathways. And then I started to do that a little bit more officially, if you will. And then, I realized this is not just a problem within my own ecosystem; this is a problem across the military community. So as I was working in technology, as I mentioned before, I started to identify tools, one of them being artificial intelligence, that could help me scale the work that I was doing. So the pathway that I started to set out on was how do I take this grassroots work that I'm doing, and then how do I scale that work to millions of people rather than just dozens of people? So that's the journey that I'm on right now. I don't know if that answered your question or not. CHAD: So if someone is listening and they're a veteran, what is the product going to offer them now? JT: So they'll come on, and they'll onboard to the platform. So essentially, we're just taking the process that we've been doing offline, and we're bringing it online. So they'll come on. They'll fill out some demographic information. They'll answer a few questions about where they are in their current post-military journey. They could even be thinking about getting out. The product will still help them as they're on their way out, thinking about getting out. They could have been out for a month, a year, an entire decade doesn't really matter. We'll help assess where they are in their post-military journey. After they go through that intake process, we'll give them the option to talk to one of our coaches, which can make this experience a little bit more personalized. And that's one of the huge things that I learned as I've been building Promenade is when I first started tackling this, thinking about tackling this issue through technology, I was like, okay, this technology these tools that I've identified and I've researched these are going to be the things that solve this problem. That's what's going to do this. No, that's what's going to fix this. [chuckles] And what I quickly realized is you can't remove that human component from this process. There are just things that technology doesn't understand about the military experience. So having a coach, having an individual or human to talk to at the very beginning of this process, or whatever that individual needs is extremely crucial and hugely beneficial to this process. So we put that coach in front of them. That's completely optional because we do want to allow this to be self-service and self-guided. So if they choose to get in front of that coach, they'll be able to talk one on one and augment this process. If they don't, they'll go straight to our dashboard. And what the dashboard will do is it's going to help that individual identify different areas within their post-military journey where they can improve and get better. And, Chad, we haven't talked about this, but we've got this social impact-driven product that we're building. But the lens that we're really thinking about this is through a healthcare lens. So what that means is there's this term called social determinants of health. And what that means is...the very simple version is a super simple concept. Every part of your life impacts your overall health. The health care system, like when you go to the hospital, only impacts 20%-30% of your overall health. The things that truly impact your health are things like, do you have a job? Have you talked to a therapist in the last six months? Do you have food, you know, the right type of food? Do you have access to the right type of food? Not just food. Are you ordering Burger King every day, McDonald's every day? But are you eating healthy food? And do you have consistent access? Those are the things that affect your overall health. So we look at all of these different factors about the veteran and how they're going through their post-military journey. And we give them a score on all these different verticals. So essentially, through that score, we're helping them identify what those gaps are, and then we're pushing them resources to help fill those gaps. So they'll get a couple of things through our platform. They'll get that dashboard and that score and personally recommended or personalized recommended resources to them, and that's where the artificial intelligence component comes into it. And then they'll have sort of a search field where they can just go and keyword for things just like they would go into Google and search for something. And then the third component to this is the community that we're building, and that won't be rolled out initially. But once we've got critical mass, we've got a community that we're building where they'll get connected to people within our community, maybe people with the same skills and interest, people that they were deployed with, people that they were stationed with, or people that they just came across. And we've got a method to do that. But that's really what it's about is bringing this community together, helping them assess where they are in their post-military journey, and then putting the right resources in front of them at the right time based on who they are. So that's the experience they'll get, to answer your question. CHAD: Awesome. Who pays for Promenade? JT: So it's going to be twofold. So there'll be a freemium model for the military veteran, so all those things that I just mentioned, minus one or two. They'll get free access to the platform. So they'll be able to log on. They'll be able to see where they're at in their journey. And they'll be able to navigate the platform and get those personalized recommendations. On the organizational side, they will also pay to access the platform. And then there's some other work...back when I mentioned a couple of minutes ago that organizations need to do a better job of understanding the military community, we help organizations better understand the military community, attract and retain military veteran talent if that's something that they're in the business of doing. So there are multiple ways to do it. CHAD: And organizations would pay for that. JT: That's right. Absolutely. Yeah. CHAD: Is that a significant or a fundamental part of the business model? JT: Which part? CHAD: The organizations paying. JT: Yeah, it is. So it depends on which part of interacting with the organization that we're talking about. So there are two ways we can do that. There's A, giving them access to the platform so just, for example, on the jobs portion, careers portion, recruiters. We'd give them access to the platform to get access to the talent. But on the let's help this organization think about how they're even reaching out to the veteran community, how they're recruiting them, the process that veterans are going through in order to apply to these organizations, once veterans are in these organizations, how are they supporting the veteran community? And maybe even after they've left, depending on which organization you're talking about, how are you supporting that veteran community once they've left so they can be...you want them to be ambassadors for your organization. How are you supporting the veteran community even after they've left? So that's two completely different ways that we can interact with the organization. The fundamental one would be those organizations getting access to our platform and interacting with the veteran community. That for sure would be fundamental to what we're building. CHAD: So who's funding Promenade right now? JT: [laughs] Yeah, that's a great question. So this is definitely up until maybe a year or so ago; it's definitely been bootstrap built for sure completely out of my pocket. But thanks to some of the visibility we were able to get, in the work we were able to do, organizations were able to get in touch. We've gotten a couple of grants, one huge one from Google for Startups last year. That was $100,000 from Google for Startups. That's been obviously huge for the work and the momentum. And what I always tell people is, you know, Chad, you've been doing this a while. [laughs] You know that $100,000 can get run through pretty quickly in the tech startup space. That was huge, and I don't want to downplay that by any means. But that wasn't even the biggest impact to what we're doing. It's just the visibility that it created for our organization. We've had just the veterans that we work with; we've had so many reach out just because they heard about us but organizations as well that have reached out to us. They want to work with us. They want to support us. That was huge. But to answer your question, it's a combination of grant money, cash awards from different organizations, and bootstrapping it from me JT here. CHAD: Well, thanks for doing that [laughs] and bringing this really important service to life. What are some of the barriers to achieving the success that you want to achieve with Promenade? JT: What we're doing is essentially we're aggregating information. We're aggregating people. We're aggregating tools and resources. We're bringing all this together. I didn't think it would be easy by any means. But it's definitely much harder than I imagined it would be when I set out in this journey a couple of years ago. One of the hardest things about this is you've got all of these different areas that you're trying to assess veterans and getting these tools and resources and organizations in front of them. How do you consistently and with quality put those organizations and tools and resources in front of the veteran? I want all of them to have the same experience. I want them to have an amazing experience. I want them to get connected quickly and with quality to the people and organizations and tools that they need to get connected to. So how do you make that experience consistent and standard across the board? And how do you control as much as possible the quality of that interaction? Building these partnerships has been challenging. It's been difficult. But every time, I get frustrated...just like, every startup goes through those barriers. You get frustrated. I just think back to those moments where I was down on my post-military journey. And I'm like, I never want another veteran to have to go through that. That's what keeps me pushing when those barriers do hit. And I'm like, this is going to be hard. How do I keep that organization, or how do I ensure that organization is doing A, B, and C? How do I ensure I'm keeping this veteran pushing forward and motivated when they get frustrated? Those are some of the barriers. But as I said before, I just look back on when I was going through my journey. And I don't want any veteran to have to go through that experience. So that's what keeps me going. Mid-Roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: So you officially started Promenade in May of 2020. Is that right? JT: I came up with the idea actually in 2017 sort of the framework for what I'm doing now. And I'm in Atlanta, Georgia, and I don't know how much you know about the tech startup space in Atlanta, Georgia, but it's booming right now for sure. That'd be an understatement. And I have a few different people around me, a number of people around me in my ecosystem that are in the tech startup space. And I watched them going through their own personal journeys and finding success. And I was like, number one, I have all these people around me that are doing it, non-technical founders, technical founders, first-time founders. There's no reason I can't also do this. And then number two, I was like, if I looked on my phone seven years from now and I saw a Promenade built by somebody else, I'd be super pissed. [laughter] I'm going to be so pissed. I remember this quite clearly December 2019; I was like, you have to do something; if you don't, you're going to regret it. So December 2019, I went, and I signed up for this organization here in Atlanta called ATDC. I signed up for my first intro to customer discovery class. And from there, I've been pushing ever since. I think I incorporated the organization around May or March or something like that officially. But the idea, inception in its current form probably 2017 and then really began building in January 2020. CHAD: So, how do you think the pandemic has impacted the ability to start Promenade? JT: Yeah, a number of different ways. But I would say net-net actually in a positive way in not like the actual of what the pandemic means but the environment. It showed me clear as day that there's a huge net need for digital services when it comes to the military veteran community. Because a large resource for the veteran community is Department of Veteran Affairs, you know, doing amazing work doing great work. But just like many other government organizations, many aspects of it were shut down during the pandemic. So let's just talk about mental wellness because that's something that is highly visible in the veteran community as being an issue. The suicide rate increased exponentially during the pandemic within the veteran community. That's because people are isolated. They're already going through issues; maybe people are getting out of the military during the pandemic. It just showed me that there's a huge increased need for digitally online for this veteran community, resources for the veteran community, and just giving them an ecosystem to interact in. And it just pushed me even harder to build what I was building. So the pandemic was obviously a very terrible thing, but in terms of Promenade and the work that I was doing, it just made me go even harder for sure. CHAD: So right now, is it just you? JT: Yeah, so it's me. I've got one personal assistant, and I've got several designers and developers that I work with. CHAD: On a contract basis? JT: Yes, all contractors. But in terms of people who are hands-on building this thing, I probably couldn't even count the number, as I'm sure you know when it comes to developers and designers trying to build these solutions. But in terms of being officially a part of Promenade, it's still just me going at this thing right now. CHAD: And while you're doing this, you have another full-time job, right? JT: I do. I do. CHAD: I think that's a scenario that a lot of people find themselves in is wanting to do something new but not necessarily being able to, you know, you're bootstrapping something on the side. How do you make it work? And what would need to happen for you to take the leap to be able to just work on Promenade? JT: How do I make it work? A lot of Red Bull, a lot of energy drinks, [chuckles] and a lot of late nights. But again, as I mentioned before, that's something I would put in as time as a barrier when it comes to building this thing. I just take it back to the many conversations I have with veterans as they've been going through their own personal journeys. That just keeps me going. As far as what would it take for me to move away to work on Promenade full time, the only true thing I think it would take would really be line of sight and visibility on being able to drive this thing forward in a sustainable manner, just having a line of sight on that, on this thing. Okay, I've got the traction. I can see it. It's tangible. I just need to do A, B, and C to keep pushing this thing forward. I know that's sort of vague, but that's really what it would take. CHAD: Do you think you're going to have to take funding from somewhere, or do you think you can continue to bootstrap and operate on the grants and awards? JT: It depends. That's a good question. That's something I've gone back and forth with. Working in the tech startup space, that's something that's discussed a lot is angel investors and VCs, and you need to do this to attract funders and things like that. That's something that's discussed a lot in this space. But it's something that I've gone back and forth with. It really comes down to what I want this thing to be at the end of the day. This thing could be huge. There's a huge gap in the military veteran space in a multitude of ways. This thing could be a unicorn if that's the direction I really wanted to take it. And I think if I go down that pathway, it's for sure going to take funding from outside sources. But if I want to keep this thing more small scale or maybe even local to that Atlanta, Georgia region where I live and only focus on that one region, that's something I could probably bootstrap until I've got the revenue necessary to work on it full time and just keep it at more of a local level. But I think based on the impact that I'm trying to have throughout the entire veteran community and not just on veterans themselves but the organizations which could help...we've got this concept called train the trainer in the military, which is the experience I had as well. But essentially, it's I can do all the work and have all the impact. But it would be 10X more impactful if I'm working with Fortune 500 companies that are doing the same thing that I'm doing, impact in the veteran community in the same way that I am. So I think that's the direction I'll probably end up going, and that's why I'll have to go look for funding from other sources to build this thing the way I want to build it. So we'll see. We'll see. CHAD: The problem with funding, obviously, is that if it comes from traditional investment sources, then they expect a return, and you have to be able to show that. It might be made up, but you have to have a story that demonstrates that there's a return. And you alluded to one angle at the beginning when you talked about healthcare. Do you see that as a potential angle in terms of what the business model might be and what industry you might actually be part of? JT: That's a great question. So I know that if I go full-fledged down the healthcare route, social determinants of health, tracking health outcomes for the veteran community, then most definitely, this would be something where I would need outside funding, traditional funding to build this thing. And I think that's where when it comes to like, okay, I set out on this journey to impact the veteran community, and I want to have the most impact possible. That's going to be the route I'm going to have to go down. But quite candidly, I do not have at this point enough expertise around the healthcare space to say, okay, let's go down that pathway. Right now, part of the journey that I'm on outside of just trying to build this thing and get this thing launched over the next month, or two is how do I get myself more integrated into the healthcare world to better understand how what I'm building overlaps or integrates into what's going on around social determinants of health in the healthcare space? And how do I insert myself into that? That's something I'm currently assessing. CHAD: Well, and the interesting thing, too, for me is the thought that I wonder if that actually is something that is top of mind for the users, the veterans, or whether they're just thinking I need a job, [chuckles] and they're not necessarily thinking about their health top of mind. I mean, what do you think? JT: They're not today. Absolutely not. Today when they reach out to me, they're like...and it's funny because that just opens another can of worms. But it just opens up this whole nother aspect of what I'm doing. So when they come to me, they're like, "I need a job." They're like, "I'm about to lose my car. I need help with my car payment," or "I'm going to be homeless soon." That's how people reach out to me. But, Chad, that's not truly the issue. As you can imagine, if you're at the point to where you're about to be homeless, there's all this other stuff going on within your life. That's truly the work that we do. It's like people come to me...I have people reach out to me literally every single day. "I need help with this. I need help with that." And I'm like, okay, I have a conversation with them. And then we realize there's like 9, 10, 11 other things going on. So to answer your question, they're not thinking about this healthcare issue. And from a user standpoint, that's not even how I want to approach this, like telling them, "Oh, I'm going to be here to improve your health outcomes." I wouldn't have that conversation with them. My conversation with them would still be around these different pillars. But on the organizational side, that's where I would communicate to them and say, "I've got these group of individuals who are coming to me and saying, 'I need this assistance.'" And what we're doing at the end of the day is improving their health outcomes. And what that means is, healthcare payer, they're not touching your healthcare system, which means you're saving tons of money. And that's the part that I'm currently unpacking to say, okay, not to the user that we're doing this work and healthcare but to these organizations. And there are examples of this already out there. So, how do I do that but stay true to the work that I'm doing with the military veteran? Because one of the things that I know that's not going to change for what I'm building is the focus on the user. There are 40,000 veteran service organizations alone. There's $250 billion that gets poured into the veteran community through the Department of Veteran Affairs. So there's no shortage of organizations working on the veteran community, with the veteran community, and there's no shortage of money out there when it comes to helping bolster the veteran community or improve outcomes within the veteran community. The true challenge that I see or the true issue that I see is there's a lack of focus on the actual veteran themselves and what they're going through. There are no tools out there for them to tap into and go on this journey. That's what I'm laser-focused on is how do I create an amazing experience for the military veteran themselves, not the organizations that are out there doing some of this work, if that makes sense. CHAD: It totally does. And I think it really makes sense for you. I think it's a problem that a lot of startups face is that there's this draw, maybe because of your business model or because of the environment that you have this other piece, but what you really need to do is focus on creating value for your users. And in an ideal world, those two things become aligned over time. You mentioned...a little while ago, you said something over the next few months, we got to get this launched. So there's a sign-up on the website now to become part of the community. But are you not fully launched yet? JT: No. So what we've got right now is a landing page which essentially is building a list for individuals. Once I launch, I reach out and say, "Hey, we're live." What's not publicly facing right now is that user experience that I described. That's what's being built. But let me take a step back because we're still doing that grassroots work to where we're working with veterans one on one. So that's still something that we're heavily doing. But again, the idea here is to how do I replicate this work that we're doing to millions of people? That's what we're going to roll out here. CHAD: I know timelines can be tricky. [laughs] What is your working timeline for doing that? JT: As far as launching it? CHAD: Mm-hmm. JT: [laughs] When people ask me, you know, one or two months. It's funny; when I first started this back when I was doing the customer discovery, I was getting all this great information and learning more intimately about what the veterans community is going through. I've got my own experience. I've got the experience of people within my ecosystem. But I was just astounded by all the myriad of issues that were going on. And I was like, oh man, I'm going to have something built and ready to go in like three months. And this is like January 2020, February 2020. I was like, I'm going to have something by Veterans Day this year. It's going to be like everyone's going to know about it. Obviously, that didn't happen because the realities [laughs] of building a tech startup set in really quickly. But we're fairly close. I'm aiming for no later than two or three months, but I hate to put the actual time on it just yet. CHAD: And I think as a founder, you need to give yourself...pressure is good. But you also need to give yourself permission to not ship until you're ready and proud of what you've done. Now the trick is most people wait too long. [laughs] So the trick is actually forcing yourself to launch something that you're probably not unhappy with but actually is sufficient. JT: Yeah, that's right. That's right. I don't want to wait until it's, quote, unquote, "perfect." But I do want to ensure that the individuals that do come to the front door in the very beginning they're going to get a great experience. And if they don't, then there's that feedback loop that helps us get better because that's what it's about. Whether you're a young tech startup or you're Facebook or whoever, there needs to be that feedback loop built-in in the right way. So that's what we're doing. We're trying to ensure that, okay, we've got the foundation of this thing built correctly. And then we've got these feedback loops at all the right points to make this thing even better going forward. And then separately, as every founder is going through, how do you continue to build this thing or fund this thing, rather, to keep it going forward? And that's through bootstrapping. That's through the revenue model that we've got going. And that's through some of these partnerships that we're trying to put wet ink on right now as well. So a lot of things going on. CHAD: So if someone's listening to this and they're in a position where they say, "I care a lot about this. I want to help. I'm a founder or a leader at a company. And I want to work with Promenade." How do they get in touch with you? Where are the best places for them to do that? JT: Yeah, they can reach out to me at jt@promenade.ai. That's the quickest and easiest way. We've got our Instagram page up and our LinkedIn page up. You can reach out on there. But the quickest way if you're like, I want to contribute, our organization we've been thinking about how do we work with the veteran community more closely? How do we recruit them? I've got veterans in my family that are going through some of the same challenges. I want to get them in touch with you. The quickest way is just email jt@promenade.ai. CHAD: Awesome. And good luck in this final stretch towards launch. And I wish you all the best. JT: I appreciate it. CHAD: And maybe you can come back on the show a few months post-launch and debrief. [laughs] JT: Yeah. I would love to. I would love to. I'm sure I'll have plenty of lessons learned. [laughs] CHAD: Yeah, exactly. Again, that was promenade.ai for the website. And you can subscribe to this show and find notes for this episode along with a complete transcript at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @cpytel. Thank you, JT, for stopping by. If other folks want to follow along with you, where can they do that? JT: Instagram, we're at promenade.ai, and LinkedIn, you can find us the same way. CHAD: Awesome. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: JT Liddell.
Sam Zimmerman is CEO and Co-founder of Sagewell Financial. Sagewell is building a banking platform for the needs of folks who are trying to retire and live off their savings and income as intelligently and as well as possible. Chad talks with Sam about deciding what their first product should be and what they would be bringing to market, finding the right partners, and minimizing risk to make a business and a product that works. Sagewell Financial (https://www.sagewellfinancial.com/) Follow Sam on Twitter (https://twitter.com/Ferrum_of_omega) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/sam-zimmerman-35152a22/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Sam Zimmerman, CEO and Co-founder of Sagewell Financial. Sam, thanks for joining me. SAM: Thanks so much for having me, Chad. CHAD: I've been following along with Sagewell Financial for a little while now, given our cross-histories and the fact that we worked with a few companies that you've worked at in the past. So I'm aware of what Sagewell Financial is, but I'm not sure that all of our audience is. So I think a good place to start would be by giving folks a little bit of an intro into what Sagewell Financial is, and then we'll touch on the founding story and go from there. SAM: Awesome. So, in a sentence, Sagewell is building the digital banking that our parents deserve. To expand on that even more, America's retirees are a really interesting and important and powerful demo in American culture at large. There are 56 million Americans on a fixed income. And last year in venture capital, nearly $100 billion went to fund financial technology companies rewriting all of finance. And of that 100 billion or a little under, less than a fraction of a percent went to America's seniors. And so we are trying to build banking from the ground up for the needs of folks who are living on a fixed income who are in their golden years and aren't thinking about that new job or making new money. We're building a bank for folks who are trying to retire and live off their savings and their income as intelligently and as well as possible. And that looks really different than the bank that a millennial or a Gen Z user might have. CHAD: So that's really interesting. Right or wrong, what are the reasons that this historically hasn't been a target demographic for investment? SAM: So the prevailing assumption among venture capitalists was (We're changing that and hopefully changing that quite quickly.) was that retirees aren't open to changing. Beyond that, they're also not technically sophisticated. These folks don't know how to use a phone or aren't open to a bank that might not have any physical branch. They are set in their ways. They're not going to move branch, or they're barely going to watch a new TV show. A lot of folks who are trying to talk...imagining a grandma or a grandpa was really what the venture capitalists are drawing on often when they're thinking about why a senior wouldn't expect to have a bank with all the new features that the millennial might. CHAD: Well, that one is certainly changing, especially as the venture capitalists get older themselves. They probably realize that that's an outdated notion in terms of the technical aptitude or familiarity of that audience, right? SAM: Exactly. And it's a fascinating moment. There are 10,000 boomers who turn 65 each day in America, about 4 million folks each year. And those folks were about 40 whenever the.com boom passed. They've been using email. They have XE and PayPal. And importantly, why we're building this company now is that COVID changed seniors' digital lives more than anyone else. ARP reports how 70% of all American retirees know how to use Zoom and video conferencing software nowadays. Across the stack of digital goods and services, seniors were actually the group that was most moved online. And so, from where we sit as entrepreneurs, we saw a massive market, an exogenous effect creating a disproportionate opportunity. And so we began designing and iterating on and understanding our user to build a product that met those needs with this massive and growing market. CHAD: Banking is a highly regulated complex space. And I imagine from day one you're looking at that and saying, "Well, we might want to do everything eventually, but doing everything is going to be difficult." So what was the process you and your co-founder and the team around you used to decide what the first product should be and what you were going to bring to market? SAM: Our founding team spent almost nine months in user interviews and user research across what one director of finance at Capital One called geriatric finance. We talked to hundreds of folks, and a lot of our assumptions about what the simplest or most low-trust or quickest to use service might be were actually totally turned on their head in a really interesting way. Another reason why venture capitalists aren't so confident you can reach this demo is a couple of companies have come before us, and a lot of them followed, in financial technology, a Mint-like model where you log in, and you share your various bank credentials. They pull your credit card transactions and bank transactions. And one of the really surprising things in our hours of user interviews was that that model was really unpalatable to this demo. They actually thought it was a lot higher trust to share bank credentials than it was to actually open an account. And so we began thinking, what's the highest engagement, most common accessible feature that our demo is familiar with? And that's already broadly online. And let's start there. And the original insight came with a woman she was from Pennsylvania, and we were talking. We built this kind of mint.com-type prototype to try to help imagine banking for her needs without this high trust checking account. And she was like, "Oh." She was aghast that we were even considering asking for her bank credentials. We heard that, and then we said, "All right, no worries, no need to do this product demo." And then she was like, "But I really love Chime, and I really love Chime's checking account." And we were like, "Wait, you have a digital bank account?" And she's like, "Yeah, I love Chime." And it was this moment where thinking about our user, what trust meant to them, what was familiar to them, and what being online meant to them opened the floodgates and helped us really understand this user and what that first product needed to be. And so our initial product is a checking account. It's got a variety of senior-specific features around and enabling it. And it's built incredibly excessively to be available to folks who use technology in all sorts of ways. But we started with the basics because that's what our members are most familiar to and most expect. CHAD: So you say in the fine print on the website that Sagewell is a financial technology company and not a bank, and your banking services are provided by a partner. What was involved in actually bringing that online, finding the right partner, implementing the features? What did that look like? SAM: Yeah, it is an incredible time to be building any sort of banking in America around the world. So to that point earlier, $100 billion was pumped into financial technology companies. And so as a result, there are so many companies and so much innovation happening in banking and fintech broadly. And so starting and figuring out what vendor to work with was actually what our strategy from a banking and regulatory perspective was. And in turn, what vendors and in-house technology we needed to build was one of the hardest initial challenges that I've ever had to face in building a company. It is still, despite what many...you'll see a lot of ads, you know, "Have a card online in minutes." It is still in today's day and age quite an achievement to build banking and get it online, and servicing your customers in a scalable and sustainable way. And so we spent a lot of time early on in the architecture and vendor selection process and product strategy process thinking about what vendors to go with; what we were going to build in-house. And before ultimately breaking ground about three months after we began, we set the product itself, which was going to be a checking account for retirees. CHAD: What were the factors that went into choosing the partner that you ultimately chose? SAM: Beyond your standard enterprise vendor selection, we wanted to make sure that it was secure, and we wanted a specific set of features. In our space, there are about six different companies that provide what's called Banking as a Service technology. And so that was one of our key vendors is the technology company that works with the bank to allow us to open checking accounts, fund accounts. And most of those companies have been around for only a few years. And so their products themselves are hardening and being built. And about $200 million I would say has been invested in those companies last year. And so we wanted one that was well-capitalized. We wanted one that had not had any IT security issues. We wanted the underlying bank to be aligned in our mission. Retirees have a variety of specific financial needs. A lot of our product development involves working very closely with the bank. And so, we needed to make sure that the bank itself that they worked with was on board. And lastly, we talked to other customers, and that was ultimately the most valuable thing in our experience and not just the customers that they refer you to but the customers who have left for one reason or another. Those were the major factors that we chose in our Banking as a Service provider. And then, beyond that, that's one piece of the puzzle. In our bank tech stack, we're looking at around 15 different partners across all parts of banking. And that's the largest and most important one. And those were the criteria we used to select. CHAD: I often say when I'm looking at building a product or service, and we look at those integration points with external vendors, it is one of the riskiest parts of building a product because you're not in control of it. So from a business perspective, it's risky. But also, from a technology perspective, that's where estimates can get out of whack. And things can work not like you're expecting or like the documentation said or just surprises crop up along the way. Or when something goes down, your product is broken. And your entire product [laughs] basically is built on those vendor relationships. So, how do you minimize that risk and work in that environment to make a business that works and a product that works? SAM: [chuckles] I suppose the answer is with a lot of prudence, thoughtfulness, and care at a high level. CHAD: [laughs] SAM: I was actually just talking with a CTO friend of mine just talking about how in a lot of startups, one of the skills that I most ask of engineers and engineering leaders early on is vendor selection and how I hadn't seen an interview process that really helped get at that. It's a core part of a lot of technologists' jobs and particularly a lot of engineering folks' jobs. The API docs looked good but did he test it or evaluate it? Was there a third-party tool you could have used instead of building in-house? Those are the sort of questions that a lot of times early-stage startups are answering all the time. And I had yet to see an interview that got at that. So it's a really shrewd point and one that I hope that as technologists and particularly early-stage startups become more about really going deep in one area and then leveraging third parties elsewhere, I hope that we start actually hiring and developing criteria to do that with the people that we assemble. I think the first part what I would say is we described a little bit about the risks. We went through a risk mitigation exercise, which smells very enterprise-y. It's kind of the sort of thing that you would expect exists in some massive waterfall with a Jira board mainframe computer but just listing like, here's this integration. If this were to happen, what would we do? If the API went down, what control do we have, or how could we minimize the impact on our customers? That exercise across some of our biggest integrations helped us select and take on the risks we wanted and avoid the ones we couldn't. So there was a lot of conversation about the sorts of failures we could put up with and how we could put up with them, and the sorts of failures we couldn't. And then really testing for the ones we couldn't to make sure that we were making as good a choice as possible. Despite that thoughtful answer, it was the best we could do. I would say that, particularly in a space that's as fast-moving as Banking as a Service, I would say that a lot of it is still that soft skill, that relational conversations with other teams and folks and whether you trust the team that you're trusting to execute and build what they said they're going to build and that hiring skill but also a good bit of luck as well. CHAD: So correct me if I'm wrong, but up until Sagewell, where you're CEO, you had been CTO of the other companies that you founded and worked at. Is that right? SAM: Yeah, that's correct. CHAD: So, what has the change to being CEO instead of CTO been like for you personally? And was that choice clear from the beginning with Sagewell? SAM: So far, it's been incredibly rewarding. I would say in between startups; I actually volunteered at an organization called PathCheck. And while my title was CTO, the scope of that included partnerships, vendor negotiations, CISO exercises, product. It was a pretty expansive CTO role. And I found myself really energized by the breadth and the ability to work with even more really talented, thoughtful experts in their own domain and empower them to do more. And so I knew in my next role, I wanted more of that breadth. There's an essay that classifies folks as foxes who can do a little bit of everything or hedgehogs who can do one thing really well. And I'm a super fox. [laughter] I love doing lots of things. And so CEO to me is just like an opportunity to...it's maximizing breadth and maximizing difference of experience. And I transitioned, I'd say, from a normal CTO role to a beefy CTO role to making CEO a pretty natural step from there. CHAD: And your co-founder is named Jeff Wright, and he's the COO. How did you meet him and get started with Sagewell? SAM: Jeff and I, it's been wonderful. I was trying to figure out how I was going to get engaged in pandemic work in April of 2020 after leaving my last startup while it was being sold to Capital One. And I was talking with a founder friend of mine, a guy named Ty Harris, who is the CEO of an Insurtech company called Openly. And he was previously the CTO at Liberty Mutual. And Ty and I had a couple of lunches and conversations, and I was talking to him about how it is getting involved in COVID stuff and how I was ultimately my species as an entrepreneur, and I was going to be building something again. And he connected me with Jeff, and Jeff and I touched base quickly in April. And it was a little bit like a frog in the pot sort of situation where it started like, yeah, maybe we could build a company. Let's riff on some ideas and see what's out there. And it was a really, really natural progression from August to a couple of evenings, maybe a Saturday call or two, to most evenings and definitely a Saturday to oh, man, when should we transition? CHAD: You were both working full time on other things at the time. You were working with PathCheck. SAM: Yep, exactly. And so he was the CPO at a company called Plymouth Rock, and I was working at PathCheck. And not to go into PathCheck's story too much, but PathCheck was largely deploying a research technology, the Google and Apple Exposure Notification protocol. And it became clear that most of the states that were going to do anything were already going to do it. And so, it was natural to start thinking about what was next in August and September. And so, as my species does, that then became the night and weekend project to figure out what's next. CHAD: So you mentioned that this is a space that is typically not strongly funded. So was that a challenge for you as you were getting started? How did you get that initial, you know, where did your initial funding come from? And I know you recently raised, at least it was announced, 5.3 million in January. So what was the transition from those early days? Where did the funding come from to ultimately getting the investment in this last round? SAM: Jeff and I worked in the fall of 2020, met our CTO, Chris Toomey, in November actually from connection through a friend. Early on, we were a team with a demo. We really knew that we cared about seniors, and our background is in financial services. We were trying to think of a new product for seniors and so a financial product for seniors. And so, around January, we sharpened our pencils on the user research side of things and the product side of things. And once we had a clearer sense of the product direction we wanted to take, ultimately building banking for retirees, we began the fundraising process. CHAD: So were you essentially self-funding at that point? SAM: Yep. So we were self-funding from January-ish till May. I find that skin in the game to be… I wish I was the sort of founder who could think about flawless ideas without a little pressure. But in my experience, it's actually been where unless I jump in, unless I can have a little bit of pressure, my ideas aren't often as refined as I'd like. And so Jeff joined it full-time in February. And then we fundraised through April, closing a 1 million pre-seed, which is pretty common in fintech. Most financial technology companies the banks won't talk to you until you have at least a million dollars in funding. And so we raised the money we needed from...and who did the money come from? It came from Point Judith Capital, who actually had invested in Ty, the guy who connected us, with his company Openly. So we had our initial conversation with David, who's been absolutely wonderful at Point Judith Capital. And also, Jeff and I knew that innovating for a vulnerable population, ultimately retirees, meant that we wanted to have folks from the beginning who represented the seniority and seriousness with which we are taking our work. And so the second investor who in between the two of them took most of that million was Crossbeam and Raj Date at Crossbeam, who's the former Deputy Director of the U.S. Consumer Protection Bureau. We really wanted folks around the table who knew what innovation looked like and fintech innovation like David, as well as folks who understood the world of government and finance like someone like Raj to innovate thoughtfully with this demo. CHAD: Was it difficult to get those funding rounds? SAM: The first one? Yeah, the first one was about two months. I thought it would have taken about a month. The second one the market is pretty crazy right now. And I would say between my first company and my second, it used to be that you'd set aside six months to fundraise, and so I'd prepared for a six-month fundraise. Started kind of in early October two weeks in, and they were like, "Wow, you've already been in the market for two weeks?" [laughter] And I was like, what? I was totally off base in terms of what was the new normal. Ultimately, that round came together in about a month and a half as well. And so we had a lot of interest. The second round that 5.3 million went from not a ton of interest to tons of interest and lots of folks around the table and having to push folks out or turn folks down pretty quickly. The first round, I would say for a pre-seed, one to two months given that the idea was hardening, sounds about right. The second one was about one to two months but was a little...a lot of people would get excited by the market; they'd get excited by the team. And then they'd say, "You can't get a senior to open up a bank account," and then they'd come back. And then we found one believer alongside David and Raj, who had been with us. And once we got the folks at 25Madison and Merrill, especially, the rest of the round came together really quickly. Mid-roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: Given that you were able to put together a round quickly, how do you decide ultimately not to take even more money? What are the factors that go into deciding how much you're trying to fundraise and how big the round is going to be? And is there pressure as you're doing that to maybe go even bigger? SAM: Yeah, we had, I would say maybe seven and a half million dollars interested. And ever since we've closed, we've had multiple firms who are interested in a new round of capital. The market is really, really quite founder-friendly right now. I think ultimately, for any founder, what you're trying to do is create as much value with as little capital as possible. That's ultimately the game that you're trying to play now. For a little baby company, it's often really hard to figure out how much money or how much value you'll be able to create over what amount of time. There's so much to figure out. There are so many bets and learnings and risks that it's often very hard for a company to say, with $5 million, I'll create $20 million in value. So ultimately, if you're a founder, you're incented to give away as little of the company as possible and create as much value from that. And so when we were doing our modeling, we actually thought that it was somewhere closer to four of what we needed to create the amount of value needed to raise our A. And we ultimately bumped it up to 5.3. And there's a good bit of advice you hear a lot among founders that raising a bit more than you think is prudent, and anyone who has managed a budget knows how that can go. So we ultimately did go up to 5.3. But taking more would have meant that we were paying a premium where we could get that million dollars maybe in a year's time, and we'd be giving away a quarter-point or a half a point of the company for that million where we might be giving away 1% or 1.5% of the company now. So it's all about creating as much value with as little money as possible. And it's easy to get lost in the big rounds and the big numbers. But ultimately, it's pretty simple math. CHAD: And correct me if I'm wrong, and this is a question as much as a statement. So to reiterate, the rounds you're talking about are seed rounds. And so traditionally, what that means is that the majority of work that you have to do is just making the product. But in the space you're in, there is a point in time where you've made the product, and you've shown the traction, so what you have becomes more valuable. And so it might be that the next round, which is maybe a Series A, a significant portion of that capital would be spent on something else like marketing or sales teams and that kind of thing. And you're growing beyond just the product development at that point. Is that how you're thinking about this, or am I wrong? SAM: So it's funny that it's really changed the names. The round size what they mean has changed more in the last two years than ever before, and I would say that, particularly in fintech, because fintech has a number of unique challenges. So I would say that that $1 million round that we raised in May that was really about building a very basic product, a very truly minimally viable acceptable product. And then the seed round in fintechs is often about getting to product-market fit or just demonstrating you can reach your end consumer or target user. In fintech, it's often not quite as much tied to a certain amount of revenue at that stage. It's often about just demonstrating that you can get to that user, and that's because, in financial technology, the cost to acquire is often quite high. And so for a company that only has raised, say, a $5 million pre-seed because of the gravity, because it often costs hundreds sometimes thousands of dollars depending upon the market to acquire a specific user, the math is such that you're just not going to have that many users, and you're not going to be able to get to a certain amount revenue. And so often in fintechs, 1 million gets you...that pre-seed gets you that initial product. The seed is about demonstrating that you can scalably get to that end user. And then the series A is really about blowing that out and starting to exploit that marketing and acquisition machine that you've been building to start creating revenue. That's a little bit industry-specific. Other industries will have similar or different terms. And depending upon what sort of branding a firm might want for the round, you also might hear $100 million pre-seed. You hear those things as well. It's a crazy time to be building a company. CHAD: So you mentioned Chris Toomey, who's the CTO of Sagewell, and he was previously at thoughtbot. As a prior CTO, what were some of the things you looked at in terms of finding Chris and deciding he was the right one to join your team as CTO? I imagine your standards were pretty high. SAM: Yeah, and Chris met them quite happily. As a CTO transitioning to CEO, I think you have to understand your strengths and weaknesses as a CTO as well as the learning curve that you might have stepping into your new role as a CEO. And I would say that one of the fortunate things is that Jeff, my co-founder and COO, we actually have a pretty unique set of skills that can span a lot of different domains. And so I would say that looking at Jeff, Chris, and myself, we really had to make sure we had our bases covered to build the financial and technology product we needed. I would encourage folks building a company early on to really think about your strengths and weaknesses, your founding team's strengths and weaknesses. And as I was getting to know Chris, kind of the initial handshake agreement starting to build and prototype various solutions, I think that I was particularly impressed and looking for someone who was willing to have a deeply experimental and MVP mindset while managing the risks of working with a vulnerable population. And so over the course of December through March or April, in dealing with and spinning up a couple of different prototypes with radically different product strategies and end products, I was able to see how Chris was able to be mature and shrewd about where he could cut corners, where he couldn't cut corners and then execute accordingly. It's funny, Chris and I were talking at our one on one a week or two ago. As a CTO, I know a little more of what's possible. I know if I come in and say, "I want the Taj Mahal," I know you'll get walked back down. Chris and I over the past year...I often come to Chris, having already teared down my Taj Mahal. And I'm like, "Well, Chris, what I really need is one little specific problem." And Chris and I actually set a goal between us that I actually kind of come to him asking for the Taj Mahal next time [laughter] or not next time but sometime in the next year. Because I think one of the things I've had to check or do in CEO is let Chris do CTO's job and not internalize all the time his voice and concerns but actually put forth a vision and not be afraid about the fact that it isn't something that we can get to market in a week or that we can't ship in three or four weeks’ time, which is an interesting contract that I think we've developed and an interesting growth area. And it's my job to throw out bigger ideas, not to be the one who tears them down all the time, which is fun, and I enjoy doing that with Chris. CHAD: Yeah, that's an interesting perspective. And I often even working with clients and consulting want that because if you're only getting the small pieces all the time, you cannot be privy to the big picture of what we're aiming for. And that will often lead you to maybe not taking everything into account, either that's on the roadmap or down the road. Or realizing, oh, you're disappointed now, but that's because I didn't know that you wanted to do this. If I had known, then we could have done this in a different way or something like that. And so, getting a sense of that big picture is often important. SAM: Yeah. And it's a fun, I'd say...yeah, and growing with Chris and figuring out that he's the right person for the role as a CTO turned CEO means kicking off the ladder and actually just stepping into my role and letting him do his, which has been a fun contract to establish. CHAD: So, did you work with Chris as a contractor before committing to him as CTO? SAM: Yeah, we were in a consulting relationship. I think Chris was politely under billing. And the pretext is always that this was something that we were really aiming to build a company together, assuming everything worked out across Chris, Jeff, and I. And so, he did start in that capacity. And then I'm trying to remember the exact timelines. Sometimes the paperwork is well after the actual agreement whenever you're creating these companies. But in a few months’ time, definitely by July and probably by May, we were building the company and off to the races. CHAD: Now, is that a path that you would recommend to other founding teams looking for a CTO is to not commit early to really make sure that you work well with someone, maybe through a contracting relationship first? SAM: Yeah, I think ultimately, if you're going to be going on a journey, a decade long journey, a lifetime-long journey, through highs and lows, I think the best way for everyone to know what they're getting themselves into, the excitement, and the reward, and the aches, and the pains and the sleepy [inaudible 33:31] in the morning is by working together, and I don't think there's a shortcut. In this case, it depends a lot on the situation. It depends if folks are in a position where they cannot take pay. It depends on whether nights and weekends are free or they have flexibility in their other roles. But generally speaking, I think that ultimately, you're trusting, and your founding team is going to be taking so many risks together that you want to go in as eyes wide open as possible and have removed as much founding team risk, disagreements, misaligned working styles, misaligned visions, or preferences as possible. My coach used to say that that's the number one reason why companies at the seed stage fail is management teams and founding teams. And so as you're thinking about building your company, and I can't emphasize this enough, mitigating and removing founding team risk, however possible, with consulting being one of them and navigating a tough conversation or two being another, is absolutely core to removing as much risk as possible for your startup. CHAD: That's great advice. And just like you and Jeff had a time of working together before you actually started a company together, I think it's great advice to try to find ways to do that with other early members of the team too because it's a big commitment, and you want to make sure that you get it right. SAM: Exactly. CHAD: Well, you've reached sort of the pinnacle of having now someone on your team that used to work at thoughtbot. I think I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that we have another podcast at thoughtbot; it's called The Bike Shed. And Chris started as a host on that show while he was on thoughtbot, and he continues that to this day along with Steph Viccari, who's a team lead at thoughtbot. And so if people are interested in hearing about Chris' work now at Sagewell and following along with the team and the work that he's doing there as well as the work we do at thoughtbot, people can check that out at bikeshed.fm. Sagewell is not a client of thoughtbot. But you've worked with thoughtbot before as a client twice, right? SAM: Yeah, exactly, both at my first company Freebird, which was sold to Capital One, and at PathCheck, the non-profit I worked at. CHAD: So you specifically, I assume, then made an effort to recruit from thoughtbot when you started Sagewell. [laughs] SAM: I would say I know and love the way that thoughtbot approaches building software. And I know and love the people that I've worked with from thoughtbot. And I would say that it was as much a feature of being in the same communities as it was specifying a specific group. But you guys have created a great culture. [laughs] CHAD: I'm just kidding. I didn't actually think that that was the case, but I can guess a lot of the benefits of working with someone who's worked at thoughtbot before because of the level of experience and the level of skill and communication and everything that people at thoughtbot have. But I'm curious, what if I turn that around? Is there a downside to hiring someone who worked at thoughtbot previously to your team? SAM: So one of the things that I love about, particularly early on, we have a hire that we just made recently. She worked at a senior living facility for four or five years and then worked at Wells Fargo for four or five years. And before, we had a bunch of fears, and this new employee listed five or six totally different fears than we ever would have thought of. And so now we have way more fears. And part of that can be unnerving, and part of that can be challenging. And I would say that one of the challenges of working with a team that builds software in such a clear culture is that you might not get all the fears. You might not get certain sorts of diverse perspectives or headaches because of a particular way that product and engineering are conceived. And so one risk...it’s kind of the unknown-unknown sort of situation, but it's real in startups which is I think that making sure you have diverse perspectives across the domains where you need to be deeply an expert for folks who are very similar to you is a major risk. CHAD: That's great. Well, Sam, thanks for stopping by and sharing with us. I really wish you and Sagewell and the entire team all the best. SAM: Awesome. It was wonderful talking. CHAD: And if folks want to find out more about Sagewell Financial or follow along with you or get in touch with you, where are all the best places for them to do that? SAM: sagewellfinancial.com is our email. And if you or your parents are interested in what we're building as a customer or a member, you can sign up there. If you'd like to reach me, I'm mostly on Twitter following cute animals and occasionally a good tech post @Ferrumofomega. And if you'd like to contact our company, you can just go to /press and fill out the form there. CHAD: Awesome. And you can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode along with a transcript of this episode and all past episodes of this season at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.
Brian Hollins is the Founder of the Takeoff Institute and Founding Managing Partner of Collide Capital. The Takeoff Institute is focused on equipping Black undergrads with the resources and mentorship they need to build a young professional career. Chad talks with Brian about providing students with necessary skills like etiquette and polish to break into Tesla and McKinsey-level companies and facilitating facetime, communication, and mentorship with other Black people within those companies who are at executive levels. The Takeoff Institute (https://takeoffinstitute.com/) Follow Brian on Twitter (https://twitter.com/BHolls1) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/brian-hollins/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Brian Hollins, Founder of the Takeoff Institute and Founding Managing Partner of Collide Capital. Brian, thanks for joining me. BRIAN: Chad, I'm pumped to do this. Thanks for having me. CHAD: So you are obviously the Founder of the Takeoff Institute. So let's start there. Why don't we give folks a brief overview of what the Takeoff Institute is, and then we'll dive right in? BRIAN: Absolutely. Happy Black History Month. Let's start there. I'm a Black undergraduate student in the past, and I'm building something for Black undergraduate students today. So Takeoff Institute is focused on equipping Black undergrads with the resources and mentorship they need to build a young professional career. I was lucky enough to go to Stanford for undergrad and almost get thrown over the wall, if you will, by mentors and people that could advise me as I broke into my young professional career. And I, unfortunately, noticed that that wasn't the same for a lot of other folks. I ran diversity recruiting at Goldman Sachs for a few years and just saw some of the mistakes and little things that people who don't have advisors, people who don't have mentors, people who don't have an older brother in private equity. I saw the mistakes they were making and knew I wanted to build something to help bridge that gap. So we focus on providing the types of things that I think you need to break into a Goldman Sachs or a Tesla or a Facebook or a McKinsey today that might not have been true five years ago. And unfortunately, I think a lot of career development offices and programs out there are helping students break into a job that doesn't exist anymore, and that's more focused on some of the skills that we've tried to tap into. CHAD: And what are those skills? BRIAN: I'll point to a few off the top of my head. One is just polish. If you've never had an internship, you don't know cadencing on scheduling or sending an email to a direct report or really focusing on your LinkedIn, and your resume, and your social media being clean and disciplined. And so we bring to light a lot of the things that I think employers are looking for today. I'll use a good example with our students. If you don't have 500 connections on LinkedIn, the number of connections you have shows. But if you have more than 500 connections, it just shows 500+. And as a recruiter, when you really think about it, at the top of the funnel, they use these little things to guide a lot of their decision-making. For better or worse, I'm not sure it's a great way to decide who should be a good candidate for your company. But when you get 5,000 applications, and you need to get it down to 100 in a couple of days, there are little things like sending your resume in a Word Doc instead of a PDF or having spelling errors in your application, or not filling out some of the boxes that matter. And so we really train them on that etiquette and polish. Another bucket that I think is super important we built a speaker series at the Takeoff Institute called You Can't Be What You Can't See. And I think for a lot of Black undergraduate students, you go through a Superday at some of these places. You might meet 10, 15 people. Most of the time, you're not going to meet anyone Black. And you're definitely not going to meet Black people that are at the executive level. And so we really pride ourselves on bringing in managing directors from banks, and founders and CEOs from growing companies, and leading venture capitalist investors and just help our students see that there are people out there doing what they did. There are people that come from their backgrounds that also weren't sure who they were going to be when they were a sophomore or a junior in college. And so, building confidence is another key pillar of the program that we really pride ourselves on. And we're very lucky we have students at Tesla, at Apple, at Facebook, at Goldman, at NBC Universal. These students have broken into really exciting roles. And as we think about building the full flywheel around Takeoff, now those students become advocates. Now those students become mentors and advisors. And we build proximity for our students to help them realize there are people that very recently went through a very similar program and are now doing the things that they aspire to do. CHAD: That's great. It sounds to me like it really is a combination of things that they might not have the opportunity to have done before or gain the experience and because they're marginalized, historically. And also just things that are good to have that, in general, aren't taught in school regardless of your opportunity. BRIAN: That's right. CHAD: And sometimes people who have more opportunity are getting that exposure in the jobs that they have along the way and that kind of thing. That makes it certainly easier for them to succeed later on, let alone what they look like when they show up to the interview. BRIAN: Yeah, I completely agree. And I think the anecdotal use there is most of the things that I'm teaching these kids you can find on Google. The problem is they don't know what to look for. And when we think about fast-tracking these students or getting them into these rooms quicker, getting them through those interviews more effectively, it's almost like bringing all of these resources right in front of their face and allowing them to soak and absorb them in a very efficient manner. So there's a guide somewhere on the internet of how to break into consulting, and there's a guide on how to crush a product interview. And there's a guide on how to build a perfect resume or a perfect LinkedIn. But we find that most of our students, one, don't know that they should be looking for that stuff, and two, don't know how to go get it all when it matters. And that's really what we focus on, bringing all that stuff in front of them at a more efficient clip and help them build that confidence so that when they do get in front of that interview, they're armed with all the things they need to succeed. CHAD: Well, I know you're already solving a big problem. But is there anything in particular that you do to then make sure that once these people are in the workforce, in the workplace, they're going to companies that are going to treat them right where they're not going to face bias as much as possible and those kinds of things? Or are you mostly focused on getting them ready right now? BRIAN: No, it's a great question. I'd put that in a 2.0 Takeoff University, Takeoff Institute, but it's absolutely critical. It's super important. And we have a long way to go. Chad, I don't want to pretend like the world is ten times better than it was five years ago. But the transparency through which some of this data is being recorded, the accountability that's being held in rooms that matter, so C-suite, executive suite, board meetings, it is changing. And I'm very excited about that because I think for the students that can, and this is in every student, and I don't want to pretend like it is, but for the students that can choose where they go, they're going to choose to go to those companies. They're going to choose to go to the companies where there is active, positive feedback from underrepresented people, so Black, Latin, female, people that don't look like the rich, white guy that runs the company. They're going to look for that feedback. And they're going to look for companies that very, very clearly advocate for supporting those types of communities. And, again, I think we're in the early innings of that. But I think that we're definitely on a path towards that being more and more important and that tailors who we partner with and who we spend time with. And if you look at a lot of our partners, they are people that care about that stuff, and they are people that are actively working on doing something about it, which we certainly appreciate. CHAD: So the core of the Takeoff Institute is the fellowship. Is that right? BRIAN: Yeah, that's right. CHAD: What exactly is that? BRIAN: The Takeoff Institute Summer Fellowship is an eight-week program, again, designed to advance and equip Black undergraduates with the resources and mentorship they need to launch a young professional career. So the first thing that I think about is what we had talked about earlier, just aggregation of resources. So we have a partnership with Wall Street Prep, and so our students have to do an Excel and PowerPoint tutorial within the first two weeks of the program. And that's in after hours, and they have to do it on their own. And we track their progress, and they have to submit it. Because I cannot think of a single role in a post-undergraduate career where it is not important to be literate in both of those platforms and also, maybe more importantly, where top performers are not very good in both of those platforms. So the first piece is resource aggregation. CHAD: And this is happening remotely? BRIAN: This is all remote. This is all remote. I started the Takeoff Institute in 2020. Chad, I hope there's a day where I say that none of it is remote, but it's the world we live in. CHAD: [laughs] BRIAN: And it's what allowed us to scale it the way we did. We had over 500 kids apply for our first fellowship two years ago. We took 50 and had a little over 600 apply for the second year and took 50 again last summer and have some really exciting things coming up for this summer. So we can talk about the goal and where we're headed later. But the second piece is the speaker series that I told you about. And so, bringing in folks during our weekly meetings and allowing them to ask questions and be vulnerable and share that experience. The third piece is mentorship. And so, I wanted to recreate the feeling of having a direct report. I think too many Black undergrads get to their first job without any real internship experience. And I think in an internship, one of the things you do is you make a bunch of dumb mistakes where your direct report tells you they were dumb because you're an intern. And you check that box, like, whoops, I did that I'm never going to do it again. And unfortunately, when you get to your first job, and that's some of the stuff you're doing early on, it just doesn't go well. It doesn't lead to you being ranked highly. It doesn't lead to you getting an offer a year later. It doesn't lead to you getting the advocacy and support of people internally to say that you're a top performer. So we almost try to recreate that direct report internship experience and allow them to make some of those mistakes. And so every student is paired up with a one on one advisor. And so, for folks that are listening, if you want to be an advisor, I'd call it anywhere from 25 to 50-year-olds with a desire to help undergraduate students succeed. We have a variety of different types of advisors. And again, it's really about challenging our students to make sure they send the email to check-in. They send the email to let them know that they need to meet. They send a calendar invite. And if it's in ET, they remember, oh wow, I need to send that in PT. So just giving them that experience. So resources, access to people that look like them in seats that matter, and mentorship and guidance are the three main pillars of the Takeoff Institute. CHAD: I love that idea of learning from experiencing failure. One of the things as someone speaking for myself coming from a place of opportunity and privilege and being a white male, I might approach certain circumstances where I'm just not as afraid of failure. I'm a big believer in learning through failure, and so because of that, I'm less afraid of that. Someone who hasn't had that opportunity and is underrepresented might be much more scared of what might happen if they fail, and that's just missing the opportunity to do that. BRIAN: I think you're absolutely right. And I want to, if you're open to it, have a little fun here. I'd love to flip that question on you and just think about what are some of the things that you would be sharing or guiding to underrepresented ecosystems to help them bridge that gap, to help them kind of get that confidence to know that they do have the right, they do have the skills; they do have the knowledge to break into those places? And it's about quieting that imposter syndrome and going after some of those opportunities. CHAD: Yeah, I've always believed it's really difficult to tell people not to feel something that they're feeling. [laughs] It's really hard to change someone's feelings. And so I would put it on the mentors that they need to work to create the environment where people understand that it's okay to make mistakes. That's certainly the experience that I had in my internship when I was just getting started out. I saw my manager making mistakes, and they owned up to them. And we talked about them. And we were doing a lot of the same work. We were working alongside of each other. And so that close working relationship is one thing. I don't know if you're aware, but at thoughtbot, we have an apprentice program where new people are paired with an experienced mentor, and it's almost entirely working together on work. So creating that opportunity. So assuming you have a mentor that's supportive and wants to work with you, great. And if not, I would say try to circumvent that as much as possible and get yourself working with them as much as possible so that you can get close to them and see them working, and see them failing, and really gain that first-hand experience, which in and of itself can be uncomfortable to force that. I totally recognize that. BRIAN: Totally. Part of the program is they do a research report with their mentor. And so it's sort of this guided I'm here to answer questions, but I am not here to do this for you. And I'm very intentional with our mentors about that. I think a lot of these students, especially the ones who have never had a direct report, they wait until they're told what to do. And they don't know how to turn on that proactive brain. And I think it's a super important muscle to flex, especially at that age. How do you teach a kid to do the thing that he thinks his boss is going to ask for as opposed to the thing that his boss asked for? CHAD: Well, this is sort of a pet peeve of mine because I think that, in some ways, there is a flaw in our educational system. It's centered around people telling people what to do. BRIAN: Do what you're told, yeah, absolutely. CHAD: Right. And so, I was very fortunate that I had some teachers that did more project-based learning and then chose to go to a college that was project-based. And the difference when you're in charge of something, and you're responsible, and people aren't telling you what to do, that really creates the environment where you can do that great work. BRIAN: Totally. What's pretty cool is we keep a repository of all their presentations. And so, a lot of them, after the program is over they'll actually share their presentation on their LinkedIn or through their socials. And just having a body of work that early in your career, mapping the Esports competitive landscape, or how to build a D2C skincare business for people of color. I mean, really cool projects that they're very proud of, that they worked hard on, and now that they can share. And, again, part of what we do is build that LinkedIn, build that thought leadership, help them become experts in their own craft because I think it builds that confidence that we just talked about missing for so many of them. And it's doing all these little things that really just unlock their inner self. I'm not giving them anything that they don't already have. I'm just unlocking it. Mid-roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: Let's take a step back. And I'm curious what it takes to start something like Takeoff Institute. How difficult is it to set up a non-profit? From when you decided to do this, what steps did you take as a founder getting off the ground? BRIAN: I'll give you context of how I started it at first. I was a student at Harvard Business School. Nine months into my MBA program, the world blew up. And so what was a trip to Shenzhen or Tokyo turned into hanging out in my apartment. And I think similar to what you described around that participatory learning environment and how that helped you, HBS is known for what's called the case method. And the case method is a very, very powerful way to learn. It's, by far, in a way, my favorite way to learn. And I knew nothing about it before I got to HBS. And the repeat experience of being presented a problem and having to choose a side and then gathering information after the fact around whether that was not necessarily right or wrong but whether that was educated or insightful and then repeating that process over and over again. You just learn a ton about your biases and the types of things that you can and can't accomplish on your own without thinking of other parts of your brain or using other kinds of tools in your toolbox. And so I found myself really challenged after my first year of school, saying, I've never built anything, and I've never put my mind towards some of the problems that I think exist in the world. And I mentioned while I was at Goldman running diversity recruiting at Stanford for a couple of years, and I saw so many problems and flaws in that model. And then my youngest brother was a Marine. So he served in the military for four years and then took the GI Bill, and he's now a junior at Columbia University in New York. And I saw his journey very recently and a lot of the flaws in the system. And so I just knew that this problem wasn't going anywhere. And I knew that I really, really wanted to be a part of the solution. And I think unfortunately, our generation is taught that you're supposed to turn 50 and be rich before you start giving back and before you, whatever, consider building a non-profit, and I sort of call bullshit on that, to be honest. I think I will never be more proximate to the problems I'm trying to solve than I am right now. And I'm 30 years old. I'm seven, eight years out of school, but I still very, very intentionally stay close to the undergraduate ecosystem and understand what it takes and what the problems are with breaking into the industry right now. So I think it was a combination of being a student of the problem, knowing the problem, knowing it exists, building confidence and desire to become a leader while I was at HBS. And third, COVID, just realizing that a lot of these problems were actually being exacerbated, and they were getting worse, not better. I'm sitting at HBS watching some of the smartest kids I know lose internships. And all I could think was, what does that mean for the Black community? What does that mean for Black undergrads who already don't have the internship that's high paying and kind of seasons through these types of things? And so I wanted to do something about it. And I knew it was going to be bootstrapped. I knew I didn't have a million bucks to put towards it, but I knew I could put something together. And like I said, when I saw the demand for 500+ kids applying, I knew we had something. And in the last two years, we've done a lot and have a long way to go but are really excited about some of the things around the corner. CHAD: That's great context. And so, how did you go from zero to something? BRIAN: The first part was just surrounding myself with people that I thought wanted to be contributors and collaborators and building it, so that's both students and mentors, so building an operating board and people around us to help us do it. I can tell you the process of launching a 501(c)(3) is not fun, and it's not for the faint of heart dealing with the government. And I caveat that by saying towards the end of the process, I almost appreciated how difficult it was because it forced me to get a lot of things in place that were not fun to put in place. And as a result, if I wasn't that serious about building this, I think I would have been paused multiple times throughout the journey. While it's a frustrating manual, kind of nasty process, I do think it's a filtering mechanism for the government. Because the last thing you want to do is allow corporations to give people money that they think is going somewhere good and then it not go somewhere good, so I definitely appreciate that. But yeah, the journey is not fun. I think anything that's bootstrapped...I'm sure you've had plenty of guests on here that have experience at bootstrap companies. If you can't go out and raise $10 million like some of these seed companies on day one, well, then you can't hire five people, and you can't set up all of the right systems online that you want to someday. So I think that's another component that I just learned a ton from was how do we put the things in place to allow us to do this thoughtfully but not necessarily the things in place that we want to have in year three when now we have a 500k P&L and can flex into some different things and bring people on full time? So it almost forced us to build a bare-bones mechanism that just went out and really focused on the product, really focused on is this something that Black undergraduate students need and want? And only very myopically focused on that in the early days. Because all of the other stuff, the infrastructure of a non-profit, the operating board, who we bring around, and what money we raise, none of that really matters if Black undergrads don't see it as valuable. And so I very intentionally spent a lot of our time with the students and was very hands-on, still very hands-on. But really spent time getting feedback and gathering feedback from our first cohort around what are the things you love? What are the things we should change? Who are some of the speakers you wish you heard from? What are some of the ways we can engage you guys now that you have graduated? It's been a fun journey. I'm learning a lot still. As you know, I run a venture capital fund alongside this. And so just finding ways for those two things to talk to each other and to support one another. We back predominantly underrepresented founders. And these founders come from the same ecosystems where our students come from. So it's a really unique opportunity to see synergies exist across the two things I'm building. CHAD: As you were getting started with Takeoff, like you said, the most important thing was the students. So was there anything in particular that you did that you thought worked really well to let people know about this and spread the word? BRIAN: Yeah, I'd say less so in season one, chapter one, whatever you want to call it. Less so in that season than last season. And so what I did is I really turned on our brand ambassador program SO taking the students who graduated from the first cohort and using them to push us into career development offices, help them share on their campuses. We had 50 students, but it wasn't 20 from Harvard and 20 from Stanford. We probably had 35, maybe 40 schools represented where we had a few kids from a few different schools. But the network effects of allowing the students to go out, and there are 100 things on a job board at a school that people are trying to get access to these students. But there's not that many students actually advocating for the programs and saying, "Hey, I went through this, and it was valuable, and here's why it was valuable. And here's why you should go through it." We have a ton of our students who are very proud of the program and share what we're building with other students. And I think that that was a really cool unlock because I think that's the most authentic way to get to know your customers is go through people who really have experienced what you're building and allow them to tell the story for you. CHAD: You said you get 500 applications, 600 applications for the latest cohort, and you're choosing 50. How do you do that? BRIAN: We use a couple of different filtering mechanisms, so the first is the application. So there are questions in there around why they would join the program, things like do you have another internship lined up? We tend to focus on kids who either couldn't get an internship or don't have a Goldman Sachs banking internship already lined up. We tend to find that they're just more absorbed by the program. They're more focused. The second thing is there are a couple of questions around just what their aspiration is. I try to look for students who at least have spent some time thinking about who they want to be when they grow up. That doesn't mean you need to know. But oftentimes, if you're not curious or aspirational on your own, regardless of whether you have confidence, if you're not curious or aspirational on your own, it's very hard for me to elicit that in an eight-week program. And so we really try to filter out the students that we think are excited about getting to the other side or are excited about breaking in or excited about challenging ceilings. That's a little harder to search for than did they fill out their LinkedIn? Did they submit their PDF the right way? So that's the second component. The third component is honestly being very intentional about matching with our mentors. So I try to find mentors that are at least somewhat lined up with the ecosystems these students want to go to. So if I have someone that wants to break into product, I actually think it's super-valuable to get some of our friends that work at Facebook or some of our friends that work at Pinterest who are in product as their mentors, regardless of whether they work on a product-related research project. And so, using our mentors to guide that journey from 100 to 50 students to make sure that they all feel like they are getting someone that can really help advance them. And it's funny; it's pretty incredible. At the end of the program, a lot of them will come and say, "I can't believe how similar I am to Tyler, or Stacey, or Rebecca." It's really incredible how connected they become. And I just like to say, "Oh yeah, I can't believe it too." We are very intentional in the background on making that happen. But our mentors stick around with our advisors, and I hear two years later they are helping each other find a job. Or I'll get a picture of them out to brunch because they check in once a quarter. That's the stuff that just gets me super jacked up to keep doing it is recognizing that these people continue these relationships long after the fellowship program is over. CHAD: And that's great and really shows one of the great things about programs like this, and you already alluded to it earlier, is that they compound. As more people go through it, the value of the overall program hopefully goes up. BRIAN: That's right. CHAD: So are there any interviews or anything as part of the process of getting? BRIAN: There's not. That's new this year, which we're super excited about. The first two years were, again, really just us in the background making that happen. And I wouldn't have known what to interview for, to be completely honest. I think now I have just a better understanding of the type of student that succeeds in our program. I didn't entirely understand that before. And I think regardless of whether you're diverse yourself, I think there's implicit bias that comes with jumping on a Zoom with someone and seeing how they interact. And I don't know that those biases always lead you to the best candidate. And so, I think we tried to take a thoughtful approach but didn't want to over-engineer the early days of building our cohorts. And we beta-tested a bunch of different stuff. So we had freshman, sophomore, junior, senior, and first-year out, as well as Harvard, Stanford, Arkansas State, two-year community college, really just the full gamut. There are 1.1 million Black undergrads in the country in every given year. So finding students from all these different places and then kind of honing that in and figuring out, you know what? I think if you do this program right after your freshman or right after your sophomore year, it's super valuable. And it really sets you up to have that strong junior year internship because that's the one that matters. That's the one that changes your trajectory if you go get a good one. And so just learning those types of things over the first two years, I think, really helped us hone in who we focus on, and why we focus on them, and what resources we provide for them. Because it just, again, it just helps us build that treadmill to really accelerate their trajectory into their young professional career. CHAD: You mentioned undergrad, so the program is specifically focused on people in college going to a university of some kind. BRIAN: It's specifically focused on Black undergraduate students. I struggled with this a little bit because there are a lot of people that need help. I grew up in some underprivileged ecosystems as well. And there were plenty of poor white kids that also should get this or underrepresented Latinos that I knew. And while I wanted to build that, I also knew there's just a lot of noise. There's a lot of resources and advice and people out there trying to help. And I kind of said to myself, "This is the demographic that I understand best." And instead of pretending like I know how to build a platform to help someone from an ecosystem I don't truly understand break-in, I'm just going to focus all my effort on getting more people that look like me because I know that there's a need for that and know that there's a gap for that. And I know that historically, companies have not been good at doing that on their own. So that's been our focus. And I hope there's a day where we have the privilege to expand that horizon and spend time because we have the resources to do it. But for now, I still have a long way to go within the Black community. And I'm going to keep focusing our time there. CHAD: Yeah, I was thinking more about the kids who aren't even getting the opportunity to go to college. So they're 1.1 million Black undergrads. There are probably even more people who don't even get the opportunity to go to college. There are so many people you could help with this. What are your goals for growth? And how do you serve more people? BRIAN: Yeah, I'll tell you the one that's top of mine because we're super excited about it. And this hasn't been released to many places, and so for our lovely thoughtbot community, I'm super excited to share this early, but we're building something called Takeoff University. Takeoff University will be the largest resource repository in the world for Black undergraduate students. Again, I think that the positioning is Black undergraduate students. I don't think that there's a paywall set up where if you don't have a .edu you can't use it. And so, I'm still thinking about how we provide access for some of the people you're describing. But regardless, the idea being our fellowship is very hands-on and very intentional, and specifically focused on accelerating 50 people a summer. But how can we build something that more effectively brings in anyone in their undergraduate ecosystem development? Whether you're a freshman, sophomore, junior, senior, how can we deliver resources to you and get you some of the things that we know you need at the time that you need them and allow you to more effectively become part of the Takeoff ecosystem? Because what we believe is we can build a pretty unique flywheel around the broader TakeOff University ecosystem and some of the content and curriculum and thought leadership and just sharing that can occur there. I think a lot about our older students. When we talk to them about how they engage with younger students, it's oftentimes younger students are sent to them. So they have a classmate who says, "Hey, you should talk to this guy. He broke in, or he had an internship somewhere." And those students come, and one of the first things they ask is, "How do I do it? How do I become you? How do I do the thing you did?" And I think for a lot of students, they don't have a good answer for that. It's hey, let me send you these 2009 PDFs that someone sent me on banking recruiting. Or "Hey, have you checked this out at the career development office?" But they don't send them to anywhere, at least in a concentrated manner. And that's really what got me excited about building Takeoff University was there is not a centralized resource repository where any and every Black undergraduate student should go to prepare themselves for their young professional journey. And so some of the things that'll be a part of that are the first thing is you come in as a career exploratory quiz. You answer a bunch of questions on what you're interested in, what stage you are in your internship development, what stage you are in your academic tenure. And it just helps guide us towards some of the resources that we know you should look at. And it doesn't mean you can't spend time in the whole library but help us guide you in the early days. And then from there, dynamic ways for students to engage, so building community and allowing them to share resources, ways for companies to engage. So allowing companies to come in and identify students that might be top candidates for their program. So really just building an inclusive ecosystem for Black undergrads where they can come and know that they'll give valuable resources. And so we're really excited. We have some really cool things in the oven around this and excited to launch it to the world later this year. CHAD: That's great. What would it take for you to grow from 50 fellows to 100? And is that something that you want to do? BRIAN: Definitely. If you had used the number 500, I might have paused. [laughter] Again, 50 was like, get it right, do it right. I have 100 kids. I don't want to speak for all of them, but I have a lot of students that love what we did over their summer and really shout it from the rooftops to their community. And that means a lot to us. And I'm not entirely sure that if it had been 100 and then 100 that I'd have 200 students who shout that. I think we were able to build a very intimate and hands-on experience for our first two cohorts. And as we grow, and as we introduce technology, and platform, and resources, I think there are ways for us to expand the number without getting out over our skis. And so 100 is in a very near-term goal for us. I'm not sure that it goes much past that. I think instead, like I described with Takeoff University, we start introducing other opportunities. We start putting more things under the Takeoff Institute umbrella. I think a lot like the Aspen Institute. There are so many different ecosystems and community-building efforts going on underneath the larger umbrella. And so long as Takeoff Institute is known as just advancing opportunities, I think we can build a ton of cool ways to have touchpoints with students across the country. CHAD: Are there specific blockers you would identify? Or you have an attentive audience here, are there things you would ask for to get to that 100 fellows? BRIAN: It's a great question. I think folks that have had any experience building, you know, call it Twitter University, Pinterest University, Plaid University, folks who have been on the internal teams that help stand up curriculum and training for employees, again, that's a large part of what we're standing up with TakeOff University. And I'm very, very fortunate to have the funding now and not be in a place where we're looking for money to do that. And so we have the resources to make this really special, and just getting some of the design and product folks that might be listening who might be interested in helping build a community like the one that we're building, we'd appreciate it. We'd love to chat. You can email me at brian@takeoffinstitute.com. I'd love to chat and learn. And even if you don't have time to chat, if there are platforms that you know that look really cool and look like the type of thing that we should be mocking or mimicking, I think it's always helpful to see comparisons and benchmarks. So I think that that'd be a great one. And the other thing I'd add is if you want to be a mentor, please apply, takeoffinstitute.com. It's an incredible experience. I wish I could say I had 100 advisors, but I probably only have 60 because most of the ones who did the first cohort did the second cohort. And they loved it, and they're doing the third cohort. It's an hour a week. It's a very light touch, eight weeks of the summer. It's a very light touch, but I think it's impactful. So we'd love to have some of the folks. CHAD: Do you specifically look for Black mentors? BRIAN: We don't. We don't. I think that that's a really important part of this experience. Like I mentioned, you don't get to choose who your direct report is. And so your direct report might be White, Asian, Black. I don't care what they are. You need to get used to having that direct report experience and building rapport, and building that relationship regardless of what they look like. And so we appreciate having mentors that are male, female, and come from all different walks of life. CHAD: Great. And that website again was? BRIAN: www.takeoffinstitute.com CHAD: Awesome. Well, I think that's a very natural and great place to leave it. I hope folks will contact you and get involved. And there's so much work to be done in this area. And it's a great opportunity to have an impact. BRIAN: Yeah. Thanks for having me, Chad. CHAD: Thank you. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @cpytel. Brian, if folks want to get in touch with you, you want to say your email again and any other channels they should do that? BRIAN: Yeah, perfect. brian@takeoffinstitute.com. And you can find me on Twitter @BHolls1, B-H-O-L-L-S-1. CHAD: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Brian Hollins.
Kevin Withane is the founder of Diversity-X: a community to help underrepresented founders who are trying to make a positive impact in the world thrive, scale, and grow. Chad talks with Kevin about giving underestimated founders connections and access, creating a venture fund, and creating a platform via DiversityX. Follow City DiversityX on Twitter (https://twitter.com/diversityx_vc). Follow Kevin on Twitter (https://twitter.com/KevinWithane) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwithane/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Kevin Withane, founder of Diversity-X. Kevin, thanks for joining me. KEVIN: Chad, thank you so much for having me on this show. CHAD: Kevin, I know you have deep expertise and background in law and ethics and compliance, particularly when it comes to diversity, equity, and inclusion issues. And that has led you to create Diversity-X. And so what is Diversity-X? KEVIN: Diversity-X is a community for underestimated founders trying to make a positive impact in the world. We're working on creating a VC fund for it. And also, it's an ecosystem to support those underestimated founders and help them thrive and scale, and grow. CHAD: That's great. What kind of support and community are underestimated founders lacking, and how does Diversity-X fill in that gap? KEVIN: I think it's a mix of connections and access. I use the term underestimated rather than what many people term as underrepresented because there are plenty of people of color founders, plenty of LGBTQ+ founders, plenty of female founders, disabled founders, veteran founders. There are lots of them in the world, so they are represented. They're just underrepresented in the equitable allocation of capital and particularly venture capital at early stage, which sees many of these founders not necessarily succeed or have to work that little bit harder just to get a starting place where many others get funding a lot earlier and a lot easier in their journey. And I'm not saying raising capital is easy at all for anybody, but it's easier for certain groups of people than it is for others. CHAD: What makes it easier? KEVIN: I'm going to be candid in my views. I think it makes it easier if you're a white male; nothing against white males, but it's easier. There's that privilege. But also, you look, sound, probably have a lot of similar backgrounds to the people who are allocating the money who have control over whether they invest or don't invest in the startups. And I think; also, they tend to have better connections or better ins. It is a generalized statement, but data shows that 93% of VC money typically goes to white male founders. So it's backed up by data to an extent. CHAD: Right. And it doesn't even need to be ill intent. In some cases, there might be, but it doesn't need to be. So much of the VC world is about connections, and what you've done previously, and who you know, and the intro you're able to get. And then, when you finally get the meeting, if you're out pitching something that just isn't even on the radar of the typical VC, they're not going to connect with your idea in the same way that you do. When we're building products, having a diverse team of people allows us to see all the different aspects of that product and have people saying, "Well, what about this? From my background or my perspective, I understand that this is a particular concern for women around the safety of this," or something. And people say, "Oh yeah, I didn't even realize that." KEVIN: Yeah, that's a great point. Within the Diversity-X community, very early on, I realized one of the probable flaws for VC is, let's be honest, it's a very male-dominated industry. I think they are making real strides to change it, make it more open, more accessible to females and people of color. But essentially, for the most part, it is people who look and sound the same and typically are a white male. And there's no disrespect, but sometimes you can get a pitch about femtech. And while she may go, "Yeah, I can see that this could be a problem," you don't know because the fact is you're not a woman. You just don't know. And I experienced that very early on speaking to a female founder who's part of the community, and she's really trying to do some amazing stuff. But at first, I was like, "I can empathize with the issues you're trying to address here and the problem, but that's as far as my knowledge goes." And it made me wonder if VCs who are getting this sort of pitch will probably turn them down. They can't understand the problem. So, therefore, they can't understand what the solution that the founder is trying to come up with is really trying to address. And so pushes it by because they don't have that expertise, and that's not their fault; it's just there's a lack of diversity in the VCs themselves to be able to address that. But then you hear these stories about male founders coming with a femtech solution almost on the back of a cigarette packet. And they're getting X amount of dollars to go and do some research and try and start building a product around what their idea is. And yet many of the female founders are scratching their head; well, we didn't have an in to that VC, so we never got in. And yep, so we don't get funding for what is a problem that we actually experience ourselves, and we're trying to address. CHAD: This conversation reminds me of a conversation that I had in 2018 in Episode 279 with Alex Friedman, the co-founder of LOLA, which is a feminine products company. And she talked about how it was clearly uncomfortable for the people that they were talking to to talk about these kinds of things. So even that can have an aspect to it where like...and then men may be more comfortable talking with men about feminine products than they are to women about them. And it just permeates the whole conversation when you're trying to launch a product that you need money for if it's uncomfortable, or it's foreign, or all of those things. KEVIN: Absolutely. The industry needs to change in a couple of ways, I see. There needs to be greater emphasis on VCs building networks and connections into the communities and to the founders that are underestimated people of color, female from different socioeconomic backgrounds that may not have been able to afford to go to MIT or Harvard but super-smart people solving real-life and real-world problems. And VCs themselves need to look at their own diversity, like, it is not diversity just for the sake of well, we need X number of women now with investing power, or we need more people of color to invest. It's because those people bring their lived experiences, which is the same for any business. It's no different if you're a big corporate. The reason for diversity is the same. It's to get that cognitive diversity, that cognitive difference of lived experience, which in the end, bring into your field. It's something as human beings we can't detach ourselves from. We can't detach ourselves from our lived experience. We take that everywhere we go. CHAD: So what's involved in creating a venture fund? KEVIN: A lot more work than I thought. CHAD: [laughs] KEVIN: I don't have a venture background, so I'm already 700 steps behind everybody else that is doing it. Even the good guys who are trying to actually address this problem, many of them actually come from a venture background. But I'm looking out there, and I'm seeing people like Matt the VC, Arlan Hamilton, and they inspire me that I can do this. Because, ultimately, I had a soft conversation with a family office just to try and explain what I'm doing and see if there'd be interest. And they actually liked the idea. But they said to me, "Who are your competitors out there?" And I said, "Look, you can think of me as naive, but the reality is I don't think I have any competitors." And the reason is because we have a mission. Our vision is a world where you don't have underestimated founders. Our mission is to grow the world's biggest community of underestimated founders and support those that are VC-ready and the right fit for funding that are going to be successful with capital. And whilst there are other companies and funds doing this, they have niches where they focus on certain areas. We're much broader. But ultimately, no matter how much I raised in the fund, it's never going to be enough. It's never going to be enough to meet the gap that there is right now and the opportunity. So when you say competitor, every time an underestimated founder gets funded and gets given the opportunity to really address the problem that they're trying to tackle, that's a win for me because it's helping my mission and the vision. So that's the way I look at it. And yes, that is a little bit naive, maybe. But you look at Elon Musk, and you look at founders who are trying to do amazing things. And you don't really knock them down for their grand visions. You have to aim high, and that's what we're trying to do at Diversity-X. CHAD: So I noticed that you are particularly focused on the UK and Europe. And in my experience, the investment community tends to be different between the United States and Europe. How have you found that, and has that been adding a challenge on top of a challenge? KEVIN: Yeah, it is adding a challenge on top of a challenge. It is different. I think the U.S., in some senses, is much more progressive, much more open. It's funny, I was talking to a friend, and I was saying...I can't really talk numbers because I don't want to get in trouble with the FCA. But I said to him, "This is the sort of size of the fund I'm looking to raise." And he is an American. And he just looked at me and said, "Why?" And I said, "Well, you need sort of skin in the game. You need this, this, and this." He looked at me and said, "You are the skin in the game. Your passion comes through." Guys in America, people will be looking at you, saying, "You're way too small. You need to go much bigger than this." And I said, "But skin in the game, skin in the game, skin in the game." He said, "Don't tell me about that. Go big and see if people will buy into it." And that's I think much more of the view across the pond. There's much more appetite. And I think for European VCs and particularly those probably starting out trying to address some of the issues that Diversity-X hopes to address, we've got to move probably and work hopefully in tandem with the more progressive, more open, more solution-oriented VC funds that are coming from the U.S. Because quite frankly, they are coming here now. They're coming to UK and Europe. But the reason I wanted to start in the UK and focus on the UK and Europe is that's where I'm based. That's where the best part of my knowledge is. Although interestingly, I guess my network is probably from the LP side, probably stronger in the U.S. So we'll see how that pans out. CHAD: I assume that there are some legal requirements to starting a venture fund. Or can anybody do it, I guess is the...[laughs] KEVIN: Maybe this is part of the problem as well as, the bar for entry just to start a fund is high, and it's expensive. So I guess I'm blessed that I've had the opportunities I've had in the past to be able to build something to be able to start this. But yeah, it's a myriad. And as a lawyer and someone who's even done transactional work on private equity and even helping some startups on fundraising and seeing how it works, it is very difficult. And you could be dealing with multiple jurisdictions depending on where your limited partners are. So there's a lot to factor in. And then it's not just the legal fees; it's the fund administration and the fund management. For instance, in the UK, are you going to be regulated if your fund doesn't need to be regulated? Or are you going to be authorized on your own, or are you going to use an umbrella? What does that mean? So it's a real steep learning curve. And I've got to admit, in my personal journey, there have been too few who have responded to my request just for help and advice, including what I would consider...I use this as the good guys, but the people trying to address the same problems that I am either focused on female. You reach out, but there's no return call. But there is one person who's a traditional fund; he is a white male VC. But honestly, he came back. We had a call. We talked about stuff. He said, "Keep in contact. Let me know how it's going," and he's tried to help me. A couple of weeks later, I didn't hear from him, and then all of a sudden, an email popped up, or a message popped up saying, "Oh yeah, sorry it's taken me a couple of weeks to get back to you. But I just wanted to make sure that here's an introduction. This could be the partner you're looking for blah, blah, blah." I was blown away by that, that kind gesture. Somebody who just literally could have had a call with me said, "Yeah, not interested in this, never going to go anywhere. Why exert any effort?" CHAD: That's great. You mentioned it is difficult. It's always difficult to start something new. But you're doing it alone. You don't have a partner. KEVIN: No. I'm on the hunt for a partner. It's like dating, I guess. You keep trying to kiss a lot of frogs to find that person. Ultimately, knowing that I'm going to get challenged, rightly so, on track record, I would like to find a partner who has VC experience, who buys in deeply to the concept, and the mission, and the vision that we have and is looking to build a VC firm, not a fund, i.e., this is not a one and done exercise. This is about creating over multiple funds and, hopefully, generationally growing this to something really special. CHAD: Well, if you're listening, and that describes you, get in touch with Kevin. [laughs] KEVIN: Absolutely. Mid-roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: In the meantime, while you're working on building this venture fund, you said, okay, I'm going to start building a community right away, right? KEVIN: Yep. CHAD: And when it comes to platform, how are you doing that? Are you using something off the shelf? Are you piecing it together? How's it going? KEVIN: It's such hard work. Who would have thought? My wife laughs at me because since she's known me, every time we go into a town, or a village, or a shop that has a community board, I'll stop and read it. And she would laugh. She's like, "It's such a geeky thing to do." And I was like, "I love community. I like to know what's going on, what's happening." I presumed that it's, therefore, relatively easy to build one. Then I was very nervous, and I was like, I don't know how to get started. And somebody who's in the community but also just an amazing person, Amy, she said to me, "Dude, just get started. Stop procrastinating. Just start a WhatsApp group," so I did. And then I invited a couple of friendly faces, i.e., friends, and said, "Please, can you join this group?" And then I invited a couple of founders that I had just connected with and just started having conversations with. And from that moment...and this was early October, and then my son went into hospital. But from that moment, it started growing. So beginning of October 2021 to date, we have about 60 founders, which I think is not bad. And we use a WhatsApp group. Then I had some conversations and got some feedback from the founders. And they said, "Look, we need some more organization because our feed is blowing up with the amount of traffic going through it. So we need some sort of structure. We need some resources and different things." So I was looking around, and I was like, by the end of day, what can I get for free? Because I'm not making any money on this. And what can I get for free? So we moved it...we didn't move it. We set up on Slack. But I've got to say despite having more organization, the bulk of the activity still works around WhatsApp. But I will say this; I'm not a tech person, so I do need support on this. So if there's anybody who wants to volunteer to give me some advice, or help, or just come onboard maybe in some capacity, I am trying to build a platform that's web-based, maybe even app-based, that can help facilitate conversations, learning, investor matching. Because part of what I'm doing, whilst I haven't raised a fund yet, is that there are members in this community who need support right now, financially. I can't give that to them, but there are good people out there, good angels, or even some of them, probably VCs that would. And so it's trying to create a platform where we can connect those founders, those underestimated founders, and I think predominantly angels. But if any VCs want to join, that'd be great too, just to help these guys get started. They need to start moving forward, and they can't wait for me to get a fund up and running. So whatever I can do. So I am looking at building a platform. It's just in the question of how do I do this? And is there anybody to help me? CHAD: If you're a founder who wants to get involved in this community and think it would be beneficial to them, where do they go to do that? KEVIN: I'll say reach out to me either email me kevin.withane@gmail.com or connect with me on LinkedIn, two best Places. We'll chat. But generally, the community is open. If you're an underestimated founder, if you just tick that box, you're in. Come and learn, grow, support, be supported. You'll see that. We've had some new members in the last week who have just said, "This is a really interesting community." And I spoke with one today that said, "I'm generally very wary, particularly about being around people who have similar businesses to what I have, you know, competitors." And I said, "Why? Why are you scared of competitors?" And she's in a field which relates to sustainability. I said to really deliver the sustainability you want to deliver, it's about collaboration, and that's what this group has. It has that in spades, people working together, people supporting each other, e-platform. They are going gangbusters on sharing information. This is what we use. This is a great book. This is a great resource. These are great people to go and speak to. And so it takes the pain and reduces the stresses of being a founder, which you've got to do so many different things. And generally, you've got to do all of those things on your own with a very few number of people supporting you. CHAD: And I imagine that a lot of the people in the community so far are people who invite each other in. KEVIN: Yeah, and there are other people that I've met who have contacted me and said, "Look, we've got this startup. We're looking for an advisor, or we're just looking for a bit of support," or even someone saying, "We're looking for investment." So I'm very upfront where we are at the stage we are. But I'll introduce him to the community, and they start embedding themselves in it. And it's growing. As I said, the mission I don't know if it's bold enough, but I think it is bold. CHAD: [laughs] KEVIN: It is to be the world's largest community of underestimated founders. And I actually asked a question with the group yesterday was, "How do I go from, say, 50 to 500 in a few months but real genuine people that want to be community members like actually contribute and be active?" I'm still waiting for the answer to that question. I'm hoping it's going to come next week. [laughs] CHAD: [laughs] So I'm curious, given your work in, and correct me if this is wrong, but I would say a more corporate space, in your work in international law firms and global public companies and that kind of thing. How has that experience either been different or the same as what you're trying to do now? And how do traditional companies approach issues like this? KEVIN: So I get to work with...I have a day job, as I call it, but Diversity-X and supporting diversity is my passion. To address some of the passions that I have, the reality is not every workplace can or chooses to allow that to happen for employees. In certain companies, your role is your role. And if you want more, then go outside. So for me, there are things I wanted to do that I don't get the opportunity to do in my workplace or in the way I want to do it in my workplace. So I started looking outside; well, who can I help that needs someone like me to help them with this sort of thing? And that's how I fell into helping startup founders. And that's where I found this absolute passion. I think everybody who works with founders and startups is always energized in a way that incorporates the energies that sits in pockets in my experience. And you don't tend to see huge organizations. And this is not to say they don't exist; there are some that do but who are energized and focused on a purpose. I think those that have purpose that's really, really clearly defined and embedded do have this energy of drive and innovation and disruption and even go as far as trying to have radical change. Others are trying to learn. And to be fair, to many organizations, some of this stuff is new to them. And they're learning, and it takes time, and you have to give them time, and you have to give them the opportunity to fail and make mistakes. So there are a lot of companies that are trying to do the right thing, trying to be better, trying to embrace their people and the issues, and the things that their people care about but as well as balancing with the wider stakeholders because they have multiple stakeholders; it's not easy. It's a tough balancing act for anybody in a leadership position in the corporate to say, "Well, look, we've got to deliver financial results. But also, we've got to think long term, but we're measured on short term." How do you do that? It takes a lot of work and effort, which is why I see the opportunity for startups, in particular, to operationalize this stuff early on. So that becomes embedded because retrofitting is very expensive and very time-consuming, and resource-heavy. CHAD: Having lived and worked in the UK, China, Hong Kong, Russia, The United States, how are things different in all those places when it comes to work and issues like this? KEVIN: Let me just quickly ask you a question see what you think. Where do you think was the hardest place of those locations to live and work? CHAD: Hmm. Russia? KEVIN: It's interesting. CHAD: I don't know. KEVIN: No, no, no. People would usually say, and people do say to me, "Oh, China must be really hard, or Russia must be really hard." CHAD: Well, I went to visit China about two and a half years ago. And it completely changed my perspective on what China is like, and so that's why I didn't answer China. But I don't want to invalidate your perspective if China was the most difficult place for you. [laughs] KEVIN: Actually, no. The United States was the hardest place, which is why in 2020, we made that decision, for multiple reasons, to return home back to the UK. It's the land of opportunity, but it's slipping by. They've got so much resource. They've got so much of everything. But there's such disunity in my perspective and in my lived experience. But if you're an American, you might see it differently. If you're someone, an immigrant who got naturalized there, you may see it differently. But in my personal experience, and that's all I can talk to, was that this is a deeply divided country that's frittering away the opportunity to truly be the greatest country in the world. And they talk about being the land of the free. I used to joke with my Canadian colleagues because I was in Detroit, so you look north. You look south, sorry, you look south to Detroit, which is the only place...and I use this as my pop quiz question of it's the only place in America, I believe, that if you look south, you're looking at Canada. But I used to say that's the land of the freer because truly, I actually felt more strict in the United States than living in Russia or in China. You get told what to do. It's just done in a different way in the United States, and that's just my experience. But look, I lived there for three and a half years. It's not a lifetime by any stretch of the imagination. And it was a time when I guess many of the people I love and care about in America probably said, "Kevin, you are here at the worst time to be here. CHAD: [laughs] Right. KEVIN: And this is not the real America." But unfortunately, that was the America I experienced. So it was the hardest place for me. CHAD: I think that that's actually where America gets into trouble is by continually saying, "This isn't the real America." And you can only say that for so long when we've been saying it for a long time. And so I think it's important to ask ourselves, isn't that actually the real America then? Sort of to your point of the VCs and not changing the demographics despite saying something is a problem and working at it over time. And, oh, we've made a percentage point of progress means that you're not really working on the problem or willing to change because you're probably not focused on the right things. KEVIN: Yeah. And you think about the United States of America it's funny, the house I'm living in is 172 years old. It is older than so many places in the States, and yet I remember someone saying, "Oh, you're living in a 1950s house. That's a really old house." [laughs] It's like, it's almost a new build in the UK. America has this rich history to still create. CHAD: And I think that's what lends us to being more aggressive when it comes to investment and more willing to take risks. So like you said, there are tons of opportunity and some tons of potential at the same time as there are probably real big problems. KEVIN: You know that saying about the rising tide benefits all? CHAD: Yeah. KEVIN: I think in VC, it has had a negative connotation because from the industrial gaslighting is yeah, there has been an increase in funding, but everybody got it. So the percentages of allocation didn't change. But also, America has that opportunity, in my view, to really rise everybody. Just take the education system; it should be the greatest education system in the world, bar none. The resources are there, the talent is there, the people are there, and they're hungry for that education. Heck, people from other countries scramble to get America to have a piece of that. But why is it not? And I think it's because there's too much protection of certain groups and an unwillingness to be more open. But the more open you are to the different ideas, to the different viewpoints, to then finding the best place for us, I think it presents America with a huge, huge opportunity. So, you know, I'm probably [inaudible 29:14] [laughter] because really you should be the best. You say you're the biggest and the best, but people don't care about the size of your army, really. The everyday Joe in the UK, we don't think about that. I grew up thinking America was paved with gold, and I got there, and it's like, this is not quite the way I grew up. [laughs] CHAD: Well, inside of America, there's a lack of that perspective, though, because when you can self believe that that's the case. And because you don't have a perspective on what it's actually like elsewhere, it's very easy to say, "Oh, we are the best." KEVIN: Yeah, that's true. And look, who cares what country is the best in reality? [laughter] Sometimes I like to think I've got these three children. Right now, as children, they don't care. They just want to get on with people and have more friends and more relationships, and that's what they care about. But at some stage, I don't know where it starts or how it starts; we lose that. We lose that. But you see that in founders, this ability to get past that, and they're trying to address it. At least the founders I'm trying to support they're really trying to break past these barriers of we're different, and we need to remain different to we are different. Let's embrace that. And how can we use that to our advantage? CHAD: Yeah. And I think that to take a step back, I'm a big believer in continuous improvement and always trying to be better. And I think that when you find yourself in a position where you've stopped doing that, it's no good for anybody. And it's very clear to me that there's the next frontier for improving ourselves, and the companies that we work at, and the world in which we live is all of these things that we've talked about today. And so I really wish you the best with Diversity-Xand with what you're trying to do. And please keep in touch, and we should talk further, maybe offline after this recording, about how we might be able to help more. KEVIN: Brilliant. And thank you so much for having me on this podcast. I'm so, so grateful. Thank you. CHAD: Kevin, if folks...you said your email address before, but do you want to say it again or other places where people can reach out to you? KEVIN: Yeah, so it's kevin.withane that's W-I-T-H-A-N-E @gmail.com. Or you can find me on LinkedIn. I'm very visible there. CHAD: And you can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a transcript of this entire episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening, and we'll see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.
Jay Nath is the Co-CEO of City Innovate, a govtech company streamlining procurement through enterprise software and innovative frameworks. He talks with Chad about how he focuses on helping governments be more effective, responsive, and zeroed in on helping their constituents whether on a small city or a big state scale. City Innovate (https://www.cityinnovate.com/) Follow City Innovate on Twitter (https://twitter.com/CityInnovate) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/city-innovate/) Follow Jay on Twitter (https://twitter.com/jay_nath) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/jaynath/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel, and with me today is Jay Nath, Co-CEO of City Innovate and former Chief Innovation Officer of San Francisco. Jay, thanks for joining me. JAY: Yeah, Chad, thank you for having me. CHAD: I assume based on the name and the fact that I've done my research...but I assume based on the name of City Innovate and the fact that you're a former Chief Innovation Officer of San Francisco that what City Innovate might be. But why don't you give everybody an overview of what it is? JAY: Thank you, Chad. So City Innovate is focused on helping governments be more effective, responsive, and focused on helping their constituents, whether it's a small city government or a big state. And the way that we've been doing this is really sort of an interesting; I'd say wonky place. We found that there's a pressure point in government around documents and specifically on procurement. And why is that interesting? Because what I've seen is if you want to work with government and collaborate, whether it's even volunteering or you're a startup, and you want to work, procurement is often that channel. And it's not really a channel; it's more of a barrier, a byzantine process. You can think of this from a technical frame, creating an API, a read/write API to make that process much more streamlined on both sides, helping governments be able to find the best partners to solve their big challenges. And on the other side, folks from all walks of life, whether you're a massive company or you're a founder in a garage, how do you actually connect those two? So we're really working at that intersection, and it's something that I find a lot of value in and importance in. And surprisingly and maybe not surprisingly, there's a lot of need for technology to help connect those dots. And ultimately, I think what I can do is make that process more inclusive and lower the barriers of entry so that people from different communities can participate and help make their communities better. CHAD: So your clients at City Innovate are cities and governmental organizations. Are you just delivering a product to them, or are you often helping them work better too? JAY: It's a bit of both. From a product standpoint, we're really in the B2B space and very much enterprise, if you will. And part of that standard enterprise SaaS offering is also support services, and that can be training, that can be professional services to help them in thought leadership in different ways. And that's exactly what we do. So we not only have our product, but we help them through something called agile procurement. So it's really borrowing from the software development methodology and applying the same principles and approaches to developing and finding the right partner and being more agile and iterative through that process. And historically, it's been very waterfall and very stilted and overly structured. So really being more focused on outcomes, really being focused on getting data into the process so that you can actually do, let's say, a bake-off and get more information before we make that decision. And it's surprising, Chad, folks in government are often buying multimillion dollars, tens of millions of dollars technology systems without actually trying it out. And think about your personal life. You test drive a car. You look through a home. You make these big decisions with a lot of data and evidence. And in government historically, they've been using paper documents to make that decision, RFPs responses, and marketing material. And it's hard to sift through and say, "Hey, what's real and what's not?" So we've been really helping them think through a more agile evidence-based approach, and our software supports that. And so yeah, it's really leading a movement about changing how they think about partnering with the vendor community or contractors. CHAD: So one of the things that is probably interesting about this and maybe a little bit meta is that this is what you help them do. And so you have to go through that process with them of being procured. [laughs] JAY: It is meta. You're absolutely right. [laughs] CHAD: In order to become the vendor that they use. JAY: That's right. CHAD: What are the challenges inherent in that, and does it ever get in the way? And how do people, either your clients, come to you, or how do you find them? And how do you work through that challenging process of government procurement? JAY: Well, the thing is, since we know this space really well, we know how to navigate those different channels, the byzantine processes I mentioned before. I think one of the things I worked on when I was in the City of San Francisco was a program that brought startups and governments together, and we had an educational component. We'd help founders better understand that exact question. How do you actually get contracts with government? And there are no books that are out there. There's no real knowledge out there. And so, we help them talk about the ten different pathways to doing that. So it's a bit of a hidden art, if you will. And I think there needs to be more conversation and more resources for founders if they're looking to go into the public sector to be able to navigate that. So we know that really well. And we're trying to really help broaden access to that knowledge. CHAD: I assume that the clients you end up getting are people who are...or are governments who want to be better. Otherwise, they wouldn't choose your solution. [laughs] JAY: That's right. Well, I think their motivations are multifold. Some of the governments want a process that's more efficient. They know that they can be more productive. They have maybe staffing constraints, and they have a lot of work, so we can help them on the productivity side. There are other governments that are really focused on hey; we need to get better partners out there. We've been working with the same folks over and over again. How do we work with those innovators in our community? So there's that crowd. And then there's, I think, another group of folks who are saying, "Hey, we wanted to make sure that this process is more inclusive. We want to work with folks who are from different backgrounds who may be underrepresented. How do we make this process more streamlined, more efficient so that they're able to participate more effectively?" So I think the motivations can be different, but it's really at the end of the day centered around this idea of digital transformation and service design that allows these two different worlds to be able to communicate and work together more effectively. CHAD: How long is the typical sales cycle for a client? JAY: Man, yeah, [laughs] it can range from weeks, I would say to months and going over 12 months. It can be 12 to 18 months, trying to get in, doing a trial maybe, giving them that certainty, and then securing budget and that annual process of waiting for that budget approval to happen. So it is not for the faint of heart, especially enterprise software within government is really something that requires a lot of different approaches. So partnerships with bigger companies that have the distribution channel, that might have those relationships, that might have those contracts, how do you actually work with them to shortcut the long procurement process? How do you leverage folks like AWS and other cloud providers that may already have a relationship so that you can, again, piggyback off of that? So I think there are a number of different ways to try to compress that timeframe. But it's not a walk in the park, Chad. CHAD: So, in that environment, how did you get started with City Innovate? How long was it until you were able to get your first real customer? And how did you bridge the gap between founding and being in the market? JAY: That's a great question. So being in the public sector, I knew that procurement is a huge challenge and also a pressure point and a leverage point to unlocking a lot of value. And so the work that we had done with startups and government the first experience that we had was amazing. We had a startup that came in and helped blind people navigate through the airport here in San Francisco SFO in four months and truly a collaboration with the startup and the airport staff. And unfortunately, when it came to procurement, it took two years for them to actually get into contract. CHAD: Wow. JAY: For a startup, that's like dog years. That's like an eternity. And so we really knew that we had to tackle that. So we introduced a methodology called challenge-based procurement that, as I spoke to earlier, is more agile, evidence-based, and outcomes-based. And that really leveled the playing field for these young companies to show that hey, we can actually go in here and help you solve that problem. You don't have to work with a big publicly-traded company to do this work and spend a lot of money. We can be more nimble and agile. And so that's really where I started to dig in deeper into procurement. And that work got federally funded because it created a lot of jobs. And we've had hundreds of startups all across the U.S. It's an international program called STIR, Startup In Residence, and really proud of that work. Our mayor, unfortunately, died unexpectedly. So we looked at hey, where do we move this program? And it did make sense for a city to manage a multi-city program, and so City Innovate came to mind. At the time, they were a non-profit. I'd been working with my co-CEO co-executive director at the time. It was a nice, beautiful transition into that. And at that time, I said for myself personally, where do I see impact, and what can I do? And for me, the idea of entrepreneurship, the idea of products making impact in government, I saw how much impact was being made. And so City Innovate has really become that vehicle for myself and the organization to really scale that idea out. CHAD: You mentioned you have a co-CEO. How did that come about? And how do you split the responsibilities between the two of you? JAY: Well, the good thing is we're really great complements. So his focus is really on go-to-market and focusing on how do we get this in the hands of our customers or prospective customers? And I've always been very interested on the product side. I was formerly a VP of product at a startup before my time in government, and so that scenario I find keen interest. And I deeply understand the personas and the use cases of government, having spent a lot of time there. And so that empathy and understanding and building a product around that and having somebody who can help get that product in the hands of government navigating through those difficult processes. It really does take that. You can have a great product, but without that ability to get it in the hands of your customers, especially with governments, it's really challenging. CHAD: Is there any in particular...like, why Co-CEO and not two other C-level roles, one of you CEO, one of you CIO? JAY: I don't think we've spent too much time debating that. And that might change, I think to your point to better describe our focus areas. Maybe my role changes to chief product officer and his to a different role title. I think if you're starting a company, you've got a lot of things to worry about. And it just seemed like a...yeah, I don't think there was much thought in it. CHAD: Yeah. That's interesting, though. You alluded to what you were doing before the City of San Francisco. Well, let's dive into that a little bit more. And specifically, what were you doing, and then why did you join the public sector? JAY: So I was VP of Product at a company called SquareTrade. It was a wonderful journey. We were working with, again, something kind of wonky and a space that was anti-consumer. It was around warranties, specifically electronic warranties. And we were in the eBay marketplace and expanded way beyond that in later years. But when I was there, we really took a contrarian perspective and being inspired by Zappos and many companies that are really focused on the consumer. We changed that value proposition to say, hey, can we build a product that people love, a warranty that actually works? And so we did crazy things like we would actually give you the money before you returned the product. We would have the shipping label. And we wouldn't ask any questions. We did amazing things. But that wasn't just because we were focused on the user experience. We also had data to back it up. We knew that, hey, there are a certain percentage of people who are going to return rocks. And there's a certain percentage of people who are going to do certain things. So we had a lot of information going in. The other thing we knew is that we could own the whole stack, the underwriting, the retailing. And we also knew the business. So that was a great experience. But I really was missing this connection to the public good and doing something that was having impact in a really tangible way. That's when I saw why don't I work for a city I love deeply and care about? And that really drove me into thinking about public service. I had some friends who were in it, and they convinced me that I should take a look at that. And I definitely have found the work that I had been doing in public service to be extremely rewarding and just a unique opportunity. Especially if you're a technologist or a product mindset or an engineering mindset, that is such a rare perspective in government, and being able to bring that in, you can do amazing things. We all know the healthcare.gov and how that was imploding and exploding. It almost brought down a presidency and administration, and it was saved. I think many people know the story, especially in your audience. That was really folks in Silicon Valley saying, "Hey, I'm going to raise my hand and volunteer my time. I might be working at a big company and making a lot of money, but I will take my time out and try to help." And they did. They turned it around. And I think that ethos and that mindset of giving back is something that's animated my interests in public sector and the fact that there's so much need, especially from the tech community, in helping the government out. CHAD: Now, you didn't get started as the City Innovation Officer. [chuckles] So you got started as the Manager of Enterprise CRM for the City of San Francisco. JAY: That's right. Yeah, it was interesting. Yeah, definitely. CHAD: I think that public sector work is maybe a little bit of a black box for people. I know it is for me. You mentioned you knew some people, but I assume that was not a political appointment job. JAY: It was not. CHAD: So, how does one get into that, find it, and get that job and that kind of thing? JAY: I think I took a very rare and uncommon path. So as you noted, I came in helping stand up a call center. So a 311 one call center which is, for the folks who don't know, 311 is for non-emergencies, potholes, et cetera, starting a business, how do I do that? So yeah, set up a CRM system 24/7. It was a great experience and actually much harder than I thought. I was working harder there than I had at the startup, so breaking some stereotypes or at least some ideas that I had in my mind. But I quickly found myself saturating that opportunity and saying, hey, what do I want to do? And this was at the time that Obama had just come into office, and he had a call to action. His first memo in office was around openness and collaboration and that I felt was really compelling to me. I had the opportunity to say, "Hey, let me reach out to folks in White House. I don't have any relationships there, but I have this badge of San Francisco." And that started me on a journey of innovation, civic innovation. And I did some really interesting things with great startups like Twitter at the time. We created a read/write API, the first of its kind in local government. Almost got fired by the [inaudible 16:45] [laughter] and trying to explain just like, why are you opening a channel into government to let people do horrible things? And so it was an interesting conversation. But Gavin Newsom was the mayor at the time then, so you can see it's going back in time. CHAD: [laughs] JAY: But my journey then sort of said, hey, let's continue building data standards and doing good work. And I was recognized by the mayoral campaigns that were running. And so they wanted to sort of say, "Hey, we need somebody in innovation in the mayor's office." So I got recruited into that role, the first of its kind in San Francisco and in the U.S. So it was just a great opportunity to really help define and set a foundation for what does civic innovation mean? What does that look like? And we had a small office, and we did some really interesting work at the nexus of collaboration. That's really what I think is what we tried to do is make government more permeable, more accessible for people who are driving innovation in their communities to be able to participate in government. Mid-roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: If someone's interested, how might they get involved in contributing to the public sector? JAY: I think there's a couple of different ways. So one way, Chad, is that governments are often putting a lot of data out there. There has been an open data movement that we had led, and it's now a national global movement. So you can find data, and you can create a data product around that and giving more insight into visibility and into issues. You can volunteer with a specific department. They're looking for those skill sets, so you can do that. You can also look for digital services offices. So those are becoming much more commonplace in governments if that's your thing. There are definitely ways to raise your hand and try to contribute. Folks are always looking for it. And if you don't see that opportunity, make that opportunity happen. Reach out to your council member. Reach out to a department head and say, "Hey, I've got this great superpower. I want to help you do better." And I guarantee they will listen because they're often strapped for resources. CHAD: How do you know when you should pursue a more general product that might be useful to governments versus like, oh, if I could get in there and contribute? How do you make that distinction in your mind? JAY: Well, I don't think there needs to be. So you can come in and have maybe a frame of hey, let me help my local government. And you might find opportunities while you're working there. They're using Microsoft Word and Excel to do something that really should be productized so you can think about it from that frame. Or you might have built a product for an adjacent market or for another need and say, "Hey, is there an opportunity to actually reframe this product that I have in the government context?" It might be a content management system. It might be a lot of different products can be reframed in that context. So the way that we actually became a product company from a non-profit was just doing that. We got invited to bring our methodology of agile procurement. And so we had in the back of our mind this idea that I bet if we go there, it's going to be kind of dusty. There's going to be a lot of broken tools, and that was the case. They were using 40-year old technology to manage sometimes billions of dollars of purchasing. And so we saw something that you normally wouldn't have that vantage point by really collaborating and working with them. And that led to product ideas, and that we were able to co-design and co-develop that with our partner governments. And then something that I think is also unique is that they're often eager to work with you because they don't get that opportunity often to work with vendors and folks who can conjure magic in their minds, that they have a vision or idea. And you can come back in a week or a month, and you might have a working product, not just wireframes. And for them, that ability to move so quickly they haven't seen that before. And I saw that firsthand in bringing startups and governments together, the velocity and speed that startups can work with is so different. We all know that. But when they see that, they get excited. They want to work with them. They want to lean into it and figure out, hey, can I give you data? Can I give you other ways to better understand the space? Because no one's cared about this space before. So there's often a willingness to grab a hold of anyone who can actually help them solve their problems. But you have to listen, and you have to come in humble. And I'll share a story here. I created a program called Civic Bridge that brought in pro bono services from big companies like Google and McKinsey, and many others. And some folks from Google came in, and they were sharing how they have to serve everybody. Their product is really ubiquitous and has to serve everybody. They quickly got reminded that government has to serve everybody, people who don't have technology, people who aren't online, people who don't have English as their first language, and people with different disabilities. All of them are constituents. And so technology is one way to reach people. But you have to think broadly about how do you make that service or what you're offering accessible to everybody? And I think that was a humbling experience for the folks there at the table. But what I loved about that program is really this cross-pollination and also breaking down stereotypes in both directions that people sometimes have in the public sector of private sector folks because they often don't hop back and forth. If you're a public sector person, you're often in the public sector. And so being able to actually see that they're not just a bunch of capitalists, [laughs] that they're your neighbor, that these are people who do care about the community, and they're making an impact in a different way. And vice versa, that there are so many talented people in government. And the problems seem simple or seem simple to solve on the outside, but they're often wicked problems or just have a lot of complexity to try to solve. So it's great to be able to have that empathy on both sides. CHAD: Yeah, that's maybe one thing. Are there other things that you would point out that are different when creating and shaping products for the public sector versus the private products? JAY: Yeah, I think that idea of being inclusive is really important. The other one is around...and this is, I think, true even in the private sector but more so in the public sector because of the demographics that you're working with. The demographics are folks who are closer to retirement. They are not digital natives. So when you're building products, you really need to leverage mental models and use that as a way to bring them into a new experience or a new tool. And as an example, there are obviously a lot of government forms that you see, right? CHAD: Mm-hmm. JAY: And I think as a technologist or a product person, you might say, hey, let's move away from Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF or whatever you're using. We have this thing called HTML, and we can bring this online and have all these beautiful affordances. Well, that's really hard for those folks to wrap their heads around and move from something they may have been using for 20, 30 years. And so maybe that first step is not that; maybe it's online fillable PDFs that you can actually store the data in a database and shift that back. And maybe that allows them to actually move more quickly because there's less resistance both internally and for the public as well. And so we've seen that time and time again, is that hey, is there a way to make that shift into a new paradigm but do it in such a way that there's a clear connection point? And then maybe the next step after that is, yeah, we need to make sure this is mobile-ready. Let's actually make that into a responsive design and move away from that PDF. And that's something that we've learned in our own product that, hey, we need to understand deeply the products and tools that they're using today. And how do we draw those parallels and bring them into the current modern set of technologies that we're offering? So it's not always easy, but it's something that we found a lot of success leveraging those mental models. CHAD: Are there other things that you might call out as things you got to keep in mind? JAY: Well, security is often, you know, we see that everywhere with SolarWinds, et cetera. I think there's just a deeper concern of supply chain attacks, ransomware, et cetera. So you're seeing, I think across the board in enterprise as well but in government even more so really focusing on that. And I think the challenge for folks who are building products is how do you find that balance when you have to make sure that you're NIST-certified and all of the SOC 2, et cetera? How do you build a great product that is accessible that doesn't make you go through a bunch of hoops to try to get access to it? And it's not easy. So that adds a layer of complexity trying to build that out. And, Chad, I'm sure you've worked with a lot of folks who have thought about government or may have had some success with it. So it might be interesting to hear from you if there are certain patterns or product sensibilities that you've seen that have been successfully applied in the public sector realm. CHAD: Well, I think you're right about that inherent complexity or that the bar is pretty high in order to have a product which is accessible and secure. If you're building a product for consumers, you can do some of that stuff iteratively. It can be difficult to work in an agile, iterative way in a highly regulated space. And so there's maybe not even one set way that you do that. It might be different for the space that you operate in. But it is important to take a step back and say, what can we do iteratively, or what can we leave off right now because we have to do this other thing? And those will be different for every product. And I see the real mistake being not taking that step back and not really being thoughtful about how you're going to do that in the complex, highly regulated space. And this is true for healthcare and finance as well. There are certain things you've got to do. And really, you have to approach it pretty thoughtfully in order to make sure you can still work and not just default to doing everything agile. We have this concept of like the 80-20 rule, and that is sometimes really difficult to do in the public space, right? JAY: I think you're absolutely right. And I think people recognize that highly regulated markets or industries are tough to crack. And I think you're absolutely right, Chad, that you have to find that entry point where maybe you can come in and the regulations are lower for that problem that you're solving initially. And use that as a place to land and then better understand where you fit into the overall workflow. And you're able to go upstream and downstream from there. And that's a lot of what we've seen success with these young startups, and the work we're doing will come in where there's maybe not so much regulations and provide value there, build trust, and then look at the broader ecosystem or processes to say, "Hey, where can we add more value?" Yes, it might be highly regulated. But we now have a better understanding, more resources, and customers to help us educate climbing that mountain together. But yeah, I want to make sure that...the flip side of all this...so if I were listening, I'd say, "Well, it sounds like the public sector is really tough," [laughter] and it is, but it's also truly rewarding. I think being able to know that you're able to help at the scale that the government does its work is really, really rewarding. One of the founders that we helped get her first product was to help foster kids, and that foster process that we've probably all heard is really, really tough. And they brought that online, and they went from one city...they're in so many different states now serving so many people across the U.S., and they're doing really well. They're, I think, Series B or C. And it's amazing. But it took that one government to take a chance and to be able to bring all this value. So that's something that excites me is the level of impact is so significant. CHAD: On that note, you started the conversation saying that procurement was the area where you felt like you could have an impact. Do you see expanding beyond that in the future, or is that not on your roadmap? JAY: I think we have a lot to chew on. But like a lot of product folks, we've got ideas that are further out. What I'm seeing in the government space when we talk about digital transformation...in the government context, you're often talking about PDFs and Microsoft Word documents, et cetera. So I think for us, we're really excited about is there a new way to think about documents in a way that works for governments? They're used to Microsoft Word. But is there more that can be done there to create more affordances, to create more powers that they just don't have today? And they're using Post-it Notes or whatever it might be to try to address those shortcomings. CHAD: Everything is going to be marked down in GitHub eventually. [laughter] JAY: Yes, we do need to introduce Markdown or just plain text, maybe. Why are these contracts locked up in Microsoft Word? Yeah, that's something that's a pet peeve of mine as well. I spend a lot of time in open data. And let's not use proprietary formats. Let's use something that folks understand. But the world is changing, which is great. We're seeing more governments using JSON. And one of the things that I'll share is that when you're building a product for government, you do have to think about the data component because that data doesn't belong to you; you're really stewards. That data belongs to the government and its constituents. So that's a different way of thinking because often, private companies are trying to monetize the data that they're having. So you have to have a much more sort of a frame that you're a custodian. CHAD: I think that's one of the things that can get a little lost, whether it be bureaucracy or politics or whatever but this idea that there is a community here. It is the community in which you live. You said that what inspired you to get involved was wanting to contribute back to a city that you love. It's easy for that to get lost in everything. JAY: Yeah. And that's my call to action to your audiences. Sort of touching upon our earlier points in our conversation, find a way if you have that means, and ability, and interest to make your community better. It might be something just for your city, or it might be something bigger. And I've seen so many people have good ideas. But to your point, how do you actually convert that good idea into something that's valuable and used by the community? And hopefully, this conversation is helping people and inspiring them to raise their hands and knock on the door. I think you'll see folks on the other side giving you a warm reception. They're very hungry and eager for people who have the capabilities of product and engineering and that type of talent to come to the table and help them. CHAD: That's great. If folks want to get in touch with you or find out more about City Innovate or STIR, too, where are the places where they can do that? JAY: They can go to our website cityinnovate.com. They can also go...I've got my own personal website, jaynath.com. And I'm very open. I have been since my days in public service. I'm still very accessible, maybe not as responsive as I used to be, just with all that work of being a founder. But if you're interested in this space, I always want to give back because we need great people with great talent working in the public sector, whether it's for government or within government or building a product for government. CHAD: Awesome. Jay, thanks very much for stopping by and sharing with us. JAY: Thank you so much, Chad, for the opportunity to share the work that we're doing. CHAD: You can subscribe to the show and find notes and a transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening and see you next time ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Jay Nath.
Alexandra Holien is the Vice President of Revenue and Strategy and Deputy Director of Ada Developers Academy. She talks with Chad about working for a nonprofit that prioritizes teaching Black, Brown, Latinx, Indigenous, Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, and low-income folks software development for free. Ada Developers Academy (https://adadevelopersacademy.org/) Follow Alexandra on Twitter (https://twitter.com/AlexandraHolien) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexandraholien/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Alexandra Holien, Vice President of Revenue and Strategy and Deputy Director of Ada Developers Academy. Alexandra, thank you for joining me. ALEXANDRA: Thank you for having me. I'm excited. CHAD: Let's start right off the bat with giving folks a brief overview of what Ada actually is. ALEXANDRA: Yeah, I'd love to. Ada Developers Academy we are a super unique non-profit, and I think, well-functioning business. We're a tuition-free 11-month software developing bootcamp academy for women and gender-expansive people. That may sound like some of the other bootcamps you've seen out there, but we're completely different. We have this really cool intersection of education, social justice, equity, bringing money to the people that need money sort of drive about us. We prioritize serving Black, Latine, Indigenous, Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander folks, and low-income folks. And we prioritize them because they've been left out of this capitalistic system the most. And we think if we can really put money in the hands of these gorgeous, resilient communities through the career of software development and one of the hugest wealth engines of our time, then we're going to change the world. We're crazy because it's like we're free for our students. CHAD: [chuckles] ALEXANDRA: There are wraparound services, ridiculous, not even ridiculous, just like, natural. And it seems unique, and it seems crazy. But these things that we're doing to support our students are actually just human and basic needs, providing comprehensive support for our students financially, childcare, mental health care, free laptops, just making sure that they're set up for success, unlike I think other more traditional education systems. So they can go and be really amazing software developers. And it's proven time and time again if you just set people up, open the door, give them the opportunity, make sure that you're creating equity, then 92% of those folks what we're seeing is our numbers are going to go out there and get full-time software development jobs. So that's Ada in the smallest nutshell and believe me, I'm going to tell you way more. CHAD: Well, we're going to dig into each of those things and more. I interview a lot of people who graduate from bootcamps. We have a pretty wide-reaching apprentice program. And I'm pretty familiar with what it looks like when people are graduating from those programs. And you can graduate from a three-month program and be successful, and I don't mean to imply that you can't be. But I do see folks who go to slightly longer programs, up to 11 months, a year like at Ada, and those people are often much more well-rounded developers not only with the technical skills but with all of the other skills that are important to development. How intentional was the length of the curriculum? And was there pressure early on to get people into the market faster? ALEXANDRA: Yeah, great question. I think that so many...let me answer your first question, which is how intentional was it? It had to be at the forefront of what we wanted to do. And the reason why it had to be is that we were taking a group of people that had already been left out of the system. And we already knew that there were going to be steps that they had to take to get into...like, once they got into the tech industry, getting in and staying in was going to be harder than their counterparts, harder than the white dude who took apart a computer or a Nintendo when they were in the 80s and growing up because their dads were software engineers. And then went on to college and knew they were going to be software engineers. So our founders, Scott Case and Elise Worthy, were so intentional in making sure that the technical bar and the technical merit of our students going into the industry was not what they were going to have to worry about. That was not going to be the thing that kept them up at night thinking like, oh, man, I don't know if I can do this because I don't understand it. That was not going to be it because we knew there were going to be other things. We knew there were going to be people mistaking you for the secretary. And these are examples that are all true. It's mistaking you for the secretary or the person that's the assistant or the executive assistant when they walk into the room or that person that constantly misgenders you. We knew there were going to be other really big obstacles that they're going to have to overcome when walking into a very homogenous industry like the software development industry of the United States. We knew that that was going to be the big thing. So being intentional about the programming that we were going to offer our students that five and a half months of nine-to-five intense programming that also concentrates on what I don't think a lot of bootcamps really concentrate on, that CS fundamentals part of it, showing people that that is a part of the world. It's not the part of the world of the most entry-level software engineers, but it is there, so showing them that that's there. And then giving them that internship, giving them that on-the-job training that Ada does that no other bootcamp does like we do. That sort of on-the-job training where you go in, and you see what does that practice of what you learned in code look like in real-time when you put it next to one of our sponsoring companies' tech stack? So it had to be really intentional. I don't know if it was like, yes, this has to be perfectly like this. I think we definitely iterated and made it better over the years. But making sure that the technical bar of our students was at the technical bar of everyone else was something that we really wanted to make sure that we hit on. So they didn't have to worry about...so retention was not that they couldn't quote, "hack it" like everyone else like the people say, or they didn't have the aptitude. The retention was all about is the company creating a good enough environment for these folks to want to stay at that point? CHAD: What is the tech stack that you're teaching now? ALEXANDRA: Yeah, we just switched. We talked about this for a little bit. We just switched from our beloved Ruby on Rails. We were Ruby on Rails for a very long time. But we just switched to Python, React, JavaScript. HTML and CSS is part of our curriculum. And yeah, that's it, Python, React, JavaScript. CHAD: I don't take the switch away from Rails personally. [laughs] ALEXANDRA: People did. We had companies being like, "What are you doing? We love Ruby." And we were like, "Yes, we do too, but we had to move forward and on." [laughs] Ada started at the same time Ruby was in the spotlight, too, eight years ago. CHAD: So is that what you're seeing in the industry now, is Python, React are in more development, in more demand? ALEXANDRA: Yeah, we're seeing that definitely come up. We put together a steering committee for our curriculum when we made this switch. We basically just brought in our partners to help us like, okay, what is the thing because, you know, our partners range...every cohort, we have a company that sponsors the education of one of our students, and then they take that student on as an intern. So we can't please everyone. We knew we couldn't please everyone here. But we wanted to find a good middle, and Python seemed like a really good middle. Python, React was a good middle for us to go towards for just the future. Eight years from now, again, we'll probably be in the same place we are right now. But we say it's like teaching Spanish. We're not teaching you building out a bunch of Python engineers. We're building out people that know how to be agile, know how to learn different curriculums, know how to be flexible and all that, and know that the industry is changing, and you have to be a lifelong learner, right? CHAD: Yeah. ALEXANDRA: You know this to be a part of this industry. CHAD: Well, beyond the tech, what are some of the other things that students in Ada learn or focus on over the course of the program? ALEXANDRA: I would say our curriculum is broken out into three distinctive pieces that are all a part of our everyday classroom. So that first part being that technical part that our students really are just getting the chops of what it means to be a software engineer, understanding a full tech stack, understanding the frontend, backend, the APIs that all connect the stuff, just making someone that sort of bare bones of what I think is a good software engineer. The next step is that social justice piece, which is held up by our equity and policy team. They're really teaching students once you get in the door, it's not just about getting in the door; it's about staying in the room. And it's about not just diversity; it's about inclusion. And we're seeing that we cannot just expect just because someone's decided to sponsor an Ada student, we can't expect someone knowing how to support someone that is outside of what they've supported in the past, and we know what that looks like. So we have to really create students who know what allyship looks like, know what advocacy for themselves looks like. So they can really manage up in this process, bring people in. We do not want to say someone did something or said something to me, so we're just going to push these people away because we found that when you push those people away, especially in the tech software engineering space, you're really just left out of it. You're just out of the system. So we have to figure out how to change the system from within. So really teaching students how they can talk about gender expression, how they can talk about racial expression, how they can advocate for themselves while they're on the job. And the goal of all of this is actually to keep people on tech. We don't want our students having to talk about these things all the time. We want them to be talking about the tech that they're doing just like they want. And so we want to just keep things as much on tech as possible. The third part is our professional development part. How do you manager up, take yourself in that first block to that SE2 SE3? And that's just helping folks with career development. CHAD: When it comes to the inclusion piece, I imagine it's a little bit of a fine line to walk because you don't necessarily want to put all of the work of creating an inclusive environment on the people who have been historically marginalized. But at the same time, you want to set those people up for success coming out of your program. How directly do you provide training to the companies that are sponsoring? ALEXANDRA: Completely directly. [laughter] We know that if we can get a whole...I would say I sign people at the CTO level and the senior manager level. They have the budget. They're the ones pulling the purse strings. But once we figure out, once you sign on as a company, your manager and mentor are going through our corporate accountability training. While our students are learning the technical part of it, our managers and mentors are going through a monthly training with our team to make sure they are ready to receive these interns. So when that intern comes on-site, they're speaking the same language. We're not only teaching the students how to be allies and advocates. We're teaching the managers how to be. So many times, they're like, "Someone on my team keeps misgendering someone, and I don't know what to do." We had enough of those calls, so we decided to teach them what to do. And not only do we teach them, but we also put them in peer learning groups together so they can teach each other what to do because that's where they really start listening to each other. When two folks coming from the same background are having a conversation on how to be a better manager, we love that. CHAD: Yeah, that's great. And I think that's really likely a very important component to overall success. Well, let's talk economics a little bit because I've gotten up on my soapbox before around how companies have traditionally been way too comfortable saying, "Well, we have this position open, and we're using recruiters." And the position has been vacant for months. And in the meantime, they're willing to pay recruiters tens of thousands of dollars trying to fill the position. And I've always made the case like, tech and the way the economics work it would be better to invest that money that you're willing to give a recruiter into training people. When I learned about Ada, it really resonated with me. So what is the complete picture of how students afford to attend Ada, where the funding comes from, and how that all works out for them? ALEXANDRA: Oh, you're speaking to the choir. [laughs] When I talk about this with companies, I am oftentimes like, "How much did you spend on recruiting last year?" And then they tell me the number, and I'm like, wow, okay. We work with companies we call them our company partners because they are partnering with us to complete this mission of Ada that we have, which is to educate more women and gender-expansive people to be software engineers. Our business model is simple, but it works. We wanted to remove all barriers for entry for people that wanted to become software engineers within that group. So we wanted the program to be free. We knew that was always the case. We knew that there was this hole with bootcamps that was out there. This was seven, eight years ago where it was like people were going through these bootcamps and then not getting full-time jobs. And so we knew we didn't want to fall victim to that. So what we did was put an internship on the backend and really got companies to not just put their money where their mouth is but put their time and resources where their mouth is. That's more money. So they pay $55,000, and that $55,000 educates the student while they're in class with us, keeps the program completely free for our students. And then the other part of their buy into this whole shebang is you have to now make this person a hireable junior engineer because they're going to do an internship with you. And then everyone's always like, okay, the return on investment. To me, the return on investment is you did good, company. CHAD: [laughs] ALEXANDRA: But also, the return on investment for a lot of our company partners, I call it the icing on the cake because it is not a part of our model. It is 70% of them convert their students to full-time jobs, full-time FTE offers from these internships. We had a company give...they sponsored six interns, gave six offers, and then went on to do a hiring loop with our graduating cohort and gave another 23 offers. CHAD: Wow. ALEXANDRA: And this happens every six months. So these companies that are out there saying it's a pipeline problem or I'm just going to spend money on this recruiter to go find talent, I'm like, are you kidding me? We're either in your backyard, or we're a phone call, phone call, excuse me, an email away. CHAD: [laughs] A fax away. ALEXANDRA: I age myself. I said Rolodex to our students, and people didn't know what it was, and I was so embarrassed. I was like, wow, I guess a LinkedIn I'm sorry. CHAD: [laughs] ALEXANDRA: But we're like, you know, the resource is there, the talent is there. We have 120 students in our cohorts, and that's only growing. We're expanding to Atlanta. We're expanding to the DC area. It's there. So when companies are like, "I don't know." I've seen us move the needle at mid-sized companies. There are companies like Amazon, and there are over 100 graduated Adies there. We've moved the needle. So it's like, you just got to call or email at this point. There are other ways to do it. And if you keep going to the same well, you keep going to the colleges; you keep going to that recruit, yeah, you're going to fill up the same thing over and over again. And we know 70% of jobs are received by...you’re networking with your friends, and you’re networking with your peers. And if something like 75% of the industry is white dudes or just dudes in general, then we're just going to keep bringing in the same person. And it's not just diversity is the right thing to do. It is the right thing to do, but it’s also like you build a better product, period. That's just a better product. CHAD: Yeah, the different perspectives that people have, the different blind spots that people have. When you get rid of those, you build a better product. ALEXANDRA: And we're talking about building the future here. We have to include the other 50% of the population. So it's imperative. It's not necessary; it is imperative we get up to that. You're at 40% in your company. We got to get up to 50%. We got to get a little bit more. And we got to make sure that 50% is diverse on all intersections of what diversity can mean. Mid-roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: So you mentioned the companies pay to sponsor individual students. You also have mentioned earlier in the conversation that you provide things like child care. So are the pooled resources of all of those sponsorships also going to pay for those additional benefits while in the program, or do you have another source of funds? ALEXANDRA: We are still very much so a non-profit. [laughs] We have a good amount of philanthropic dollars coming our way, and it's individual donors. I would say one of our biggest clumps of donors, our biggest group of people that donate to Ada, are our alumni. They come out with 160% salary change, and they are the first people to see the value in giving back to Ada. We also have some major donors out there. We just got a pretty large expansion grant from the Pivotal folks, which is Melinda French Gates, MacKenzie Bezos, and the Schusterman Foundation. They invested $10 million in helping us expand. That expansion has served more students. Wraparound services mostly come from philanthropic dollars. So donating to what we do, donating to keep our program equitable, is always very much needed because about 10% of our budget is all philanthropic dollars, and that's covering those wraparound services barriers to entry. CHAD: Is healthcare one of the wraparound services that you provide? ALEXANDRA: No. I wish. I mean, geez. CHAD: I know. ALEXANDRA: If the U.S. government gets it right, after they get it right, we'll follow soon. [laughter] But we're trying. We are trying to do it differently. We're trying to meet people where they are and see the reality of people's situations. And the reality is that if you're a woman or gender-expansive person and you want to take this chance, we offer a zero-interest either loan or a zero-interest grant that comes directly from Ada, or from our partner, Community Credit lab. And that's a zero-interest loan. We don't even check your credit. If you're in it with us, then we're going to get it in it with you. And that zero-interest loan just gets recycled back to serve more people. So that zero-interest loan is while you're in class for that five and a half months, you're going to need still some money coming in. So we make sure you still have money coming in. The stipend hits when you get to internships, so from that 55,000, about 17 goes directly to the student for their stipend while they're interning. Also, we give a childcare stipend. We're looking for a childcare partner out there because we really want to be able to make this more of a national program. But we're looking for that out there. But we give that stipend out to folks so they can pay for daycare or whatever they may need so they can actually come to the program. We have a laptop program. You need a Mac to come to Ada. Everyone can't afford a Mac. We take donated Macs from companies that...companies sometimes give them a two-year life cycle for their Macs. So we can use it for another couple of years. So we take donations for Macs. And we also have a fund that we fund every year so people can buy a Mac. And my favorite and I think one of the most needed things is we partner with BetterHelp and offer our students free therapy while they're in the classroom and while they're in their internship and a little bit after that as well. The free therapy was just...we're in a pandemic, and it's hit women hard. It's hit gender-expansive folks, parents, Brown folks, it's hit people hard. And so we're like, hey, why don't we, while you're in a pandemic, send you through the most rigorous part of your life? [laughs] And so, making sure we were supporting people all around was really important to us. And it did nothing but create success for us. This did not make a deficit in our bottom line. This actually created more success for us. We saw when we did this; we got more people graduating. We get more people donating back. We get more people paying back their loans faster. So it just does nothing for the community but make it better and stronger. So we're going to continue to do it. It's going to continue to always be a part of who we are at Ada. But the wraparound services are key to the success. CHAD: That's fantastic. So you mentioned you're expanding. Where is the original location? ALEXANDRA: Seattle. We are a Seattle-based school. CHAD: And you're expanding to Atlanta and DC you mentioned. ALEXANDRA: Yeah. We first went digital because you know -- CHAD: That is what I was going to ask. ALEXANDRA: [laughs] CHAD: How have you dealt with the pandemic with a primarily in-person model previously? And then how has that affected your expansion plans? ALEXANDRA: The pandemic was shitty and just horrible in so many ways. And out of a lot of shitty and horrible times, it creates a lot of innovation, and that's what it did. Our leadership team is a group of Brown parents. And they went to work immediately. We switched from being an in-person classroom where there's a lunch club, and a push-up club, and there are hugs everywhere and to being 100% online program in three days with systems. And companies were coming to us saying, "How are you creating community in this time?" So we did it very quickly. It taught us that we can educate people digitally. So the first thing we decided to do is like we've got our digital cohort up and running. So still, I would say in quotes, "our Seattle cohort and digital cohort," but digital cohort basically means you're partnering with a company that is fully digital, and they are not attached to anything geographically. And that helped us expand to Atlanta because it helped us jump over the hurdle of like, oh, we have to go get a brick and mortar. We have to set up this brick and mortar. Instead, we just decided to educate people still digitally. If you're in the Atlanta cohort, you're still having your education 100% online, and your internship is going to be in person with an Atlanta-based tech company. So you might be but and see [inaudible 24:11] in Atlanta later on, but we can educate you digitally. So we didn't have to slow this down. We saw the need just like the amount of women that lost their jobs in the pandemic. We were completely energized by the fact that we can do this. We have people that believe in us. They're giving us money. They're funding this. We can do it. So we went for it. And Atlanta is the first campus. We already have staff there. We already have a campus director on point there. And then, the next expansion will be to the DC area. And we're excited to do the same thing. It's educate them digitally because that's what we've been doing for the last few years, and we're good at it. And find but and see partnerships in DC because that's how we can really make sure we have good programming that we know they can do and then give them to the sponsoring companies to complete their programming with the internship. CHAD: So where are the current limits of growth for you then? ALEXANDRA: Current limits for growth, I mean, we've been such a Seattle-based place, and COVID pushed us into that national arena, so not a lot of people outside of our geography know who we are. Pacific Northwest was our sweet spot because people used to have to move to Seattle to be a part of Ada. So we got a lot of Californians. We got a lot of Oregons, Montana, Idaho, some Floridians because Florida knows about...we have a very huge population of Floridians. I don't know how they know, but they know. CHAD: [laughs] ALEXANDRA: Our thing is, how do we get the Ada Developers Academy name and model out to the rest of the country? So they know that we are here, and we're an option for them if they want to become a software engineer. CHAD: And right now, it sounds like you have your sights just set on the United States, not internationally. ALEXANDRA: Not Internationally. I always joke about Ada at sea, but we'll see. CHAD: [laughs] ALEXANDRA: Give me 10, 20 years to get that spun up. But I would just love to...[laughs] but yeah, over the next five years, there'll be five markets in Ada. By 2025, we're hoping to educate 10,000 women and gender-expansive people. We just graduated a class of 72 last Thursday. And we just admitted another class of 120 that starts in March. So we're chugging. But right now, it's Seattle, digital, Atlanta, DC. I imagine there'll be a Southern region, and then probably a Midwest region coming after that. CHAD: So, and then you have the purely digital cohort too? ALEXANDRA: Yep. And that's that sort of the sixth market, purely digital, which means there are so many companies that went fully remote and have no plan on coming back. And so that's just a market that we want to make sure that we're...we want people to opt into that. That's for some people who want to be fully remote forever. Some people are seeing that they need some sort of community while doing this work. And so they want to have a but and see internship. And there's every which way in between. So we'll figure it out as we move through this pandemic like the rest of the folks. CHAD: You've shared some numbers there. And I think sometimes it's good to put that in context because people don't realize that 10,000, on one hand, sounds like a small number in the grand scheme of the United States. But actually, it's a very large number. ALEXANDRA: It's huge. CHAD: The U.S. only graduates around 65,000 CS graduates a year in the whole United States, so just to put that in context for people. ALEXANDRA: Yeah, it's huge. I looked at the numbers for...I'm in Seattle, and I'll just say there's a college here, a large college here in Seattle, and they graduated 300 CS folks last year, and 20% of them were women. And we graduated in six months, 72 women and gender-expansive, and our focus is Brown folks, low socioeconomic folks. So you could just imagine underneath that umbrella of women, even under that, the diversity that you see. We're getting up there with some of our colleges, and we're doing this every six months. And so it's a powerful model. It's the reason why I've been here for six years. It's the reason why I get really excited talking about this program. [laughs] I don't know if you can tell, but I get really excited talking about it. Because once people get in, they love being a part of our program, and they love being a partner with us. And it's a cool place to be. It just feels like a transformative place right now. And I think that we can really make a difference. CHAD: Yeah, your excitement, and I'm a big believer in the opportunity. Your excitement is clear [laughs] when you're talking about it. How did you get into this work? ALEXANDRA: I was in recruiting before. I did technical recruiting, contractor for a few different places. And I just saw the amount...and I came from a working-class. My family is from the Deep South in Louisiana. And the average income from the town I'm from is $26,000, and that was my reality. And then, when I started technical recruiting, it was insane. The amount of wealth that was a part of this churn, the going to these colleges, early recruiting, paying people $6,000 a month, paying them a living stipend, making sure they had a plane ticket home, hot air balloons, tours of people's, you know, these millionaires houses. I was like, holy crap, this has to be more readily available. And again, having two working-class black parents, they didn't even know what software development was. We didn't even know that was a possibility. My dad was like, "We're getting a computer," because he wanted to be on the forefront. And we got to that clear Mac that was like a purple color. We had that purple one. CHAD: [laughs] ALEXANDRA: And my dad was like, "We've one." But still, there were kids in my school and in my college that had been around computers their whole lives; their schools had programming and things. So they just had that extra step. My opportunity to see in was recruiting. And after that, I was like, okay, where do I find the intersection of this and what I want to do, which is making sure that black folks have money? To be crude about it. [laughs] If we’re going to work and live in a capitalist society, then I want us to have some coins to play, and that is where I found Ada. And I love having this place. I just get to be a part of this place where I just get to open doors or show people a door. They can open it themselves and go through, and just that's the amazing part of me, a part of this is watching people change their lives, buy their grandparents' homes, pay off their student debt, get a divorce, anything they want to do. [laughs] But to have the agency to do it in this world we live in, in the society we live in, and that's all I care about is that agency. CHAD: Yeah, I was very privileged to be exposed to computers really early on and get to experience that spark of I love this. This is what I want to do. And I talk to so many people who just never had that opportunity to discover that that was even a thing that they could do, let alone love. It's just incredible when I meet someone who's like a plumber, and then they somehow get that exposure to computers or technology, and you see that spark go off for them. And it's amazing. ALEXANDRA: It's so cool. It's one of my favorite...like; our admissions process is pretty rigorous. I think the average is like 15% or 20%, depending on the cohort admissions process. And to hear how obsessed these airline stewardesses or hairdressers or mothers are obsessed with coding, I'm like, yes, yes. Or these folks who are like...Oh, we had this woman who she was an immigrant from...she fled Israel, and she came to the U.S. And she's like, the only thing she knew about coding before she started was she had one time saw someone with two screens in a movie. CHAD: [laughs] ALEXANDRA: And she saw them on the computer, and she saw two screens. And then she started going through finding free stuff online. She found Ada. And this person's sitting in front of me talking about how geek they are about arrays and loops, and I'm like, yes, this is amazing. And to watch that person graduate less than a year later with just the salary that she got from Microsoft, and just the feeling that she felt when she got to call home and say, "Hey, I'm a software engineer now," I was like, all day, all day. That's like the gravy for this. CHAD: It has nothing to do with aptitude. It has everything to do with opportunity. ALEXANDRA: Oh my gosh. Yeah, opportunities. Yeah, it's everything here. CHAD: Well, that's great. And Ada is providing folks with that opportunity. And I am so excited to hear about it and share it with our audience. Hopefully, students are listening and want to sign up but also those sponsoring companies too, right? ALEXANDRA: Yeah, for sure. Sponsoring companies too. We love you too. You keep the wheels on this bus. So definitely give us a call. CHAD: So if folks want to get in touch, where's the best place for them to do that? ALEXANDRA: Our website that's the best place to start, adadevelopersacademy.org. And there there is stuff on corporate partnership. If you sign up on the partners' email list, it leads you right to my email. And then, for students, we have full admissions. Our admissions opens in March for the next Atlanta cohort. There are going to be 48 seats in Atlanta, 60 seats digitally, and 60 seats in Seattle. I would say get ready for that via our website. CHAD: Awesome. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm along with all those links that Alexandra just mentioned and a transcript of the entire episode. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Alexandra Holien.
Dagna Bieda is an engineer, career coach, and founder of theMindfulDev.com. She talks with Chad about being a software engineer first and then becoming a career coach who has helped a big range of clients with communication and marketing themselves successfully. theMindfulDev (https://www.themindfuldev.com/) Follow Dagna on Twitter (https://twitter.com/dagnabieda) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/dagnabieda/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Dagna Bieda, engineer, career coach, and founder of theMindfulDev.com. Dagna, thanks for joining me. DAGNA: Absolutely. It's a blast being here. So thanks for having me over, Chad. CHAD: So what you do is a little bit unique in that you provide career coaching to engineers. But you yourself are an engineer and have a background in engineering. So how did you arrive at what you're doing today? DAGNA: Yeah, you're exactly on point there. I was a software engineer and then turned into career coaching. So essentially, I've been coding for over ten years and coaching for the past 3. And I'm the tough love, “I've been in your shoes” kind of coach because I have that engineering experience. And a little bit about what it is that I did as a software engineer is I essentially moved from programming in microcontrollers in C through cell phone towers, providing LTE networks in C++. I also did behaviors of social robots in C++. I wrote a distributed web app in Ruby on Rails. And I also wrote some mobile apps for parking and transit in Swift and Java. Having that range of experience, I really get to help a big range of clients. My former clients have worked for LinkedIn, Amazon, Google, Disney, as well as much smaller businesses. And their own experience was ranging anywhere from 2 to 20 years of experience. And I had clients who are self-taught, who are career-changing bootcamp grads, who are college grads. And my goal as a coach is to really help them reach for their potential. CHAD: Now, did you arrive at this because you yourself struggled with some of these things? Or did you have it easy and you said, "Oh, I don't understand why these other people..." [laughs] DAGNA: So both of these questions are exactly on point. I feel like I had it very easy at the very beginning of my career. I essentially got promoted to a senior engineer very quickly. It took about two years or something, so like superfast. But then, as a senior engineer, there was a moment where I felt that I've just plateaued in my career, and I was stuck, and I was frustrated. And I wanted to learn all the technologies out there. And what was missing was some people skills. So once I finally was able to figure out okay, this is what I'm missing...and in hindsight, it was so obvious. I decided to move into career coaching because I realized that we're kind of brainwashed, so to speak, to put the technology on a pedestal and ignore everything else, right? CHAD: Yeah. DAGNA: But if you don't work on your soft skills and don't realize that at the end, it's all humans because you're working with humans...you're creating products for humans. So it's not something you can really escape from. That was like a huge aha moment. I was like, people don't even know this is important. Like, I got to change that. [laughs] That was a mission for me to change that, to help discover what are those roadblocks? What are those limiting beliefs that software engineers often have that keep them stuck in their career and frustrated and stopping them from really fulfilling their potential? CHAD: I often say that almost all problems are actually communication problems at their heart. DAGNA: Ooh, yes. CHAD: And in consulting, we have clients who come to us with what they think is a technical problem. And we have to sometimes tell them like, "We can fix this problem. But if you don't address the underlying communication problem that caused it in the first place, it's just going to happen again." DAGNA: Absolutely, yeah. CHAD: So I think that's a problem engineers have is that they try to apply technical problems or think code is the solution to every problem. DAGNA: Well, it's not just that. Let's think about how software engineers are trained into their careers. If you have a class and you need to deliver a piece of code that compiles and does whatever it was meant to do for your assignment, even if you had incredible communications with your teammate and partner, even if you negotiated changes in the scope of features, it's all not going to matter for you passing your class if the code doesn't compile and if it doesn't do what it's supposed to do. So early on, whenever we're creating software, we're taught how to create software. We're being taught to put technology on a pedestal. And I've worked with multiple senior engineers that feel really frustrated because they're so knowledgeable but aren't able to communicate all this knowledge that they have in their own mind. They might be having brilliant ideas that might be helping their businesses grow and get past helping the businesses they work for grow. And they're not able to pitch those ideas and not able to really be heard and seen for the value that they bring to the table. And this is where I come in, and this is what I help with, getting past that frustration and that feeling of being stuck. CHAD: And just to clarify if I'm following right, and what I'm advocating is this isn't just if you're a developer and want to move into management. This is for just moving up in your career as a developer, right? DAGNA: Absolutely. Here's the thing, even if you're going to become the principal architect in the company, what are the skills that you need to have? It's not just technical expertise. If you have technical expertise and you're not able to talk about it with the business stakeholders that don't have the same amount of knowledge that you do, then you're not going to get to that point. Principal engineers create direction in the company, make decisions, have to be mindful about the business value that they're creating, not just the underlying tech stack. So as we grow in our careers as software engineers, it is really critical to, once you have, I'd say, five years of experience as a software engineer, to start working on the soft skills. And to be honest, someone who has gone through a coding bootcamp because they had less of that brainwashing about putting the technology on the pedestal often tend to advance in their careers much faster because they bring that previous experience with them to the table, so they can communicate better. They have different types of ideas, different perceptions. They don't have those limiting beliefs that a lot of developers have. The number one limiting belief that I see my clients have is believing that the work they do speaks for itself, and it doesn't unless someone literally dives into the code that you wrote. So for you to be able to advocate for your career, you need to be able to say, "Hey, I wrote this feature," and not expect people to dive into the code and look through the feature and all the lines of code you wrote. It’s to be able to emphasize the business impact that the feature you wrote had on the business, and how it helped, how you contributed to the business side. And that's something that I work with developers on. Now, you did mention, Chad, that you work with a lot of developers, right? CHAD: Mm-hmm. Yeah. DAGNA: Would you say that marketing what developers do is a huge thing holding people back in their career? CHAD: Yes, not only because of what I said earlier about a lot of the root causes of problems are around actual communication. But you're right; when it comes to who you can rely on in your company, who you can communicate with, who gets their ideas across more, it comes down to being able to communicate those ideas and that value. Even little things like when the code you've been working on is ready on staging, don't just say, "It's on staging. Check it out," and moving the ticket forward. DAGNA: [laughs] CHAD: But actually being able to communicate what you've done either through words or screenshots. I think we've all been in scenarios where you're working on a complicated ticket, and you are making decisions along the way about how to do that. And you make all those decisions, and they're the best decisions in the world. But if you just put that ticket up for a review and say, "It's on staging," it's either not going to be accepted, or you're going to get tons of questions around why you did this. What did you consider when you were doing this? It's like a lack of trust and understanding there. But if instead, you say, "Here are all the things I'm considering along the way." And you say, "I've balanced all of these priorities, and here's the decision I've made, and it's on staging, and it works like this. And here's where you go to view it. And click on this. And here's a movie that shows how it works". People are going to be like, "Oh, sounds great. Accepted." DAGNA: Yeah, absolutely. But here's the thing. As developers, we're not taught to do all these things that you just described. We're taught to write code that compiles, boom, done. [laughs] CHAD: So when working with people who have this sort of mindset o the skill gap, what are some things that you have people do to level up? DAGNA: Yeah, there are certain things that we specifically work on, and that is negotiation, setting expectations and boundaries, being able to respectfully either decline a change in scope of work or try to negotiate the change of a deadline whenever there's an impossible feature request. Or things like being able to set expectations that if you're working on your focus time, that you shouldn't be disrupted. And it's something that's very hard because developers usually really want to be helpful. So when a product manager comes to them and says, "Hey, I really need this. It's for a critical client," what happens is most often than not, they're going to drop everything they were doing just to finish that one thing and be helpful. And so being able to create a boundary saying, "Hey, I'll get back to you after I'm done working on what it is that I'm working," is a skill. Being able to market what you did and being able to show the business value, how your work contributed to the business side is also a skill. And even having communication with your manager telling them, "Hey, I realize that I need to work on XYZ. Would you be willing to give me feedback? Because we go to the meetings together, you see how I communicate; you see how I think, you see how I act. Give me more feedback. What can I do to grow in my career?" So asking for that feedback is a skill. So there are a lot of moving elements, and these are the skills that I work with on my clients. But there's a big thing that I want to address here too is that with technology changing and being at such a fast pace, it is very important to give yourself grace, especially when you're starting out. Be patient with yourself to give yourself that time to actually master the tech part. And it's really important to see and understand how you think about your career growth. Do you beat yourself up in your mind, or do you actually see the opportunities for growth? With developers, since we're not being taught how to communicate effectively with other people, oftentimes, when someone wants to give us feedback that might help us in our career, we get defensive because it feels like an attack on our character. And I see it with juniors all the time. "Why did you say I was messy?" "No, no, I said your code was messy." Taking that kind of feedback on the code very personal and getting agitated instead of seeing opportunity for growth in the career. CHAD: Would you say that most of the people that work with you are doing it while they're going through a transition or in between looking for their next thing? Or are they doing it while they're in a position hoping to improve within that existing company? DAGNA: So all three paths that you mentioned are very valid. It depends on what people are doing, what their goals are. When I work with my clients, we work one on one. So it's very tailored to their specific and unique situation and their needs. But I can tell you that from last year, my absolute best example was one client who came to me because he felt that he was being an undervalued senior engineer. And he wanted to promote himself and maybe move on from the job that he was in at the time that he didn't see much opportunity for growth. And he was just stagnant. "Help me market myself. I need to get out of this current situation. I know I have the potential. And I want to find something more exciting to work on." As we worked together, within three and a half months, he became a startup CTO, which was a dream come true for him. But he didn't believe at the time before we worked together that he could actually make that happen for himself. Then I had another client who, within two months of us working together, was preparing to land a team lead position. But he actually was able to jump two levels up, and he became a VP of innovation at his own company. CHAD: Cool. DAGNA: It so happened that as we worked together, his company was going through a massive spurt of growth. And because he was the right person working on the right skills at the right time, he became the VP which is incredible. And I had another client just recently who felt that he was overworking himself. He was coming also from a military background. So he had certain beliefs that they served him in the military, but they were not really helpful for progressing in the tech industry. And as we worked together, he was able to not only stop overworking himself and have a better relationship with his wife; he also landed a new job where he doubled his salary. He went from 109,000 a year to 220,000. That actually made even my jaw drop a little. [laughter] But it shows you how powerful the process is that I follow with my clients. It's really about the engineering mindset. It's about how to think about career growth and how to prioritize certain things depending on which stage of your career you're in. CHAD: Are there other common pitfalls or mistakes that developers make that hold them back? DAGNA: So absolutely the limiting belief that I mentioned earlier, believing that your work speaks for itself. I feel like 80% of people that I work with have that limiting belief, and we work to get past that. Another thing that is pretty common is not understanding how you come across. That's a problem that I had in my career. When I mentioned that I was a senior engineer for a few years and I felt stuck, I wanted to advance, but it wasn't happening for me. It wasn't clear why it wasn't happening until I started working with someone who was open enough to provide me some tough love type of feedback. One time he told me, "Dagna, why are you calling these people idiots?" And I'm like, "I never said that." CHAD: [chuckles] DAGNA: My intention was really pure, good, coming from my heart and my soul, from really good intentions. But my intentions were completely different from the message that got across, right? CHAD: Was it your tone, what you were saying? What was it that made that come across? DAGNA: Part of it is not being assertive enough. And I should probably mention here that I am an immigrant to the United States. I originally grew up and got educated back in Poland, my home country. And the way we communicate in Poland is completely different than how we communicate here in the United States. And at the very beginning, I didn't really understand how my communication impacts my career. So essentially, as a senior engineer, I was way too direct. And I was using words that were triggering for some people. So I had to learn how to be more assertive, how to communicate to people that I get where they're coming from, what is their perspective, what it is that they're trying to accomplish in the conversation. Once I started doing that, I actually got the offer to get promoted to the engineering manager that I was working towards. But the funny thing is that was the day that I actually came into the office and put my notice in because I was so sad of being a coach by then. I was like; I figured this communication thing out. I need to spread the word. CHAD: [laughs] DAGNA: It's way too important for me to now be a manager, nah, nah, nah. I have more lives to impact here than just the team that I might be working with. Mid-roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: That's great. And it segues really nicely into the next question I was going to ask you, which is your experience with the cultural differences. There's a general trend in the market that we're seeing now in more companies hiring remotely, opening up the candidate pool to people who live all over the place. And not only does that expose more people to be hired by different companies, but it broadens the candidate pool. So you're competing against even more people. So is that something that you're seeing as well? And how do people position themselves within the global market now, particularly if they're not in the U.S.? DAGNA: Well, if we're talking about global market, we got to be mindful that for a company that's located in the United States or any other country for that matter, there are tax implications. So it really depends on the company and how they are set up to be able to pay out salaries offshore or hire contractors offshore. Because the reality is that a lot of clients of mine that are from the European Union, for example, a lot of clients of mine that are in the EU, if they wanted to apply for companies in the United States, they wouldn't really be considered because of those tax implications. So even though a lot of companies open up and want to hire people from abroad, not every company does that. And even if companies say that they are open for remote workers, it really depends on how they're paying their taxes and how all that is set up. So the way I see it is there is a movement towards opening up for remote work. But it's definitely not about competing across the globe, not yet at least. CHAD: I think maybe my perspective is a little bit skewed on it just because of where we're at. So are you saying that developers should do their due diligence about what companies they actually want to work for? DAGNA: Absolutely, yeah. I mean, applying for a company that is not set up in a way that can support paying salaries outside or even having those international agreements in place, you're just wasting your time applying there and setting yourself up for frustration because they're not going to reach back to you. CHAD: Yeah, that's good advice. DAGNA: Now, in terms of your work with remote positions, who do you usually work with, Chad? CHAD: Are you asking from developers that we typically work with or who do we -- DAGNA: Yes. I was curious, like, what's the amount of people that you work with that are actually remote and worldwide? What is your experience there? CHAD: So last year at thoughtbot, we got rid of all of our offices, and we went fully remote. And when we did that, it took us a little while to get everything organized. But when we did, our goal was to open it up based on time zone, not based on country that you live in. And so we organized into two teams, all of the Americas and Europe, Middle East and Africa is the second team. DAGNA: So I'm curious, what are the tax implications of you guys paying out those salaries? CHAD: So we use a company called remote.com along with a few other partners that provide employer record in the country that you live in. So there's an actual entity. You're fully paid according to local rules with actual salary benefits, paid time off, all that stuff. And you are a real employee of that entity in that country. And then what they do is they invoice us for that total amount. DAGNA: Ah, that's awesome. CHAD: And they handle all the local employment, which is great because up until that point, we previously had to have entities of our own in every country in order to do it right because we really want to do it right. We're not that big, and so it's a lot of overhead for us to be able to do that. So working with partner companies, companies that provide that local entity is the direction we've gone in, and it's worked really well overall. DAGNA: Awesome. Glad to hear that. CHAD: And I think in general, I'm trying to spread the word about that because I do think it is important. There are a lot of companies out there. This is building on what you said before. There are a lot of companies out there that are, on one hand, doing things incorrectly or, on the other, they might not have good intentions; they're sort of purposely taking advantage by having people work as contractors when they probably really shouldn't be. DAGNA: Oh yeah, I hear you. CHAD: I'm curious, in your role now, do you still code at all? DAGNA: So I gave up coding for now. I essentially left my last engineering job in March of last year, and I've been fully focused on coaching. Coaching as it is is a skill as well. And I realized that if I really want to make an impact, I have to have my attention fully devoted to that business. And part of it too is business growth. A skill that I'm learning right now is writing, writing a newsletter, writing posts on social media, and just sharing what I think is very important and what is not really being talked about enough like the communication, like the human side of software, like career growth, and the fact that we are set up to overvalue the technical skillset in terms of career growth. And all this really takes up my time and my effort. CHAD: One of the things that resonated with me when I looked at your website was this idea of being clear on your personal definition of fulfillment. Fulfillment is one of the things we talk a lot about at thoughtbot. It's one of our core values. And so, how has it been for you to transition away from coding? And do you think you're going to be fulfilled by that over the long term? DAGNA: Oh, absolutely, yeah. It's been a blast. Here's the thing, as I help my clients achieve spectacular results, that's what really puts me on fire. And I wake up every day thinking, damn, I can help people in very critical moments in their life. I had a client who, as we were coaching together, unfortunately, his father passed away. And he told me that thanks to the coaching that we did together and the mindset training that we did, he was able to cope with this difficult situation in his life so much better, not to mention how that impacted his career. So I get to really help, really have a huge impact on people's lives, and that's something that really is incredible for me. That is my personal definition of fulfillment. And I like to say that I used to be programming, and now I'm re-programming human minds. CHAD: So this idea of personal definition of fulfillment, first, why is it important to be clear on that? DAGNA: It affects your energy levels, your motivation. If you're working in a place that might be giving you an incredible benefits package, but every day you wake up, and you just don't want to go to work, that is something that I like to call golden handcuffs because you're essentially in hell, in prison. And it feels horrible to be in a situation like that. And I have experienced it myself where I felt like I have so much potential within me. Why am I wasting my time here? Even though the money was great, the benefits were good, but I knew I had so much more within me. And figuring out the personal definition of fulfillment is really what helped me open my eyes that; hey, my job was great, but it wasn't something that I really wanted to do. It's kind of like being in a relationship that just doesn't work, but you're in it just because. [laughs] Isn't it so much better to work in a place that is meaningful to you, that supports your values, that fits your desired lifestyle, someplace that every day that you wake up, you're really excited about going to work? Isn't that a much better way to live? CHAD: Yeah. What if someone finds themselves understanding that these are the skills that they should have to be a really great developer and advance in their career and maybe even making progress on that? Are there other things...you used the term earlier about marketing yourself. Does that mean having a great personal website? What does it mean when you say that? DAGNA: Well, I really mean being able to talk about your accomplishments, depending on which stakeholders you're talking to. So if you're trying to pitch an idea to your product manager, then talking at the product manager level, being able to show how what you do or the idea that you have contributes to the business. If you're in an interview setting, how to discuss what you have accomplished with the people that might want to potentially hire you. It also is related to having your LinkedIn in a way that attracts attention and brings people in that you actually wanted to work with. I've had some people come to me and say, "You know what? I get seven; eight offers every single day on LinkedIn." And I'm like, that's great. But are these the offers that you actually want to work on? Is it something that you actually want to pursue, or you just want to keep getting those notifications?" And oftentimes, whenever we have our LinkedIn profiles set up, what happens is we put the keywords there. I know this tech stack; I know this framework. I've worked with this language, blah, blah, blah. And what's missing is who you are as a person, what you value. What do you expect from a workplace? What kind of change do you want to make in the world? What is really important to you? What are your expectations? And I think that the pandemic, in a way, showed that, that as we got to work from home, we got to re-evaluate what is really important in our lives. Back when you used to go to the office, you would have that disconnect between the work and the life. And you could strive for some work-life balance but keep them kind of separate. Now, with everything being super entangled, it kind of forces you to reevaluate okay, what is really important for me? Is it important for me to eat breakfast with my kids and drop them off at school, and pushing that meeting to a little bit later during the day? Or is it important to me to clock out after 6:00 so I can be with my kids after they get back from school? Or do I really care about maybe doing all my work after 6:00 p.m. because that's when my brain lights on fire? Have you found yourself going back to re-thinking what is important in life after the remote work started? CHAD: [laughs] Well, yes, and no. Yes, but I also have made a habit of doing that. DAGNA: Oh, perfect. CHAD: As a result, I often dramatically either change my schedule or my focus or something about every two years. And that has been critical to me to be able to do this for so long. I haven't really worked...I've been doing this for more than 18 years now, but I haven't really worked in the same job more than two or three years. Even though it might be the same title, the job has dramatically changed. And that's through my own personal initiative of realizing what I need to do to be fulfilled now. And I'm fortunately in a position where I can make those changes happen. DAGNA: That's great. But I kind of want to share that I believe everybody's in a position to actually do that. CHAD: Yeah, I agree. DAGNA: Especially in engineering. There are so many opportunities for growth. It's kind of ridiculous. You can be an embedded engineer and become a front-end engineer. You can go into the backend, and then you can do DevOps, and then you can become an engineering manager. And then you can go back to being an individual contributor if you wanted to. I mean, you could just move up, down, left, right, check things out, see what's fun, what's not, change industries. So there's just so much opportunity for growth. And I think it's also very human wanting to grow, wanting to learn more, trying to kind of push the boundaries and check what's out there outside of your comfort zone. I think that's very human. CHAD: Yeah. Well, if people want to get in touch with you or find out more, where are the best places for them to do that? DAGNA: The absolute best place is going to my website, theMindfulDev.com/podcast. And that link will actually redirect you to a case study of a client of mine that explains how I work with clients. So if you're interested for us to get to work together, you can just go there and watch the case study video, and let's go from there. CHAD: Awesome. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode along with transcripts at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Dagna Bieda.
Chad talks to Benjie De Groot, co-founder, and CEO of Shipyard. Shipyard manages, creates, builds, and deploys ephemeral environments. Benjie talks about how Shipyard became a funded company, discovering who their ideal customers are, and building out the core team so Shipyard can accelerate and figure out their next steps in how to bring it to the masses. Ephemeral Environments (https://ephemeralenvironments.io/) Shipyard (https://shipyard.build/) Follow Benjie on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/bueller/). Follow Shipyard on Twitter (https://twitter.com/shipyardbuild), LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/shipyardbuild/), or GitHub (https://github.com/shipyard). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel, and with me today is Benjie De Groot, co-founder, and CEO of Shipyard. Benjie, thanks for joining me. BENJIE: Thanks for having me. CHAD: Why don't we start by if you don't mind sharing a little bit about what Shipyard is and does? BENJIE: Sure. At the core of what Shipyard is working on is ephemeral environments; not everybody knows what that means. That is changing a bit. But essentially, what we're focused on is on every pull request or commit for a feature; Shipyard manages, and creates, and builds, and deploys ephemeral environments. So that's a disposable one-off on-demand environment that any stakeholder in your internal company can use. And we focus on the tooling around that, on build pipeline, and then security around that. And then all kinds of other cool features that are necessary that pop up. CHAD: Cool. So as a developer, I'm familiar with the concept of developing locally, putting up my pull requests. And also, we deploy a lot of stuff to Heroku. So I'm familiar with some of the infrastructure that Heroku might give. How did you arrive at saying like, this is a thing that I want to work on and believe should exist? BENJIE: That's a great question. I actually am also a developer; that’s my background. And throughout the course of my career, I've always been on the technical side of the company. And what that's translated to, because of passion, to be honest, is always taking on a DevOps type role, so throughout the course of my career, a lot of responsibility. I mean, I started off writing Bash scripts, went to Puppet, did Chef for a while, did Ansible. Somehow I went back to Bash scripts for a lot of this stuff. Then this company called DoCloud popped up, which obviously became Docker, and I kind of got obsessed with that. And then I had a bunch of friends at Google, and they were telling me about this creepy thing called Borg, and that became Kubernetes. And so, my career has kind of happened throughout that entire process. And throughout, DevOps has kind of been my passion. Along with my co-founder, Peter, I was a high-priced Kubernetes consultant in the New York ecosystem just a few years ago. And a lot of companies were trying to make the transition to Kubernetes. And Peter and myself came in and helped people that were struggling to find DevOps resources. And what that always kind of looked like was there was some bespoke version of a deployment system that was perfect for the person that wrote it. But obviously, it wasn't good enough for me and Peter, for Peter and myself. CHAD: [laughs] BENJIE: And so we would rewrite it, and it would be great. But then, eventually, we'd move on, and someone else would rewrite it. And there were a few instances where we ended up going back to companies and just reimplementing what we had already done. And throughout that process of being this consultant, we kept running into this ephemeral environment thing and building the same tooling over and over and over again. So Peter and I, on a weekend, kind of got, "Oh, let's make a tool for ourselves." So we did that. And we made this exoskeleton to help our consulting business. And as things progressed, we kept just adding features, and it was really fun, and it was great. And then some of our customers or clients saw that. And they were like, "Hey, can we click that button?" And we were like, "I guess." And so slowly, it turned into a product that was very duct tape-y and glued together, but it worked great. And to be frank, I had been through the VC process on the technical side in the past and didn't want to go through that again, the hamster wheel of need to raise more and more money and so very, very averse. And was very set on a really nice lifestyle consulting business, and hell was going to have to freeze over for us to take any VC dollars. And then I don't know if you heard, but in March of 2020, hell froze over, and [laughter] there was a little pandemic. And at the same time, we got some pre-emptive term sheets, yadda, yadda, yadda. Next thing you know, we're a funded company building out a really cool product. So that's the origin story of where Shipyard came from. CHAD: Really cool. I definitely want to come back to what building the product for you has been like, and the funding, and where you go from here. But let's come back to the product itself. As a developer, my normal workflow is I'm working locally. I'm able to run the application that I'm working on locally here on my computer. I put up a pull request on GitHub. I ask my team to review it. Once it gets reviewed from a code perspective or a design perspective and gets a thumbs up, I merge it back into the main branch. And I deploy it to a staging server, at which point I would ask my stakeholder, my client, whatever, "Hey, this thing you're expecting it's on the staging server for you to check out." And everyone else on the team is doing the same thing. So where does Shipyard come in, and why is it better than that? BENJIE: So where Shipyard comes in, it's after the local development but before you get to staging or really before you get to production because, in practicality, a lot of people turn Shipyard into their staging servers. But what happens is through webhooks, we hook into your GitHub. And we see that there's a new commit that comes in. And we automatically build and deploy a fully ephemeral environment for that feature. And what that gets you is a few things. One paradigm that we're seeing a lot of is when you make that PR, a lot of end-to-end test suites are being run automatically using Shipyard ephemeral environments. And what that gives you is, in some instances, before you even have a code review, you're passing the suite of tests. And what that gives you is you save a lot of time. If there's just a dumb migration error or some typo or something like that, you're not wasting human capital or human energy on those environments. And the other instance there that gets really interesting is by bringing up these environments earlier on, product stakeholders and QA stakeholders can do their jobs earlier on in the process. And so you can avoid a lot of merge conflicts. So like, you merge something, and maybe there's an edge case that you hadn't tested for, and the code review didn't pick up. Well, all of a sudden, staging is broken. And some other team member that's using the same process you were now they're blocked. Or the client can't see that environment, and there's some other type of problem. But really, we didn't invent this paradigm. This is what FAANG does. There's a reason why I can't remember the last time that Gmail itself a button broke, or there was bad CSS, or bad HTML, same thing with Facebook, same thing with Netflix. Obviously, we all know about –- CHAD: There's the obvious DNS outages. BENJIE: [laughs] Right. I was going to say we all know about AWS, especially in December of 2021. That was a tough month. But yeah, from a UI/UX and controllable release perspective, this greatly increases your internal stakeholders’ ability to get their hands on features earlier, find problems, and then get those back to developers. And the other thing, and maybe this is a question for you. But have you ever been in a situation where you built something, and it doesn't actually get reviewed for a few weeks? And then there is a bug, and you have to go back, and context switch off of what you're working on and go back and put a whole other mental model in place to go back and remember why did I use a switch statement here? That's a bad example but something to that effect. CHAD: [laughs] Yeah. Well, I really try to avoid that scenario by having tight feedback loops, but sometimes it's unavoidable. It might be you finish something right before a holiday or going away or something like that; that can happen. So it's happened to me before, yeah. BENJIE: Right. And how do you get your product people or your UAT teams...when do they get to touch the feature that you're working on? CHAD: It's usually not until after a code review when it's been merged into main and deployed to staging. BENJIE: So that's kind of how we make that feedback loop tighter. And what we've seen in practice actually is a lot faster, more reliable releases. And there's a significant increase in the cadence of releases that can happen and a higher quality of those releases. CHAD: You mentioned that some customers end up even getting rid of staging. And so that's really exciting and interesting to me. When they do that, what does the overall picture look like? Is the code merge manual? Or do you have customers that are doing continuous deployment off of a thumbs up from the person reviewing it in the ephemeral environment and getting that automatically merged, and then maybe canary deploy or something to production? BENJIE: Yeah, that's a great question. The thing to keep in mind here is that the majority of our customers are larger, and they have bigger teams because obviously, this is a collaboration platform ultimately. And so there's more value for the more complex teams and more stakeholders. So we don't have anybody at this moment that I know of; there could be, doing LGTM is good enough. So there's always a manual component. But what it looks like from a staging perspective is that your main branch is actually ostensibly your staging environment, and so all the ephemeral environments are sort of dev environments that are shareable. And then when you merge because a code review passes, and QA checks, and UAT, then it gets automatically built into the main branch and the main environment. And then some people do QA. They'll final pass a QA or a final end-to-end test there. And then there's also a manual promotion to production as well. That's the typical pattern we've seen. CHAD: Cool. One of the things that when I've used...sometimes a problem even with staging. But when I've used or been on projects with some ephemeral environments, getting good data in those environments can sometimes be a challenge. Is that something that Shipyard helps with? Or what's your recommended approach to that problem? BENJIE: So that was one of the biggest problems we had early on. We put a lot of work into that. We apply the same git branch model to data. So the way that we do that is basically if you...oh, by the way, I forgot to mention something. We use Docker Compose as our application definition. So we extrapolate from Docker Compose and transpile into best practice Kubernetes YAMLs. So there is a little bit of inferring and magic we do in certain places. And one of the places we do that is if you have a named volume...sorry, am I getting too technical, or is this --? CHAD: Not for me. And in fact, I have follow-up questions about [laughs] why you have that approach of converting. BENJIE: We will dive into that in a second. And I have a whole bunch of redhead friends that make fun of me about Compose all the time, but I stick to my guns on that one. But I'm happy to talk about that. At high level, if you indicate to Shipyard this is a persistent volume that we want to make sure that child environments get, then we will do an instant snapshot. And we will actually provide that to the generated child ephemeral environment. And ostensibly, what that does is it allows you to test data migrations as well on these ephemeral environments. Now, to go back to your initial question, we encourage...and we're working on some partnerships actually with some interesting companies. But we encourage people to specifically have their main data set on main be ostensibly a copy of whatever the good data set is. But obviously, you're responsible for pulling out your own PII and all the confidential stuff there. But the key thing here is you're maintaining one environment with the right data on it. And then all of the subsequent generated ephemeral environments inherit that and can then change that. CHAD: Yeah, that's cool. That solves a real pain point that I've had in the past when trying to work this way. BENJIE: One company that I think is really interesting around this space is Tonic.ai. And we're actually working on some stuff with them, I think. But we share an investor, so that's why I know them, for disclaimer purposes. But they're great. And they have some really cool tooling around mapping your database to PII and automatic detection of certain types of information that you don't want pushed into your staging servers and to your developers' hands. So that's one to check out, too, if you're looking for data help. CHAD: Cool. So do you want to get back to this Docker question? Why that approach of converting the Docker Compose into YAML for Kubernetes? BENJIE: So this is quite a controversial topic. CHAD: [laughs] BENJIE: But I will tell you where it came from. Hearkening back to our origin story, what we saw was we saw a pattern of a lot of companies going a little bit too all-in in Kubernetes; let’s just put it that way, where every single one of the developers is running minikube or even K3s or K3d or whatever. And all of a sudden, the DevOps people and the SRE people in the organization are spending most of their time supporting developers in local development environments. So early on in that consulting game, we realized we don't want to do that. So if you want to work with us, we think you can use Docker Compose for most things. Now, that's obviously not always the case. There are some companies and applications that have hundreds of microservices. So obviously, Docker Compose is not a very realistic fit for those people. But the majority of people can pretty much encapsulate their application in Docker Compose. So that's one thing. The other thing is I mentioned to you that I'm a DevOps engineer for years. I'm sick of new YAML formats or specifications. So I have a saying, "Not another YAML, I say nay." My co-founder, Peter, hates when I say that, but whatever, I like it. CHAD: [laughs] BENJIE: So that's another piece of this. And then the biggest thing here is that we look at Docker Compose as rabbit ears on a television set. So you know, like a 98-year-old grandmother can somehow stand on one foot and hold the antenna the right way, and it's static. The picture is perfect, and they can watch...I don't know why I'm saying Jay Leno. I don't think it's on the air anymore. CHAD: [laughs] BENJIE: Sticking with the grandma reference, humans are really good at figuring out stuff like that. [laughs] And that's kind of what Docker compose is. It's kind of like if you can make it work locally, Shipyard is going to take care of the rest and clean up a bunch of stuff for you. So that's how we look at it. Admittedly, we do have some Helm stuff we're working on and some Kustomize (with a K) stuff. And there are a whole lot of other interesting things out there. But frankly, we haven't run into problems with our current approach. And when we have tried to ingest raw manifests and stuff like that, other issues tend to arise. So we use Compose as a funnel to be very opinionated about our Kubernetes deployments. CHAD: Well, I'm a big believer in, especially in early days having opinions about things. And it sounds like, with this particular opinion, you not only can help people at different stages and say that "This is good enough," but you're also casting a wide net for what people can do. You're not cutting people off because they already use Kustomize or something like that. BENJIE: Yeah. And a lot of it is about accessibility. And so it's proven to be a pretty interesting thing. We didn't think that we were going to go this far with it. [laughs] We really thought that we were going to get in trouble soon. But it's pretty cool how it's going. And also, I will do a shout-out to the Docker Compose community. They're picking up some steam here. I think a lot of people are realizing that it's a pretty good spec for most use cases. So I know that Docker released somewhat recently you don't have to do Docker-Compose anymore. It's just Docker Compose. And there are all kinds of Compose specifications stuff that I think is worth checking out. Mid-roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: So to get a little bit meta for a minute, how do you use Shipyard on Shipyard? BENJIE: The ultimate dog food. That is one of the biggest selling points to our own engineering team when recruiting. We've got a pretty spectacular team that comes from some pretty awesome companies. And people sometimes ask me, "Hey, how did you get these engineers?" And honestly, I think the answer is dogfooding. Because what we're building is what every DevOps engineer sets out to build every time they start their job, in my opinion. You always want this ephemeral type of elastic environments are only on when you need them to be on. I didn't discuss this, but we also have functionality that we call SLV or Since Last Visit. So we know the last time someone went to one of these environments, and we'll turn it off for you. And then, obviously, it's very quick to turn it back on when needed. So there are cost savings. There are all kinds of stuff there. But ultimately, we're building the ultimate DevOps tool. And so we use Shipyard to run Shipyard. We use it in our QA process. We use it in our end-to-end testing process. And we also use it in our production process as well. We have some of our...we do have a production offering, and we use that ourselves for our stuff. So it's a very recursive conversation around that. And sometimes, when I'm actually doing a demo for various people, the only way to show or the only good demo I have of certain functionality is to actually show the Shipyard organization itself in Shipyard. And I get very recursively tied up, and people get confused. And it's always a bad idea. CHAD: [laughs] Yeah, you have to queue the Inception music. BENJIE: Yeah, exactly. We're at the third level. We're at the ice palace or whatever, ice hideout at this point. That's from the movie Inception for those that don't know what we're talking about. CHAD: [laughs] Yeah, that's really cool. I imagine that...sometimes when I'm working on a project, and you get down to the instrumentation level, to those levels, it can be difficult to run the system on the system. Have there been particular challenges? It's not just a normal web app; I guess is the way of saying that. What Shipyard is isn't just a normal web app. BENJIE: Yeah, one of the things that we do is that we have a pretty robust security posture, so every single one of our customers gets their own cluster. And so our security model is using the hypervisor basically, which, by the way, for anyone looking at Kubernetes, forget Shipyard for a second. Please understand that if you're in a shared namespace anything, our back is great, but don't do it. There's a CVE around on the corner, I promise you. Don't do it. Anyway. CHAD: [laughs] That's a good PSA for people. BENJIE: Yeah, right? [laughs] Yeah. So some of the cool challenges we've had is we early on, we definitely had some stuff where if we did a bad release, we would break our own ability to fix our own releases. So that was that way early on. We figured that one out very early. I think that was even before we were a product even. That was just a few sleepless nights of Peter and myself being like, oh God; we got to fix this so that we don't screw up this client's website. So that's been interesting. I mean, that was really it. And my co-founder, Peter, is listening to this, and he's like, there are 4,000 different things I've fixed over the last few years that were a problem around this, and I can't bring them up. But there's a lot, and I don't know what they are. And Peter is very good at fixing them. So that speaks to my co-founder and the rest of the team. CHAD: So you mentioned that March of 2020 happened, hell froze over. And you found yourself thinking you're going to take a different path and fundraise and become a funded company. How difficult did you find fundraising in that environment, or was it easy? BENJIE: It was real tough at the beginning there. For one, I have no idea what I'm doing. [laughter] That's just the truth. Maybe I should say that in the past tense. I had no idea what I was doing. I still feel like I have no idea what I'm doing. But like I said, I come from a technical side, and I'm a bit of an engineer. So if a VC asked me a question and the answer is yes, but I have to qualify it with some weird edge case that I came up with. That's not a great look for these types of pitch meetings. So I would suggest people not overengineer answers to questions, yes or no works very often. So it was challenging. But also, at the time, I'll say that there was definitely some predatory term sheets going around because this was really early, and we had no idea. And I was a fool...I wasn't a fool, but I had no idea. We're running this consulting company, and I'm like, oh my God, all my customers are funded. They're all going to go away. We had some pretty large customers. It was very irrational looking back. But it was a crazy time. Also, I should mention that we're in New York. So things were heightened a lot more also in March of 2020. It was very intense, and so I had to learn a lot. And basically, the realization like, oh, if the world becomes remote, software is just going to go crazy had not seeped into my brain quite yet in March or April. So did a lot of learning that way. We were very fortunate to have some really helpful people along that path and eventually figured it out. I will say, funny story, I literally didn't have a pitch for three months. I would just do a demo and talk about stuff. And then a friend of mine was like, "Oh, what's your pitch?" And I was like, "I do a demo, and I talk about it." So he's like, "Dude, you got to have a pitch." So that helped a lot once I figured out [laughs] that I needed a pitch. CHAD: It did help. So you recommend people have a pitch. BENJIE: I would say that that is a positive, yes. Having a pitch is helpful. I know that that's a ridiculous statement here, but I literally didn't have...I just didn't think about what's my pitch? CHAD: Well, I think it's simultaneously a ridiculous thing but also there exist in the world things that people do just because that's the way that they're done. And so it's valid, I think to say, "Do we really need that? Can we get by without it?" And if the lesson learned there is actually there's a reason why people do it and it is valuable, that's a valuable lesson. It's too bad you had to go through it to discover it. BENJIE: Well, yeah. I look back fondly at that. And I wouldn't say I was being contrarian. I was just kind of being a jackass, frankly. But I learned a lot. And honestly, in the end, I couldn't be happier. I'm pretty anti-VC. Everyone knows that about me. I like to make fun of them and all these things. But I couldn't be happier with our investors, and they've been unbelievably supportive. And so that's been a super positive. The one thing I would say to anyone listening to this podcast that has to go out and raise money is you got to get really good at letting things roll off your shoulder. As an engineer, it's really hard for me to deal with any level of rejection because I'm like, oh, it works, or it doesn't work. Oh, you found this edge case that I didn't think about? Oh, you got me, but I'll fix it now, and now it's fine. That's not the way that fundraising works. You have certain conversations, and you feel super positive. And then, all of a sudden, you don't hear back from this person for weeks at a time. You have other conversations where you think that it was the worst thing that you've ever done. And the next day, you get a term sheet. I had one pitch...this is when I knew how to do a pitch. This was a few months in. I had this one pitch, and it was all virtual, and it was very early days in our remote world. And there were four partners on this call and a few associates or whatever. And I do the pitch, but everyone is muted on Zoom for 45 minutes. Now, it's pretty clear from our conversation that I talk a lot. So it's not the end of the world. But I had no idea what was going on. And I just thought that I had bombed it. It was horrible, all these things. And the next day, I got an email, and it was three introductions to amazing opportunities. And two of them actually panned out. We didn't end up going with that fund. But I just thought it was hilarious that I was convinced that I shouldn't be doing this, and it was the opposite. So you never know. That's the other thing I learned is you literally can never know what's going to come of any particular meeting in the VC fundraising world. CHAD: So how long did it take you from the point that you decided you were going to do this and you were going to start trying to fundraise to actually getting the investment in the bank? BENJIE: Probably four to six months. We obviously had some opportunities, but as we went through this process, realizing that having the right partner for the next 7 to 10 years was really important. And we ended up with our lead. I can't believe I'm talking positively about a VC on a podcast but whatever. CHAD: [laughs] BENJIE: Our lead, Owen Davis from Contour Venture...Contour is like this New York fund that they do everything, but no one knows their name. Oh, he's going to love that I said that but whatever. CHAD: [laughs] BENJIE: They're great. He's great. And he's the dream investor for us to lead. And then we have other...and I'll mention Shruti over at Array and the folks at Heavybit and Work-Bench as well. They're all in this round, and it all came together. And I was a little picky. So we kind of took our time. And I suggest that if you have that luxury, which we did because we already had a successful consulting business, make sure you know who you're getting into business with for sure. And we got very lucky with that. CHAD: So how much time while you were fundraising did you personally work on that as opposed to other things for the product or the business? BENJIE: I should have probably put a little bit more time to the fundraising. To be honest with you, I would say I probably put 50% to 60% of my energy into the fundraise, and then the 40% was all building product. As an engineer, you have a really frustrating call, or you think you're doing well, and then you're not, or vice versa. So for me, I would retreat into building. And so I probably retreated into building a little more than I should have to be frank, [laughs] but it worked out in the end. CHAD: While you were doing that, you supported yourselves from the consulting revenue. BENJIE: Yeah, for the most part. We still had active clients. So we converted most of those...actually all of those into Shipyard customers. And they were very supportive in that process, by the way, doing due diligence calls for us. They were all very helpful. CHAD: And how did you decide how much money you should be seeking to raise? BENJIE: Ultimately, that was something I struggle with just because I really want to know what I'm going to do and what the plan is. And one of the lessons that I've learned as a CEO now is your job is basically to make unbelievably important, critical decisions with little to no data and just hope you're making the right one and then adjust quickly if you're not. So understanding when you've made the wrong decision. But ultimately, to answer your question, I built out a spreadsheet. I had a wish list of engineers that I knew or positions that we needed to fill, probably underestimated some of the product marketing needs that we would need to do. But built out a model and then figured, hey, how can we get there in 18 to 24 months to get to the next round? Because you really do have to be making sure that you can...I mentioned the hamster wheel early on; maybe that's too negative of an analogy there. But you have to be thinking about your next round. And so you have to get to what metrics you want to hit. And you just work backwards from there. CHAD: At what point along the way...you mentioned earlier that your customers tend to be larger companies. At what point along the way did you discover who your ideal customers were? BENJIE: I think we're still discovering that. We're still figuring that out. But for me, this tool Shipyard, and I've seen it, if you start using a tool like Shipyard from day one, the gains and the benefits are just insane. We had one company that started off from scratch with us. And within two months, they had extremely robust software development lifecycle, production deploys, all kinds of stuff. And they've been going now for years...not years but a year a half or so with us and super successful. So I always wanted to be like, oh, startup X with two engineers you should use us. And the more we talk to them, the more conversations we had. We're just like, this is not a DevOps priority. DevOps is not the priority. CHAD: Especially in those early days, I feel like there's such a tendency, especially from engineers, to say, "Oh, that's not that complicated. I can do that," or "We don't really need that. Let's piece together this." BENJIE: Yeah, that's exactly right. So then, as we started to talk more and more and understand what people were doing, we just fell into this ICP or Initial Customer Profile of more complex teams that are really facing these problems. I mean, specifically, when you get to a certain size, a bad release costs you a lot of money, customer success, customers that are leaving you, frustrated sales execs, frustrated product people, frustrated QA people. So it's when you get to these more complex levels is when you need this type of tooling. Now, one thing Shipyard released actually very, very quietly, but you know, it's released. We released a 30-day free trial. It's kind of like our light tier, so people can start doing it. And we're starting to see some people at the earlier stage companies starting to do this, which is exciting to us. But our goal as a company is absolutely to figure out how to get this to the masses because ephemeral environments is the paradigm of the future. I mean, it's the paradigm of the present with the big tech companies. And it's now coming down to the rest of us. And so instead of having to hire five DevOps people to build the system out for you for six months, you hire one DevOps person, and that DevOps person shifts into an SRE role, not entirely, but their concerns are more about reliability of the actual site rather than reliability for developer environments or QA environments or staging environments. So we think that's really powerful. One thing that I probably should have mentioned way sooner is we have a community site that we've donated, and we're more than happy to have some pull requests come in. We've had a few. ephemeralenvironments.io, yeah, I don't know how to spell ephemeral either, but you can Google it. It will come up. CHAD: [laughs] BENJIE: ephemeralenvironments.io, and it goes through the different use cases of ephemeral environments and where there's value there. So that's kind of the goal with all this. CHAD: So what are you working on now? And what is the next stage for the company, I guess also from a product perspective? But also, you mentioned that hamster wheel. [laughter] You're coming up on 18 months of being on that wheel, right? BENJIE: We are. One thing is we've had some success, so our revenue is pretty solid, but no rest for the weary. But we're probably going to go out and bring in some more capital pretty soon. And the reason for that, because that's always the important thing to me, is that we have some pretty spectacular design partners, some pretty big logos, all these things. The product is there. The product is killing it. I couldn't be more proud of the product and the team. We've also started to build out the core team and couldn't be more proud of that. And so now we need to accelerate and figure out our next steps and how to bring this to the masses. And ultimately, the vision of Shipyard is to make all this stuff move a lot faster, bring velocity to teams, and all that stuff. And we believe that ephemeral environments are a huge component of that. So we're probably in the next few months going to probably go out and look at our financing options. I will say that the market has been a little insane. So I feel like all the education that I got in 2022 is probably out the window because some of these valuations and other stuff seems like it's a frothy market, as they say, but we'll be doing that. And we're really going to probably double down on figuring out what the community needs and where the value is for the community, so both with ephemeralenvironments.io. But also, there are some really cool internal tools that we've built that solve some of the issues within the Kubernetes ecosystem. Okay, that's a strong word. They help a lot. I'm never going to say I've solved anything in Kubernetes. CHAD: [laughs] BENJIE: But they help a lot with understanding why the state of your application is maybe not where you want it to be. And so, we'd like to probably contribute a bit more back to CNCF, in particular, but open source in general. So continue to build the team to work on that. And then, obviously, pushing forward with product and some pretty cool stuff we have on the roadmap that we're really excited about. CHAD: Awesome. Well, I wish you all the best with that. If folks want to find out more about Shipyard, follow along with you, get in touch; where are the best places for them to do that? BENJIE: Really, shipyard.build is our website. And that is probably the best place to try it and also to contact us. Our Twitter is @shipyardbuild twitter.com/shipyardbuild. Personally, I'm not a fan of Twitter. So I personally don't use Twitter, but we do as a company. And I think that our Twitter and our website are probably the best things to reach out to, and obviously, sales@shipyard.build you can send an email there. But I think you'll probably find the information you're looking for on the website. And if not, please let us know what's missing. CHAD: And you mentioned the free trial. So I feel like that's a great thing for people who want to get more into the product; they can give it a try, right? BENJIE: Yeah. And one thing to note about the free trial the reason that it's kind of cool is it's your own cluster. You get your own cluster. It's completely single tenant. It's pretty dope. It's pretty cool. And you can really take it for a spin. I would suggest, I mean, we've had a lot of success with companies that are using Docker Compose already to just dive in there and get their application running. But I would say that we have some pretty cool starter apps as well. They're linked in our docs and our GitHub. Just seeing the power of this through our starter applications has also been a great experience for a lot of people. So I'd suggest taking a look at that. Oh, and I should plug a podcast that I'm a co-host of, Kubelist. I do that with Marc Campbell from Replicated, where we interview CNCF open-source projects all the time. That's why I got to be careful pretending like I'm solving anything. There are a lot of options in the Kubernetes landscape. CHAD: Wonderful. You can subscribe to the show and find notes and a full transcript of this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening and see you next time. ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Benjie De Groot.
Chad talks to Tiffany Shubert, Senior Product Manager at Relias Healthcare. Relias is an online healthcare education company. They develop and create education and clinical content for anything from physicians to nurses, physical therapists, to in-home care aides in multiple healthcare settings. They span the entire range from acute care hospital settings to in-home care to hospice. Tiffany talks about how her clinical skills apply really well to product management, defining who you're solving the problem for, being all about your end-user, and making sure they have an amazing experience with your product. Relias Healthcare (https://reliashealthcare.com/) Follow Tiffany on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/shubertconsulting/). Follow Relias on Twitter (https://twitter.com/relias) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/relias/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Tiffany Shubert, Senior Product Manager at Relias. Tiffany, thanks for joining me. TIFFANY: Hey. Thanks so much, Chad. I'm really excited to be here. CHAD: So, Tiffany, folks may not be familiar with what Relias is, although if you're in certain spaces, it's certainly a big name that you may have heard of. So why don't you start off by telling people a little bit about Relias? TIFFANY: Sure. So Relias is an online healthcare education company. Relias is in many, many different settings. But the majority of what we do is we develop and create education and clinical content for anything from physicians to nurses, physical therapists, to in-home care aides. And we are in multiple healthcare settings. So we span the entire range from acute care hospital settings to in-home care to hospice. CHAD: We do a lot of work with different clients in the healthcare space. And so many of them, without even me prompting, mention, "Oh, we use Relias." [chuckles] And it's remarkable to see. Is Relias the biggest provider of learning management software for the space? TIFFANY: So, we are the biggest provider of compliance training in the skilled nursing space. And we are a big provider in all of the other spaces. And really, where Relias started was in this notion of compliance training which, for those who are not familiar, really could benefit from a lot of design. That is the kind of training that every single healthcare provider has to take in order to see a patient. So that's where you take your patient privacy training, your bloodborne pathogen training, all of those types of trainings. And that's where Relias really started and has grown from there. CHAD: So, how long have you been at Relias? TIFFANY: So I started, interesting, in the end of March 2020. [chuckles] So yeah, it has been my pandemic experience, so almost two years now. CHAD: What brought you to Relias? TIFFANY: So I was at an interesting juncture in my career. I'm a physical therapist by training, and I was in clinical practice for about 15 years. And I transitioned over actually through a very interesting pathway but working for some different startups that were creating different technologies around healthcare. And one of the startups I had been with had run the course. And I was looking for something more around education, which is my original passion. And when Relias actually found me, I didn't realize it was actually in my backyard. CHAD: [laughs] TIFFANY: What drew me to it was this ability at this space where we could be looking at education, especially for clinicians, not as what I would call a penance which is how it's looked at. Like, ugh, I have to take my online education, or I have to take my training. But more of a hey, how can we make education interesting and dynamic? And how can we really apply many of the concepts we know about design and about really developing excellent products to clinical education? Which was incredibly exciting to me. CHAD: As you moved from someone practicing to product management in this space, did you do any formal learning or training in that, or did you just learn along the way? TIFFANY: A combination. Really my original experience in product was working for a startup company that was developing a really innovative concept around creating a soft, light exoskeleton, and they needed a clinician on staff to really understand how bodies move and what kind of problems could be solved. That position really evolved into being a director of user experience. And so that really entailed bringing our end users, who happened to be older adults, into the lab and having them really work side by side with the engineers who are creating the product. So I developed that whole program, validated it, expanded it. And from there, I really realized, oh, my clinical skills actually apply really well to product management. But now I do need to get some more formal training. So I went through some of the different...I actually went through the CSPO certification program, and then I have also just continued doing some more formal training at Relias. CHAD: I imagine that the industry itself experience being almost on the user side helps. But is it ever a hurdle that you need to overcome? TIFFANY: I think when clinicians first get into industry, they make a lot of mistakes because they want to solve every single problem. Or they want to give their users every single opportunity or every single feature. So, for example, if you sit down with a group of physical therapists, and if you say, "I'm going to build you an app for helping your patients with their home exercise program," every single physical therapist is going to give you a laundry list of 30 things that they want. And typically, where clinicians go in my role is they're like, "Okay, we're going to fix all 30 things." And really, it's that ability to narrow it down, narrow it down. And to be honest, if you're a good clinician, it's the same thing. Patients usually come with multiple complaints, and you've got to figure out what that number one complaint is and what you can do to address it. So that's where I think it becomes a barrier is wanting to fix every single problem as opposed to being able to really winnow it down. But when you can winnow it down, it's very powerful. CHAD: An extension of that that I've seen, which I think is one of the challenges in healthcare, is that there are a lot of edge cases. And in normal SaaS products like an e-commerce product or whatever, it's easier to say, "We're not going to solve that right now." But in healthcare, every edge case is an actual person that you could be helping. And so it's a little bit harder to really get in the mindset of not solving every problem. Because especially if the space of healthcare that you're in is literally life and death, it can be difficult from a product perspective to say, "We're not going to solve that case." TIFFANY: I completely agree. Those are just conversations that you have to have because you also have to look at if we spend all of this time solving all of these use cases or all of these edge cases, we're never going to have a product. So then you got to pull back, and you got to go, what is going to have the biggest impact? Or what are the components across every single patient that we can address? Because there's always going to be some commonalities, not necessarily disease space, but in how we actually address that patient and manage that disease or manage that impairment. It is a big trap that we fall into because you're right; healthcare provider training is you have to address everything. But the fact of the matter is that's not realistic. CHAD: What are some other challenges that you encounter while creating products in the healthcare space? TIFFANY: I think the biggest challenge is really defining who you're solving the problem for, and we run into this all the time. And this has become very clear to me lately that if you're working for a Facebook or a Google, you are all about your end-user. And it's all about making sure that that end-user has an amazing experience. But in healthcare, you've got patients, you've got clinicians, you've got hospitals, you've got healthcare systems. You've got private insurance payers, and you've got Medicare. And all of those groups may be interacting with your product. And all of those groups have totally different use cases and totally different problems to solve. So first of all, figuring out, like, who am I building this for? Who is going to pay for it? And where do those two things intersect? And that has been the biggest problem I have seen in innovation in this space over the last ten years has been, well, we're going to build this for the patient, and it's going to be amazing, and the insurance companies will just pay for it. That hasn't really panned out because nobody sat down and actually talked to the insurance companies and asked them what problems do they see happening that a product could solve? And then the flip has happened too where they've gone to the insurance companies, and insurance companies have said, "Well, here are the problems," but then they've never talked to the patients. So it's getting that multifaceted perspective and then boiling it down to what truly is the problem we're going to solve? CHAD: And the way I see it is that this problem is amped up in the healthcare space because there are so many stakeholders or people you're potentially building the product for. But it's a general problem too in enterprise software where basically the people making the buying decision are not the users necessarily or the people you're trying to help. And any time where that's the case, you also run the risk of very difficult to build a good product because the people making the buying decisions aren't actually the ones who are going to be using it or don't have the same needs as the people that you're trying to help with the software. TIFFANY: Exactly, exactly. So it takes a lot of time to sort all that out, and we rarely have that amount of time. I'd say one of the things that was so fascinating on the product that Relias and thoughtbot worked on was we had the time to go a little deeper and to really figure out...so the problem we were trying to solve is okay, we need a better tool. Physical therapists need a better tool to engage patients, specifically older adult patients. And again, so we had the conversation with the clinicians, and they're like, "Oh, well, we want all of these exercises." But then we paused, and we said, "But really, what is your biggest clinical challenge?" And they all said, "Time. We don't have enough time." So then we were able to pull back and not go, oh, this is not about making the best exercise program ever. This is about creating a product that actually solves the problem of time. If we can enhance efficiency, then clinicians will use it. They'll be happy with it, and we can take it from there. Solving the problem of time is a totally different problem than we have to create a product that offers you 30,000 different exercises. It was just a really important lesson because then once we said time, then all of a sudden, we had clinician buy-in. And then we also had an organization buy-in because the organization is going, "Absolutely. If you can save my clinicians 10 minutes, that's going to increase their productivity. That's going to give them more time with the patient. Or maybe we could even get so efficient that there are more opportunities to see more patients." So it's tricky to figure all that out. CHAD: So how did we figure that out? What tools did we use to have those conversations with people? TIFFANY: Yeah, there was a lot of really excellent discovery and meeting with a good variety of clinicians but all practicing in the same space. And that's one of the things I want to call out. When you look at healthcare, healthcare spans so many different settings. And there are not a lot of consistency or universal truths between settings. And what I mean is someone who is seeing a patient in a home health setting is going to have a very different skill set than someone who is working with a professional sports team, same training, same title, totally different set of problems. So we were really, really clear that we had to really refine this problem and get a very specific type of therapist. And we also wanted to get a specific...I'm going to just use home health just for an example. But okay, so let's make sure we get therapists who are working in rural settings, in-home health, and therapists who are working in urban settings in-home health because we wanted to make sure that we had a better understanding of the problems they were facing in these multiple settings. From there, from that discovery, got really, really, really very strict on what consistencies we were seeing around the problems that the therapists were running into. And from there, we just really focused on what was going to give us the most bang for our buck. And the problem of time was super consistent. The questions really were not like, well, would an app save you time? The questions were really what are your biggest challenges right now? CHAD: And did you do that in one on one interviews with them? TIFFANY: Yeah, those were one on one interviews. Yes. Yeah. CHAD: How do you, when you're doing it, collect the data from those interviews in a way that is conducive to analysis later on? TIFFANY: So I've used a whole variety of tools. And we were very analog in this particular one. We were interviewing one person, but there were about four of us on the call, and everyone was taking notes. And then everybody was highlighting common themes. And I've used focus group analysis software as well, which is always really, really helpful. But in this particular, we were really just going analog, and it worked pretty well. CHAD: And you were doing this without a prototype or anything like that yet, right? TIFFANY: Correct, for the initial without a prototype. Yep. CHAD: And so once you had that potential job to be done or value proposition, how did you go from that job to be done to a potential product? TIFFANY: So from there, we did go ahead, and we prototyped, and we prototyped a workflow that seemed to make sense given what we had heard from our users and then also just with my clinical background. And then that prototype really was the trick because a lot of times in healthcare, when you are working with clinicians, some are tech-savvy, but there's a significant amount (And this isn't age-dependent, but this is younger and older.) that are not. And so they really need a little bit of context to ground what their thoughts are and how they think you can solve them. So by getting that prototype in place and by letting the therapist really bounce around in there and see what was intuitive and what wasn't, that was the game-changer. And we could really see okay, here's our understanding of this. And whoops! Missed that one. [laughter] Oh, this all makes sense. But you could see as therapists went through what they appreciated was that the user interface was super simple, super clean. They could easily find things. And even those who didn't have a lot of self-efficacy around technology really felt at the end of a 20-minute session I know how to use this, and I could see how this will save me time. All of that data really helped us understand we were going down the right path. It was a little unsettling because when we looked at other products in the market, they would basically say, "We literally have 6,000 exercises that therapists can use." Well, we were really saying, "We're going to give you about 400. But the reason why is because it's a lot quicker to review 400 exercises and identify what you want as opposed to 6,000." And by and large, what we were hearing was that "Oh, well, when I use those apps that have 6,000 exercises, I just get overwhelmed, and it takes too long." CHAD: But that can be a little scary, too, because if you're in that situation where you know that the person making the buying decision is just going to look and say, "Oh, this one has more exercises." [laughs] TIFFANY: Yep, yep, yep. Yeah. CHAD: Actually, at this point, let's take a little bit of a tangent because you're doing this within an existing company, Relias. Relias isn't necessarily a small company. So what kind of reporting out or management of other stakeholders or the business did you need to do along the way? TIFFANY: That's a great question. And Relias is a big company, but also, this was a very new space for Relias. So they had never looked outward at a patient engagement tool. The focus had always been education for clinicians. So this was a very new space for them. And actually, the most important and early conversations really were with our legal team and our cybersecurity team. And that was because we were going to be creating a database for patients. Again, new space, and we really needed to de-risk as early as possible, make sure that we could actually build this thing, keep it safe, that the budget was going to align. Also, that information really restricted the kind of information that we can actually keep about patients. So having that on the front end saved us so much time later on. That was number one. And I would say anybody who's looking in the healthcare space absolutely has to start there because, again, the rules are changing constantly. And as clinicians, we are trained on how to take care of patients. We are trained to maintain patient privacy. We typically don't have a whole bunch of experience on cybersecurity and how you actually keep an online system secure. So you need to make sure you're talking to the right stakeholders to get the right information. So that was critical. CHAD: Some organizations have an executive sponsor on the team or embedded in the team so that there are direct status updates and awareness of new product development. Is that the track that Relias took, or was it something else? TIFFANY: That was absolutely the track that we took, so we did have an executive sponsor who we reported out to each week gave updates to. And he was able to communicate out to leadership as well. And we also had lots of opportunities internally to give updates and to do demos. So people could understand what we were doing; why we were making the decisions we were making to make sure everything aligned appropriately. CHAD: I'm a big believer in demos and that kind of thing to communicate. I think we all have been in situations where when you're working on a complex problem, even if you do all your research and answer every question in the most perfect way and all that stuff, if at the end of that process it’s the first time anyone's hearing about all the results of that, there's going to be so many questions about did you consider this? Did you consider that? And I think we all know that if instead we communicate things along the way and keep people up to speed, there's much more understanding but also trust in the process. TIFFANY: Yeah, absolutely. And I have also experienced what you're describing. And what I have found is it's really like the weekly demo can be really quick, super helpful, and then documentation, documentation, documentation. We've created FAQ pages because of exactly what you're saying. Because a lot of times, something isn't intuitive to a stakeholder, and maybe you've answered that question three or four times. So you've got to have it written down somewhere so that everybody's on the same page and understands. And even if they've missed seven meetings, if they come and have that question, hey, just so you know, we made that decision three weeks ago. This is why. This is the justification. This is why we're moving forward. CHAD: Yeah. Is there any other sort of techniques that you employ to try to keep people up to date or strike that balance there? TIFFANY: The main one, I think, is the weekly report out. And it is a challenge, and especially with things being virtual, of course, it's even more of a challenge because I think it's really easy to get insular but being consistent and being timely. So if everybody knows okay, I'm going to go to this meeting on Monday morning at 10:00 o'clock, it's going to be 15 minutes, and I'm going to know exactly what's happening, all of a sudden, that organization piece is so key. Keeping it short is really key, and then everybody's on the same page. And you don't end up with that; hey, wait a minute, I didn't hear about that. Or why is that happening? Because that takes so much time to manage. CHAD: We worked with one team several years ago, actually, but I realize that it might even be more relevant now. And I don't necessarily recommend this for every team. I think each team needs to find their own techniques that work well for their culture. But this team, rather than having meetings actually had...they had occasional meetings, but they actually had a team blog, internal, completely internal. And they essentially wrote a blog together that everyone who wanted to follow along was able to follow along with. TIFFANY: I think that's a great idea. I think in bigger companies, sometimes that gets lost. [laughs] CHAD: Yeah, it definitely worked for this organization's culture and who was following along, but it wouldn't work for everybody. TIFFANY: Absolutely. One other thing that I need to call out that I didn't was with some of the formative user interviews, we had to push on this, but we did try to get at least one member of engineering coming to some of those or at least getting some highlights. And this may seem like, of course, you would do that. But when you're working in a fairly large company that's entering into new space, there are new ways to be engaging your engineering team that are different and may not seem valuable at the time. So we rallied pretty hard to get some folks in there so that they could really understand the problem that they were going to be contributing to solving. And that was critical because the assumptions about if you're building an app for an older adult versus the realities are so radically different that you can only really understand it if you visually see it or hearing from your user. Mid-roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: Okay, so let's pop the stack now and go back to where we were before we took that tangent into that side of internal communication and management. So you had the prototype and were starting to show it to potential users and were getting positive feedback. What were the next steps after that? TIFFANY: So the next steps for us were running through...and to be clear, we actually were creating two apps, which I never actually said, one for the clinician, [laughter] which the problem was to solve time, and one was for the older adult. And I've had a ton of experience actually designing for older adults. So some people may think that that might have been the harder app. But there are some really straightforward design tenets that work when you're designing for somebody who's 60,70, 80, 90, 100-plus. So starting out on the clinician side, got our prototype, went through, validated it with about seven clinicians, identified some areas of confusion, identified some areas that we thought were totally intuitive and were completely not. So my favorite was we wanted a way for clinicians to identify the patients that they were going to see that day, and so we just thought that if they favorited the patients, if they just clicked a star, and they'll show up. And we had seven out of seven clinicians say, "Does that mean that they're actually my favorite patient? [laughter] Like, no. Okay, missed the boat on that one; regroup. We went through about three prototype revisions before we got to the point where we were really happy with the workflow and felt like it was intuitive. So that was the first thing. And then the second thing was on the patient-facing side. And for that one, it's a totally different workflow because it's just one human who's being given exercises. So it really was, okay, how do they access the exercises? How did they experience the exercises? And what makes sense? And so we had a lot of questions because we were trying to figure out, do we want written text? Do we want animations? Do we want animations with audio? So we had a really robust user group that we were able...we had about ten that we were able to actually demo, and they could give us direct feedback on. And then we had a user group of about 30 people that we actually just started sending prototypes and surveys to get some better feedback. And what we found is when we did more of the email, we would send them an audio clip of an animation. And we did some really lovely A/B testing that way. And we got much better results. Because generally speaking, when you interview an older adult about something you are creating for them, they're super positive, even about the stuff they don't like. So it was a lot easier to get more robust, more real feedback by removing the human element and saying, "Hey, tell us how you really feel." We got some amazing feedback that way. CHAD: That's interesting. And just in terms of timeline, was this happening pre-pandemic or post-pandemic? TIFFANY: This was post-pandemic. Well, we really started doing this design work in the summer of 2020, so right in the middle of the pandemic, yes. CHAD: Right. And so when you talk about these interviews and all that kind of stuff, everything was remote. TIFFANY: Yeah, everything was remote, worked fantastic. That has been one of the cool things about being in this space, especially in design space, technology design, and aging, is that the acceleration of the technology adoption that happened in 2020 was mind-blowing. I started working with design with older adults in 2014, building them different types of applications. And it just was incredible the level of comfort that I saw in 2020 amongst a much broader audience compared to 2014, 2015. CHAD: Yeah, we've definitely seen that as well across different products. And the underlying reason is bad, but it certainly makes what we're doing a lot easier to have more people comfortable, even with little things like being on a Zoom call and knowing how to share their screen. Little things like that would sometimes be a big hang-up for getting good interviews and good feedback with people. TIFFANY: Absolutely, absolutely, and doing some relatively complex things. Like, we were trying to validate doing a two-factor authentication, and we were able to do it virtually. So it's really giving us some really neat tools to reach a broad audience. CHAD: A little while ago, you called out that there are patterns for building applications for certain ages. Can you tell me more about that? TIFFANY: Sure. There's actually been a lot of research done in this area. I've contributed a little bit to it. [laughter] So what we really found especially early on...and I was involved with a project to take the connect technology and the Microsoft Connect technology and modify it to deliver a fall prevention program to older adults. So in my previous life as a physical therapist, I have a Ph.D. in human movement and did a lot of research in healthy aging and injury prevention. And older adult falls is a fairly significant public health issue. And there are a lot of cool things you can do to address it around exercise. But the problem is scale. So how do you actually bring some of these exercises to older adults at scale as opposed to one on one? So that's the context behind this. And so we started working with Microsoft SDK, building this out. And what we quickly realized is that the things that tend to make, let's say, a video game really cool and engaging are actually the worst things you can put into design if you're introducing an older adult or someone who's not comfortable with technology into a game. So you need a very simple interface, to begin with. And you need very straightforward commands. And so it's funny because, in 2013, 2014 the people that were in this space all came from the gaming world. So they'd make these really beautiful backgrounds and things jumping and popping out. And you would lose your user within two minutes because it was just so visually overwhelming. And one of the things that's interesting is as we get older, our brains are just not as flexible. They're super smart, but they get easily distracted. So what we learned is if you keep your user interface super simple, and then you make your early experiences very positive, so you keep the tasks very straightforward, you show success, what happens is your user gets a ton of self-efficacy. And they start to really realize that they know exactly what they're doing because they do. And then you can start doing some more interesting things. So what we found is with our technology, as we got our users, okay, they're using it three times, they're using it four times. They're being super consistent doing this exercise program. Let's make it more visually engaging then they could actually handle it because they weren't so worried about what do I do next to go forward in the exercise program? So yeah, so when you think about design, that was a really long-winded answer, sorry. CHAD: [laughs] It's okay. TIFFANY: But you want to keep things super simple and straightforward. You do need to infuse it with compassion and empathy, and if you can do small successes, really, really helpful. The other thing that is incredibly helpful, and this is going to sound a little hokey, is that any kind of avatar or chatbot who's super positive really, really can have a big impact. Because a lot of times, older adults are by themselves trying to navigate this thing, and they have no idea what's going on. And if a chatbot pops up and says, "Hey, you're at this stage, do you need any help?" Or "Hey, you pushed the red button, good job." There's this very interesting relationship that gets built with older adults and chatbots and avatars. They engage with them much more. And I think ultimately what I saw because we were using an avatar to lead through exercises is that self-efficacy increased because even though the avatar was leading them through the exercises, they ultimately knew it was them. Compared to if I was leading them through the exercises, there's always that yeah, I did it, but Tiffany taught me how. Whereas this is well, I did it, and the avatar taught me how, which really means that I actually did it. So I can actually do it. It's a really cool space. CHAD: In validating the exercise format through those surveys and that kind of thing, what did you learn in terms of the format? Was animated ones winning out? TIFFANY: Absolutely. What we learned was animation, hands down 100%. We also learned that animation plus narration really was the winning ticket. What we had tested we did some A/B testing where we did animation plus narration, and we had the exercise instructions written with the assumption that, well, some people are visual, and some people are auditory, and some people want to read the exercises. And we compared that to just animation plus narration and no written instructions. And the feedback we got was that it was too much. Like, you're reading the instructions, you're watching, and you're listening, and it just was confusing and overwhelming. And sometimes it wasn't an exact match because when you're narrating an exercise versus reading about it, the words aren't always exactly the same because sometimes it just doesn't make sense to make them the same. But when you just had the narration with the exercise, people were really happy. They could see it, they could hear it, they could replay it. And the other thing that was really nice about that particular format is it also gave a little bit of space. And this is on a mobile device, so when I say little space, I do mean little space where if the therapist had any specific cues, they could input it in there. So then now the patient's got...they can see the exercises, they can hear how to do it. "Oh yeah, and my therapist said, 'Make sure I put all my weight on my left leg.”’ So that just seemed to be the right package as opposed to dumping all of this information on the user. CHAD: One of the things, when I've worked with people or organizations before that can become a bit of a blocker, is identifying something like this. Oh, animations with narration that's what this should be and then needing to produce all of that in order to bring the product to market to create it all from scratch. Was this material that you already had at your disposal? Or was it going to need to be created? TIFFANY: It was going to need to be created. And the way we addressed that issue is we looked at, for lack of a better word, what are those key bread and butter exercises that just about every therapist prescribes to just about every person? I mean, it still was a sizable lift, but again, it wasn't an overwhelmingly huge production. So we went ahead and said, okay, table stakes. We've got to have these in because if you don't, then it's not really usable. And of all of these, which are the ones which are generic enough that if we built it once, a therapist could put in additional instructions to do any kind of modifications? So that was really how we addressed that. I would say if somebody is starting completely from scratch, pick a total of 10 exercises or a total of 10 things and just pilot that and just try to do low-fidelity prototypes and just validate it before going down the path. CHAD: So in the story here, we're moving towards actually building something. Was there a go/no go point in the product's life cycle where you needed to get sign-off on something in order to decide to actually bring this product to market? TIFFANY: Yes. And interestingly, we are in that point at this exact moment in time. [laughter] So we're at the point where it's released in alpha. We're getting some really great feedback. And on the clinician side, we're back to the original challenge around building something for patients. We are still actually putting finishing touches on making sure that we can really secure this database the way it needs to be secured in 2022 because things, again, are moving pretty rapidly. So we are waiting for our go decision as we speak. CHAD: But we did build something. TIFFANY: Yes. CHAD: So you didn't need to get full sign-off and go/no go before going from prototype to starting to build something. TIFFANY: Correct. Yes, yeah. Yes, sorry. CHAD: No, it's okay. TIFFANY: We had, like I said, we were really good communicating out. We had all the data to support the decisions that we made. We felt like we had a couple of very minor outstanding things that we knew that needed to still be addressed. But we also felt we were at that point where we could go ahead and build. And once we got in people's hands, we probably have much better data on how to address the outstanding items. CHAD: So given that you're at the point of you've gotten some things in people's hands, you're now making sure that this can be a product that you fully bring to market. What are some of the factors that are being looked at? And you mentioned security is one. What are some of the others? TIFFANY: Some of the others...I will say one of the things that is not a factor but was a factor early on is, hey, wait a minute, can older adults really use this? Are they really going to want to use this? That's a slam dunk. Yes, they can use it, and yes, they really want to use it. Plenty of data there. So one of the factors that's...believe it or not, the pandemic is actually throwing us a little bit of a curveball in the sense of there is so much transition happening in healthcare right now that we're having a couple of little challenges around...some of our clients are actually changing their settings. So our first target market is people who are in home health. Well, if all of a sudden you are going from skilled nursing and opening up home health, there are a lot of factors you've got to balance. So that's been a little bit of a curveball. And it's also been a curveball in finding our early adopters to really go ahead and test it out. And then the final thing that is a big challenge, and I think it's a challenge for everybody, is integration with pre-existing systems because there's so much variability and variety of EMR systems. I'll give you a great example. You could have a skilled nursing facility that has one EMR system, and that skilled nursing facility could contract with a rehab therapy company who uses a different system, but they're both seeing the same patient. We want to be super strategic about...because, again, that's a huge resource suck of looking at those API integrations. That's one of the things that we're really doing a deeper dive into now to really figure out where do we actually put these resources? What's going to give us the most bang for our buck? And knowing that the target is moving constantly. CHAD: What do you do while your...one of the challenges can be like, oh, we've got a team ready to build the product. Are you in a holding pattern now? Or what do you do? How do you manage that? TIFFANY: There are two ways to manage, and one is going back to your product right now and doing more testing, which is always a good thing because you're just refining, refining, refining. It’s tricky, though, because when you've got a lot of limits on resources, especially human resources, lots of projects going on, the tricky part is can I keep my team, or do they need to get repurposed? And I think it's all about having really honest conversations and if they are going to be pulled into another project, making sure everybody's on the same page about what that looks like so that if you are in a holding pattern, when you get off that holding pattern, that there's not a huge delay. Lots of conversations, lots of discussions, yeah CHAD: Well, I wish you the best in working through all of that and bringing this product to market. I know you've been a tremendous partner in working on this together. I know the team has enjoyed working with you. And we work with a lot of people at different companies, and your experience in navigating this has been notable. TIFFANY: Thank you. The team was amazing. I mean, it is a really great group of people, really open, at the same time, really able to crystallize some of the challenges in a way that was incredibly effective. So yeah, it was really a fantastic experience, and I'm very grateful for it. CHAD: So if folks want to follow along with you or get in touch with you, where are the best places for them to do that? TIFFANY: Either on LinkedIn. I, of course, have a space on LinkedIn but also at Relias. And my email is tshubert@relias.com. CHAD: Wonderful. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening and see you next time. Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Tiffany Shubert.
Chad talks to the CEO of thoughtbot, Diana Bald, about 2021 in retrospect. thoughtbot, as a company, has settled into a new structure that contains different teams and committed to becoming a fully remote organization. Last year, Diana successfully transitioned into taking over the company's CEO role. She and Chad talk about the improvements the company made in 2021, including DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) efforts and training sessions, and look ahead to some improvements coming in 2022, such as an expansion of the apprenticeship program. P.S.: thoughtbot is hiring! To see open roles, visit thoughtbot.com/jobs (https://thoughtbot.com/jobs). Follow Diana on Twitter (https://twitter.com/dianabald) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/dianabald/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Email Diana at dianabald@thoughtbot.com. Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today back again is Diana Bald, the CEO of thoughtbot. Diana, welcome back to the show. DIANA: Thanks for having me back, Chad. Hello everybody out there. CHAD: You joined us in the spring; I guess is the best way to put it where we talked about the transition from me to you of CEO. And it feels like it was actually simultaneously both just yesterday that we did that recording and a long, long time ago. How has this year been for you? DIANA: Yeah, I completely agree. It feels the same way for me. [chuckles] This year has been interesting and eventful. Well, 2021 has been. CHAD: So we're recording this just in the dawn of 2022. Looking ahead, we're bright-eyed and ready to go to the New Year, right? DIANA: That's right. CHAD: So I thought that it'd be good to do a little bit of a retrospective or a review of 2021. A lot changed for thoughtbot. And the last time we talked about it was way back at the beginning of all those changes. And I've had all the managing directors of the different teams on now to talk about the different teams, and what they're focused on, and how they're working, and what their goals are. And I thought it'd be fun to do that for thoughtbot overall with you. DIANA: Yeah, I think it's a great idea. CHAD: Cool. So since we last talked, we really settled into the different teams and the new structure. And even little things like we've sublet most of our office spaces and those kinds of things. I'm really reaffirming how things have gone. But I'm curious, just at a high level, what's been the most surprising thing for you about 2021? DIANA: [chuckles] That was not a question I was expecting. CHAD: [laughs] DIANA: The most surprising thing for me was (There were a lot.) I think how quickly we put everything together actually. That was probably the most surprising thing. I think that we were able to reorganize and pretty much just get to work in the new team structure right away. There wasn't a lot of reinventing. We reinvented when we redefined. But as we started doing the work, it was very logical, like, oh, this makes a lot of sense. These teams break out very nicely. So that speed in which that happened, I think, was the biggest surprise to me. CHAD: I know that some people said we moved maybe too quickly on some of those changes. How do you respond to those people? DIANA: [laughs] It's different personalities. Well, can I take a philosophical perspective? CHAD: Yeah, totally. DIANA: Okay. So I have a frame of mind as life doesn't happen to us. It happens for us in the sense that there is never a perfect time to do anything. One can be preparing, preparing, preparing, and it's good. Preparation is great. Analysis is great. All that stuff is good. But there's never going to be perfect anything. In fact, it's better to get started to get the feedback because the feedback is real. And it's kind of like the way that we actually work, in fact. You respond, and you iterate based on what the circumstances are telling you. And I think that's the difference in point of view. So, for me, I thought the pace was nice. But I could see why other people might have thought we moved too quickly. CHAD: So I forgot to mention the episode number if folks want to go back and listen to more of the details. It was Episode 392 (https://www.giantrobots.fm/392) where we talked, and then Episode 393 at giantrobots.fm/393 (https://www.giantrobots.fm/393) is where we talked about the details of the different teams and going fully remote, so if folks want to go back and listen to that. And then obviously, I've been talking to the different managing directors recently. So now that we're almost a full...actually, I think we're a full year from when we actually made the changes. DIANA: January eighth was the day. CHAD: So we're a few days shy of a full year. I think there are really two aspects of this whole thing. There was the concept of going remote and committing to being fully remote. And there's the concept of then reorganizing the company in a way that was supportive of that. And a lot of that was driven by the fact that we were really organized previously around the geographic studios and how we didn't feel like continuing that way was going to be something that would be sustainable for us over the long-term, both from a sales and business perspective but from a people perspective too. And so we talked about the teams and how quick and how I think overall well that has gone. How about the fully remote aspect? How has it been for you personally? That's one way to put it. DIANA: Well, I think that remote should be taken into context. We went remote in a time when the entire world was going remote. And I think that if we had gone remote at a different time, our experiences would be a little different because, with the start of the pandemic, we had a lot of limitations to our freedom because we were on lockdown. And so when you go remote in a time of lockdown, and a time of limitations to freedom, it's very different than being remote at a time when you have the flexibility to go work out during the middle of the day, go pick up kids from school or whatever one does when you have flexibility. [chuckles] So I think that the time that we started remote helped us clarify that yes, this is something we want to do. But I think our experience was tainted because we were in lockdown at the time, and our freedoms were very limited. If our freedoms weren't so limited, we had planned, as you know, because we talked about it, having pop-up offices or having the ability to bring people together, and we weren't able to do any of those ideas. The pandemic took much longer than we thought it would for us to get to that. And right now, we're back in that place where Omicron is going on. And we're still kind of semi...not really locked down, but a lot of us are being extra cautious. And then, for me personally, I'm enjoying the freedom. I like the freedom. But I'm also very cautious because I have to protect my family. And I just need to be very careful when I meet with people and things like that. CHAD: Well, I agree that the social-emotional impact of how things have been for the last two years basically has made this transition difficult for a lot of people, myself included. And we've needed to be mindful of that, I think, as we try to move forward as aggressively as possible towards the way things we want to be. I think it's been challenging for myself, for team members to realize that the way things are now isn't necessarily the way things are always going to be. We will be able to be in person. We will be able to visit each other. We'll be able to have those pop-up offices and that kind of thing that we've been limited to do. I'm really looking forward to that sometime in the future. DIANA: Yeah, for sure I am as well. CHAD: The other side from the business has been we're not getting pressure from clients. I feel like I'm revisiting this topic. [chuckles] I know last time we talked, it was like, I wonder what it's going to be like when we start getting clients back in person. And is there going to be pressure to be with them? And that kind of thing. And unfortunately, because of the pandemic going on, we haven't been getting that pressure. Now, that works for our business because it just relieves the pressure or the need to travel or schedule things and that kind of thing. But that being said, I'm more optimistic than I was before even though we haven't truly lived it that not only will clients...and that we have a really good way of doing things like design sprints and everything remotely but that there will be a benefit to getting together at the start of projects once we can safely do that and everything. And I think people will better understand the concept of we're getting together to kick off the project or to do the design sprint. We could do it remotely, but we're choosing to do it in person with the understanding that it's totally fine to go back remote after we've had that in-person kickoff. DIANA: Yeah, and I think that there's going to be some situations where it will be better to be remote to have the sprint and other situations where let's say you want to test something with a live audience or you want to get feedback from live people interacting with a physical object or something like that where it would make sense to have the physical in-person component. And other things are better with a brainstorm to have it be digital. I think it just depends on the circumstances and the client and what they're looking to achieve. And having that flexibility that we don't currently have right now because of the variant is something I'm looking forward to. CHAD: So when we talk about the transition and you taking over the CEO role, I said that one of the reasons why I thought that was the right thing to do and was excited to do that was because I thought that you were going to be better for what the company, and particularly the managing directors and the other leaders at the company, needed to get to the next stage. And I forget exactly how much...a lot of that is baked into getting to the next stage of thoughtbot. One is resiliency of team and leadership and not having it be based solely around me. That's certainly one aspect of it. The other is your deep experience with sales and marketing; business development better match what we need to do going forward in terms of building, getting to the next levels of revenue, and sustainability. And at the time, you were still learning, or maybe learning is the wrong word. How would you describe it? Basically, like getting a handle on things before making decisions or changes to move forward with certain aspects of how we do business development and that kind of thing. DIANA: Yeah, I think I understand what you're saying. CHAD: And so now that we're significantly past that point, what are some of the things that you've done or focused on with thoughtbot business development with thoughtbot overall that you would consider positive changes? DIANA: I think the introduction of Rocket Fuel is one that I would consider a positive change in that direction. We had...I don't know if we want to re-familiarize the audience with the theme of rocket. CHAD: Yeah, I totally think you should because I think it might come out of nowhere for people. DIANA: [laughs] So we organized around a theme to make it easier for us to convey what we're doing. And you could think of the stages of a rocket from ignition to blast off in orbit. And basically, it's a fun way of saying that we have an end-to-end product development process. And so everything from ideation and validation that's our Ignite team, to building and going to market is our Lift Off team. Scaling and transforming is our Boost team. And supporting and maintaining is our Mission Control team. So when you have a rocket, you need fuel. [chuckles] And so that's where we introduce Rocket Fuel, which is basically business development and marketing. And what we did is we changed it from being two different ways of approaching, driving the business into business development being the driver and marketing being the support. And what I mean by that is it's more strategic, in line with the different stages of where we are. So for the Ignite team, their needs are very different than for the Boost team. So when we're in the ideation validation stage with a client, it's very, very different than a client who's in the transformation or in the scaling stage of their product. So having that mindset of driving that phase of product development has been very helpful to us because then we can apply the marketing tactics, strategies, plans around the stage of that product lifecycle. So that's been something that I think has worked really well this past year. CHAD: So what does the Rocket Fuel team look like? What are the different roles on it? DIANA: Well, it's small right now, but we're growing it. We have Kelly, who is our Associate Director of Business Development, and she's focused on supporting more of the implementation of some of the ideas that are coming out of each of the marketing tactics that I mentioned earlier. So whether it's partnerships with different organizations or whether it is campaigns that we're running so overseeing those, and she's also stepping in when the managing director has to step away for a few months, maybe somebody is taking paternity leave or something like that. Kelly stepped in there. And then we have in sales enablement Liz who's serving as a Sales Enablement and Business Development Manager. And she's really helping us get exactly what her title says, enable the sales process. So she's putting together the marketing collateral. She's got our CRM system, getting that organized and up to date with information. And she's starting to work on updating our handbook with business development information and marketing information that's changed since we were in our old structure. So she's getting that in line. So she's more behind the scenes and more enabling us to move quickly. And Kelly is more on the strategic end of it, helping us build out the plans that'll drive the growth of each of our teams. CHAD: And Liz is also helping respond to RFPs and making sure things move forward or are pulled together for making proposals and contracts with clients, right? DIANA: Yeah, she's doing a great job on that. CHAD: I think all of those things are something that we had talked about doing for a while, having someone be able to help with those kinds of things, especially when we have a world where managing directors at thoughtbot are responsible not just for sales but for the whole business that they run. And so they have a lot on a day-to-day or a weekly basis of what they need to spend time on. So having someone who can help them have time to spend on things that are not sales and to make sure that sales move along quickly, I think, has worked really well. And it was something we had talked about for a while, and I'm really happy to see it come to fruition. DIANA: Yeah, I am too. I agree; it is helping the managing directors take a breath. They need sustainable lives as well. And it's good that we're able to help them in this regard. I think we can help them even more. Liz has only been with us for a few months. And as she gets more and more comfortable, she gets more and more ideas and starts to run a little faster, which is great to see her do that. And the same with Kelly, as she's wrapping her arms around her new role, she is also coming up with a lot of ideas. And it's exciting to see them work because they energize each other. [laughs] It's really cool. And we're also recruiting for an Associate Director of Business Development for Mission Control to help us grow that team. If anybody out there is listening, and you know of anyone, [laughs] encourage them to apply. CHAD: Yeah, that's a really good point. So that Mission Control does DevOps, maintenance, SRE work, so we're really looking for someone who has experience growing and building that kind of business. And it's quite honestly a big growth opportunity because there's a real opportunity to start as the Associate Director of Business Development in that business and grow into more of a Managing Director role, right? DIANA: Absolutely. We see it as an opportunity to come in on the ground floor; essentially as the very fast-moving, high potential team gets going. So it's a super exciting opportunity for people that are interested in DevOps or Site Reliability Engineering or anything else that we're doing in that space of support and developing. CHAD: Great. Well, hopefully, someone hears this and says, "That's for me. I want to apply." If that's you, you can go to thoughtbot.com/jobs and check it out there. I'm making my hard pitch here. We also have some outside consultants helping with running different campaigns and digital marketing activities, right? DIANA: That's right. We are working with outside consultants to help us run some targeted campaigns based on some of the strategies that Liz and Kelly are developing. And they're doing the actual implementation of the marketing. So they'll buy the ads; they'll run them. And we also have somebody helping us with social media. Mandy is doing that. She's doing a great job of that. And we have Tori, who's still helping us out with some of the digital marketing campaign, conceptualizing them, and transitioning some of that work that she was doing on the CRM, transitioning some of that over to Liz to take over our sales enablement. So a lot of activity happening over here at Rocket Fuel. CHAD: So to put it as plainly as I can, thoughtbot has been successful. We've been particularly successful from a culture and team, and thought leadership standpoint. But we haven't been incredibly successful in making a company that operates at the level that we do and generates enough profit to be really comfortable that when a pandemic hits...that's an extreme circumstance, but there are ups and downs in every business. And our margins haven't been historically as large as other consulting companies and that kind of thing because of the kinds of team we have and the way that we run the business. And so a big goal of when we talk about taking thoughtbot to the next level has been sustainability and making sure that we operate with enough cushion that we can more than weather downturns or ups and downs in the business without having to let people go or make significant changes. And if people listened to the prior episode, they know that we had actually made significant progress towards that goal in 2019. And we were feeling really great going into 2020 about what we were going to accomplish. And then, in April of 2020, we had a significant decrease in revenue all at once, which really threw the business into turmoil because we hadn't been operating with that significant margin, a sustainable margin. So we spent 2020 recovering from that, making sure that we had corrected some of those fatal flaws. And we saw, I think, a lot of that come to fruition in 2021 and had a really sustainable year where we met and exceeded our goals. I'm really happy about that. I assume you're happy to. [laughs] DIANA: Yes, I'm really happy about that too. [laughs] I think that it's something that we haven't celebrated, and we need to celebrate it. It was actually a really great year for us financially. And I talked about speed earlier. And I said I was pleasantly surprised with the speed. And one of the factors is that in the first quarter of last year, things started to come together for us in that vein of financial sustainability. And we were able to maintain it every quarter of the full year. That's pretty great. And we should pat ourselves on the back for that. Congratulations, Chad. [chuckles] CHAD: Congratulations, Diana. You and I have talked about this before. So overall, the market recovered in a really good way for services, businesses, for software development. So that boosted our ability to really go above and beyond. But even putting that aside, it took a lot of work. It wasn't easy. And it was through the fundamental changes we had made that we were able to take advantage of that good market, I think. DIANA: Yeah, I agree. And the intentionality of what we were doing, I think the reorganization helped us see clearly the benefits of each team. Obviously, today, I have a much clearer insight into each team's strengths and each team's capabilities than I did a year ago when we last talked. I think we are still trying to get our...is it going to work? What is it going to look like? And now it's like, oh, this is so obvious. This makes a lot of sense. The teams are working on very different aspects of the product development lifecycle. And I think that intentionality also helped us with our goals. CHAD: And I think that one of the goals of doing that too was to free people up to better understand and focus on the kind of work that they wanted to do rather than trying to do everything everywhere. And for the individual person at thoughtbot, never knowing what your next client project was going to look like because it could have been any of our types of clients that we have. And I think overall, what I've heard from the team is that it has been a good opportunity to reduce those surprises, get better at the kind of thing that you're working on now, even if ultimately that means okay, you've done your stint in Lift Off and now you want to move over to Boost, or you've been in Boost, and now you want to give Lift Off a try. At least you can do that with intentionality as opposed to never being quite sure what your next project is going to look like. DIANA: Yeah, exactly. There are some people that like that variety of moving back and forth, and that's good that we can make that happen. And then there are others like you said, that really want to hone in on an area of specialty and get better at that particular thing. CHAD: I think there's a benefit to us even just having words to use to describe the different kinds of projects now because we never had those words to use before. So when now internally people say, "Oh, this is a boost-style project," that means something to people. And I think it helps us talk about the work that we're doing or we might do for customers. DIANA: Yeah. CHAD: Cool. So what else happened in 2021? [chuckles] DIANA: What else happened in 2021? Well, we did a lot of DEI training, and that was great. I learned a lot in that training. I thought actually that I was pretty hip with everything. I thought I've been involved in DEI activities all my life, so I get it, of course. But then, once I took the training, I was like, wait, there's a lot to learn here. I thought I knew a lot. But I'm learning a lot. There were several courses and several sessions. And with each session, I came away learning a lot more than I thought I would and having a greater appreciation. I think one of the greatest appreciations I learned last year was an appreciation for words, how important it is to think about what you're saying. A lot of times, we just talk, and it's important to really think through what one says. I took that to heart from the training that we got. CHAD: And I think people might hear that and say, "Oh, you're talking about being politically correct," and perhaps maybe having a negative reaction to that. But I think one way to think about it is it's not just being politically correct for the sake of being politically correct. But words can have an impact on people, or the way that you talk about something can have an impact on people, either by making them feel bad or excluding them. When you have a group of people working on something, people come at work with so many different backgrounds and experiences, and perspectives. And so, having an inclusive environment where everyone can contribute fully is super important to not only being fulfilled in our work but ultimately creating great products too. DIANA: Yeah, absolutely. And that diversity is something that will make us have better products. But it also makes us; I think in many ways, better people by understanding where others are coming from, what they might have experienced in the past, and knowing that what is available to one person may not be available to others. So it's not just political correctness but also a better understanding of humans and what we go through and that it's not necessarily equal for everyone. And it's not necessarily fair for folks. And that's sometimes easy to forget. And I think that training that we went through really reminded me. And it gave me an appreciation for the privileges that I do have and just a greater awareness that I'm so grateful for. Mid-roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: So we've had a DEI Council at thoughtbot for a couple of years now. And I think that we created it because of the studio model. We were very distributed as a company. And so we wanted a group of people that could come together, work on things, but also collectively, educate themselves and take action items and everything, and then take them back to their physical studios. And I think that now with the reorganization, with the progress we've made, it's not that the Council doesn't work. But it's in a different spot in terms of what we're hoping to achieve as a company and the way that it's working. So we actually have right before the end of the year, we opened a DEI program manager position, which is a full-time position at thoughtbot for someone to not do all of the work that the council is going to do but a centralized thing to make the distributed nature of the...to sort of empower the council, and free up time. We're all on client work a significant portion of our time. And so striking the balance between having DEI ingrained in the company, having everyone have enough time to work on what needs to be worked on, and to have it all be managed, we looked at that whole picture and said, we think that the Council could be even more effective if we have someone on board who can work with them full time basically. And people might be saying DEI Council full time? It's not just the council. So it's diversity, equity, and inclusion. So it really permeates everything about our culture, and how the company works, and how it functions. And there's a lot there. So that person is going to be part of the operations team, which is my team. And they'll be ingrained, you know, part of everything that we do to make thoughtbot operate but through the lens of is this equitable? Are we inclusive of the people that we have on our team in Africa and South America, as well as the United States now? That's a huge thing for us, making sure that we're setting things up in a way that works for everyone at the company. And we're more internationally diverse than we've ever been before. And so that has been something that takes up a lot of our time. And we want to make sure we do a great job with it. So that's one of the things that this new person is going to do. DIANA: Yeah, and one of the things I'm really excited about for this person is putting some metrics together for us. It's been hard for us to quantify our progress in DEI. And I know that this individual will be doing that, which is to me exciting because we're going to be able to see how are we really progressing with these initiatives? I think that's going to be great. And also, being able to partner with other organizations just outside of thoughtbot is going to be interesting as well because our DEI Council does it, but none of us have a lot of time to actually do too much of it. Everybody's got like you said, client work and other things they have to work on. So that's another thing I'm really excited about this individual taking on is that outside partnership perspective. CHAD: I feel like we have a lot of positions open right now. DIANA: [laughs] We sure do. CHAD: Not only in the operations or the non-designers and developers. We've got a lot of design and development roles open as well. DIANA: Yep. Plug for the thoughtbot.com/jobs page. [laughter] CHAD: Yeah. Well, one of the things that I'm really excited about going into 2022 we've had the Apprenticeship Program for 11 years now. We say on the website we've done over 50 apprentices. I think it's more like over 75. I just stopped doing the count a while ago. But we haven't been able to do it consistently previously because when we were distributed among the different studios, and everything was based on who you worked with in person, we needed to make sure, you know, not every studio was even large enough to have enough mentors to be able to have apprentices. But we also needed good projects for mentorship and having apprentices on them. And we also needed to make sure, like, oh, if we take on an apprentice in Austin, we need to make sure that the Austin studio needs another Rails developer. And so it was pretty limiting. But even though it was limiting, we did lots of apprentices. And it's been super successful. So many leaders at the company started as apprentices. DIANA: Christina comes to mind. She's like a development director now. CHAD: Yeah, exactly. A lot of the development directors at thoughtbot started as apprentices over the years. So I'm super excited because this is another thing that no longer being in-person studios unlocks for us is to say basically thoughtbot as long as we're hiring across all of thoughtbot, we will always have the need for designers and developers. And so we can make the Apprenticeship Program more of a rotational program. No matter where you live now, you can join. We can do remote apprenticeship like all of our positions. And you can rotate among the thoughtbot teams with a great mentor from each team and then be promoted as a designer or a developer onto one of those teams that has a position for a Rails developer or a designer. And that is going to enable us to have consistent apprenticeship positions across the company open all the time with a consistent application process with timelines laid out for when deadlines are going to be for applications and when we're accepting people, and when people start. And I'm really excited about that. I think it's going to be not only great for apprentices, which is actually one of the primary reasons why we do it but also great for thoughtbot to get this consistency to what has been a really valuable hiring channel for us in the past. DIANA: Absolutely. I think that's one of the things I'm most excited about, to be honest with you, is that Apprenticeship Program because of everything that you mentioned. And it's not like we just need to limit it to one person. It could be a group of people going through the program together, which gives them a sense of camaraderie as well and a second incoming class. We have an incoming class. [laughs] CHAD: Right, right. My only regret is that even just in this first batch, we can see...or I've just had the potential of the Apprentice Program for us reinforced. In this batch, we have almost 1,000 applications across the two Launchpads with the design and development positions. It's incredible. [laughs] DIANA: That's so amazing. CHAD: Even though we're having more apprentice positions than we've had in many years going for 2022, it's still not enough. There are so many people that could be great fits for thoughtbot that we might not be able to have enough bandwidth to take on. So I'm looking ahead to the next thing as like, how can we grow enough to have even more apprentices? DIANA: Well, let's get Rocket Fuel to help with that. [laughter] CHAD: Yeah. I've often said that hiring great team members really isn't our problem. Our problem is consistently having more than enough work to be fulfilled, to be picky and choosy, while also having enough work for our team very reliably, weathering those ups and downs. And when we turn off hiring, it hurts our ability to hire overall because it takes longer to ramp it back up and that kind of thing. And I think you saw that throughout the course of 2021. We had to turn off hiring for a while in 2020. And when we resumed it, it took quite a while for those wheels to spin back up and for enough people to get through the pipeline. Because even though we get a significant number of people applying, we really only hire less than 1% of the people who come across because our standards of what we want when we add people to the team are high. DIANA: Yeah, it's true. It's challenging. We really did feel that impact pretty hard for a while there; the repercussions of not having the hiring open in 2020 were felt for sure. CHAD: We also made the decision that we were going to focus on making sure that when we started hiring back up, we didn't just necessarily go right back to the way that we were doing things before in terms of all of our process. So we used to have a lot of automation in place because of the number of applications. And we didn't immediately put all that in place because sometimes that automation got away from us. We care a lot about the hiring process. And we wanted to make sure that we just didn't blindly turn it back on because we had a sense that it wasn't 100% working for us. And the other was that we made the decision from a DEI perspective to make sure that we didn't move forward on starting interviewing for a position without having the candidate pool we were choosing from reflect a representative sample of the United States. And that's in the tech industry; if you put a role online and just let people come into it organically from a normal job pool, the tech industry isn't representative of the United States demographics. And so, if you just let that status quo come in, you're going to see what's reflected in the tech industry. So that was another important but real limitation that we put on ourselves when we started hiring again. DIANA: Yeah, it was painful, [laughs] but it was necessary. CHAD: And I think we've seen as people move through the pipeline and as our hiring goes up that it was worth it, even if it wasn't easy and was difficult. DIANA: That's how things usually are, right? CHAD: Right. [laughs] DIANA: Things are usually not easy. And usually, things that are worth it, there's work involved. CHAD: And we're not done with DEI work and trying to build the kind of organization we want to have. You're never really done. So there's always something that we can do better. We still need to really speed up our hiring process, which has been pretty much stuck at a certain timeline for a long time. And figuring out a way to speed that up while still staying true to the kind of process and the qualifications that we want to put on the process continues to be a challenge for us. DIANA: I think that's industry-wide, though. I don't think that's unique to us. There are a lot of companies challenged with hiring at the moment. There are a lot of reasons for that. But we definitely have to keep on top of it and try to figure out ways to make ourselves better. CHAD: Yeah. I think the biggest problem is to the extent that if you lose people along the way that you would totally otherwise hire because they go to other companies first just because you didn't finish the process fast enough. That's the fundamental thing that we want to avoid. DIANA: That's the real risk that we...I think we actually lost some people for that. CHAD: Yeah, definitely. And over the years, despite trying, we haven't been able to significantly speed up our hiring process. For folks who aren't familiar, a big part of our process is having a few different stages. And the final stage being pairing, working with actual members of the team for the day. We pay for that day. And meeting the rest of the team and having a process which involves the rest of the team it's not just a siloed hiring team that's making all the hiring decisions. But doing a full day visit as the last stage means effectively that we can never have two people interviewing for the same position. And then everyone being on client work and only really being able to do those visits on Fridays means that the fastest, unless we're willing to make a change to that, the fastest we can go to hire into any one position is one final stage interview a week. That's a bottleneck. DIANA: That's a bottleneck for sure unless we have dedicated people doing the recruiting. Then that would be a challenge as well because that's all these folks would do. CHAD: Right. And then the team would feel, you know, we gain a lot from everyone being part of the team. So that when people show up on day one, we can say, "Hey, everyone that you worked with, everyone that you met was a unanimous yes to you being here." It builds a tremendous amount of trust and confidence on both sides, I think. And to not have that, I think we would need to then do a lot more work in building up that confidence of those new team members and of the team in that process and on day one when they show up. So it's an area of future work for us, definitely. I don't know what the solution will be eventually. But I do know that it's an area that we have to improve on. DIANA: Yeah, agreed. CHAD: Cool. Well, anything else on your mind before we wrap up? DIANA: No. I'm looking forward to 2022. There's a lot that we want to do. And it's going to be an exciting year. It's already starting off exciting. [laughter] Though, I do want to talk a little bit about community now or? CHAD: How about we give a little sneak peek in terms of what we're thinking for 2022? And then, in a little while, we'll have you back on to talk more about it. How's that sound? DIANA: Yeah, it sounds great. CHAD: Okay, community has always been a big part of thoughtbot. It's what has driven a lot of the open-source that we've done, our blogging. But what do you mean by community in 2022? DIANA: Well, we started off this conversation by talking about remote and some of the pros and cons associated with it. And I think that one of the things that remote does there’s a lot of benefits to it. But I think that we need to help overcome the challenges, and I want us to do more of that in 2022. So, for example, creating a culture where people feel the recognition that you might be able to do more in person than you do remotely or lessen feelings of isolation that some folks feel, bringing out the quiet voices among us, giving them space to talk and give their voice. How can we make that happen? Finding ways for people to build relationships with each other and maybe people that have never met, that are on different teams. How do we make that happen? Just overall experiencing a positive, respectful and inclusive work environment. That at a remote level is something that I think we need to dive in deeper this year. And like you said, we can dive into that more at another time. CHAD: Yeah, I'm excited. I feel it too. And it comes from I think maybe it was Stephanie or Louis that was talking about it, both members of our team who were generally like, when you were in person, there was an ease to either talking to someone off-hand or even just when you have a daily sync every day in person, it's easy to recognize a success and to have everyone applaud. And when you aren't in person with each other, you need to work at it more to really foster that sense of team and community. And that's clearly part of what getting through 2021 and settling in and getting to the next level is about for us. DIANA: Yeah, absolutely. CHAD: Cool. Well, if folks want to get in touch with you or follow along with you, where are the best places for them to do that, Diana? DIANA: I started off last year actually doing some tweets, and I'm not very good at it. I totally stopped doing it. But I'm going to try to do more of it. I can be found on Twitter @dianabald, first name, last name. I'm on LinkedIn, first name, last name. The good news about my name is that there’s not a lot of me out there, [laughter] people with my last name. So I'm easy to find. And by email, it's dianabald@thoughtbot.com. CHAD: Great. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode along with transcripts at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. I'd love to get some comments and questions in 2022 and bring them to the episode. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Diana, thanks again for joining me. DIANA: Thank you, Chad. Thank you, everybody. CHAD: And thank you for listening. See you next time. Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Diana Bald.
Chad talks to Rob Hirschfeld, the Founder and CEO of RackN, which develops software to help automate data centers, which they call Digital Rebar. RackN is focused on helping customers automate infrastructure. They focus on customer autonomy and self-management, and that's why they're a software company, not a services or as-a-service platform company. Digital Rebar is a platform that helps connect all of the different pieces and tools that people use to manage infrastructure into infrastructure pipelines through the seamless multi-component automation across all of the different pieces and parts that have to be run to bring up infrastructure. RackN's Website (https://rackn.com/); Digial Rebar (https://rackn.com/rebar/) Follow Rob on Twitter (https://twitter.com/zehicle) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/rhirschfeld/). Visit his website at robhirschfeld.com (https://robhirschfeld.com/). Follow RackN on Twitter (https://twitter.com/rackngo), LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/rackn/), or YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCr3bBtP-pMsDQ5c0IDjt_LQ). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Rob Hirschfeld, Founder, and CEO of RackN, which develops software to help automate data centers, which they call Digital Rebar. Rob, welcome to the show ROB: Chad, it is a pleasure to be here. Looking forward to the conversation. CHAD: Why don't we start with a little bit more information about what RackN and the Digital Rebar platform actually is. ROB: I would be happy to. RackN is focused on helping customers automate infrastructure. And for us, it's really important that the customers are doing the automation. We're very focused on customer autonomy and self-management. It's why we're a software company, not a services or as a service platform company. But fundamentally, what Digital Rebar does is it is the platform that helps connect all of the different pieces and tools that people use to manage infrastructure into infrastructure pipelines through the seamless multi-component automation across all of the different pieces and parts that have to be run to bring up infrastructure. And we were talking data centers do a lot of on-premises all the way from the bare metal up. But multi-cloud, you name it, we're doing infrastructure at that level. CHAD: So, how agnostic to the actual bare metal are you? ROB: We're very agnostic to the bare metal. The way we look at it is data centers are heterogeneous, diverse places. And that the thing that sometimes blocks companies from being innovative is when they decide, oh, we're going to use this one vendor for this one platform. And that keeps them actually from moving forward. So when we look at data centers, the heterogeneity and sometimes the complexity of that environment is a feature. It's not a bug from that perspective. And so it's always been important to us to be multi-vendor, to do things in a vendor-neutral way to accommodate the quirks and the differences between...and it's not just vendors; it's actually user choice. A lot of companies have a multi-vendor problem (I'm air quoting) that is actually a multi-team problem where teams have chosen to make different choices. TerraForm has no conformance standard built into it. [laughs] And so you might have everybody in your company using TerraForm and Ansible happily but all differently. And that's the problem that we walk into when we walk into a data center challenge. And you can't sweep that under the rug. So we embraced it. CHAD: What kind of companies are your primary customers? ROB: We're very wide-ranging, from the top banks use us and deploy us, telcos, service providers, very large scale service providers use us under the covers, media companies. It really runs the gamut because it's fundamentally for us just about infrastructure. And our largest customers are racing to be the first to deploy. And it's multi-site, but 20,000 machines that they're managing under our Digital Rebar management system. CHAD: It's easy, I think, depending on where you sit and your experiences. The cloud providers today can overshadow the idea that there are even people who still have their own data centers or rent a portion of a data center. In today's ecosystem, what are some of the factors that cause someone to do that who isn't an infrastructure provider themselves? ROB: You know the funny thing about these cloud stories (And we're talking just the day after Amazon had a day-long outage.) is that even the cloud providers don't have you give up operation. You're still responsible for the ops. And for our customers, it's not like they can all just use Lambdas and API gateways. At the end of the day, they're actually doing multi-site distributed operations. And they have these estates that are actually it's more about how do I control distributed infrastructure as much as it is about repatriating. Now, we do a lot to help people repatriate. And they do that because they want more control. Cost savings is a significant component with this. You get into the 1000s of machines, and that's a big deal. Even at hundreds of machines, you can save a lot of money compared to what you get in cloud. And I think people get confused with it being an or choice. It really is an and choice. Our best customers are incredibly savvy cloud users. They want that dynamic, resilient very API-driven environment. And they're looking to bring that throughout the organization. And so those are the ones that get excited when they see what we've done because we spend a lot of time doing infrastructure as code and API-driven infrastructure. That's really what they want. CHAD: Cool. So, how long have you been working on RackN? When did you found it? ROB: [laughs] Oh my goodness. So RackN is seven years old. Digital Rebar, we consider it to be at its fourth generation, but those numbers actually count back before that. They go back to 2009. The founding team was actually at Dell together in the OpenStack heyday and even before the OpenStack heyday. And we were trying to ship clouds from the Dell Factory. And what we found was that every customer had this bespoke data center we've already talked about. And we couldn't write automation that would work customer to customer to customer. And it was driving us nuts. We're a software team, not a hardware team inside of Dell. And the idea that if I fixed something in the delivery or in their data center, and couldn't go back to their data center because it was different than what the next customer needed and the next customer needed, we knew that we would never have a community. It's very much about this community and reuse pattern. There's an interesting story that I picked up from SREcon actually where they were talking about the early days of boilers. This is going back a few centuries ago. But when they first started putting boilers into homes and buildings, there was no pattern, there was no standard. And everybody would basically hire a plumber or a heating architect. Heating architect was a thing. But you'd build a boiler and every one was custom, and every one was different. And no surprise, they blew up a lot, and they caused fires. And buildings were incredibly unsafe because they were working on high-pressure systems with no pattern. And it took regulation and laws and standards. And now nobody even thinks about it. You just take standard parts, and you connect them together in standard ways. And that creates actually a much more innovative system. You wouldn't want every house to be wired uniquely either. And so when we look at the state of automation today, we see it as this pre-industrial pre-standardization process and that companies are actually harmed and harming themselves because they don't have standards, and patterns, and practices that they can just roll and know they work. And so that philosophy started way back in 2009 with the first generation which was called Crowbar. Some of your audience might even remember this from the OpenStack days. It was the first OpenStack installer built around Chef. And it had all sorts of challenges in it, but it showed us the way. And then we iterated up to where Digital Rebar is today. Really fully infrastructure as code, building infrastructure pipelines, and a lot of philosophical pieces we've learned along the way. CHAD: So you were at Dell working on this thing. How did you decide to leave Dell and start something new? ROB: Dell helped me with that decision. [laughs] So the challenge of being a software person inside of Dell especially at the time, Crowbar was open-source which did make it easier for us to say, "Hey, we want to part ways but keep the IP." And the funny thing is there's not a scrap of Crowbar in Digital Rebar except one or two naming conventions that we pulled forward and the nod of the name, that Rebar is a nod to Crowbar. But what happened was Dell when it went private, really did actually double down on the hardware and the more enterprise packaged things. They didn't want to invest in DevOps and that conversation that you need to have with your customers on how they operate, the infrastructure you sold them. And that made Dell not a very good place for me and the team. And so we left Dell, looked at the opportunity to take what we'd been building with Crowbar and then make it into a product. That's been a long journey. CHAD: Now, did you bootstrap, or did you take investment? ROB: We took [laughs] a little bit of investment. We raised some seed funding. Certainly not what was in hindsight was going to be sufficient for us to do it. But we thought at the time that we had something that was much more product-ready for customers than it was. CHAD: And what was the challenge that you found? What was the surprise there that it wasn't as ready as you thought? ROB: So what we've learned in our space specifically...and there are some things that I think apply to everybody, and there are some things that you might be able to throw on the floor and ignore. I was a big fan of Minimum Viable Product. And it turned out that the MVP strategy was not at all workable with customers in data centers. Our product is for people running production data centers. And nobody's going to put in software to run a data center that is MVP. It has to be resilient. It has to be robust. It has to be simple enough that they can understand it and solve some core problems, which is still sort of an MVP idea. But it can't be oops. [laughs] You can't have a lot of oops moments when you're dealing with enterprise infrastructure automation software. It has to work. And importantly, and as a design note, this has been a lesson for us. If it does break, it has to break in very transparent, obvious ways. And I can't emphasize that enough. There's so much that when we build it, we come back and like, was it obvious that it broke? Is it obvious that it broke in a way that you can fix? CHAD: And it's part of the culture too to do detailed post mortems with explanations and be as transparent as possible or at least find the root cause so that you can address it. That's part of the culture of the space too, right? ROB: You'd like to hope so. [laughs] CHAD: Okay. [laughs] In my experience, that's the culture of the space. ROB: You're looking more at a developer experience. But even with a developer, you've got to be in a post mortem or something. And it's like everybody's pointing to the person to the left and the right sort of by human nature. You don't walk into that room assuming that it was your fault, and you should, but that's not how it usually is approached. And what we find in the ops space, and I would tell people to work around this pattern if they can, is that if you're the thing doing the automation, you're always the first cause of the problem. So we run into situations where we're doing a configuration, and we find a vendor bug or a glitch or there's something, and we found it. It's our problem whether we were the cause or not. And that's super hard. I think that people on every side of any type of issue need to look through and figure out what the...the blameless post mortem is a really important piece in all this. At the end of the day, it's always a human system that made a mistake or has something like that. But it's not as simple as the thing that told you the bad news that the messenger was at fault. And there's a system design element to that. That's what we're talking about here is that when you're exposing errors or when something's not behaving the way you expect, our philosophy is to stop. And we've had some very contentious arguments with customers who were like, "Just retry until it fixes itself," or vendors who were like, "Yeah, if you retry that thing three times, [laughs] then it'll magically go away." And we're like, that's not good behavior. Fix the problem. It actually took us years to put a retry element into the tasks so that you can say, yeah, this does need three retries. Just go do it. We've resisted for a long time for this reason. CHAD: So you head out into the market. And did you get initial customers, or was there so much resistance to the product that you had that you struggled to get even first customers? ROB: We had first customers. We had a nice body of code. The problem is actually pretty well understood even by our customers. And so it wasn't hard for them to get a trial going. So we actually had a very profitable customer doing...it was in object storage, public object storage space. And they were installing us. They wanted to move us into all their data centers. But for it to work, we ended up having an engineer who basically did consulting and worked with them for the better part of six months and built a whole bunch of stuff, got it working. They could plug in servers, and everything would set itself up. And they could hit a button and reset all the servers, and they would talk to the switches. It was an amazing amount of automation. But, and this happens a lot, the person we'd been working with was an SRE. And when they went to turn it over to the admins in the ops team, they said, [laughs] "We can't operate. There's too much going on, too complex." And we'd actually recognized...and this is a really serious challenge. It's a challenge now that we're almost five years into the generation that came after that experience. And we recognized there was a problem. And that this wasn't going to create that repeatable experience that we were looking for if it took that much. At the same time, we had been building what is now Digital Rebar in this generation that was a single Golang binary. All the services were bundled into the system. So it listened on different ports but provide all the services, very easy to install, really, really simple. We literally stripped everything back to the basics and restarted. And we had this experience where we sat down with a customer who had...I'm going to take a second and tell the story because this is such a compelling story from a product experience. So we took our first product. We were in a bake-off with another bare metal focus provisioning at the time. And they were in a lab, and they set our stuff up. And they turned it on, and they provisioned. And they set up the competitor, and they turned it on and provisioned. And both products worked. Our product took 20 minutes to go through the cycle and the competitor took 3. And the customer came back and said, "I can't use this. I like your product better. It has more controls with all this stuff." But it took 20 minutes instead of 3. We actually logged into the system, looked at it and we were like, "Well, that's because it recognized that your BIOS was out of date, patched your BIOS, updated the system, checked that it was right, and then rebooted the systems and then continued on its way because it recognized your systems were outdated automatically. And he said, "I didn't want it to do that. I needed it to boot as quickly as possible." And literally, [laughs] we were in the middle of a team retreat. So it's like, the CTO is literally excusing himself on the table to talk to the guy to make this stuff, try and make it right. And he's like, "Well, we've got this new thing. Why don't you install this, what's now Digital Rebar, on the system and repeat the experiment?" And he did and Digital Rebar was even faster than the competitor. And it did exactly just install, booted, and was done. And he came back to the table, and it took 15 minutes to have the whole conversation to make everything work. It was that much of a simpler design. And he sat down and told the story. And I was in the middle of it. I'm just like, "We're going to have to pivot and put everything into the new version," which is what we did. And we just ripped out the complexity. And then over the last couple of years now, we've built the complexity back into the system to do all those additional but much more customer-driven from that perspective. CHAD: How did you make sure that as you were changing your focus, putting all of your energy into the new version that you [laughs] didn't introduce too much risk in that process or didn't take too long? ROB: [laughs] We did take too long and introduced too much risk, and we did run out of money. [laughs] All those things happened. This was a very difficult decision. We thought we could get it done much faster. The challenge of the simpler product was that it was too simple to be enough in customers’ data centers. And so yeah, we almost went out of business in the middle of all this cycle. We had a time where RackN went back down to just the two founders. And at this point, we'd gotten far enough with the product that we knew it was the right thing. And we'd also embedded a degree...with the way we do the UX, we have this split. The UX runs on a hosted system. It doesn't have to but by default, it does. And then we have the back end. So we were very careful about how we collected metrics because you really need to know who's downloading and using your products. And we had enough data from that to realize that we had some very committed early users and early customers, just huge brand names that were playing around. So we knew that we'd gotten this mix right, that we were solving a problem in a unique way. But it was going to take time because big companies don't make decisions quickly. We have a joke. We call it the reorg half-life problem. So the half-life of a reorg in any of our customers is about nine months. And either you're successful inside of that reorg half-life, or you have to be resilient across this reorg half. And so initially, it was taking more than nine months. We had to be able to get the product in play. And once we did, we had some customers who came in with very big checks and let us come back and basically build back up. And we've been adding some really nice names into our customer roster. Unfortunately, it's all private. I can tell you their industries and their scale, but I can't name them. But that engagement helped drive us towards the feature set and the capabilities and building things up along that process. But it was frustrating. And some of them, especially at the time we were open-source, were very happy to say, "No, we are a super big brand name. We don't pay for software." I'm like, "Most profitable, highest valued companies in the world you don't want to pay for this operational software?" And they're like, "No, we don't have to." And that didn't sit very well with us. Very hard, as a starting startup, it was hard. CHAD: At the time, everything you were doing was open source. ROB: So in the Digital Rebar era, we were trying to do Open Core. Digital Rebar itself was open. And then we were trying to hold back the BIOS patches, integrate enterprise single sign-on. So there was a degree of integration pieces that we held back as RackN and then left the core open. So you could use Digital Rebar and run it, which we had actually had a lot of success with people downloading, installing, and running Digital Rebar, not as much success in getting them to pay us for that privilege. CHAD: So, how did you adjust to that reality? ROB: We inverted the license. After we landed a couple of big banks and we had several others and some hyperscalers too who were like, "This is really good software. We love it. We're embedding it in our service, but we're not going to pay you." And then they would show up with bugs and complaints and issues and all sorts of stuff still. And what happened is we started seeing them replicating the closed pieces. The APIs were open. We actually looked at it and listening to our communities, they wanted to see what was in the closed pieces. That was actually operationally important for them to understand how that stuff worked. They never contributed or asked to see anything in the core. And, there's an important and here, and they needed performance improvements in the core that were radically different. So the original open-source stuff went to maybe 500 machines, and then it started to cap out. And we were like, all right, we're going to have to really rewrite the data store mechanisms that go with this. And the team looked at each other and were like, "We're not going to open source that. That's really complex and challenging IP." And so we said the right model for us is going to be to make the core closed and then allow our community and users to see all the things that they are actually using to interact with their environment. And it ends up being a little bit of a filter. There are people who only use open-source software. But those companies also don't necessarily want to pay. When I was an open-source evangelist, this was always a problem. You're pounding on the table saying, "If you're using open-source software, you need to understand who to pay for that service, that software that you're getting. If you're not paying for it, that software is going to go away." In a lot of cases, we're a walking example of that. And it's funny, more of the codebase is open today than it was then. [chuckles] But the challenge is that it's really an open ecosystem now because none of that software is particularly useful without the core to run it and glue everything together. CHAD: Was that a difficult decision to make? Was it controversial? ROB: Incredibly difficult. It was something I spent a lot of time agonizing about. My CTO is much clear-eyed on this. From his perspective, he and the other engineers are blood, sweat, and tears putting this in. And it was very frustrating for them to see it running people's production data centers who told us, and this is I think the key, who just said to us, "You know, we're not going to pay money for that." And so for them, it was very clear-eyed it's their work, their sweat equity, very gut feeling for that. For me, I watched communities with open-source routes, you know, the Kubernetes community. I was in OpenStack. I was on the board for that. And there is definitely a lift that you get from having free software and not having the strings. And I also like the idea that from a support perspective, if you're using open-source software, you could conceivably not care for the vendor that went away. You could find another life for it. But years have gone by and that's not actually a truism that when you are using open-source software if you're getting it from a vendor, you're not necessarily protected from that vendor making decisions for you. CentOS is a great...the whole we're about to hit the CentOS deadlines, which is the Streams, and you can't get other versions. And we now have three versions of CentOS, at least three versions of CentOS with Rocky, and Alma, and CentOs Streams. Those are very challenging decisions for people running enterprise data centers, not that simple. And nobody in our communities is running charity data centers. There's no goodwill charity. I'm running a data center out of the goodness of my heart. [laughs] They are all production systems, enterprise. They're doing real production work. And that's a commercial engagement. It's not a feel-good thing. CHAD: So what did you do in your decision-making process? What pushed you, or what did you come to terms with in order to make that change? ROB: I had to admit I was wrong. [laughter] I had to think back on statements I'd made and the enthusiasm that I'd had and give up some really hard beliefs. Being a CEO or a founder is the same process. So I wish I could say this was the only time [laughs] I had to question, you know, hard-made assumptions, or some core beliefs in what I thought. I've had to get really good at questioning when am I projecting this is the way I want the world to be therefore it will be? That's a CEO skill set and a founder skill set...and when that projection is having you on thin ice. And so you constantly have to make that balance. And this was one of those ones where I'm like, all right, let's do it. And I still wake up some mornings and look at people who are open source only and see how much press they get or how easy it is for them to get mentions and things like that. And I'm like, ah, God, that'd be great. It feels like it's much harder for us because we're commercial to get the amplification. There are conferences that will amplify open-source TerraForm, great example. It gets tons of amplification for being a single vendor project that's really tightly controlled by HashiCorp. But nobody is afraid to go talk about TerraForm and mention TerraForm and do all this stuff, the amazing use of open source by that company. But they could turn it and twist it, and they could change it. It's not a guarantee by any stretch of the imagination. CHAD: Well, one of the things that I've come to terms with, and maybe this is a very positive way of looking at it, instead of that you were wrong, [laughter] is to realize that well, you weren't necessarily wrong. It got you to where you were at that point. But maybe in order to go to the next level, you need to do something different. And that's how I come to terms with some things where I need to change my thinking. ROB: [laughs] I like that. It's good. Sometimes you can look back and be like, yeah, that wasn't the right thing and just own it. But yeah, it does help you to know the path. Part of the reason why I love talking about it with you like this is it's not just Rob was wrong; we're actually walking the path through that decision. And it's easy to imagine us sitting in...we're in a tiny, little shared office listening to calls where...I'll tell you this as a story to make it incredibly concrete because it's exactly how this happened. We were on a call. Everybody was in the room. And we were talking to a major bank saying, "We love your software." We're like, "Great, we're looking forward to working with you," all this stuff. And they're like, "Yeah, we need you to show us how you built this plugin because we want to write our own version of it." CHAD: [chuckles] ROB: We're like, "If you did that, you wouldn't need to buy our software." And they're like, "That's right. We're not going to buy your software." CHAD: Exactly. [laughs] ROB: And we're like, "Well, we won't show you how to use it. Then we won't show you how to do that." And they're like, "Well, okay. We'll figure it out ourselves." And so I'm the cheerful, sunny, positive, sort of managing the call, and I'm not just yelling at them. My CTO is sitting next to me literally tearing his hair. This was literally a tearing his hair out moment. And we hung up the call, and we went on a walk around the neighborhood. And he was just like, "What more do you need to hear for you to understand?" And so it's moments like that. But instead of being like, no, you're wrong, we got to do it this way, I was ready to say, "Okay, what do you think we can do? How do we think we can do it?" And then he left me with a big pile of PR messaging to explain what we're doing, conversations like this. Two years ago when we made this change, almost three, I felt like I was being handed a really hard challenge. As it turns out, it hasn't been as big a deal. The market has changed about how they perceive open source. And for enterprise customers, they're like, "All right, how do we deal with the licensing for this stuff?" And we're like, "You just buy it from us." And they're like, "That's it?" And I'm like, "Yes." And you guarantee every..." "Yes." They're like, "Oh. Well, that's pretty straightforward. I don't have to worry about..." We could go way down an open-source rabbit hole and the consulting pieces and who owns the IP, and I used to deal with all that stuff. Now it's very straightforward. [laughs] Like, "You want to buy and use the software to run your data center?" "Yes, I do." "Great." CHAD: Well, I think this is generally applicable even beyond your specific product but to products in general. It's like, when you're not talking to people who are good customers or who are even going to be your customers who are going to pay for what you want, you can spend a lot of time and energy trying to please them. But you're not going to be successful because they're not going to be your customers no matter what you do. ROB: And that ends up being a bit of a filter with the open-source pieces is that there are customers who were dyed in the wool open source. And this used to be more true actually as the markets moved a lot. We ended up just not talking to many. But they do, they want a lot. They definitely would ask for features or things and additions and help, things like that. And it's hard to say no. Especially as a startup founder, you want to say yes a lot. We try to not say yes to things that we don't...and this puts us at a disadvantage I feel like from a marketing perspective. If we don't do something, we tend to say we don't do it, or we could do it, but it would take whatever. I wish more people in the tech space were as disciplined about this does work, this doesn't work, this is a feature. This is something we're working on. It's not how tech marketing typically works sadly. That's why we focus on self-trials so people can use the product. Mid-roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: So you have the core and then you have the ecosystem. And you also mentioned earlier that it is an actual software package that people are buying and installing in their data center. But then you have the UI which is in the cloud and what's in the data center is reporting up to that. ROB: Well, this is where I'm going to get very technical [laughs] so hang on for a second. We actually use a cross-domain approach. So the way this works...and our UX is written in React. And everything's...boy, there's like three or four things I have to say all at once. So forgive me as I circle. Everything we do at Digital Rebar is API-first, really API only, so the Golang service with an API, which is amazing. It's the right way to do software. So for our UX, it is a React application that can talk to that what we call an endpoint, that Digital Rebar endpoint. And so the UX is designed to talk directly to the Digital Rebar endpoint, and all of the information that it gets comes from that Digital Rebar endpoint. We do not have to relay it. Like, you have to be inside that network to get access to that endpoint. And the UX just talks to it. CHAD: Okay. And so the UX is just being served from your centralized servers, but you're just delivering the React for the JavaScript app. And that is talking to the local APIs. ROB: Right. And so we do use that browser as a bridge. And so when you want to download new content packs...so Digital Rebar is a platform. So you have to download content and automation and pieces into it. The browser is actually your bridge to do that. So the browser can connect to our catalog, pull down our catalog, and then send things into that browser. So it's super handy for that. But yeah, it's fundamentally...it's all behind your firewall software except...and this is where people get confused because you're downloading it from rackn.io. That download or the URL on the browser looks like it's a RackN URL even though all the traffic is network local. CHAD: Do your customers tend to stay up to date? Are they updating to the latest version right away all the time? ROB: [laughs] No, of course not. CHAD: I figured that was the answer. ROB: And we maintain patches on old versions and things like that. I wish they were a little faster. I'm not always sad that they're...I'm actually very glad when we do a release like we did yesterday...And in that release, I don't expect any of our production customers to go patch everything. So in a SaaS, you might actually have to deal with the fact that you've got...and we're back to our heterogeneity story. And this is why it's important that we don't do this. If we were to push that, if we didn't handle every situation for every customer exactly right, there would be chaos. And it would all come back to our team. The way we do it means that we don't have to deal with that. Customers are in control of when they upgrade and when they migrate, except in the UX case. CHAD: So how do you manage that if someone goes to the UI and their local thing is an old version? Are you detecting that and doing things differently? ROB: Yes, one of the decisions we made that I'm really happy with is we embedded feature flags into the API. When you log in, it will pull back. We know what the versions are. But versions are really problematic as a way to determine what's in software, not what's not in software. So instead, we get an array back that has feature flags as we add features into the core. And we've been doing this for years. And it's an amazingly productive process. And so what the UX does is as we add new things into the UX, it will look for those feature flags. And if the feature flag isn't there, it will show you a message that says, "This feature is not available for your endpoint," or show you the thing appropriate without that. And so the UX has gone through years of this process. And so there are literally just places where the UX changes behavior based on what you've installed on your system. And remember, our customers it's multi-site. So our customers do have multiple versions of Digital Rebar installed across there. So this behavior is really important also for them to be able to do it. And it goes back to LaunchDarkly. I was talking to Edith back in the early days of LaunchDarkly and feature flags, and I got really excited about that. And that's why we embedded it into the product. Everybody should do it. It's amazing. CHAD: One of the previous episodes a few ago was with actually the thoughtbot CTO, Joe Ferris. And we're on a project together where it's a different way of working but especially when you need it... so much of what I had done previously was versioned APIs. Maybe that works at a certain scale. But you get to a certain scale of software and way of working and wanting to do continuous deployment and continually update features and all that stuff. And it's a really good way of working when instead you are communicating on the level of feature availability. ROB: And from an ops person's perspective, and this was true with OpenStack, they were adding feature flags down at the metadata for the...it was incredible. They went deep into the versioned API hellscape. It's the only way I can describe it [laughs] because we don't do that. But the thing that that does not help you with is a lot of times the changes that you're looking at from an API perspective are behavior changes, not API changes. Our API over years now has been additive. And as long as you're okay with new objects showing up, new fields showing up in an object, you could go back to four-year-old software, talk to our API, and it would still work just fine. So all your integrations are going to be good, but the behavior might change. And that's what people don't...they're like, oh, I can make my API version, and everything's good. But the behavior that you're putting behind the scenes might be different. You need a way to express that even more than the APIs in my opinion. CHAD: I do think you really see that when you...if you're just building a monolithic web app, it's harder to see. But once you separate your UI from your back end...and where I first hit this was with mobile applications. The problem becomes more obvious to you as a developer I think. ROB: Yes. CHAD: Because you have some people out there who are actually running different versions of your UI too. So your back end is the same for everybody but your UI is different. ROB: [laughs] CHAD: And so you need a back end that can respond to different clients. And a better way to do that rather than versioning your API is to have the clients tell you what they're capable of while they're making the requests and to respond differently. It's much more of a flexible way. ROB: We do track what UX. We have customers who don't want to use that. They don't even want us changing the UX...or actually normal enterprise. And so they will run...the nice thing about a React app is you can just run it. The Digital Rebar can host its UX, and that's perfectly reasonable. We have customers who do that. But every core adds more operational complexity. And then if they don't patch the UX, they can fall behind or not get features. So we see that it's...you're describing a real, you know, the more information you're exchanging between the clients and the servers, the better for you to track what's really going on. CHAD: And I think overall once you can get a little...in my experience, especially people who haven't worked that way, joining the team, it can take a little bit for them to get comfortable with that approach and the flexibility you need to be building into your system. But once people are comfortable with it and the team is comfortable, it really starts to hum. In my experience, a lot of what we've advocated for in terms of the way software should be built and deployed and that kind of thing is it actually makes it so that you can leave that even easier. And you can really be agile because you can roll things out in a very agile way. ROB: So are you thinking like an actual rolling deployment where the deployed software has multiple versions coming through? CHAD: Yep. And you can also have different users seeing different things at different times as well. You can say, "We're going to be doing continual deployment and have code continually deployed." But that doesn't mean that it's part of the release yet, that it's available to users to use. ROB: Yeah, that ability to split and feature flag is a huge deal. CHAD: Yeah. What I'm trying to figure out is does this apply to every project even the small like, this just changes the way you should build software? Or is there a time in a product to start introducing that thing? ROB: I am a big fan of doing it first and fast. There are decisions that we made early that have proven out really well. Feature flags is one of them. We started right away knowing that this would be an important thing for us to do. And same thing with tracking dependencies and being able to say, "I need..." actually, it's helpful because you can write automation that says, "I need this feature in the product." This flag and the product it's not just a version thing. That makes the automation a little bit more portable, easier to maintain. The other thing we did that I really like is all of our objects have documentation embedded in them. So as I write a parameter or an ask or really anything in the system, everything has a documentation field. And so I can write the documentation for that component right there. And then we modified our build scripts so that they will pull in all of that documentation and create an aggregated view. And so the ability to do just-in-time documentation is very, very high. And so I'm a huge fan of that. Because then you have the burden of like, oh, I need to go back and write up a whole bunch of documentation really lessened when you can be like, okay, for this parameter, I can explain its behavior, or I can tell you what it does and know that it's going to show up as part of a documentation set that explains it. That's been something I've been a big fan of in what we build. And not everybody [laughs] is as much a fan. And you can see people writing stuff without particularly crisp documentation behind it. But at least we can go back and add that documentation or lessons learned or things like that. And it's been hugely helpful to have a place to do that. From a design perspective, one other thing I would say that we did that...and you can imagine the conversation. I have a UX usability focus. I'm out selling the product. So for me, it's how does it demo? How does it show? What's that first experience like? And so for me having icons and colors in the UX, in the experience is really important. Because there's a lot of semantic meaning that people get just looking down a list of icons and seeing that they are different colors and different shapes. But from the CTO's perspective, that's window dressing. Who cares? It doesn't have functional purpose. And we're both right. There's a lot of times when to me, both people can be right. So we added that as a metafield into all of our objects. And so we have the functional part of the definition of the API. And then we have these metaobjects that you can add in or meta definitions that you can add in behind the scenes to drive icons and colors. But sometimes UX rendering hints and things like that that from an API perspective, you're like, I don't care, not really an API thing. But from a do I show...this is sensitive information. Do I turn it into a password field? Or should this have a clipboard so I can clipboard icon it, or should I render it in this type of viewer or a plain text viewer? And all that stuff we have a place for. CHAD: And so it's actually being delivered by the API that's saying that. ROB: Correct. CHAD: That's cool. ROB: It's been very helpful. You can imagine the type of stuff we have, and it's easy to influence UX behaviors without asking for UI change. CHAD: Now, are these GraphQL APIs? ROB: No. We looked at doing that. That's probably a whole nother...I might get our CTO on the line for that. CHAD: [laughs] It's a whole nother episode for that. ROB: But we could do that. But we made some decisions that it wasn't going to provide a lot of lift for us in navigation at the moment. It's funny, there's stuff that we think is a really cool idea, but we've learned not to jump on them without having really specific customer use cases or validations. CHAD: Well, like you said, you've got to say no. You've got to make decisions about what is important, and what isn't important now, and what you'll get to later, and that requires discipline. ROB: This may be a way to bring it full circle. If you go back to the stories of every customer having a unique data center, there’s this heterogeneity and multi-vendor pieces that are really important. The unicycle we have to ride for this is we want our customers to have standard operating processes, standard infrastructure pipelines for this and use those and follow that process. Because we know if they do, then they'll keep improving as we improve the pipelines. And they're all unique. So there has to be a way in those infrastructure pipelines to do extensions that allow somebody to say, "I need to make this call here in the middle of this pipeline." And we have ways to do that address those needs. The challenge becomes providing enough opinionated like, this is how you should do things. And it's okay if you have to extend it or change it a little bit or tweak it without it just becoming an open-ended tool where people show up and they're like, "Oh, yeah, I get how to build something." And we have people do this, but they run out of gas in the long journey. They end up writing bespoke workflows. They write their own pipelines; they do their own integrations. And for them, it's very hard to support them. It's very hard to upgrade them. It's very hard for them to survive the reorg, your nine-month reorg windows. And so yeah, there's a balance between go do whatever you want, which you have to enable and do it our way because these processes are going to let your teams collaborate, let you reuse software. And we've actually over time been erring more and more on the side of you really need to do it the way we want you to do; reinforce the infrastructure as code processes. And this is the key, right? I mean, you're coming from a development mindset. You want your tooling to reinforce good behavior, CICD, infrastructure as code, all these things. You need those to be easier to do [laughs] than writing it yourself. And over time, we've been progressing more and more towards the let's make it easier to do it within the opinionated way that we have and less easy to do it within the Wild West pattern. CHAD: Cool. Well, I think with that, we'll start to wrap up. So if people want to find out more, where are some places that they could do that or get in touch with you? ROB: The simplest thing is of course rackn.com is the website. We encourage people to just, if this is interesting, download and try the software. If they have a cloud account, it's super easy to play with it, all things RackN through that. I am very active on Twitter under the handle @zehicle Z-E-H-I-C-L-E. And I'm happy to have conversations around these topics and data center and operations and even the future of cloud and edge computing. So please look me up. I'm excited to have conversations like that. CHAD: Awesome. And you can subscribe to the show and find notes and transcripts for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening and see you next time. Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.
Neal Amrhein is the founder and CEO and Matt Erickson is the CTO of My Goat. My Goat is a subscription mowing service for commercial properties. They use robotic mowers and elegant software tools to make turf care easy, convenient, and affordable. Follow Neal on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/neil-amrhein-9398969/). Follow Erik on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/matt-erickson-153fish/). My Goat (https://mygoat.co/) Follow MyGoat on Twitter (https://twitter.com/MyGoatCo), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/MyGoatCo), LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/my-goat-inc), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjV3ITbDvfqhQGIImFL5T7g/featured), or Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/mygoatco/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot), or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is a couple of people from a company with actual robots. It's Neal Amrhein, the founder and CEO, and Matt Erickson, the CTO of My Goat. Gentlemen, thanks for joining me. So tell me more about this idea that you are robot-agnostic? Are you helping people choose the solution that's right for them? Or do you have go-to vendors? NEIL: We do. So my philosophy, having spent a number of years in technology selling hardware and even software solutions, is that one thing that my experience has held is that hardware gets better, faster, and cheaper. And for us to invest in a hardware platform or have customers invest in a hardware platform, I liken it to my early adoption of high-definition televisions where in 2003, I was one of those guys that spent $2,400 on a 42-inch Sony Wega TV. And now you can get a 70-inch with a lot more technology and so forth for about $300 at Costco. So my feeling about hardware is it gets better, faster, cheaper. It's really the software that makes the difference in terms of how you leverage it. So we engage about 6 to 12 different hardware manufacturers that make autonomous robots from robots that are 27 to 35 pounds up to 1,200 pounds and all different variations in between. And then, we extract the communication tools so that we can help our users who are formerly the groundskeepers become technology groundskeepers. And they are now interfacing with the concept of autonomous robots that are mowing commercial properties 24/7, which we would actually call maintaining versus mowing. So we use nighttime, you know, day, night, rain or shine. So that's why we're robot-agnostic and welcome the latest and greatest designers and developers of hardware. We've got some folks that are just totally focused on designing, and developing, and building awesome autonomous robotic mowers with solar panels or great things that are going out there. And we're the software platform that brings it all together. CHAD: I totally get what you're saying about the progress of hardware and wanting to be in the business of creating value on top of that. How do you make sure that you don't take on the business risk of one of the manufacturers just providing the solution that you're providing? NEIL: Chad, we don't look at a business risk if there's a manufacturer that's going and selling autonomous robotic mowers. We welcome that, in fact, because that helps us with the adoption process. The idea of having, you know, Roomba is the de facto vacuum cleaner that goes randomly in your house. But there are half a dozen other hardware devices and opportunities, and they're all selling it. It's really how are you managing that Roomba? Which is also the subscription component of the Netflix part of our business, which is that Roomba may be a shark next year. It may be something else the following year. For our customers, we select the best hardware for their particular property, whether it's a golf course. They may have an autonomous robot that's manufactured by XYZ for the tee box and another one for the fairway, and another one for the greens. They just pay a monthly subscription for access to the software to manage those particular hardware pieces and optimize that hardware. And that's something that Matt will talk a little bit about. But we really have taken the approach that robots are just like cars. They'll sit in your garage 20 hours out of the week, but they're actually effectively useful 168 hours a week. So how do we maximize that and utilize the hardware itself? And that's what our software does. And of course, with that, we share that information with our customers and our users to continue to make it more efficient. CHAD: Thanks, Neil. Matt, what does the software stack actually look like that you're all putting together? MATT: So we got to talk about the technology so Laravel, PHP, MySQL. We host in DigitalOcean. And we have a WordPress front end, but the back end is all Laravel PHP. CHAD: And so it's in the cloud for all the customers? MATT: Yes. CHAD: And then how do you communicate with the fleet? MATT: So we connect through APIs. The hardware generally has an API that can give us status updates at various intervals. So we aggregate that information back. And then, we present a web-based solution dashboard that includes different views. We can get into the different users and how we've tried to meet their needs and drive workflow for them. But at a high level, we've got some graphical dashboards. And we also have some very tactical workflows for the guys. We call them shepherds taking care of our goats on the ground. CHAD: I know that you said it's autonomous, but how do you communicate with the robots when you need to? Is it radio frequency locally, or is it cell phones? MATT: So the robots actually come with…they have both GPS and cellular connectivity. So we have pretty good real-time connectivity with the robots. So we can remotely control them. We can park them, or we can send them back to their charging stations, different features like that. You can adjust cutting height, things like that, remotely. We also use just text messaging, SMS for communicating with shepherds. It's kind of real-time feedback. So yeah, let me dig in a little bit, the autonomous idea of the robot. Yeah, we want them to be autonomous. And we work with our shepherds, groundskeepers so that each of the goats works in a pen, an area defined by that in the ground kind of like an invisible fence dog wire type thing. But basically, we work with the shepherds, and we have this training certification process. But basically, they can get that pen to an area where really what we shoot for about 72 hours of the robot should be able to operate autonomously within that pen for about three and a half days. And then shepherds will be instructed to move that robot to another pen for about three and a half days. Usually, one robot is taking care of…it ends up being about two and a half days. And that's kind of the way the software solution is driving that efficiency of people time as well as robot time. The robots can mow 24/7. They take care of the grass. They maintain it, as Neil mentioned earlier. So it's not throw the robot out once a week kind of thing. You have to change your thinking. A lot of what we deal with when we go to a robot solution over that traditional status quo mowing we really have to help people through that thought process of this is not how it used to be. It works differently. But yep, that's kind of the solution. CHAD: I feel like I need to ask, even though it's going to be a little bit of a tangent. MATT: [laughs] CHAD: How did you arrive at the name of My Goat and take the leap on a quirky name like that? NEIL: Yeah, it's a great question. [laughs] First of all, I think that I first saw one of these robots through a YouTube video about three and a half or four years ago. And you may or may not know this, Chad, but there are about 3 million of these things that have been sold since 1995. So this is not bleeding edge technology in any way, shape, or form. When I saw it on a YouTube video, it just kind of hit me that wow, these things are out there doing their thing day or night, rain or shine. And interestingly enough, the market, I guess the landscape market, the residential side, was somewhere in the neighborhood of $65 to $80 billion that we were targeting and looking at. And as far as the goats, I had talked to some early folks who were marketing folks, and we just settled on Goat. And then we put my on the front end of it. And before we knew it, we had My Goat. And as we've evolved from just a cool robot-centric organization that's using software, we've evolved into an organization that's really teaching shepherds how to become interactive with the goats. And it's taken a life of its own. The blades are called teeth. CHAD: [laughs] NEIL: And those are some of our…of course, the goats need to be brushed. They don't get washed, or they don't get sprayed down with water, but they get brushed. And there's the whole the operating system is the heart and all kinds of stuff that's been going on. CHAD: Well, I feel like with a name like My Goat, if you're not going to commit and carry that branding through to everything, what's the point? [laughter] NEIL: Right. Yes, it has taken a life of its own. And it's interesting. I don't know that it's the most catchy name for a software technology company. But it's certainly gotten some folks' attention, and it's helped. Let's put it this way: our marketing team really enjoys everything about what they can do with it. CHAD: Well, and there's something to having a brand and carrying that through in the naming that causes ideas to resonate with people and makes them special. At the end of the day, you're mowing lawns. And so making it special and communicating that you have something special, I think, is something that people can do regardless of what their product is thinking of ways of doing that. NEIL: Yeah. And I would add that I think the only pushback we've received on the name is probably from some of our high-end golf course users and prospects who don't want to turn their golf course into a goat track, so to speak. CHAD: [laughs] NEIL: But that's probably the extent of it. But overall, it's been well received without a doubt. And as we're focused on the software component of interacting with autonomous robots, our software development mentality and our vision is that it may be the same thing applied to 500 Roombas inside of a million square feet at a fulfillment center for Under Armour. And instead of having 50 people cleaning the floors, you may have five people managing 500. And how do they do that effectively and efficiently? So there's really a business-focused component of the vision that I've had for the business. And that's helped me, along with many others, to get us to where we are. MATT: I'm just going to jump in. You're right; the name sticks and people really adopt to the shepherd mentality. We get a lot of requests for shepherd crooks. [laughs] They all want a shepherd staff. CHAD: So along those lines, when people are considering working with you, what are some of the questions or concerns that they have about a solution? NEIL: Sure. So it's disruptive, Chad. I think I could probably start by saying the traditional way of maintaining or mowing commercial properties is that you have a big guy and a big machine, and how fast does it go? How much noise does it make? How many grass clippings get blown all over the place? You get in, and you get out. And then you start over. So in the state of Tennessee, where we are here, it's about 34 to 36 weeks of mowing a year. In Michigan, it's 17 to 22 weeks, depending on where you are. In South Florida, believe it or not, I know there are only 52 weeks, but they're mowing 56 to 58 times a year. So it's the frequency of going and mowing and blowing, right? CHAD: Mm-hmm. NEIL: We're changing that by saying, why be worried about the weather? Why would you be worried about darkness? Why would you be worried about noise regulations when you can have the grass maintained all the time? So that mentality of maintaining essentially two football fields a week up to three football fields a week with less than 35 minutes of labor. There is nothing in comparison. There's nothing you can compare with the traditional what we call the status quo to make that happen. So the labor efficiency and improvement in labor productivity is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of the cost savings and the financial payback. So because we are so disruptive, a lot of what we do, and a lot of the time we spend, and one of our core values is being educators. So back to your question about manufacturers selling their own proprietary hardware; absolutely, the more the merrier. We welcome. To me, the sign of success and progress is not the small city block that has one gas station but has four gas stations on the corner. It just now means there are cars that are driving around. And so, I embrace that level of competition. I believe iron sharpens iron. And folks who are traditionally in the landscape space who have made trimmers and blowers and chainsaws are now finding a little bit of competition with folks who are now solely focused on making unbelievably efficient autonomous robotic mowers, or cleaners, or robots in general, which is, again, we're not crashing giant robots although that's the name of your podcast. [laughter] We're not trying to crash them or break them. But it is certainly the foundation for where we are. MATT: Hey, Neil, you've got a good analogy. I think analogies help explain concepts. So you want to run through your airport analogy with the runways and the different airlines? NEIL: Yeah, I could share that with you. Thanks for reminding me. So my philosophy about…we sell subscriptions that are based upon a geography, Chad. CHAD: Size of geography, you mean? NEIL: Yeah, the size of the geography. So it's about a football field, give or take. Based upon some limitations with technology, we put invisible dog fences in the ground, and we charge our users, our subscribers by the particular pen or the number of pens, and then there's a ratio. So much like in an airport, we're not selling flights; we're selling runways. And those runways are accessible by all kinds of…you may have 30 terminals at the gates, and you may have five different airlines. And each of those airlines has a different brand and name, but they're using multiple hardware components. Those jets are maybe McDonnell Douglas, or maybe they're a Boeing or whatever it may be. All of that is fine by us. What we do is we have the software that runs the gates, the terminals. So you have Southwest in terminal two and Delta in terminal 32. And they're using our software to figure out how to get the baggage on the planes and get those planes off the ground so they can make money for their businesses. So we look at it that way. And that's kind of where our IP rests is in that spot in that place. And, again, there'll be other airlines, whether it's Allegiant or whomever buying more Boeing planes. But ultimately, they'll all need a runway, and the software that manages the process and the workflow is what we're focused on. CHAD: So, is the total cost of ownership of autonomous solution typically lower than what they are doing today? NEIL: It is, specifically, the labor improvement is generally about 3x in terms of improving the efficiency of the labor. So if you talk about an average groundskeeper who may be responsible for mowing, if it's a perfect day outside mowing nine acres a day and they are out there five days a week, they may have efficiencies of maybe up to 40 or 45 acres a week. With our solution, that is increased to about 135 to 145 acres a week where they can maintain about 70 mowers, 70 autonomous robotic mowers, or 70 goats as we call them. They'll herd 70 goats with the same full-time employee. So that's one aspect. With that, the immediate reaction is, well, you're eliminating jobs. We're actually redeploying jobs. I'm a builder. I'm a job creator. I've had 4,800 folks work for me in my home care business over the last 12 years. And so, I'm a big believer in improving and deploying folks in areas that we don't have robots. So, for example, there's no robot right now that's pruning trees or making up a sand trap, robots that are planting flowers or putting mulch in a flower bed. So those kinds of jobs are still out there. We're just making the traditional idea of throwing somebody on a mower in the middle of a cemetery or golf course or open space and having them manage that through our software platform sitting in their F150 pushing start and stop or pause and doing other things. CHAD: Instead of riding on the mower. NEIL: You got it. MATT: A lot of our potential customers come to us because (we kind of touched on that) there's a labor shortage. It's hard for folks to find people that want to ride zero-turns. So to Neil's point, we're not about deploying robots, kind of one for one replacing jobs. It's basically we're taking the labor force that we can get, that we have, and we're retraining them to be more efficient through these robots. Pretty age-old story when you're talking about industrialization. But the idea is we haven't displaced workers. They're not hiring fewer people. They're taking everybody they can get. And they're doing all of that value add. The groundskeepers now have time to go out and do the mulching and the landscaping, trimming, improving the property. A lot of these groundskeepers have a lot of pride in their property. And they would rather be doing the items that to them are a value add and beautification projects rather than just riding a Back 40 or a zero-turn. We had one shepherd say, hey, it's really helped his back. Riding a lawnmower is kind of rough. And walking around every now and then helping out a robot is a whole lot easier of a physical life for you. Mid-roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: So I saw on the website because of the kind of solution and the scale that it's at, it seems like you have a few different key customer bases. You want to talk about that and whether you knew that going in, or did you find them along the way? NEIL: Yeah, that's a great question. So we came out of the gate initially with early investors. We were focused on what we considered was the low-hanging fruit in the residential space. So we had designed and developed the operational and financial template to actually have shepherds who were employees of My Goat. And we would have the Goats sold in a subscription model to residential customers. And then we'd have the goat stay on a property and then get moved, et cetera. But we learned very quickly that business to consumer and residential customers it's not that impossible; it just was not as low-hanging fruit as we had thought initially because folks leave rakes in the yard. And anytime a goat comes upon a rake, it's going to get trapped, and therefore it needs to be rescued. And you have to send a shepherd out, et cetera. Or somebody decides to put a new vegetable garden, and they break the wire that's in the ground. They're just a bunch of…, or there's a dog chasing the robot or a little kid out there, or somebody stops it. So those required a lot of…it didn't make the robot autonomous. So we pivoted in late 2019, early 2020 into the commercial space. We expired all of our subscriptions to residential customers and went completely into the commercial space. And we had had some success with some golf courses and some cemeteries. And we've gained a lot more momentum now with cities and counties, regional airports. But large open areas that are a minimum of five acres, typically we would run a pilot or a preview with at least 12 to 14 acres. But the biggest restriction, of course, when you get into those large open areas is electricity because they've been traditionally maintained or mowed by gas-powered machines. So back to your other question about where the savings is and the payback period, and how we have an immediate impact. There's an operational savings that is pretty quick in terms of the return because we flatten out a lot of the ups and downs that a traditional landscaper has. So let's take a golf course, for example. The average golf course spends about $80,000 per hole per year and depending on the course, 45% to 60% of that is spent on mowing, mowing machines, and people involved. And we're able to take that, and they're hiring temporary people in March here in the south, and they have them here until October. So they're having to go through that cycle every single year. So if they can flatten that operational expense out by redesigning the golf course and having…and maybe it's not 100%. Much like a Roomba, you still have to get the corners and the edges, maybe with a broom if it doesn't get into every nook and cranny. So it's not a 100% solution. It's not for every application. But as we moved into the commercial space, we found a greater payback period not only on the cost of the gasoline is...you know, take a zero-turn mower. And again, I say that's probably our greatest competitor is institutionalized thinking to say, this year we're going to buy a big green, big red, or big orange machine for $16,000 or $18,000, Kubota, Toro, or John Deere. And we're going to do the same thing we did last year. We're going to find a guy who can operate it. We're going to put gas in it, and we're going to run it around. Well, you put hours in those things, and they're very costly to maintain if you hit a root. So you've got to make sure that you can't run a 1,800-pound mower when it's been raining for three days. So what do you do with a fairway when it's soggy or any other commercial area that could be…or a hill that could be dangerous. So we've found a lot of application and then, of course, the environmental part of it, Chad. So the average zero-turn emits the equivalent of a carbon footprint every hour it's running about 300 miles of a Toyota Camry running. So they haven't become more efficient. And then you've got noise regulations and so forth in a lot of communities. And even in California, they're moving in the direction of I think it's 2024 where gas-powered and oil-powered landscaping blowers and tremors, et cetera, are not going to be allowed, or you'll be fined for using them. So that's the third component of where My Goat has seen some opportunities in the commercial space. CHAD: You mentioned that they can run at night. So they must be quiet. They must be. NEIL: Yes, they are. And it's not the traditional…you're not making as much of a mess. Some of our cemetery customers have mentioned that the fact that their trimming has been reduced by up to 50% because they're going up and over markers because they only weigh 27 pounds. They're mostly plastic and rubber. They're not doing any damage to vases. So they're having a cost reduction in that regard but also with the uprights. Folks have their family members in a particular private estate area where they may have an upright, and if you have a zero-turn mower out there throwing and splashing grass clippings, you're likely having to go out there again with more labor and take a blower and clean up the mess that the mower made. So these little small operational components along with the experience. Again, back to the cemetery, you're asking about why we're there. We know that industry very well. And we know that the experience that loved ones want to have when they're out there celebrating life and grieving across a 40 or 50-acre property. They don't want to hear a zero-turn. So you're turning those things off three or four times a day for those services, and you're having that individual parked a quarter-mile away. No longer is that an operational challenge or a concern because all of these robots are being controlled, start, stopped, and programmed through our software. CHAD: That's really cool. So you mentioned investors and the early pivot away from residential to commercial. What does your funding story look like? And what phase did you get to when you took on investment? And let's start there. How did you find your initial investors? And what phase were you at when you did that? NEIL: Yeah, that's a great question. So we went through the traditional friends and family and moved into an angel round, but really I started my first company…bootstrapped it. And so, I wasn't really proficient in raising money in the traditional sense. I had an idea, put a business plan together. And I talked to a couple of folks and just told the story. To be honest with you, Chad, I wasn't really asking for money. I was more or less asking for advice. And then a number of folks were like, "Are you taking money? I'd like to take an equity position." And so, we structured the business and the shares on a pre-revenue valuation. And then, within 14 months, we were able to double that valuation. And we're now opening a new round here and a Series A with a valuation that's nearly five times our initial valuation. So we're making a lot of progress because we have, again, it's an annual recurring revenue stream. It's a subscription model. And what we did with our investors in the early rounds is many of them came on, and they just wanted to be silent. They were not interested in having an opinion. They wanted me and my team to run it. So that's been very helpful. So that's where we are in 2022. We'll be opening and closing a Series A. And I certainly can get more specific with others about that if your listeners or audience are interested. CHAD: So when you think about a Series A, what will you be using that for? What are your next scaling goals? NEIL: My commitment to my investors in the previous two rounds has been to sales and technology, so sales, business development, and technology enhancement to the software, so hiring more developers, scaling that team. Matt's leading the vision, and we've got a number of other folks who are involved in the user experience. But again, because we're a software company, it starts with a demonstration that's usually 15 or 20 minutes that can be scheduled through our website at mygoat.co. And it goes from there. On the sales side and business development is telling the story. In those verticals, we're interested in building out potentially even reseller markets with other industries that are aligned with us. We've had some very high-level conversations with folks that sell electricity for a living. The Tennessee Valley Authority we became an early preferred partner with them and because they have carbon credit that they can offer and sell to their customers, their local power companies. And they're in the business of selling power. And we're in the business of providing subscriptions that require power. CHAD: What are some barriers to continuing to scale? Do you have geographic barriers? NEIL: I have self-imposed geographic barriers, [laughter] So it's a Neil Amrhein barrier. But overall, our barriers, our challenges really are; I’ve never heard of these things before. Do they actually mow? So we get through those conversations fairly quickly. But depending on who we're talking to, it also becomes a fear. People fear change and especially things that are disruptive. So our barriers, once we get through the fear, is we don't have any electricity here on this golf course, or this city park, or this regional airport that there is unlimited electricity. So we can pull whatever electricity is necessary there. So it is really the barriers of education, just like anything that's truly disruptive in an industry that's been doing the same thing for 45 or 50 years. CHAD: So you already talked about how you view potential competition from manufacturers, but how do you view competition in general? Is there other competition out there? NEIL: The biggest competition we have is institutionalized thinking, which is doing the same thing we did last year. So that's a battle that we have every day. I like competition because I think it makes the end product, and the customer is the one who benefits the most from having lots of people in the market no matter what their angle is. We like our position because, again, we're not the hardware manufacturer. We're able to work with others. We're the financial advisor that gets to work with the insurance guy and everybody else, where all your money is with your college buddy who's managing it, et cetera. We're agnostic. We're putting it all together. So it benefits everybody. And those who make and manufacture these robots get the benefit as well because it's part of the subscription process as far as that's concerned. But the more, the merrier. A lot of people come to me and say, "Well, I saw an autonomous robotic mower out on this lawn or in the neighborhood here." And that's good for us. CHAD: Matt, I assume that being robot-agnostic means that you need to integrate with the different systems. Does that have challenges? MATT: You know, not really. Robots are, as far as the autonomous robotic lawn mowers, they're pretty much telling us the same thing. There are status updates; there are battery updates; there are GPS coordinates. It does tend to be a pretty common data set that we're seeing. So it's been a lot easier than I thought. When you think about…data integrations are always the top challenge you have. It's worked out a lot better than we thought initially. CHAD: Well, that's great. Has there been anything surprising the other way which was something you thought was going to be easy turned out to be a lot harder? MATT: Yeah. We've had a manufacturer that actually had a tiered concept in their data availability. They weren't giving us all of the data that they had. They were saving it because they were running their own kind of hey, you can use home automation techniques to integrate with your residential autonomous robotic lawnmower. Hey, if it's raining at your house, we could park your robot. So they were kind of hiding some of the API from us. We were able to work through that. But I think that goes to one of your questions about concern around competition from the manufacturers. They're really not looking at this from that niche that we're hitting, that commercial perspective. Maintaining one Roomba in your house is the analogy I use. You kind of know where he gets stuck, and you go find him. And that's okay. You don't need a lot of software for that. But that analogy Neil mentioned, if you have 500 of these guys running around a warehouse, or for us, we have property with 50 robots on. How do you know which one right now -- CHAD: And the space that that takes up. MATT: Right. Right. CHAD: You can't see them all necessarily even. MATT: [laughs] Exactly. You can't. You can't just walk around and see everyone and visually check. You need that software to be efficient to know; oh, there are three things I need to do today with the robots. Let me plan that out, and let me take care of it. So I think, like Neil said, the manufacturers out there they're making lawn equipment. They're making lots of different hardware. And to them, fleet management is really where is my hardware right now? [laughs] That's the extent of it. And they can't think about a property that needs maybe two or three different manufacturers of hardware because properties are not one homogeneous set of type of grass. There are always different needs, different features on that property. So there's always that idea that we're going to need a couple of different manufacturers, maybe. So, yeah, it's really interesting. For me, I think it's we're really hitting a home run in an area that there really aren't any other competitors exactly in our niche. And if there are, I think the industry for us what we do is at a place where we need more adoption out there in the world. [crosstalk 34:03] CHAD: Do you ever hear from early adopters? People who say they've either already bought autonomous mowers and they're struggling to manage them, or they really want to, and they're coming to you to do it? NEIL: That's a great point. I have a couple of thoughts here because you guys are going in a lot of different directions here. MATT: [laughs] NEIL: Chad, the short answer is when people buy anything early on, they're going to have the proverbial challenges of who supports it when it breaks? Who do I call? What happens next? It just goes on and on and on, whether it's a hardware platform, and that's mostly the case, or it's something else. It's what does that support look like? So the early adopters when we talk about their experiences, and this is one of the things I would say is probably our biggest challenge is that we have created a learning management software platform, a video library of how do you work with robots? We know that they're going to get trapped. There is no doubt that a 27-pound autonomous goat if there is a lightning strike like there was here in Nashville last night, they're going to be tree limbs that are down. And there'll be goats that are trapped. And it's going to take a human being, a shepherd, to be notified via SMS alert to proactively go to that spot on that property across 50 or 100 acres and rescue that goat. And it's just a matter of these kinds of things happen environmentally. So we talk about, when we talk to customers, about their utilization of the goat. And we talk about optimizing their property. It's not really that the goat doesn't graze or the robot doesn't work. It's what are the restrictions and the environmental challenges that are in front of it? If there are erosion issues around a marker or in a large open field, and if it's a really well-groomed practice field or intramural field, it's likely going to be aerated. It's going to be very flat, et cetera. But most commercial properties are not that way. So the goats actually have a tendency to go out, and they're going to find all those environmental challenges. And it requires a human being to go out there and fix them. Because if the environmental challenge is that there's a hole and on a horse farm, it's going to be there until somebody throws some dirt in it. It's just the reality. And that goat is going to find that environmental challenge every single time. So there is a learning curve that goes with it. There's a level of patience. And I think you mentioned what's our challenge? Our challenge is letting folks know that it's an evolution, not a revolution, as far as what your property is going to look like. I spent a number of years at the Ritz Carlton Hotel Company, and we talk about property health as is it a two-star property, a three-star property, four-star property, five-star property? We recognize that a lot of commercial properties are going to just be a two-star. But potentially, they could be a three-star property. Or if it's a cemetery and you've got a goat that's maybe found environmental challenges on a cemetery, it also becomes a liability or risk for family members who go visit their loved ones. So now we're using the robot proactively to improve the status of the property as opposed to saying, well, it just gets trapped every time it finds a hole or every time there's a situation that goes on. So it does require an active level of engagement and maintenance. And the philosophy has to be changed so that groundskeepers are now checking their phones or being alerted at 7:15 in the morning. And they may go rescue Billy, the goat, because a lot of folks name their robots. [laughter] They're going out there, and they're in pen 34,27, 31. And then at lunchtime, they may have another two or three of the same goats that were trapped, need to be rescued, and then again at 4:00 o'clock in the afternoon. So it's a maintenance mentality as opposed to a mow and go mentality. So that is philosophically a big change in terms of their mindset. CHAD: So what's next for My Goat then? You mentioned the Series A. Is there anything in particular on your radar that you're either worried about or are looking forward to? NEIL: Looking forward to more folks like your audience and listeners hearing our story. I'm in the business of telling our story. And I welcome, again, the competition because that means there's validation for what's going on. I don't think we're going to stuff this genie back in the bottle, so to speak. It's going to be hard for me to believe that five, six years from now, folks are going to be out there firing up a push mower that they just bought at Lowe's when they can buy something at Lowe's that's $250 for a residential robot that they get to use. Same thing on the commercial space. I don't know what it ultimately looks like from a vision perspective. But I think our challenge is continuing the messaging, the adoption, enhancing the payback period. It is really just like any good technology, artificial intelligence, robotics, et cetera. I mean, that combination. I hold the position, Chad, that I don't really think any technology is being developed or new per se since the invention of the internet. It's the application of the technology. It's what are people doing that they weren't doing before? We have the communication tools with 5G or what have you that we didn't have five or six years ago that we can now ping our goats every 15 minutes and find out what their status is. And then we can report that back to the user and say, "Hey, your optimization or utilization on your hardware and your subscription is X, Y, and Z. And your return on investment is six months to 16 months." That's where I think it elevates the conversation of efficiency and changes the game. So our next steps are continuing to get the message out, embrace not only users but industries we haven't thought about. I mentioned horse farms that just came on my radar screen not too long ago. We've had some success with cities and counties. You can imagine…everything one of our core values is green is good, and time is a number. So you just drive down the interstate, and you can see so much green everywhere as far as opportunities ahead. And there's plenty of room for lots of people to play in this space. We welcome more and more of probably the designers and developers that you got on this podcast to come up with the latest and greatest hardware and make those APIs available for Matt and his team to integrate and continue to grow. CHAD: That's great. If folks want to reach out to you to either learn more or see if you can work together, where are the best places for them to do that? NEIL: Sure. Let me first direct them to www.mygoat.co. And there are a series of areas there where it's either click on a demo now or information. Our phone number is listed there as well. I'll also give you my email address, which is Neil, N-E-I-L neil@mygoat.co, so neil@mygoat.co. And Matt's is just matt@mygoat.co as well. And those are probably the fastest way to connect with us. And if they put in a quick subject line your name and your podcast, it'll bubble everybody to the top a little faster. CHAD: Wonderful. Thank you both for joining me. I really appreciate it. MATT: Absolutely. Thank you, Chad. NEIL: Thank you for having us. CHAD: And I wish you all the best. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening and see you next time. Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guests: Matthew Erickson and Neal Amrhein.
Joe Ferris is thoughtbot's CTO and Managing Director of the thoughtbot DevOps and maintenance team known as Mission Control. Mission Control is our newest team doing DevOps Support, Maintenance, and SRE (Site Reliability Engineering). The goal of Mission Control, rather than building products or pairing with team members to improve their team like the rest of thoughtbot, is to support those teams and support other client teams in deploying and scaling applications. They have an on-call team and do more complex cloud build-outs with the goal being to empower and educate the teams that we work with so that they are more capable of working in those ecosystems on their own. Follow Joe on Twitter (https://twitter.com/joeferris) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/joe-ferris-81421a167/). thoughtbot's Mission Control team (https://thoughtbot.com/mission-control) Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Joe Ferris, thoughtbot's CTO and Managing Director of the thoughtbot DevOps and maintenance team known as Mission Control. Joe, welcome back to the show. JOE: Thanks, Chad. It's been a while. CHAD: It has been a while. I think you were the first-ever guest, if I'm not mistaken. JOE: I believe that's right. We talked about null, I think. [laughter] CHAD: Yeah. And it would have been with Ben back when I was just a listener and maybe producer. So welcome back to the show. It's been a long time, and a lot has changed at thoughtbot over the years. I've been talking to each of the managing directors of the new teams, and I wanted to be sure to have you on. Why don't we take a little bit of a step back and talk about Mission Control? When we say DevOps and maintenance, what do we mean? And what does Mission Control do? JOE: Sure. Mission Control is our newest team doing DevOps support, and maintenance, and SRE. It came out of our experiments with DevOps a while ago now, almost two years coming up. Historically, thoughtbot has shied away from getting too much into DevOps. I think a lot of us had some unpleasant experiences earlier in our career around sysadmin tasks and expectations there. Not a lot of people have wanted to be on call historically. So we've heavily leveraged services like Heroku that take a lot of that burden away from you and avoided doing things like direct to AWS deployments or getting too involved with CI/CD pipelines that were particularly complex. But we've had clients over the years that have requested more interesting or more difficult deployments. And finally, we had one a couple of years ago, where we said, "All alright, let's just handle this instead of saying no or trying to outsource it." We thought it made sense for them. And after going through it, we came to the conclusion that it was actually pretty good that the ecosystem had evolved a lot and that it was a service worth offering. That began our journey into DevOps, so to speak. So we did some smart DevOps work for a variety of clients over the next year or so before we decided to form an official team doing this new kind of work, which is how we ended up with Mission control. The goal of Mission Control, rather than building products or pairing with team members to improve their team like the rest of thoughtbot, the goal of Mission Control is to support those teams and support other client teams in deploying and scaling their applications. And we have an on-call team. We will do more complex cloud build-outs. And our goal is to empower and educate the teams that we work with so that they are more capable of working in those ecosystems on their own. CHAD: You used the acronym SRE earlier in that little spiel. I'm not sure that everyone knows what that is. [laughs] So it stands for Site Reliability Engineer, right? JOE: That's right. And that's been newer for us. So DevOps is supposed to be the fusion of development and operations. But the operations world is really big. So similar to how everybody has problems getting people to be full-stack enough given the complexity of front end and back end, we have similar problems in design. We also have that problem in DevOps where both development and operations are huge, rich ecosystems. And so, having developers that are fully experienced at both is hard. So the path of least resistance, when you say are doing DevOps, is definitely just to do operations. And it's been a struggle for us to actually break down those silos and have teams work more on the operation side on their own. So one of the things that caught our eye with SRE was some of the built-in mechanisms for engaging with the team. The one-sentence pitch for SRE is that it is operations if you approach it like a software problem. It has these concepts of SLOs, Service Level Objectives, and error budgets, which is the amount of time you spent violating your SLO. And part of the process is getting buy-in from the entire team, from the stakeholders down to the developers and the operations team. And so, it provides a natural interaction point between the operations folks and the rest of the team because nobody wants to break the error budget. Once the error budget is exhausted, everybody has to stop building new features and focus on stability until the error budget is cut up again. So rather than having this unpleasant give or take where we're more coming from the operations side, and we're always pushing for more stability, and everybody else is coming from the product side, and they're always pushing for more features, SRE gives you this useful metric to have that conversation around where we're not always just pushing for more. We're trying to hit a specific goal that we've agreed on. And when we hit the goal, we know that we can keep full throttle moving out new features. CHAD: Now, is the SRE a developer who is also working on resolving errors before the budget is hit? JOE: Yeah, a Site Reliability Engineer is a developer. But that's actually not too different from other forms of DevOps. DevOps is supposed to be developers in general. When I say we built an operations team, even if you look at the work that we're doing, a lot of it is development work. We build scripts, and automations, and so on. We don't manually set up EC2 instances, and not everything is toil, even outside of SRE. But the idea in SRE is that somebody will be more integrated with the development team and make changes to not just the operational stack but also the development stack in service of reliability. I've heard it said that SRE is a particular implementation of DevOps. That makes sense to me. CHAD: Let's start back in the beginning because you made reference to the fact that historically, a lot of what we deploy was deployed to Heroku. And we did that because, for a lot of the applications that we're building, it made sense. It minimized the operational overhead of deployments. There is a point in some systems that you cross a line. Where do we see that line typically being where you need to start looking at something else? JOE: I think there can be a few different instigating factors. One of the fastest ways for somebody to want to move to AWS is if they have significant security concerns, particularly for healthcare applications. The security model is more straightforward in AWS to have better isolation. There are options on Heroku, but it requires going to a different Heroku platform using Shield. And you just don't get the same power you get in terms of network isolation models you get on AWS with your own VPC. So if you're already at the point where you want to start out with a VPC out of the gate and do that kind of isolation, my opinion is you may as well own it and go to AWS. So that's one reason. Another is if you start hitting scaling issues, Heroku is easier for the developers because it's simple and it's very streamlined. But doing complex deployments is difficult, which eliminates some of the options available to somebody doing something like SRE. So to give one example, one mechanism people can use to make it safer to deploy without potentially introducing bugs or performance degradations is a canary release where when you release, you put the new version out as the canary build. And you route maybe 5% of traffic to that, and you actually collect metrics on performance and error rates on the canary traffic versus the regular traffic. And then you have some period where you're in experiment mode, which varies depending on the level of stability you're looking to achieve. Once you're confident that the canary release didn't introduce a regression, then it gets promoted to the stable build, and you do that every time you deploy. I have no idea how you would do that on Heroku. CHAD: I think you'd have to do it at the application level. You'd have to do it with a feature flag system. And it would only be possible to do some of the things that you would be able to do if you're able to do the whole system. JOE: Right. And I guess you could do weighted random numbers to try and decide whether to canary or not. But one of the benefits of doing it outside the application is there's no way to make a mistake. So, for example, if you introduced a bug in your canary mechanism in the application or you forget to put it behind a feature flag, then you've now deployed to production, and you have an error. Whereas if it's managed by the CI/CD pipeline, you're just deploying a new version of the application. In Heroku land, that would mean you deploy the new slug as a canary build. In most other areas, it means you're deploying a container image. That's one example of why if you get to the point that you have a lot of traffic in production and you need to manage that traffic while continuing to release features, it can be helpful to work on a platform like AWS where you have a lot more deployment options. Another one is that SRE is heavily built on observability and metrics, which can be difficult to collect on Heroku. Some of that is just a matter of lineage. Like, the SRE community was built up around tools like Prometheus that are scrape-based. That means you need to have a special metrics endpoint exposed on all of your containers. In Heroku, there isn't a way to access any of your dynos directly except through the web router, and you can't control which one you get. So using Prometheus on Heroku is not really practical, which means you need to re-implement what everybody else has built for SRE using a different observability tool. And observability out of the box on Heroku it's easy to get set up, but it's more limited. So doing something like complex SLOs and setting up error budget dashboards and alerting is going to be a significant task. Versus on a platform like Kubernetes where it doesn't sound like it'll be easier, but it is because there are open-source tools that you can just deploy. CHAD: You mentioned Kubernetes. It's probably worth calling out that that's pretty much what we are using across the board, right? JOE: For our AWS and other cloud deployments, we have standardized largely on Kubernetes. We started out using simpler containerization platforms like ECS on AWS. But what we found is that the developer tooling is generally not particularly good because there's not enough community momentum behind any of those. And the open-source is limited versus something like Kubernetes there's a massive open-source community. There is a ton of different tooling that people build that's available for developers and for DevOps. And for these things like SRE, you can use almost entirely open-source software to build out all of the interesting parts of that and deploy that. So what we've been building is basically an SRE Platform as a Service where we collect these open-source components. We deploy them to a managed Kubernetes cluster. And then, applications can immediately start exposing metrics to Prometheus and defining SLOs. CHAD: So much in the same way where we talked about some of the boundaries where it starts to make sense to not be on Heroku, what are some of the boundaries that teams hit where it makes sense to start thinking about SRE or even just having someone on the team that's focused on that kind of work? JOE: I think as soon as people start hitting their first scaling challenges. So for an MVP where you're validating a product where you don't actually have production traffic yet, I don't think it makes sense. And I also think I would avoid deploying to something like Kubernetes if you can help it for an MVP. But for anybody who has scaling concerns, SRE is a very useful mindset. And the sooner you start adopting it, the sooner you'll start to build an application that's made to scale. It can be very difficult to put out those fires while something is not on a platform where you have many options, and nobody has been thinking about observability. It means that you need to be guessing at how to put out the fire as well as simultaneously introducing metrics and potentially planning a cloud migration. So I think as soon as you start feeling nervous about deploying to production or as soon as you notice that you're spending a lot of time working on performance, it makes sense to bring in SRE. I also think anybody that needs to provide an SLA should for sure implement SRE. It can be used to measure whether or not you're on track to hit an SLA because you basically set SLOs that are stricter than your SLA, and you make sure that you meet it. CHAD: Is there a way that existing teams can layer on some of the SRE activities without having full-time SRE people? JOE: I think you can have a team member who does development that also acts as the SRE. If you have a small team, I could see the commitment to it being daunting. I think that could be one good reason to bring in outside specialists if you're not at the point where you can afford to have a full-time SRE in-house. Working with a team that can provide an SRE on-demand like Mission Control could be valuable. CHAD: I didn't realize that that was going to be a perfect segue into part of the value proposition of Mission Control [laughter] when I asked the question. But I guess that's a really good point. That is part of what we're helping people do is monthly contracts that provide this to them, even if their team can't do it 100% of the time. JOE: Right, except for pretty large teams. I don't think it makes sense for them to hire a full-time SRE. It's much easier to work with a team like ours that has the experience and has more than one person. Even if you do hire a full-time SRE, you will only have one. So if they go on vacation, or if they get sick, or if it's in the middle of the night, then do you still have an SRE? I think that's one of the benefits of working with a team. CHAD: And that's been interesting with Mission Control because we introduced Mission Control and made it a formal thing at the same time as going entirely remote. And it's interesting how doing that freed us up in terms of being able to commit to building a different kind of team. It doesn't necessarily need to be on call after hours if we're going to have an entirely remote team. We can have people on that team that span different time zones. And so, from a thoughtbot perspective, it's interesting how those things went hand in hand for us. JOE: Yes, it's been immensely helpful for Mission Control, in particular, to be fully remote. There are a lot of options that wouldn't have been available to us if we were a U.S.-centric team. It's been really interesting. I've built out development teams before that were focused on a location. And it's been really interesting to build out this team with a focus on availability and distribution. For example, one thing that has helped us is having somebody in South America because they don't celebrate U.S. holidays. So even discounting time zones, which are a challenge when you're trying to provide around-the-clock availability, just having that kind of diversity in holiday schedules really helps. So we've been able to build it totally differently than we would have if we were trying to put a bunch of people in an office. And I think it's made it possible for us to have much better coverage with a much smaller team. Mid-roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: So Mission Control I introduced it as maintenance and DevOps. So we're also helping people with different kinds of things beyond operations, right? JOE: Yeah, particularly with SRE, there's a focus on stability and scaling. And we're also helping people with CI/CD. One of the focuses for us this quarter has been helping people develop CI/CD pipelines that provide safer deploys and providing guidance and a system for developers to implement things like feature flags and beta flags. Because one of the challenges of making performance improvements is that you don't actually know if you've solved the problem until it's deployed, and deploying something that changes performance is inherently risky. And so, in addition to helping people actually make the performance improvements, we have to demonstrate the process for deploying and testing those improvements. CHAD: I've worked on fairly big systems in the past. But there have been a couple of different instances over the last maybe year where we've approached the problem in a different way than we have in the past, which has been really interesting to me from a development standpoint. It's the idea of…if you remember, for the food delivery application, we had that conversation about the different ways to build APIs rather than versioning APIs explicitly. And that has been a different approach than the way I would have done things in the past. And it's been a really powerful approach. So, can we talk a little bit more about that approach? JOE: Sure. CHAD: Well, specifically, so we have mobile applications that use a back-end API, and not everyone updates their mobile application at the same time instantly. You have bugs basically in the wild that you are fixing or that you're changing in your API, or if you're just introducing API changes. And so the idea of instead of explicitly versioning API on the server-side and having clients write to a specific API, instead building much more flexible APIs, in particular, having the client tell you what version of the API that they're expecting but through consolidated API endpoints so that the server is much more in control of the behavior than the client being in control of the behavior. JOE: Yeah, I think the two big changes that were helpful on that project were using GraphQL for some of the APIs, which provides more flexibility generally than a typical REST API and the minimum version requirement. So the application sends the version of the application. And the API will tell the client they have to upgrade if it's a version that isn't compatible with the newer APIs. So when we do have to break backwards compatibility, we force an app upgrade. CHAD: But in general, you're taking the approach not to break backward compatibility. And you're meeting the client where it's at whenever possible and maintaining backward compatibility in the APIs. JOE: That's something that we have been teaching developers about generally is backwards and forwards compatibility. We do that with deployments as well. For some of the larger deployments we have where there might be dozens of containers running for a service, it certainly doesn't make sense to stop them all and start new ones because the app would be down for a long time. And it would take too long to catch up to the backlog of requests. But even a typical blue-green deployment is problematic. So if we have 30 containers running and we spin up 30 new containers, and they all need 15 database connections, then during the deploy, you potentially overload your database or exhaust your connection limit. Plus, you will need to allocate the compute resources for double the normal workload. So what we've been doing instead is rolling deploys almost everywhere where we spin up a few new containers using the new version and wait until they're fully online, spin down a few old ones, and then repeat that process until everything is up to date. But to do a rolling deploy like that requires backwards compatibility with the services it uses, in particular, at the database. And so, writing Rails migrations that are backwards compatible for one version has been a challenge. CHAD: And there's not really good tooling in Rails to do multiple stages of things. So if you really want to do that, you have to manage that in your source control basically and say, "Here's a new migration. We're going to merge in and deploy after this one," and that's not so great. JOE: Right. The other way to do that in the CI/CD pipeline would be to release commits one at a time and wait for them to be rolled out. But depending on how you structure your commit log, that could be pretty tedious. [laughs] CHAD: Yeah. I've seen as I've worked on this other project we're really striving to do continuous deployment. It's a high traffic, very complex deployment with lots of individual configured tenants. Separating out the concept of a deploy from a release has been very valuable for the application and for the clients. It changes the way that you need to think about how development progresses. I never before really worked in a system where you're literally sometimes duplicating and preserving old code, putting new code in place, having them both deployed, and then being able to switch between them as part of the release, and then cleaning up the old code later. At the scale that this is at, at the complexity that this is at, it makes sense for that application. It obviously doesn't make sense for everybody to be working that way. JOE: Right. Breaking up applications to be a little smaller, having components that could be experimented with individually would make some of that easier. The experimentation there separating the release from the deploy some of that is necessary because it's monolithic in so many ways. Like, it's a very big Rails application with one database with ACID compliance, which is a very powerful model. And it provides simplicity in some ways. But then it requires you to take on the complexity of making sure that you release things correctly. I do think that it would be difficult in this particular situation but for applications that reach that level of traffic and where you need to manage the risk of deploying, having smaller components, having some services broken would make that easier because you could do, for example, a canary deploy with one release rather than duplicating the code and having the old and new version. CHAD: Right. The services create boundaries with contracts about behavior and reduces things that are tightly coupled together, and their behavior is tightly coupled together. So, for example, on this application, we do have that one service that is completely managed independently from the main monolith and has its own deploy schedule. And we can, for the most part, change them independently without needing to go through all of that process that we go through to manage change. I think you're absolutely right. JOE: Another experiment we've been trying for another client is it's another Rails monolith. There are different audiences for it. So this is the food delivery application again. And there are customers who are placing orders. There are drivers who are delivering orders. There are restaurants that are fulfilling orders. And then there are admins who are managing everything in the back end. And there's some overlap in the data they use. But the actual requests, and controllers, and pieces of the Rails application they use are almost entirely isolated. So one challenge we had was being able to provide different reliability contracts for those different audiences and also scaling them and configuring them differently. So, for example, if you've done tuning for a Rails application before, you've probably tweaked things like how many threads will I have for each of my Puma workers? How many Puma workers will I have per container? How many database connections do I need in the pool? And what we were able to do for this application using Kubernetes and Isto was running the same application, the same container, so like one monolithic Rails container but running it more than once in different configurations and routing traffic to different pools of containers based on the audience. And so, for example, if the customer is making requests, those all go to the customer pool of containers, which are scaled independently and have their own configuration tweaks for the kinds of requests that customers tend to make, which are generally small, high throughput requests with lots of little rights. And then, compared to the admin panel, they typically view dashboards and big lists of records. And so, the requests tend to be larger, but the number of users is much smaller. There are way more customers than there are admins. And so, for those, we have fewer connections. We have more memory allocated for the kind of bloat that results in those types of requests. And we also have a different performance objective for admins. It's more acceptable for those pages to respond a little bit slower. And admins understand it's their job. They have to use the software. So they'll reload the page if they have to versus a customer where if they're having trouble placing an order, they might just buy somewhere else. So that's been a pretty powerful mechanism we were able to leverage CHAD: Is that switching on URL-like endpoints? JOE: Yeah, it's based on the path. But the mechanisms available to us are actually pretty powerful. At that point, we have access to the full request. So we could really route based on anything we wanted right down to the user. CHAD: I guess that's a really good example. You don't have access to that routing on Heroku. JOE: No, I think any Platform as a Service where they manage the routing if they don't provide that feature, you don't get that feature. CHAD: This is the first we're talking about this. That is a really interesting example of how to scale a monolith solves some of the problems that services often get you without having to break everything up right off the bat in order to do that. JOE: Yeah. I also think it provides kind of an inside-out approach to doing that. One of the problems with breaking out services is you have to plan what the services are going to be to a certain degree. And so, I think the best way to do it is to extract services from a monolith the same way you extract classes to break them up. And this audience-based approach is almost like a dry run. You can see if the boundaries you're drawing make sense in terms of traffic. And if those make sense, it probably makes sense to break up the front end at those boundaries eventually into different applications. And then figure out what services you need to extract to provide the common infrastructure for those front-end services. The same way test-driven development makes it much easier to find the correct tests to write, I think this approach of audience boundary discovery is an interesting approach to finding service boundaries versus trying to guess at what the services are, which very frequently leads people to wrapping services around database tables which doesn't help at all. CHAD: Yeah, that's the wrong thing to be looking at when you're looking at how to do services. JOE: Right. It's almost like deciding what your database tables would be upfront before you've seen the UI for the application. CHAD: Cool. So heading into 2022, we're looking ahead at the upcoming year. And so what's on the docket for Mission Control? JOE: We didn't start experimenting fully with SRE until the third quarter of this year. And so far, we've loved it. So I think we'll make a pretty heavy investment into our SRE offering. The goal is for us to have an open-source set of Terraform modules that effectively deploy a platform ready to go for SRE. What we want to do is maintain and curate that platform and then deploy it and maintain it for our clients. I think another big thing we'll be doing is (This might be incredibly boring.) but restructuring the way our agreements work a little bit. One of the things we wanted to test out when we built Mission Control was how much we could have built into a monthly recurring contract versus billing for time and materials like we usually do. So we tried putting a lot into that contract and really pushing the boundaries of what would be reasonable. And there was definitely a lot of pain there for us and a lot of difficult conversations with clients. So I think for 2022, we will be shifting a lot of our work back towards time and materials. So I guess that's a lesson out there for anybody else that's providing [laughs] support contracts is to make sure that the responsibilities contained in the linear amount scale linearly. CHAD: I think when we originally conceived of Mission Control, we also saw it handling a lot more things that it turns out just were not doing as part of Mission Control like regular Rails upgrades. JOE: Yeah, a lot of the things that we included in contracts originally were not particularly important to clients or at least were not outside of what they were capable of doing already. So it wasn't that much of a value-add. There are a lot of people out there that will upgrade your Rails version. And having somebody who just does it in the background but isn't aware of some of the impacts that might have in the application turned out to be not much of a value prop. Whereas stability turns out to be a big pain point for a lot of people, people don't know how to do it. And then our maintenance offering, I think what ended up providing the most value is not the keeping the code fresh parts, but it was more for the teams that don't have a large continuous development team having access to somebody who can fix quick bugs and things like that without needing to first negotiate a contract with a provider. I think that provides a lot of value. Those are pretty separate and different offerings. But those are the pieces that we found have really been valuable to clients. CHAD: Well, great. If people want to find out more about Mission Control or get in touch with you, where are the best places for them to do that? JOE: Well, we have a website thoughtbot.com/mission-control with a dash between mission and control. There are a few ways to reach out there. You can also find us on Twitter. We are @thoughtbot, and I am @joeferris. CHAD: Cool. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Joe Ferris.
Emily Bahna a Managing Director at thoughtbot who leads the Lift Off team, where they focus on really leaning into the core of the company. The team works with new founders to launch new products or they work with existing companies that want to build out a new service or open up a new area to generate revenue for their business. But, the thing that ties Lift Off together, is that they start at ground zero to build upon an idea and actually build the first version product to get it out live into the marketplace. Follow Emily on Twitter (https://twitter.com/emilybahna) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/ebahna/). thoughtbot's Lift Off team (https://thoughtbot.com/lift-off) Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Emily Bahna, Managing Director of thoughtbot's Lift Off team. Emily, thanks for joining me. EMILY: Thank you. CHAD: So at this point, we've talked with a few of the different managing directors at thoughtbot about their teams. And Lift Off is one of the largest teams that we have. And so what is it that Lift Off actually does? EMILY: Lift Off is focused in on really leaning into the core of thoughtbot. We work with new founders launching new products or work with existing companies that want to build out a new service or open up a new area to generate revenue for their business. But I think the thing that ties Lift Off together is that we are starting at ground zero building upon an idea and actually building the first version product and getting it out into the marketplace. CHAD: And oftentimes, those are pretty significant endeavors. The last episode that came out was with Dawn at Ignite who is more on the validation, early stage, getting things that are fairly straightforward into market as quickly as possible usually in a matter of months. But Lift Off the endeavors are usually quite a bit more significant than that, right? EMILY: Yeah. I would say that the difference between validation...we're beyond the stage of validation. We're working with clients who are ready to build a foundation. They really need to put in the infrastructure that's going to take their product and get it ready to scale into the future. So they really need to make that investment into the longer-term strategy. They need to know what's realistic to build first. But they also have to keep an eye on the long road ahead of building something that can be something that can set out to grow down the road as well. CHAD: I guess another way of putting it is that Ignite often works with brand new teams, brand new companies creating something for the first time. And Lift Off typically works with existing companies who have existing significant revenue who want to do something new, either a new business or a new product, or maybe they have an existing web product and they're going into mobile for the first time. That's another way of putting it, right? EMILY: It could be. I think that when people are ready to move into the Lift Off space, it's about having the investment, the right kind of funding to move in that direction. Sometimes we do work with new founders that have a significant amount of funding, but a lot of times it is folks that are at the enterprise level that are building a new service line. They've got validation and market research already done. And they're building out a completely new line of business that they need to explore and set a new foundation in place. CHAD: Do you have some examples of clients that have been projects of Lift Off? EMILY: Yeah. We've been doing a lot of really interesting work in the health tech space, a lot of interest in improving patient experience. So we worked with a company called Relias in terms of moving them into a new service line that they'd never been in before, really focusing on improving patient care for therapists, physical therapy therapists. We've also worked with an organization called Groups Recover Together, building out a mobile application for an organization that helps people recover from substance abuse. And we also are working with an organization called Airrosti. That is also an organization that helps in the physical therapy space, so improving patient exercises or rehabilitation through an improved mobile experience, virtual experience to improve overall patient outcomes. CHAD: I think it's not a coincidence that a lot of the projects that we work on in Lift Off are in the health tech space because that combination of...like you were saying, a lot of what Lift Off does is really build products that are complex and that are going to scale and have a certain scale fairly quickly and need to really think about more of a platform that's going to be iterated upon into the future. And once you get into a highly regulated industry like health or finance or something, there are so many factors at play, especially if you're an existing business going into that. There's lots to consider. The projects are more complex. And so having a team of people that are focused on working in that kind of environment and know the challenges of doing that and an integrated design and development team who's comfortable operating in that space, I think that that's why it's not a coincidence. EMILY: Yeah. I think there's also a lot of great energy in that space right now to move it to the next level. And to be honest, the pandemic really accelerated the need for improvements in patient engagement and allowing therapists or physicians to be able to care for patients in a virtual setting. It also is true not just in health tech, but as you mentioned, we've been actively working with a lot of FinTech companies as well, building out mobile experiences for companies that are helping people get out of debt or working in even some of these new areas like cryptocurrency and things that are changing pretty rapidly in the marketplace and being able to respond to that. But kind of working in a really complex environment some particular industries that have specific compliance security needs in order to be able to serve their customers in a safe way. So working through a lot of those challenges is what's really important and having a team that can navigate through those levels of complexity. CHAD: I've talked with the other managing directors about the benefits of our new focus teams and how working on a similar project allows the team members to focus. The other aspect of it is there are parts of what we did under the studio model. And it may have been like there'd be one Lift Off project within...I think we should mention that you used to be the Managing Director of the Durham Studio. And it was a relatively small team working with local clients. And so you may only have one of these kinds of clients a year or maybe even less. And so building up an expertise but also meeting the needs of those particular clients there wasn't enough work there, for example, to hire someone with a specific skill set or knowledge if it's only going to be few and far between. And that's been true in Lift Off because we used to, at thoughtbot, not really have product managers. Everyone was designers and developers. And that was because only a subset of our projects really needed a product manager at the table. For the most part, a lot of those smaller projects or the boost-style projects are just developers or designers working directly with a stakeholder. And so, within Lift Off, we've built a product management practice because of that specialized need within these kinds of projects, right? EMILY: Yeah, I think just like you said, the ability to really focus in on the first version product is looking at ways that we could improve our process there and provide more support that's really needed for these kinds of engagements. So what we have seen with the more complex MVPs is a lot of these clients need reliability. They need to know that what they're building is the...They need to have more support in terms of the management of that, having someone who's dedicated to being able to straddle between the business objectives and working with the team navigating some of these more complex compliance issues, security issues, and keeping that on track. Also, we've been leaning into improving our practices around defining what first version product is. We've been using design sprints to really help align both business owners and the team to determine what are the biggest risk factors? How do we define what we're actually going to build and start building that roadmap? And we've been leaning into those best practices and actually improving upon it. And so we've looked at that and built out a discovery sprint that is not just a week-long but really extends that out to about three weeks to give us more time to do more user research, dive a little deeper through the design sprint exercises, but then bring in engineering, bringing an interdisciplinary team to look at the problem from both a product management point of view, a design point of view, and a development point of view to really determine the first version product roadmap and give more clarity to our clients and a clearer sense of what we can accomplish in the first. CHAD: I can speak to this firsthand because I was advising and working on a project that started before we reorganized into teams and effectively playing that role. But as the project went on, not that we did a terrible job, but it became overwhelming for me with my other responsibilities and spending a couple of days a week. A couple of days a week is sufficient on a smaller project, but on a much larger project, it's essentially a full-time job to do all of that work. [chuckles] And I just didn't have enough time to be able to do that, let alone then provide a real active management of the roadmap six-plus months out. So a very lightweight process with not a lot of definition works when that period is then over in 6 to 12 weeks, and you have something [chuckles] in the market. When you're trying to plan and trying to coordinate work and trying to give clarity around a product and everything that's six-plus months out, it's a whole nother ball game. And it requires a whole nother level of effort, and the clients want that. And so being able to give it to them not only makes them more successful and more confident and feeling like they have that reliability, but it also then puts our team in a better supported set up for success and that kind of thing because they have what they need, and the client has what they need. And everyone's able to really come together and collaborate on building and launching a great product. EMILY: Yeah. I think we're always looking at ways that we can improve our process, and as we are taking on more of the complex projects recognizing the need for this role. What's really exciting is the interest in the product management role. It’s been an opportunity for our team members. We've had two senior developers who've wanted to move into that role. And it's been an amazing transformation of with them, similar to you, having that background, the hands-on background of understanding what it means to be a developer on a project but then being able to transition to a different role on the project and get more involved on the business side of things. But that's been extraordinarily successful in making that transition and providing the support that the team needs in order to be successful. So in some ways, it's like we were trying to do that job without really defining it. But now that it's been defined, just recognizing the value that that role plays on these types of projects and seeing the opportunity to even improve it. CHAD: I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one on one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one on one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. So we have a bunch of positions open in Lift Off. But product management is one of those positions that we're looking for people, right? EMILY: Yeah. We are actually opening up a position for Director of Product Management because the role is so critical to the work that we're doing, just like...I feel like we're extending our design and development model but then adding this third tier of product management, which is just as important in terms of the team that works best for these types of projects. It's having that interdisciplinary core of product management, design, and development working together for new products. A lot of it is really having that high-level oversight, the business strategy integrated in with the folks that can specialize in the development and the design piece. Having to look at the problem from those three different points of view just provides a level of reliability for clients that they just can't get with a single point of view. CHAD: What is the size of the product management team now? EMILY: Right now? Let's see. I think we've got about five. We have four or five active product managers right now. CHAD: So tell us more about the ideal Director of Product Management. What do you think that they would be? Able to lead a team that size while also evolving our product management process and doing product management themselves? EMILY: Yeah. I think I'm bringing in somebody who can help us improve our product management process specifically for first version products and really looking at it, and really shaping it, and pulling in the best practices, and really shaping it for the clients that we have I think is one thing I'm looking for the director to do. I'm also looking at the director to upskill our team. Like I said, there are a lot of folks like developers and designers that are actually interested in moving into that role and building up a potential career pathway for folks that may want to move into that area and to ensure that they are successful with that. And then growing the team, we are hoping to be able to...I think we've got five active projects right now, so being able to grow our projects and to grow the team so that we can support those kinds of projects on an ongoing basis. So really extending that out and then working collaboratively with our design and development directors to look at how we can collectively put together best practices around first version products. CHAD: Awesome. Well, what's on your radar now? What's next for Lift Off besides hiring a Director of Product Management? EMILY: [laughs] That's definitely number one. I think what is up next is really focusing in on teamwork. How do we work collectively as a team? Are there ways to improve our process to better serve our clients? We've done a lot of things in the past year. Like I'd mentioned before, we've improved our design sprints and extended them to become discovery sprints. Those are just names, but it's really the beginning stages of kicking off a project more successfully. Looking at ways that we can improve our customer experience and being able to serve clients in a better way, improving our product management across the board for all our projects, looking at ways that throughout the first version product for our clients what other ways can we better support our clients? Either through go-to-market strategies or helping them recruit permanent team members onto their team. But I think what's next for Lift Off is really examining how we service clients and looking at ways that we can actually make it even better. CHAD: Cool. Well, I want to change gears a little bit and ask you about you. EMILY: [laughs] CHAD: So your background, I think it's important to say is as a designer, right? EMILY: Yeah, that's one of my backgrounds. [laughter] CHAD: Okay, you have a varied background. But what were you doing when you joined thoughtbot and moved into the Managing Director role? And how has that evolved over time? EMILY: I think it's really interesting. You're always leaning into something. And as you look back at your past, even if it doesn't seem to make sense, you're always gravitating to something that is your North Star. Before I joined thoughtbot, I actually ran my own agency, which was called UX-Shop. And it was a team of one; it was me. As I was building up that agency, I recognized that I couldn't do it all. The types of projects that I wanted to work on were more complex. And so, when I started UX-Shop, I would be pulling in talent to create the type of team that would make that project more successful. It was hard to continually do that in a way where I had to recruit talent [laughs] and secure projects as well without having them as permanent employees. When I joined thoughtbot, it was an opportunity where I had access to amazing talent. And I could really focus in on building that, first off doing it in the Raleigh, Durham office where we went from a team of four to I think we grew the team to about nine. And starting to really grow that office to transitioning to this new model where we went from a team of nine to...I don't know the exact number, but I think it's like 25, 28. We're heading toward the 30 mark. So it's a significantly larger team with the ability to really focus in on the kind of projects that I actually really love, which is new product design and development but going after those more complex projects. And I think when I start looking back at my own career, I'm just starting to see patterns of the same focus but the opportunity to dive into it in a bigger way, in a more challenging way, and starting to tackle that. So thoughtbot's really given me the opportunity to take that ambition and actually apply it with the opportunity to have the talented team to be able to execute on those types of projects. CHAD: How has going from a team of one to a team of four to a team of nine to a team of pushing 30...are there things that you've needed to evolve in your own skillset or experiences? EMILY: Yeah. I think certainly building leadership skills, understanding how to work through a lot of challenges on what makes a team work really well together, making sure that we've got the guidelines and structures in place. There are a lot of things that I've grown just having the opportunity to work through some of those challenges. But also, in some ways, growing into a larger team has made some things a little easier. But it was nice having that progression from a smaller team to a larger team. I don't know if I would have been as successful with growing to a team of 30 right off the bat without being able to work in that smaller space, kind of learn my lessons, and then build upon those and grow that unit, get better at what I was doing. The reason why Lift Off is really starting to thrive is understanding that that foundation is built upon a lot of trial and error and just learning how to navigate and improve my own personal leadership skills. CHAD: Are there any particular resources that you called upon in order to do that? EMILY: So certainly reaching out to folks who are in similar positions. There's a strong community here where I live in Durham, talking to a lot of founders or folks in the leadership space who are growing teams. I've had some coaching with executive coaching that's helped quite a bit, especially when I've been in situations that I just wanted to make sure that I was handling them in the right way. And then, of course, having access to the folks at thoughtbot like you, Chad, and people that I can talk to and get advice on how to navigate tricky situations have all been contributing to my education and making me a better leader in this space. CHAD: Would you recommend coaching to other people? EMILY: I would. I think it's a real opportunity for you to...there's a lot of things that you don't really know that you don't know. And there's a lot of ways of approaching things in a different way on how you communicate. That is the difference between really getting through and solving a problem versus having a situation arise and escalate and become problematic. And it's a little bit of understanding how to frame things in a thoughtful way. It's also an opportunity to understand that sometimes you just need to have some space to think before responding and understanding how to navigate complexity, especially in today's world where leadership there's so much going on, transitioning to remote. There are different things that are pulling at us in different aspects and just really understanding the human element of your teams. So having someone who you can talk to in a way that you can share those ideas and get a different perspective, I think, is really helpful. CHAD: Yeah. Well, if folks want to get in touch with you or Lift Off, what's the best places for them to do that? EMILY: Well, there's always my email, emily@thoughtbot.com. I think just reaching out to me directly is the best place. I'm always happy to talk about Lift Off or have an intro coffee call with folks that are interested in what we do. So that's the best way to get in touch with me. CHAD: Excellent. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have any questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening and see you next time. Special Guest: Emily Bahna.
Dawn Delatte a Designer and Managing Director at thoughtbot who leads the Ignite team, where they focus primarily on validating and launching early-stage products through design-thinking, business and product strategy, and iterative design and development. Dawn works collaboratively with designers and developers to ensure they add value to the people and products thoughtbot works with every day. Follow Dawn on Twitter (https://twitter.com/dawndig) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/dawndelatte/). Visit her website at dawndelatte.com (http://dawndelatte.com/). thoughtbot's Ignite team (https://thoughtbot.com/ignite) Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Dawn Delatte, Managing Director of the thoughtbot Ignite team. Dawn, thanks for joining me. DAWN: Hi, thanks for having me. CHAD: Ignite is one of the examples I always use when I talk about why we split up into teams the way that we did and what the benefits are, Dawn. So why don't you tell people what Ignite actually does? DAWN: Cool. So the Ignite team we work with entrepreneurs, and non-technical startup founders, in some cases, experienced startup founders, as well as innovation teams within existing organizations. And we work with them to validate their product ideas and deliver very initial versions of their products to continue that validation process. We provide all kinds of services around that from a validation perspective. We use product sprint methodology to understand the opportunity, understand the market, the problem, come up with solutions, all those things to arrive at some ideas and some solutions that we can then quickly prototype and then test with target users depending on who we've decided their customer is or who they've decided their customer is. And that's very high level. I'm happy to get into more detail about what our discovery sprints are like. But after that, then we would go into, like I said, continued validation but through actual product launches. So sometimes that looks like proof of concepts, sometimes that's first MVPs. But either way, we focus on a set of goals, and that could be a certain number of users onboarded to the platform. It could be getting that next round of investment funding. But it's pretty straightforward, not a whole lot of complexity, and focused on getting a product and company to that next best stage. CHAD: One of the reasons why I use Ignite is that it's on one end of the spectrum. It's at the extreme end of the spectrum. Last week, I talked to Josh, who's on the other end of Boost, where we're working on existing products with existing teams. And Ignite is all the way on the other side, which is sometimes we are not even writing any code at all; we're just validating an idea. The work that Ignite does has always been a very important part of what thoughtbot does. But it's a big challenge to go from a product where maybe you have hundreds of thousands or millions of users and a large team, and you're doing development as a developer or designer, maybe it's healthcare or something super complex, and then to the next week where you're working on something that is going to get into market very quickly, maybe is totally unproven. The things you need to do in that environment and the way that you need to work can be a little bit different. And so allowing the thoughtbot designers and developers to focus on the particular needs of the Ignite-type clients I think we have seen, and I think we'll continue to see it as people even get more used to it, it has a direct benefit to our clients as well The best thing might not always be to write a Rails app. But if you take a developer who was on a Rails app on Friday or Thursday, and then they start on a new project on Monday, chances are they're expecting to write a Rails app. DAWN: That's a really important observation and distinction about what our developers do compared to other developers at thoughtbot. I've always said that selling any kind of project or working with new clients with any type of project, whether it's very early stage or that enterprise client that we all wear our product consulting hats, or we're product consultants first, and then we have our toolkit. But I think that is the most true, at least from my experience, in the Ignite team. And we've even talked about and, in some cases, have been able to blur the lines even more between designers and developers because first and foremost, you're coming to the problems thinking about it exactly how you're talking about. Like, what is it going to take to make this product launch successful? It might not involve writing very much code. And we might not discover that until after we've been working together for a couple of weeks and started to validate some of the ideas we have. And so, being able to have that adaptability and really focus on the consulting and strategy aspect of things is super important. CHAD: So if there is a typical or Ignite client that we're working with, what does it look like? DAWN: I would say a typical...so who we've engaged the most with are non-technical founders and entrepreneurs. And I say non-technical but what I really mean is they haven't had the experience of launching a product and going through that process. CHAD: A digital product. DAWN: Yeah, a digital product. So for lack of a better way to describe them, non-technical because there's a lot of work involved in helping them understand product strategy and technical architecting and everything that happens in between. So that's who we've been able to work with primarily while we've also worked with other types of clients. CHAD: What is typically the first step with clients? At what stage are they at, and what is the first step that we're taking them through? DAWN: The sales process is a little bit different. We're not talking about requirements. And we're not exactly talking about what the end product looks like. If the conversation is going that way, we're usually trying to bring it back a little bit and keep things more high level just to make sure that we have a really good sense of what it is that we should try to do. So the sales process is we're already starting to dig into validation processes and making sure that our clients are able to define their customers and define the problem, and have started to think about their value proposition from a business perspective, and have made other considerations that through all of our experience, all the years that we have experience with shipping products, make sure that the client understands at least at a very high level what the big components for success are going to be. And if they haven't started to make decisions about those things, that they know that we can help them do that. So that conversation is already starting in the sales process, which is great because we can get the team involved, and everybody starts wrapping their head around the problem. And by the time that we actually kick off the project, we're really excited because we all are ready, and we have ideas for what we can do together. But the first stage is usually always what we call a discovery sprint. So we've been doing Product Design Sprints for a long time at thoughtbot. And we've always been iterative with everything we do. But with Product Design Sprints, especially because every single one of them is unique, you have to figure out either what exercises you're going to do that make the most sense for this client in this project. We had, I guess a bigger iteration of the Product Design Sprint as a whole. And we've moved into this concept of a discovery sprint or a discovery phase. And it allows us to do a couple of things. So the Product Design Sprint was largely modeled after the Google Ventures Sprint, which is this intensive five-day process where you quickly understand the problem, come up with some solutions together, prototype, and test within five days. We've elongated that process a little bit. So we definitely do two weeks, sometimes four if there's a lot to uncover and make sure we understand about the market before we start writing code or before we start doing the next phase of work together. And we kick off with a lot of the same processes. So like I keep saying, making sure you understand the problem, making sure you've defined the customer, the opportunities. In some cases, at least with our clients, we're actually doing lean model canvas work because our clients haven't always thought through how they're going to make money off of this product and what their competitive landscape looks like and things like that. We incorporate a lot of that business strategy into the product strategy work that we're doing during this phase. But yeah, the first week of a discovery sprint is usually those kinds of exercises, working together through all this institutional knowledge that the client might have. Because usually, they're experiencing this problem or they've been in this industry,and they know what the problems of their customers have, and so they can talk a lot about it. And then, we move into some of the more traditional Product Design Sprint phases, so diverge exercises, converge exercises that help us to come up with a bunch of ideas for what the product should be or should do. And then decide as a group which ones are the strongest so that we can move into prototyping. We prototype. We test with either existing customers in this space, or we get anonymous users based on certain demographics that are important to validate the concept with, and then we test. And then, we do that iteratively throughout the process to make sure that we're capturing as much data as we can to feel confident about how validation is going. Or, in some cases, it might make sense for us to think about the next phase of validation actually being more like a proof of concept. And so we can jump into that really quickly depending on how validation is going. A lot of times, at the end of discovery spreads, we've incorporated some technical planning and architecting into the process. Sometimes we have to validate that the launch approach is going to work from a technical perspective. And so that's the kind of research that our developer would be doing in this process. And by the end of this phase, we have a presentation of our findings, an architectural diagram if that's where we're leaning or where we would recommend the next stage go. We would present all that information and make a decision. Sometimes we invalidate. We largely invalidate some of the ideas that we came up with, and we have to go back to the drawing board. CHAD: Have we worked with any clients recently that had a major invalidation where they really needed to go back to the drawing board based on what we learned with the whole concept? DAWN: We did have a client that we worked with this year that we didn't invalidate things during the sprint but not far into the product build, we realized that we were going to need some other infrastructure in place in order for that product to be successful. So we actually did a more traditional Product Design Sprint with this client. Part of the reasoning was…, and this product idea was in the real estate space. [chuckles] The idea was to open up the market a little bit by...I don't want to say eliminating, but I guess, in a way eliminating certain aspects of what a realtor might do in the process of buying and selling real estate. It is possible to knock on somebody's door and ask them if you can buy their house, and then the transaction is facilitated through a realtor. But this would open up the possibility of this happening digitally through a product. So there’s certain data that you can pull from real estate sites out there that let you know certain things about a property. And this is public information; anybody can find it. And the concept was to have homeowners who might potentially be interested in selling their properties be on the platform and have their homes be available to anybody that might be looking or vice versa. Like, someone who's buying could get on the platform and see what kind of homes are in their area; maybe they have a particular area that they want to buy in and essentially cut out the realtor in that they could go directly to the property owner and inquire about their home or see if they might be interested in selling it. So that was, at a high level, the product idea. We did a more traditional sprint with them because the client was obviously very familiar with this space and really understood the opportunity well. And there are not a lot of competitors in this space in the U.S., at least. Our goal was ultimately to get to a plan for MVP. And so we spent time validating the user experience and at a high level, making sure that we were confident and moving forward with everything. And we felt like we got validation for that. And we got started on the project, and we realized there's actually a lot to this space. It's very heavily...if not regulated, there are all sorts of processes in place that require very specific people and roles to accomplish different things and facilitate the process. It's also because of the role that a realtor has played for so long. People aren't very educated on what this process could be like, buying and selling homes, especially with a direct transaction. And so there was way more to uncover and to understand and to work through on the business side than we had initially anticipated. And so we decided to quickly bring in somebody to focus on product strategy while we were also iteratively working through an MVP launch. So we decided to test as often as we can and constantly be working through on a weekly basis what it was that we were building, making sure that that aligned with what we were learning in real-time, essentially. The product strategist came on and started to continue some of the competitor research that we had started in the Product Design Sprints really try to understand the market and try to work very directly with the clients who were both in real estate to quickly make decisions about the direction that we were going in while we were also iterating on this product idea. About halfway through, which is standard to Ignite a 12 to 16-week MVP launch, so about halfway through at about six weeks in, we decided that we needed to continue validating with a working prototype as opposed to continuing to chug along until we got to MVP launch and just see what happened. That was feeling too risky as we were learning more and more about the market. So I wouldn't say we invalidated anything, but as we continued to validate and as we started to build iteratively realized that we needed to spend a lot more time on validating the product idea and that it made sense to do that with a working product. And so, we pivoted in that way once we had started building. CHAD: Yeah, that's cool. I often say that it's fairly rare that we completely invalidate the core of someone's idea. But it's not at all rare that it changes based on what everyone is learning along the way, whether that be in a Product Design Sprint or discovery sprint. And I think that's one of the things that not only does it make products more successful because you're reducing risk and you're changing them based on the things that you'll learn, but I also think it leads to the working environment that I want to be a part of where it's very collaborative; everyone's building off of each other's ideas. We're changing based on what we learn rapidly. I really love doing that. DAWN: Yeah. AD: I wanted to tell you all about something I’ve been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that’s AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one on one with a small group of Agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more, and many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and referring work to each other. Whether you’re struggling to grow your agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I’ve seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I’d be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up at thoughtbot.com/agencyu DAWN: And it's funny what you just said about learning versus invalidating. I literally just got off of a call with somebody right before I joined this, and we touched on that exact same thing. They've been building a prototype and going through their own validation phases. And this person pointed out that they didn't want to call the work that they had been doing validation that they wanted to call it learning. And I just thought that was very poignant. I feel like I call it continued validation when I'm talking about delivering a proof of concept or initial MVP because, really, that's what it is. But I think a better way to say it is just learning. You're learning from the process and from your market, and it's all at the same time. It's very agile in that way. CHAD: One of the meta reasons why I like that from a thoughtbot perspective is that oftentimes, founders, in particular, can be very precious about their ideas or not want to give up. And so this idea of oh, it could potentially be invalidated is almost like a confrontational tension or something that even when they are shown something they might not be willing to adjust because it's not their original idea. And the word learning subtly de-escalates that a little bit. It's like, what have we learned? [laughs] Have we learned something that we can take into play? It's not invalidating the idea. DAWN: Yeah, I find that using the term like de-risking does a similar thing. Because whether or not you're an investor, that's a term that I think everybody can understand. Like, let's try to learn from and lower the risk of us not being successful with each step we take. The ultimate goal is product success and business success, and we want to get people there. But we want to make sure we do it the right way. And we want to make sure that all the decisions that we're making early on have positive, long-term effects. So yeah, de-risking and learning. I think I'm going to change the way I talk about validation now. [laughter] CHAD: So what else is Ignite working towards now? I know that you have...everywhere at thoughtbot, we've got a bunch of open positions open. So you're actively hiring, right? DAWN: Yeah. So going back to what you were saying and what we were talking about earlier, a lot of what we've been thinking through on the development side is what skills are really necessary and important for our developers to have for the types of projects and the type of work that we're doing. We made an assumption and have been working through learning [laughter] whether or not that assumption is true that we don't necessarily need a ton of back-end Rails expertise to be able to deliver products in the way that we're thinking. Rails has always been really good with MVPs, really good for MVPs and speed to market and things like that. But I think that we are thinking through how we can be even more agile and iterative with product delivery. So we're leaning towards skill sets that focus on the front end, so delivering that really great consumer or user experience on the front end because MVP and startup space is incredibly competitive nowadays. We have to be thinking through, I think, more than what we did maybe ten years ago when we were delivering MVPs for startups. So we're focusing more on the front end. We're focusing more on the user experience. And we're thinking through how we can utilize existing tooling on the back end to support the products that we're building, which we assume is going to require a lot less particular expertise and a back-end language like Rails and a lot more openness to making decisions that make the most sense for that product idea in particular so whether that's pulling together existing tools on the back end. CHAD: Well, I find it useful to think about...or one way to articulate this is mobile apps in particular because some people might not get the distinction with a web app the difference between the front end and the back end. I think it's maybe a little bit more obvious with things like React and that kind of thing. But if you take a mobile app, for example, in order to actually build and launch a mobile app, we typically need to build the mobile app, and then that mobile app needs to talk to servers on the backside. And put quite plainly, if we have a Rails developer on the project and a mobile developer on the project, that's two people. And if instead, we can have a mobile developer who is putting together some back-end services from companies like Google or Twilio or those kinds of things, to get to the next stage of the company, it's going to be a lot cheaper and potentially faster for the stage that that company is at if it makes sense then. That doesn't mean that they won't ever need a back end of their own, right? DAWN: Yeah. Well, and I'm learning more and more too that making those kinds of decisions now doesn't necessarily mean that I can't scale, even with the services that we pull together for the back end at that time when we do the initial launch. AWS, for instance, has a ton of capability for initial launches and for scaling. So there are a lot of options. That's what's become more important to us when we think through the development expertise on our team is not only experience with delivering early-stage products, because you're in that mindset, but openness to working with different technologies that would allow you to, like you're saying, plug into these different tools and servers and systems that already working for a particular industry, for instance. I mean, e-commerce is one that you think of where we definitely don't want to be reinventing any wheels there. [laughs] From a conceptual perspective, yes, and from a competitive perspective, yes. But from a back-end development and architectural perspective, there's so much that we can utilize that already exists. So yeah, we are hiring. [laughter] I think that was your original question. And we have open developer positions, which is why I was focused on that. Our development focuses less around what you've historically seen at thoughtbot, which is we need Rails developers. We need full-stack developers who can for sure stand up a custom back end. And we've shifted to...we definitely need to focus on the front end. We need that expertise. And we need some adaptability around back-end tooling and being able to pull stuff together that way. CHAD: So you were the Managing Director of the Austin studio. And now you're the Managing Director of the Ignite team. Before that, you were a designer. How has this transition compared to prior transitions that you've been a part of? DAWN: I think the biggest difference, and this has been just as challenging as it has been rewarding, and I think positive for our business, is the fact that I can focus on expanding our services and expanding our expertise in this one area. Before, we had the local studios, and we could work across the entire product lifecycle. And from a sales and business development perspective, that both gave me varied experience. And it gave me a lot of levers to pull, especially with the teams and making sure that we were all working on different things and able to cycle through different types of projects. But that's hard to do, and it's a lot of work. [laughs] And being able to focus on one stage of the product lifecycle and a set of clients, and expand our expertise in that area has been really challenging and really rewarding. We've been able to sink our teeth in and imagine what possibilities are here and explore markets that we haven't before and actually think through how we can build partnerships with people and really become experts in this space in a way that we haven't been able to in the past because there hasn't been dedicated time and dedicated effort in particular. So the transition has been really great in that way. I'm really excited about it. CHAD: Well, that's good. [laughter] You were out on parental leave for a fair amount of time. How long was it in total? DAWN: About four months. CHAD: Welcome back, by the way. DAWN: Thank you. CHAD: I'm curious on your perspective either with Ignite or maybe even more so thoughtbot overall. How was it being away, and what surprised you when you came back? DAWN: So a couple of things, we were a smaller team in the beginning of this year. We knew that we were going to have to be iterative with our approach to refining our positioning as a team and understanding all these things that we're talking about, like our clients and our customers, and who we're going to work with, how we're going to work with them, how we're going to deliver value. We knew that we were going to have to be iterative. So we went through some phases this year. We were experimental and applied our validation processes to Ignite as a business. And we learned a ton of stuff. And we're going in a great direction. And then I was out for four months [laughter], and so there was a gap. And I tried very hard not to check my email. I mostly did a good job of it. And so I was telling Diana, our CEO, earlier that I feel a little bit like we're going into 2022 with a fresh start even though we have this whole year behind us that we learned from. We got to a point where we're going in a particular direction now. And we validated enough and felt strongly enough about the direction that we're going in that we're hitting the ground running now going into next year. And I don't know what I assumed; maybe I assumed that we would have established a little bit more this year in the direction that we initially intended. And it's not like a far departure. It's just that it's certainly evolved beyond what I was imagining initially from the technical perspective, for instance. CHAD: Well, even in Ignite, which is pretty short client cycles, we're not so huge. [chuckles] Ignite might do 12 projects in a year, and that might be a lot. So we get a lot of opportunities to try new things. And the cycle time isn't that long, but it's not super-fast pace, and it's not super high volume. So it does take some time to refine things based on what we learn, even in Ignite, which is typically faster cycles. DAWN: Yeah, that's true. If you think of it that way, a lot of our projects if we're doing an MVP launch, for instance, it's about a quarter along. And if we only do a couple of those every quarter, it takes those whole cycles to be able to look at things in retrospect. I agree; it takes a little bit longer to learn overall. I like the way that you put it, too, like when you really look back and think of it, even though we do a lot of what you would consider rapid projects, it's still going to take some time to learn. And I think overall, and I think this is true for all of our teams and our whole company, the year has been so positive. And we've learned so much. And everyone is feeling really strong, I think, in their positioning in going forward into the next year. Again, it's been good. It's been certainly challenging [laughs] but good. CHAD: I think there have been certain things about this year that have been challenging, and we've talked about it on previous episodes, some of them. But just in general, I think I got the sense that we transitioned from being tired of the current pandemic situation and working situation to actually being upset and angry about it, which was a really weird transition. And I think it just made work in general challenging sometimes. We also had the challenges of fairly high turnover this year at the company like a lot of companies have had. The reasons why it happens at thoughtbot might be different than other companies, but it's something that people in general have. And sometimes that can make it hard to get ahead, but because we were having such a positive year overall, it was this weird dichotomy of general success and positive change and all that stuff. But at the same time, people were still leaving the company, and that can make it challenging. The silver lining is for a team like Ignite, even though that can be super challenging, you're in your early days, and now you're getting the opportunity to...the new people being added to the team are doing it with different expectations, and you're able to shape the team into what it needs to be today. DAWN: Yeah. There has been an interesting...it seems like there was an influx this year and excitement and readiness to get back into building products and working on their ideas from a client perspective, but our teams were just coming off of a very hard year. People were coming off of a very hard year. So a lot of exhausted people trying to show up and be positive and work through all this excitement and movement in the industry. So it's kind of like parental leave. [laughter] Totally exhausted, but you're showing up, so it's good. CHAD: Well, Dawn, thanks for stopping by the show, and joining me, and talking to me about Ignite and beyond. I really appreciate it. DAWN: Yeah, this has been really fun. CHAD: If folks want to get in touch with you or follow along with you, where are the different places that they can do that? DAWN: Let's see. Well, I have an email address that is dawn@thoughtbot.com. I have a Twitter. I'm pretty sure that my handle is @dawndig. [laughter] Why I don't know this off the top of my head. I haven't looked at my handle in a very long time. Yeah, @dawndig, so D-A-W-N-D-I-G. LinkedIn is just my name, and it's pronounced Delatte. CHAD: And you can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening and see you next time. Special Guest: Dawn Delatte.
Chad interviews Kirsten Hurley, Managing Director of thoughtbot's Launchpad II team. The Launchpad II team covers the EMEA area: that's Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. She talks about working remotely for almost the entire time she's worked with the company, her approach to talking with potential customers when she knows she's never going to meet them in person, and what she sees happening to the different geographies that thoughtbot is selling and expanding into. Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/) Follow Kirsten on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/hurleykirsten/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Kirsten Hurley, Managing Director of thoughtbot's Launchpad II team. Kirsten, thanks for joining me. KIRSTEN: Thanks for having me on, Chad. CHAD: So I've now talked with a few managing directors at thoughtbot about the new team that they're leading. So I think listeners are probably expecting what's coming next which is, you know, why don't you give people a little bit of an overview of what the Launchpad II team, which has a slightly different name than the other teams we've talked to so far, do? KIRSTEN: Sure. So I guess maybe to remind some folks, so Launchpad I refers to the Americas. So you've already spoken to a few of the managing directors who head up different teams across the Americas. You have different propositions. Over in Launchpad II, which historically was the London studio when we were working in a physical office environment, we are a smaller team than everyone else who was based over in the Americas. So we didn't quite scale out to be able to have individual teams working on particular propositions. But I think what the team had been successfully doing anyway was working across everything. And we still do work on Ignite-style projects, Lift Off, and Boost engagements as well. So yeah, that's where we've got to. And I think maybe the changes for us is that since we've gone to fully remote working and officially called ourselves the EMEA Launchpad II team, we've started hiring folks from further afield, which is really exciting for me. CHAD: So not everyone may be familiar with the acronym, although it's fairly common, EMEA. So what regions does that actually cover? KIRSTEN: [laughs] Sorry. So that's Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. And I should say we were already working with clients pretty much fully across the region anyway. It was just never really official. But I think the more global terminology is Europe, the Middle East, and Africa or EMEA. But because we're thoughtbot and we like to do things a little bit...well, we like to own our things. So we've called it Launchpad II to go with the rocket theme that we had in our rebranding. What was that? The end of last year I think we came up with it all. CHAD: Yeah. So what has it been like to go from a team of people that were...[laughs] actually, as I ask this question I realized that you joined a week before the pandemic started, and we had to go remote. So I was going to ask you what it was like to go from a team of people that were going to a studio every day all based in London to a remote team. [laughs] But you never really experienced the alternative. KIRSTEN: [laughs] No. I think the most time I spent with the team as a whole was actually in my interview process [laughs] before I even started in person I should say. That was a pretty interesting week. You had flown over from Boston [chuckles] to spend some time getting me all set up and running. And I think it was the Wednesday where you and I had a bit of a chat, and we were concerned about this virus that was going around and the duty of care that we actually had to our teams across the world from a point of view of them commuting to work, and it didn't feel right. And so I think we made the decision that day that from the following week, everyone would start working from home. And I think we thought it would just be for a few weeks, and we'd see how it went. So yeah, it was interesting for sure. [laughs] CHAD: Right. And I remember what happened is I went to...I usually leave on a Friday when I visit, but a few of us, I think, went to a pub or something on...we were planning on doing that on Friday. So I was going to leave on Saturday morning, and I did. But I woke up on Saturday morning ready to catch my flight to the news that the U.S. had shut down all flights from the UK or from Europe, was what the headline said. And I was like, oh no, [laughter] I might be stuck here. And then when you actually read the article, it said actually the UK is exempt and also U.S. citizens were exempt, so they can get back. I remember waking up that morning and having a fright that I was going to be stuck there and made it back safely, thankfully. So the U.S. then went remote that following week if I remember the timeline right. It was an interesting time. And like you said, we thought it was going to be temporary, relatively short, but it wasn't. And then, at the end of last year, we decided that we would be going completely fully remote, and that was pretty exciting. I think for folks, it was obviously...unexpected is probably the wrong word because we couldn't be in person anyway. But it wasn't what people were necessarily expecting when they joined thoughtbot. People join because we often, or at least they have the expectation that we're in an office together. But it's been exciting for Launchpad II because it means that you can now and are hiring people much differently and further afield than you were in the past, right? KIRSTEN: Yeah, and even actually working with partners further afield as well. So we have some great partnerships still in the UK but actually working with some of your cohorts from AgencyU, your coaching program, Subvisual over in Portugal, and a couple of others as well. That's been really great to work with those teams as well. CHAD: Having come into a new team as in a leadership position and being, basically as we've said, entirely remote almost from day one, how has that been for you? KIRSTEN: Certainly, it wasn't the plan. [laughs] So I think my last few roles were very much working based in an office. And so my background is commercial and sales, account management. And I was very used to building rapport with teams and clients in person. So I had joined thoughtbot and joined the London studio as it was then but Launchpad II with a remit to grow the business. So I think you had been looking after the team for about a year, giving us a great foundation to then really grow. And coming in, this black swan event had happened in the world, so the priorities changed overnight. And it was okay; how do I keep this team safe? Is everyone set up to be successful in their role? And also our existing clients and our existing projects, are they supported in the right way? This is a shock to them as well. I think, at thoughtbot, we're very lucky that from a point of view of asynchronous communication and remote working practices, being a global company, it wasn't such a shock to the system, but for some of our clients, it was. So we had to make sure that they were supported. And in some cases, we showed them what good looks like. But rather than focusing on new business and growing straight away, it was really a period of stabilization, I would say, for about three to six months while everyone got used to what was an evolving situation, but we came through it. And I have to say a huge thank you to the team actually for their kindness and patience with me and learning remotely everything about thoughtbot that I was so excited to become a part of. But also, learning a leadership style over Zoom wasn't really what I thought I was going to be doing. CHAD: Well, you mentioned selling a lot of what you had done previously was relationship building with clients in person or potential clients in person. Is there anything that stands out to you in terms of how you've needed to adjust either your style or your approach when talking with potential customers when you know you're never going to meet them in person? KIRSTEN: I'm not sure you can really change your personality per se because I am always interested in building rapport through understanding an individual's motives and what they're passionate about. And quite often, those conversations can be things outside of work, so talking with clients about maybe going up for runs and things like that and personal bests and things just because that's a natural thing to talk to someone about. I still very much make room for those kinds of things in calls. Because I think in a consultancy relationship, people buy people, and people want to work with people who understand them. And while the majority of that is obviously people understanding your job and the product that you want to be building as well, I think you need to have that personal element. So while it felt a bit stilted over Zoom to make that time, I think that it's worth it in the long run. CHAD: That's a really good point. I think if you're not careful about it, it's very easy to just get right to business in a call as opposed to when you're meeting someone in person you need to walk to a conference room or something, and it naturally lends itself to some small talk. KIRSTEN: Exactly, that bit where you're riding in the lift together. CHAD: And I think that that probably applies to sales as much as it does our team members too. KIRSTEN: Absolutely. Funnily enough, I was talking with our Development Director here, Rob Whittaker, the other day about one-to-ones should not be really that much talking about your client project. It's obviously important to make sure that someone is happy and they're being successful in their work. But actually, what's going on behind the scenes and understanding that within your team is probably just as important, if not more so, like you say. CHAD: So tell us a little bit about some of the interesting work that's happening in Launchpad II. KIRSTEN: Well, we've got a couple of flagship clients that keep on growing for us, which is really great, actually. They're effectively partnerships, really at this point. And so, one of those clients is a large financial service institution where we were building APIs for all of the COVID loan schemes. And I think the last I checked, the amount of money that had flowed through that system and the loans approved was something over £75 billion. So for a pretty small development team, it's really impressive what they've achieved over that time. So that's a team of three developers in a Boost-style engagement, so like Josh's team over in the U.S. working on a Rails project and working alongside business analysts from the team and other stakeholders there as well. And so over in the Middle East, we have a food delivery client, so they're actually a huge brand over there. And we had started working with them nearly two years ago now on creating a mobile app for their customers. So we've been adding to features, getting that released. And obviously, with what's happened in the last 18 months, food delivery is a sector where you've seen huge growth. And that's even led to us recently looking at re-engineering the platform and making sure that we're still managing to delight their customers as well with their user experience. And we've even been working on some Ignite-style projects too. So there's a lot of startups, a lot of folks have been at home thinking about what is this new business? What's the impact I'm going to have on the world? And most recently, we've been running some product design sprints with a wellness brand who are looking at bringing a different type of wellness to the market. And again, that's a mobile app which we're really excited to be working on. CHAD: Have you seen the different geographies both from the U.S. and UK...what do you see happening to the different geographies that you're selling into and expanding into? Are there any notable differences you would call out? KIRSTEN: I think the biggest difference that I see between clients in the Americas and over here in Europe, the Middle East, Africa would be the funding levels for startups and the expectations around that. It seems like a more mature market from a point of view of being able to get a decent budget to really build a meaningful platform for first release over in the Americas, whereas over here, it's a bit leaner definitely [laughs] on the startup side of things. So I think that's probably the biggest challenge we have when talking with clients and making sure we can give them the bang for the buck, as it were. So making sure that the research that we did, that the designers do, for example, is focused on the right thing and really gives them the insight that they need to have the confidence to progress and invest in that build. Or whether they actually need to go back and do more before they actually start spending on the development side of things. CHAD: I would definitely second that. And one thing that I noticed not only were the amounts different in the U.S. and the UK, but it seems like in the U.S., when you're talking with a founder, there's more often than not other people they need to check in with in order to make a decision. And when I was talking to founders in the UK and beyond and in Europe, what I often felt was that there was actually someone that they needed to check in with and get permission from or that was holding the purse strings or something. And that might be a cultural thing as well, far less likely to just make a decision with you in the meeting saying, "Yeah, we're going to work together." There was always, for me, a lot more back and forth, and checking and permission getting around decisions that are being made. KIRSTEN: Yeah, I would agree with that. CHAD: Is that something that you've seen too? KIRSTEN: I think so. It's interesting because what we've started doing recently actually...sometimes through the product design sprints but even in the sales process, if a founder does know or does realize in those conversations that they're going to need to find an additional source of money to be able to fund it, conversations have gone more into how can we help them with their pitch deck as well? And I think I've seen this with the Ignite team over in the Americas as well, to be fair. The prototypes that we build, very early-stage prototypes, where we're testing and doing the user research those go into the pitch decks now to give potential investors greater confidence as well if that's the route that they go down. MIDROLL AD CHAD: I wanted to tell you all about something I’ve been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that’s AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one on one with a small group of Agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions, and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more and many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and referring work to each other. Whether you’re struggling to grow your agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot I’ve seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I’d be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up at thoughtbot.com/agencyu CHAD: What do you think is next for Launchpad II? As you look ahead, what do you see, and what do you want to accomplish? KIRSTEN: Well, so it's budget season [chuckles] at thoughtbot at the moment. So we've just gone through our first iteration of what that might look like. And we are super keen to make the most of what we've built over, certainly in my time, the last 18 months. We've had great commercial success, and we've grown existing clients. We've brought on a couple of new ones. And we've really matured our team as well from the point of view of what we think works for our clients and what we get the greatest fulfillment in as well. So I think in that first card, we would like to grow the team by an additional ten folks, and that's working across design, development, and product management as well. So that's something new that we brought in this year. We had our first product manager join the team, and that's been a huge success as well. It's something that everyone at thoughtbot working on projects had assumed responsibility collectively for, but actually, some projects really need that nominated person. So I'm excited to grow that team as well as the other ones. And I think looking ahead for our hiring as well building a more geographically diverse team as well that better reflects our client base. So we currently have clients in the Middle East; as I mentioned, we've got France, Germany, and a few more UK-centric ones as well. So it would be great to build a more diverse team from a point of view of life experience. Because as we well know, the more diverse a team, the greater the empathy for a broader range of human experience, and that leads to great products as well. CHAD: Well, speaking of hiring, you do have a bunch of open positions in Launchpad II now. And we probably can't stress enough that those positions are open to anybody, anywhere in Europe, the Middle East, Africa. And we'd love for people to apply from across all of those places and including an apprenticeship opening, right? KIRSTEN: Oh, absolutely. I would also encourage people to reach out to me as well if they're not sure whether they would maybe qualify for the role. I think we do a lot of work on our job descriptions to make sure that they are as approachable as possible. But nonetheless, if someone isn't sure, then please do just reach out to me. And we can have an informal chat before the more formal process starts. I'm more than happy to have a 15-minute call with someone and just answer any questions too. CHAD: Well, on that note, I'm interested in your perspective, especially as someone relatively new to the team. Coming in externally, you have a perspective that maybe someone who's been here a long time doesn't have quite as fresh a perspective. But what do you think makes people a good fit for thoughtbot? KIRSTEN: From what I've learned from the team over the last 18 months or so, there's obviously a passion for creating great software. But I think what really seems to resonate with folks is feeling like they're a part of something bigger, so open source contributions, contributing to potentially clients who've got some social good agenda. Those kinds of things are pretty important to people. And working with even people who have empathy for each other and who envisage those values we have around earning, imparting, and summoning trust. I think we've all been through a pretty tough time over the last 18 months. And the level of compassion that everyone has shown each other has been incredible. And the patience, as I've mentioned before, is great. And I think everyone just wants to pull together for positive outcomes, whether it's within the team, whether it's for clients. What would be your old school view then, Chad, as a founder of what, 18 years ago? [laughs] CHAD: Yeah. I think the other thing that I would call out that maybe isn't explicitly in the values, which people can read about at thoughtbot.com/purpose, is designers, and especially developers at thoughtbot, are not what you might typically envision a developer to be in that developers at thoughtbot are expected to be able to talk directly to clients and work directly with clients. And that's not an expectation everywhere. So, people who like talking with people about problems and collaborating to solve problems, not everyone is a fit for that. And one of the things we look for in the hiring process is those communication skills, and the ability to have those conversations, and to weigh trade-offs, and be a consultant, and all of those things. So someone who enjoys doing that in the process of building a great product is something that I would call out. KIRSTEN: Yeah, I think that's a really good point. Collaboration is huge for us, always has been. And obviously, the way that that works has changed slightly with the move to remote working. But I think thoughtbot is the least hierarchical consultancy that I've ever worked for in that everyone is encouraged to give their opinions and discuss challenges with clients very openly. Everyone is encouraged to contribute. It's not just the senior developers or the team leads who are making decisions. Everyone makes a decision together. And I think that's incredibly empowering for people maybe who haven't had that opportunity before. Sometimes it takes folks a little while to grow in their confidence and believe that it's true. But it's really nice to see when people who join us start coming out of their shells and really get a sense of satisfaction from genuinely being a part of a really constructive team. CHAD: And the other thing that I often say is really important, not necessarily to being hired at thoughtbot but being really successful here, is being able to lift your head up from the particular client project that you are on right now and to see and get excited by the bigger picture of what's going on. So that might be noticing patterns in the way that we're implementing something that will lead to the creation of an open-source project or a product to solve that need. It could be if you really love thinking about engineering or design best practices and getting the chance to experiment with them in your work, that's going to make you really successful at thoughtbot over the long term. Because we do great work on clients’ projects, but our actual product that we're selling goes far beyond the lines of code or the design that we produce. You said it yourself earlier, people buy our people, and our process, and our culture. That's what people are making decisions about whether to work with us or someone else over. And so we have an opportunity to be working on improving the company, and our processes, and our engineering practices, and all that stuff, and it makes us a better company. So the people who are able to do that tend to be very successful and grow into leadership positions and those kinds of things. KIRSTEN: Yeah, I would agree with that. So I was actually going to ask you, Chad, what are your hopes and dreams for the Launchpad II team? We obviously have a few conversations here and there. But it's good to know from your experience, having worked with the team before I came along, maybe it's interesting for people listening what you think the potential is. CHAD: I think that there is a lot of potential, and I think that it's probably no surprise that I think that, to be honest. [chuckles] I'm very excited by the ability to expand throughout a larger region and to bring new team members on as well as new clients on, and the way that that's working now is really great. It's not that the way that we were working before wasn't good. There are pros and cons to every way of working. And the pros now are being able to hire people no matter where they live and to have the expectation that we're able to work with these clients remotely everywhere. And we're getting the chance to be involved in a lot of really cool exciting things and with cool, exciting people because we're doing that. And I do this and have done it for so long because of the cool, exciting things that we do with the cool, exciting people that we do them with. So that is what I'm really excited by. And the thing from a business perspective and a team perspective that I keep on reminding people of and pushing people towards is the team structure that we have in the Americas was created at a certain point because the number of people in the Americas made sense to have a breakdown and have some focus. And that focus is proving very positive. It's not that in Launchpad II, we're not doing a good job on our client work. It's not that people aren't fulfilled in their work. But what we see is when people never know what kind of project they're going to be on next, or are tasked with going from a project where they're doing huge scaling and architecture, and the timelines on things are months, not days, and then you rotate on a project where it's the complete opposite. You're bringing your product to market super quickly. The timelines you're operating on...a ticket you're going to work on now is going to go to production a few minutes later. It's a different skill set. And not that the people at thoughtbot can't do all of those things, but there is a benefit to being able to excel in the moment of that kind of project that you're on and to be able to raise your hand and say, "You know, I really like this kind of work," and to be able to focus on that. So that's down the road for Launchpad II. That's something that we have to look forward to is the team will eventually get big enough where we're able to say, "Hey, what kind of work do you want to focus on?" It's a transition we've been through in the Americas. Hopefully, we've learned from that. And the other thing that will be the case for Launchpad II is that it won't necessarily all happen at once. In the Americas, we did it as a reorganization, and it all happened at once. But in Launchpad II, it can happen more organically where we say, "There is enough work in this area and enough people now," that we start to focus a little bit and we create a team of people that focuses on Boost-style projects or a team of people that focus on Lift Off-style projects and without worrying about also needing to create those other teams at the same time. So we should do it more organically. I'm excited. I'm looking forward to that process. I'm not exactly sure when it will happen. But I think it will be an indicator of the growth and success that we've had in Launchpad II. KIRSTEN: We're certainly watching all of the great experiments that are happening over in Launchpad I in the different teams, looking at the learnings that are coming out of all of the different things. And yeah, I think it's giving us a lot of food for thought right now as to how will that work for us and how will it work for the clients that we work with as well? Because that's the other thing we mentioned before about the maturity of the startup market, et cetera. So we may need to organize ourselves a little bit differently to be able to serve them. So it will be interesting, as you say when we get to the scale, that that's appropriate, which I hope is going to be sooner rather than later. [laughs] So yeah, it's going to be an interesting challenge. And I agree with you on the organic thing as well. I think it might be a case where some folks want to actually try out some different types of things. Maybe the newer folks who join us next year may not know what gives them the most fulfillment. But that's also another great thing about thoughtbot generally is that nothing is permanent. [laughs] And if we find a better way to do something, then we'll always twist rather than stick. CHAD: I like that saying. That's cool. You're right to call out that a lot of the improvements that I've talked about are from a team perspective and an individual perspective. But a big driver of that was from the client-side, and we see lots of benefits there too. And you called out that we have project managers now. And that's been successful in a way that project management at thoughtbot has never been successful before. And part of it is when everything was the same in all of the individual studios, not every project would benefit from a project manager. And if we only have one project and that happens to not be a full-time project for a project manager, it wasn't enough work. But when we can coalesce a team together and a client base together that needs a certain kind of thing consistently, then we're better able to support that which makes our work for the clients better as well. And so that's also been a really good area of improvement for us. KIRSTEN: Yeah, I think it's interesting to consider product management in the industry as well. I think it's matured quite significantly whether thoughtbot was doing that or not. I think product management generally is a far more important role than it ever used to be because clients themselves invest in those roles a lot more than they used to. CHAD: Yeah, and I think that I realized...I just caught myself in a mistake. Was I saying project management before? KIRSTEN: [laughs] I should have corrected you. I wasn't entirely sure if I'd misheard you across the pond here. CHAD: [laughs] Okay. That was a mistake. KIRSTEN: I think a few of us still make that mistake. CHAD: Yes. Actually, that's a really good thing. I caught myself doing it just because they're similar words. But I totally meant product management and not project management. And there are two different things, two distinct things that I think it's important to make that distinction clear. So what is the distinction between those two things, Kirsten? KIRSTEN: [laughs] And now it's my turn to tie myself in knots a little bit. It's because product management; I think the first thing you go to is thinking about someone who's responsible for maintaining a product roadmap. And I know that that's a spicy conversation to get into sometimes because you don't want them to be so resolutely set at the outset of a project. But you need someone who's got one eye on the end goal. And sometimes, when you've got a team of developers and designers working to some pretty aggressive timelines, and deep in technical problems and solving challenges, that person who helicopters out and looks across everything and retains the broader context of the overall program or the overall client objectives, and can hold the team true to that is really important strategically for the success of a project. But I think; actually, you also need to be flexible and listen to the designers and developers when something that was on the roadmap is disproved somehow or is not viable for whatever reason, whether that's because of end-user research or just technically [chuckles] it's too challenging for the budget available to the clients. So then being able to talk with the client as a whole team but lead that discussion and help them understand the recommendations that are being made. I think we've seen that work really well in our team here this year. CHAD: And I think an important distinction as well is that some of our clients look to us to make those decisions on their behalf, not all of them but some of them. And that's one of the things that distinguishes a product manager and someone who's making decisions about what the product even is versus a project manager who it's much more about the day-to-day tasks, making sure the backlog is organized, tickets are clear, things are moving along, meetings are scheduled, that kind of thing. And it's much less about the product actually being built. KIRSTEN: Absolutely. CHAD: Well, I think that brings us at about time. If folks want to get in touch with you, apply to those positions, where are the best places for them to do that? KIRSTEN: Well, my email is kirsten@thoughtbot.com. And I am on LinkedIn, Kirsten Hurley, pretty searchable,I think going Kirsten Hurley in thoughtbot. Those are the best ways to get ahold of me. CHAD: And I think people can check out all those jobs and apply at thoughtbot.com/jobs. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks, Mandy. And thank you for listening, listener. See you next time. Special Guest: Kirsten Hurley.
Chad interviews Managing Director at thoughtbot, Joshua Clayton, about what a Managing Director at thoughtbot does, what makes Boost at thoughtbot different than other teams, and the belief in integrated teams of designers and developers company-wide. Empathize with Your Customer by Josh Clayton (https://thoughtbot.com/blog/empathize-with-your-customer) thoughtbot Boost (https://thoughtbot.com/boost) Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/) Follow Josh on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/joshuadclayton/) or Twitter (https://twitter.com/joshuaclayton) Check out Josh's website (https://joshuaclayton.me/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is The Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Josh Clayton, Managing Director of the thoughtbot Boost team. Hey, I know that company. Welcome, Josh. JOSH: Hey, Chad. How are you? CHAD: All right. I'm back to the show I think. I didn't get a chance to look up the last episode you're in, but it was probably hundreds of episodes ago now. JOSH: Yeah, it's got to have been a while. CHAD: [laughs] Speaking of a while, you recently…now time is all messed up for me, but I know that you have been at thoughtbot for a long time. How long has it been? JOSH: It was 12 years in August. CHAD: It's been a wonderful 12 years, Josh. JOSH: I agree. I agree. CHAD: [laughs] JOSH: It's been fun. CHAD: So in that time, you have had a few different roles. But you've been a Managing Director for a while now. JOSH: Yeah, I think that's...let's see. It was seven and a half years for the Boston team. And then it's 10 and a half months with Boost. CHAD: So your background is as a developer. And you, like a lot of people who have a background as developers at thoughtbot, myself included, still do development on a fairly regular basis. What does the Managing Director job at thoughtbot actually do? JOSH: What don't we do [laughter] is maybe a better question. Effectively, we're running that team's business. So it involves some amount of software consulting. It involves software sales. It involves managing the profitability of the team. There are marketing functions, and, I don't know, anything and everything, hiring-related things. We opened up and recently filled our Development Director position, which was open for a couple of months over the summer. We've just opened up a Design Director position. So it's everything. [laughs] It's everything it feels like. CHAD: At the beginning of this year, we did an episode about the changes that we had made at thoughtbot to reorganize the teams around rather than geographic studios around the types of work that we would do on that team. And that's how the Boost team was created. So in that episode, we gave people an overview. But I'd love to hear in your own words, what makes Boost at thoughtbot different than the other teams, and what do you focus on? JOSH: So what makes Boost different? I think one of the drivers, one of the motivators, is to embed alongside existing product teams, engineering, and design teams, and help them get better, help them grow as well as ship features and fix bugs. So I think that the way that I position it is if there's an existing product that's deployed, people are using it day in and day out. Hopefully, it's been battle-tested. There are probably some funky areas of the code. Those are the codebases that we're operating in. It might be a team of two people; it might be a team of 200 people. But there is an existing product and an existing team. They're looking for our support to help make it better. CHAD: One of the things I love about Boost and the changes that we've made, especially relative to Boost, is that at thoughtbot, we really believe in integrated teams of designers and developers. And a big part of what we've always done has been to be a complete product design and development team that brings new products to market, big and small. And because we were one of the first consulting companies in the world to switch to Ruby on Rails and because of that deep experience with Rails, and scaling, and working on existing products, we had a significant number of customers who engaged us for development for that expertise, and to help them scale, and grow, and hire, and implement best practices or solve problems that they were having in their existing codebase or on their existing team. And even though that was a significant part of our business, it was always something that seemed that we maybe even didn't really want to be doing it, or it was on the periphery of our marketing and positioning. And I was super excited when we officially created this team because it allowed us to acknowledge that this was a significant part of what we do, a significant part of our revenue, and to have a team of people that opted into doing this kind of work who would not only love the kind of work but want to even grow it and do more of it. And we haven't really had that for this kind of work. We've had individuals wanting to do it but not at an organizational level in an organization that supports it. That was more of a statement than a question, but reaction? JOSH: [laughs] I think you're spot on. It's always been interesting to me to hear that it's...obviously, at thoughtbot, we have been building MVPs and working with a lot of different types of companies over the years and helping them launch products. But I think that the type of work that I and, ideally, obviously, other people on the Boost team enjoy working on is existing platforms and working alongside existing teams. We talk about legacy systems, and I think they get a bad rap. And it's like, no, it's battle-tested. CHAD: [chuckles] JOSH: The business has proven its viability. It is still around years later. Conway's law applies in all of the stuff. Again, there are gnarly aspects of the code. But I think that's what the folks on the Boost team enjoy being challenged by is problems where these things are larger systems. They've been around for a while, and they do get pretty gnarly. CHAD: I think one of the things that held us back in the past is that it is a skill set, and it's an experience. And you are going to be on an MVP project where you're doing design and development, going from concept to launching of a new idea, usually in a matter of weeks, working directly with a founder or a team of co-founders. And then you rotate on to this significantly larger project with maybe an engineering team of tens or dozens or hundreds of other developers on it. It's a very different skill set, and you have very different challenges in that environment. And when you're constantly switching between those different kinds of projects, you can't necessarily get better at it. And that's one of the other things that I think is helping us be more successful. JOSH: I remember one of the teammates had joined the kick-off call with me at the Boost inception that very first meeting. And it was Joël. And Joël had asked pretty straightforwardly, "What is the expectation in terms of project rotations?" Because I think historically across the company, we'd aimed to do two to four-month engagements before we'd rotate folks. And I told him point-blank it's going to be six months to a year probably. And I don't think it necessarily shocked him or other folks on the team. But I think when you're going into existing codebases and working alongside existing teams, there is inherently politics at play and complexities at play where it might take you being a new developer on a team six weeks, maybe longer before you actually feel comfortable and confident navigating the codebase and knowing where you can have and make an impact. And so, I think some of the shifts there have been particularly interesting to watch the types of consulting conversations that we have within the team just because it is a different beast, I think than building and launching products. CHAD: So let's get into a little bit of detail about the kinds of projects we're doing in Boost to the extent that we can give specific examples and maybe more importantly and relevant to the audience, what are the things that we see? What are the common challenges that we see as products grow and evolve, as teams grow and evolve? What do you think one of the most common challenges that people have is? JOSH: As teams grow and evolve, I think a lot of teams run into onboarding issues and general knowledge sharing. I think when you start a small team, and you're two, three, maybe five engineers, it's pretty easy for everyone to keep probably the entirety or the majority of that domain in their head at any one time. As you work to scale a team...there's a client of ours right now where they're effectively doubling every...I don't know what the time period is, but they're growing very, very rapidly. And the feedback that some of our team have provided to them is it's really hard, and there are very much knowledge silos. And they're working through, okay? How do we tease this out? How do we share this context so that you don't have a couple of folks that are effectively blocking every single other member of the team? And so that's one of the core areas that hangs up our team and other teams. [chuckles] Our clients bring us on, and a lot of times, it's like we're rip-roaring and ready to go. And it's like, I need information from a bunch of people, and the processes aren't in place such that we can be as effective as we would want to be given the nature of work that we're doing. CHAD: I think that's a straightforward problem, and it's a good example...I don't want to make this an hour-long thoughtbot commercial. But I'll just point blank say one of the reasons why sometimes working with us is positive for clients is it's really easy to have a certain pain around your onboarding process or company, even just simple things like how long it takes to get a new person a computer or to ramp them up on their existing team. If you're just hiring an employee, it's easy to ignore the cost of that. JOSH: Yes. CHAD: But when you're bringing on thoughtbot and we have a specific start date, and it's a certain cost, and those kinds of things, it can really expose the pain that is already happening but was just being ignored and provide the impetus to actually fix the problem. JOSH: One of the things that we try to set out to do on the first day for any project is to open up a pull request to the codebase, whether it's an improvement to the onboarding like the README for the repository or whatever it might be. Ideally, we are finding ways to contribute on day one. And sometimes, that's frankly not realistic for individual contributors doing it from their own machines. But oftentimes, we'll know that going in. And as we onboard new folks and things like that, we'll say, okay, well, day one is going to be your pair programming over Tuple or some other tool so that you are able to engage and interact with a team and work on the code, even if there's still a bit of a lag between GitHub access and everything else that's the base of onboarding steps. CHAD: So another common one that people bring us on to help with is scaling challenges in terms of the actual product itself, maybe that's performance or other scaling challenges. I'm working on a project now where that was how we first got involved. The service was failing, and it was only getting worse under the increasing scale. So, what are some tips that you have for how to effectively solve some of those problems while not bringing everything else that you need to accomplish to a screeching halt? JOSH: At the end of the day, you can't fix something that you don't know is broken. Or you might have a hunch in terms of, oh, I know this page or this set of pages are slow. I think so much of what we see is teams come in, and they're like, "We don't have New Relic setup." We don't have an instrumentation setup. So they can't measure anything. And so it's like, I know this page takes three or four seconds to paint, but I don't know why. And I don't know how to fix it. It's like, okay, well, the first thing that we need to do is set up some amount of performance monitoring and application tracking just to get a sense of what that's like. There is a potential customer who had reached out back in January of this year. So this was weeks into Boost's inception. And they said, "Listen, we've got some performance-related issues. We don't really know what to do, but we know the application is really, really slow on these couple of pages." It's like, "Are you using New Relic, or Scout, or anything like that?" They're like, "No." It's like, okay, that's the first thing that you need to do. And they came back about a month ago and were like, okay, "Here's the access to all of this data. Now we're ready to go," and it's like, "Yes!" They probably didn't need to wait for that long. But it really speaks to that in order to address some of the performance-related stuff; we need to have some sense of what is going on and where. I know Steph over on The Bike Shed Podcast had talked to Nate Berkopec. And she had floated one of the questions I had had. And he basically schooled me on that podcast and reiterated it really is ultimately about measuring so much of what we're doing. CHAD: Yeah. One of the things, especially for teams that are having a problem but feel like they don't know what to do it's tough when it's actually the case. But the reality is a lot of times; there’s actually very low-hanging fruit that it's just no one has the time or experience to actually identify that. And putting some monitoring in place combined with actually taking the time to look through it, especially if it's the first time you ever hit scaling problems...There's either a missing database in that index or some N+1 queries, and fortunately, once you identify that kind of problem, it's usually fairly quick to fix as well. It's a different thing when there's maybe fundamental architecture things that are causing your app to have scaling problems. But it's very unlikely that those are the first problems you're ever experiencing. The first problems you're ever going to experience if your app is running slow are going to be things happening at the database level or missing an index or something like that. And it's very unlikely that significant architecture changes need to be put in place in order to fix the first scaling problems that any product usually has. JOSH: That wasn't the type, or at least I think when we got brought on, and you were working on your most recent clients, we were well beyond...maybe we weren't, maybe I'm misrepresenting or misremembering, but it feels like we were well beyond some of the low hanging fruit. CHAD: Yeah, there was a batch of low-hanging fruit. One of the things if you're working on a product that is scaling super rapidly, what can happen is that the low-hanging fruit masks the other problems that are happening there because it all happened too quickly, all at the same time. And that was the case on this project. So it went from having hundreds of people using it to millions of people using it in the span of a month. And so there was low-hanging fruit. But removing the low-hanging fruit didn't make the app suddenly work again; it just made it so that we could look at the metrics and say, "Okay, those things are no longer the problem." The real problems are not being masked now. We now can identify the architectural changes that need to be put into place in order to operate at the scale. JOSH: Yeah, it's the low-hanging fruit when the orchard is on fire. [laughter] That is true. CHAD: Right. So you got to peel back like an onion. And this is the case with I think a lot of...whether it be a technical challenge or a team challenge. You can't always come in and very quickly solve the root problem. You might not even know what the root problem is. You just have to start solving the problem that is obvious in front of you and learning more. And then you solve that one, and then you expose the next one, and you expose the next one. And even when you can identify the root problem, you'll be like, this is the problem, and everyone agrees it's the problem. It still might be too hard to actually fix that problem. It might be an organizational or a systemic problem. And instead, you say, "Okay, we have to iteratively solve that problem." And you start peeling back those layers to get to the point where you've positioned yourself to solve that core problem. And I think we face that a lot, particularly as external consultants. We're coming in, and we can't just be the bull in the china shop. Because we haven't built the trust with everyone necessary to make the changes, or we don't know enough to know what the changes need to be. JOSH: Right. And I think the people aspect of all of these things in my opinion...and I should caveat this with I've been writing software professionally for almost 20 years. The people, in my opinion, are always the harder aspects to any engagement. It's very rare that we go into a technical project where it's like we literally cannot figure out a technical solution to this thing. We can usually figure it out. And it might take weeks or months to implement, especially as it spans multiple systems. But more often than not, it's really navigating the people and the relationships and building that trust like you had mentioned that is really what will help dictate success within that project. CHAD: I have a line that I use fairly often, and it's that I really believe very few, if any, developers sit down and are like, I'm going to write a bad solution today, or I'm going to write bad code today. That's not what people are doing. I think the majority of people genuinely try within their entire capacity to do a good job. And so that means that when I'm coming into a situation where there are problems, or things are messy, or there were bad decisions or bad code written, it can't be chalked up to like, oh, that was a bad developer, or that was a bad choice that was made. There was usually some people or organizational problem that caused that to happen in the first place. And merely fixing the bad code is not going to be what we should focus our time on. We probably need to do that. But if we don't fix the reason for that problem in the first place, it's just going to happen again. A really popular example of this is when we get approached to do a Rails upgrade on a very significant product that is very behind with Rails. First of all, it's very expensive to do that on a very significant project if there's no test coverage. People could hire us to spend and spend a lot of money just getting to the next Rails version. But if they do that and don't solve the reason why they were so behind with Rails and have no test coverage and all that stuff, along the way, it will have been wasted effort because in a year or in two years, it will be back to the way that it was before. And that's one example that's very technical. But that kind of stuff happens all the time, even with squishy things [laughs] like the structure of a team or something like that. So if you could give advice to people that are struggling with a particular problem, what would you tell them? And let's maybe make it a little bit more concrete. Like, one thing that can happen is as teams grow, like you said, not everyone can know everything. And so it starts breaking down into pods; maybe is one way to organize the team. And then you've gone into a bunch of individual teams working on discrete features. And that's happening fairly quickly. What are some ways to manage that change and manage that growth while maintaining continuity and making it go well? JOSH: I think a lot of it depends on the goals from the technical leadership in terms of areas of ownership. That'd be the first part that I would dive into, I think. We work with clients where they segregate front-end from back-end development. And that allows the teams to focus on React and TypeScript versus Ruby or Go or whatever their back end is written in. But if the goal is to share that knowledge, I think you've got options in terms of lunch and learn and shared code review and team demos and things like that. There are other ways to spread that information across the team so that everybody still has maybe not intimate knowledge of the code that's being written on a day to day basis, but they're at least aware of those patterns and practices and what each of the individual pods is may be responsible for and is delivering. So you have that team cohesion across more of the functional space, on the engineering side or on the product design side. CHAD: One thing that I think I would also add is that a lot of times, people take for granted how better developers will do their job if they understand the reason or the business drivers behind what they're working on. And it's really easy for people to take that for granted because it's like, there's a ticket to the ticket. It says what to do on the ticket. [laughs] JOSH: I have a blog post about this, actually. CHAD: [laughs] Okay, great. We'll put that in the show notes. But if someone doesn't understand the reason behind that, it's not going to go the way that you're expecting frequently. It's not as straightforward. JOSH: Yeah. You're left guessing what the underlying customer need is. And if you're guessing about the motivations, I don't want to say not in absolutes, but you're likely not going to address all of those core needs and implement an effective solution. I think in the blog post that I had written, ultimately, it was advocating for getting engineers to participate in customer interviews and really understand, like, how are people using the product that I am implementing features for? Because without that exposure, without seeing those pain points, oftentimes, it's okay, you've got a product designer or a product manager who's putting together this list of things to do. And if it's treated as a checklist or oh, I need to go implement XYZ without understanding why that needs to be done in the first place, what is the pain point? What is the customer-facing? How are they feeling as they're going through the product? Without that context and without that empathy, the solution is going to be...it might functionally work. But will it be a good user experience? Will it be a good customer experience? It's a little bit more shaky, I think. CHAD: Yeah. And in a fast-moving, fast-growing startup where everyone has a lot to do, if you're experiencing this kind of problem, it might manifest to you as stories get caught up at the beginning stages of when a developer is supposed to be working on them. And you find yourself having calls about what something is even supposed to be or supposed to do. And as the person who originated that ticket or originated that idea, you might have the feeling like, I can't believe we're having this conversation. Like, we don't have time to educate you about all the reasons why this is important and just please just do what we've said on the ticket. That is a natural reaction to that thing. And so my advice would be if you're feeling that, if your team is feeling that or something similar, there's probably something small you can do. It might not even be having developers participate in discovery or interviews or anything. It might be as simple as just making sure that on the ticket you say why it's important. If your ticket is a checklist of things to change or do, making sure that the reason why is communicated there will go a long way to having the person pick up that ticket, get the context necessary to understand, and make good decisions as they work on it. JOSH: Yeah, I remember the switch to the jobs to be done format. And I remember just being like, oh, [laughs] this makes a lot more sense because we can understand the context and the why. What is driving it? What is the problem there rather than what is the solution? And I think that shift in mindset does go a long way, like you said. CHAD: I think one of the ideas behind a well-functioning team is we talk about this idea of collaboration which is you feel like you're doing your best work, that things are moving quickly, and you're enjoying the people you're working with, and you're building upon each other's ideas, and you're making things better as a team. And I was recently talking to someone else, a candidate for VP of Engineering at one of our clients, and they were talking about flow, the idea of flow. And it wasn't a way that I had articulated it previously, but it's certainly another way of thinking about and a good way of thinking about it, especially when it comes to what is the role of a VP of engineering? Or what is the role of a CTO at a small company? Or what is the role of a development team or a product team in general? And one way to think about that is to work to maintain a flow state. And when we think about the processes that we have in terms of retrospectives where every week we gather, and we identify things that could be better, and we come up with action items, a lot of the things that drive what could be better or what we want to try to do differently are all identifying the things that take us out of the flow state and trying to fix that problem so that items flow from beginning to end smoothly, that they go from concept to production smoothly as quickly as possible, and that individual people know where the next item to take is that it's ready so they're not blocked as they begin it. And they're able to get that to staging, and get a pull request out, and get that reviewed quickly, get it to staging, get that reviewed quickly, and then deploy it to production. And in theory, even do a continuous deployment so that that whole flow is automated as much as possible. So this idea of flow resonated with me. Has it resonated with you? JOSH: Yeah, I agree. I remember seeing the comparisons people saying, okay, you're not actually looking for an engineer's passion necessarily. What you're looking for...and I come back to the hiring side of things because I'm doing that right now. But rather than looking to assess passion, it's assessing capacity and ability to get into a flow state more quickly. And obviously, so much of that is dependent on the team, and the communication style, the management style, and things like that. But flow is very much...I think once you get into that and you know how to get into that like you said, every waking moment is spent trying to optimize how do I get into this space? Because when you're in that space, when you're flowing, be it from an IC level or above, there's nothing quite like it. It's just this calm state of just everything feels like it's firing all the time perfectly, and it's good. And I think trying to make those spaces available for the rest of the team to get into that state and maintain that state makes a lot of sense. I remember years and years and years ago, there was the focus on maker versus manager time. And we talk about anchoring manager time either at the start of the end day or around lunchtime or whatever is a logical time for a break. The idea is to maintain that flow state for as long as possible so that nothing else eats into that. Because you do an hour of writing software, and then you've got a 30-minute one-on-one with a teammate. And then you go, and you run for another hour, hour and a half, and then it's another half an hour meeting. It's like you're being sucked away. It is really hard to get into that zone and then stay there. So I think there's been a focus on it for a while. And I'm really glad that there's now a name and a thing that we can point to. CHAD: I don't want to lead people astray about what Boost is. There's a big important part of Boost, which may not be immediately obvious to people, and that is design. I may have insinuated that design wasn't part of Boost before when we were talking about it, but it is. And it's designed on existing products and existing teams which is a different need than going from concept to launch of a new idea. JOSH: So we had done some work with The New England Journal of Medicine. And their team, a very small team, internal team, had basically designed an application. And they ran into a number of accessibility and usability issues. They continued to hear feedback from a lot of folks saying, "This is not effective for what we're looking to do." And they'd engaged us in a couple of different times basically to rip apart and re-architect some of the application hierarchy and the usability side of things. It's been really interesting to see okay, well, within the design side of operating within existing products, it's often lended or leaned more towards doing some amount of a design audit and usability audit, talking to customers. And less around we're going to start from scratch and more what are some of these iterative improvements that we can make to make the product more accessible, easier to understand, easier to navigate, easier to use within what is, again, these very large platforms sometimes? CHAD: I know one common request we get is we're thinking about implementing a design system or introducing a design system with the first version of the product. And we're having this growing pain around introducing new features. Is a design system the right thing to do there? That's a request we sometimes get. JOSH: Yeah. And I think a lot of it at the end of the day, what we're looking to assess is what are the knowns? How much do we know about the application, about the interface? We talk about on the software development side of things avoiding premature abstraction, and I think the same thing is true about design systems. Like, if we're going through a product, maybe it's a wizard, and apart from forms, the pages are individualized, and there's not really any common patterns. It's like, okay, well, maybe now it doesn't make sense. But when you've got an application that spans hundreds of pages, there are going to be patterns across the different pages in terms of application hierarchy and componentization and things like that. And the work that we're oftentimes brought in to do is let's assess what's there, figure out what are the common patterns here. And it's almost like refactoring and teasing things apart to where we get slight...it's a reduction in code use or rather an increase in code reuse because we're removing some of the idiosyncrasies that maybe were not teased apart into some component-based system. And that's fun work. [chuckles] It's really interesting. You get things like React when you're doing client-side rendering. And within the Rails side of things, there's a big push for the GitHub ViewComponent. RubyGem is another example. It's both ways to introduce these layers of abstraction that allow more of the engineering team to take on more of the application development, not because design isn't necessary, but they're then empowered to reuse these logical set of components. And so it amplifies the dev work, but it also amplifies the design work because the entire team is now leaning on that pre-baked work. It enables designers to shift focus and priorities to okay; what are new components? What are different ways to position this or present this information? And also, for our designers, it frees up their time to talk even more to customers, to people using the system. CHAD: Well, I guess we'd be remiss if we didn't do a more blatant plug. You mentioned it earlier, but we do have an opening for Design Director on the Boost team. JOSH: We do. CHAD: So who would be a good fit for that role? JOSH: That's a great question. I think a couple of the things that we're really focusing on for this role is someone who has done the work, so to speak, at an IC level for a lot of the work that we're doing right now with customers. And so we ask point-blank on the application sheet, have you worked in HTML and CSS? Have you facilitated design exercises like design sprints? Have you facilitated user interviews? Because so much of what we're seeing from a vision and a strategy perspective is we need to take and leverage these tools in the skill sets that our teams are looking to hone in on, and we want to take it a lot further. I think there's a big opportunity there. So I think it's less around years of experience. I wouldn't say you need to have 15 years of management experience or having been a director in order to apply for the role. But it's someone that can empathize with the team and has some opinions and some thoughts in terms of okay, what is design? What is not only visual design but product design accessibility? What does that look like in the next 5 to 10 years? Those are the people that I would love to see apply. CHAD: If someone's interested, where's the best place for them to do that? JOSH: thoughtbot.com/jobs. And the listing is there. CHAD: So what's next for Boost, Josh? What do you have your sights set on as we wrap up 2021 and head into the next year? JOSH: Oh boy. A lot of where the focus has been on this year is continuing to double down on Rails as the technology stack and get our feet wet, not that our feet aren't wet, [chuckles] continue to invest on the front end with React. I think for 2022, I think the big focus...we've run in the past some pretty successful custom trainings workshops for engineering teams. I think one that we had done earlier was late last year into early this year. We ran about 120 or so of their engineers through a custom RSpec course. So we worked with their engineering managers and some of their teams and got a sense of okay; given this codebase and given the skill sets of this 100-plus person engineering team, where should we focus? And we put together a two-day RSpec workshop. We administered over; I think, five or six weeks. We did it virtually. And the reception from that was incredible. They ended up bringing us back on. We're getting ready to start another round of consulting work where we're embedding alongside their teams. So I see that as a huge opportunity for Boost coming into next year. And then I think one of the things that we've been pushing for is reducing some of the billing time from folks in leadership positions so that they're in a better position to support their designers and developers. And I'm really excited about the progress that we've made thus far. And I'm excited to continue carrying that into next year. CHAD: Awesome. Well, thanks for taking the time to talk to me. JOSH: Thank you. CHAD: Part of this new season, Season 11 of the podcast, for the next few episodes, I'm going to be talking to each of the managing directors at thoughtbot about their teams, about the different kinds of work we do on those teams, and the challenges, and what phases are clients in those different stages of the product lifecycle. So you can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode and all the other episodes at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @cpytel. Josh, if folks want to get in touch with you or follow along with you, what are the best places for them to do that? JOSH: Definitely Twitter. My handle is @joshuaclayton, all one word. CHAD: Awesome. Thanks again. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening and see you next time. Special Guest: Joshua Clayton.
Chad interviews Co-Founder and CEO, Victoria Ranson of Prisma. Prisma is a stealth-mode education startup on a mission to reimagine the way children are educated. Their mission is to create a generation capable of solving the world's biggest problems by creating and running a comprehensive virtual learning program for kids in grades 4-8 that is very unlike any other traditional homeschooling program you've ever heard of. Prisma's Website (https://joinprisma.com) Follow Prisma on Twitter (https://twitter.com/JoinPrisma) or Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/joinprisma) Follow Victoria on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/victoriaransom/) Follow Co-Founder, President, and Victoria's husband Alan Chuard on Twitter (https://twitter.com/AlainChuard) For more info, email info@joinprisma.com Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Victoria Ransom, founder, and CEO of Prisma. Victoria, thanks for joining me on the show. VICTORIA: Hi, thanks for having me. CHAD: So, Victoria, before we jump into this great product that you have, why don't you tell people what Prisma really is. VICTORIA: Sure. Prisma is a very comprehensive educational program for kids who are learning from home or from anywhere in the world. It is not at all like traditional homeschooling because we provide kids with a very social experience. Kids are part of a cohort where they're meeting live with other kids every single day and collaborating with them on projects, and learning from each other, and discussing. And we provide coaches who are there every step of the way with the kids, providing them with rich feedback, helping to bring out the best in them, providing really engaging, live learning experiences. So it’s not traditional homeschooling, although it has a lot of the really great benefits of that with the flexibility and the ability to learn from wherever you are. But we're equally not like typical online schooling, which I would say has tended to be more of an approach of taking traditional school and bringing it online. So there's still a concept of lectures, and grades, and textbooks. They may be electronic in nature, but they still resemble textbooks. The Prisma curriculum is very different. It's rooted in learning through doing and project-based learning, and applying learning to the real world, and allowing kids a lot of choice. So they're ideally always learning through the lens of something that interests them and allowing them to go at their own pace. So a lot of the best practices from some of the most innovative bricks and mortar schools we're bringing to an online environment. And then, of course, we're very different from bricks and mortar schools because it is a virtual program where kids can learn from anywhere. So we think it's a new approach to education that is really uniquely flexible, really prepares kids. We're very focused on preparing kids for the kind of world they're going to live in. The world is always changing rapidly. But I think this generation of kids is going to experience a future that's unlike anything we've ever seen in terms of the level of shift and change, AI being one of the reasons. If you look at studies that look at the future of work, I think some studies we've read say 65% of today's elementary school kids will work in jobs that are yet to be invented. So, how do you prepare kids for that kind of future? And so, we're very focused on giving kids the holistic skills and the mindset that they will need to thrive in that kind of world. So yeah, that is Prisma in a very long nutshell. CHAD: [chuckles] Obviously, I think we'd be remiss if we didn't talk about the context of where we're in, which is kids just went through a year or more where a lot of kids were remote for school. And did Prisma exist before the pandemic? VICTORIA: It did in our minds very much so [chuckles] but not in reality. So Prisma arose out of our own personal needs. So my husband and I are the founders of Prisma. We've actually been entrepreneurs for most of our careers. After successfully selling a company to Google a few years ago, we said whatever we do next in our lives; we want it to be something that has the potential to have a large positive impact on society and on the world. And then struggled to figure out what that should look like because there are a lot of things that need solving in the world. But we have three children, and as they approached school age, it really caused us to do a deep dive into how do we want to educate our kids? What do we think is the best approach to education? And from that, we started to formulate a vision by looking at all kinds of different schooling models, from homeschooling to micro-schooling to innovative bricks and mortar schooling. We developed a picture for how we wanted to educate our kids. But that really inspired us to create something that could be accessible to many more kids than just our own kids. And so we had a good 18 months to 2 years of researching, ideating, thinking about the pros and cons of a virtual model. And then along came COVID, and at that point, we said, you know what? There's never been a better time to test out an innovative new approach to schooling, especially one that was always going to be home-based from the get-go. And so let's start ideating and dreaming about this, and let's just put it into action see how it goes. So it was born during COVID, but the roots of Prisma very much predate COVID. CHAD: So, what was the actual timing there from when you decided to do something? When was that to you had the first students? VICTORIA: Yeah, that was a whirlwind. [laughs] CHAD: I can imagine. VICTORIA: Yeah. So really, it was late March, I think of 2020, when we said, "We've just got to do this. The world is telling us to do this." To when we had our first kids in the door was early September. So between basically the beginning of April to the beginning of September, we incorporated, we refined our vision. The good news is we had a vision, and it was mapped out. We hired a curriculum team, hired coaches, created a website, found our first families, all of that. And we launched Prisma very clearly with the families saying, "This is a pilot. We're trying something new here. Let's see how this goes." And we actually told the families, "Look, we're going to definitely run this until the end of December, the end of the year. And if it's not going really, really well, then we will suggest you go and do something better." But it went great. It's not to say our model is perfect. And we believe very much in constant improvement and constant iteration. But in terms of kids loving school at a time, the national narrative was that kids were hating school, and they were falling behind, and parents were finding distance learning a disaster; we had kids that were loving school more than they ever had. And we surveyed kids, and that's why we know that. Parents were extremely happy. Everything was pointing to the fact that we really had found something unique that was really working. And so it turned from a pilot into something that we're now putting all the building blocks in place to be able to scale more broadly. CHAD: School is a big thing, a big concept, and a very important one. Working so quickly in the midst of a pandemic, you know, launching any product is as much an art and finding what those first features need to be. How did you identify what that is and make sure you had something that was viable but that you could get done on time? VICTORIA: I think that came down to...because obviously, our product is our curriculum and our model. We have a software development team and a product development team. And they are building the tools that we'll need to run our model. But when we first launched, we were piecing together different tools that already existed. So the initial product really was the curriculum and our model of education and the tools that we pieced together to make it work. And I think the reason we were able to be successful is that we did a lot of groundwork in saying, what really matters? What is our perspective on what is the goal of this educational model? We got clear on that. What do we think are the values or approaches that really are critical to achieving that goal? And then using that as our Northstar. So to be more concrete, we were really clear about two things in terms of why we were developing this model. One was we really wanted kids to love learning. We think they should love learning because learning is amazing, and it's exciting. And every kid is born with an innate desire to learn. And that if you want to bring the best out in kids, you want them to be excited about what they're learning. So kids loving learning was a very strong Northstar for us. And the second was what I already talked about before is developing an educational model that will really give kids the skills and mindsets they will need to really thrive in what is an exciting but uncertain future. And so that was the Northstar of why are we doing this. From that, we developed a clear perspective on okay; if we want kids to love learning, how do we do that? And so it was things like making sure that kids have choice so they can apply their learning to things that really excite them, making sure learning is applied to the real world, so kids are never saying, "Why the heck do I need this?" Making sure that learning is hands-on as possible because we think kids just get more out of it, and learn more, and enjoy it more if they can really be hands-on and project-based. Making sure...I won't go through them all, but we have our sort of core curriculum values, making sure learning is happening in a community-supportive community. And then the other thing we're really clear on is okay, what are these overarching skills or mindsets that we think are critical to succeeding in adulthood? And it was things like systems thinking and problem-solving, having a designer's mindset, which is this concept of being comfortable with iterating, and getting feedback, and putting yourself in someone else's shoes, being an excellent communicator and collaborator. Again, I won't go through them all. But we were just really clear. I think we had a really strong foundation of why do we exist and what is our approach here? And that enabled us to then be really clear about things like, okay, we're not going to throw the kitchen sink in terms of everything that kids need to learn, no. We're more focused on overarching skills than checking the box on 1,000 different science standards that kids might need to go through. So yeah, as you said, I think whenever you launch a product or a company, being able to narrow down because you can't offer everything you want to offer, being able to narrow down to what really matters is important. And I feel like we did a pretty good job with that. CHAD: Awesome. What was the makeup of the initial team? You mentioned you and your husband. How did you split the responsibilities between you two, and then who else was involved? VICTORIA: So my husband and I have been co-founders of several companies. And it's worked really well because we have very different skill sets. My husband has much more of a product mind. He's much more detail-oriented. And he has a real eye for design and user experiences and also a creative marketing mind. So that gives you a sense of where he tends to focus. And I've tended to focus more on people management and operationalizing businesses, being more that external spokesperson. And so that's how we have split. He's doing more of the software development and product marketing and marketing side of Prisma. And I'm more involved in the day-to-day running of the program. Our first two very, very critical hires were curriculum developers, and Prisma would not be what it is today if we hadn't hired the two people that we hired. And they really balanced each other well because we hired Kristen, who had really deep experience in education. She had at a pretty young age founded her own charter school very successfully and just had such super deep experience in education, teaching, teaching teachers, training teachers, managing her own school. And then we had Emily, who came from a really non-traditional background. She'd actually come up through the theater world, had done a degree at Harvard School of Education. And they actually had some good experience with working with professors at Harvard in innovative ways to assess, also, computer science education. And she's got a very out-of-the-box way of thinking. And between the two of those, it was a really great combination for us to turn what was a vision of a curriculum that Alain and I had created into something actually concrete. And then the other critical hires were our first coaches. Again, we got super lucky in hiring just really fantastic coaches. And we've now realized hiring great coaches is a very fundamental part of what we do. And in fact, it will be one of our scaling challenges, I think. But again, we got really lucky with our coaches. And then, over time, we've hired operations people and product people. But I think that initial magic of the curriculum team and the coaching team was really important. We wouldn't be where we are today if we hadn't have hired those people, I think. CHAD: Did you bring on the two curriculum team members full-time right away? VICTORIA: We intended to, I think, when we were still incorporating the business. And all of this was happening in such a rush that I think we technically had to bring them on as contractors. But it was intended as a full-time role. Having said that, our hiring process asked them to sketch out in a fairly in-depth way or at least to sketch out in-depth pieces of what the ultimate Prisma curriculum would look like. So we did have a chance, I think, to test them out fairly well before we committed. CHAD: So did you take investment to start Prisma, or did you self-fund it? VICTORIA: We have self-funded. We're super lucky to be in the position to be able to do that, and we are continuing to self-fund. We had a ton of interest from venture capitalists; I think partly because we're somewhat proven entrepreneurs with other successes. And then also, because there was just suddenly a big spotlight on education and the belief that education might really shift. But we have not taken funding because...it doesn't mean we won't ever. But we're very focused on being mission-first. And we're also very focused on growing carefully and thoughtfully. We think in the long run, we'll be far more successful if we really grow conservatively, at least initially, until we really feel like we've refined this and we know how to keep a really high level of quality and customer satisfaction while scaling. And I think our concern is that sometimes when you take outside capital that that capital might not be as patient. It might really push to grow faster than what we think might be the best approach. So thus far, we're just in the lucky position where we haven't had to take outside capital. CHAD: I assume that you're on a traditional school schedule based on what you said about starting in September. VICTORIA: We kind of are actually, which is funny because our initial vision for Prisma was to have it be year-round. And I think our families have been super open to so many innovative things. But the idea of having a summer break seems to be something that families don't want to give up on. CHAD: [laughs] VICTORIA: So I think our ultimate goal is that we'll be able to offer a summer program for those families that want to either go year-round or maybe they want to do the summer program and not do a winter program. And we do have kids already that are in the southern hemisphere, where that is desirable. But so far, we haven't tackled a summer program just because we're already tackling a lot. But we surveyed families, and they actually really wanted to mostly stick with the idea of having a summer, a more traditional summer break. CHAD: But does that mean that you can't add students outside of that cycle, so you really truly have cohorts? Or are you adding people along the way? VICTORIA: We're adding people along the way. We operate in five weeks cycles, actually. And each cycle has an overarching theme. And that's part of our goal of making things feel really-real world. And also, because kids have a lot of choice, we do want there to be some unifying factor to what they're doing. And so examples of themes that we've done are cities of the future, hidden histories, which looked at U.S. history but really from the perspective of lessons we can learn, inventor studio where kids learned all about design thinking through being real inventors. We have a super cool theme right now called uncharted territories, which has got some really strong STEM learning but through the lens of space exploration and deep-sea exploration. And kids are working on an interdisciplinary project during that time. We have live workshops that are aligned around the theme. And then they're also working on what we call missions. So math missions and writing missions, which again, are really honoring that idea of giving kids choice and allowing them to go at their own pace but just to make sure they're really getting the foundations they need in math and writing. But really, a kid could join at the beginning of any cycle. CHAD: Okay, that's great. Is that a happy accident of the model, or was it intentional in terms of from a product perspective making sure that you could continue to add people and weren't locked in to a small set of initial users? VICTORIA: No, that was intentional, although our original model that we launched with did not have five weeks cycles. It actually didn't have themes either. It was more trimester-based. We call them sessions, not trimesters. And so that was more of a model where we could have kids come in every trimester. And that's evolved to do these five-week cycles and themes. And from the feedback we got in that first trimester, we evolved the model. And so, I guess we've now evolved in a way we could have even more frequent intakes. But yeah, I think it was very...for us not coming from the education world, the idea that you could only bring customers on board once a year that felt very foreign. So we've always had the idea of let's make sure we can onboard kids throughout the year. CHAD: So what did the first families, I guess, the early adopters, what did they look like? VICTORIA: They were a real mix, so some long-time public school families and private school families, some long-time homeschool families. It was a real mix. I think it was a mix. Now, the Prisma families, I would say, are very much bought into precisely what our model and our vision is. But that first set of pilot families, I think some of them, if you ask them honestly, would say, "School was a disaster because of COVID. We're willing to give anything a shot. We'll give this a shot." And I think what's been really surprising to some of those families is, wow, we actually really only thought we would do this for a year, and now we're continuing because it worked. But it was a mix of families I'd say who had always really believed in a more alternative innovative approach to education but, for one reason or another, hadn't had the ability to test it perhaps because there were no schools like that in their neighborhood or because they just hadn't perhaps had the courage to try it out. So there was that set of families. There were families that had kids that would be probably said to be gifted and were just not being challenged in school and were a bit bored and not really living up to their potential that I think were attracted to give Prisma a shot. There were homeschool families who really loved the idea of home-based learning but were looking for more community, a bit more support by having some structure and some coaches. And in some families where kids had not thrived in school because they had special learning needs. We even have kids at Prisma that have physical disabilities where physically showing up in school each day is really tough. And online learning just makes their life so much easier. So I guess the ultimate theme here is it was families for whom the more traditional bricks and mortar approach was maybe okay, but it wasn't wildly successful for their kids. CHAD: You focus on particular grade levels or age range, right? VICTORIA: Yes, four through eight right now, yeah. CHAD: And you said, "Right now." [laughs] So why did you choose that age to focus on, and do you plan on expanding? VICTORIA: Yes, we do plan on expanding. I think the first expansion will be to go up into high school grades. The reason we focused on fourth through eighth was twofold. One was that we just think parents are more open to experimenting with a new model at the elementary-middle school level than they are at the high school level, so there was that. Just because once you get to high school, parents and kids alike start to get more anxious about things like college admissions and perhaps become more risk-averse. But the other really big reason came from all the conversations we had with teachers. I didn't mention that when we hired for our first coaching roles, we got 1,400 applicants applying. [chuckles] CHAD: Wow. VICTORIA: And so we narrowed it down. I did not talk to 1,400 people, but I talked to a lot of teachers. And actually, we first started those conversations saying we were going to focus on high school. And we shifted our thinking in part because so many of those teachers said that they felt like fourth, fifth, sixth grade is a real turning point for kids in terms of their enjoyment of school and their confidence in their own abilities and part of the reason for that, not the only reason, is that testing starts to ramp up at that stage in schooling. But we just really felt like if we could catch kids at that point, before they'd sort of lost their enjoyment for learning and before they had started to internalize ideas like I'm not good at school, or I'm not good at math, or whatever it may be, that we could have the greatest impact. The other thing is there is quite an unlearning process that kids have to go through when they join Prisma because we give them a lot of autonomy, and independence, and ability to make choices and have control over their schedule. And we ask them to write self-reviews. And when it's time for a Parent Coach Learner Conference, the learner leads that conference. And the earlier you can get kids, I think the easier it is to get them to adapt to that approach than when you get them later in their schooling where it's been drummed into them that you paint within the lines. You do what you're told. You do this in order to get good grades. And so that was another piece that attracted us to that age range. CHAD: How old are your kids? VICTORIA: Good question. So they are seven, four, and two. So they're not quite old enough for Prisma yet, so we're doing our own version of Prisma right now until our oldest is old enough for Prisma. And the reason we didn't go below fourth grade, at least for now, is we do think there is a limit to how young you can go and be successful with a largely virtual model, and so that's why we haven't gone below fourth. And so, our seven-year-old is being homeschooled. But we've also put together a community of other homeschool kids that she learns with several times a week and gets that socialization piece, so that's the cohort piece that we offer through Prisma. But yeah, she's definitely...she's in training to be a Prisma kid. CHAD: How do you balance with both you and your husband working on Prisma, homeschooling a seven-year-old, the other kids? How are you balancing all of that? VICTORIA: And just parenthood in general because this is our first time starting a company while having kids. CHAD: Yes. VICTORIA: We had a pretty long gap in between our last company and this. So the honest answer is we have hired a teacher for the homeschooling piece, so that helps a lot. And she's super capable, and she's really the frontline person for managing the community that we've developed. So the harder piece is not that so much; it's managing parenthood with entrepreneurship. [chuckles] I would say it's a work in progress. And ask me some days, and I'll say, "That's going great." And ask me other days, I would say, "It's not going so great." We are really, really lucky that we can hire good childcare, so that helps a lot. But even if you have great childcare, I want to be involved with my kids. I love my time with my kids. There's also just so many decisions and things you need to be involved in with kids that you truly don't want to and should not outsource, whether it's as simple as like on my to-do list right now, is that the two-year-old's birthday is coming up, and I'm not going to outsource buying birthday presents or organizing a party. So that's on my to-do list. So I would say relative to when we had our previous company which was really successful, and stressful, and busy but that was the only thing we had to worry about. Trying to manage a company and kids it's a lot of context shifting. But for me, at least, I'm very, very rigid about my time. So I will organize my schedule so that I finish at least at the latest by 4:00 p.m. each day, and that is my time with the kids. And I'm with them until they're in bed, and then I'll jump back online. But there's almost nothing that will interfere with it. And that's just how I've prioritized, and it's just really important to me. So it's setting priorities, I guess. CHAD: Yeah, when we were setting up for the show, you said that you were in the office. So you separate home and work, and school places, I guess. VICTORIA: Kind of. The office is a little built-out area of our garage, [chuckles] so I walk from the front door three paces into the garage. But it is separated to the extent that the kids are not running in at any moment. They don't really come here. But it's really nice. And I think a lot of parents have discovered that during this whole COVID work from home experience and with kids home too, it's really nice. Because not every day, but some days I can go in and have lunch with the kids because they're all around. And some days, I can pop over to Elle's classroom and see what she's doing and be involved and do a bit of reading with her and that sort of thing. So I personally really love the efficiency of working from home, wasting no time with commutes, and also just the ability to be really flexible with my time. Maybe I will take an hour out in the middle of the day to do something with the kids, and then I'll make it up later in the evening because that's fine. I don't have that much going on in the evening anyway once the kids are in bed. So I personally really like that flexibility. CHAD: So, turning our attention back to the product, you said that you got started piecing together existing tools on the tech side. And so, what were the first things that you started to replace in that stack? And when did you start hiring a tech team to do that? VICTORIA: Yeah. So Alain, my husband, his background is product management. So we had product expertise already. We spun up a team of engineers, I think already by October or late October of 2020. So shortly after, we had officially begun the school year. And fortunately, these were engineers we'd worked with before in previous companies. And the first thing we started to tackle actually was the live learning experience, so basically a replacement for Zoom. And that was partly because we felt like there was nothing available that really designed a live learning experience through the eyes of fourth through eighth graders, through that sort of demographic. And also, because the other product needs that we have that we're now tackling is everything we need to just manage the whole curriculum like a learning management system. But our whole model was still too much in flux for us to want to focus on that right away. We needed some clarity about what the model would look like. Whereas the idea that we would always have a live learning component where kids would be online, there'd be a coach, but it would be very collaborative and interactive was very clear. We knew that wouldn't shift, and so that was the first piece we tackled. And we've really tried to tackle a few different areas there. One is to make coaches really efficient so that they're not trying to focus on creating this really engaging learning experience while also having 15 different tabs open and trying to play this YouTube video. So we've basically created what we call Prisma LIVE, where our curriculum team can create these semi-scripted because we certainly let coaches deviate, of course, but experiences with chapters. And there's a lot of shifting of the way the room looks, and the way the kids are organized, and the visuals. Because a lot of the research we looked at is that fatigue, Zoom fatigue, actually comes from staring for a long time at the same scene of this person you're talking to or these people you're talking to. So to make it visually stimulating and appealing for kids and seamless for coaches so they don't need to worry about managing all these different aspects of the workshop. They're just clicking through and focusing on making sure kids are participating. And participation was another thing we really focused on. We do a lot of breakout rooms because we want kids to be collaborating in small groups. So we wanted coaches to be able to instead of having to jump into breakout rooms and interrupt the flow and not know who needs help, the ability for them to stay in the main room and be able to listen in and get an oversight for how things are going in the various breakout rooms and jump into those rooms where it's clear that they're needed perhaps because there's not much going on in there. There's not much discussion, or maybe there's a lot of very animated discussion. So that was an area we focused on and then just making it more kid-friendly and more fun. And every cycle at Prisma ends with Expo Day, where kids present the project they've been working on to the whole Prisma community, parents, and grandparents. And one of the real downsides of virtual in that experience is that these kids are presenting these amazing things, but there's limited ability for people to express how amazing they think it is. And so just visual ways of people being able to express their emotions and their reactions during live workshops is another thing. We've focused on fun avatars that would appeal to kids and that sort of thing. So that has been our first focus. Now we're heads down on the learning management piece. Like, what are the building blocks we need to put in place in order to be able to keep the customer experience really high whilst making our coaches more and more effective and more and more scalable? CHAD: So as you got started or when you were thinking about getting started, what were you most afraid of? VICTORIA: Well, aside from the fact that we're trying to pull this off really quickly and being afraid that this would be a complete failure, aside from that, honestly -- CHAD: Just that small thing. [chuckles] VICTORIA: Yeah. I think the thing that we were most nervous about, and I think it's the thing we probably get the biggest question about, and yet it has proven to be the thing we really didn't need to worry about, is socialization. And to what extent can kids build friendships virtually? To what extent can they build community virtually? To what extent can they meaningfully collaborate and learn together virtually? And I think we went in hoping that all of that was fully achievable but not being quite sure about it. And honestly, the signs were so quick that that wasn't going to be an issue for us. Already in orientation...we organized this really fun orientation mostly oriented around making sure kids were excited and got to know each other. And so quickly, we started hearing from parents, like, "Oh, my kid can't stop talking about Prisma. They're jumping out of bed every morning. They've never done that before. They've never jumped out of bed to go to school. And my kid has already made their first friend." And what I think we've discovered is absolutely kids can make friends virtually, and probably kids would have never questioned that actually. That probably felt natural to them. I think it's maybe adults that might question that. Now, does that mean that kids shouldn't have in-person friends? Of course, they should. And we would strongly encourage Prisma families to make sure their kids are enrolled in extracurriculars in their community and that sort of thing. We've surveyed the kids. Every single Prisma learner has said that they've made strong friendships at Prisma. For some of them, it's many friendships. For some of them, it's a smaller number of friendships. And the other thing that's just going really well, I think, better than in-person school or bricks and mortar school is the community we've created. It's a really, really supportive community of kids. There hasn't been this sorting that I think happens in schools, particularly at the middle school and high school level of like, you're part of that clique, and you're part of that clique. And we're a little cooler than you are. Maybe just the nature of virtual makes it harder to sort kids like that. And there's not the natural time of in the cafeteria where you have to decide where you're going to sit and that kind of awkwardness. Plus, we did a lot of legwork upfront of working with the kids to say: What kind of community do we want to build here? What are the values of our cohort? What are the expectations of our cohort? And I think that really helped to create a community that's just really kind and supportive, pretty uniquely kind and supportive, I think. CHAD: Cool. That's great. And now that you're up and running and continuing to grow, looking ahead, what are you most worried about now as your next challenge? VICTORIA: I think the biggest, hardest thing for us to figure out is how to keep the level of quality, great results. I haven't even mentioned it yet, but we are making sure that kids are progressing both academically in terms of these holistic skills. And on the academic front, we've seen really amazing growth. So the kids did a nationally recognized assessment at the end of last year and at the beginning when they joined. And they grew in math at 153% of expected growth and 174% of expected growth in reading. So we've set a really high bar for ourselves. Kids are loving Prisma; 100% of kids said they're happier at Prisma than at their previous school. We have a really great Net Promoter Score, which means parents are really willing to recommend Prisma. We're seeing great growth in the kids. So how do we keep that super high bar whilst opening Prisma up to more and more and more kids? Because part of the attraction for us to offer a virtual model was the desire to be able to reach large numbers of kids if we came up with a model that really worked. And I think through all of our research, one of the things we noticed is there are amazingly innovative schools out there. There are a lot of really innovative brick-and-mortar schools, actually, but they really haven't scaled. They tend to be...a few have scaled a bit, but they're still very limited in the number of kids that they can reach. And part of our thesis was that if you could do this online, just online is inherently more scalable. You're not dealing with buildings and everything that goes along with that. But nevertheless, we still are a model where coaches are really important. So our ability to continue to find, train, and develop coaches that are really awesome I think will be a challenge, something we're going to have to get really, really good at. And then just making sure that we can strike the right balance because we also want to be a model that's as affordable as possible and that requires us to make sure that our costs are reasonable. So striking that balance and trying to use technology to be as efficient as possible, I think that is the next set of challenges that we need to deal with. CHAD: Are you comfortable sharing how many students you have now? VICTORIA: Yeah, I'm comfortable with that because the number we have was very much set by our own desire to grow carefully. So we have almost 90 kids. And we have a very long waitlist, basically. CHAD: Well, that's bigger than my high school graduating class. [laughs] VICTORIA: Oh, there you go. [laughs] It's funny because people react differently to that. Some people are like, "Wow, that's pretty big." It's not nearly as big as we intend to get. But we decided to cap. We wanted to be disciplined. We had way more demand than that. But further to what I said of quality first and delighting customers first, we said, "No, we'll cut it off at that point." And families have gone on to a waitlist, which is growing by the day. And then we'll be able to let more families in throughout the year. We're small, but we're a lot bigger than we were in our first pilot year. And I think what's been really exciting is we're still somewhat early into the school year. But that level of delight, and excitement, and families just writing to us and saying, "I've never seen my kids so excited." And that's happening again. So it's really exciting to see that we're getting that again even though we have actually grown quite a bit relative to where we were. CHAD: Well, congratulations on everything that you've achieved so far and in tackling these upcoming challenges. VICTORIA: Thank you. CHAD: If people want to find out more about Prisma and join or if they're interested in becoming a great coach, where can they do that? VICTORIA: So the best place to go is our website which is joinprisma.com, so not prisma.com, joinprisma.com. We have a super detailed website, which I think is really informative. So that's a great place to start. You can also sign up for an info session there if you want to talk to someone live about Prisma. And then yes, we have job postings on there as well. And we're always super excited to hear from talented candidates. So that's the best place to go. CHAD: And if people want to follow along with you personally or get in touch, where are the best places for them to do that? VICTORIA: So we do have Prisma social media accounts, so Twitter is @joinprisma. And I'm not the most active person on social media. My husband is much more active, so they may want to follow him. He's Alain Chuard. I presume his Twitter handle is @AlainChuard, C-H-U-A-R-D. [laughs] And you can reach me if you email info@joinprisma.com, but you address it to Victoria. It will reach me, and I will reply. CHAD: Awesome. And people can find all these links and everything in the show notes, which are at giantrobots.fm. You can also subscribe to the show there as well. And if you have questions or comments for us, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Everybody, thanks for listening and see you next time. Thanks, Victoria. VICTORIA: Thank you. Thanks so much. Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Victoria Ransom.
At harbour.today, Natalie Nzeyimana and her team are helping people build holistic resilience. On this episode, she and Chad talk about building the app at the beginning of the pandemic when she witnessed herself and others feeling like they were close to drowning and feeling really unmoored. Harbour is a space for people to anchor themselves, find clarity, and set sail. The community offers one-to-one coaching, workshops, a course, and a daily check-in tool. harbour.today (https://www.harbour.today/) Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/harbour.today/) Twitter (https://twitter.com/natalieisonline) Lunchclub (https://lunchclub.com/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And today, I'm joined by the founder of Harbour, Natalie Nzeyimana. So, Natalie, thanks for joining me. NATALIE: Thanks for having me on. CHAD: So tell me a little bit about what Harbour is. NATALIE: Sure. Harbour is a space for people to anchor self, find clarity, and set sail. We offer one-to-one coaching, workshops, a course, and a daily check-in tool. Harbour was built at the beginning of the pandemic when I witnessed within myself, and the people I knew who I'd worked with, friends, family, just a lot of us felt like we were close to drowning and feeling really unmoored. And so, it began as a course to think about the ways we could use holistic strategies to anchor ourselves and set sail. And from then, from November 2020 to now, it's become a product. CHAD: You started in November. And I know we first met in London a while ago. You were teaching yourself to code working on an education product if I remember right. And we got together at Google Space there and paired for a little bit. Did you code Harbour yourself? NATALIE: It feels like another lifetime. CHAD: [laughs] NATALIE: I think life before the pandemic and life after the pandemic; there’s a real line there. I've done quite a bit of the coding myself. However, I've also used a lot of no-code solutions to create MVPs. They've been amazing at helping me scale, helping me test out ideas incredibly quickly. And so one of the interesting things about juggling doing client work, and then also building the back end, and building the module, and then building the design work, and thinking about content juggling all of these different pieces, is that equation of do I invest time in HTML, or do I invest time in machine learning that's going to help me scale? And making all of those intricate decisions has been really, really interesting because, of course, I want to make everything myself. But these no-code solutions have enabled me to test hypotheses so much faster so that I can save time in the long run. CHAD: Well, tell us a little bit more about what the product is today and what you went through to get to this point. NATALIE: Sure. So initially, I just posted on LinkedIn to see who would want to join the course. I had a really simple Squarespace page, and then that evolved into a Typeform which I would use with clients to help them track progress and checking in with their chakras every day. And so, the way that Harbour works is that we do an energy review based on the seven in-body chakras. And so, for anyone who might be unfamiliar with this terminology, the chakras are...well, there are different schools of thought on this. They are a system for either focusing during meditation depending on where you sit in terms of your feelings towards energy bodies. They are a subtle body energy system of themselves. And what I find incredibly helpful for those chakras is that they help people map their energy in a way that I haven't found anything else does effectively. So starting from the root chakra, which is the base of your spine, you can ask yourself, am I feeling safe? Am I feeling grounded? Am I feeling as though my material needs are met? Traveling up towards your reproductive area, you've got the sacral chakra which governs your sense of feeling as though you can desire the things that you desire in the world, feeling as though you are sensual. You're able to experience pleasure. You're able to be creative and playful. And then up to the solar plexus, which is around your navel area, governs the sense of personal power, empowerment, will, feeling as though you're able to go after your goals with chutzpah and energy. And then moving into the heart chakra, which governs this idea of do I feel as though I'm open to receiving and giving love freely? And the throat, do I feel as though I'm an open conduit for the truth of who I am? Do I feel as though I'm able to express myself fully in the world? And then into the third eye, which governs your intuition. Do I feel as though I'm able to trust my intuitive leads and to move with grace and ease, trusting and able to go with the flow? And then finally, we have the crown chakra, which governs do I feel open to receiving divine wisdom? Do I feel as though I'm in this world on my own and there's nothing but pure materiality? Or do I feel open to receiving what some people might call God or Allah or the Tao? Whatever your orientation is, do I feel open towards receiving that kind of wisdom? What's really beautiful about the chakras is that they've been used by ancient Chinese, ancient Egyptians, Tibetans, Sikhs, multiple traditions, and indigenous systems. And so there's kind of this lovely thread of people around the world thinking about how energy moves through our minds, bodies, and spirits. But that's quite a lot. So we just ask seven questions every day. CHAD: So I have to admit I was not...and my first exposure to this is this conversation. So is this something that you have been aware of and practicing prior to working on Harbour, or is it something that you found which then led you to the creation? NATALIE: Definitely the latter, the latter. So I went through a pretty gnarly, dark night of the soul and just had this huge existential crisis of wondering what am I here to do? Why am I here? What's my purpose in life? I don't know if other people might resonate with this, but kind of feeling that you make these huge or not so huge career goals, and then you reach them, and you still feel like something's missing. And in my quest to understand what that missing piece might be, I came across chakras, and I found it incredibly helpful. I think people who do yoga might be aware of this because they often come up to yoga. Physical movement is often a way of realigning and balancing the chakras. So there are specific movements or specific asanas that you can do to balance out your root chakra or balance out your Sacral Chakra, which is great because it's kind of like all of these different hacks you can do to bring your mind, body, and spirit back in line. And that's why I think I loved it because when I encountered a lot of other systems or other approaches, it just all felt a bit ephemeral and like I couldn't grasp it. But there was something about chakras that really spoke to the budding engineer within me because I was like, wait, you can just hack yourself into alignment? This is great. [chuckles] CHAD: So this is something you do daily. NATALIE: Well, something I try to do daily. [chuckles] CHAD: Okay. I meant, is this something one does daily? [chuckles] NATALIE: Yeah. Ideally, yes. Because it's like anything else that we do, if you want to maintain a certain level of well-being or perhaps a certain level of fluency, let's say, for example, in a language whether that's a programming language or the spoken language, you need to practice it every day. And so, with chakras and aligning one's mind, body, and spirit, it feels as though the stakes are slightly higher when we're in the middle of a pandemic, and there's so much uncertainty, and all of our lives have kind of been exposed to so much change. But yes, daily is optimal. Daily is, at least at Harbour, the bare minimum. What are some things that you do every day to balance your mind, body, and spirit? You may be aligning your chakras without quite realizing that you are. CHAD: Yeah. So I run every day. And I've often described that as that's my meditation. So I find that that really does wonders for reducing my overall stress. I do it in the morning before starting my day. And so, I think it really sets the foundation on which the rest of the day is built for me. And it wasn't until I made the commitment to do it every day. And now I run long distance enough where I need to take a rest day once a week. But when I made the commitment to do it every day, it really did change my relationship with running. NATALIE: That's so interesting. I was thinking about Kazuo Ishiguro's what I think about when I'm running or something along those lines. He's written this great book. And I know several people who run and have spoken of its incredible meditative qualities. And I think that's a wonderful way of connecting with yourself or creating space to connect with yourself. I also wanted to touch upon something that I know that we tend to move towards or perhaps even a dichotomy: do we meditate to relieve stress, or do we meditate to get closer to our divinity? And so one of the things at Harbour that we try to do is we try to help folks shift from meditating to relieve stress to meditating to connect with one's divinity, and that way, the stress doesn't become as prominent a factor for which meditation is there to alleviate. CHAD: What do you mean by divinity in this case? NATALIE: Yeah, great question. Very controversial. [laughs] I mean, it's 2021, and the least cool thing you could possibly do in an engineering environment is talk about God and the divine. I think there is a really interesting choice point we're at as a collective where there is an increased awareness of consciousness. So there's a lot of language in at least the tech community, from my experience, whether you've got things like Burning Man or just a lot of products and offerings out there, which are there to raise your consciousness. One of the really tricky things about raising your consciousness...and in the chakra system, we do that through something that's called a kundalini awakening, which is where your consciousness does raise from the root chakra all the way to the crown. As your consciousness raises through the chakras, coming from the Indian tradition, what happens is your life force, your consciousness moves through your chakras, and each chakra it touches upon triggers a mini awakening. So, for example, as your life force is moving through your root chakra, anything that may have happened in your childhood, anytime that you may have experienced any aspect of material instability, let's say you lost your job or you had a partnership fall apart, or any time where you felt like your world completely crumbled, that will likely be triggered when you're going through that mini awakening in that root chakra. I mentioned divinity because it feels as though there are two paths we can go down. We can either go down the path of I am raising my consciousness. I am the master of my own destiny. I know what I am here to do in life, and I'm in control of my own awakening. Or we can go down another path which is far trickier, which is sort of saying, "At every point in every day, I choose to surrender to the wisdom that is far beyond me. And I'm going to trust the signals and the science that I receive that they are aligned with my highest good." One of these paths is more egoic, and the other one is more surrendered. That's not to say that we don't need an ego. But the ego can get into really tricky territory when you're doing this kind of alignment and awakening work, and it can really do a lot of harm. And I don't say that through judgment. I say that because I've been through the wringer with a lot of ego deaths. And so, one of the safest ways to mitigate that risk of the ego taking over is to surrender to something that is far more wise than you. Perhaps you don't resonate with the idea that there is only one creator, and that's fine. But perhaps just from a logical point of view, it does seem to make more sense to surrender to the fact that there's something that knows more than I do at any moment. CHAD: So this is some really big stuff. NATALIE: Oh yeah. CHAD: Before we get much further into it, I think for listeners who want to learn more or are interested in what they're hearing and want to give it a try, where do they do that? Where do they find Harbour? And what is it going to look like? NATALIE: Sure. So you can follow us at harbour.today online on our website also on Instagram. And I'd love to invite your listeners to try out our 30-day trial, where if you complete 30 days of your chakra daily check-in, you'll receive access to our platform with activities, reading prompts, and also different course materials for free for a whole year. And I know I'm probably giving this away to a lot of people because all the engineers I know are very disciplined, [laughs] and they'll do this 30-day streak like it's a GitHub streak. CHAD: [laughs] NATALIE: So I'm shooting myself in the foot a little bit. But I'm really keen to offer folks who are asking these questions who are thinking about what am I here to do? Is there more? How do I engage with literature that could help me ask these questions more deeply within myself? And the daily check-in and the learning platform is a really simple way to do that. CHAD: Great. That's great. I hope folks check it out. So, in addition to the daily check-in, you just gave some hints on what is actually on the platform. There are reading prompts and those sorts of things. Is there more than that as well available? NATALIE: Definitely. So we are launching a monthly course on October 6th, and then the next one will be in January when we come back from the break called Organic Cycles. And the purpose of this course is to help people who are thinking about launching something. So you may have a side project that you're thinking about launching or perhaps a hobby that you feel like you want to take up, or maybe you even want to become an entrepreneur full time. But you're a little bit overwhelmed by what might be involved by that. And so at Harbour, we're real big believers in cyclic, iterative, sustainable growth. And so, we use the moon cycle for our sprints. We use it for measuring our tasks. And in Organic Cycles, you will learn about the moon. You'll follow the Moon Phases. And let's say, for example, you want to start a new business selling socks. [laughs] On the new moon on October the sixth, you will join us, and you will tell us all about your sock business. And we'll listen, and we'll make a plan as other people in the cosmic plan. In the first quarter, we'll start thinking a little bit about why do you love socks so much? Where does that come from? And what are the small steps we can make together to help you grow your sock business within this moon cycle? Which is, of course, 28 days. On the full moon, we'll celebrate all the progress that you've made with your sock business. And together, we'll figure out the next steps. In the last quarter, we'll think about hmm, what were the experiments making the sock business so far that worked really well? What are the ones that didn't? Which ones would you like to take into the next cycle? And on the next new moon, we'll start all over again. And so it's very similar to an agile workflow, except you're learning about the moon. And the reason why I believe that's important is because a lot of our day-to-day lives are just so focused on abstract entities and not necessarily the natural world. And so a lot of the prompts in the daily review for Harbour are getting outside, all sorts of different things that reconnect you to nature as a way of rewilding you. So yeah, I'd really love for folks to come on board. If you have any experience with agile, even if you don't and you're just curious about the moon, and want to find out a little bit more about the stars and anything natural, and meet other people who are curious about energy and ideation and how to create cycles which feel more organic, we'd love to have you along. CHAD: I really like the sound of this in that it's a structure to anything. A group environment where you're helping each other is great. Layering on the information about the moon and everything adds an additional element of interest to it. I'm just a big believer in being intentional about what we do in our businesses and in our lives. So any structure that can help people be intentional about what they do, I think is going to help people and help them be more successful than if they just don't have a plan and aren't intentional, aren't consciously thinking about what they want to achieve, and what they want for themselves. And helping people do that, I think, is great. NATALIE: Definitely. And I definitely have been on both sides of that coin, either having too much structure or no structure at all. And I think there's something really beautiful about naming things in ways that feel soft and ways that feel different to people so that they can access that idea and be playful with it and be creative. Because I know that for a lot of people who we work with, post-burnout, folks who are incredibly structured. The Harbour client is a recovering Type A like me who has probably been an overachiever at school and has probably been incredibly structured in their lives but didn't really know how to let go and didn't really know how to create fluidity and flow in their life. And so one of our tag lines is between discipline and surrender and a devotion to flow. And flow is made possible through that playfulness, and through that structure, and through those rituals, and through that surrender, which is really fun. And it's always really, really fun to see people connect the dots and see, oh, it's quite interesting. Like on full moons, I do have a lot more energy. Or on the new moons, I do feel a little bit more restful, and giving people prompts to add self-care and add meditation to their existing structures. CHAD: So this might be an overly practical question, but I'm curious how you manage time zones. NATALIE: [laughs] With naps. [laughter] CHAD: Okay. Fair enough. NATALIE: No, really, I do. I have naps. And I really love work...as you know, I've been working with folks in the U.S. for the last ten years. And I really enjoy it because I think it feels like transporting to a different environment. So, yeah, just a nap, and then I wake up, and I'm in a different country. It's great. CHAD: [laughs] So it's almost like you've actually traveled then. NATALIE: Exactly. Exactly. CHAD: Hopefully, a little less jetlag. NATALIE: Yeah, it's really great. What about in your work? I know that you're one of the most organized and structured people I've ever met. But sometimes, when I'm in Notion, I'm like, what would Chad do? [chuckles] But how do you find the balance between order and structure and allowing yourself the space to find flow and surrender even as a leader, even when you're building a product? CHAD: Well, thank you for the compliment. I appreciate it. Let me preface by saying I think that nothing ever stays the same. And so what I do today and what's working for me today is probably pretty different than three years ago because our teams are in different places, and the people I work with are different, and I'm in a different place. So the thing that's working for me now is putting times blocked off on my calendar where I want to either...it's a regularly scheduled time. And I have one on Thursday; it's from 2:00 to 5:00 p.m. It's just blocked off, and it just says, "Focus time." And each week, then I decide in advance what I'm going to be doing during that focus time. And it might be exploring something new. It might be working on something specific. And then, when I need to accomplish something else, making sure that I block off the time on the calendar. And so that's working for me now. And it's not what I used to do. I used to be much more freeform. Nowadays, if I don't block off the time, I lose it. Previously, I could maintain a lot of free time on my calendar and use that as the time I was doing things. And as we grew and as I was working with people more across all of thoughtbot, across many different time zones, I needed to be much more conscious about what my scheduled time actually looked like and make sure that I'm scheduling time to work on things more freeform. NATALIE: Yeah, definitely. That's so helpful. And I like the idea of time blocking. I've been trying to do a little bit more of that. What's interesting, too, is as Harbour grows and the product grows, and thinking about scaling and trying to anticipate things before they happen, even though you can't anticipate everything, one of the exercises I've been thinking about is what would it feel like to have a team of this many people and meditate on that idea and see if it feels right? And do I necessarily need to have a team that looks like X or a team that looks like Y? And trying to meditate into what that experience would be before making the decision. And I'm wondering if, through your experience having run this global company and having scaled it over more than a decade, what are some of the things that you've done to pre-pave and to support the sustainable scaling of the business? CHAD: I think thinking things through in advance is very important. And I don't say the next thing I'm about to say because it's not important because I think that it is very important, and I certainly do it. But I've also come to grips over the years with the idea that no matter how much we plan, it's not going to go like we plan. And so there's this interesting balance between planning too much and reacting to what's happening. And I'll come back to intentionality. And the way that I talked about it at thoughtbot is letting fulfillment be our North Star. So we shouldn't be doing things just because we think they'll be good business decisions or because we think they're the right thing to do for some arbitrary reason. We should be driven by what we want to be doing in our work and what kind of company we want to be, and being fulfilled in our work. And when we're faced with a decision to make about who we are, or what we do, or how we're going to approach this, letting it be driven by fulfillment is very powerful. Because it means that likely what everyone wants from their work is not so different from one another, especially when we curate a team of people that want to work together for our working lives what might be. It's probably not so different from each other. So that's also very powerful because it means that I don't need to be the one to make all of the decisions. Other people can make those decisions around who we are and what we'll do, and which direction will head in. And they'll very likely be what will be fulfilling to the rest of the team as well. And so it sort of democratizes that decision-making in a way which is more resilient and then can be more flexible. As our best-laid plans start to go awry, we're making decisions based on fulfillment. And I think that allows us to be resilient. NATALIE: Yeah, that's so helpful. CHAD: Because so much of what we've tried, particularly when we intentionally try to grow, so many of the decisions that have made thoughtbot successful we weren't making them for business reasons, we were making them because -- NATALIE: They felt right. CHAD: They felt right. We were the first consulting company in the world to switch to Ruby on Rails. We didn't make that decision because we thought Rails was going to be popular. We made it because, as developers and designers, we were more fulfilled using this new thing, Rails, than using PHP or Java. And, in fact, if we had been focused on what we thought would be the successful business thing, we might never have chosen that because it can feel very risky because you're choosing something entirely unknown. So the opposite example is we've tried very hard to grow over the years non-organically geographically. So someone is moving to this area, or we are going to hire someone in this area. And we're going to grow into this area. And it's not driven necessarily by fulfillment. And in a lot of those cases, it's been very difficult, or it's outright not been successful. And so, being able to react to those situations and adjust has been critical for our long-term success. Another word I use often is grit. And grit, for me, means we fail a bunch but we stay at it because we are driven by...what's driving that is fulfillment. So even if we really believe in it, even if we've failed in execution for business reasons or something like that, we tend to stick with it over the long term and just try a different way. NATALIE: Yeah, I hear that. There is so much grit that's required to sustain something over a long period of time. And it feels like quite an incremental grit as opposed to huge pushes of energy that we might witness in different business models, for example, venture capital. And having been in the whirlwind of the VC world a little bit and now building what I hope is a more sustainable model, the grit is very moment to moment. It's continuous. Each task, each decision, it's a soft resilience that kind of grows over time as opposed to having to wield huge amounts of chutzpah to get through this investment cycle. Do you know what I mean? CHAD: I do, and I think that has a flip side as well, which I try to be conscious of but don't always do a good job with. I tend not to project too far; that’s one side. And then the reverse is also true, which I tend not to celebrate successes enough. I tend not to reflect on the past too much because I'm on to the next incremental improvement pretty quickly. That has benefits because when you have a down day, tomorrow is a new day. It's a brand new day. But that has downsides too, which is when you have a great day, [laughs] you're on to the next thing the next day as well, at least for me. I move on very quickly. And like I said, I think that has its benefits, and it has its downsides. NATALIE: What are your rituals for celebrating both personally and professionally? How do you celebrate yourself and the ways that you've grown? And how do you celebrate the business that you've grown with others? CHAD: Just being honest, I probably have not...I do not have rituals. And I think this is where having good partners, or other members of my team has been helpful because knowing that this will be my tendency, having other people backing me up to recognize the successes or to call me on when I’m moving on too quickly or something like that has been helpful. NATALIE: Yeah, definitely. CHAD: Are you working on Harbour solo right now, or are you working with others? NATALIE: Sure. Sometimes I work with a really wonderful ayurvedic practitioner called Sriram, who was an engineer for 15 years before he became an ayurvedic practitioner. So completely similar to you in that thought about going about and finding a co-founder or partnering with someone. And then I just had this really lovely chat with someone on Lunchclub. And we ended up talking about chakras for an hour and also coding. And I was like, this is my dream. [laughs] I get to talk about chakras, and I get to talk about product. This is great. And so, I work with Sriram sometimes on client work. Normally, the split is that he takes approximately a third of the client sessions, but we work on the one-to-one coaching. And so, I'm your accountability coach. And we're hiring more now, which is really exciting. And I'll do the weekly reviews with clients, and then Sriram will put together the ayurvedic program for the client. So that's always really great fun. And I'm also working with a wonderful designer based in San Francisco called Christina. And yeah, so the three of us...Sriram has his own practice, and Christina has her own agency. But there's a lot of collaborative work that's happening there. And I'm currently onboarding more coaches, which is exciting and very necessary because I came to a choice point, and I said, do I want to study chakras and become qualified? And I realized I didn't. I wanted to talk to all the people who knew about chakras and who were qualified, and so that's been a lovely experience onboarding them, and onboarding therapists, and onboarding other personal development coaches who are going to be able to serve clients as we scale. CHAD: Nice. You mentioned Lunchclub many times in the story of Harbour on the website. I have never used Lunchclub. But I heard of it before. And if folks haven't heard of it, what's the pitch for Lunchclub? [chuckles] NATALIE: It's LinkedIn as you'd want it to be. [laughter] CHAD: Oh, that's great. That's great. NATALIE: I think Lunchclub gets rid of all of the bravado and all of the stuff on LinkedIn because I think a lot of us do really struggle with self-promotion online. But at the same time, we want to connect with people. And we want to have real conversations that hopefully lead to more conversations or more opportunities for both parties. And when I started on Lunchclub about a year and a half ago, it was just an incredible way to connect with people around the world. I'd just moved into a flat. I was living on my own in the middle of the pandemic and in the middle of the lockdown building product. And I thought, I really need to chat to people because I really enjoy doing that. And through 45-minute conversations, you get matched by their little magical AI, and you connect with people who might be related to the interests that you have. And you can build streaks. And the more streaks you build, the more points you get. And the more points you get, the more you can choose who you connect with based on geography and business development goals, et cetera. Well, even if you do choose I want to meet an investor or I want to meet a Biz Dev specialist, this isn't really a sales call or an investment pitch. It's just I want to increase the likelihood that the person I meet will be aligned with where I'm trying to get on my journey. CHAD: Well, the pandemic has been a really difficult time for everybody, parents, and of which I count myself in that. In particular, seeing it across thoughtbot, obviously, a trend is the people who live alone had an especially challenging time during the strictest of the lockdowns that were happening. And it was challenging. We saw a lot of people struggling. And because we were all remote, you're remote all day working. You don't necessarily want to be reaching out to people remotely, just that energy there. And I think that's maybe where Harbour comes in is solving that energy problem that I think many of us are feeling now. NATALIE: Definitely. I think what happened over the last year and a half, two years, has created a tectonic shift, but I think also a portal because it's forced us to reckon with ourselves in ways that perhaps we had been ignoring, in ways that we didn't know we needed to, in ways that we've been forced to. And it can be really scary. And even as an adult, that's weird. It's weird to feel that scared as an adult. It's weird to feel that displaced as an adult. It's weird to feel so unmoored. It's weird to feel like you're starting from scratch again, not necessarily in terms of your career or what you post on LinkedIn about who you are, but inside that, you really are starting from scratch: Who am I without access to my friends? Who am I without access to family members? Who am I without X? Who am I without Y? And so, the pandemic kind of energetically takes everything away, and so we can see ourselves more clearly. And that can be really strange because we haven't had the opportunity to do that in the past. And for many folks, often, we don't engage with mental health or well-being until something goes wrong. And we don't really engage with these ideas until we feel we're at a breaking point. And so the pandemic being the biggest breaking point we've had as a collective, at least in the Western world, we are forced to do that reckoning. And so, of course, it's not just a loneliness pandemic; it's not just a burnout pandemic. I really do think it's an existential pandemic because people are wondering, or at least I am, and I know others who are, and I think others who are listening might be: Who am I? What am I here to do? What's my destiny? Why am I here? What's next? How do I make sense of all of the things that have happened in my life so far? And because there's no noise and no distraction or no busyness much as there was before the pandemic, you really are just there with yourself reckoning with those questions. CHAD: Well, Natalie, I'm happy to see that someone emerged on the other side of this with a new product. NATALIE: [laughs] CHAD: And I wish you the best. NATALIE: Thank you. Thank you very much. CHAD: Again, if folks want to sign up or check it out more or just follow along with you, where are all the places that they can do that? NATALIE: Sure. I would love for folks to connect on Instagram, harbour.today. You can also sign up to our newsletter. We have a daily email that comes out with questions from our community. So folks might ask things along the lines of what I've been describing, and we'll respond with some chakra guidance, some ancient philosophy that might be helpful, and also some practical tools, things that you can do like walking barefoot in your local park. Or some breathing exercises that might help you find balance within, or some yoga can really help you hack your chakras back into alignment, or some scripture that may help you reconnect with your divinity. CHAD: Wonderful. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm. And we are emerging into this new season with full transcripts of every show as well. So you can find those on the website. And it will be included in the show notes, so they appear in your podcast player as well. I'm excited. It's something that we have been talking about doing for a while, but the time and expense of it traditionally was prohibitive. But we've made it happen for this new season in no small thanks to our new editor and producer, Mandy Moore. So if you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and edited by Mandy Moore. Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Natalie Nzeyimana.
Lindsey and Chad talk about product roadmaps. Are they dead? Lindsey and Chad think they just smell. We also say an emotional goodbye to Lindsey as she moves on to new adventures. We miss you! Buffer Transparent Product Roadmap (https://trello.com/b/PDIV7XW3/buffer-transparent-product-roadmap) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: LINDSEY: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Lindsey Christensen. CHAD: And I'm your other host, Chad Pytel. LINDSEY: And today we're going to talk about product roadmaps. CHAD: Product roadmaps. [laughs] LINDSEY: Whoa. This is the topic. I feel like recently I've seen some thought pieces that product roadmaps are dead. So I'm curious if you think product roadmaps are dead. CHAD: No, I don't think that they're dead, but I want to make the distinction too. I've never believed in a public product roadmap because I think that sets you up for just disappointing everyone involved, your customer, yourselves. And I think that there's a balance to be struck there. Saying that product roadmaps don't have a place, to me, in my mind, is like saying planning, having plans doesn't have a place and that just doesn't ring true to me. I think you should plan out what you're going to be working on. But I'm sure we'll get more into it. I also believe things about not having big backlogs and not doing too much planning and that kind of thing. So it depends on what you mean by a product roadmap. LINDSEY: Well, yeah. I think that therein lies the issue. You can do it well, and you can also [laughs] run it into the ground. But you mentioned having it public and that being a bad idea. And I think at the core of product roadmaps is communication and alignment and getting all of your stakeholders on the same page about what you're building and why. So to me, I would think those stakeholders are the leadership team of the company, if this is a product company and product is the main business driver, the leadership of the company, the product team, of course, and engineering, sales, and marketing as well. Am I missing others? Clients, customers. CHAD: Right. Customers. LINDSEY: How do you feel about it? Does that count as the externally facing do not reveal? CHAD: Oh yeah, it does for me. So we've all seen the companies that say that they're going to do something and then in a best-case scenario, that becomes a deadline which was arbitrarily made in the first place that everyone is stressing out over, that sales is potentially making promises that are either going to need to be broken or are going to need to be super stressed over. And then in a worst-case scenario, you end up not delivering on that roadmap as you essentially promised. And you actually end up with disappointed customers. LINDSEY: So you would recommend not telling the customers about future features. CHAD: Yeah. I think there's a balance to be struck there. So certainly, if you know that you're working on something now like actively working on something and a customer were to ask you about that thing directly, I might say, "Yeah, we're working on that now, and we're excited about getting it out to you." But I have only [chuckles] ever been a part of when a team is saying, "Q3 of next year, six months, nine months down the road, this specific feature is going to make it to customers." That's a real recipe, in my experience, a real recipe for lots of people being either really disappointed in that not happening or really working unsustainably in order to hit that in the first place. It's really hard to plan software that far in advance. We just had the CEO of Dragon Innovation on the podcast. And I think that even then, you have to be careful with hardware, but at least with hardware or other kinds of businesses, it's a little bit easier to say, "Our goal is to have this incorporated in the product, or whatever, in the next revision of the hardware. And we expect to do that two years from now," or something like that. That's a little bit easier to put a bow around, I think. LINDSEY: Yeah. I was a part of a software company that got acquired by a hardware company. And all of a sudden, we were wrapped into these 5 to 10-year product roadmaps that were blowing all of our minds [laughs] and a very different fit than how we were used to working. CHAD: Yeah. It's worth noting that there are some companies that essentially go so far as to publish a Trello board of their roadmap. I don't know which ones they are. [chuckles] I have to find them. But even then, they're not necessarily making hard promises. And if you're committed to being transparent and publishing some roadmap to the public, the ways that I've seen it done best are working in themes. So you say, "Two quarters from now, our focus is going to be on reporting," or something like that. That is a little bit...because you're not making specific promises. You're just establishing a theme of what your focus is going to be on for that time. You can imagine you can still get yourself into a position where customers are putting all their hopes and dreams on what that's going to look like, and maybe your support staff or salespeople or whatever start to make promises about what's going to be delivered in that time. And then again, a bunch of people end up disappointed. LINDSEY: Yeah. I've also seen what I think to be the most successful roadmaps be based around themes. And I think it’s also…again, going back to that, the fact that it's, in addition, to actually delivering product and delivering good product, it's helping align your internal team around what you're doing. So to rally your whole team or your whole company around reporting is the next big thing that we're working on, and this is why. This is what we've heard from users, from our research. And this is the direction we're going in and then actually getting everyone working towards reporting in their own ways. Marketing can be working on content around reporting. Hopefully, sales is seeding the idea of maybe not promising around reporting as well. And that also really appeals to me as a marketer and as someone who's thinking often about how do we get folks moving in the same direction, speaking the same language and creating some momentum around something that can differentiate us, get people excited about what we're doing? Then hopefully, it's also strategically valuable to the company adding a new feature or entirely a new product. You're expanding your offering and maybe even your market reach. Who do you think are the most important folks within the company to be driving the product roadmap? Who owns the product roadmap? CHAD: Well, [laughs] so if you have a company that has a roadmap...I'm getting distracted by the premise here. Let's just come back to that a bit. Momentum is key. You used the word momentum. And if you're feeling the need to plan things out or to gain a sense of clarity on your team about what's going to be done, and what's important, and you need to do a long-term roadmap in order to do that, that to me does point to it's sort of a smell. That's what we do when there's a code problem. We say it's a code smell. It points to if you had a team that was continually delivering value to your customers, to your users, and that you had a team where when sales, or marketing, or someone learned something about what will be valuable to customers and it's validated that it's valuable, and it gets put into the design and development process, and it comes out relatively soon, there's no need for a product roadmap. Or I should say people don't feel the need for a product roadmap as much because they have high confidence that user needs are going to be met in a tight feedback cycle and that there's not a loss of momentum. And things going into the system are coming out in a week, two weeks, three weeks. Even four weeks, you can maintain that sense of momentum of we understood that this was important. We validated that it was. It went into the system, and it came out the other side, and it's in the hands of users. It's only when that starts to break down that stakeholders start to say, "We need to plan. We need a roadmap," because they lack the confidence that putting things into the system they're going to see them come out the other side in a way that maintains momentum. LINDSEY: Does that depend on the size of the company? CHAD: Well, ideally, even companies of large size are able to do that, but we all know that that's difficult. It may be that most companies just can't do that. And when that's the case, you have that breakdown. You have that lack of confidence. You have a system where you aren't putting things in and quickly seeing them come out the other side. And so that's where something like a product roadmap you start to say we need that in place. And I think that that's why it often happens as teams get bigger and as companies get more complex. LINDSEY: Interesting. So product roadmaps are not dead, but roadmap can be a smell. CHAD: Yes. [chuckles] Yeah, that's what I would say. That's my opinion. LINDSEY: Who owns that smell? CHAD: So now to get back to who owns the product roadmap, if your customers aren't the ones driving what's on the roadmap, then something is fundamentally broken. At the end of the day, the real owners of the product roadmap, even though they probably shouldn't see it, are the users, the customers. But I don't think that's the question you were asking. Who decides what's on the roadmap? It's got to be the people who are closest to hearing customers and who have the vision for what the product is supposed to be. So that will often be the company leadership, the CEO, the chief product officer, something like that combined with people who are talking with customers. LINDSEY: So on the opposite end of the spectrum, if it's a big company, maybe it's a little bit harder to operate without the roadmap. If you're a really small and young company, let's say, and you already have a roadmap, is that too much? CHAD: Well, this is a podcast, so we can have opinions. I would say [laughs] growth opinion, high-level position, yeah, you should probably not have that roadmap. Now the devil is in the details. What is the roadmap? Is it high-level themes? Is it I'm building this idea, and I'm a visionary about what this product is going to be, and I've laid out in broad strokes...we've done an initial version, a minimum viable product, and we have a vision for where we're going over the next year or two? There's a way to do that which doesn't then convert into this rigid product roadmap. And I think that that's what people who say product roadmaps are dead and you shouldn't be doing them; that’s what they're pushing against is that really rigid expectation setting system where promises get made and then broken. LINDSEY: Right and promising especially deadlines far out into the future. CHAD: And they also understand or believe that if you have a product roadmap, it potentially puts you in a position where you stop listening to customers because you say, "In six months, this is the thing that we're going to be working on." And then you get there, and you just work on it, and you deliver it without having learned along the way that the next most important thing might be something completely different. And so that's another risk with product roadmaps is you start working to the roadmap instead of working to what your users are telling you. So at that company, I'm not surprised to hear that it was a 5-year, 10-year thing, and then it's based off of a thing, Was it really concrete, or was it more sort of vision stuff? LINDSEY: It was very concrete, I would say. CHAD: Yeah. [laughs] LINDSEY: And it's interesting because a lot of it was around trying to be first to market with cutting edge technologies. And on the hardware side, there was also R&D and multiple scientific teams working on specific things. And actually, to get more concrete, I think I can share without giving specifics. So it was 3D printing, and there's like an arms race in 3D printing to be able to print with new materials. So there are multiple teams working on trying to figure out how to print with new materials. And then we had these really long-term product roadmaps that were like by this year; we’re going to have gone to market with it and using that as a way to stay ahead of the competition basically. CHAD: I can imagine that from a business perspective, you're looking at that situation, and you say...and this is true both in science and in software. But from a business perspective, it's saying, "If we don't have this deadline in place, then we have a research project that's just going to go on. We need this timeline, this deadline to hold everyone accountable to what a goal is and to make sure that we're bringing new products to market in that timeframe." And then the scientists are probably saying, "We have no idea. It's completely arbitrary. We think that we could do this, but what happens when we don't? What happens when we don't have something?" A lot of times, I make an analogy between science and even software development and art because it is a creative process. It's all in our heads, and we're just coming up with it. You can say, "I need to have the book," or "I need to have this painting finished by this time." But it's very difficult to then ensure that that is actually going to happen at the creative level of saying, "I'm proud of this work, or it's good." It's hard to do that. LINDSEY: Yeah, and I think there was an element too of either we will figure it out, or we will acquire whoever figures it out. And then there's a separate team that's off trying to suss out who's figuring it out and what are they willing to be bought for? [laughs] CHAD: Right. And maybe from a business perspective, a lot of that makes sense. And you have to balance all of those things in order to try to be successful from a business perspective. LINDSEY: Yeah. It's interesting on the hardware side, too, especially as you do get closer to actually launching. It can be very waterfall-esque working towards launch because there are so many dependencies in order to get the thing built and shipped and launched on time. CHAD: I found a Quora thread about companies that have made their roadmap public. LINDSEY: Did any do it successfully? CHAD: [laughs] LINDSEY: I've only seen nightmare stories. Like, let this be a lesson. Here's a company that made their roadmap public, and within weeks they were disappointing people. [laughs] CHAD: I think that it's tempting, you know, and I think we should just do it. Part of the benefit of not having a roadmap that people say is that it allows not only the flexibility for what you're going to do to change based on what you learn. But the other is it offers you the opportunity to surprise and delight customers. And it allows you not to say, "This thing is six months away," but to say, "Here it is now." And one of the best examples of that that I think we're all familiar with is Apple. Apple doesn't typically pre-announce products that far in advance. And they're even a hardware company. They're clearly working on things years in the making. But they don't talk about them publicly until it's like, you can order this today, or you can order this on Wednesday. And the excitement and momentum that Apple builds around that is like the Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Willy Wonka kind of secretive thing. It's super exciting to customers, and they're super successful doing it. And last year, we had a really public thing where...actually, it was I guess two years ago that the saga started when Apple unusually announced AirPower, which is a charging mat that could charge both of your phone and your watch and everything all at the same time. They announced that far in advance. And then it actually ended up never shipping, and they eventually canceled the product. And they had to do all of that publicly, which is very, very different from Apple. I imagine that there are tons of products that Apple thinks that they're going to eventually release, and they don't work out, and they have to kill the projects. And all of that happens behind closed doors. LINDSEY: So we don't know of anyone who does it successfully. What does Quora say? CHAD: Quora doesn't know. A lot of the companies are not even in business anymore. [laughter] LINDSEY: There you go. CHAD: Buffer has apparently...Buffer has a transparent product roadmap. And I guess if there's any company that does transparency pretty well that I could point to, it would be Buffer. So we can link to that in the show notes. How does this board work? We've made this to give you a clear view into what we're working on, what we're about to work on, and what we're thinking about working on. We hope you enjoy the peek behind the scenes. They have four lanes: potential, next up, in progress, and done. They have voting enabled on their Trello board so their customers can vote on the different things that they have going on. LINDSEY: Are you in the actual board? CHAD: I am on the actual board, yeah. LINDSEY: How many votes? What kind of numbers are we talking? CHAD: So the in-progress thing that they are currently working on is a better way to manage campaigns in Buffer, and it has four votes. LINDSEY: Oh. CHAD: [laughs] So it doesn't seem like there's tons of engagement. There's another one, the best time to post to maximize your reach. It has seven votes. LINDSEY: Okay, so a pretty low number. CHAD: Pretty low. Oh, here's one, flexible pricing for Buffer has 67 votes. So I think you can get a little sense of the engagement that's on there. But I like that there's no description on these cards. It's just a better way to manage campaigns in Buffer. So they're not saying what they're going to be doing. There are no timelines on any of these cards. It was only moved to in progress. And they're not saying anything on these cards from what I can see about when it's going to be done or what is actually going to be entailed in it. I encourage people to look at this. It's pretty good in terms of potentially ways to make a public roadmap work for you and your customers. LINDSEY: And what about thoughtbot? We also heavily gravitate towards the Trello management. CHAD: Yeah. This is clearly not their actual Trello board. It's a specific board created for a transparent roadmap. LINDSEY: It’s a distraction. CHAD: [laughs] Yeah. If we were going to do something like this… LINDSEY: I guess I meant as far as tools; what are the things that you have seen work with…? My guess would be Trello because we use that a lot for managing projects. CHAD: Yeah, we use it for managing pretty much every project. And longtime followers of thoughtbot will know that we used to use a tool called Pivotal Tracker. And then, we created our own tool called Trajectory, which doesn't exist anymore. But the big thing about that was it was really meant to address the flow between coming up with ideas and the design thinking that goes into evolving a product idea and then breaking it down into stories and doing the stories from there. And we switched to Trello in part because of the flexibility of Trello. Trello is not specific to any one product or any one workflow. And so, the nature of software development is again a reason why product roadmaps can be troublesome because things change constantly. You're constantly learning. You should be meeting on a regular feedback cycle of not only how is our product working for people and what should we do differently, but how is our process of developing that product working, and what should we be doing differently? That's one of the great things about Trello is that because it's so flexible, you can say, "Yeah, we're having this problem with our process. Let's change it." And you can usually find a way to embrace that flexibility in Trello. LINDSEY: And how do you know that your product roadmap is on the right track? Or what are some smells that you're going in the wrong direction? We talk about customers being happy. What does that actually mean, and what does that look like? CHAD: If the things that are going into what you're doing on your product are coming from users, and then they're going back to them, and they're receiving usage, that's a really good sign. And a lot of teams look at and measure cycle time, so the total time for something that goes into the process to come out the other side and get in the hands of users. And a lot of teams really high functioning teams will be working to make that as short as possible. And one of the reasons why is because that gives a sense to your customers that your product is continually moving forward in a way that comes from their needs. And that's a really good place to be in. You know what I mean? LINDSEY: Yeah, that makes sense. CHAD: Do you use any products where you feel like they've got that flow working really well? LINDSEY: As far as asking for feedback and then incorporating it into the product? CHAD: Yeah, or even just that you use the product and you're maybe not even giving them feedback directly, but you have a vague sense of how your need might not be met. And they're releasing features and that kind of thing on a semi-regular basis where you say, "I didn't even realize I needed that, but now that I have it, it makes me happy." Or "Boy, that really solved this problem that I was facing." LINDSEY: I think the one that comes to mind immediately is Slack, actually. I feel like their product releases often speak to something I was feeling. Like, I think especially they seem attuned to the fact that it can create a lot of noise. And so providing or increasing the different ways that you can personalize your own experience so that you can mute things or have certain kinds of notifications or be able to set hours that you're away and unavailable. Those releases, I think, feel especially personal when I see those come through. CHAD: I think you're right. Slack is one where that would be the case. And it's worth noting that Slack does publish a roadmap, and they've been doing it for a couple of years. Particularly, it seems like, from the outside, a big part of what drove that and what's in their marketing around it is better setting expectations with their enterprise customers and that sort of thing rather than necessarily not meeting the needs of actual users. LINDSEY: They also seem especially responsive and helpful out in the world too. I've seen multiple instances of folks I know tweeting about a bug or something in Slack, and very quickly, the Slack account is responding with how to fix it or notifying that it's been logged in, and they'll be following up, that kind of thing. CHAD: So I'm looking at the Slack one a little bit more, and it seems like the roadmap is centered primarily around what they call the platform roadmap. So it's more like APIs and system-level things that they're going to be focusing on or adding rather than user-facing features. So it's more serving the needs of people who are building on top of the Slack platform versus saying that their product is going to have a specific feature at this time that's user-facing. LINDSEY: That's interesting. CHAD: Which makes sense because people building on top of the Slack platform who are really dependent for their business needs on the Slack platform are going to have high expectations for knowing what's coming and knowing that their needs are being addressed at some point in the future. LINDSEY: Right. And on the enterprise side, as they're getting more enterprise customers, I imagine that could come into play as well where enterprise companies are going to have some dependencies or requirements that maybe the Slack team hasn't had to deal with before, which could be integrations. It could be certain kinds of security measures, which if they're definitely working on those or creating the necessary partnerships, it can also make sense to say, "We have in our sites this integration or the security measure coming by the end of the year," kind of thing. CHAD: Yeah. So one that I have...and it's interesting because I think they've been doing a good job lately, but they went through a real period of time where I felt like they weren't doing as good a job with it, and it’s GitHub. So GitHub lately has done a much better job of, for me as a developer, as a user of GitHub every day, delivering features where it's like, yeah, this is awesome, and it fills a need or a pain that I was really having. Or I didn't even realize that I was going to need this feature, and now that it's here, I can't imagine it being any different. And they do that, as far as I know, there's not a public roadmap for GitHub. And GitHub, I could be completely wrong on this; they do a conference. They do shows. And what they're doing at that is they're announcing things. So they're more on the sliding scale towards Apple, where they're announcing general availability or beta availability of new features at their events as opposed to saying, "Here's what the roadmap for the next year looks like." LINDSEY: Which does create a forcing function of having things ready enough, maybe not launchable but ready enough that you can at least talk about it and talk about the timeline. CHAD: Yeah. And we had the product manager of the payments that GitHub announced on a previous episode. Her name's Devon. And that's one of the things she talked about was working towards that deadline of that presentation and how stressful it was and making sure that they manage scope within that. LINDSEY: So, do you think GitHub has been doing a better job since they were acquired? CHAD: It doesn't so much match since when they've been acquired, but there was a period of time where...and maybe it could be that there's nothing GitHub-specific about this, but there's probably a period in every product's time where you go from this is a new thing, and so there are so many new features that are low hanging fruit. And you can quickly roll them out, bang, bang, bang for a long period of time. Your roadmap is just sitting there in front of you, waiting for you to do it. You don't need to worry too much about it. That's, depending on the product, probably six months, a year, two years, maybe even five years. But then you're going to work your way through that list and the things that you do next, particularly if you reach a growth stage, which means that your core customers may be different than your original core customers…where you can enter a lull. And you need to take some time to figure out what the next phase of your product looks like. It's possible that it happened with GitHub. I tend to think that it's more that internally GitHub had real challenges. And we know it had some issues with sexual harassment and workplace issues like that. I think that really got in the way of GitHub functioning well. That's my theory. But again, I'm totally on the outside. But I do know that they went through some significant restructuring and addressing a lot of those issues and creating what is hopefully a more inclusive workplace where people can do their best work. And then good work started to come out again. LINDSEY: As far as launching products or new features, it's always interesting and challenging I think with SaaS products where you're continuously releasing improvements and how you think about…again, from the marketing fun of it too a little bit, is like how you think about when is something like a new launch? When is something a significant enough new feature? Is this actually a separate product from what we've been offering? And sometimes, that can be really obvious. Going back to the reporting example, that's a nice kind of shiny new toy in your platform that you're going to have, like a dashboard. The difficult ones are performance improvements. But I was curious if you have any takes on that too. CHAD: Yeah. What I've always done on the products that I've worked on...and thoughtbot has created several products that have been fairly successful not only for our clients but for ourselves as well. I've always favored not underestimating people's ability to absorb significant product changes as long as they're coming from a place of you know that they are needed. And that if you're shipping regular new things on a basis, not all of your customers know about that right away, and so you can take a marketing touchpoint for those changes. And even though you have a sense of urgency about communicating them right away, you do have some time to do that. I think I said earlier when I was starting out, "Underestimate people." What I think I meant was overestimate. We, as people who are very close to the product, assume that the minute we deploy a new feature or a change that everyone in the world is going to know about it. And that's just not the reality of what it's going to be. So when rolling out new features, you have to communicate them to the people who are touching them and are who are hitting them. But there are almost multiple layers of marketing and communication for any new feature that's going out, communicating with immediate customers that are touching a new feature, and then making sure that everything that's going out is flowing through marketing and is coordinated with marketing around what those touchpoints are going to be. And the general guideline that I've always used is at least once a month; there should be a major round-up or communication about a significant change that has been made. And I've always felt really good about the products that I was working on if we were in that cycle like we're continually delivering new things. But then, on a monthly basis, there's at least one new either individually significant thing that we can talk about. Or absent of that, doing a roundup of a theme of changes or just here are three major improvements we've made in the last month. LINDSEY: Yeah, I totally agree. It's great to have those opportunities to engage with customers and keep them invested in the product, and looking forward to those regular updates as well. CHAD: Right. So when we think back to Trello boards or roadmaps and that kind of thing, I don't think marketing should be…after that fact, marketing shouldn't be saying like, "What was just released? Can we know?" and then responding to it. Marketing should have insight into what's in the backlog, what's the next things that are going into production. What are the things we're planning now? And they should be contributing to that process because, in a lot of companies, marketing is going to be on the front lines of interacting with customers. So you're going to hear things, and you're going to see things and that should contribute to the process. LINDSEY: Right. Ideally, the marketing team is also customer-facing and providing those insights as well and tapped into what folks are having challenges with or looking forward to as well as what else they have their eye on that others are offering or trying out that are your competition. CHAD: So that's the cadence that when I'm in charge of a product, I've tried to achieve. It's easier to do in the early days of a product when, like I was saying, you don't even need the roadmap. There's so much low-hanging fruit, and everything is valuable, and the priorities are relatively clear. It's harder to maintain that pace far into your product's future not only because what you're doing is less clear and maybe less valuable to all of your customers but also that daily, weekly, monthly pace can be difficult to keep up indefinitely just from a sustainability standpoint. LINDSEY: Yeah. I feel like sometimes I even see products incorporating content in those later stages as ways to keep folks engaged and updated and have that be a feature of the product, whether it's community-based or the company itself actually producing new content and incorporating that into the product. CHAD: Yeah. So a really good example of that is (Boy, we've had a lot of good people on the podcast.) the folks at Wistia, which is a local company to Boston. And they're continually evolving what their product is offering. And they're launching new features. They're doing new things. But a big part of what you see publicly from them is also new content that helps people be better creators. So they are a good example that comes to mind of a company that does that pretty well. LINDSEY: So, we're going to be talking to three other startups of different stages in different industries about how they approach their product roadmap. Any sense for what might be consistent versus what is different? I imagine you also have insight from seeing a ton of client projects. Are certain areas of product roadmap more consistent than others? CHAD: I suspect what we're going to hear from the early-stage companies is that they actually have what...They're probably either going to say, "We have no idea. We're just flying by the seat of our pants." But actually, I think it wouldn't be surprising to me if there's just so much low-hanging fruit in front of us that that gives them a sense of a clear product roadmap. And they say, "Yeah, we do know. We do have a sense of what we're going to be doing next week and the week after." But they're going to not be so worried about what six months from now looks like. And I think a common trend of later-stage companies is I wouldn't be surprised to hear that they're very focused on partnerships and external relationships in a way that early companies aren't. And that is one of the factors which we haven't really touched on is, anytime you start involving external people the same way with Slack; it’s like people who are depending on you for their own business needs outside of your users creates more pressure for you to set expectations with them and to introduce roadmaps. So companies that are really focused on that who have channels and partnerships and that kind of thing are going to have more desire or pressure to introduce some form of roadmap. LINDSEY: Yeah. And in a way, that's the later stage companies' low-hanging fruit. When you bring in a partner, or you make an acquisition and immediately fill in a need that you've identified or an opportunity that you've identified, instead of taking your existing team to build it, or hire a team, or work with someone like thoughtbot. CHAD: Yeah. And it could be that that is actually totally the right thing. Because if you give everybody the benefit of the doubt and you say, "This product has been well-managed and user-centric to meet the needs of the users, then you're going to get that cycle." In the early days, we know what we should be doing, and our users are telling us. And we've got a lot of things to introduce into the product to fully meet the needs of those customers. And you're going to do that, and it's going to serve you for a really long time for delivering new things to them. But at some point, again, giving the benefit of the doubt, assuming you've done that and things have gone well, there is a point at which you say, "We've delivered all of that. And we have a product which is meeting the needs of our users. It's fulfilling the job to be done of those users." You say, "Okay, great." So we're either bringing new people in who might have different needs and different jobs to be done. Or we are exploring other business opportunities like bringing on partners and opening up new channels which have their own needs that are driving your product roadmap, or they're bringing in customers who have a different job to be done. LINDSEY: And honestly, it's an easy way for early-stage companies too to add a partner and gain access to their audience. But it's not likely that they're going to want to partner with you [laughs] because you're not bringing anything to the table, so you got to do that building first. CHAD: Yeah. So we'll see what they say. I'm looking forward to the conversations. So, Linsdey, you have some personal news. LINDSEY: Yes. With mixed emotions, I'll be moving on from thoughtbot and the podcast. CHAD: This comes as a complete surprise to me. You're just springing this to me on the podcast. LINDSEY: I know. I know I told you I wanted you to join five minutes earlier. And it's inappropriate. CHAD: [chuckles] LINDSEY: No, that's not true. I used all the proper channels. I read the handbook. But yeah, end of an era, moving on. But dang, it's been a lot of fun, hasn't it? CHAD: It has been fun. It's been great working with you. The impact that you've had on thoughtbot will be long-lasting. It was significant and long-lasting. I think that you joined at a really interesting time. Pandemic and all that stuff aside, completely separate from that, we were going through important transitions, and I think you're an important part of this. I remember commenting to you not long after you joined when you gave the first company-wide presentation that you were the first person I think who had ever done a full company-wide presentation like that, besides me. LINDSEY: Yeah. Wow. This feels like so long ago. CHAD: And you're just so fun to work with and collaborate with and just be a team member with that you're definitely going to be missed. So thank you for everything. LINDSEY: Thank you. I am definitely not tearing up. So no one has to worry about that. It's hard to look back without getting choked up. It's been a really great experience. [laughter] CHAD: I'm glad to hear that. You brought so much to the table. We learned a lot along the way, and it wasn't always easy. We had a marketing team working in a certain way, which went through a big change. I think we learned a lot about how the next phase of thoughtbot needs to work, and I think you're an important part of getting there. So thanks again. LINDSEY: Thanks for having me. Thanks to all of you for listening. And I'm now available as a guest, which is the great news. CHAD: [laughs] LINDSEY: And I almost know how to set up all my recording settings, so that's half the battle. But it's been real, and thank you for the opportunity from the experience. CHAD: So we will be back in a little while with new episodes of the show. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. And for all you listeners out there, I'll talk to you next time. Bye. Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.
Chad talks to Leadership Coach and Founder of Plucky, Jen Dary, about working with individuals and companies to create healthy dynamics at work. In fact, Plucky just released a new product that aids in doing just that! Manager Weeklies are notebooks designed to help leaders intentionally set up their weeks and track progress. It includes tips and tricks, including useful 1:1 tools. Each notebook is designed to last one quarter. Follow Jen Dary on Twitter (https://twitter.com/jenniferdary) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/jen-dary-46b0367/) Plucky (https://www.beplucky.com/) Manager Weeklies info & order link (https://shop.beplucky.com/products/manager-weeklies-2-pack) Newsletter: beplucky.com/newsletter (https://beplucky.com/newsletter) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Jen Dary, founder of Plucky. Jen, welcome back to the podcast. JEN: Thank you. My third time. Three time's a charm. I feel very lucky. CHAD: There aren't many people who have been on the podcast as guests three or more times. So you're in an ever-increasing select group of returning guests. JEN: Thank you. I feel like it's maybe because the Tokyo Olympics have just started, but I feel competitive and ready to take on this third session. CHAD: [laughs] So the last time you were on was October 28th, 2019 is when the episode came out. JEN: Millennia ago. CHAD: Not quite two years ago, but yeah, also a millennia ago. And that was Episode 342 so if people want to go back and take a listen to that. And then before that, you were on Episode 270, which I actually don't even know the date of. It was even longer. So welcome back. You are celebrating the eighth anniversary of Plucky. JEN: I know. I don't really think of it in these ways because I don't have an MBA, or I didn't come from a business background or anything. But definitely when I hit five years, I feel like my husband said something about that. He was like, "Honey, you should be really proud. Not a lot of businesses make it five years." And that was not really on my mind. But now that Plucky is eight, I feel like oh man, I'm just so happy to talk about how businesses evolve and how what you thought it was going to be in year one was different than year three, was different than year five, and of course, it's different than year eight. So we're eight years in, but nothing's the same, and everything's the same. I'm sure you've experienced that too. CHAD: It was actually the eighth year going into the ninth year mark that we at thoughtbot started to make big changes. And it was that idea of coming up on a decade. It started to feel like, wow, there's real momentum here. And instead of thinking about what the next year looks like, what does the next decade look like? And are we the kind of company that is going to last 20 years? And that put us in a different mindset. And I started to think about the impact we were having and the legacy that we would have. And was it big enough for the size of the company that we had? JEN: How old is thoughtbot right now? CHAD: We just celebrated our 18th anniversary. JEN: Oh my gosh. All right. Well, maybe at the very end, you can give me your best wisdom for the ninth year. [laughter] CHAD: Oh jeez. Okay. [chuckles] JEN: No presh, but tuck that in the back of your brain. CHAD: Yeah, get some sleep. That's my best advice. JEN: [laughs] Great. CHAD: That would be great. We can come back to that. JEN: Cool. CHAD: So obviously, it's been a big two years since we last talked. I'm sure a lot has progressed in Plucky. How have things changed? JEN: Well, what's funny is that the two years spread that we're talking about or 18 months or whatever it is, for the most part, overlaps with COVID so far. So by the end of 2019, things were cooking, and everything is good. And even, personally speaking, my youngest son would be entering kindergarten in the fall of 2020. Again, as a business owner, a mom, all those things I was sort of at the end of 2019 hot, so good. And then I was anticipating 2020 to be continued pretty much the same as is. Like, we would keep training managers. I would keep traveling. All that would get easier because the kids are getting bigger, then my kid would go to kindergarten. And I was also finishing a book about...I can't remember if we talked about this before, but I was really sick in 2016. I had a brain tumor diagnosis, and I'm okay now. It was benign. I had this memoir that was eh, I don't know, maybe two-thirds done. All that was the plan for 2020, Chad. And I'm sure this is shocking news to you, but none of it happened, including freaking kindergarten, obviously in person. So on the business side of things, I kept everything stable as best as I could. So coaching kept going because coaching has always been remote. We have some products, and we kept shipping those out as best we could. At the very beginning of COVID, when everybody thought it was this three, four-week hiatus from real life, I recorded a story every day. Because I was like, what can I do for all the world that's working? So I recorded a storytime for Plucky with my kids. And I put it out on social media so that working parents could have another 15 minutes of distraction for their kids. That's how cute I was back then. [laughter] After one month of that, I was like, I need somebody to read stories to my kids. Yikes. CHAD: Yeah. [laughs] JEN: So the big thing that changed was that our manager trainings in person obviously I had to cancel those. So I transitioned from in-person to virtual events, and that has continued. And as of this recording, end of July, I was thinking that our November event this year…it's the 20th cohort of So Now You're a Manager. I was going to have it in person. And just last week, I pulled the plug on that. And I was like, no, we're going to stay virtual a little bit longer because I don't know how to predict what the hell is coming. So again, that sort of stabilizing, right? Like, okay, well, now I know how to do the virtual. That will be the stable choice this year, which is weird to say, but true. CHAD: Yeah. So you just gave a great organic listing of the things that Plucky does, and a big part of that was that in-person So Now You're a Manager training, which, if people remember from the previous episodes, new managers at thoughtbot have attended over the years. It's a really great training for people who become managers. So what was transitioning that to remote like? Because you'd only ever done it in person before, right? JEN: Yeah, totally. The first 11 cohorts were in person, and then we got to 12, and that was supposed to happen in March in Atlanta. We canceled that, and it wasn't until June that we had the 12th, and that was the first virtual one. And to say that I needed to go through stages of grief is probably pretty accurate. [chuckles] My energy in person is so a thing, like a tool of mine and just pulling people together, and making safe space for conversations and all that jazz. So I was like, what the hell is that going to be like on Zoom? And meanwhile, remember I'm watching my first grader go through the shenanigans of Zoom for the end of that year. And I'm like, oh my God, how am I possibly going to get grown-ups on this and paying attention and not being distracted? So a couple of things, I will say number one is I definitely interviewed four or five people in the industry who are good at virtual events, and I tried to get their deepest wisdom about it. The second thing is that I made the cohorts smaller. So in person, we have around 20 to 22 max, and in virtual, we do 10 to 12 max. And so that got a lot smaller. Also, instead of being two days back to back, I broke it into three half days which is just a different ask. And I wasn't sure if people would bite at that. I tried to mimic it after how some people do an MBA on the side. So then they go to work, and they practice the stuff they're learning at the MBA. And so that has been my thought like, okay, you'll be with me basically for a month. We'll have three half days together, usually on a Friday. And then you're practicing in the meantime. So between the times I see you, you're improving your listening skills. You're coming back with anecdotes about hires or tough conversations or whatever. So I won't say that's like a silver lining, but it's just a different beast. And the first day I did it, I mean, I'm telling you, I was on the bathroom floor on my knees like, don't let the internet go out. CHAD: [laughs] JEN: I was so scared. I don't know why looking back. I'm in tech, but I'm not technical. It's my husband who helps me set up a monitor and whatnot. Oh God, I was so nervous. And I just thought, shit, this is the thing I can't problem-solve. If the internet goes out, I don't know what to do, but if someone's upset, I can help them. So it just brought all of my skills in a different environment. And now I feel pretty good about it. I don't know if you found this with your distributed company overall, but I have worked very hard to make sure that it's a blend, of course, this digital experience, but also I use the mail. I use snail mail a lot. So attendees get a packet before we begin. They get a gift at the end, a graduation gift. And yeah, I feel like I've learned a lot about how to have a hand-in-hand experience of digital as well as a physical object that they can touch to make that experience more than just a screen. CHAD: Yeah, I think that's important. How did changing the format, reducing the class size, what business ramifications were there for that? JEN: Well, it's way less money. [chuckles] CHAD: Right. Okay, sorry. JEN: No. Oh my God. I want to be very real about these things, especially for people starting their businesses. It's way less money. And also if you think about it, everybody had already bought tickets to Atlanta, and then they had already started buying tickets to...I can't remember what the next one was going to be, New York, I think. So for a lot of the year, everything was, I'll say, comped, but that's not really what's going on. All of a sudden, the amount of seats that I thought I was selling for the year got reduced in about half, and much of that were already pre-bought tickets. So, as a line item, that was way lower. I also think I got...man, I haven't really said this transparently to anybody before, but I'll say it here. I got really scared about what to charge. Do you charge the same thing virtually than you do in person? And so I lowered it, I would say for a year. I lowered it by a couple of hundred dollars for each ticket because I didn't know what the market wanted. And also, I didn't know, oh God, were businesses closing? Were people getting prof dev budgets? Everybody was frozen for a good while. So I'm lucky that now today I'm back up to the same price that it had been before, but it's not as much income per event. And the other thing I'll say which affects money…but again, I want to be transparent for other folks who think about or currently run businesses. One great thing to come out of some of the social unrest of last year is that we now have an equity scholarship for So Now You're a Manager. So in every cohort, be that virtually or in person, I always reserve a seat for someone who's coming from an underrepresented group, so people apply. And that is something that I very happily said I will eat the cost of that ticket because it's important to me to have different voices in the room. And that has been a total awesome thing this year. That just started in January of 2021, but that's something really great that came out of last year. CHAD: Yeah. What did you find that customers wanted, and did it change over time? Was there an appetite for it to be remote, or was there resistance to it? JEN: I think at first people were overwhelmed and didn't want it. That's why I held it from March until June until I thought people were ready. I can tell you categorically that I've had the lowest percentage of parents attend of all time because, let's be real, who wants another kind of obligation? Or also, parents during this time, especially with young children, were not in that growth space necessarily for work because there was so much to keep afloat. So other than the three half days, I also have this optional hour that I throw in just if people can come; there’s this extra exercise that didn't fit in from the original curriculum. And I don't think I've had one parent, maybe one, come across all those cohorts that have been virtual to that. So the optional stuff I see parents opting out of. That said, I saw more folks who maybe either live alone or maybe have a roommate but who are pre-family or some people won't have families but someone who was socially like, "It was so hard and tiring last year." And that sort of swung back around towards the summer and end of summer. I saw much more interest there because I think people were really lonely. CHAD: Yeah. And I also think, at least for me personally and for thoughtbot, that was when the thinking definitely shifted that this wasn't going to be going away anytime soon. And so we came to terms with that and started to then make much more long-term plans and permanent changes. JEN: I think it was also in the...I want to say like early fall when Twitter announced they'd be remote. Like, they have an office, but they wouldn't oblige anyone to ever come back again. And whenever that decision was made, there were a couple of other companies...At that point, I was still living in the Bay Area, and there were a couple of other companies that made similar suggestions. And so again, to your point, there was a revisioning of what the next phase was like or at least what to expect. And so, I think people weren't holding out to go back to normal. It was like, what's the new normal? CHAD: Yeah. So when we first shut down offices and went remote, we were giving updates every two weeks, and then it changed to every month. And then it would be like, "There's really no change. We're going to give another update in April." And then April was, "We'll give another update in May." And when it came to June, we just said, "We're planning on being in this mode for at least the end of the year. Let's start all acting and make this sustainable." So that is when our thinking changed too. JEN: Did you feel like with your CEOness and business responsibility over there...what kept you grounded for all that thing? Because obviously every time you make that announcement or regardless of whether that's in person or just...I don't even know– retention or whatever it is. It feels like you're just building strategy on freaking quicksand. CHAD: It wasn't easy. You feel responsible for everybody's well-being, both financially and everything else. And so the lack of stability…you want to provide it in an unstable world. You want to say, "Well, at least you shouldn't have to worry about this. Let’s provide…" but it was impossible to do. And I'm much more comfortable with uncertainty. I think there's a spectrum of comfortableness with uncertainty, and I'm pretty far on one end of it, and even I was struggling. Same thing with like I'm very much on the spectrum of not having to worry about anxiety or anything like that, and even I was feeling it. And so I was just like...at one point I said to I think it was Diana or whatever "If I'm feeling this, if I'm getting chest palpitations, [laughs] something's really wrong, and we really need to pay attention to how everybody else is feeling." JEN: Oh, yeah. I even saw that anxiety obviously with coaching clients. There are some clients that when budgets dried up, there was like an initial drop-off, I would say March, April. But then I feel very lucky that the pipeline was still very strong, and I had clients stay with me or join or whatever. You remember as well as anybody not only did we have this health crisis going on, which again we still do but my last class...So third of three of the cohort in May last year was a couple of days after George Floyd's murder. And the responsibility I felt too...like, when all these things were going on last summer, it was like, who freaking cares about anything? It's like these huge things. And you start to say nothing matters. There are only three things that matter in life. And then you kept sort of recycling the drain on that. So here I am going into teaching the third of three classes. And during the third class, I always teach concepts on how to hire, concepts on how to lay someone off and fire someone, which everyone's always very barfy and nervous about. And I try to bring us together and graduate us in what feels like a victorious moment. But that's three days after George Floyd's murder, and everyone is reeling and needing to process. And I remember thinking that morning, I don't know how this is going to go because I was fully willing to rip up the plan and do something different. But at the same time, there's also sometimes they want some structure. Folks want to just show up and take this class and be distracted from what's going on in the world. So we sort of talked about this a few minutes before we started recording but really, what has been fascinating and challenging about continuing to train managers over the last two years is that these very large things are going on in the background: George Floyd's murder, a lot of social unrest in Minneapolis, the election, COVID, all these things. And you can't just put that away and show up to manager training. It is freaking relevant because it is relevant for them. Of course, it's very meta, but all of my students are then going to go back and be responsible for 3, 5, 7 other people in their day-to-day work. So it was really wild, but again, stretching and a challenge that I met with a lot of intention. I don't know if I was always super successful at it, but I thought a lot about it. CHAD: Yeah, I think that was the shift that we saw on our team. And what I've heard from people is that enough is enough in several different categories of things. And like, we just can't keep on doing what we were doing before. It's not working, and it is unacceptable. People are angry too. So it's not just processing. It's anger and wanting to see action, wanting to take action. And yet, doing it in a world where we can't actually be together, I think, made it particularly challenging for some people and for managers to know how to meet their team members where they were. And people process things in different ways too, and people need different things. And at that point, we had hired people who had only ever been remote. So I think the connections that you have with people that you might've worked with in person you can lean on a lot in the beginning. But then you're working with someone or managing someone who you've never met in person. JEN: Yeah. It's a whole new ball game. And I think that the notion of community has gone through the wringer, not only in the worst, it's a rebirth almost. I think the notion of locally what's going on for you and then who can you see? Who can you have a barbecue with? All of those questions of like, who can I be with? Of course, the internet's great, but the internet has some major, major boundaries to it. And people see that at work, and they see that in training. CHAD: One of the things we're struggling with in that category now is there are people who live next to each other because we were historically in offices. And as it becomes more possible to get together with each other, and this is something that, as managers, we're trying to navigate, it actually has a huge potential for exclusion now that we have hired a bunch of people who are anywhere. If the teams that were in-person together but are now working remotely start getting in person again, even if it's just an outing at a park, who's not able to attend that, and how will they feel? And what expectations have we set with them? And then you have just sort of equity and inclusion issues around people we've hired in Brazil since we've gone remote. There's no way for them to come. JEN: Sure. CHAD: It's not fair. And navigating that as a team, I think we've been able to do that, but it hasn't been easy. JEN: I think sometimes the only way to see it is none of it will work. So if none of it will work, then cool. The bar's low. [laughter] Yeah, it's not going to be perfect. And all in person had its issues too. So then, if you just sort of bottom it out and say, cool, cool, cool, there's no one silver bullet answer here. So what that means is yes, as human beings, folks who are possibly able to meet up for coffee will resonate and glow and be psyched to be around some other people. So, how do we say "No," less often to that? Because that's great. That's really something to celebrate. And I'm sure if everybody was in that situation, they would try to take advantage of that too. But then to say, if you're not in that situation, here's another option. And then, every once in a while, we'll mix those options together and have like a rolling menu with it so that nothing gets too static and paralyzed and presumed. And it's in that flow state, which of course, is more fatiguing because you have decision fatigue, and you got to keep making decisions about it. But if you can just say, "Oh, well, we're going to decide that on a week to week basis or on a quarter to quarter." I probably have said this to you before in one of these other podcast conversations, but I just really think that life is a giant science experiment. So if that's true, then you can just say, "Hey, y'all, for Q3, we're going to try this. And at the end of Q3, we'll ask you how that went, and we'll either keep doing it, or we'll totally change it, or we'll increment it." Software people are really good at this because they know that not everything has to go from 2.0 to 3.0. You could go 2.1, 2.2, 2.3. There are incremental builders. So if you can leverage that metaphor even culturally or socially with the makeup of the team and the way you run things, I don't know; I kind of think that's the best you got. CHAD: Yeah. And I think we generally have the idea that we trust people and that we can provide the information. And people will generally use that information to make good decisions that are oriented towards fulfillment. So a really good example when it comes to managers is in an environment where if you're meeting in person with someone, one team member and you're their manager, and you're not meeting in person with another, that could influence negatively the other person's path to promotion or the relationship they have with you and just subtly bias you towards the person that you might be able to meet in person with. And so as a manager, making sure people know that, that that is a thing that can happen is a good way to manage that bias because I think generally, people don't want to let that happen, but they might not even realize it, so they can actively manage it. JEN: Well, it sounds like even in that thought, you are gently nudging people back towards intention and back towards just not sleepwalking through their work, that this is important for us, not only in the distance conversation here but also obviously for race, and for gender and for all kinds of different ways that humans are. We will never get it 100% right and yet intention, and taking a beat, and taking a breath before you move into conversations about promotions or whatever will help remind you hang on a second, remember there's invisible stuff inevitably going on based on who I am and where I came from. How do I make sure things are fair today? Or whatever the reminder needs to be. It sounds like that's...I don't know. It's good that you have that front of mind. CHAD: So that's one example of remote management. How much of before the pandemic were people who were coming and attending the workshops? Were they managing people remotely? And how much of your curriculum was specific to that, if any? JEN: My gut says maybe about a third were remote managers. They are definitely with bigger companies that I was seeing that. The small agencies based in Pittsburgh, you know, Austin, those places were pretty localized. But so what you get with a bigger company is also a bit more infrastructure that supports some of these cultural conversations. And we had it as part of the curriculum, but it wasn't very big, and maybe I would sort of be intentional. There are breakout groups and stuff like that. And I might think I'm going to pair these two together for their practice one-on-one because I know they're both remote managers. I am very intentional about a lot of the pairings and all that stuff, and so I would be thoughtful in that way. But now, on some level, in all these virtual workshops, everybody has an equal footing now. So everybody's kind of screwed, and everybody's also making it work. So that has been a very interesting thing to see. And I always laugh at this example, a woman who came early on, maybe like the eighth or ninth cohort, and she's a remote manager. And she would say, "Well, I don't have a water cooler. I don't have, like, I'm walking down the hall sensing somebody’s upset or anything." But she would say, "This is going to sound weird, but I keep an eye on how fast they emoji something." So if you have a person who...You know this person in Slack. They're always on Slack, always so supportive, funny, have something to say, a little thumbs-up emoji, or whatever. But if one day they're at work for sure and they haven't said anything about something, she would learn to read the tea leaves like that and check-in. And I just thought that was so clever and very creative. And what she's alluding to is this level three listening that I teach, which is gut or instinct or intuition. And what she was tracking was basically a change in behavior. And that's pretty much what we're tracking when we're in the office too. There could be many reasons why somebody doesn't emoji something right away. Maybe your daughter just ran into the room. Maybe there's a doorbell. There are a million things. But at the same time, not to be too precious about it but to casually track that at least instinctively. She was doing a good job of meeting the moment as best she could. CHAD: Are there other ways in which what you've been doing has changed over the last year? What are managers concerned about or challenged by? JEN: Yeah. First of all, I always had name tags that allowed for pronouns. But this is now certainly part of the curriculum. When we start, I give some social norms and then some tech norms. And so I make the suggestion that in Zoom, after your name, you put your pronouns. And it's not a huge chunk because I really don't feel like I am the best to teach this, but I've added in a DEI component, diversity, equity, inclusion component. And we have some folks in the alumni community who are DEI consultants, so that's great. I always give them shout-outs and refer over if people are looking for that. I've noticed that people are...I'll say careful, but what I mean by careful is that they are aware of all of the stuff we're talking about, like race and social stuff. Depending on where your office was in the country, the election was sometimes really hard. I think about companies in Ohio or Pennsylvania or swing states where it was not obvious that everybody in the office was on the same page about that. And the way that that stuff comes up and is like this piece of baggage in the room that prevents literally like a website being made. We want to think no, that shouldn't enter. That's not relevant here. And yet people are careful about both trying to say, "Listen, bring who you are. You're accepted here." And also like, well, sometimes what you're suggesting you believe about the world is harmful. The whole Basecamp thing is a good example of that. And so I found the managers who come to my training to just be open to not only sharing their experiences with that but looking very much for some guidance on that from their peers and then from me. CHAD: That's sort of what I was saying about people felt like you needed to be changing the way that you were approaching things. It wasn't okay anymore for most people to say, "We shouldn't be having this conversation. It's not a work-related conversation." It affects people's work and their ability to work. It is a work issue. And you can't simply put everything aside. That's one angle of it, but we're not all equipped. We're not all educated. We're not all ready to be able to do that as managers. JEN: Totally. But with the amount of shit that we have had to handle for the last two years, short of somebody who's a social worker/priest, I don't know who was ready. I feel like a lot of what we're talking about is so resonant for me because all of this is so hard. And if you are alone doing hard things, it's impossible. But the reason that I run the manager trainings the way I do and the reason that I hold onto them after and I put them in a Slack community, they're now alumni of the program. And it's active; it depends on the day. But people have hard questions that they're wrestling with. People have jobs that they're promoting, that they're trying to get people to apply to. It's this active community that goes on afterwards. Because, honestly, Chad, I feel like a big input into me creating So You're Now a Manager and the community around it was my experience becoming a parent. I was one of the first ones of all my friends. I was the first one of my siblings, and my son was the first grandchild on both sides. And I was like, this is so lonely. All my friends are going out in Brooklyn for dinner. And I was 31. It's not like I was very young or anything, but that's New York. And so I had a moms’ group. And man, that moms’ group got me through those early days because we could all laugh at how hard it was. We could cry together. And when I looked at the transition that people go through from IC, individual contributor, to manager or some level of leadership, you get responsibility. You have to play the messenger sometimes, something you're not totally down with. You have sometimes competition with peers. You have to manage up sometimes. And then you have these people who come to you with requests: I want a new career path. I want more money. I want a different title. And the slog of that is very reminiscent, on some level, of parenting to me. So I thought, well, this is not going to be like, here's your book. Good luck being a manager, although books could be helpful. For me, it seemed like there was at least a certain template of a person in the world who could use community too. So I always say you'll be with me for two days or a month if it's virtual. But I can't possibly teach you everything you'll encounter. That said, we can get some critical skills under your belt. And then you can just continue to riff with this peer network. And that has been a very, I would say, unique thing about the manager training I run and something that is so fulfilling to me. I have a very tiny business. Those are, in weird ways, kind of my colleagues, the funny jokes they tell or those personalities. That was another thing that we had to let go of. In 2020, I was going to have the first reunion. CHAD: Oh yeah. We actually talked about that in the previous episode as an idea. JEN: Heartbreaking. Yeah, it was called Encore. Basically, it was a follow-up and open to anybody that has already taken SNYAM, So Now You're a Manager. I had people who pitched talks, and we had selected them. And yeah, we had to pull the plug on that. So my hope is that next year we can do that. And now we've got almost...actually; I think we just hit 300 people, so maybe 50 will come, I don't know. We'll see. But I like the idea of providing a space for these folks who were new managers when I knew them and when they came through me but have gained some skills themselves and could become thought leaders in this management space. And whenever the world is ready for it, I'm excited to put that together. CHAD: Yeah, that's awesome. That sense of community is one thing I've struggled with, to be honest. Because having done this for 18 years, there aren't many people who worked at the company that work there now anymore. [chuckles] We've grown too. So I no longer have the close personal relationship that I had with most people at the company before or close work relationships. And combined with as we've grown, it's harder...you have to be more of a leader. You have to put yourself aside. It's harder to always be a servant to others. And then I found that especially difficult last year. And it's part of why I needed to not be CEO anymore and to transition to the COO role. Because I couldn't be in a position where everyone was always looking to me continually to make...and as distributed as we are, one of our values is self-management. But continually always looking to me to be the one who always has an answer, who is the stable one, I needed a break from that. So it's been nice, the transition. JEN: I was going to say is it better? CHAD: [chuckles] So it's a little bit different than I expected. So what happened was we made that change. We made other changes, and that was all going well. And then, in February, the largest vaccine scheduling provider in the United States came to us and needed help scaling the infrastructure and all that stuff. JEN: Oh my God. That's exciting. CHAD: And so I, along with a crack team of other experienced thoughtboters, went and spent all of our time focused on that. It has pros and cons, which is right as I was transitioning into a new role; I completely got pulled away and started working full-time with that client for a very important cause, which is the reason why we did it and decided it was worth it. The silver lining is it put everyone else in a position where we went very quickly from Chad's no longer the CEO to Chad's not here right now. [chuckles] And that was unexpected. But I think that it had downsides, but it had upsides too in terms of really being in a position where people could come into their own, into their new roles and sort of a forcing function for some of the changes that we needed to make. JEN: You know, I'll give you major props on that, Chad. Because 18 years and especially, I think this about a lot of things, but especially business here, people get stuck. They really do. They get stuck, especially founders, CEOs. They don't know how to get out of something if they're tired. And there are not a lot of models for what that could look like. The biggest disservice someone could make to leading a company would be to not really be feeling it because that shit trickles down. And if you're tired or if it's not your thing anymore, really, the biggest gift you can give is to go get aligned somewhere else and then hand over the reins to what I keep thinking of as the next generation. I coach a lot of people, or I work with a lot of people who are in the middle, let's say, so they're not C-suite, and they're not newest managers, but they're sort of senior there. They're totally ready to go. I can't overstate that. [chuckles] Will they mess stuff up? Sure. So did you. Will they have questions? Absolutely. But the next generation of every company it's the most strategic thing that a CEO could do is to think, what happens if I'm not here? That allows you to take a freaking vacation, like take a month off. Or that allows you to meet such a huge civic call, which you're describing here, and step away. Or again, God forbid something happened, and you get very sick; it allows the company to be bigger than yourself. So I just commend you on even having the courage to step towards COO and then obviously also kind of redirect as needed this year. But I hope that if there are other CEOs listening or folks in the C-suite who are wiped, this is my gentle nudge to them to hand over the reins at some point. Because you'll get a paycheck, I’m sure you can figure that. CHAD: [chuckles] Being wiped was one small part of it. And I had Diana on who's the new CEO, and we talked about this. We had grown to a certain point. Also, to toot my own horn, I had done a really good job of building a team of managing directors who were really good at what they were doing. And I was no longer the best manager for them. I was no longer what they needed in order to continue to grow. I could do it, but I wasn't the best person for it. So that was the overriding reason to make the change, and being tired and needing to not always be the one that everyone was looking to was certainly a part of it. But yeah, it's been good. JEN: Yeah. I figured we would get there at some point, but we talked a little bit earlier about how I have this new product coming out in September. So the product is called Manager Weeklies, and it's basically...I got to figure out the exact noun for this. I guess this is the marketing moment. [chuckles] But it's basically a small notebook. The way I think of it is it helps you take a deep breath before your week starts. And so I'm not messing with your to-do lists. Everybody has different versions of that, Trello or wherever the heck you keep it. But before you start the week, it is so important to wonder where's my energy at? What's my perspective? What are the couple of priorities? What am I blocking? Just a couple of invitation questions there. And then the idea is that you then can do this on whatever, a Sunday night or Monday morning. And then the rest of the week has, I feel like I've said intention 50 times in this conversation but has intention in it. You can decline those three meetings because they're not the highest priority. You can make some space to actually do the work that comes out of the meetings that you're in. And what I have watched over the last maybe three years are my coaching clients who get themselves together at the beginning of the week who have some sort of practice about setting things up in a good way are the most successful. They get the promotions because they look like they know what they're doing because they do. So anyway, it's called Manager Weeklies. So it's a small notebook. Each notebook is for a quarter. And then, because I'm a coach, I also filled it with other good stuff. Like at the end, there are all kinds of prompts for ways to give praise to people on your team, ways to give feedback, ways to handle conflict, ways to say, "Yes, no, maybe." And then there's a Work Wheel tool at the very end. And so my hope is that people who just feel like they show up on a Monday already behind that they would find some help with that intention. And I feel like what you're saying is that self-awareness component that came through for you, Chad, to say, I'm not the best at this, and also, I'm a little fatigued and so, therefore, deep breath. Here's the strategy going forward. It wasn't reactive, but there was some thought behind it. And so we'll see this fall people get a chance to try that out. CHAD: That's awesome. I feel like it's getting back to your roots but also building on it. So for people who don't know, the Plucky Cards were actually the first way that I was introduced to you was someone showing me a pack of those cards. So, where can people find out more about that? JEN: The best way for people to find any information is just to subscribe to the newsletter. I send it once a month. It's usually a reflection on work, life, something going on there. So if you go to beplucky.com/newsletter, then you'll be first in the know. What's very funny, Chad, is I have a former coaching client who holds the record now. He was the first one to buy the first pack of cards. He was the first one to buy the second pack of cards. [laughs] And he was also the first one to do this Small Group ticket that I recently did as a little offshoot of Plucky. So anyway, in my mind, I always laugh, and I wonder, I wonder if he's going to grab the first pack of Manager Weeklies this fall. But you're right. They certainly plug and play with the cards very well where there's even space in the weekly template to say, what's the one-on-one topic for the week? So it could be a card that you pull, and you use, or it could just be something else going on in the world that you want to bring to all the one-on-ones. But I feel like there are a lot of things I'm not great at in the world, but the things I am good at are people. And then I listen to people over and over again through all of these experiences. And I try to hear what else do they need? What weird little thing can I invent that could help them with some of these things that they struggle with? And I'm also just really mindful of the fact that not everybody has the budget for coaching or for manager training. And I would love for Plucky to be a brand that even if you work for a nonprofit or if you don't have the money to pay for some of those more expensive things that you would have 35 bucks for a pack of cards or 20 bucks or whatever the pricing will be for the notebooks and that you can engage with my brand, even if you're not very wealthy. And I feel like as a person who works and serves an industry like tech, that is always really a priority for me to not only coach or work with the people with the most money. CHAD: Yeah. If I remember right, you designed the cards, right? JEN: Oh my God, I wish. No. CHAD: Oh, okay. JEN: For the first pack of cards I worked with, I don't know if you know him, Greg Storey. CHAD: Yeah. JEN: He's great. Greg Storey did my first deck of cards, and then he moved on, and he's doing other interesting things with his career. So I have a designer who helped me with the second deck of cards called the Manager Pack. So that's questions for managers of managers to bring to one-on-ones, and then the Manager Weeklies are coming out. I've been collaborating with a woman who runs a design little shop called YupGup in Delaware. So her name is Joni. So it is so wild, Chad. I wish that I had any design sense. But it's like, I make these things which look like a terrible PowerPoint. I'm like, here, then there will be a bullet. And then I give it to a designer like Joni at YupGup, and all of a sudden, she has a logo. And then she has some emojis and colors. And I'm like, this is how I felt when I was pregnant, and someone showed me a sonogram, and I was like, (gasps) there's a baby in there. CHAD: [laughs] JEN: This is how I felt when she showed me them, and it was so exciting. And I will never be good enough to even be talented at all to make these things myself. But I hold the idea, and then I find someone who wants to help me make that in the world. It's just magical. That is so fun for me. And so I just ordered them. Actually, I ordered 1,000 of them about three hours ago. And so they'll come in August, and I just know it will be very surreal when I open the box and look at them and think about how many people in the world and pens in the world will be used to set intention, to set up people's weeks and hopefully, make a softer and more fair and thoughtful place to work. CHAD: And one of the things I love about your business and products is that you know you're having an impact beyond that 1,000 notebooks that you put out in the world because each of those people manages 3, 4, 6, 7 people. And if you can make work better for those people, then you have a 7,000-person impact. JEN: Yeah. And it's funny you say that because I think that recently...I keep saying I'm about to go away for a month or just be out of work for a month as a break after this whole COVID time. Since starting Plucky eight years ago, I didn't really have a model. I am not a traditional business. And even though many people kept saying, "When are you going to hire? When are you going to build the team? When are you going to do all of that?" That is not the shape of Plucky medium-term or long-term. I'm not going to be a coach factory. I certainly could, but then I'd end up super burned out and not liking my job. And then I'd have a sad company, and it would be bad. So I don't want to do that. CHAD: And that's literally the opposite of Plucky. JEN: Right. I mean, in the name, right? So, where I have landed as a model is to look at what artists do. And you would never take an artist...I really like Lisa Congdon in Portland. She's a cool, cool artist. And I've heard her speak, and I like her a lot. And what would Lisa Congdon's team look like? She sure isn't hiring other artists to do the work that she's over-signed up for. You get Lisa. And so she has a shop, and then she has partnerships where she teaches at different universities. And as I move into the ninth year here, I'm thinking a lot about what's standing between me and Plucky's shape and what an artist like Lisa Congdon has going on? And honestly, fully transparently, I think it's that I need to own that Plucky is me. And it's so messy in marketing. Do you use the royal 'we'? We at Plucky? Who is we? And I think that there's some good growth in front of me this fall and next year to say, yeah, I'm Jen, and I run a company called Plucky. And I'm putting this stuff out in the world, and I hope to have ripple effects. And it won't be by hiring 100 people. It'll be just like you described, selling things to X people, and then those people's reports, those ripples will follow down. And I'm really grateful to have found myself in this place because I love coming to work every day. CHAD: Awesome. Well, even though you love coming to work every day, also enjoy your vacation. JEN: Oh my God. Thank you. CHAD: And your time off and your time to reflect. JEN: Yes, thank you so much. CHAD: You already mentioned the website, but again, mention that, and then are there other places that people can follow along or get in touch with you? JEN: Yes, sure. So the newsletter, like I said, is beplucky.com/newsletter. On Twitter, you can look at @BePlucky. I'm on LinkedIn, too, obviously for Plucky. And then I have basically a behind-the-scenes account on Instagram because it was too annoying...Like, what do you take pictures of, Chad, when you're a coach? You can't take pictures of confidential conversations. CHAD: [laughs] JEN: So Instagram, I was like, I don't know what to do with this anymore. So anyway, I just have a behind-the-scenes one over there, which is called bepluckster because somebody else had it. So yeah, so all those ways. And also, I just generally say that if you're a person listening to this podcast and you just wanted to say something to me or ask a question, you should always just email me. It's just hello@beplucky.com. I love just hearing from people. And I might not be able to send you a three-page essay back, but I really love just interacting. And if something moved you or made you think about something, whether that was something I said or Chad, you can always just shoot me a note and tell me what you're thinking. I am not precious about that. CHAD: Awesome. Likewise. So you can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @cpytel. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. Thanks for joining us, Jen. JEN: Thank you. Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Jen Dary.
Chad and Lindsey talk about how the pandemic has changed "normal" remote work and how thoughtbot has dealt with the transition from being majoritively in-person to fully remote, plus the impact it's had on both employees and clients. Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. LINDSEY: And I’m your other host, Lindsey Christensen. We’re back. Chad, I've only seen you pixelated for over a year now. CHAD: I know. LINDSEY: Can you believe it? CHAD: It's hard to believe. I haven't seen anybody that I work with [laughs] not pixelated for over a year now. LINDSEY: It seems normal now. CHAD: Yeah, it seems normal, except when you think about it, and you realize how long it's been. We're going to talk about remote work today, and I think that that's something to keep in mind, which is what we're doing now isn't normal remote work. We can make the best of it and that kind of thing, but it's obviously different than normal remote work when you can actually have a social life outside of work and meet people and get together in person to kick off new projects or to be like, “Let's have a retreat or whatever.” So right off the top, we should acknowledge that we're not in this normal period, and this isn't necessarily normal remote work. LINDSEY: Right. Which is a good thing, I guess, or the optimist in me says remote work can be way better than it is right now because this is quarantining work. [chuckles] CHAD: Right. So for those who don't know, thoughtbot made the decision to go remote-first work from anywhere. And we touched on it in the previous two episodes a little bit, and that's what we're going to be talking about today. And I think that that's one of the things that made us confident in the direction was that things aren't great now, but they're certainly not bad. And the majority of the team felt good about what was happening now, even given all of the downsides. It gave us the confidence to look ahead and say, “Can this be even better, and will it be okay?” And I think that's part of what gave us the confidence to move forward. LINDSEY: I saw this interesting stat, and this was actually from a while ago, last July 2020. Gartner did a survey of company leaders, and 80% plan to allow employees to work remotely, at least part of the time after the pandemic, and 47% will allow people to work full-time from home, which is even a bigger percentage than I anticipated. But I think it speaks to the major change that everyone's seeing. We've all learned that remote work can work. I saw another stat that was, I think, no companies are reporting a reduction in productivity because of remote work, and in 27% of cases, companies feel like they're being even more productive. CHAD: We didn't not do this before because we didn't think it would be productive on a day-to-day basis or that we didn't believe in the ability to work remotely working. There were a couple of important points that caused us to choose the direction we did; the first one being we went through a period of time where we were a hybrid remote or about half the team was remote, and the other half was working in an office in Boston. And it felt hard and mediocre and something we couldn't -- It wasn't worth the amount of effort we would need to invest in making that work well. It just didn't seem worth it. And so we made the decision to -- And I think this is the way thoughtbot works like we've got to make intentional decisions in a lot of things that we do and half measures don't really satisfy us over the long-term. And so there was this feeling back then of we either need to decide to go completely remote, or we need to all be in person. And because we work locally with clients, that pushed us in the direction of well, we really like working with local clients face-to-face. We like how that feels, and it feels like something that's going to be enjoyable and fulfilling, and sustainable over the long term. So let's commit to that. And I think that that's one of the reasons why we've been successful in this transition is because, at the same time, we no longer had the client constraints of clients asking us to be in person with them or wanting to work with them in person, that was just completely off the table. LINDSEY: That's interesting. I think I hadn't really fully thought about that element which was need or perceived need from the client to be side-by-side with us. CHAD: Yeah. Once that was off the table, it allowed us to be freed up to make an independent decision, probably more confident in that decision because going through a period where we could show clients that it could work, I'm more confident now that when clients can be in person again, that they will be more open to working with us remotely. And I'm sure some portion of them won't be, but we'll find other clients in that time period. [laughter] LINDSEY: I think another thing that helped us in that transition was we weren't fully remote, but we were remote in a lot of regards. So we had six different studios around the world who collaborated together, worked on the same projects and the same teams. And we had a really good starting point for how we collaborated online, whether that's in actual video meetings or doing asynchronous work or project management all the way through to client work. Not everyone was in the city of the client that they were collaborating with. CHAD: Yeah. And all of the corporate team, the operations, marketing, all that stuff was already really a distributed team. It was primarily the design and development that fell back on being in person the most often. LINDSEY: And I would say we also had a pretty flexible work from home policy too. So if folks felt like they were going to be more productive from home a certain day or were having a delivery or whatever those life things are, we trust that they know what's best for them and best for the client and allow folks to make decisions about where they're working. CHAD: The way that we worded it before was that temporary remote working was always okay. And that could be I'm going somewhere for two months; even that was okay. And the opposite of that is what we said wasn't okay, which wasn’t permanently remote. And the big difference now is that we said permanently remote is okay. And walking back through the transition, this was something that has been an ongoing conversation at thoughtbot for a while. It was pretty early on in the pandemic that we said that people needed to start to move out of the places that we had studios. And I think that that was the first important step that we took as a company to make sure that we were supporting everybody in what they needed to do for life reasons saying, “If you need to move outside of a place where you would normally be based, do it. We'll continue to support that.” And then about 20 people, [laughs] a little less than 100 moved over the course of the next six months or so. And once that happened, that's a pretty significant portion of the team no longer being based where we have offices, and that sort of sealed the deal. LINDSEY: I didn't know that number. CHAD: I think it's less than 20. I think it's like 17 or something like that. LINDSEY: So it probably works out to about 20% moved to where there weren't offices. And do you have an idea how far spread out everyone is now? CHAD: I think most people who moved significantly moved to be closer to family or back where they were originally from. I think that was the driving factor. So it's places like Texas, different parts of Texas, Arizona, that kind of thing. And then people bought houses to get out of the city and that kind of thing as well, particularly New York City was -- I think a lot of the people in New York City are the ones who moved as well. LINDSEY: So, how would you describe our remote structure now? CHAD: I think there are a couple of important things like, we're specifically calling it work from anywhere, not work from home. Obviously, we all need to be in our homes now, but long-term, there's no reason why if the home isn't comfortable for somebody that they will work somewhere else, and anywhere also means geography. And we're not even completely shutting the door on eventually having small co-working spaces or small offices where people can get together and work in person. It's just not what we have right now and not what we're specifically planning on in the short term. So I think that's the base level when I think about the important parts of the structure is what are we actually saying, or what are we actually doing? And then the next important aspect we took into account was okay; one of the things that influenced the way that we were working before, which was a local team working with primarily other people in your office was it's pretty annoying, and it does affect productivity to be waiting significantly across time zones for people that you're supposed to be collaborating with. And so we ended up splitting the company by time zone into what we’re calling Launch Pad 1 and Launch Pad 2. And Launch Pad 1 is all of the Americas, and Launch Pad 2 two is Europe, Middle East, and Africa. It's interesting because that's actually only about three maybe four times zones different at the extremes. All of the Americas, when you do it out, it's a lot of time zones. It's ten timezones, but the reality is we don't have anybody in Hawaii or Alaska yet, so we're okay with that.[chuckles] But it's something that may need to be revisited in the future if we really start to hire people remotely in those extremes of the time zone. LINDSEY: So the geographies are really time zone-based, which is an interesting note. And then I'm sure some folks are also interested in logistics, especially now that you're heading up operations. What does that mean, or what are the big hurdles when you do have people spread across countries, let alone states? CHAD: So let's break it down in terms of employment stuff, and then we'll talk about operations like how we run things. We're not leading the charge in this. Other companies have done it before. And so we're taking a lot of cues from companies like GitLab and Buffer about how they do things. We've had international employees for a little while off, and on or international team members, I should say. And what we've historically leaned on for that is having them as independent contractors. And it's pretty common for them to create their own company that they're then using, and they're working within, and they're paying local taxes, and they're invoicing us for the time. And in a lot of countries, their laws are conducive to that. But strictly speaking, it's not okay to do that in every country. And if you were to get audited and someone were to look at the relationship you have with that person and their laws are similar to the U.S., they might declare that person an employee, and you're responsible for the taxes and everything, not them. Operating at the size we are, to be perfectly honest, at the size, we are with a handful of people, it’s a gray area. Like, some places it's okay, some places it's not quite okay, but it's only a handful of people and everything. You can get away with that without doing a lot of research into each specific country, whether it's okay or not, particularly if you make it the responsibility of the people, and you set up contractor agreements, and you set things up that way. So that's a pretty common way of operating. But as you start to grow and formalize it more and the numbers of people that you're working with as international contractors increases, the pressure is going to mount to say, “We have to get out of this gray area; otherwise, some country or someone could get in trouble,” not even us, but potentially the team member. If they were to get audited and it's not quite up to snuff, they could be held for some employment taxes or something like that. So we want to avoid that. We don't want to create a burden on people. And so there's really two ways of going about it; one is to create local entities in each of the countries where you want to hire somebody. So you create your own local company. That company employs them and pays the local taxes and employment taxes, and all that stuff and everything is fully set up and official, and we've done that before. We did that in Sweden when we had the studio in Stockholm, and that's how we work in the UK. The overhead of doing that is really high, especially --It’s okay when we were in Sweden and the UK and the U.S. But as we look ahead and we say, “We're going to have ten then maybe 20 in different countries,” the overhead of that is really high. So the alternative is to work with a company that does that for you. So there are companies they're called PEOs professional employment organizations or international PEOs. And what they do is they create companies in all of the countries that they want to operate in, and then they employ the people as real full employees there. And they do all the books, and they pay all the taxes and everything. And they make sure that everything is done correctly for each individual country. And then they invoice you for the employee's salary, the taxes, and then an administration fee. And it's typically on the order of $250 to $600 a month per person. And so that's the direction we're going to go in as we expand this and we do it. That's the direction we'll go in because we've been through what it's like to create that overhead of the individual entities in each country. And it might make sense if we were saying we're going to open an office or hire significantly in this one country and build a whole team of 20 people in one country, but that's not what we were planning on doing. We may only have one or two people in each of the countries that we end up hiring someone in. So it doesn't make sense to have that overhead. And there are a few different companies out there, and not to plug them, we're not using them yet, but the interesting one that's on my radar is remote.com which was started by the person at GitLab that did this all for them and learned a ton about it and then left GitLab and started remote.com as a way to make that more accessible and modern for other companies. A lot of the other companies that do this tend to be very large, and they've been around for a long time, which typically means things aren't really done online so much; it's a lot of paper. And remote.com it's a website you sign up for. You could just enter the people in, and things happen automatically. And so that's why that's on my radar. LINDSEY: They're probably getting a lot of business these days. CHAD: Yes. And they have a lot of countries that they're expanding to over the next year or so. LINDSEY: How many countries do we have people in now? CHAD: That's a good question. I don't know [laughs] United States, UK, and Uruguay right now. I think those are the only ones. But we have two people who are moving, one to Canada, one to Austria. So those are the next two that are on the horizon. And we're actively hiring, so we just opened a bunch of positions. And I know that a lot of people applying to those positions are from places like Brazil, other places in South and Latin America, and potentially Canada as well. LINDSEY: Cool. Oh, we also got some great audience questions for this episode, so thanks to everyone who submitted. One of the questions was, when will you start hiring Canadians? CHAD: We're doing it now. [chuckles] All the positions on thoughtbot are at thoughtbot.com/jobs. They're all listed as remotely. They're segmented by Americas versus Launch Pad 2, which is Europe, Middle East, and Africa. LINDSEY: So, continuing on the hiring conversation, obviously, the hiring process itself has to be modified for the remote life. I'm not personally currently hiring, but I see the activity. And I think it seems like right now we've got a good handle on it but are also in the process of figuring out what works best and how to optimize it. Because we were on a hiring freeze for a while, and now it's opening back up, and we're trying to figure out how -- Honestly, it seems like the biggest question is how do we replicate that in-office cultural experience, social experience in the online format? CHAD: Yeah. Up until the office visit portion, the majority of our hiring process was already remote. So the non-technical interview was primarily done remotely. The technical interview was primarily done remotely. But at the final stage of that process, we would bring people into the office for the full day to pair with one person in the morning for developers, pair with another person in the afternoon, have lunch with the team. For designers, it was getting a design challenge and working with the team throughout the course of the day in a conference room. And so replicating both the working together aspects and the social aspects of that office visit day is important to us, and that's where the tricky part has been. The working together part is the easier part of it, I think we found because we're all working remotely anyway. So we just replicate that; it’s pairing remotely, and it's doing the design challenge in collaboration remotely. It's the social aspects that are harder. And part of it is is we're not necessarily getting everybody together on a regular basis every day and so creating a time for everybody to come together just because we have a candidate visiting and do something that's not artificial, together, was a little bit tricky to find. LINDSEY: Everyone act natural and social at 2:00 p.m. [chuckles] CHAD: Right. Go. [chuckles] And then to insert someone into that mix who doesn't know anybody on the call and is interviewing, it's a high level of awkwardness for the candidate as well. So what we've found has worked best is to find something that we are doing already and piggyback on top of that. So in the case of the UK, they were already getting together where everyone shares something that they're working on. They were already doing that on a regular basis. Or someone would say, “Let's have a discussion about this,” we were already doing that. So just making sure that that gets scheduled for when there is going to be a candidate and then prepping them and asking them to prepare something to share as well. And then, when it came time to do a different team, I encouraged them, “Don't just do what they're doing because they were already doing this. If you try to do it, and it’s something you're not doing already, it might turn out to be even more awkward. Try to find something that you're doing already and piggyback off of that.” And some teams were brand new, and they didn't have anything that they were doing already. And so that's the one thing we talked about in the last episode. But at the same time as going remote, we also, instead of being small teams based on geography, we reorganized to be based on the kinds of projects that we work on. And so Boost, for example, was an entirely new team of people that didn't necessarily have those norms and those regular events happening. And so they needed to create something that they could use not only to bring the team together but that that hiring process could piggyback on for that final stage. I think mostly it's gone well. I think everyone knows that it's a little awkward, so I think everybody gives it the benefit of the doubt. I couldn't imagine...well, I guess I can imagine it. But I wouldn't necessarily want to arrive at a standpoint where we start hiring people without the opportunity for the whole team that they're going to be working with to get to know them a little bit but also to provide their feedback but also for the candidate. When you join a new company, you want to know what it's like to work there. You want to know that you want to work with the people. You want to flush out any red flags. And I don't think we have any red flags. And so I'd rather that be out there and that kind of thing so that people can experience as much as possible what it's really going to be like to work at thoughtbot and who you're going to be working with. LINDSEY: So we have another audience question, and you can let me know if you actually want to answer this or not. How will you handle compensation? Will it be the same for everyone across the globe or country-specific, et cetera? CHAD: I can totally answer this. LINDSEY: You want to get into it? Let's do it. CHAD: I realize I'm answering in long-winded ways, but I think the context is important in these things. So the way things worked historically at thoughtbot was based on your geography, but that made sense because the clients were based on geography, and each of the locations was working with local clients. And so, the economy of the different studios was entirely different from one another. So the studio in Raleigh-Durham worked with clients there primarily, and that is very different than Manhattan, New York, and what people understand a local team costs and what they're willing to pay and that kind of thing. And so there was a natural one-to-one correlation between the studio you worked in and the economics of how the business of that studio worked. And so the salaries and the economics of the whole expenses of the studio were based on that local thing. And so that's the way it worked previously. And then we would always do reviews within that group of people to make sure that there was fairness in pay from an equity perspective between people with the same level of experience and not for other factors like gender or anything like that, so equity in pay is really important to us. And so every compensation thing goes through that review process. And then we do an annual salary review every year where we re-review everything for equity, and we review an increase for economics and performance, and that happens in April. So when we went remote, we didn't change anything. And historically, what would have happened if you lived in one place and you moved to another studio with different economics? Your salary might change because you needed to be sustainable within that studio. And you would find that out in advance, and it would factor into whether you want to do it or not. So when we went remote, and people started moving, what we did was we reminded people that traditionally, that might have an impact, but you're not moving to where a new studio is. We don't know how things are going to be in the future, just that we'll do the salary review in April. So coming up to the salary review, we started looking at the way that we were going to do it. We went through a little bit of a change when we originally started the process; like I said, we're taking cues from other people, and one of those companies is GitLab. And what GitLab talks about is cost of market. And so that's what we had planned on doing so rather than paying people cost of living, cost of market is the idea of what would your competitive salary be based on where you live? And that includes both remote and local employers, what you can command, but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's the same everywhere based on where you live. And so that was the direction we started to go down. It's not where we ultimately ended up. Ultimately, we ended up creating within the United States, based on the position you have, a salary range, and that is the same salary range across the whole United States with a couple of exceptions, and I’ll mention what that is. So if you're a developer, or if you're a senior developer, or you're a team lead across the whole United States, you'll fall within this range based on your performance, and I'm happy with that. We were never philosophically opposed to doing that. And I'm pretty cool with the fact that we got there in the course of doing the review. So the exception to that is we financially couldn't set the level of that salary at a city like San Francisco or New York. If we were bringing everybody up to that level at the company, it would be very difficult for us to be profitable. And so we set the tiers based on the next tier down of cities in the U.S., so it's cities like Boston and Austin are where we took the bands from. We have team members who live in San Francisco and New York, and that, strictly speaking, would have meant a salary reduction for the people who live there. And we didn't want to create hardship on people that didn't know that we were going to do that. When they decided where to live, it would create hardship on people. And so, we took a look at New York and San Francisco, and we created another tier that is based on those markets. And then, between those two tiers, what we're looking at is, are these salaries based on the cost of living equitable? So does someone who was working at thoughtbot in New York effectively earn the same amount of money as someone on the other tier who's living anywhere else? And if you actually look at that, the interesting thing is there are more people at thoughtbot now who are at the main tier who live in even lower cost of living places. And so they're actually coming out sort of it's more favorable, which is I'd rather be in that position because I think over time, more and more people will become more and more distributed, and people will live in different places with different cost structures. Any follow-up questions or thoughts on all that? LINDSEY: For me, I'm glad I didn't have to decide it. [laughter] It's really complicated because I see there's logic to different approaches. Nothing is an obviously bad decision. The reality is we do live in a world where economics of location vary greatly. But at the same time, what does the future of work and equity look like? CHAD: Everything I just said was U.S.-centric. So we actually don't have a set thing that we're doing for countries outside of the U.S. We're going to evolve that based on what we learn over the next few months as we hire people. There are really two tracks or two options in front of us: the first one is to establish country rates, and the second one is to establish an outside of the U.S. tier like that is maybe the same or slightly below that other tier that we're already talking about, the main tier that everybody in the U.S. is on. And so we'll see what we learn over the course of that. The reason why we probably won't end up there is because Canada is very different than Uruguay, for example. And so establishing one rate that works everywhere -- There are two important things that are our guiding principles here; the first is people should be paid equitably and fairly for the work that they do. At thoughtbot, there's not really an ulterior motive. We don't have outside investors. We're just people who work at the company trying to create the company that works on our behalf as people who work here. That's the primary motivating factor is to be fair and to pay people as much as we can, and then the second thing is while being sustainable. So we also don't have outside investors. We don't have a huge bank role, and we have to operate profitably. We’re not a VC-backed company that doesn't need to operate profitably. And so that's the second guiding philosophy is we've got to make sure that we operate profitably. And if we create a tier, creating a tier that works to meet both of those things, pay people fairly and be sustainable, we've got to set those numbers right because it's pretty easy to hire a bunch of people in an expensive place and set the tier too high and then not be sustainable. So we'll learn over the next six months. LINDSEY: So switching gears a little bit, we got a few questions from folks who are curious how we are actually doing the remote collaboration with clients because that's obviously something core to what we do that we're really passionate about and I think especially on the design side too. So someone's like, “How, are you doing things you used to do on whiteboards or on the walls?” The sprint comes to mind with the sticky notes all over the different walls. CHAD: Well, I've been talking a lot. Do you want to start this one? [chuckles] LINDSEY: Yeah. It's funny; I’ve said this before on the show, but I feel like going remote has also almost made our meetings more equitable. We had a lot of especially corporate folks in the Boston team who would sit in a room, and then we'd have a few folks from our different studios calling in remotely. And there is a disadvantage to that, not being in the room and not being able to hear every comment or the conversation after the call has ended. And I feel like this spills over to client work as well, where remote meetings can actually be even more productive and collaborative in a lot of ways. So that's one component. But as far as the actual tools that we're using, I would say right now we're using online whiteboarding, sprint-mimicking tools a lot. So Miro is definitely getting a lot of use. CHAD: I think that's the one we're using the most. New things come along, and people experiment with them and everything, but the default at this point is Miro. LINDSEY: They even have the sticky note feature, which for some reason, just works. It's the same thing as having a little box and writing in it, but it feels like a sticky note. So it evokes the feeling of the sprint. So we do use that a ton for brainstorming and collaboration internally and with clients. CHAD: And there are actually some things that are obviously being in person in the room with people is really nice, especially in those early days of a product where it's a really critical portion of the time. But there are some things about being remote equitable inclusive is one. Another is when you're in person, you have limited space. And Miro whiteboard is an infinite canvas, and so you don't run out of space. And when you flex to fill your whole tool and take advantage of that, it makes it easier. And the other I would say is -- and Jaclyn and Kyle just talked about this on the last episode of Tentative, our design podcast, which if people don't know about, they should check out. And talking about how when we're in person and one person is at the whiteboard, they have a marker, and they're working on a sketch, bringing together the wireframe and the storyboard. They’re the one with the marker, and they're the one who's doing everything, and not only is that not necessarily -- They're the funnel of all the ideas, but it's a lot of work for them as well, and it's not as collaborative as it otherwise could be. But when everyone is remote, and everyone's on the live whiteboard, people can share the work in a way that is better and more efficient when it comes to those wireframes. And you can give people a task because everyone can have their own portion of the board. And you can say, “Can you do this for me?” And then two people can go off and do that on one portion of the board, and then you can drag it over when they're done, that kind of thing. And it makes the sprints more efficient. LINDSEY: Yeah, like organizing the Post-it notes. I've seen that done a lot, asking for help. Grouping common themes together can make things move really quickly. CHAD: We were already using Figma on the majority of our products. And for those who don't know, Figma is a collaborative design tool so think Photoshop or Sketch, a totally online version of that that's more like working on a Google Doc with people together. And now Figma has prototyping tools built in. So it's pretty powerful in a very online collaborative way to be able to create the designs and then turn them immediately into prototypes and to do that directly with clients and with other team members all in the same document. This is one of those things that is actually a little bit harder to do. If you're all in the same room with someone, you're inclined to -- I guess you could all open your computers and work in the same document together, but I feel like that doesn't happen as much instead one person's driving, so it actually makes things more productive to work that way. LINDSEY: Yeah. Miro and Figma both have that kind of Google-ish feature of you see everyone who's in the doc, and you can actually see their cursor moving around in real-time as you're both working on it. And you can leave comments on all the kinds of collaboration features that you'd want with those kinds of things. And then on the development side, we also obviously put a lot of value on pairing on work. So I know even before Covid, we were experimenting a lot with different ways to do development pairing, whether it was in Hangouts or Slack video. And I believe we're currently using Tuple a lot for that. CHAD: Yeah. Tuple was created by a previous host of this podcast, Ben Orenstein, thoughtbot alum. LINDSEY: It’s how all the greats get started. CHAD: Yeah. But unfortunately, it's Mac only. And so we do have some team members who are not on Macs; they're on Linux. So we can't totally rely 100% on Tuple. And so there are some other things we use like USE Together, and people who use Team Macs will share that way. LINDSEY: And then I think one of the last things about remote work that is worth chatting about today is the team culture. We did have a very in-office culture, especially because folks are working on different client projects. And one of the things they love most about thoughtbot is the other thoughtboters and getting to see each other and maybe do investment projects together or going to the summit. So we had another question about this too, which is how do you foster that culture? How do you keep it going when no one's in-person anymore? CHAD: I think this is one of the areas where we have the most iteration and learning to do because the work stuff we were already doing a lot of it. And the project stuff is easier to judge, too. So did the project work? Did we ship on time? Was the design great? It's a lot easier to get immediate feedback on whether what we're doing is working or not. And with the culture things, the ramifications of doing it badly might not manifest for months. LINDSEY: We also need the client work to get money. CHAD: Right. [chuckles] LINDSEY: We need the money in order to work on the culture. [laughs] CHAD: Right. And the fact that we've been doing this in the pandemic it's a double-edged sword. I think it gives us a little bit of leeway to say, “Things are not normal now. And so we can't do this or we can't do that, and that is just what it is. And so we're just going to have to make the best of it.” The other side of that, though, is that it's been a very difficult time for a lot of people, not only just because of the pandemic. This last year has been a really difficult year for a lot of people. And so, yes, we get a little bit of runway to figure things out because it's such a unique situation. At the same time, it's important more than ever to figure out how to support people and have things be good and fulfilling and sustainable for people and to have a culture that thrives, not necessarily just gets by. I think that is what has made this last year challenging is figuring that out. So some specifics, we traditionally get together as an entire company once a year. So we brought that all online last year, and we combined it with our end-of-the-year parties that we usually do, which are also a hackathon where we take time off of client work, and we work on projects together. So we combined those two things in December and had a two-day all-remote event with murder mysteries hosted by professional companies to trivia and then underlying with the hackathon. And I think people really enjoyed it. It was one of those things where I think people were -- there was a pocket of people who were really skeptical about it. “I'm tired of being on video calls all day,” and all that stuff. “I'm not feeling up for it,” like all these sorts of things. And it was like, “Trust me, just show up, just do it.” And I think what we heard was pretty universal that people were surprised at how enjoyable it was. And so this year we're doing three of those, two one-day ones and one two-day one. And that'll be in May and then the summer, and then the winter. Implicit in that is we're not expecting to be able to get back in person together in any large group for all of this year. LINDSEY: But you do anticipate in-person summit return. CHAD: Yeah, definitely. I think it's more important than ever. And I think what we'll also see and encourage is team in-person get-togethers where it's not just the whole company, but you're on a project team or the marketing team or rocket fuel, as it likes to be called now, and get together. Yes, it's fine. Get together in this place. And that's one of the things that -- We spend a lot of money on very expensive offices in Boston and New York, and in the past, San Francisco, and Austin, London. It’s over $500,000 a year in office expenses between all those places that we still have the expense now. But once we're able to eliminate that expense, it's going to free up a lot of money to be put towards getting those teams together in person and do other things. LINDSEY: That was the other thing I was going to say, and you noted this about the UK team is that there's also a lot of team-specific activities where team leadership for Boost, Ignite, Lift Off, Mission control or with the geography-based ones too are figuring out what kind of social stuff or testing out different ideas like the show and tells or doing quiz time. I know there's a pocket of folks who jump in the lounge, which came out of the remote summit, the lounge during lunchtime or after work on Friday, and just trying out different things. CHAD: And Stephanie, who was the office manager in New York, has moved into an operations manager role, so company-wide. And a big part of what she is doing is figuring out things to try. And I think some things will succeed and some things won't, whether it's organizing games or the thing that just happened on Friday was people opting in to be paired for a 15-minute conversation with somebody else in the company, things like that. We're trying a lot of different things and seeing what works, what doesn't online. She created an online art gallery where people who are doing art can post it, that kind of thing. So we'll learn. LINDSEY: We'll learn, and then we'll most likely share it with you, so stay tuned for that. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm. CHAD: If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @cpytel. LINDSEY: And me on Twitter @Lindsey3D. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot. CHAD: Thanks for listening, and see you next time. LINDSEY: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. Thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.
Chad and Lindsey take listeners behind the scenes and go deep into the nitty-gritty of recent thoughtbot company changes driven by the pandemic and the organization's need (and desire!) to go fully remote – all while reaffirming and revisiting the organization's values, mission, and purpose as part of the process. Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD PYTEL: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. LINDSEY CHRISTENSEN: And I'm your other host, Lindsey Christensen. And we're back. Thanks for tuning in. CHAD: We've missed you. LINDSEY: Yes. We’ve been kind of busy. CHAD: We've been busy, and we knew we were going to take a break after the last season. We didn't necessarily know for quite how long, and then a whole bunch of stuff happened, which we're going to tell you about today. From the last episode, you heard about the change to the thoughtbot CEO, and we alluded to some changes that we've made to the company. And we're going to talk about those today. LINDSEY: Yeah. And in true thoughtbot Giant Robots fashion, we’ll go behind the scenes and give you the nitty-gritty of why things happened and how it's going because it's all really interesting. CHAD: Yeah. I think on the surface, it's really easy to think about how maybe these changes have been entirely driven by the need to go remote or the desire to go remote. And the reality was that's an important part of it, but it really was so much more than that. Some of these changes that we've made are ones we've been talking about for a long time. And it wasn't until almost a year of operating in a different way that we said, “We need to make some of these changes in order to accommodate remote and working from anywhere.” And we fell back on a lot of other problems we needed to solve along the way. LINDSEY: So we actually decided to break out remote work into its own episode, which will be the next episode. And I'm sure it's going to come up today, but it's a whole other area of changes and focus, whereas some of the reorg changes that we just underwent solved a lot or are trying to solve a number of challenges that we've been working on over the years. So I guess to start off, before we reorganized, how did we function? And that was largely geographically based. CHAD: Yeah. And the geographic basis means that we had a studio in a city, and in that studio, we offered the complete thoughtbot services. And that was driven by this idea back in 2012 when we started to expand. Prior to that, we really held the company to less than 30 people. And we were primarily a group of people all in one location working together, and we were all of what thoughtbot was. And we really liked that. We liked the structure. But people wanted to move and live somewhere else. And our purpose is that we believe that there's a better way to work. And we want to share it with as many people as possible, although we've revised that purpose now as part of this process. And so I really remember the day we were having a company meeting, and someone stood up and said, “If we really believe we have a better way to work, why are we not trying to bring it to more people? Why are we losing these great team members only because they want to live somewhere else?” But we also really liked the small, close-knit team of people who worked closely together on client work. We had done some client projects that were split across teams and across time zones and that kind of stuff. And it just didn't feel as good as we wanted it to feel, especially because it was hybrid. And so we said, “We know exactly what a great thoughtbot looks like. Instead of trying to expand what that great thoughtbot looks like, let's try to replicate it instead.” And so when someone wanted to move to a new city, we said, “That’s great.” We looked at the market in the city that they were moving to and said, “Let's grow another thoughtbot around them and use that as the starting point for a new thoughtbot studio that would be a full design and development team that offers and works with all the different kinds of clients that we work with.” And that was the model which brought us to being in six cities in the UK and in the U.S. and about 100 people working with a whole bunch of clients every year across those. But for the individual person working at thoughtbot, individual designer or developer, it felt very much like thoughtbot had always felt, which was you were working with a team of three or four other people directly on that client. Oftentimes, the client would be in the same city as you. And when we could meet face-to-face with people, they'd be working in our office, and we'd be working really closely with them. LINDSEY: Another interesting element of that structure was the marketing, and community was also very locally based, so engaging in and hosting local meetups. Actually, all of our offices -- We had offices, first of all, in amazing locations in all of these tech hub cities, and all the offices additionally had space for specifically events and community type of activities. And we thought a lot about nurturing local community, creating local partnerships. Obviously, we're thinking a lot about the hiring pool, and nurturing potential future hires in those cities as well. CHAD: Yeah, and that's what we had done in Boston where we got started, and it's very fulfilling to be part of your local community. And we wanted to embrace that as we grew. And for a good while, it worked pretty well. We were certainly able to grow quickly once we decided to do it. A lot of people who listened to the podcast a long time will recognize that we actually at one point had ten cities, some of which were pretty established and other ones which we were expanding into. And we learned a lot along the way about how much harder it is to build a local business than we originally were anticipating it would be. One of the things that we learned, and I've talked about this on the podcast in the past, is that with our reputation in the design and development community, we could often go into a major city and have a great first year because there was a lot of pent up demand for people who wanted to work with us, work at the company and as our clients. And that really led us astray in the beginning because we would go into -- We were expanding in three or four cities in the same year, and they were all super successful. So we were hiring teams to do all the work that we had. What we weren't doing was all the legwork we needed to do to build a sustainable local business. And so after the first batch of clients or the first batch and a half of clients we were done working with, we didn't have a sustainable pipeline of new local clients coming in. And so we learned a lot about how much we actually need to do when going into a new city to not only have that great first year but to have a great fifth year. And so we had a few failures where we had to close some studios just because we couldn't afford to operate them profitably, and that was pretty painful. I forget the episode numbers where we talked about it in the past, but we have. You can go back and listen to it. We can link them in the show notes. LINDSEY: In addition to having the designers and the developers in the local studios, at least in recent years, we also had the structure that each city studio had a managing director. And a lot of those managing directors actually came from design and development themselves, but they were in charge of everything local including, and especially the sale, so finding new clients, onboarding them, the actual profitability of their studio, hiring. And again, as you mentioned, that was across all kinds of clients, all kinds of projects, but primarily locally based. CHAD: And once we realized what it was going to take to build local businesses and make them successful, we refined that managing director position a lot. It wasn't one that we necessarily had in every studio, and so adding it or, in some cases, making the difficult decision to swap out the person in that with someone. Now that we understood what was necessary, making sure that someone in that position actually wanted that job and could do it. And that has been the journey we've been on; I would say for the past three or four years of making those changes, figuring it out so that when it was working well, each of the studios could work really well. And we've made a lot of progress with that. But one of the problems we had, so we have all the individual studios, and then we have the corporate-level people which are myself and you, marketing people, operations supporting all of the studios. And one of the things that we've struggled with over the years is being consistently profitable as we've grown or primarily operating break-even, which historically we were very comfortable doing because the whole leadership and shareholder of thoughtbot and ownership all worked here. We care a lot about paying people as much as we can possibly do and having the greatest benefits we possibly can while staying sustainable. And so it wasn't an issue. We're not running the company to generate lots of profits that then go to some investors or shareholders. So operating breakeven wasn't historically a problem, where it started to become a problem is as we grew and grew, the numbers became large enough that when things didn't go like we were expecting and we were managing to break even, then we would be very unprofitable very quickly if something didn't go the way that we were expecting, and it started to put the company at risk. So we started to focus more on profitability. And one of the things that was hurting profitability is that we were maintaining these small teams with offices, and just the overhead of a small team across many different geographies added overhead, which made it harder to be profitable because we needed to do everything in each individual location. LINDSEY: Right. So now, really getting into those big challenges that were pressuring us to rethink how we operate, profitability and margin was a big one, which once you look at the breakdown in the numbers, the overhead of having the different studios was one. I think that also bleeds into the MDs have really challenging positions. They're responsible for a lot: they're responsible for the happiness and fulfillment of their teams; they're doing business development; they're doing client management; they're in charge of their entire revenue sheet. So that was another area that I think over time, we were consistently looking at; how do we improve this role? How do we make it so that folks can be successful here? CHAD: Well, you can imagine, too, that designers and developers at thoughtbot we were seeing a similar thing, which is in a lot of ways, thoughtbot is modeled around me and other early developers. And I would often tell people I really like a lot of variety. I like to be working on one client and have huge scaling problems and challenges that we’re working at and growing their business to a whole nother level. And I like rotating off of that. And I then like working with a startup where we’re building the first version of the product. And for some people, no doubt that is exciting and challenging but worth it. And same thing on the sales side for managing directors, like being able to know how to effectively communicate and sell to the needs of each of those different kinds of projects. It's totally doable, but it adds to a lot of effort and angst being spent on just always trying to do everything, both on the development side and the managing director side, and it's hard. And that was one of the challenges that we were hearing either explicitly, or in a lot of cases, I don't think people realized it was happening. Everyone at thoughtbot is amazing and is great and very high execution level and all that stuff. And when you start getting challenges or feedback about poor performance from a great performer, you start to question why is that? What's going on? And it's an unrealistic expectation to have someone work in as part of a large enterprise for six months and then next week have them working on a brand new startup MVP that's got to go to production in six weeks and necessarily expect them to on a dime be able to change their approach to managing that product and making sure that it's successful. And like you said, we want to put people in a position where they can be as successful as possible in everything that they do and having good people spin their wheels even if it's not a performance problem -- if there's a level of interest or excitement for one kind of client over another, we have a system of collecting feedback about what you want to work on and rating the incoming projects. But the primary determinator for what project you work on was which one was starting at the time your other project was ending; that was the primary determiner. So people effectively had no choice about the kind of project that they would work on. And that was a common complaint that we heard from people is that lack of control. LINDSEY: And even though it wasn't supposed to happen, I think people did have reputations for a specialty, and the managing directors or whoever was staffing a project would seek out certain folks for certain projects. So even though we'd like to think of everyone as being able to handle any kind of project, and at a basic level, they could for sure, people with specialties were sought out for things. So that was already happening organically. CHAD: And related but even going deeper on it, when we're maintaining small groups of people that are a complete replica of everything that is thoughtbot, and it's a group of 9 to 25 people, that ability to specialize or to have a career path that extends -- The company you're a part of feels like a 20-person company, and in a 20-person company, there's naturally not going to be tons of room for a big career ladder and lots of advancement or specialization. You will trend towards having a team of people that are more generalized and less hierarchical. LINDSEY: Were there any other big challenges that come to mind for you when we were going into, like, let's revisit how we're structured? CHAD: Well, there was one that touched on all of what we just talked about, and that was design and thoughtbot. And this is one thing that's super interesting. And I think I've talked about it on the show before. But we started from day one as a design and development company. We've always done design, and we've always had people on staff that did it. And one of the things that happened, though, is being the first consulting company in the world to switch to Ruby on Rails and being a big contributor to that community, and building a reputation through our open-source and through our blog and everything on the development side, that part of the business has grown. The development team is much larger than the design team. And a lot of people in the world view thoughtbot as oh, they're a Rails development company and really it wasn’t -- What we've always talked about is Rails is in service of the products that we want to design and build and creating great products. And so design has consistently been a challenge over the years as the reputation there isn't as big as on the development side. And so what we saw in the individual studios were each individual studio needed to have a certain number of designers in order to feel like it had a design team and to be able to service the work that it did have locally and a management structure within that team that made sense. It had all those problems that we've just talked about. It was difficult to be profitable. It was difficult to have enough locals work for the two or three designers that were in a studio. And that specialization for what they would do and the kinds of projects that they would work on didn't always match the actual work that we had in a particular city at a time. And so because we were organizing the work that we did geographically, it wasn't uncommon for a designer to not have client work to do and that hurt the design team because we were attracting these great designers. And people are at thoughtbot because they want to build great products; they want to do great work, and then they join the team, and they're not doing it. And so design turnover has been much higher than other parts of the company for that and other related reasons. LINDSEY: Okay. So I have a question for you because you and Diana started on this process before I was involved. So for you, when did reorganization first start? CHAD: Well, as I alluded to at the top of the show, we had been talking about these kinds of things for a while. And I think you were part of most of those discussions as part of the management team where it'd be like, oh, should we break out design? And there wasn't really this clear -- Our strategy for the last many years has been strong local studios bound together by a common purpose and values. And we were feeling pretty good about that strategy. So these problems would crop up, and we would evaluate them in the context of that strategy and say, “No, we're reaffirming our strategy.” So it wasn't until having gone through 2020 and looking towards what 2021 was going to be like and saying, “We've got all these things that could be better. But one thing we know that needs to change is we can't go through another year of everyone planning for all of this to be temporary and to be back to the way that we were before.” We had already been breaking down the geographic barriers of studios because many projects were being staffed across offices at a much higher level than ever was before. And we had given everybody the thumbs up to move wherever they wanted, and we were going to support it. And we had about 20 people move from places where we had a studio to places where we didn't. And so it was really that that crystallized the need to -- I didn't know exactly what we were going to do going into it, but this feeling we need to do something because we can't stay in this limbo state for another year, which is what we were predicting in terms of how long we were going to be in the current operating mode. And even when it does come back, we now have 20+ people who don't live where we have offices anymore. So we can't go through this next period of time expecting things to just go back to the way that they were. So that was when we knew that we were going to do it. So I guess that was at the end of November or the beginning of December of 2020. LINDSEY: It was exciting to have this push to do it. As you mentioned, we talked about different options before. Like Joe had come up with, I remember, a really clever squad-based team proposal. We’d thrown around, “Should we do an industry-based team structure?” But I think what was really missing was a push, a driver, you know, you have to. Because it was “Everything else is kind of working okay the way it is. What if this is a big mistake?” And so we wouldn't move forward. So we had these major drivers to decide on something and then went into what I think is a really successful and fascinating series of brainstorming and iteration sessions pretty quickly as a leadership team to hone in on what we've ended up rolling out. CHAD: And I think one of the things that I appreciated, and it was Diana who did this, was saying, “Let's make sure we reaffirm or revisit our values and purpose as part of this process.” And when you have a company that is driven by values and purpose, it's important when you're making big decisions to revisit them so that they're helping guide what you actually do so that you don't get off track. And we anticipated that the change was going to be big enough that maybe even the value -- We need to be open to the possibility that the value or the purpose would change or should change in the process or had already changed and we hadn't reflected them. And so that was a part of it, like expecting to go into it doing that. And then we can't have a...or maybe we could, but we decided it wasn't realistic to have a 100-person meeting. So again, for a lot of the things we do at thoughtbot, we treat thoughtbot like a product in and of itself. And we use the tools and techniques as designers and developers on that product itself. And so we did survey the team to get their thoughts around purpose and values and around what it had been like to work remotely and just a few questions in general about how they felt about projects and work and that kind of thing. And then, we took that information that we had gathered from the team into the design thinking and brainstorming sessions with the leadership team, which was the managing directors across all the studios and the design and development directors, and then the corporate leadership. LINDSEY: And I'd say at the forefront of these exercises and decisions was how do we ensure thoughtboters are fulfilled? And also, how do we provide the most value to clients, and where those things intersect, how could we potentially reorganize ourselves? And these sessions are some of my favorite things to do, even though they can be maybe stressful times that are driving these exercises. But doing these kinds of really open brainstorming and design thinking exercises, problem-solving with our team, which is full of the smartest, most thoughtful, kindest people, I find incredibly fulfilling and really drive amazing outcomes. And I’m kind of sappy, I guess here. But I start to feel like, oh my gosh, I know why our clients love working with these folks. It's a really powerful exercise, and you come up with really amazing ideas and outcomes. CHAD: Yeah. I had a thought as you were saying that, though, that I agree, but I think you could do exactly the same thing but not be committed to actually making a change. If you were just doing it, it would drive me crazy. [chuckles] And I think that that's an important component is that we went into it saying something is going to change; we don't know what it is. We define problems, and then we come up with solutions to those problems, and we are going to make a change. And that was the difference between the previous we're all sort of venting or trying to do it in a leadership meeting. And I think off-sites and brainstorming sessions and that kind of thing get a bad rap, but when they're actually necessary and when they're done well, and when you have a group of people that are committed to improvement and actually making a change, they can be really great. LINDSEY: Yeah. And I think you all had set out a goal. You and Diana had set a goal schedule of how this would work, which is coming up with ideas as an extended leadership team which is maybe like 18 people. And doing that, we booked a half-day, maybe a bit more; obviously, this is all virtual. And we'd have different sessions where we were breaking out into smaller groups of maybe five people randomized each time and working through a specific challenge or coming up with a specific proposal, then reconvening as the extended leadership team and running through those proposals. So that would be the first individual day. And then you and Diana went off with those proposals and ideas to make some executive decisions around what you thought made sense and then re-proposed to the extended leadership team for feedback and iteration with the goal that every week we're getting closer to the final, final thing that we're going to roll out to the team. And also, by the way, how do we roll that out? CHAD: I'm curious from your perspective how that worked because we didn't go into the process expecting it to work that way. Well, I guess we did. When Diana and I were planning it, though, we initially started from a different place, and then we realized this is going to be too difficult for a group to converge on, and it probably does need us to go and force a convergence basically and then go back and make a proposal. But I'm curious what you think about that. LINDSEY: Oh, I think you absolutely have to do that. CHAD: [chuckles] Okay. LINDSEY: And that's the way I operate, too, even from a marketing perspective, is to take input and ideas and see what folks think. But at the end of the day, you can't make a group decision; someone has to make an executive decision based on what they've heard. So I thought that worked well. Plus, I was in the group that came up with the idea for the reorg we chose. I don't want to brag about it, but it was a great decision. CHAD: [laughs] LINDSEY: So yeah, I guess getting into what that actually was, what we ended up deciding and have moved forward with was breaking out the teams, so keeping a team-based structure but no longer geographically-based but actually each team based on the types of clients and client projects that they're providing services for. And obviously, those services are tailored to the type of client projects. CHAD: Shall we go through them? [chuckles] LINDSEY: Yeah, we should go through them. CHAD: [chuckles] Okay. LINDSEY: So the naming came after the fact, but we also had a lot of fun with branding and naming these teams and went all-in on the rocket theme, as you'll hear. So we've got four main service teams. The first one deals with the earliest stage products kind of pre-product so validating ideas, and that is thoughtbot Ignite. The next team deals with more MVP, V1 but not really a quick project, like longer MVP types of projects, and that is thoughtbot Lift Off. The third team deals with more established companies and teams who are elevating their product and teams to the next level that's thoughtbot Boost. And then finally, we've introduced more DevOps and maintenance services under thoughtbot Mission Control, and they also manage our PR reviews as a service, reviews by thoughtbot. So that's the quick overview of the four teams you've got Ignite, Lift Off, Boost, and Mission Control. CHAD: And the interesting thing about the team structure and what each team was going to focus on is that once we made the decision that this was -- there wasn't really a lot of question around what those teams would be. We knew these different project types existed. It was something that we have documented, and it's in our marketing. We have positioning statements already. A lot of these client types were already created. We have an internal consulting class that people take, about 20 people a quarter take it. And it goes over the different kinds of clients that we work with and the different needs that they have and how to work with them. And it was split along these lines. Now there were some small details on the edges to be worked out, but what was difficult was making the decision to do this. Once we made the decision to do it, what those teams would be was pretty clear. LINDSEY: Obviously, I love it. From a marketing perspective, breaking out these different types of clients makes so much sense. You're talking to them about different sets of needs, goals, pain points, so there's great focus and clarity there. And then that trickles to everyone's job. The managing directors now are responsible for one of these service-based teams. The designers and developers themselves are specializing and really enjoy that type of work. And in the breakout group during these brainstorming sessions that I was in, I remember when we were starting from this place of anything goes, I was asking the directors in my group, “What do you think makes our team fulfilled? Are they more interested in a specific industry? Are they more interested in a specific technology? Are they more interested in a type of client?” And the directors in my group all said, “I really think it is the type of project that provides fulfillment in different ways for different folks.” So we took that as a starting point, and then it was, “Okay, well, what are those different types of clients if we could put them into four or five buckets?” CHAD: And Ignite and Lift Off are really interesting to me because it's a good example of where the lines can be effectively drawn. So you alluded to it already, Ignite is for the earliest of products and teams where the idea hasn't even been validated yet, and they need our help determining whether it even makes sense to proceed at all. And then when we do validate it, the size of what we're building and the speed at which we're going to be able to get to market falls under 12 weeks. It will typically fall in the 8 to 10-week range where we've gone from that concept that we validated to a launch product in the hands of users. And they’re ruthlessly prioritized. They're usually pretty straightforward, both on the tech side but also in what we need to build. And I think one mistake we've made in the past is taking large finance and healthcare companies and these large companies that we also work with and trying to do the same thing that we do for those Ignite clients for them and ending up in a place where maybe we haven't done as good a job, or the project doesn't go as well because we're trying to squeeze it into a place where it doesn't fit. And that's what Lift Off is; it’s creating a space where it fits, realizing that a client who comes to us with this massive need it's not massive because they're doing too much. It's massive because they have a big problem that they want to solve, usually for a business that already exists, and it's a new product within that business. Maybe they've even already validated it. And the integrations that it's going to have, the systems it needs to talk to, the level of scale that it's going to have is different than is going to be possible in 8 to 12 weeks. And when we try to squeeze it in there, it's not going to be successful. So Lift-Off is giving a space for those projects to thrive in a way. And I also think it's one of those things where it's going to have an impact on our sales too because what would happen previously is that one of those clients might come to us and we're furiously trying to squeeze it down. And how a client perceives that is potentially like, “Oh, they don't know how to do what we need them to do, or they don't want to do it. Or they think our idea is bad because they're saying we need to validate it, and we've already validated it. We have an existing business that we're building this off of,” or something like that. And it causes us to lose that work, which we would otherwise love to have. And now a client like that comes and is talking to a managing director who gets the needs of that kind of project and a team of people that are going to work on it that understand that there's a process to run through and it's going to take six months or a year. We're going to launch along the way, and then we're going to continue to grow the product from there. It's just a different feeling all around, which I think is going to have a positive impact on our ability to actually grow those parts of the business. LINDSEY: And Lift Off by nature of working on those health, tech, and financial products is also dealing with highly regulated spaces, which is another reason why those projects are necessarily longer and more complex and lend themselves well to someone who's dealt with it before. CHAD: Right. Another thing, and we touched on this a little bit earlier with Boost, is a big part of our business historically is that those clients that have built-in Rails along the way, they've built a super successful business. They're scaling a lot. They're growing their team. They need technical leadership, experience mentorship, and those projects tend to be very development-heavy as well. Like, we have clients where we have four or five developers working with them and no designers, and it caused the design and the development team to be very lopsided. But we really liked that work, and it's very valuable to clients. And so same thing with Boost, Boost instead of that being something which is pushed off into the back where like, oh, well, it's not the project-based integrated team of designers and developers launching a new product, and so it's not our ideal work. It gives a space where that can be our ideal work, and the kinds of people who want to work on those kinds of projects with that level of experience and need feel like they are able to do that on a team that is focused on that. And that team doesn't necessarily need to have a design team that works or looks the same as every other place at thoughtbot. And it creates a place which can focus on what it needs to do in the best way possible that is the most fulfilling to the team and success for the customers. And it looks different than thoughtbot has historically looked, and that's okay. Because actually, when you pick it apart, it's not that different; it’s just taking the 20% of all of the thoughtbot studios where the 20% felt like something that wasn't quite right and putting it all together to make 100% of something that feels right. LINDSEY: And from the design perspective, Boost design is a lot around optimizing what already is in place or helping take care of design debt that's been neglected, making sure design and development are talking to each other and thinking about those processes to make them talk to each other better. Whereas Lift Off and Ignite are more introducing design or design processes or design frameworks like putting your design system together or thinking about your accessibility processes, those kinds of activities. And then Mission Control is probably the newest to thoughtbot in terms of services that we're offering clients. CHAD: And within Mission Control, there are two big areas that are different, so the first is maintenance. So we historically have been project-based at thoughtbot. And what that would mean is that well, it doesn't necessarily mean -- So historically, project-based plus everyone working on one project at a time, I think the combination of those two things meant that what we mostly did was we help people set up their own team of people who are going to take over from what we had done after we launched the first version of the product and level it up from there. And most of our clients got to the point where the goal was to become self-sufficient. And we also would meet people who had already built something and were just looking for our expertise to help take care of it but not necessarily have enough work for someone full-time. And for both of those clients, we didn't really have a solution for them. And so that's where the maintenance team in Mission Control comes into play because it's a team of people who have opted into splitting their time across multiple clients. The contracts are different where they're paying a monthly recurring maintenance fee for us to take care of certain things every month: security upgrades, patches, small bug fixes, and features. Maybe they even have a team on staff where they're doing the majority of the development work, but they just want our support in helping things go well. And also, you mentioned the pull request review service that's within Mission Control as well where we have a separate service where you can sign up, and you just request a pull request review from thoughtbot, and then one of our team members goes on and gives you feedback on that pull request. So that's one part of what's happening in Mission Control is that maintenance work. And then the other is DevOps, and infrastructure is an area where the majority of projects that we worked on across all of thoughtbot were deployed to Heroku or the teams had their own DevOps and infrastructure people and creating a specialization of that for a handful of projects for an individual studio that has that need, over the course of a year, never made sense. But once we started to do it and we took a more global view to it and said, “Across all of our clients, what is the need either met or unmet and what might we be able to do? And where is the interest of our team?” It became clear we could offer -- like, our clients need us to do this sometimes. And for the clients who need us to do it, we want to be there for them. We want to do it. And creating a team of people that is global, that can do it across time zones 24/7 is also one of the needs of the clients, and having that team span those geographies is one way we've been able to do that when historically we would have shied away from that. LINDSEY: And speaking of the team's interest in different areas, different services for the rollout of this new organization, we, by and large, had folks opt in to what they wanted to do even as far as the managing directors picking what team that they were going to head up. CHAD: So we said, “These are what the teams are going to be,” and we did a company-wide presentation. And then, we asked people to submit their first and second choice. And then we made the decision around which of the managing directors were going to do what and then we announced that to everybody. Am I saying this the right way? Did we announce the managing directors before we asked everybody or just before the deadline was up? LINDSEY: I think it was trickled in. At first, it was “What team do you want to be on?” But then, as that's going on behind the scenes, you and Diana are having discussions with the managing directors around where they want to be. And then, as that information became available, you shared that with the team also to help with decisions, same with the design and development directors. I think it was announced the design and development directors chose the teams they wanted to be on and lead. And then, once that was finalized, that was also shared with the team as they're voting on where they want to head. CHAD: And the majority of people got their first choice and the majority of people the person who was their manager also chose a similar choice. And so there was a lot of change but not too much churn, I guess is the way I would put it. We were able to do it in a way which I think people felt like they had a choice. And I think going into it; people were afraid of that like okay, am I going to make a choice here and then end up on a team of people I've never worked with before? That was not the case. Now there's certainly a big blending of the teams, particularly Boston and New York were the biggest studios. And so they make up the majority of the people in each of the Boost and Lift Off. But people are working with people that they have worked with before. LINDSEY: And it turns out the people they didn't work with before are also awesome, also, very cool. CHAD: [chuckles] So much effort over the years spent -- that strategy of replicating what was great about thoughtbot into other geographies is true. And so the standards that we had for hiring, and the kinds of people we hire, and the screening for values fit, and all that stuff led us to a place where everyone at thoughtbot is great. And so I wasn't really concerned about that, but other people may have been because there's always a fear of the unknown. LINDSEY: Yeah, definitely. I'm trying to think if there were other rollout things that might be interesting. CHAD: Well, one of the interesting things it's a little in the details. On the surface, that is the team, and those are the services we offer. But we also needed to contend with the fact that we are in the U.S. and the UK, and we didn't really feel like it makes sense to have those teams span 10+ time zones, that that would be too far of a stretch. And it would affect people's fulfillment on the team as well as the services we are able to deliver. So these services that we offer are actually fulfilled by two…do we have a word for it? [chuckles] LINDSEY: Geographies? CHAD: Geographies, yeah, I guess. LINDSEY: There are two geographies that we ended up naming Launchpad 1 and Launchpad 2, because rockets. CHAD: So Launchpad 1 is all of the Americas, and Launchpad 2 is Europe, Middle East, and Africa. And so they provide all of those services in those places. But they have teams that are formed across the whole geographic region. And then eventually, if all goes well, we'll have Launchpad 3, and that'll be [chuckles] the other side of the world. LINDSEY: I've got the icon ready and waiting. So I guess timing-wise, this all happened...rollout was by the beginning of the year, right? January? CHAD: Yeah. One of the things is more people took more time off between the December Holidays and New Year's and everything than they have ever done before, and we needed it. Everyone needed it. So we weren't able to finalize what team everyone was on and have a conversation about that with everybody before they saw it in a message somewhere, which we really wanted to do. So we ended up not being able to finish all of that before the end of the year. And so it rolled into the first couple of weeks of January as people came back, and we were able to talk to them. And then I think we made the internally public announcements about all the teams that everyone was going to be on, and we did a formal kickoff. What was it? January 8th or something like that. LINDSEY: Yeah. And I think that's actually a really good point to bring up is the communication to the individuals. It was important for them to hear it one-on-one from their manager before anything was announced more broadly and then to transition to their team if their manager was changing, which in a lot of cases, it didn't, but sometimes it did. Having one-on-one-on-one transition meetings to really ease that move was also important to not make this really abrupt and unnecessarily stressful in a time that is already very stressful for reasons we know. CHAD: And even if someone's direct manager wasn't changing, it was very likely that their director would change. And so, in those cases, we still did a one-on-one-on-one, but it was with the new director sitting in as well as a skip-level one-on-one on-one. And we did it quickly, but it was important to make it happen quickly. LINDSEY: And it was also important to not abruptly change on the clients because obviously, we weren't doing a full stop of client work just because we're doing some reshuffling internally. So that was phased, and we didn't even really make it a big deal to the clients because that probably would have just added confusion as we were making these changes. CHAD: Yeah, definitely. And we made the decision that we weren't going to just arbitrarily say, “This person is now on this team; therefore, they have to leave this project,” so we made that decision. And we have as natural points in the project for a rotation to happen. People will move to a project; if there's a mismatch between the project that they're on and the team that they're on, they'll move at a natural point. But the reality was that a lot of people also chose -- It's not like we have 57 different project types; we have three. And so a lot of people were already working on the project type that they chose just because the odds were good that they were. There's been very little customer-facing impact to it. So it's early days. It's March now, so it's been a couple of months. But how do you think it's going, or where do you think the growing pains are? LINDSEY: Good question. I think there's been more of a smooth transition than there have been growing pains, first of all, which has been nice. I think folks have been pleasantly surprised by really enjoying their new teams and new team members. I think growing pains-wise, on the operations side, obviously we've had to...I think we’re still in the process of figuring out how to best pipe certain kinds of inquiries into the right team and managing director. Sometimes it's a no-brainer. They're like, “I need to validate this idea.” It's like boom, “You're off to Dawn for Ignite, and you’re going to have a conversation there.” But if they come in and they say, “I'm working on an MVP, and we don't know if that MVP is one of the really fast ones or one of the more complex ones,” then it's like, okay, is this going to Dawn or Emily? CHAD: And we historically didn't need to have any handoffs because one person was able…one person and team; it was based on geography. So we knew exactly who was going to be having that conversation with them. So operationally, it's actually one thing we didn't touch. So no one was let go in this big reorg. There was a position for everyone, I guess, if they wanted it. But one area we haven't touched on is anyone who was local, who was in a support role moved up into the corporate level in a support or operations role. And there weren't that many of those people, but the office manager in Boston is now full-time in people operations. And the office manager in New York City is now the operations manager for the whole team, the whole company. Kelly, who was doing business development just in Boston, is now helping across all of thoughtbot, which is really good at using her skill set across the whole company. I think that that's good. And now, like you said, figuring out how to support everyone across the teams is a little bit of whether it be the operations manager figuring out how to get people computers when we hire new people to like what you were saying around inquiries coming in and making sure that they're sent to the right person. The thing that has made it more challenging for me is that just a confluence of events at the time where we were making some of these changes. And now it has made my involvement different than I was originally expecting them to be. I expected to be a little bit more involved in certain things, but because I've been pulled into several important client projects and was working on client work at the time that then expanded very rapidly, it's been challenging for me to manage the workload. But in some ways, there's a bright side to it, which is it's giving other people the space to operate without me, which I think can be good because I'm very confident in what everyone's bringing to the table. And when you go through a big period of change like this, if everyone was deferring to what I thought as the founder or looking for me for answers or permission to do something, I think that we would suffer for it. And so being forced in a way to not be available for everything that's going on is a way for people to have more ownership over it and not be relying on me, and I know that they can do it. LINDSEY: Cool. CHAD: So we never said what the new purpose was. So maybe we'll just talk a little bit about that, and then we'll use that as a wrapping up point. LINDSEY: Sounds good. CHAD: So I mentioned earlier our purpose had been we believe that there's a better way to work. There's always a better way to work, and we want to find it and share it with as many people as possible. We had written down that purpose several years ago, like a decade ago, I think. And I believe a good purpose describes what is the underlying motivation for the company and the people at it. And when we did that survey of people, a few of the questions we asked touched on it. And it wasn't that surprising to me about -- one of the threads in that was this idea of positive contributions to the world, making sure that the things that we work on and do have positive contributions to the world and that being a motivating factor. Like, that's part of what makes the team tick and what they want to be doing and are fulfilled by and that kind of thing. And so we incorporated that into the purpose. And so we adjusted the wording a little bit to make that incorporation, but we ended up that we believe that it's always possible to continuously learn and improve the way people work while building higher quality products that make positive contributions to the world. This resonated with me in a way that -- it's a little bit more wordy, and that's not why it resonates with me. [chuckles] Specifically, our previous purpose of we believe that there's always a better way to work and we want to find it and share it with as many people as possible lacked one thing that I think a good purpose can incorporate, which is what is a clear idea of what the alternative is like, what you're fighting against, or what you're trying to improve. It's there in the previous purpose. So, in theory, there maybe are people out there who believe that there's not always a better way to work that they've achieved it or something like that or that they have particular practices which aren't great. But it's not explicit or really even implicit in the purpose. And the new purpose we believe that it's possible to continuously learn and improve the way people work while building higher quality products and make positive contributions to the world. You can point to someone who might believe the opposite of that, that you can't build higher quality products that make positive contributions to the world while also continuously learning and improving the way that you work and everything, that to build higher quality products or make positive contributions to the world, you might need to compromise on the values of continuous improvement and learning. And our new purpose makes a statement that you don't need to compromise in order to achieve that result, and I like that about it. LINDSEY: I really like the addition of talking about the kinds of positive products because I think once you know thoughtbot at all, you know that that's underlying the purpose but take out the guesswork, just tell the folks. All right. Well, I think that's a good place to stop. I'm glad we didn't even go into the remote because there's obviously a lot to talk about. CHAD: Yeah. So we'll talk about that next time? LINDSEY: Yeah. We're going to talk about what changes we've made in going completely remote and what that looks like, what we think it looks like for the future. CHAD: Cool. LINDSEY: So you can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm CHAD: If you have questions or comments, and we'd love to hear them, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm, or you can find me on Twitter @cpytel. LINDSEY: And you can find me on Twitter @Lindsey3D. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot. CHAD: It's good to be back. Thanks for listening and see you next time. LINDSEY: It's so good to be back. Stay tuned. This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. Thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.
Chad is joined by Diana Bald, the new CEO of thoughtbot, to discuss her background, the organizational changes to the leadership of the company, and the reasoning behind them. Diana on Twitter (https://twitter.com/dianabald) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD PYTEL: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And today, I'm joined by the new CEO of thoughtbot, Diana Bald. Thanks for joining me, Diana. DIANA BALD: Hi, Chad. This is so fun. This is so exciting. I've only done one podcast before this, so I'm excited. CHAD: Well, don't worry. You can still be CEO of thoughtbot even if you're not a podcaster. [laughter] DIANA: Okay, that's great to know. CHAD: So it's been several months now. So I want to go back and talk about how we arrived here. But I'm curious, how are you feeling now? What does it feel like? DIANA: It feels great. I think I'm getting more and more comfortable every day, which is amazing. And I think the year has gotten off to a great start, so that's helping me feel more comfortable as well. So far, so good. CHAD: So for folks who are listening, I'm sure they're wondering who are you? [chuckles] Let's give the audience a little peek into your background and how you arrived at thoughtbot, and the role you originally had. DIANA: Great. How far back do you want me to go? CHAD: As far as back as you're comfortable. DIANA: Okay. I actually was really interested in technology at a younger age. I put myself through undergrad and grad school while I was doing tech roles. I trained lawyers on how to move from the analog world into the digital world. That was one of my very first jobs at a law firm. And then, shortly after that, I did webmaster work when I was putting myself through MBA school. It was a very different world than it is now. This is way back when the internet was really just kicking off; it was 1998 to 2001, around that time. When I graduated from MBA school, I was recruited into Univision into their leadership pipeline, which was very much focused on business development. But my very first project there was web integration, integrating the univision.com with their TV and radio. That was when I started to move away from technology. I was there for ten years. I had a variety of different roles, a really fun job. I got to experience a lot of different roles, lived in a lot of different cities. I spent a lot of time in Philadelphia, where I actually launched a television station in Spanish, which was really fun. And then I came to New York. After Univision, I spent four years in the advertising and marketing world. I spent two years with IPG at ID Media, which was a direct marketing agency. And then two years at MDC Partners at an agency called TargetCast, which later became Assembly, which was more media buying and planning. And then, when I left there, I went to Liberty Mutual for three years. And at Liberty Mutual, I fell back in love with technology. I missed it. I was doing a lot of strategic partnership opportunities with really interesting companies that were doing brand new business models and disrupting insurance, and there was a lot of exposure to telematics and IoT. And it was just calling me back, and I was like, I got to get back to tech. And somehow, I don't recall exactly how, but I found you. You and I chatted, and then I fell in love with thoughtbot [chuckles], and then after that, the rest is history. CHAD: You joined us as the Managing Director of the New York City studio. I want to say that was a position we were advertising for, and you applied to it. DIANA: Yeah. CHAD: And one of the things that really stood out when I first met you and as we've got to know each other and work together is the variety of experience that you had because I've only ever done what I do, which has its own strengths. So the fact that I started freelancing web design and development in high school and have continued to do that now for 25 years is a strength, but it's also, aside from the jobs I had as a dishwasher or the checkout person at the grocery store, this is literally all I've done. And the variety of experience you have not only helps thoughtbot be better, but I also think it positions you well for our business. In consulting, you need to be unflappable in a lot of circumstances, and I think you're good at that. You're good at maintaining an even keel and talking with customers and dealing with difficult situations and that kind of thing. DIANA: In some ways, I'm envious that you have been able to stick with development the entire time; that’s really, really cool. But in other ways, I can see what you're talking about because I do feel like I have had a variety of roles and seen a lot of different situations. And every one of these situations has had their challenges. And they've all been generalist roles where I've dealt with clients, and then those clients had challenges in their respective industries. So I've really learned a lot about keeping things in perspective, if you will, more so than people who are in a role for a particular time and see that aspect of it. I'm seeing things from a bird's eye view much more often because maybe I've seen the situation in the past only it was in this industry, or I've seen this situation in the past, but it had these characters. And it's like I can carry that knowledge over to thoughtbot, which has been really helpful. CHAD: So the managing director role, I think I've described it on the show before, and it’s sort of the CEO of the individual studio. That’s the way that it works. You oversaw the individual studio, and you were responsible for business development and the whole P&L of the studio, the whole business. Going back to first joining thoughtbot, what was a surprise to you? DIANA: How comfortable I felt. [chuckles] I felt like, oh, I'm home. I felt like, oh, there you are. I've been looking for you all my life kind of feeling. I don't know how to explain it. It just felt really good. Like, okay, these are problems. I like these problems. Or this is really joyful. I felt like I was actually in my element for probably the first time in my career, although I've had some jobs where I felt pretty much in my comfort zone, but thoughtbot took it to a totally new level. And I don't know if it's thoughtbot, or the role, or the combination of the two, or maybe it's me where I am now in my life and just having had all these different jobs and experiences. Maybe it's all the above. CHAD: One of the interesting things that's been a journey for thoughtbot not only just with you but with several people is up until a few years ago, we hadn't, aside from some office managers or people operations, we hadn't had people in direct client-facing roles who are not designers and developers. And it comes from a place of fear and skepticism about that, historically for us, for me personally. And I don't think I was wrong per se; I was just misguided. And I've learned over the years that when you're afraid of something, there can be some truth in what you're afraid of, but you should let that fear guide you into making good decisions and not let it hold you back from doing anything. And that's what we were doing: we were so afraid of what adding non-designers and developers to the consulting side of the business would mean for us as designers and developers that we didn't do it at all, instead of trying to find people who would be a great fit, who would be great advocates for us, a great fit for the company. And once we figured out the recipe for doing that, I feel like not only did it make thoughtbot better and stronger on the business side, but it made thoughtbot better overall. One of the things we strive for is an inclusive, diverse environment, and that doesn't just mean the obvious things. It also means having different perspectives and experiences that a group can bring to the table that makes the results better and more enjoyable, and more fulfilling to work in. And I think that you've been successful in bringing that to the company, and it felt good and not only you but the other people that we've added in the managing director roles. And that kind of thing that brings that different experience and different skill sets to the table has made thoughtbot better, I think. So, thank you. DIANA: Thank you for letting us bring it to the table; not every place lets us do that. But you've set up a culture, to your credit, that I think brings the best out in people. And I think you've enabled that to happen, so thank you right back. [chuckles] CHAD: There's another angle to that, which has been on my mind, which is what we were doing in the past was basically forcing designers and developers to do some of those things and potentially setting them up to fail because it wasn't a strength, or it wasn't an area that they were actually interested in. They were just doing it out of love for thoughtbot or wanting to see us succeed. When you put people in a position where they're going to struggle or where they're going to not succeed, that's doing nobody a favor as well. And so that's in part been on my mind because as we've been reorganizing the company and everything, I think that's part of the lens at which we're looking at it: what can we do to make things easier to make us more successful as a team and as individuals in our day-to-day work, too? DIANA: I think that there's a lot there. I feel like in every designer; there is a business person because they're breaking things down. They're deconstructing constantly, and they're asking tons of questions that business people just naturally ask. And then developers are super creative, and they're problem solvers, and they do the same thing. I feel like it's a combination of art and science. Everybody's got their science part of it, the developers, designers, even people like me with a business development background. But then when you do enough of that thing, and you're meshed with the people who bring a complementary skill, then you're able to do the art side of it together that you wouldn't get solo, for instance. If you just put a bunch of business development people in a room together, it's very different than when you mix them up with a designer who brings that side of thinking and a developer who brings their thinking. I think together we're better than siloed. CHAD: So when it came to the actual transition and having you step into the role of CEO and move into the COO role, and I want to be relatively honest that it wasn't some grand plan that I executed over a period of a long time. And if that had been the case, I think we would have gone about it a little bit differently and certainly with more transparency for the rest of the thoughtbot team. For the listeners, the path there was that Matt Jankowski, a long-time COO and member of the leadership team at thoughtbot, was getting ready to move on. And that wasn't the only thing that was changing. Obviously, 2020 was a big year; it was a difficult year. And so the combination of all of those things and me looking at what does the leadership team at thoughtbot look like going forward? Who is going to fill Matt's responsibilities? That kind of thing, and really breaking down those roles and responsibilities and coming to the conclusion that the CEO role and particularly business development are inherently coupled at the company right now and that we have a lot of things we need to do in front of us and who is the best person to be able to do that? And feeling like it might not be me. And the things that I was going to be taking over from Matt operationally were in and of themselves a significant area. I love thoughtbot. I love helping it work better and being close to the client work. And now that we've built an incredible team of managing directors, that was another thing that was on my mind that I've built that team. I'm really proud of that team, and it's an awesome team. But who's going to be the better mentor and leader for that team going forward now that we've got a team of experienced people who are slightly different than just designers and developers and who have different needs and jobs? And again, the best person for that might not be me. And so those were all the thoughts that were going through my head. And then things came together really quickly. DIANA: Yeah, they sure did. [laughter] They sure did turn around and come together really quickly. First, I have a lot of admiration for you, in particular, like the way that you're able to take a step back and look at things objectively and not let ego get in the way of things because that's a big deal. Not everybody is able to do that, Chad. And I've worked at a lot of places, as we talked about, and I've seen ego get in the way. And I've seen ego get in the way in a bad way. It's not always a friend. Sometimes it could be a friend, sometimes it's a very powerful friend to have, but sometimes ego can hurt. And so there's a lot of wisdom to that. And in terms of the speed at which things came together, yes, I agree; I think that's a reflection of the times we're living in. We're in a time where things can change on a dime, and we just have to be able to pivot and be able to reassess the landscape, see what we have to do, make the necessary modifications and then go. And I'm really proud of both of us and the team of the managing directors and everyone at thoughtbot for our ability to quickly adjust and do what we had to do during the really crazy year that 2020 was. CHAD: I spent the majority of 2020 in intense survival mode. And so it wasn't until we were through that period that I realized how much it had affected me, whether it be in burnout ways but also in terms of realizing that we were going to survive. At the end of March, early April, it was the most difficult time. We saw a good portion of our business…new projects were starting, people doing new things. At the end of March, early April, a lot of that new stuff got completely put on hold as the whole world recalibrated. And so we saw a significant decrease in revenue in those months, and we didn't know where it was going to go. So we were very proactive about redoing our numbers and making sure that we weren't going to go out of business and didn't go out of business. And once we were able to do that and to stabilize things, we still needed to spend a significant amount of effort for the rest of the year, working really hard to make sure that we made things less bad. And that was pretty difficult. But my main point or my takeaway from the year and part of what has led to this transition is the realization that I don't really have any plans to go anywhere per se, but rather than be like, oh, I need to keep my position forever, it's more we're coming up on the 20-year mark of thoughtbot. When we came up on the 10-year mark of thoughtbot, we asked ourselves the question, “Okay, it's ten years. We're not really going anywhere. What do the next ten years look like?” And so, as we continue to move forward as a company, I think the horizon tends to expand. And it's like, okay, we're coming up on 20 years. What do the next 20 years look like? So, I don't really have any plans to go anywhere, but am I going to be doing this and the same thing in the same way for another 20 years? Probably not. [laughs] I'll be getting close to retirement age. So I always have come to work every day, just trying to create the place that I want to work, doing the kinds of things that I want to do. And I think that motivates everyone at thoughtbot. That's how we all come to work every day. And I think it's one of the things that leads to that culture that we have. And I think this transition has been part of that expanding horizon part of thinking about being a resilient company that is going to last for a long time. DIANA: Yeah, absolutely. I think that's one of the things I love most about thoughtbot is just that we're intentional and that we do want to make this a place that people want to work at. CHAD: So we asked for questions from the audience, and one of the gists of the episode was what was the actual way that we communicated this change to the company? DIANA: So I think we went about it in multiple ways. You notified people in the early stages. And then, we also went about a transition period, which was like the second phase of it. I think you can speak best to the first phase. CHAD: Yeah, one of the first things I did was once the decision was made; I met one-on-one with the rest of the C-level team and looped them in on it. And then I think the next thing was crafting a company-wide message that went out to the whole company. I'm not sure if there was much in between those two things. DIANA: Yeah, I think that's what it was. CHAD: Now, one of the interesting things, as I was saying earlier, is that part of the change that was happening at the same time was Matt transitioning out of the company. And so I think in some ways that made the whole thing a little bit more understandable for people. There was change already happening, and they were together. I think in retrospect, in other ways, or at least one thing I wanted to make sure people understood, is that the COO role and the CEO role going forward aren't necessarily the same as what they were in the past. And so even though Matt was leaving and I was taking on that title, that doesn't necessarily mean I was just going to be doing everything that he did in the same way that he did it. And the same is true for you in the CEO role. DIANA: Yeah, we bring our own personalities and our own strengths to the roles. We give each other room to do that. I know that you like to be involved in the development. You like to be involved in sales as well. It's important that things change, that things don't stay the same. I think it's important to evolve and to bring in different viewpoints and change the roles a little bit if we need to, which I think we've done and we're doing. CHAD: And so someone asked, “Were people surprised?” I think people were very surprised, don't you? DIANA: [chuckles] Yeah, I think so. I think I was surprised, [laughter] starting with me. Yeah, everybody was. But it's understandable; you’re the founder. And I think change does bring an element of surprise in and of itself. CHAD: Yeah, I think we got to that place very quickly. But in retrospect, knowing where we ended up, I could have envisioned more proactively saying, “This is a transition,” not even necessarily with you specifically just like “maybe next year I won't be CEO,” like giving people some clue that a transition of some kind might be coming. But I didn't know myself, and so it wasn't really practical to give people. But I think in retrospect, it would have been nice to make it more clear that that's the kind of thing that might be on the table. DIANA: I also feel, though, that there is an element like we were speaking about earlier that sometimes things change and they change quickly, and we can see more of that happening in the future. I don't think that's going to stop. I think that actually might increase to some extent. So it's great if we have an advance notice of things, but sometimes there isn't the room or the opportunity to do so. CHAD: So then you moved into the role. We had a transition period. What was that like for you? DIANA: It was interesting because I thought, well, let me bring things that I always wanted my CEOs to do but never did. And let me not do things that I saw my CEOs doing that I didn't like. [chuckles] Let me start there. And one of the things that I really enjoy, and I think it's part of the culture here, is just being a little goofy and a little silly and just having that freedom. And I actually think that that makes for a better, healthier environment. And I guess I wished my prior CEOs were a little bit less uptight, maybe, if you will, a little bit more goofy, a little bit more fun. And so I think bringing that even more because you already bring that but really doing it together. [chuckles] CHAD: Well, I have to be honest, I used to be a lot more goofy than even I am now. And I've just been worn down over the years [laughter], which is why part of this is just making sure that things stay fresh, too. But yes, I really appreciate that. DIANA: And also another thing that I would think is really important to me is that voices be heard. It's all a collaboration, right? Because I've worked at some big companies, I would say a lot, but not all of them have been big companies, and it's been very top-down, and it shouldn't be that way, even in big companies. I think that it should be a dialogue. You put something out there, but you also have to hear the feedback. That feedback loop is really important. And you might miss something really, really big if you don't have that feedback loop. And I really enjoy that we are doing that here. We have our director sessions where we break out into teams, and people come up with ideas, and they share those ideas. And we take that in, and we synthesize it, and we say, “Yes, that's valid. Don't agree with that. Definitely agree with that.” We're able to have that dialogue that I think serves us really, really well, which is another thing that I'm really enjoying about my new role and working with you in this capacity. It’s great. CHAD: I have a couple of things that surprised me, and I'm curious what surprised you. But the first is that I knew that things were going to have to change. There were too many pent-up questions at thoughtbot. It was too obvious that the pandemic was going to last a lot more longer, but I didn't know what any of those things were. I just had a sense that they were going to change. And so the process of navigating that change with you and not being the one who is CEO while that's happening has been really positive for me and surprising. What's been surprising for you? DIANA: Very few things surprise me if I'm honest. [laughs] I feel like with time, with so many experiences people have, things get less and less surprising the more time we're on this planet. I don't feel that surprised about things. I actually have gotten to a point in my life where I'm seeing things as opportunities (and you and I have talked about this a lot) and leaning into those challenges and turning them into what's the silver lining here? Can we find the silver lining, and how do we pull that silver lining out and actually turn that into something really strong? I'm doing that more and more. And I feel like the pandemic has actually really called that out and made that a strength in a way which is ironic, but it's actually been really a very useful skill. CHAD: So the other thing that's been surprising or unexpected, once the transition was over, some things happened that pulled me into client work much more than I was originally expecting. And that's been really interesting because I feel like it's both good and bad. There are things that I would historically be involved in, and even in my new role, I should be, and I just can't be. So all of you are left to do things without me, but there was never any doubt in my mind that you'd be able to handle it or that the team would be able to handle it. But I think it's actually been an interesting thing to have those two things coincide. We've got these transitions going on, and we've got the reorganization, and suddenly, I'm a lot less available than I have been in the past. So that's been something that's been unexpected that we've had to deal with. DIANA: I think one of the things that's helped me deal with that is that you've been working on some very important projects for the world, and that really do help humanity. And I just think that that's been one thing I keep thinking about: Chad’s doing really important stuff right now. So I think that's been a good thing to keep in mind as well. And then there's another side to it, too, where it's like a parent analogy. Even though I'm not a parent, I have young people in my life. You leave them alone sometimes, and sometimes they'll surprise you, and they'll actually be able to take care of themselves. And they're able to actually do more than you thought they would because you left them alone and it’s like, let's see what they do. And then they actually do something really cool. Some of that has played into this, too, which is interesting. CHAD: Well, from my perspective, it's almost the opposite of what one might think, which is I never had any trust issues. And I always believe in the thoughtbot team to be able to do things. But oftentimes, I feel like I'm being asked for permission or being checked in with just because I'm the founder and that kind of thing. And so I actually think it's been healthy to be not available and be pretty explicit about that because then it means that I'm not being an artificial gatekeeper for people and things. DIANA: And it also strengthens the decision-making, I think, because people get to practice that without you and not become dependent on you solving the problem for them, for instance. That's another healthy side to that. CHAD: So in upcoming episodes, we're going to talk about the reorg, and a big part of that is going remote. We don't need to dig too much into it now, but through the lens of becoming CEO through that transition, that has been entirely remote. For me, as CEO, I was traveling to each of the studios meeting people in person once a month. How has it been going through this transition, becoming more embedded into the rest of the company at different levels and that kind of thing and having it be entirely remote? DIANA: It's got its pros and cons. In some ways, we've been able to move really quickly on some things. We've also been able to bring perspectives that maybe we wouldn't have thought about before. On the other hand, I really enjoy getting out and seeing people in person, and I feel like there's a chemistry that's developed when you're able to go to lunch together or just have coffee together. And I’m missing that side of it and looking forward to the day when we can do that safely, especially the folks in London; getting a chance to do that with them would be terrific. But I think as with anything, it's got its pros and cons associated with it. We’re trying to lean into the pros as much as possible because this won't always be the case. There will be a time when we all come together. And we might as well just make the most of this time that we're apart to move as quickly as we can, learn as much as we can, and take those learnings so that when we are in person, and we do connect that we can then explore other advantages that that brings us. CHAD: So when it comes to working from anywhere, which we're specifically not saying that we're an entirely remote company; it’s just that we are now working from anywhere going forward. And that was an intentional choice. But that's been an interesting transition; I think because previously, our whole strategy as a company was local studios working with local clients with a local team. Our culture was built up around our physical places of work. So my question for you as the CEO of thoughtbot is how do you maintain that culture, or how do you change it to not lose what people think makes thoughtbot great along the way? DIANA: I think we're in the process of discovering that right now. And we are learning things that work and things that don't work. And I don't have an answer. I can only speak to things that we're trying to do. I have noticed there have been a lot of people who have left and gone to different parts of the country, or some have even left the country. And I think that was really surprising. I wasn't expecting people to move to some of the places that they've moved. But knowing that they have an increased comfort level in their lives because they're closer to their families or they're doing things that they need to do right now in certain locations that are not where they started gives me a sense of reassurance that this was the right decision because we're giving people that space, that ability to do that. And some people really did need to move to different locations and deal with certain things. And then just giving that extra flexibility that’s honestly practical, it's just practicality. I feel like all we've done is introduced the element of this is just a practical application of life. Like, if you need to take your kids to school or if you need to go to the doctor, go to the doctor, it's okay. If you need to run an errand, go ahead and do that. You don't have to be tied to a desk in one location all day long. It's healthier if you do what you have to do and then get back to work when you're ready. And then we've had a lot of issues that have impacted society in general that have affected thoughtbot overall, like the things that happened with George Floyd and some of the things we're hearing about recently in Atlanta, killings in Atlanta. Sometimes people just need to take a moment and process all that and see how do we make this world a better place and how do we bring our best selves to thoughtbot? And in our new remote structure, we're giving that, not that we didn't do it before, but it's just giving that extra space that it's okay, it's safe. It's safe to do that. Take the time you need and the place that you need, if it's closer to your families, do that. I feel like that's been a very practical thing that we've done. There's a sense of loss because I miss all the New Yorkers. [chuckles] I’d see them often, and everybody would get together on Fridays and have lunch together, and there's a sense of that loss. Seeing our Slack channel go away was sort of sad in a way, but then happy in other ways. But that's true with everything that changes. With everything that changes, there's a beginning and an end; there’s a transition. And we're going through that. I'm looking forward to the days that we can bring people together, maybe in an in-person summit. I think that's going to be fantastic. It's going to be so much fun. But right now, the summit that we had virtually was a blast, and everybody was virtual, and folks had a really good time. So it's just we're finding that right balance. We're testing and trying things. I hope people feel they can bring ideas to us, and we can implement different tactics, tricks, cultures, all that is work in process. CHAD: I think we're in for an interesting time over the next year because part of why we had offices before was that highly collaborative environment with not only the thoughtbot team but with the clients that we work with and whether that would have been in their office or in ours. And when that was completely off the table, there was no discussion. We didn't need to be in person with someone. The team wasn't going to be based in New York because you're in New York, those kinds of things. And so the pandemic was the kick in the pants we needed. And since clients were also entirely remote, it just wasn't an issue. It'll be interesting over the next year as we navigate being able to be in person again staffing projects remotely, having teams be distributed, that kind of thing. It will be fine. If we didn't think it would be fine, we wouldn't have done what we did, but just because it will end up okay doesn't mean that it won't be a little bit of a challenge or interesting. DIANA: Absolutely, yes, I agree. I think we may even be more experimental and traveling to different cities where the client is, for example, together as a group, which we really didn't do much of in the past. We've talked about having things like pop-up offices, which is something we will experiment with. So there's some experimentation to happen. I know we're going to make mistakes. But I know we're also going to do some stuff that's going to be really, really great, too. We have to try it, though. We won't learn until we try it and lean into what works. Let's do more of the stuff that's working. CHAD: Yeah. And the other thing, and I think we communicated this to the team, which is like, this is what we're doing today. It's going to be iterative. And one of the things people need to keep in mind is that we spend a lot of money on offices. And so once we remove that, that money can be put to completely different things whether it be getting together in person more often, or it be other benefits or just operating more profitably so that we're all working a little less stressed. There are all these things that are going to come out of it. And that doesn't even necessarily mean that three years from now, we won't have small offices in some places that look very different than what the previous thoughtbot offices look like. But the best way forward, we felt, was to completely wipe the slate clean and rebuild what it means to be at thoughtbot and how we're working both financially but also from making this new structure work really well perspective. DIANA: Yes, exactly. CHAD: So, any parting words of wisdom or thoughts? DIANA: Yeah. You made this really comfortable for me. I was completely out of my comfort zone, but I think you made me feel comfortable in having a podcast conversation. So thank you for that. It was a lot of fun. CHAD: If people want to get in touch with you, ask you questions, follow along with you, where is the best place for them to do that? DIANA: Email is great. Also, I am getting more active on Twitter now. It's something I'm having to do, but you can also find me on Twitter @dianabald, first name, last name. And my email is dianabald@thoughtbot.com. CHAD: Awesome. You can subscribe to the show and find notes for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. You can find me on Twitter @cpytel and Lindsey on Twitter @Lindsey3D. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Thom Obarski. Thanks for listening as always, and see you next time This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success. Special Guest: Diana Bald.
Chad and Lindsey talk with Courtney & Tye Caldwell, Co-founders of ShearShare, discussing culture-fit with new hires, incorporating values into brand-thinking, fostering relationships, and planning for 2021. Please take a minute to help guide our next season with your thoughtful feedback on our Giant Robots listener survey (https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScc386ccM-nS_pcLClG1fIAH4Kr4L5jlSY4eidKa93L5DSztQ/viewform). Thanks! This episode is sponsored by HelloFresh (http://HelloFresh.com/robots80) Enter code ROBOTS80 to get a total of $80 off, including free shipping! ShearShare (https://shearshare.com/) ShearShare on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/shearshare/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: ShearShare.
Chad and Lindsey talk with Alasdair McLean-Foreman, CEO & Founder of Teikametrics, discussing the intermingling importance of mission, vision, and values. Please take a minute to help guide our next season with your thoughtful feedback on our Giant Robots listener survey (https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScc386ccM-nS_pcLClG1fIAH4Kr4L5jlSY4eidKa93L5DSztQ/viewform). Thanks! Teikametrics (https://www.teikametrics.com/) Blitzscaling (https://amzn.to/3fDJxy4)- Reid Hoffman Jeff Weiner - CS183 at Stanford (https://youtu.be/cYN3ghAam14) Dunbar's number (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number) Previous Netflix Culture Deck (https://www.slideshare.net/reed2001/culture-1798664) Alasdair on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/alasdairmcleanforeman/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: Teikametrics.
Chad and Lindsey are joined by Michael Sheeley, founder & CEO of Nurse-1-1, to discuss crafting values with purpose, living those values in the product's messaging & marketing, choosing not to publicly publish them, and what the landscape of healthcare looks like going into 2021. Please take a minute to help guide our next season with your thoughtful feedback on our Giant Robots listener survey (https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScc386ccM-nS_pcLClG1fIAH4Kr4L5jlSY4eidKa93L5DSztQ/viewform). Thanks! This episode is sponsored by HelloFresh (http://HelloFresh.com/robots90) Enter code ROBOTS90 to get a total of $90 off, including free shipping! Nurse-1-1 (https://nurse-1-1.com/) Michael on Twitter (https://twitter.com/MichaelSheeley) Nurse-1-1 on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/nurseoneone/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: Nurse-1-1.
Chad and Lindsey discuss the history of values at thoughtbot and how they served as a key differentiator in the early days of the company, and navigating the tricky waters of when client values don't align. Please take a minute to help guide our next season with your thoughtful feedback on our Giant Robots listener survey (https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScc386ccM-nS_pcLClG1fIAH4Kr4L5jlSY4eidKa93L5DSztQ/viewform). Thanks! The thoughtbot Founders' story on Giant Robots (https://www.giantrobots.fm/262) thoughtbot Purpose Statement (https://thoughtbot.com/purpose) AgencyU (https://thoughtbot.com/agencyu) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
Chad and Lindsey talk with Courtney & Tye Caldwell, Co-founders of ShearShare, about their early days of in-person marketing, the importance of naming, consistent messaging, and the effects of hiring a head of growth. ShearShare (https://shearshare.com/) Mentored by Failure (https://amzn.to/2GOxjCe)- Tye Caldwell ShearShare on TikTok (https://www.tiktok.com/@shearshare) ShearShare secures $2.3M in seed funding (https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/26/dallas-shearshare-has-a-marketplace-connecting-stylists-with-available-seats-at-salons-and-2-3-million-in-funding/) Google's Black Founders' Fund (https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/06/google-is-providing-cash-awards-to-76-startups-through-a-racial-equity-initiative-announced-in-june/) ShearShare on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/shearshare/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: ShearShare.
Chad and Lindsey talk with Alasdair McLean-Foreman, CEO & Founder of Teikametrics, discussing the day-one origins of marketing there, building your reputation through content marketing, and the efficacy of various content channels. This episode is brought to you by Teamistry (https://link.chtbl.com/teamistry?sid=podcast.giantrobots). Discover stories of teams who work together in new and unexpected ways to achieve remarkable things, on the Teamistry podcast Teikametrics (https://www.teikametrics.com/) Stats & Trends From Prime Day 2020 Webinar (https://learn.teikametrics.com/blog/stats-trends-from-prime-day-2020/) "How to Make Podcasting Work for You" (https://youtu.be/58j28Qv0Lsk)- Lindsey @ Startup Boston Flywheel 2.0 (https://go.teikametrics.com/flywheel2.0?utm_source=podcast&utm_medium=giantrobots)- Early Access List Teikametrics Acquires Adjusti.co (https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20201014005161/en/Teikametrics-Acquires-Adjusti.co-to-Provide-Market-Intelligence-for-Amazon-and-Walmart/) Nikola admits prototype was rolling downhill in promotional video (https://arstechnica.com/cars/2020/09/nikola-admits-prototype-was-rolling-downhill-in-promotional-video/) Alasdair on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/alasdairmcleanforeman/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: Teikametrics.
Chad and Lindsey are joined by Michael Sheeley, founder & CEO of Nurse-1-1, to discuss the blurry line between marketing, research, & product, committing to branding, acquisition costs, SEO & content marketing, helping to power a new provider platform, and hiring a head of marketing. Nurse-1-1 (https://nurse-1-1.com/) Nurse-1-1 Healthtech Blog (https://nurse-1-1.com/health/blog/) Utilization Management White Paper (https://nurse-1-1.com/health/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Nurse-1-1-Utilization-Management-White-Paper-Low-Res.pdf) Well At Home (https://www.wellathome.com/) Michael on Twitter (https://twitter.com/MichaelSheeley) Nurse-1-1 on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/nurseoneone/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: Nurse-1-1.
Chad and Lindsey discuss 'what's in a name' when it comes to branding, where (and where not) to start when you first begin your marketing efforts, and staying engaged with your customers. This episode is brought to you by: Teamistry (https://link.chtbl.com/teamistry?sid=podcast.giantrobots)- Discover stories of teams who work together in new and unexpected ways to achieve remarkable things, on the Teamistry podcast Hover (https://www.hover.com/welcome/GiantRobots): 10% discount on all new purchases! SWOT analysis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWOT_analysis) Being Human in the Absence of Humans (https://info.thoughtbot.com/remote-product-team-resources)- Remote Teams Workshop Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
Chad and Lindsey talk with Alasdair McLean-Foreman, CEO & Founder of Teikametrics, discussing trust within the use of data, planning the future with indexed data, a data-science related acquisition, and navigating the world of buzzwords around machine learning. This episode is brought to you by: ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/giantrobots): Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy! Hover (https://www.hover.com/welcome/GiantRobots): 10% discount on all new purchases! Teikametrics (https://www.teikametrics.com/) Amazon Marketplace Bribery Scheme (https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/19/21446549/six-people-indicted-amazon-bribery-marketplace-third-party-sellers) Alasdair on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/alasdairmcleanforeman/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: Teikametrics.
Chad and Lindsey talk with Courtney & Tye Caldwell, Co-founders of ShearShare, about using data to guide product design, imagining a machine learning recommendation engine, and their experience in Google for Startups Accelerator. This episode is brought to you by: ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/giantrobots): Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy! Hover (https://www.hover.com/welcome/GiantRobots): 10% discount on all new purchases! ShearShare (https://shearshare.com/) Google for Startups Accelerator: Black Founders (https://developers.google.com/community/accelerators/black-founders/meet-the-startups) ShearShare on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/shearshare/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: ShearShare.
Chad and Lindsey are joined by Michael Sheeley, founder & CEO of Nurse-1-1, to discuss using data to drive a better customer experience, some of the regulations around data management in healthcare, and advice for health-tech startups. Join us on Sept 24th at 12pm ET for the Your path to digital health startup success (https://thoughtbot.com/events/digital-health-startup-event), a digital health-tech event! This episode is brought to you by: ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/giantrobots): Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy! Hover (https://www.hover.com/welcome/GiantRobots): 10% discount on all new purchases! Nurse-1-1 (https://nurse-1-1.com/) Michael on Twitter (https://twitter.com/MichaelSheeley) Nurse-1-1 on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/nurseoneone/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: Nurse-1-1.
Data drives the world, and so this month we'll be talking about common pitfalls of building a business around data, laying out a tandem roadmap to drive forward both data and product, the importance of insight over raw data, when does it makes sense to reach for machine learning, tooling, and thoughts on the ethics & future legislation of data collection. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/giantrobots): Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy! GDPR (https://gdpr-info.eu/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
Chad and Lindsey are joined by Michael Sheeley, founder & CEO of Nurse-1-1, to discuss vetting your investors, his experience with fundraising, maintaining your reputation, his mindset while negotiation with investors, lessons learned while building and funding startups, the importance of establishing a founding team, and involving the team in the fundraising process. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/giantrobots). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy! Nurse-1-1 (https://nurse-1-1.com/) Michael on Twitter (https://twitter.com/MichaelSheeley) Nurse-1-1 on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/nurseoneone/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: Nurse-1-1.
Chad and Lindsey are joined by Courtney & Tye Caldwell, Co-founders of ShearShare, to discuss their acceptance into the first cohort of Google for Startups' Black Founders Accelerator, speaking the language of investors, preparing for series A, how they think about an exit, and equity for the team. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/giantrobots). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy! ShearShare (https://shearshare.com/) Google for Startups Accelerator: Black Founders (https://developers.google.com/community/accelerators/black-founders/meet-the-startups) Backstage Capital (https://backstagecapital.com/) Jaylon Smith Minority Entrepreneurship Institute Capital Fund (https://jaylonsmith.com/mei) ShearShare on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/shearshare/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: ShearShare.
Chad and Lindsey talk with Alasdair McLean-Foreman, CEO & Founder of Teikametrics, discussing early days of community building online, geography in relation to investors, his history with VC, the importance of relationship building, when & how much money to raise, time investment of a CEO for fundraising, and sharing financials with the team. This episode is brought to you by: ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/giantrobots): Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy! FusionAuth (http://fusionauth.io/podcast) - Use it for free today and get a free t-shirt, or upgrade to their paid editions and get 25% with promo code GIANTROBOTS Teikametrics (https://www.teikametrics.com/) BigCommerce files to go public (https://techcrunch.com/2020/07/13/bigcommerce-files-to-go-public/) Alasdair on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/alasdairmcleanforeman/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: Teikametrics.
This month we'll be talking about all things fundraising! The discussion covers investors vs bootstrapping, crowd-funding, differences between the various levels of fundraising, accelerators, and the expectations of taking venture capital. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/giantrobots). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy! Wistia on Giant Robots (https://www.giantrobots.fm/254) Term Sheet Grader (https://www.pillar.vc/founders-guide/guides/term-sheet-grader/)- Pillar VC Backstage Capital (https://backstagecapital.com/) It's About Damn Time: How to Turn Being Underestimated into Your Greatest Advantage (https://amzn.to/3kjZN9r)- Arlan Hamilton Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
Chad and Lindsey are joined by Michael Sheeley, founder & CEO of Nurse-1-1, to discuss figuring out the summer and working from home during Covid and beyond, his approach to feature rollout, pings, & to-dos, as well as keeping the team on a unified path, and his personal motivations to keep going. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/giantrobots). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy! Nurse-1-1 (https://nurse-1-1.com/) Michael on Twitter (https://twitter.com/MichaelSheeley) Nurse-1-1 on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/nurseoneone/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: Nurse-1-1.
Chad and Lindsey talk with Courtney & Tye Caldwell, Co-founders of ShearShare, about the offset schedule of the beauty industry, an unexpected source of inspiration, the importance of a routine, and supporting the betterment of their team & community. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/giantrobots). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy! ShearShare (https://shearshare.com/) Your First Million Podcast (https://yfmpodcast.com/) Les Brown Greatness Radio (https://www.spreaker.com/show/the-les-brown-radio-show) The ShearShare "Concoction" (https://gist.github.com/ThomObarski/f639af924a204ffbd1532d2b48c0eb74) ShearShare on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/shearshare/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: ShearShare.
Chad and Lindsey catch up with Alasdair McLean-Foreman, CEO & Founder of Teikametrics, as they head into the second half of the year discussing finding balance (especially when you love your work), examining 'what's our role' to make an impact in responding to national and global events, the importance of exercise in his life, and staying engaged with the product even as one's focus shifts more broadly in the company. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/giantrobots). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy! Teikametrics (https://www.teikametrics.com/) The Advantage: Why Organizational Health Trumps Everything Else In Business (https://amzn.to/2OyFmqF)- Patrick M. Lencioni Measure What Matters (https://amzn.to/3gS8JA8)- John Doerr Alasdair on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/alasdairmcleanforeman/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: Teikametrics.
Lindsey and Chad discuss work-life flow, both in general and during quarantine, their schedules, hobbies, and methods to preserve personal time like time-boxing, prioritization, and calendar blocking. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/giantrobots). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy! We need to stop striving for work-life balance. Here’s why (https://www.fastcompany.com/90308095/why-you-should-stop-trying-to-achieve-work-life-balance) Calendly (https://calendly.com/) AllTrails (https://www.alltrails.com/) Dungeons & Dragons Online (https://www.ddo.com/) table.party (https://table.party/) Pivoting to Antiracism (https://thoughtbot.com/blog/pivoting-to-antiracism) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
Chad and Lindsey are joined by Michael Sheeley, founder & CEO of Nurse-1-1, to discuss prioritizing revenue, their revenue models, why sales at their stage is more like business development, and considering your first 'sales' hire. Nurse-1-1 (https://nurse-1-1.com/) Utilization Management White Paper (https://nurse-1-1.com/health/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Nurse-1-1-Utilization-Management-White-Paper-Low-Res.pdf) Michael on Twitter (https://twitter.com/MichaelSheeley) Special Guest: Nurse-1-1.
Chad and Lindsey talk with Courtney & Tye Caldwell, Co-founders of ShearShare, about all the different forms that sales can take, their revenue model, the importance of personal outreach, and building trust through content marketing. ShearShare (https://shearshare.com/) ShearShare - Build My Business (https://shearshare.com/buildmybusiness/) ShearShare on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/shearshare/) Special Guest: ShearShare.
Chad and Lindsey talk with Alasdair McLean-Foreman, CEO & Founder of Teikametrics, about product-led direct-to-consumer as the future of sales, capturing multiple market segments, and sales structure within Teikametrics. Teikametrics (https://www.teikametrics.com/) Facebook Shops (https://www.facebook.com/business/shops) Alasdair on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/alasdairmcleanforeman/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: Teikametrics.
Chad and Lindsey discuss thoughtbot's ideology around sales, the sales process & cycle, identifying your ideal customers, and fostering real relationships with customers. GitHub is now free for all teams (https://techcrunch.com/2020/04/14/github-is-now-free-for-all-teams/) a16z Podcast (https://a16z.simplecast.com/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
We’re pushing out our next episode in the Giant Robots startup series. We want to pause to acknowledge, reflect, and take action against injustices against the black community. thoughtbot stands with the black community. We’re outraged by the systematic racism and violence in the US. George Floyd, Tony McDade, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, Eric Garner, Trayvon Martin, and too many other members of the black community have lost their lives due to racial injustice. It needs to end. We recognize we haven’t been doing enough to fight this injustice and need to be active in anti-racism. Our D&I council and many others on the thoughtbot team are discussing how we can do more and are working on new initiatives to better support our black colleagues, friends, and beyond - far into the future. We're looking to do things both large and small. For example, this week we changed our conference reimbursement benefit to only be applicable to conferences that have a diverse speaker lineup and a code of conduct. We hope our efforts will be useful to others as well, and plan to make them available to other companies to work from. In the meantime, we’re going to link to a reading list that we recommend. Today we’re resharing a past episode that features a black voice in the tech community that we look up to and you should know - Shelly Bell. Shelly is the founder of Black Girl Ventures, an organization that creates access to social and financial capital for Black and Brown women founders. She’s been named in the Top 100 Power Women by Entrepreneur Magazine and has a fantastic story you don’t want to miss. Stay safe and see you soon. 75 Things White People Can Do for Racial Justice (https://medium.com/equality-includes-you/what-white-people-can-do-for-racial-justice-f2d18b0e0234) How To Be An Antiracist (https://www.ibramxkendi.com/how-to-be-an-antiracist-1)- Ibram X. Kendi Behind By Design (https://medium.com/@OneBandwagonFan/behind-by-design-ad2c81f01b14) So You Want to Talk About Race (https://www.sealpress.com/titles/ijeoma-oluo/so-you-want-to-talk-about-race/9781580056779/)- Ijeoma Oluo Save the Tears (https://tatianamac.com/posts/save-the-tears/) White Guyde To The Galaxy (https://tatianamac.com/posts/white-guyde/) Black Tech for Black Lives (https://www.blacktechforblacklives.com/) Original Notes from Giant Robots Episode 354 Shelly Bell, CEO & Founder of Black Girl Ventures, discusses working to open up your messaging, what makes for a good pitch, and the current state of the investment landscape. Black Girl Ventures (https://www.blackgirlventures.org/) Ragbaby Exchange (http://ragbabyexch.org/) BEACON (https://www.thebeacondc.com/) "Male and Female Entrepreneurs Get Asked Different Questions by VCs — and It Affects How Much Funding They Get" (https://hbr.org/2017/06/male-and-female-entrepreneurs-get-asked-different-questions-by-vcs-and-it-affects-how-much-funding-they-get)- Harvard Business Review SheRaise (https://www.sheraise.com/) Shelly on Twitter (https://twitter.com/iamshellybell)
Chad and Lindsey are joined by Michael Sheeley, founder & CEO of Nurse-1-1, to discuss feeling disconnected from the team during quarantine, evaluating for communication skills during the interview process, how communication standards differ in the medical field, and avoiding AI & automation within patient conversations. Nurse-1-1 (https://nurse-1-1.com/) Michael on Twitter (https://twitter.com/MichaelSheeley) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: Nurse-1-1.
Chad and Lindsey talk with Courtney & Tye Caldwell, Co-founders of ShearShare, about being founded as remote company, their communication tools and methodologies, interview process, and messaging implementation. ShearShare (https://shearshare.com/) Notion (https://www.notion.so/) ShearShare Business Learning Portal (https://shearshare.com/buildmybusiness/) ShearShare on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/shearshare/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: ShearShare.
Chad and Lindsey talk with Alasdair McLean-Foreman, CEO & Founder of Teikametrics, about Teikametrics' guiding principles, Zoom fatigue, rethinking stances on remote work, the value of a peer group, and how retail is adapting during Covid-19. Teikametrics (https://www.teikametrics.com/) Coinbase planning and response to COVID-2019 (https://blog.coinbase.com/coinbase-planning-and-response-to-covid-2019-d0cb3379bc3e) Amazon '6 Pager' Methodology (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/23/what-jeff-bezos-learned-from-requiring-6-page-memos-at-amazon.html) Trillion Dollar Coach: The Leadership Playbook of Silicon Valley's Bill Campbell (https://amzn.to/2X99xs2)- Eric Schmidt Good to Great (https://amzn.to/366yqZA)- Jim Collins Alasdair on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/alasdairmcleanforeman/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: Teikametrics.
Chad and Lindsey discuss thoughtbot's methodology & tools for communication and collaboration, both in general and adapting them to a fully remote workplace, the pros and cons of this new environment, and approaching your work with optimism. This episode is brought to you by ExpressVPN (https://www.expressvpn.com/ROBOTS). Click through to get three months for free. 37 Signals (Now Basecamp) (https://basecamp.com/) thoughtbot Playbook (https://thoughtbot.com/playbook) Being Human in the Absence of Humans: A Q&A for Product Teams (https://info.thoughtbot.com/remote-product-team-resources) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
Chad and Lindsey talk with Michael Sheeley, founder & CEO of Nurse-1-1, on learnings from their launch, challenges of building in the health-tech space, their approach to long-term planning, and the future of medicine in a post COVID-19 world. Nurse-1-1 (https://nurse-1-1.com/) Michael on Giant Robots (https://www.giantrobots.fm/277) Harvard Innovation Labs (https://innovationlabs.harvard.edu/) Zocdoc Partnership (https://www.zocdoc.com/about/news/free-nurse-chat/) Net Promotor Score (NPS) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_Promoter) Health-Related Google Searches Doubled in the Week Before Patients’ Emergency Department Visits (https://www.pennmedicine.org/news/news-releases/2019/february/health-related-google-searches-doubled-in-the-week-before-patients-emergency-department-visits)- Penn Medicine Michael on Twitter (https://twitter.com/MichaelSheeley) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: Nurse-1-1.
Chad and Lindsey talk with Courtney & Tye Caldwell, Co-founders of ShearShare, about the history of the platform, how the beauty industry has been impacted by COVID-19, building yourself as a brand that people can trust, and how their product roadmap has adapted to the changing landscape. ShearShare (https://shearshare.com/) ShearShare on Giant Robots (https://www.giantrobots.fm/331) Mentored by Failure (https://amzn.to/2GOxjCe)- Tye Caldwell ShearShare Learning Portal (https://shearshare.com/buildmybusiness/) Courtney on Twitter (https://twitter.com/ShearShareCOO) Tye on Twitter (https://twitter.com/drtyecaldwell) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: ShearShare.
Chad and Lindsey talk with Alasdair McLean-Foreman, CEO & Founder of Teikametrics, about the history of the platform, staying focused on the needs of your customers, shifting product requirements to meet your ideal buyer-personas, and their newly-minted formal product roadmap. This episode is brought to you by ExpressVPN (https://www.expressvpn.com/ROBOTS). Click through to get three months for free. Teikametrics (https://www.teikametrics.com/) Aatish Salvi on Giant Robots (https://www.giantrobots.fm/301) The Ride of a Lifetime: Lessons Learned from 15 Years as CEO of the Walt Disney Company (https://amzn.to/2xuA0ro)- Robert Iger The Everything Store (https://amzn.to/3ekI8v7)- Brad Stone Retail optimization startup Teikametrics raises $15M as it expands beyond Amazon and beyond ads (https://techcrunch.com/2020/02/19/teikametrics-funding/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9kdWNrZHVja2dvLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAACwyNoVV6IyDU33Gvh4P0QxnqHGcOK97vl_S-wKVyrMnitd8Icn6v6dl2I27iEujt_dx5syczmpDQuTsVI7qF-zrJGY62dyc9KbqggLXO98WVDBCHGiF2lLqnvicUCHQQVRm6jzHH-ydYcswYsqO9ib868_E_JBb40bkzrW7LiVl) The Advantage (https://amzn.to/2VvwlBD)- Patrick M. Lencioni Alasdair on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/alasdairmcleanforeman/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Special Guest: Teikametrics.
Chad and Lindsey discuss their experiences around, and the pros and cons of, product road maps. Enroll in our free online-workshop on code audits How to supercharge your Rails application with a code audit (https://info.thoughtbot.com/code-audit-workshop?utm_source=GiantRobots&utm_medium=Podcast) Scott Miller on Giant Robots (https://www.giantrobots.fm/356) Quora Thread (https://www.quora.com/Have-you-ever-seen-companies-make-their-product-roadmap-public-Should-they-ever) on companies with public product roadmaps AirPower is Dead. Here's What Happened (https://www.macrumors.com/guide/airpower/) Buffer’s Transparent Product Roadmap (https://open.buffer.com/transparent-product-roadmap/) Slack Platform Roadmap (https://api.slack.com/roadmap) GitHub Universe Conference (https://githubuniverse.com/) Devon Zuegel on Giant Robots (https://www.giantrobots.fm/334) Wistia on Giant Robots (https://www.giantrobots.fm/254) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
Chad and Lindsey announce Giant Robots' latest evolution as a long-form startup series, following three startups over the course of a year. Throughout the season we will celebrate the wins, learn from the setbacks, explore how they approach high-concept issues, and truly capture the arc of a year in the life of their startup! Enroll in our free online-workshop on going remote Being Human in the Absence of Humans: A Live Q&A for Product Teams (https://info.thoughtbot.com/being-human-in-the-absence-of-humans?utm_source=GiantRobots&utm_medium=Podcast) Michael Sheeley on Giant Robots (https://www.giantrobots.fm/277) Nurse-1-1 (https://nurse-1-1.com/) Courtney & Tye Caldwell on Giant Robots (https://www.giantrobots.fm/331) ShearShare (https://shearshare.com/) Aatish Salvi on Giant Robots (https://www.giantrobots.fm/301) Teikametrics (https://www.teikametrics.com/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
Anuj Adhiya, VP of Growth at Jamber, discusses 'growth' vs 'growth hacking', growing value through your north-star metric, A/B testing, and sustainability. This episode is brought to you by ExpressVPN (https://www.expressvpn.com/ROBOTS). Click through to get three months for free. Jamber (https://www.jamber.com/) Growth Hacking For Dummies (https://amzn.to/2TXBm6B) Karen Rubin on Giant Robots (https://www.giantrobots.fm/348) GrowthHackers AMA with Karen Rubin (https://growthhackers.com/amas/karen-rubin-vp-growth-owl-labs) Pirate Metrics (https://www.pierrelechelle.com/aarrr-pirate-metrics) Anuj on Twitter (https://twitter.com/AnujAdhiya) Nerd-out about growth hacking w/ Anuj! (https://adhiya.youcanbook.me/) See open positions (https://goo.gl/AAazrT) at thoughtbot! Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
Scott Miller, CEO of Dragon Innovation and co-founder of Bolt, discusses building out manufacturing from a prototype, sustainability & environmentalism, and working with thoughtbot to validate a software idea. Dragon Innovation (https://www.dragoninnovation.com/) Bolt (https://bolt.io/) Dragon Standard BOM (https://gsuite.google.com/marketplace/app/dragon_standard_bom/499121254478?pann=cwsdp&hl=en) Halloween Robot v2 (https://www.hackster.io/DragonInnovation/halloween-robot-v2-f0d322) Adruino Bathroom Sensor Breakdown on Giant Robots (https://www.giantrobots.fm/87) Scott on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/scottnmiller/) See open positions (https://goo.gl/AAazrT) at thoughtbot! Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
Maria Loughlin, VP of Engineering at Toast, discusses restaurants adaptation to new technology, her approach to building and supporting a team, and providing better business opportunities & education to their clients. Toast (https://pos.toasttab.com/) Toast.org (https://toast.org/) Maria on Twitter (https://twitter.com/MariaLoughlin) See open positions (https://goo.gl/AAazrT) at thoughtbot! Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
Shelly Bell, CEO & Founder of Black Girl Ventures, discusses working to open up your messaging, what makes for a good pitch, and the current state of the investment landscape. Black Girl Ventures (https://www.blackgirlventures.org/) Ragbaby Exchange (http://ragbabyexch.org/) BEACON (https://www.thebeacondc.com/) "Male and Female Entrepreneurs Get Asked Different Questions by VCs — and It Affects How Much Funding They Get" (https://hbr.org/2017/06/male-and-female-entrepreneurs-get-asked-different-questions-by-vcs-and-it-affects-how-much-funding-they-get)- Harvard Business Review SheRaise (https://www.sheraise.com/) Shelly on Twitter (https://twitter.com/iamshellybell) See open positions (https://goo.gl/AAazrT) at thoughtbot! Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
Ashlee Ammons & Kerry Schrader, co-founders of Mixtroz, discuss the pain points in attending networking events, building an app from a non-technical / non-entrepreneurial background, and share some of their personal challenges along the way. Mixtroz (https://www.mixtroz.com/) The Third Wave (https://amzn.to/2vjDY4z)- Steve Case Ashlee on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/shemixalot87/) Kerry on Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/themillennialplus/) See open positions (https://goo.gl/AAazrT) at thoughtbot! Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
Matt Daniels, journalist at The Pudding, discusses journalistic editorial funding models, translating ideas through visual communication, their content-creation processes, and measuring 'success' in creative work. The Pudding (https://pudding.cool/) Polygraph (http://polygraph.cool/) Shape Up (https://basecamp.com/shapeup)- Basecamp Shangri-La (recording studio) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shangri-La_(recording_studio)) Holacracy (https://www.holacracy.org/) Editorial Data Viz Lunch 'n Learn @ thoughtbot (https://youtu.be/wxIaKasPrPY) Matt on Twitter (https://twitter.com/matthew_daniels) See open positions (https://goo.gl/AAazrT) at thoughtbot! Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
Chad & Lindsey welcome in the new year at thoughtbot, discussing actually having a budget, setting corporate goals, and the rise and fall of 'Use Your Best Judgement' as thoughtbot's principle zero. OKR Framework (https://objectives-key-results.com/) OGSM Framework (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OGSM) Health Tech Workshop (https://info.thoughtbot.com/building-compliant-health-tech-products-recording): How to stay agile when building compliant health tech products Traction: Get a Grip on Your Business (https://amzn.to/35QJetg)- Gino Wickman See open positions (https://goo.gl/AAazrT) at thoughtbot! Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots!
Tiffany Chu, CEO of Remix, discusses the different entities involved in transportation initiatives, pivoting to service an unanticipated user-group, and utilizing open-source in civic tech.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Lokesh Dani, founder of Xopolis, discusses researching the future of work, democratizing opportunity in the labor market, and focusing on the user experience.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Karen Rubin, CRO at Owl Labs, discusses embracing playful aspects of your product, tailoring their marketing focus, managing growth in a B2B e-commerce company, the landscape of remote work, the complexities of building and selling a physical product, lessons learned from launching products at Hubspot, and building a team with strong female leadership.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Robin Carnahan, Director of State & Local Practice at 18F, discusses introducing tech into government as the Missouri Secretary of State, facilitating tech-education within the federal government, and the types of needs to which 18F responds.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Geoff DiMasi, founder of Punk Ave. & Apostrophe, discusses his drive to build a CMS, balancing maintaining a service company while building a product (as well as the thought-process of spinning out a product into its own company), the Philadelphia tech-scene, and transitioning to a remote company.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Alex Cornell, co-founder of Cocoon, discusses opportunity cost, prototyping methodology, having design skills as a founder, designing for intuition, and being invested in the problem you want to solve.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Heather Ames, co-founder and COO of Neurala, discusses automated visual-inspection, balancing research with deployment, the challenges of productizing AI, and finding the right product/customer fit.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Pariss Athena, Hiring & Product Team Member at G2i, creator of #BlackTechTwitter, and founder of Black Tech Pipeline, shares her journey from never hearing about code to viral awareness campaign creator, as well as discusses visibility, finding value on twitter, and life online with thousands of followers.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Jennifer Dary, founder of Plucky, rejoins the podcast to discuss the rarity of listening, what it feels like to have a six year-old company, and conducts a 1:1 for managers with Lindsey & Chad.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
David Kaplan, head of engineering at Policygenius, discusses joining an established company in a leadership role, factors for long-term success, choosing Flutter over React Native, and challenging assumptions when building out an MVP.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Cat Noone, CEO of Stark, shares an overview of accessible design, dreams for shaping a more accessible future, helming custom support with a small team, and her motivation to create.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Andrew Steele, Olympic Medalist & Head of Product at DNAfit, discusses providing actionable wellness utility from DNA data, goal setting, "blame culture", localization, and his time at the Beijing Olympics.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Bryan Helmig, cofounder & CTO of Zapier, discusses extending tooling to small businesses through API integration, scaling, early marketing successes, and the future of automation.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Adam Scroggin, CEO of CardBoard, discusses user story mapping, consulting vs product work, the importance of goal setting, product market fit, and his favorite tools & services for building web apps.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chris Coyier, cofounder of CodePen, creator of CSS-Tricks, & host of Shop Talk Show, candidly shares how a weekend project turned into a full-time business, aspirations for the future, and areas for improvement.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Jonathan Cutrell, host of Developer Tea and Senior Engineer at Clearbit, discusses the history of the podcast, motivation for creation, learning to say 'no', and what it means to truly be 'remote-friendly'.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Devon Zuegel, Product Manager at GitHub, discusses her transition from researcher to product manager, and shepherding the funding, communication, and tooling of open source sustainability.
Learn more about open source at thoughtbot.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Matt Massicotte, creator of Chime, discusses the landscape of text editors, the complexities of writing your own parsers, building a new product while building a new family, and alternative app platform & pricing models.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Jordan Berke, CEO & founder of RepOne Strength, discusses finding your customers, working in the world of open source hardware, sourcing materials, relentless work pace, and bootstrapping.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Courtney & Tye Caldwell, Co-founders of ShearShare, discuss their journey from salon owners to startup founders, defining an MVP and maintaining a narrow focus for your product.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Special Guest: ShearShare.
Tess Posner, CEO of AI4ALL, gives an overview of the field of AI and discusses representation in AI careers, the ramifications of not having diversity in tech, the role of allies, and the future of work.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Jon Werner, CEO & Co-Founder of KOYA Innovations, discusses running a startup with his family, protecting one's intellectual property, the importance of forethought, and developing a platform for kindness.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
Links & Show Notes
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Rob Zuber, CTO of CircleCI, discusses prioritizing product direction, scaling, slow iteration to introduce major changes, and what's next for the platform.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Kate Brigham, VP of Product, Design, & Research at ezCater, discusses organizational design, roadmaps, user-research, designing to solve the needs of several groups at once, and, as a leader, empowering others to solve problems.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
Links & Show Notes
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Morgan Evans, organizational designer and CEO & Founder of Business Casual, discusses developing systems to holistically design a company, building a culture that is receptive to feedback, conflict mediation, acknowledging emotions while at work, and early days at Etsy.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Vanessa Bruce, co-founder of Dough, discusses affecting change through individual purchase-power, how she handles context-switching, choosing a platform to optimize for content creation, the challenge of visibility, and the decision to launch nationally.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
Links & Show Notes
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Karyl Fowler, CEO & Co-founder of Transmute, discusses utilizing block chain for decentralized identity-management, exploring finding the right customer profile fits, education around data-security, her time at Techstars, and the startup community in Austin.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Kristy Wallace, CEO of Ellevate Network, discusses cross-industry community building, utilizing tech to facilitate connections, scaling without losing personal impact, and becoming a certified B Corp.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Paloma Medina, performance coach, trainer, and owner of 11:11 Supply, discusses translating her brick & mortar store experience to an online shop, the themes around her coaching, design thinking, and how equity is linked to our long-term physical health.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
PricingWire: Monetization & Pricing Strategy for Software & Technology Innovators
Links & Show Notes
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Stefania Mallett, CEO and co-founder of ezCater, discusses non-compete agreements, maintaining an entrepreneurial spirit, codifying values, advice on building a marketplace, and the nuances of expanding globally.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
PricingWire: Monetization & Pricing Strategy for Software & Technology Innovators
Links & Show Notes
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Harold Hughes, Founder & CEO of Bandwagon, discusses utilizing blockchain for security and personalization in event ticketing, data-transparency, his key to entrepreneurship, the importance of investment firms funding underrepresented groups, and speaking to the SEC.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
PricingWire: Monetization & Pricing Strategy for Software & Technology Innovators
Links & Show Notes
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Bruce Daisley, VP EMEA at Twitter, discusses the international focus of Twitter, the importance of psychological-safety on workplace culture, diversity & striving for fulfillment for all workers, and fleeting happiness vs enduring purpose.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
PricingWire: Monetization & Pricing Strategy for Software & Technology Innovators
Links & Show Notes
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chris Sullens, CEO of CentralReach, discusses needing to be cognizant of company culture while introducing new systems and a management team, the difficult task of hiring for culture, and how technology can help shape the future of ABA therapy.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
PricingWire: Monetization & Pricing Strategy for Software & Technology Innovators
Links & Show Notes
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Ben Furber, Developer at thoughtbot London, presents a panel discussion around striving for professional fulfillment, as individuals, managers, and organizations.
The panelists touch on bringing your authentic self to work, finding organizations with value alignment, an environment where you're able to make mistakes, 'process' vs trust, rethinking retros, giving appreciative feedback, and honest conversations.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
PricingWire: Monetization & Pricing Strategy for Software & Technology Innovators
Links & Show Notes
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Lara Hogan, co-founder of Wherewithall, discusses finding her ideal job coaching and mentoring, evaluating for management alignment, what makes for a strong manager, the value of role-play, constructive feedback, and her upcoming book, Resilient Management.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
PricingWire: Monetization & Pricing Strategy for Software & Technology Innovators
Links & Show Notes
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Scott Orn, COO of Kruze Consulting, talks about podcasting, early stage pain-points, favorite tools, the trade-offs of remote work, and last minute tax-day advice for startups.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
PricingWire: Monetization & Pricing Strategy for Software & Technology Innovators
Links & Show Notes
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chelsea Moore, co-founder & CEO of BoxFox, discusses quickly going from idea to launch while doing everything from design to fulfillment in-house, their approach to growth, learning to say 'no', letting branding & social media evolve from itself, and reinforcing the human side of e-commerce.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Art Papas, CEO of Bullhorn, discusses the business of temporary staffing, the danger of doing a marketing push before finding product market fit, focusing early on culture, adjusting to his role as CEO, communication techniques for company-wide messaging, and having enthusiasm for the future.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Gareth Burrowes, Co-Founder & Head of Product and Marketing at The Tech Connection, discusses employment screening focused on candidate strengths, removing unconscious bias from the hiring flow, and the importance of diversity at every level of a company.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Erica Windisch, CTO and co-founder of IOpipe, discusses serverless architecture and how it can provide a clearer user-interaction story, the state of automatic code generation, and her experience in Techstars.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Alec Stern, startup founder, entrepreneur, mentor, investor, and advisor, discusses founding Constant Contact, the early days of SaaS, the importance and utilization of 'channels', and pursuing customer feedback.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Jamie Howard, Director of Engineering at TransLoc, discusses hiring, solutions-driven engineering, leadership in the military vs the private sector, and Agile methodology.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Siobhan Green, co-founder & CEO of Sonjara, discusses finding good tech solutions for organizations in the social-benefit space and developing countries, merging her passions for tech and international development, GDPR, and the ethics and security of various technological solutions.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Mike McDerment, co-founder and CEO of FreshBooks, discusses reimagining the platform with a system-wide A-B test, experiences with scaling, the value of customer service, and the art/science of change.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Ellen Chisa, CEO and cofounder of Dark, discusses building a complete programming platform from scratch, the benefits of a private beta, and making programming more accessible.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Ben McRedmond, CEO of Consider, discusses his time as Senior Director of Growth at Intercom, teases his plans for fixing email, and discusses the importance & difficulty of product validation.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Natalie Nagele, Co-founder and CEO of Wildbit, discusses product updates, operating with more meaning and purpose, user research, bootstrap vs VC funding, and experiments in productivity (like a 4-day work week, turning off Slack, and strategies for remote work).
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Margaret McKenna, Software Engineer at Devoted Health, discusses joining a team based on their mission, building systems from scratch, and evolution on a new, rapidly growing team.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Sam Clemens, Partner at Accomplice VC, discusses utilizing his product experience to nurture new companies, advice for where businesses should focus in various stages of growth, what should really be in an MVP, and his feelings around leaving a company as it's founder.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Aatish Salvi, CTO of Teikametrics, discusses building a service for 3rd party Amazon sellers using data science, being wary of pre-mature optimization, integrating data engineering research into the team, and working with Amazon as both a partner and a competitor.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Special Guest: Teikametrics.
Jennifer Lum, COO and co-founder of Forge.ai, discusses building a company and platform that transforms unstructured information into machine-readable data in real-time, avoiding biases in data collection, and evolving & defining company values as one's team grows.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Millie Blackwell, President & Co-founder of Showcase Workshop, discusses differences in business culture between California and New Zealand, pursuing tablets as a business tool early in the lifespan of the iPad, experimenting with SaaS pricing, and providing value to both enterprise buyers and end-users.
DJ Patil, Head of Technology at Devoted Health, discusses his time as the U.S. Chief Data Scientist, scaling healthcare to meet modern data demands, and the process of architecting a health care company.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
David Kloba & Rob Meinhardt, Co-Founders of Furious Collective, discuss the mindset and methodology of their venture production studio, recount their adventures over the past year of growing FormKeep after having acquired it from thoughtbot, and offer advice to founders preparing to sell their product or company.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Andrew Bialecki, CEO of Klaviyo, discusses building systems to process and get insight from business' data, scaling personality and humanity to mass communication, and translating customer feedback into concrete product improvement. Plus, the debut of 'Ask thoughtbot'!
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Jonathan Kim, CEO of Appcues, discusses building better onboarding and personalization to apps, starting a company as a solo founder, lessons learned from his time in journalism, and core culture values.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
In this special crossover episode, Chad is joined by Chris Toomey, Development Director at thoughtbot and host of The Bike Shed podcast, to discuss the content, history, and the process of making Upcase, thoughtbot's online learning platform, FREE.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Sandra Richter, Co-founder and CEO of Soofa, talks about redefining the infrastructure of out of home advertising, purpose vs business motivation, and learning from setbacks.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Lindsey Christensen, VP of Marketing at thoughtbot, discusses shaping thoughtbot's marketing strategy, team, and future.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Heena Purohit, Product Manager of IBM Watson IoT, discusses how they are tailoring custom solutions with IoT data, building business acumen for better product managing, and iterating at scale.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Mike Trotzke, CEO of Cheddar, talks about the future of billing models, when is the right time to do seed investing, and finding your value pricing metric.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Jameson Toole, founder of Fritz, discusses AI & Machine Learning on mobile, the process & ideology of launching a product from scratch, and the business of developer tools.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Yoav Shapira, an Engineering Manager at Facebook with a long history in Boston startups, discusses early technology choices for startups, balancing product needs/wants with technical limitations, the role of Capital-D 'Design', and common startup advice.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Sarah Cooper, comedian, speaker, and author of 100 Tricks to Appear Smart in Meetings, joins Chad to discuss management burnout, the creative process, and her latest book.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Stephan Ango, Co-founder and Head of Product at Lumi, discusses merging creative and scientific mindsets in industrial design, the logistics of packaging, developing custom solutions by slowly replacing 3rd party tools, and building your ideal culture while balancing operational needs.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Jerry Talton, leader of the Machine-Learning Services team at Slack, talks about picking up after a failed startup, design-thinking for machine learning, and important lessons from managing.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Clara Vu, co-founder & VP of Engineering of Veo Robotics, shares her story getting into the world of robotics, designing perception systems for industrial robots, and 'First-Principles Thinking' in all aspects of business.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Joe Ferris, CTO of thoughtbot, joins Chad to discuss Data Engineering, what it is, when you need it, and some of the challenges thoughtbot has faced while using it.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Tim Enwall, CEO of Misty Robotics, discusses designing, building, and selling a fully autonomous robot for developers.
GiantRobot for $200 off pre-ordersSee open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Robby Russell, VP of Engineering & Partner at Planet Argon, discusses considering remote work for an agency, strategies for leading a dev team, defining focus for an agency, and the results of the 2018 Rails Hosting Survey.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Greg Storey, founder of Airbag Industries & Executive Director of Design at USAA, discusses the blurring of personal and company identity, helming a budding design group, "safe agile", what it means for design to 'have a seat at the table', and sustainable pace within an agency.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Alex Friedman, co-founder of LOLA, discusses overcoming stigma, launching new products, measuring success, and brand values.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Sam Moorhouse, creator of Global Code, discusses the importance of mentorship and how he established a software engineering summer education program in Ghana.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Michael Sheeley, former co-founder of Runkeeper, talks about his struggles with scaling, experimentation with prices, finding ways to connect and work together as a larger society, and innovation in health care.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Special Guest: Nurse-1-1.
Chris Heivly, author & entrepreneur in residence at Techstars, discusses the early days of MapQuest, Raleigh as a burgeoning tech city, and building up new tech communities.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Paul English, co-founder of Lola, discusses what it means to be a good brand, transitioning from a tech foundry to a single-product focus, lessons learned from having launched multiple companies, and his approaches to competition & success.
See open positions at thoughtbot!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Ram V. Iyer, Business Thinker & Professional Business Mentor at The Business Thinking Institute, discusses his internalization of business success/failure, having a 'business thinking' mindset, and distinguishing oneself through the value you can create.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Nilan Peiris, VP of Growth at TransferWise, discusses growth sources, handling failure, studying user evangelism, launching in a new market, and scaling globally.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Dermot Daly, founder and CEO of Tapadoo, discusses being a developer early in the iOS ecosystem while differentiating themselves now as it's become a more crowded market-space, building your ideal company, and developing apps for med-tech devices.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Camille Fournier, author, speaker, and Managing Director at Two Sigma, discusses her path from Director of Infrastructure Engineering to CTO, lessons learned from tech team management, and the importance of defining core-values.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Jennifer Dary, founder of Plucky, discusses purpose, process, longevity, relationships, and trust by turning the tables and giving Chad a corporate counseling session.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
David Cancel, CEO & Co-founder of Drift, discusses bringing the personal touch back to sales through conversational marketing, validating an idea, competition, and differentiating yourself through communication & marketing.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Adam Marchick, CEO & co-founder of Alpine AI, discusses pioneering vocal analytics, making a better experience for digital commerce on vocal platforms, and operating in an early stage market.
Thank you Alpine AI for providing a transcript of today's episode
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Sara Tateno, founder and CEO of Happity, shares her journey from BBC Radio, to coding bootcamp, to startup founder.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Ernesto Moreno, business coach, entrepreneur, & restaurateur, joins Chad to discuss transforming a restaurant using lean methodology, focusing on your strengths, and finding creativity in running a business.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Tracy Osborn, author and the creator of WeddingLovely, joins Chad to talk about juggling projects, redefining your core customer base, the feeling of giving up control when hiring, and publishing via Kickstarter.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad discusses reflection & goal planning, the scope of internal projects, and balancing time & team structure for both client & product work with Allen Pike, CEO & co-founder of Steamclock Software.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by George Brocklehurst, development director of thoughtbot NYC, to discuss the methodologies, tools, and use cases in working with machine learning.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
In 2003, five friends came together to form thoughtbot. In this special episode, we take a look back on the founding of thoughtbot, and it's first years, told from the perspective of the original founders and early partners. From their first meeting in college, to the dramatic first work-experience that led them to create thoughtbot, to the eventual breakup and reformation, we explore the events that led thoughtbot to become the company it is today.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by Pamela Pavliscak, founder of Change Sciences, about human-centered design thinking, and incorporating well-being & ethics as a measure of success.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by Andrew Carroll, CPA and independent CFO, to discuss how the new tax regulations will affect freelancers, small business, & solopreneurs. Also, recommended strategies for savings, retirement, and investing for entrepreneurs.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by Curtis Herbert, independent app developer and creator of Slopes, to discuss balancing client and product work, the pros & cons of a seasonal app, the importance of outreach, and experimenting with non-traditional business models.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by Max Seelemann, co-founder and lead developer of Ulysses, to discuss app-review, the complexities of multi-platform releases, initiating a full-app rewrite, and switching to a subscription pricing-model.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by Anne Halsall, co-founder and Chief Product Officer of Winnie, discussing intention in branding, assumptions about features, balancing local and remote work, and quantifying growth.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
The tables are flipped and Chad is interviewed by Alan Wick, at our Playbook Launch Party, on the lessons learned from starting thoughtbot, company methodology, and looking towards the challenges & opportunities of the future.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Thank you to Storyblocks for sponsoring today's episode!
Chad chats with Maria Parker, CEO of Cruzbike, about running your first Kickstarter, issues with scaling production, and the challenge of shifting public perceptions.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Thank you to Storyblocks for sponsoring today's episode!
Chad talks with Chris Savage & Brendan Schwartz, co-founders of Wistia, about building/launching new products, hiring, and managing company identity & vision.
Thank you to Storyblocks for sponsoring today's episode!
Chad is joined by Aleen Simms, an organizer for App Camp For Girls, to discuss the importance and logistics of their new Indiegogo Campaign.
Head over to the App Camp Indiegogo via tbot.io/appcamp to have your donation matched today!
Check out our newest podcast, Crossroads.
Thank you to Storyblocks for sponsoring today's episode!
Chad is joined by Amy Webb, Professor at the Stern School of Business NYU and Founder & Quantitative Futurist at The Future Today Institute, to discuss distilling trends, incremental decision making, and the role of organizational management on the outcome of a company's future.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by designer and author Jarrod Drysdale to discuss lessons learned from shutting down Cascade, writing about design, cultivating content for your audience, and design's evolving role within organizations.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by Anders Brownworth, Chief Evangelist at Circle, to discuss zero-cost transaction fees, cryptocurrency, and re-envisioning modern payment systems.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by Thomas Smale, founder of FE International to discuss valuations, selling SaaS businesses, and tips to make your product more attractive to potential buyers.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by author Geoffrey A. Moore to discuss the concepts in Crossing the Chasm and how they relate to scaling consulting.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by Laurie Young to discuss The Developer's Path, a panel discussion hosted at thoughtbot London on how companies and developers can work together to achieve reciprocal growth.
Chad is joined by Sara Chipps, cofounder of Girl Develop It & CEO of Jewelbots, to discuss integrating with custom hardware, building a community of young coders, working with retailers, and branding.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by Code School & Envy Labs founder Gregg Pollack to discuss optimal work environments and building a company to support Open Source Projects.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by author, blogger, entrepreneur, and marketer Seth Godin to discuss the organizational introspection required to move from the cutting edge to the mainstream.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by Mike McKenna, CEO of Shotgunflat, to discuss cultivating a business in the town in which one grew up, working with family, the effect of adding a sales team to a consultancy, and the legislation of craft-brewing.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by thoughtbot designer Kim Goulbourne to discuss inspiration, side projects, and winning a Webby Award!
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Chad is joined by Nick Charlton, thoughtbot developer and co-host of the Build Phase podcast, to give their impressions on all the news out of the WWDC17 Keynote & Platforms State of the Union.
Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots!
Ben outlines his next steps, reflects on his time at thoughtbot, and hands the proverbial podcast reins over to Chad.
Ben bids adieu to thoughtbot, and outlines his plans, hopes, and fears for the future.
Derrick gets technical about Drip's performance optimization, and reflects on pre-conceived opinions in regards to tactical & strategic planning after receiving some constructive criticism.
Ben and Derrick recount their experiences and lessons learned speaking at MicroConf.
Thank you to our sponsor this week, FreshBooks
Ben is joined this week by Spencer Fry, founder of TypeFrag, Carbonmade, Uncover, and Coach, to discuss carryover lessons of successful startups.
Thank you to our sponsor this week, FreshBooks
As we prepare for MicroConf, Ben takes a new tact on his talk after giving an early demo, and Derrick recounts a positive pair-programming experience.
Thank you to our sponsor this week, FreshBooks
On FormKeep, Ben implements custom redirects on form submissions and starts a test to remove up-front credit card collection, as well as discusses evaluation of feature requests. On Drip, Derrick walks through the app with new devs, considers on-boarding automation, and continues his refactoring project.
Thank you to our sponsor this week, FreshBooks
Derrick welcomes new Javascript and Rails developers to Drip. Ben prepares a content deal and interviews a Content Manager for Upcase, discusses the benefits and methodology to Vim proficiency, works on an integration with Wistia, and ponders growing / selling apps.
Thank you to our sponsor this week, FreshBooks
As Ben and Derrick prepare their talks for MicroConf, Ben shares his tips and habits for talk preparation and public speaking.
Thank you to our sponsor this week, FreshBooks
Ben & Derrick reflect on the S3 outage and how it affected their services, and muse on managing user perceptions. Derrick submits a talk to MicroConf on what it means to be "customer driven", and begins a refactoring effort to rework Drip's integration system. On Upcase, Ben integrates a referral widget, and enables subscription pausing, while on FormKeep he fixes a trial plan selection bug.
Thank you to our sponsor this week, FreshBooks
Ben & Derrick welcome Anna Jacobsen, Education Director at Drip, to discuss customer demos / onboarding, sales and retention strategies, customer success, and best practices within Drip.
Thank you to our sponsor this week, FreshBooks
On FormKeep, Ben runs an A/B test on trial length and adds a short onboarding survey, meanwhile wrapping up team signups and working on a content licensing deal for Upcase. Derrick reports back from his machine learning class, and discusses an issue in quality assurance testing.
Derrick travels to Portland to visit fellow bootstrapper friends, Ben recounts his recent conference travel, and a discussion of their most pivotal hires as well as account rescue techniques.
Derrick celebrates a great shipping week, completing both 'live segments' and a Drip certification course. Ben recounts the rollout & results of the Upcase + Tapas promotion, and reflects on its successes and possible pitfalls.
Ben presses to meet the Upcase & Tapas launch deadline, and shares some lessons learned from its preparation, promotion, and launch. On Drip, Derrick rolls out more UI updates, is looking to hire JavaScript and Rails engineers, and details his hiring & interview process.
Ben halts the search for a marketer to instead hire a sales consultant and focus on growth himself, and announces a collaboration with Ruby Tapas. Derrick enrolls in a machine learning class, and contemplates Drip team & work structure.
Thank you to our sponsor this week Mobile Dev + Test Conference from Techwell
Derrick takes a solo retreat to reflect on new goals for Drip, and draws up preliminary plans for scaling team size / structure, as well as speeding up velocity through parallelism. Ben shares his experience with GrowthHackers Projects, hides the lowest plan and implements an automated annual upgrade reminder, pitches a content partnership for Upcase, considers a thoughtbot products bundle, and realizes a need for a mentor.
Ben & Derrick discuss music in the workplace, optimizing Redis, reaching larger markets beyond early adopters, and standing out in job application e-mails.
Derrick considers learning a new language to be prepared for scaling Drip's optimization, and gives new details on the tech used to streamline queries for large accounts. Ben breaks down his post to finding the best candidate for product Head of Marketing, and pointers on developing an entrepreneur's mindset.
Ben discusses the lessons of mimicked learning and tempering of judgmental thinking gleaned from a sports book, and muses on how to apply them to career advice. On Drip, faced with a mountain of catch-up work after the holiday, Derek confronts scalability.
Ben decides to hire a support firm, document support processes, completes the Hound pricing change, and prepares to make products their own division for next year. Meanwhile, on Drip, Derrick addresses a performance challenge.
Ben is joined by Mike Perham, author of Sidekiq, to discuss running a business solo, taking a side project from hobby to full time job, and scaling support as an app grows.
On Drip, Derrick launches a free tier, and utilizes credit card anti-fraud measures. Ben publicly launches FormLinter, pauses exploring new product ideas in favor of giving attention to existing ones, and starts to rebuild the product team. They also discuss the merits of remote vs in-person collaboration, the pros and cons of open offices, and dealing with interruptions from notifications and meetings.
Ben and Nick get super nerdy this week and chat about Meetspace's architecture using Go, Postgres, and HMAC including custom cookie signing, rendering, error handling, tooling, and more!
GIANTROBOTS30 for 30% off your first monthSadly, Ben is stuck in hammock somewhere, and we are without a new episode this week. However, we would love you all to check out thoughtbot's newest podcast, interviewing inspirational designers, developers, and other makers in tech, The Laila & Brenda Show!
Give their latest episode a listen here, and if you like it subscribe to their feed however you listen to podcasts!
Ben and Nick chat about ways to pitch your product, working solo as well as sustainably, and the costs of doing business.
GIANTROBOTS30 for 30% off your first monthBen talks to Nick Gauthier, founder of MeetSpace, about the importance of validating ideas, reading through API documentation, and pricing surveys.
GIANTROBOTS30 for 30% off your first monthDerrick finds some new areas to improve after walking new hires through Drip's architecture, and discusses his custom billing engine. On Hound, Ben delegates the new-pricing project, and validates a new product idea.
Derrick brings a few more new hires onto the team, and ships a change to make clients' Javascript snippets more performant. On Hound, Ben does some direct outreach sales, considers bringing on someone to help with marketing, and muses on the balancing act between product manager, developer, and marketing.
On Hound, Ben sends out announcements for pricing changes, questions when a decision is the "right" decision when it comes to customer feedback, and toys with per-seat pricing model feasibility. Derrick has a successful first week on-boarding the new dev-ops hire, offers Ben some advice on balancing features with price, and discusses some customer acquisition campaigns.
Ben plans a camping trip, acquires a new Twitter account, releases his notes on giving great conference talks, and begins to tell users of Hound's new pricing. Derrick reacts to the announcement of Github Projects and what that means for Codetree, ships the new form design on Drip, and muses on the ramifications to Google's announced penalizing of intrusive mobile pop-ups.
On Drip, Derrick deals with a high-bandwidth customer and hires a new devops team member. Meanwhile, Ben brainstorms new pricing structures for Hound.
Derrick switches domains from getdrip.com to drip.co, begins to update the design of the Drip widget, and tries to find balance in his varying roles as CTO. Ben hands off the reigns of Upcase, switches to a low-tech project management solution, and mixes work and personal todos.
Ben welcomes guest co-host Derrick Reimer, co-founder of Drip, getting to know his background and products for our first outside-thoughtbot view on SaaS strategy (as well as Ben's arm-twisty methods for getting him on the podcast in the first place)!
thoughtbot CEO Chad Pytel joins Ben to discuss our recent office closings and reasons necessitating this decision, what this means for the product team, and the future of thoughtbot. Also, a teaser of what to expect next from Giant Robots Podcast.
Fresh back from vacation, Ben shifts his attention to a Hound project, adding in tiered plans and pricing. Chris begins to build out a drip sequence for content recommendations, prepares to roll off to return to client work, and leaves us with some final reflections, takeaways, and lessons learned while on Upcase.
Chris delves into marketing mode for the TDD course, removes more client-side analytics code, and starts redesigning the information architecture on Upcase. On FormKeep, Ben alerts users to site down-time, removes all pay-per-form logic from the codebase, and begins to set up trials sans credit-card.
Ben receives some insight on customer referrals for FormKeep, applies his pricing philosophy to Hound, and realizes a personal blind-spot when it comes to customer satisfaction. On Upcase, Chris patches an automated follow-up messaging bug leading to enhanced focus on server-side analytics, welcomes Tyson to the team to begin work on trail mapping course content, and soft launches the Fundamentals of TDD trail.
Ben rants about bad jokes on twitter, doesn't ship any improved activation features on FormKeep this week, irons out some bugs on FormLinter, and begins an ad campaign. Chris contemplates shifting Upcase's business model, and walks through the impetus driving this decision.
Ben encounters a downed FormKeep and enables a monitoring service, completes the un-grandfathering process for accounts on old tiers, and begins work on improving activation flow. Chris sends out a survey to users and discovers a shift in the Upcase demographics.
Chris digs into the causes for a MRR drop, discovering usage trends with seasonality; and in the process gets a clearer picture of Upcase's user base. Also, he welcome Geoff to the project, and begins a new marketing initiative driven by user testimonials. Ben welcomes Tyson onto team Formkeep to begin redesigning on boarding, and continues FormLinter improvements / marketing.
This week, we ruminate on the meta-organization of project management. Ben embraces team feedback on FormLinter.com, reaches the end of Formkeep's grandfathered pricing window, and removes sandboxing to streamline plan structures. Chris contemplates Upcase's role as a product within thoughtbot, prepares to welcome on new team members (bye Gabe!), and restructures topic relationships to improve discoverability. Also, the return of Dance Talk!
On Formkeep, Ben launches FormLinter to increase form accessibility and conversions, and looks forward to additional persons on thoughtbot product work. Chris continues marketing of the Bourbon Smash course, wrestles with metrics and analytics, and improves team logins on Upcase.
On Upcase, Chris releases the Bourbon course, restructures how new courses are highlighted, and discusses juggling the various factors that contribute to MRR. Ben takes on-boarding notes from a century old dance school to improve activation on Formkeep.
Ben changes product activation flow, possibly for the worse, launches a new UI, and muses on new customer acquisition for Formkeep. On Upcase, Chris starts to see benefits from the domain transition, and brainstorms on how to un-bottleneck course releases.
Ben delays a new feature until an easier implementation can be reached, adds additional event tracking for better site usage feedback, takes a medium to large digression to rant about Javascript, and makes headway on Formkeep's UI refactor. On Upcase, Chris steps back from the content spotlight, takes a hit to traffic from the domain transition, and tests all things email.
Chris transitions Upcase to thoughtbot.com/upcase for SEO and branding purposes, and introduces reactivate & resubscribe functionality. Ben publishes a blog post on Formkeep's pricing history, optimizes the initial form setup page, and begins work to implement a no credit card up-front trial.
Ben switches from Mandrill to Sendgrid, turns a corner on his guarantee vs trial test, and begins the process of overhauling Formkeep's UI. Meanwhile, on Upcase, Chris utilizes an interesting method for A/B Testing, teases a secret project, and increases SEO by changing out the header.
Ben and Chris muse on the nature of weather-related happiness. Also, Ben works on instrumenting Formkeep's activation funnel, utilizes a monitoring utility to optimize sign-up flow, and vows to almost certainly not toy with pricing any more. Meanwhile on Upcase, Chris confronts multiple root causes for a dip in MRR, updates content displays, and overhauls the checkout.
Ben and Chris discuss taxes and financial (as well as bedtime) routines. On Upcase, Chris showcases "The Weekly Iteration" on the site, reveals a long-term dream for the platform, and patches a critical security issue. Ben adds a bunch of features to cut down on support requests, does some UX cleanup, and performs other general tasks to improve usability on Formkeep.
Thank you to Hired for sponsoring this episode!
Chris makes progress on Upcase's to-dos in order to shift focus to after-the-funnel improvements, and makes a renewed vow to talk to customers for direct feedback. Meanwhile, Ben attends a conference, and while he picked up some great strategies for Formkeep onboarding, he mostly just wants to fix the airline industry.
Thank you to Hired for sponsoring this episode!
Chris keeps improving MRR on Upcase, patches a Javascript problem with a Javascript solution, and implements benefit focused text on course descriptions. On Formkeep, Ben discovers a flaw in an A/B test, deals with squirrely payment code, and prepares for a conference talk.
Thank you to Hired for sponsoring this episode!
Ben decides to A/B test pricing, begins grandfathering existing customers to the new tiers, teases new features on Formkeep, and recounts some interesting customer interactions. Meanwhile, Chris drives conversions through e-mail and Twitter, identifies unique customer segments, and brings in more of the thoughtbot voice to Upcase.
Thank you to Hired for sponsoring this episode!
Chris welcomes a new member to team Upcase, confronts a drop in MRR, and looks forward to increased content production. On Formkeep, Ben introduces tiered pricing and trials, considers tier differentiators, and muses on what next to implement.
Ben and Chris welcome on Ryan Buckley, co-founder of Scripted, for an honest discussion on the shortcomings, pain-points, and benefits that arise from restructuring a product's focus.
Ben welcomes SaaS growth and customer success pioneer Lincoln Murphy to discuss the true importance of providing value to existing customers and focusing on their success, as every tactic you undertake as a business is predicated on understanding their desired outcome. He also delves into how focusing on customer type is beneficial for both consumers and producers, as well as gives Ben some feedback about Formkeep.
Ben accidentally launches a Vim course, debates a B2B vs B2C focus, and feels out different Formkeep pricing tiers. Chris welcomes back a handful of former subscribers to Upcase, continues to work on content production, and integrates relevant content into broader thoughtbot docs.
Chris converts with email campaigns, lays out a time-table to churn out a ton of content, and tries to analyze a dip in revenue. Meanwhile, Ben tests the definition of what constitutes a "conference", focuses on how to enrich Formkeep for specific use cases, and makes headway on tiered pricing.
Ben finalizes Formkeep's Ember removal, toys with the idea of manual on boarding, and positions himself to begin experimenting with plans and pricing. Meanwhile, Chris deals with credit card fraud, too many inodes on Upcase's server, and finishes the changes required to offer free videos.
Chris talks with growth expert Brian Balfour on starting and sustaining SaaS business, and his team's approach to addressing growth issues.
Chris gets a surprise while reviewing Upcase's Q4 profit & loss statement, gains some insight into e-mail marketing, wrestles with the added complexity of adding github auth-to-access, and brainstorms new community-driven projects. Meanwhile, Ben gets his hands dirty with Formkeep's Ember removal, is tempted by the siren's call of distraction, and gets an open review from the Bootstrapped Web podcast. Also, Chris does a live user-test of Formkeep's new user activation flow.
Ben resolves to cut back on dashboard checkins, makes progress on Formkeep's Ember extraction, and struggles with product-market fit. Meanwhile, Chris tackles some analytics issues, opens up Upcase landing pages from behind the paywall to improve marketing and SEO, and steps up his marketing and social-media game.
Ben and Chris both struggle with cancelations coming into the new year, Formkeep continues to strip out Ember and focus on content marketing, and Upcase resolves a major issue in the exercise system and improves the checkout flow.
Chris tracks new members after the release of the new Mastering Git course from Upcase, launches a drip e-mail campaign to attract more members, and focuses on increased content output. Ben continues removing Ember from Formkeep, rethinks an activation sequence A/B test, conducts user tests to improve the checkout flow, and adopts a mindset of continuous improvement.
As Ben transitions from Upcase to Formkeep, so too will the podcast transition to an open discussion around growing thoughtbot's internal projects and maintaining them as businesses, highlighting our hopes, experiments, tactics, failures, and success along the way! Today Ben and new co-host Chris discuss finding that magic feature or metric around which to structure pricing, selecting the right framework for your app, and customer acquisition tactics.
Ben talks with Ashe Dryden about ways to approach diversity in the tech community from workplace, conference, and personal perspectives.
Ben and Laura Roeder, founder of Edgar, chat about anthropomorphizing your brand to build better engagement, going the extra step to care about customer success, and some tips for social media marketing best practices.
This episode is brought to you by Formkeep: Form endpoints for designers and developers
Ben talks with Hiten Shah, co-founder of Crazy Egg and Kissmetrics, on the value of helping others, frameworks for a better life, being an infovore, and tips for finding a successful product niche.
Ben and Eric Normand of LispCast and PurelyFunctional.tv talk about the pros and cons of Haskell and Clojure, empathize on some of the pain points of running an educational coding platform, and hypothesize on how the next great programming "killer demo" will present itself.
Ben talks with Steli Efti, CEO and Co-founder of Close, on maintaining energy and passion in speaking, why engineers make great sales people (and how they can be even better), and managing your emotions to be more productive and happy.
Chad talks with C. Todd Lombardo & Trace Wax about their new book, co-authored with Richard Banfield, Design Sprint: A Practical Guidebook for Building Great Digital Products, as well as the process and benefits of design sprints.
Brenda talks with Sara Chipps on the desire to educate in code, her inspiration to work on hardware, and the troubles of manufacturing.
Chad Pytel and Laila Winner welcome Star Simpson to discuss PLIBMTTBHGATY (Programming Languages I’ve Been Meaning To Try But Haven’t Gotten Around To Yet), fostering community through meet-ups, and the finer points of taco delivery via drone.
Ben talks with thoughtbot designer Brenda Storer on fitting both development and design in her job title, tips for public speaking, and introduces a new change to the show.
Get to know your new sometimes-host better!
Ben talks with John Norman about his process and modified approach to the delivery, payment, and tech of modern managed health care. They also touch on age bias in the programming world, living a purpose-driven life, and dealing with startup growth.
Ben talks with Adam & Jerod of The Changelog Podcast to discuss their personal interviewing modalities, doing full-time media creation, and a new video project aimed to explore the actual people behind your programming heroes.
Ben talks with Mirabai Knight about the technology and uses of modern stenography; including using steno with Vim, and her work on Plover, the open source Steno engine.
Ben talks with Nadia Odunayo about giving non-technical conference talks and full-time pairing.
Ben is joined by Brinkley Warren of MegaBots Inc. to discuss the history, build, and strategy behind the MegaBot Mk II, USA's entrant in next years giant robot duel!
Ben and Jules Coleman, founder of Hassle, discuss staying close to the codebase while in a more managerial role, the challenges of rapid growth, and the value of internalizing feedback.
Ben and Drew Neil discuss freeing up Vim's leader key, the value of visual learning, and using GitHub to crowd source closed captions.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
GiantRobots for a $10 credit towards your new account.Links & Show Notes
Ben and fellow thoughtbotter Mike Burns take time out of their Summer Summit schedule to chat about launching offices, the art of classical code, and why Mike no longer loves Haskell.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
GiantRobots for a $10 credit towards your new account.Links & Show Notes
Ben is joined by trepidatious producer, Thom Obarski, to talk all things media at thoughtbot, compare working in tech to entertainment environments, and bestow some beginner advice on starting one's own podcast.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
GiantRobots for a $10 credit towards your new account.Links & Show Notes
Ben is joined by Tom Stuart to talk about incorporating computer science topics into Ruby, his process of preparing talks, enriching your development career with a bit of computer science knowledge, and gushing about how amazing computers truly are.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
GiantRobots for a $10 credit towards your new account.Links & Show Notes
Ben is joined by Steve Tooke to discuss the importance of communication, testing, and building Cucumber 2.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
GiantRobots for a $10 credit towards your new account.Links & Show Notes
Ben welcomes Joe Ferris, thoughtbot's CTO, to discuss design parity within the company, inversion of control, and solving all the world's problems with monads.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by Digital Ocean. Simple and fast cloud hosting, built for developers. Use the code GiantRobots for a $10 credit towards your new account.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
GiantRobots for a $10 credit towards your new account.Links & Show Notes
Ben and Samir Talwar of Codurance discuss the appeal of functional programming, mob programming, and a different take on conferences.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
GiantRobots for a $10 credit towards your new account.Links & Show Notes
As Giant Robots nears its 3 year anniversary, Ben welcomes back Chad Pytel to reflect on the highs and lows of the previous year at thoughtbot.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
GiantRobots for a $10 credit towards your new account.Links & Show Notes
Ben welcomes Denise Yu and Rosa Fox of Codebar to discuss the importance of fostering community, mentoring tips, and more.
Ben discusses consulting and open source from within the government, as well as choosing the right clients, and the value of mentorship, with Aidan Feldman of 18F.
Ben talks with fellow thoughtbotter Derek Prior on conference speaking, code review, and podcasting.
Ben talks with fellow thoughtbotter Chris Toomey on networking, mentorship, React.js, and sustainable pace.
Ben talks with Rebecca Miller-Webster, Managing Director of thoughtbot Chicago, on beginners contributing to open-source, organizing conferences, and cultivating a more inclusive culture.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
GiantRobots for a $10 credit towards your new account.Links & Show Notes
Ben welcomes on Saron Yitbarek to talk about creating communities that foster learning and niceness; as well as getting comfortable with being uncomfortable, and how confronting that discomfort can ultimately lead to success.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
GiantRobots for a $10 credit towards your new account.Links & Show Notes
Ben and Shelby Kelly discuss teaching at a coding bootcamp and the future of junior-developer programs. Stick around till the end to catch a sample of her Rocky Mountain Ruby rap!
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
GiantRobots for a $10 credit towards your new account.Links & Show Notes
Ben talks to Sam Phippen on working on the RSpec core team, new features in 3.3, tips for contributing to open-source, and his favorite parts of Rails.
This episode of Giant Robots is sponsored by:
GiantRobots for a $10 credit towards your new account.Links & Show Notes
Ben talks to Pam Selle on the importance of self-impossed structure, voice coding, and living with RSI.
Haymakers For Hope: Ben's Charity Boxing Match
Ben talks with Carin Meier on the writer's process, how programming relates to the arts, and the importance of a graduated and immersive approach to learning.
Ben talks with Justin Gitlin on changing the experience of a social media platform, as well as shaping game dev to art (and vice versa).
Ben sits down with therapist/writer/podcaster/speaker/Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu champion Georgia Dow to discuss the value of new experiences, the advantages of private mentorship, and living life to its fullest.
Ben talks to Sir John Hargrave, CEO of Media Shower, about his new book Mind Hacking on the power of reprogramming one's thoughts to maintain new habits, and innovations to the traditional publishing model.
Ben talks to Mike Brittain, VP of Engineering at Etsy, on interacting with the development community, strides in diversity practices, the pros/cons of an open office, and the difficulties in transitioning from engineering to management.
Ben talks to Craig Andera, developer at Cognitect, on his latest 20% time project, how Clojure gets made, and driving immutability into a database.
Ben talks with Pat Brisbin on his new book, and the future of Haskell at thoughtbot.
Chad officially welcomes Ben back to the podcast, discuses the employer/employee ideology that can facilitate a successful sabbatical, and reveals some exclusives on the future of thoughtbot.
Chad talks with Ben Arent, product manager at Rackspace, on the pros/cons of app acquisition, as well as their favorite Sass tools.
Chad talks with Paul Dowman, founder of OK GROW!, on replacing Rails with Meteor, and how martial arts has made him a better developer.
Chad talks with Matt Aimonetti, co-founder of Splice, on remote worker strategies, fundraising, and his vision for the future of digital musical collaboration.
Chad talks with fellow thoughtbotters Adarsh Pandit and Kyle Fiedler on the pros and cons of stories, story points, and job stories.
Chad talks with Irene Ros, data visualization practice lead at Bocoup, about her pursuit of making data visualization function in a social context.
Chad & developer Joanne Cheng break down thoughtbot's statistical year in review!
Chad talks with Ian Logan, an Engineering Manager at Airbnb, on the challenges, ideology, implementation, and future of their payments system.
Chad talks with thoughtbot CMO Dan Croak about our content marketing strategy, managing the flow of new media, and the origin of our growth team.
Jeff Smith talks to Meng To, author of Design + Code about the blurring line between developers and designers, learning tools to better communicate, and the difficulties of planing a world-wide workshop tour.
Chad talks to Zach Dunn, CPO of Robin, about the future of smart spaces, working with family, and when to shift your company's scope.
Chad talks to Adarsh Pandit, thoughtbot SF Managing Director & host of the Reboot podcast, about his personal journey which inspired our newest show.
Chad talks to Scott Ford, founder & COO of Corgibytes, about the business of software remodeling/retrofitting, and finding value and beauty in old code.
Ben & Chris Hunt catch up on their latest conference talks, podcasts, and things accomplished on their recent coding retreat.
Britt Ballard leads this roundtable discussion on home-growing your own conference and their experiences, from theme and logo selection to scheduling guests and venues, turning Keep Ruby Weird from a dream into a reality.
Guest-Ben Chad Pytel talks with Allison House about maintaining personal growth while freelancing, and her approach to harnessing your capacity to learn.
Ben talks with Tom Lehman, creator of Genius, about the power of honesty in corporate culture, and navigating the mores of discussing salary.
Ben talks with Pete Hunt, formerly of Facebook & Instagram, on React and what makes this unique JavaScript library tick, as well as shifting from a technical to a business focused mindset.
Ben talks with Dan Martell, CEO and founder of Clarity, about self-actualization in business, how life is affected by those around which one surrounds themselves and the value of staying outside one's comfort zone.
Ben talks with Will Sulinski, founder of Pistol Lake, on translating lessons learned from the tech sector into success in the fashion industry.
Ben talks with nGen Works founder Carl Smith about alternatives to a "flat" structure, remote management & community building.
Ben talks with Brandon Bloom about finding the right tool for the job, there being too many objects in OO Programing and the importance for a full spectrum of options, regardless of the choice.
Ben talks with Gumroad grower Ryan Delk about standing out from your peers by adding value before you ask for value.
Ben and Rob Walling, founder of Drip and HitTail, discuss engaging your audience, the path to building new habits and the need to create.
Ben talks to developer Joanne Cheng about lessons learned from the conference circuit, as well as the subject of her latest conf talk, Data-Driven-Documents within JavaScript, and trends in dashboard design.
Ben talks with Chris Granger, creator of Light Table, about building a better IDE and envisioning a world where all programming happens inside a database and anyone can do it.
This week Ben talks with former thoughtbotter, and creator of Is It Christmas, Eric Mill about the power of blogging, the personal empowerment offered by the internet and the role of government in the digital age.
Ben delves behind the scenes of a VC firm with Alex Taussig of Highland Capital.
Ben talks to Brett Van Zuiden, founder of Filepicker, about the importance of finding your specialization and passion in your industry, as well as his experiences in Y Combinator.
Ben talks to Sarah Haider, Android lead at Secret, about anonymity in social media, her work with Girls Who Code and Android Development.
Ben is joined by fellow thoughtbotters Alex & Galen to break down their product design sprint workflow.
Ben welcomes Marc-André Cournoyer of Coded Inc. to discuss self-marketing and sustaining info-product platforms.
On this weeks Giant Robots Ben welcomes Adam Wiggins, Heroku co-founder and former CTO, to join as more of a guest host than guest. They discuss team size/structure, project scalability, the benefits of working abroad & self-maintenance best practices.
Giant Robots welcome Adam & Chris of Vehikl who inquire about project selection / scheduling, portfolio building & customer-facing.
Ben sits down with Peter Cooper, of Cooper Press, on his evolution from blogger to published author and publisher.
Ben is joined by Alex & Jatin, recent graduates of the first thoughtbot / Metis Ruby on Rails Bootcamp, to talk about the process, experience and feedback on their path to becoming junior developers.
On our special 100th episode Aaron Patterson joins Ben from RailsConf to talk AdequateRecord, frustrations in software, bulk meat discounts, the finer nuances of cat-naming and the importance of scientific thinking in web development.
From RailsConf, Ben & Greg Baugues of Twilio discuss how mental illness affects the development community and the importance of, as well as resources to, proper treatment.
From RailsConf, Ben talks to Chris Hunt of Github about techniques for enhancing spacial memory, competitive personalities, the coffee infamy of the Pacific Northwest and Clojure testing.
Live from RailsConf Ben & Ernie Miller explore his "Curmudgeon" talk, modules and the importance of nuance.
Live from RailsConf, Ben talks to Executive Director of The Turing School Jeff Casimir on Conf-stress, the lack of jobs in open source and the challenges of learning to run a business.
This week Ben sits down with Chas Emerick to discuss his latest venture, The Quilt Project, start up philosophies and the importance of balanced time management.
Ben is joined by Diana & Jessie of thoughtbot San Francisco to discuss their latest book, iOS on Rails, the concept of releasing a book in Beta and the importance of apprenticeships to emerging junior developers.
On this weeks show Ben talks to David Nolen, Rails & JavaScript developer for the NY Times, about being a steward of ClojureScript, functional programming, the advantages of immutable values and Om.
Ben and Ryan Hoover, co-creator of Product Hunt, talk revenue models, the value of blogging, diversification of skills, and tiny steps towards major change.
This week on Giant Robots, Ben talks to Rich Thornett, Co-Founder of Dribbble, about the formation and criticisms of the company, the role of product design and remote team management.
Ben talks to George Brocklehurst & Mike Burns of thoughtbot's Stockholm office on creating and distributing gitsh, an interactive shell for Git, and why it shouldn't be a Ruby gem.
This week on Giant Robots, Mahmoud Abdelkader of Balanced joins Ben to talk the priorities in ones career trajectory, the role of a successful CTO, and the benefits of radically open transparency.
This week Ben Talks with Kyle Bragger of Elepath, Inc on the nature of online community building, advertising vs subscription revenue models and the importance of continued creative output (and actually releasing it to the world).
This week on Giant Robots, Ben chats with Tony DiPasquale on utilizing Arduino engineering to solve 0th world problems.
In this week's episode, we're joined by Peter Reinhardt, Co-founder and CEO of Segment.io. Ben and Peter discuss the product, their tech stack, the companies big pivot to Segment.io, their growth and future plans. They also discuss leaving MIT to start a company, getting along with your co-founders, nuclear reactors, hiking, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @reinpk on twitter.
This week, Ben is joined by Max Temkin, creator of Cards Against Humanity and Humans vs. Zombies. Max talks about his success with Cards Against Humanity and his feelings of impostor syndrome. He talks about some of his other projects including his first indie game, Humans vs. Zombies. Most recently Max had a multiplayer PC game published called Samurai Gunn. Max talks about the "open source" nature of his games. They discuss money, sustainability, kickstarter, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @MaxTemkin on twitter.
On this week's episode, Ben talks with Harper Reed, former CTO of Threadless, former CTO of Obama for America, and currently CEO of Modest. Harper talks about management and his "cabal" of people that he likes to work with. He also discusses his experience on the campaign, healthcare.gov, and procurement laws. When asked about his playbook for success, Harper talks about networking strategies, the use of different languages for different problems, craziness, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @harper on twitter.
On this week's special episode, Chad Pytel turns the tables and interviews host Ben Orenstein. They discuss the process of running the podcast and Ben's roots in programming and computer science. Ben talks about his Vim mastery, how he got into public speaking, and his experiences speaking at RailsConf. This year Ben is organizing the live coding track at RailConf. Ben describes his strategies for learning programming, how he's getting into Clojure, and much more!
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @cpytel on twitter.
This week's episode features Matt Knox of Twitter. Matt is a part of Twitter's university team which teaches new Twitter recruits about the company. He works as an engineer as well in order to stay current. Matt discusses his background as an engineer, and how he got into teaching. He discusses using Storm, essentially a real-time Hadoop, for Twitter. Ben and Matt talk about the importance of keeping a portfolio as a programmer and deliberate practice routines for coding, and more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @mattknox on twitter.
In this week's episode, Ben Orenstein is joined by best selling author, Seth Godin. Seth describes himself as an entrepreneur, a blogger, and an agent of change. They discuss art, frustration, and the endless pursuit of perfection as an artist. In his newest book, The Icarus Deception, Seth discusses seeking art in your work and looking beyond standards and production. They talk about the importance of finding connections with other artists and people who can provide meaningful feedback. They discuss several of Seth's blog posts which are linked below, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @thisissethsblog on twitter.
This week on Giant Robots, Ben Orenstein chats with Josh Pigford about time management, entrepreneurship and farming
This week on Giant Robots, Ben Orenstein talks with Uncle Bob Martin about functional programming, ethics, and writing.
This week on Giant Robots, Ben Orenstein talks with Chris Lindland, CEO of Betabrand.com about online fashion, self-generating product and dress-pant-sweatpants.
This week on Giant Robots, Ben Orenstein speaks with Harold Giménez, Heroku postgres leader, about postgres, data management, and beer brewing.
Ben Orenstein speaks with Alex Kesler, founder and CEO of inSegment about digital marketing, GTD and productivity.
This week Ben Orenstein interviews Catherine Bracy, Director of Community Organizing at Code for America.
Ben Orenstein speaks with thoughtbot developer Sean Griffin about scala and ruby.
Ben Orenstein speaks with Drew Neil, creator of vimcasts.org about teaching writing and workshopping vim.
This week on The Giant Robots Podcast, Ben Orenstein chats with Nathan Barry about book writing, teaching and self employment.
Josh Clayton and Ben Orenstein interview each other about their managing director positions.
Ben Orenstein speaks with Jeff Atwood about Discourse, forum software, and soylent.
Ben Orenstein interviews Josh Clayton and Laila Winner on their book, Geocoding on Rails.
Ben Orenstein and Paul Farnell, CEO of Litmus, talk about starting up, business practices, and Litmus.
Ben Orenstein and Hilary Mason, Data Scientist in Residence at Accel Partners, talk about Data Science, Bitly and Cheeseburgers.
Ben talks with Anthony Eden about DNSimple, programming languages and code retreats.
On this episode Ben talks with Chris Savage and Brendan Schwartz about Wistia
In this episode of Giant Robots Ben talks with Des Traynor about intercom, concise communication. blogging and customer outreach.
Ben and Chad discuss mentoring, job hunting tips and FAQ
In this of episode of Giant Robots, Ben speaks with Natalie Nagele and Ilya Sabanin about Wildbit, Beanstalk, and work flow.
In this episode Paul and Ben talk about tito, funconf, and organizing conferences.
In this week's episode Ben discusses effective business practices and advice for optimal page design with special guest Patrick McKenzie.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @patio11 on twitter.
In this episode, Ben Orenstein speaks with thoughtbot CTO Joe Ferris about the technical interview process at thoughtbot, and more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @joeferris on twitter.
This week Ben Orenstein, Pat Brisbin, and Mike Burns talk about Haskell, Linux, functional and dynamic programming, Conway's Game of Life, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, @patbrisbin and @mikeburns on twitter.
In this episode, Ben Orenstein is joined by Michael Klett, Co-founder and tech lead of Chargify. Ben and Michael discuss the evolution of Chargify and bumps along the way, underwear subscriptions, Michael’s transition from hardware to software, negativity in the Rails community, slow tests, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @moklett on twitter.
]In this episode Ben Orenstein is joined by Alex MacCaw, creator of Spine, formerly of Twitter, and now a developer at Stripe. Ben and Alex talk about travel, writing, code, and couch surfing.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @maccaw on twitter.
In this episode Ben Orenstein speaks with designer and founder of Authentic Jobs, Cameron Moll, about Authentic Jobs, design, the value of flow and family, and much, much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @cameronmoll on twitter.
In this episode, Ben Orenstein is joined by 17 year old Jack Kaufman, author of The Found a Business Book. Ben and Jack discuss Jack's inspiration for the book and how he got all his interviews, the other opportunities it's led too, the common themes he uncovered in his interviews, the differences between those who got funding and bootstrappers, working on the book while in highschool, marketing he's doing, his plans for the future, the issue with college computer science programs, his fears about the future, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @kaufman_jack on twitter.
In this episode Ben Orenstein is joined by Yehuda Katz and Tom Dale from Tilde. They discuss bootstrapping a business and the model behind Tilde, their breakdown of product development and consulting, and how they all met. They also talk about designing APIs and frameworks that people actually want to use, how teaching helps them be better framework developers, how they can beat the competition, how supporting multiple languages and frameworks can ruin your app's experience, the big surprises as they've launched, Ember.js' push to 1.0 and beyond, the difference between Ember.js and Backbone.js and why JavaScript matters, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, @tomdale, and @wycats on twitter.
In this special episode, number 52, and our 1 year anniversary episode, recorded at RailsConf 2013, Ben Orenstein is joined by Ruby and Rails core team member Aaron Patterson, thoughtbot CTO Joe Ferris, and a live studio audience. The trio discuss Rails 4, observers, callbacks, dubstep, namespaces, Scheme, functional programming, thread safety in Rails, what it would take to remove callbacks from Rails and why you would want to do it, what should be in our anniversary episode, dealing with Rails security issues, why Aaron likes to work on Rails, meeting people's expectations, Vim, intuitive software, and so much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, @tenderlove, and @joeferris on twitter.
On this week's show, recorded at RailsConf 2013, Ben Orenstein is joined by Sandi Metz, developer, author, podcaster, and recent Ruby Hero award winner. Ben and Sandi discuss winning awards, writing, whether notoriety changes who you are, what Sandi is proud of, the bad code she's writing and why, what she's doing now, getting real feedback on your work, that it's OK not to know everything, and much, much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @sandimetz on twitter.
In this week's episode, recorded at RailsConf 2013, Ben Orenstein is joined by Jeff Casimir and Katrina Owen from Jumpstart Lab and gSchool to discuss performing, speaking, and imposter syndrome, preparing for your talk, and what makes a good talk and how to give one. The also discuss gSchool, the way the program works and they way it's guaranteed, teaching, admitting ignorance, how good practice should be harder than the real thing, and why Jeff didn't like studying Computer Science and why he didn't enjoy programming and how Rails reignited his passion for creating things, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, @j3 and @kytrinyx on twitter.
In this episode, recorded at RailsConf 2013, Ben Orenstein is joined by Gregg Pollack and Nathaniel Bibler from EnvyLabs and codeschool.com. Gregg shares what he's learned running his business, when not to be transparent, how to deal with compensation, and how the EnvyLabs compensation structure has changed over the years. Nathan, Gregg, and Ben also discuss Code School, yearly payments to a subscription, making courses effective, effective marketing, the effectiveness of mailing lists, community events, shared ownership, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, @greggpollack and @nbibler on twitter.
In this episode, recorded at RailsConf 2013, Ben Orenstein is joined by Jon Larkowski, closet hippie and developer at CareZone. Ben and Jon discuss being a closet hippie, transitioning from consulting to working on a startup/product team, ping-pong, paying attention to your habits and improving to your life, meditation, firewalling your attention, fostering a startup culture, imposter syndrome, podcasting, coffee, code review, guitar, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @l4rk on twitter.
In this episode, recorded at RailsConf 2013, Ben Orenstein is joined by Ryan Bates of RailsCasts. Ben and Ryan discuss Ryan's transition to working on RailsCasts full time, staying up to date on the latest technology, how his coding style has changed, maintaining his open source, the process of producing RailsCasts, why he doesn't speak at conferences, the latest technology he is excited about, and much more
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @rbates on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Joe Kutner, programmer and author of ‘The Healthy Programmer’. Ben and Joe discuss how the demands of a development job lead to unhealthy habits, and ways to address the issues. They discuss specifics like standing desks, walking desks, the pomodoro technique, exercise, vitamin D, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @codefinger on twitter.
This week we try something a little different. Joe Ferris, Matt Jankowski, Ben Orenstein, and Chad Pytel get together and have a little fun, in what we're calling "Tiny Robots cuddling with other Tiny Robots". We'd love to get your thoughts on this special format, tweet us @thoughtbot or email learn@thoughtbot.com.
Follow @thoughtbot, @joeferris, @jankowski, @r00k, and @cpytel on twitter.
In this week's podcast, Ben Orenstein is joined by Chad Fowler, author, speaker, and CTO of 6wunderkinder. Ben and Chad discuss Chad's recent move to Berlin and 6wunderkinder, what a CTO does, getting back to coding, the early Ruby community, who Chad wants to hire, predicting success of new hires, and what makes a truly good developer, favorite interview questions, how Chad's interviewing process has changed over time, how age and experience can change your perspective, how Chad built a great team, and what he might write about in the future. They also discuss Chad's new tattoo, his regrets, meditation, therapy, gaining control over your mind, and much, much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @chadfowler on twitter.
thoughtbot's Ben Orenstein is joined by Scott Orn, venture capitalist at Lighthouse Capital Partners by day, and co-founder of Ben's Friends by night. Ben and Scott discuss building a community, the future of Ben's Friends, and how running the site helps him be a better VC, teaching people, and getting value out of giving back. They also talk about his work as a venture capitalist at Lighthouse, how the money flows, the freemium software model, why it's good and how it works, picking the winners, and how the market can affect success, and the companies Scott thinks are great investments, and where he thinks the market is going.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @scottorn on twitter.
This week, Ben Orenstein is joined by Peter Moldave, attorney at Gesmer Updegrove to discuss attorney client privilege, what not to do with email, the similarities between lawyers and programmers, how he got into law, his history with technology, and his time as a corporate lawyer at Apple. They also dig into how EULAs work, whether they are binding, whether you should be reading them, and how they can be enforced, software licensing, copyrights and the First-sale doctrine, patent law, software patents, and navigating the patent landscape. They also discuss how to view stock options in your startup job offer, working at startups, how to have a valuable career path, what your employer owns from your side projects or your work for them, how to manage liability in your startup, web site, app on the App Store, and side projects, the best corporate structure and much, much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @petermoldave on twitter.
This week Ben Orenstein in joined by thoughtbot CEO, Chad Pytel, to discuss thoughbot's books, online and in-person training programs, other educational products, and the launch of thoughtbot's new subscription to everything they teach, Learn Prime. They also discuss some changes to apprentice.io, Five Guys, and much more!
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @cpytel on twitter.
Ben is joined by Bryan Helmkamp, the founder of CodeClimate. In Bryan's second appearance on the podcast, Ben and Bryan discuss the architecture behind CodeClimate, scaling the service, and growing the business. They also discuss speaking at conferences, proposal selection, two factor authentication and adding it to CodeClimate, marketing and content marketing, how to decide what to build and proving that it was worthwhile, strategies for testing at the beginning when you have few users, and Bryan reveals CodeClimate next big upcoming feature.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @brynary on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Avdi Grimm, software developer, author, and podcaster. Ben and Avdi discuss Emacs, Avdi's personal assistant and delegating work. They also discuss naming and finding implicit concepts in your code, encoding processes as objects in their own right, his publishing and podcasting, the pronunciation of Parley, Ruby Tapas, education resources and the benefits of open source languages, his goals, the most civilized way to travel, and what we got wrong about the Law of Demeter.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @avdi on twitter.
This week Ben Orenstein is joined by Jeremy McAnally, employee at GitHub, author of Ruby in Practice, Rails 3 Upgrade Handbook, MacRuby in Action, and more. Jeremy and Ben discuss teaching and organizing conferences, remote working for GitHub, the and the company summits, GitHub workflows, their internal tools team. They also talk about standing out from the pack in work, life, and getting accepted to conferences, selecting people to speak at conferences, self-publishing, Jeremy's writing process and future writing plans, work-life balance, how to get a job at GitHub, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @jm on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined this week by Joe Ferris, CTO of thoughtbot. Ben and Joe discuss starting a new Rails project and our Rails application generator, Suspenders, test spies and breaking up your tests, and using Rails beta versions.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @joeferris on twitter.
This week Ben Orenstein is joined by Nick Quaranto, developer at 37signals and one of the maintainers of RubyGems.org. Nick and Ben discuss the just released Basecamp iOS app, the architecture of the app, the origins of the app and how it became what it is today, and RubyMotion in general. They then move on to discuss the recent RubyGems.org cracking, the mechanism behind it, the process of restoring the service, and how it might affect RubyGems going forward. They then circle back to talk more about RubyMotion, testing, working at 37signals, CoworkBuffalo, OpenHack, and good coffee.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @qrush on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Dennis Najjar CPA from AccountingDepartment.com. They discuss international companies operating in the United States, the tools of his trade, how AccountingDepartment.com is set up and what their different clients look like, and why it makes sense to outsource your bookkeeping and accounting. They also explore the checks and balances you should have in bookkeeping and accounting, the accounting departments role in an organization and 1099s their purpose, and what to do if you don't get one.
Follow @thoughtbot and @r00k on twitter.
In this week's episode, Ben Orenstein is joined by Steve Snyder, Entrepreneur in Residence at the law firm, Gesmer Updegrove LLP. Ben and Steve discuss Steve's history, his unique position at the law firm, mistakes to avoid, and advice and guidance to entrepreneurs just starting out.
Follow @thoughtbot and @r00k on twitter.
This week Ben Orenstein is joined by Jarrod Drysdale, the author of Bootstrapping Design. Ben and Jarrod discuss the sales and revenue of the book, and his new project, cascade.io. They also talk about learning new things, problem solving, and the differences between programming and design. They also discuss the downside to recurring revenue, successful marketing strategies for his book, advice for people who want to start something new, the concerns of a solo entrepreneur, and how his previous failures help him keep perspective.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @studiofellow on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined this week by Daniel Jalkut, the developer of MarsEdit and other fine software. Ben and Daniel discuss the origin of Daniel's twitter username, his history at Apple and his work there, and how it influences what he builds today. They also discuss the challenges of running your own company, and how Daniel's priorities and rule systems help him get things done, how the success of MarsEdit takes up his attention at the exclusion of other ideas, and how he thinks about failure. Then then go on to talk about App Store versus direct sales, why Daniel still sells his software outside the app store as well as in it, and what the breakdown of sales are like there, as well as Daniel's thoughts on App Store pricing and the benefits of being in the app store. Finally, Daniel tells us why he thinks git is like a PC and Mercurial is like a Mac, why he dislikes git, what he thinks makes a good podcast, how his podcast has changed, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @danielpunkass on twitter.
This week Chad Pytel is joined by software developer, podcaster, and author, Brett Terpstra. Chad and Brett discuss Brett's work location and setup, his open source and commercial software projects, app store pricing, his publishing experience and workflow, and his podcast. They also discuss his keyboard and trackpad mappings, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @cpytel, and @ttscoff on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Chad Pytel, the CEO of thoughtbot to take a look back at some of the things thoughtbot did in 2012. They then answer a bunch of listener questions.
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
November
December
Follow @thoughtbot, @cpytel, and @r00k on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Gordon Fontenot and Matt Mongeau, two thoughtbot developers, to discuss iOS development using both Objective-C and RubyMotion. Ben, Matt, and Gordon talk about the differences between the two platforms for iOS development, testing in iOS development, the difficulty in it, and the ways to do it. They also make they're recommendations for getting started with iOS development, and discuss iOS apps they like, designing iOS applications, the iOS release cycle, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @halogenandtoast, @gfontenot, and @r00k on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by David Heinemeier Hansson, the creator of Ruby on Rails and a partner at 37signals. David and Ben discuss David's normal day, his working relationship with Jason Fried, how their blog, Signal vs. Noise, is important to the company, how he got into programming, where he draws his inspiration from, some good books he's read and how he learns today, how he overcomes fear and why he takes risks, how he got into racing, why he enjoys it, what he learns from it, and how feedback loops and goal posts help you learn, inspire you, and help you know how good you are. They then go on to explore what David would, or wouldn't, change about Rails, and how he sees Rails evolving into the future. David also talks a little bit about the new product 37signals has in development, and 37signals' overall product strategy, coding at 37signals and his approach to providing guidance to the team, what role he plays on Rails core, what he cares about, and what he pays attention to, and much, much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @dhh, and @r00k on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Joe Ferris, CTO of thoughtbot. Inspired by a question on Law of Demeter from listener Nathan Long, Joe and Ben (hopefully) answer Nathan's question, and then go on to discuss how the Law of Demeter is a form of duplication, how it effects testing, and how to better architect your report, your view, or your entire system to better obey the Law of Demeter. They also touch upon Rails' try method, how the pain of testing helps guide the code you write, where the Law of Demeter doesn't apply, how people don't refactor their tests, how to productively refactor your tests and avoid wasting time rewriting things, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @joeferris, and @r00k on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Gary Berhardt from Destroy All Software Screencasts. Ben and Gary discuss DAS, how it has changed over the two years he's been doing it, and how his thinking has changed over that time. They then discuss Gary's thoughts on how to write software and tests, how we wants to "fix the kernel", and his exciting plans for the future. They also discuss his background, the production process behind Destroy All Software, and much, much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @garybernhardt, and @r00k on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Alex Godin from dispatch.io. Ben and Alex discuss Alex's hectic time in both apprentice.io and TechStars, how he got started at his age, what he's accomplished so far, what he worries about, when he is happiest, and his outlook on the future.
Follow @thoughtbot, @alex_godin, and @r00k on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Sarah Mei, RailsBridge co-founder, a developer at Pivotal Labs, and Diaspora core team member. In this episode, recorded at RubyConf 2012, Ben and Sarah discuss how communication patterns of your team manifest themselves in the code it writes, and how understanding those patterns can help you improve your code. They discuss RailsBridge, teaching, how teaching is an incredible learning opportunity, and how RailsBridge has helped expand the community of women developers in San Francisco and beyond. Finally, they explore how she got into Ruby, and women in technology.
Follow @thoughtbot, @sarahmei, and @r00k on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Tammer Saleh and Randall Thomas, the founders of Thunderbolt Labs. In this episode, recorded at RubyConf 2012, they discuss their philosophy of running and building the company, how they differ from other consulting companies, and how they do much more than just Rails programming and how its leading to very interesting new kinds of work. Why they list their prices right on their website, and how they derived their rate of $277 per hour. They also explore what their first year in business has been like, some challenges they've faced, and some important lessons they've learned.
Follow @thoughtbot, @thunderboltlabs, @tsaleh, @daksis and @r00k on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Bryan Helmkamp, founder of Code Climate, hosted software metrics for Ruby apps. In this episode, recorded at RubyConf 2012, they discuss what code climate is, how Bryan considers it a small business not a startup, and what its like being a solo founder. They also discuss how code metrics can help you write and maintain better software, how it helps, and how it changes behavior. Finally they explore what the biggest surprise for him has been so far, some of his plans, and what success looks like for him.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, @brynary and @codeclimate on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Jim Gay, author of Clean Ruby, and Joe Ferris, CTO of thoughtbot, in the episode recorded at RubyConf 2012. Ben, Joe, and Jim discuss Data, Context and Interaction (DCI), what it is, whether it is at odds with Object-Oriented Programming, how it can be applied to your applications, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @saturnflyer, @r00k, and @joeferris on twitter.
In this special episode from RubyConf 2012 we pulled aside some of the attendees and found out what they're working on. We also include a selection of the great lightning talks at the conference. Enjoy!
Follow @thoughtbot and @rubyconf on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Aaron Patterson, Ruby Core team member, Rails Core team member, and a Señior Software Engineer at AT&T Interactive. Aaron and Ben discuss the upcoming features and excitement for Ruby 2.0 and some things Aaron would like to see in Ruby in the future that didn't quite make it into Ruby 2.0. They also discuss how the Rails Core team differs from the Ruby Core team, how much effort it takes to write a detailed blog post and how many mistakes are involved, how he likes being a ruby celebrity, his involvement in Seattle.rb and what it teaches him. Finally, how awesome his job is and how he could do it forever, how he worries about Ruby or Rails becoming irrelevant and wants to stop that from happening, how he is happy all the time, and if he could wave a magic wand and change one thing about Rails, what it would be. This and so much more in this entertaining episode recorded at RubyConf 2012.
Follow @thoughtbot, @tenderlove, and @r00k on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Brennan Dunn, author of double your freelancing rate and planscope.io. Ben and Brennan discuss transitioning from a freelancer to a consulting company, the issues he faced doing it, and how he overcame them. How he promoted someone to replace him in his consulting company and is focused exclusively on products now, where Planscope came from, how it works, and how he more than doubled the conversion rate. How content marketing was slow to work for him, and how he fixed it. How to effectively pitch and sell products, what victory looks like for him and what he's working for, and so much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @brennandunn on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Kyle Fiedler, a designer at thoughtbot, and one of the creators of Bourbon Neat. Ben and Kyle discuss responsive design, what it is, and how to implement it. They also discuss Bourbon (a library of Sass mixins) and Neat (a fluid grid framework based on Bourbon), what's wrong with Twitter Bootstrap and why Bourbon Neat is better, and the other reasons why Bourbon Neat was created despite all the other grid frameworks that are available. Kyle shares the most common design mistakes he sees developers make in projects, whether or not design is subjective or whether it can be more objective, his design process and how it has changed, what the Golden Ratio is, and how it's used in Neat. Finally, they also discuss the Design for Developers workshop offered by thoughtbot, which teaches the fundamental design principles and tools to developers, and much, much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @kylefiedler on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by William Josephson and Jay Moorthi from Solano Labs, the makers of tddium, the hosted, scalable continuous integration service. They discuss the architecture of the service, including how they're using Go to speed up parts of it, the surprises they've had in getting started, how they've gotten involved in the Ruby community, and how they validated their idea and get feedback from customers. Also, their experience working with thoughtbot, what has worked and not worked for driving public customers to the site and converting them, dealing with privacy, customer support, their goals and their growth plans, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @tddium on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Seth Priebatsch, creator of SCVNGR and LevelUp. Ben and Seth talk about LevelUp, how it got started, how they make money, and what the future holds. They also discuss his daily schedule, maintaining focus, what he worries about, how your motives can limit your success, how to change the world by choosing the right thing to change, why he stopped hiding doubt and started being more transparent, and much, much more, including the most interesting question he's never been asked.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @sethpriebatsch on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Prem Sichanugrist, a developer at thoughtbot and the #31 top Rails contributor. Ben and Prem walk through the major changes that will be introduced in Rails 4, including strong parameters, the new built in queue, cache_digest, changes in ActiveRecord::Relation, and ActiveResource. The also discuss what people can do to ease contribution and issue submission to Rails, how can people get their first commit into Rails, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @sikachu on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Joe Ferris, CTO of thoughtbot, and Josh Clayton, developer at thoughtbot and the lead maintainer of FactoryGirl. In this Rails focused episode, Ben, Joe, and Josh dish on ActiveRecord callbacks, observers, state machines, and before_filters vs. middleware. They discuss the good, the bad, and the ugly of each, and how to keep your app clean while doing the right thing. Then they touch on what's new in FactoryGirl, how using build_stubbed can speed up your test suite, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @joeferris, and @joshuaclayton on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Matt Jankowski, COO of thoughtbot. Ben and Matt start off by talking about how Matt came to join thoughtbot and his role at the company. They then discuss the typical thoughtbot sales process. How all problems are communication problems. How the way thoughtbot works is appealing to startups and how they hear about thoughtbot. How thoughtbot handles its 20% investment time in open source and our own products, how we preserve that despite trying to grow the business, and how that has evolved over time. The reasons why it's not always possible to work faster by increasing the team size. Goals, metrics, and things thoughtbot can do better. Plus, how project management techniques translate to child-rearing, his standing desk, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @jankowski on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Sean Cribbs, Software Engineer at Basho, the makers of Riak. Ben and Sean start off discussing the interesting overlap of programmers and musicians and why it seems to happen so much. They then discuss Sean's role at Basho, what Riak is, how it works, and how it differs from other NoSQL databases. Sean works remotely for Basho, which has several offices, so Ben and Sean discuss remote workers and remote offices, and the ins and outs of navigating that set up, and how he got paid to work on open source. Finally, they discuss Erlang, which most of Riak is written in. These topics, plus much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @seancribbs on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Joe Ferris and Mike Burns. They start off with some recommendations for awesome programming books and then dive right in to questions about not following "Tell don't ask" in the view, how MVC and the Single Responsibility Principle may be at odds with "Tell don't ask" in the view, and what a more object oriented approach may look like. They also discuss "Class-oriented programming", what it is, why it is bad, how Rails does it, and how to avoid it. They take a quick trip through Mike's experiments in Ruby and Smalltalk in creating his own programming language. The three codecateers then take on the really important topic of method order and code organization, and finally they reflect on how their code has changed over the years, how no solution is foolproof, and how to move to the next level as a programmer. These topics and more, in this installment of the GIANT ROBOTS SMASHING INTO OTHER GIANT ROBOTS podcast!
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, @joeferris, @mikeburns on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Chad Pytel, the CEO and Founder of thoughtbot. Ben and Chad talk about the history of thoughtbot, success, failures, lessons learned, the current growth plans for the company, and much more. They also answer listener questions about hiring, growing, balancing client and internal work like open source and products, and contractor rates and how to set them.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @cpytel on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Gabe Berke-Williams and Edward Loveall. Gabe is developer at thoughtbot and the product manager of the thoughtbot apprenticeship program, apprentice.io. Edward is a current design apprentice. Gabe, Edward, and Ben talk about apprentice.io, how it works, it's successes, and lessons learned. They also discuss how Gabe goes about mentoring new developers, and effective learning and teaching methods. Edward also gives his perspective on his apprenticeship how it went, his typical day as an apprentice, his advice for incoming apprentices, and much more.
Follow @thoughtbot, @r00k, @gabebw and @edwardloveall on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is once again joined by Joe Ferris, CTO of thoughtbot. Joe and Ben dive right in to a technical discussion about Objects versus Structures. They then discuss what Joe does as the new CTO of thoughtbot, and how his goal is to set up a system where everybody is teaching everybody. Finally, they discuss why Joe doesn't like using rspec's let and subject, and his strategy for writing tests without them.
let and subjectFollow @thoughtbot, @r00k, and @joeferris on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Dan Powell, founder of Abakas. Dan plays the role of Consulting CTO for his clients. They discuss the best and the worst of his job, his history as a Linux hacker, and what his experience has taught him about technology and technology trends, and how he stays on top of them. Also, how to create effective, well-written, maintainable software, the Rails talent crunch, developers getting promoted to management, maintaining work-life balance and how not to get burnt out, and much, much more.
Follow @thoughtbot and @r00k on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by “Cowboy” Ben Alman, JavaScript open source developer and Director of Pluginization at Bocoup. They discuss how Ben Alman got started with programming and his crazy projects, the open web, favorite tools, and one of his latest projects, Grunt. They also discuss CoffeeScript, and why Ben Alman’s not using it yet, speaking at conferences and how Ben Alman got more comfortable in front of crowds, whether its important to understand straight JavaScript, or just jQuery, and more! Also, Whiskey.
Follow @thoughtbot, @cowboy, and @r00k on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by David Thyresson, the founder of Stattleship and a past client of thoughtbot. Ben and David discuss how he got started with Stattleship, how he came to work with thoughtbot, and what it was like to work with us. Also, how the idea of what he would initially build changed, and how through agile software development he discovered how it was wrong. How he learned Ruby on Rails from thoughtbot during his project. Finally, what has worked for driving visitors to the site, and important lessons learned about starting up, building an app, and running a business.
Follow @thoughtbot, @stattleship, and @r00k on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined by Josh Clayton, the maintainer of FactoryGirl, and a developer at thoughtbot. Ben and Josh discuss FactoryGirl: using it, its development progress, and features. What it's like to run an open source project, and how to contribute to open source effectively. Looking at your old code and being a better developer. Approaches to testing. And answer your questions about: FactoryGirl, How to write effective tests suites and whether integration tests are a scam, our process for upgrading between Rails versions, testing complex UI logic, and leaving code untested.
Follow @thoughtbot, @joshuaclayton, and @r00k on twitter.
Ben Orenstein is joined this week by Phil LaPier, the creator of Bourbon and a designer at thoughtbot. Ben and Phil discuss the design process, fundamentals of visual design, common design errors, and how to be a better designer (even if you're a developer), and how to work with designers as a developer. They also answer some audience questions about design: How to handle feedback from clients, and HAML vs. HTML.
Ben Orenstein and Joe Ferris (and the surprise special guest Seana Quental) start the series off with a very technical discussion about Polymorphism vs. Conditionals. We also answer some of the audience questions we asked for last week.