Category: Big Ideas

  • Crazy train

    On the trip home from a conference last year, it struck me how lonely it was. Yes I talked with people on the train. I had wifi and a phone but I didn’t have anyone who had shared the awesome conference experience I’d just been through, I wanted to keep it going. Returning to my city, I wanted to keep it the momentum rolling there as well.

    I happened to have attended an amazing conference named BitNorth. In the case of the crap conferences, the travel back and forth is even more torturous. BitNorth is unique in that it really attempts to leverage what are typically considered the fringe elements of conferences.

    All this left me wondering if we could make crappy conferences better and great conferences awesome by explicitly building up the fringes. We, at ThreeFortyNine, are taking our first shot at it this July. We’re cheating by starting with an amazing conference with The International Startup Festival in Montreal. We’re getting ourselves our own first class car on a Via train to travel to the conference and back from Toronto, Guelph, or Kitchener-Waterloo. We’re filling the car with founders, funders and startup junkies. For us this experience starts when we hop on the train and it doesn’t end when the conference ends. It won’t even end when we get off the train since you’ll be returning to your city with a group of friends who’ve shared this experience with you. We’ll conspire, plan, meet and keep the momentum going.

    In the case of the best roadtrips of my youth, I can hardly recall what our destination was. It’s the getting there I remember. It’s the getting there that was the starting point of something bigger.

    Join us this July as we bring the Ontario startup scene to Montreal and give them a peek at who we are and what we’re building. Clearly we have limited seats on our train car so when we sell out, we’re sold out for realz.

  • Entrepreneurs can achieve anything

    Editor’s Note: This is a guest post by Chris Arsenault, Managing Partner, iNovia Capital.

    3 hours - trioomph - driving your successWhat would happen if you decided to take action by putting 100% of your focus on achieving your goals, or better yet, start with a specific goal? Is that a scary thought? Well if you haven’t seen the video below of my good friend and great entrepreneur – Francois-Charles Sirois, then you are missing out on the number one most important success factor for any entrepreneur – the willingness to take action.

    I think there are many critical factors that make an entrepreneur become successful: knowledge, creativity, self-confidence, attention to detail, experience, intelligence, patience, perseverance, team building, risk management, customer centricity, connections, timing and luck. But the number one and most important factor is by far, the Willingness to take action. When combining willingness to take action with focus, only then, can one succeed, because every other factor doesn’t have any importance unless action is taken.

    Yes, I’m an optimist. I don’t disregard what isn’t working, how hard it is, how little chance I have in succeeding each time I take on the creation of a new Fund, the backing of a new startup or the planning of a new ambitious project. Instead I focus my attention at looking at the bright side of every situation and I then pull all my energy to make it happen. Positive energy attracts positive energy, and it is also right the other way around. It’s not easy, mostly because too many people tend to, purposely or not, pull you down, discourage you by highlighting every possible reason why it “just won’t work”. It is no different when setting out to build a new VC fund, a local business or an international tech company, it requires the same set of criteria for an entrepreneur to succeed, and when you willingly decide to take action, there actually is nothing stopping you. So when I can share concrete examples of what it means to set your mind to something, I share it with my friends and hope they will share it with there friends, helping getting the message out. So this is the most recent Willingness to take action example I want to share with you:

    In early January, I met Francois-Charles for dinner and he tells me that he wants to learn how to play the guitar. No, he rectified, his dream is not to learn how to play the guitar, it’s actually to learn and play the best guitar solo in history! “Why just learn guitar, when you can do so much more, and I want to do this before summer” he said.

    So the below video, is of Francois-Charles, on his mission tagged: 3 hours a day to succeed. He is playing the guitar solo: Lynyrd Skynyrd’s “Free Bird” with extreme perfection. Driven, focused and enjoying his moment like any successful entrepreneur should be when they take action and achieve their goals.

    I hope some of you will be, not impressed but rather, motivated to go out a take action with the same amount of focus and determination. Or at the least, share this video link with a friend.

    3 hours a day to succeed

    François-Charles Sirois
    President and Chief Executive Officer, Telesystem
    Founder, TRIOOMPH Foundation
    Dream:
    For many years, he wanted to learn how to play a great guitar solo: Lynyrd Skynyrd’s “Free Bird”
    Coach:
    When you’re working toward your dream, it helps to have an experienced mentor to guide you along the way. His “guitar hero” was François Lamoureux.
    The three-hour-a-day rule
    It takes time and hard work to make a dream come true. In his case, he practiced three hours a day, three days a week; two hours a day, two days a week; and one hour a day, two days a week. A minimum of one hour every day is essential to making steady progress.
    Official video: April 27, 2012
    http://www.trioomph.com/0-3h-per-day.html3 hours a day to succeed

    3 heures par jour vers le succès

    François-Charles Sirois
    Président et chef de la direction, Telesystem
    Fondateur, Fondation TRIOOMPH
    Rêve:
    Depuis plusieurs années , il souhaite jouer un des meilleurs solos de guitare ; « Free Bird » de Lynyrd Skynyrd.
    Coach:
    Pour réaliser un rêve, on doit trouver quelqu’un qui s’y connaît pour nous aider. Dans son cas, il a trouvé un super coach; François Lamoureux qui a accepté le défi.
    La règle du 3 heures par jour:
    Pour réaliser un rêve, il faut investir du temps. Pour le sien, il a pratiqué 3 heures par jour, 3 jours par semaine; 2 heures par jour, 2 fois par semaine et 1 heure par jour, 2 fois par semaine. Un minimum d’une heure par jour est essentiel pour s’améliorer et continuer à progresser.
    Vidéo officielle: 27 avril 2012
    http://www.trioomph.com/0-3h-par-jour.html
  • How Rob Ford is Failing the Startup Ecosystem

    What has he done for us lately?

    I don’t often look to politicians to help out startups. Typically when they do, they mess it up and make it worse than it was before. And probably if I looked at Rob Ford’s track record of do-little-ness, I’d think even less of trying to push him to get involved in our just blooming, fragile startup ecosystem.

    But, being here in New York the last few months, I have seen Mayor Bloomberg involved in some helpful, innovative projects. In fact, in a fascinating report about the New York startup ecosystem titled “New Tech City“, on page 24, specifically outlines the “Bloomberg Effect” and some of the tactical steps he’s taken to bolster New York’s early stage, rising tech startup community.

    “New York’s tech sector has benefited greatly from an unprecedented level of support from Mayor Bloomberg and his top economic development officials.” –New Tech City Report

    I’d love to hear this said about any government entity at any level in Canada.

    Now I know some of you have distant (errrr… recent) memories of political thoughtfulness gone wrong (cough cough, the inadvertent disappearance of the entire angel investing class). The typical refrain I hear from folks in the tech scene is something like “Gov’t should provide money and get out of the way”. But I’ve seen the Bloomberg administration do a lot more, successfully.

    For instance, here are two extremely low cost areas where city politicians can help startups – promotion and their powerful networks. I’ve been at four startup events here in New York in three months, and Mayor Bloomberg has been at two of them.

    “He’s visited scores of start-ups, given major speeches at local industry events such as Tech Disrupt and the NY Tech Meetup, and last year installed a chief digital officer to help coordinate promotion efforts. As the “mayor” of City Hall on Foursquare, he’s even become an avid user himself.” — New Tech City Report

    The city hosts an event called NYC Big Apps. Basically the city has been opening up up more and more data each year and runs a contest to see who can build the best mobile apps based on that dataset. The event has about $50k of awards, the grand prize winner gets $10k. The event looks to be partially covered by sponsors (BMW’s venture arm seemed to be prominent at the event). Folks from NYC’s Economic Development Council are there en masse, helping facilitate introductions between investors, well networked folks & startups. If you are a winner, you’ll get a chance to pitch to some of NYC’s best investors (many of whom support the initiative and help judge the apps themselves) – Fred Wilson et al. Not only can you see Mayor Bloomberg at events the city runs, but you can see him at other big events in the city – Disrupt, NY Tech Meetup, etc.

    Wouldn’t you love to see cities get involved with key startup folks in the city (like say Howard Gwin or Boris Wertz) and run some interesting events akin to Big Apps. I’d also love to see prominent politicians supporting existing events like say Demo Day. How about hanging with Rob Ford at Startup Drinks?? Yeah, didn’t think so… but maybe a hipper, cooler city councillor?

    On top of that, politicians could easily use their followership and social media outreach tools to preach and promote local startups. I’d love to see Mayor Ford tweeting about reading his Kobo, or hear Vancouver’s local government talk about their usage of HootSuite. I’d love to see some city councillors buying a new shirt using Buyosphere. Anything really to show they know entrepreneurs exist and can use every piece of help they can give.

    Why Isn't Rob Ford Talking About Toronto Startups Like This?

    Less talked about in the NYC Tech City report is that NYC is overhauling their own contracting/vetting procedures so smaller startups can bid and have a chance on winning meaningful business with the governments. Why shouldn’t City Hall’s use Freshbooks for instance, or FixMo? Presumably it would offer some real cost competition vs the usual city hall tech vendors.

    Or better yet, how about introductions and biz dev help? New York’s Economic Development Committee actually runs events abroad (like in China), where they use their network to provide trade excursions for local New York startups. I know, because we participated in one of them (in China). We had the chance to meet lots of industry leaders in China and received meaningful business development introductions.

    And then there are the “dream-big” projects. New York has created a private-public partnership, providing millions in funding to build a new engineering school with Cornell, in New York City. Or how about a high school devoted to software? I mean we have high schools for the arts littered across Canada… and I’m pretty sure that a software oriented high school might have a bit better of a business case than say… the Etobicoke School For The Arts.

    Cornell's Proposed New Engineering School In NYC

    So, dear Canadian politicians, I dare you to be creative and get more involved. You can actually help startups out! Talk to influential key people in your local startup scene and ask them “how can we help?”. Use stuff created by local startups, evangalize and promote the crap out of them.

    And I’d love to hear more from our audience on ways that your local gov’t has helped (or has not helped) from within your own communities.

    PS – A weird corollary post might be titled – “How startups should get involved in government and politics”. When are some of you going to become city councillors and mayors? 🙂

  • Hot Sh!t 2012 Nominations

    CC-BY-NC-20 Some rights reserved by chrissam42
    AttributionNoncommercial Some rights reserved by chrissam42

    It’s been 376 days since I put together the Hot Sh!t List 2011. And we’re looking to round out the list with some the next generation of to be watched entrepreneurs. Who in Canada is better than all the rest?  Perhaps we’ll can get custom awards modelled after  Philippe Starck’s Flamme D’Or.

    Who do you think should be on the list? Help us find the next generation of up and coming Canadians. In particular we’re looking for those folks behind the scenes, the developers, business developers, growth hackers, marketers, etc. that often don’t get the sames recognitions as the CEO or founders. But they are critical to the success of Canadian startups.

    [gravityform id=”3″ name=”Hot Sh!t List Nomination” ajax=”true”]

  • What makes a startup “disruptive”?

    Editor’s note: This is a cross post from Mark Evans Tech written by Mark Evans of ME Consulting. Follow him on Twitter @markevans or MarkEvansTech.com. This post was originally published in April 17, 2012 on MarkEvansTech.com.

    CC-BY-20 Some rights reserved by Kevin Krejci
    Attribution Some rights reserved by Kevin Krejci

    I had coffee recently with a VC who talked about how “disruptive technology” was a key part of his firm’s investment approach.

    On the surface, it makes sense. After all, “disruptive” is impressive because it sounds like something that could make a difference and, in the process, attract a lot of users and be worth a lot of money.

    But after thinking about it, I began to wonder what “disruptive” really means and, in particular, what makes a startup truly disruptive. Is it a product that leaps ahead of the competition in a major way? Is it a product that solves a problem or a need in a new or different way? Is it a product that’s easier to use or less expensive than what exists?

    • Is Wave Accounting, for example, disruptive because it launched a free online accounting service into a market in which most players were offering a fee-based service?
    • Is 500px disruptive because its elegant and service displays photographs so beautifully.
    • Is Engagio disruptive because it offers a “social inbox” at a time when people are getting messages from multiple sources.

    In many respects, “disruptive” can be defined in many ways. This makes it an alluring but, arguably, difficult creature to discover and identify. For one investor, disruptive may be one thing but it entirely different from another investor.

    The problem with “disruptive” is it’s a sexy term for entrepreneurs and investors to throw around. Suggesting your product is “disruptive” is easy to do and get away with because it can be difficult to argue otherwise because “disruptive” is so slippery. How many times have you heard an entrepreneur proclaim their technology is “disruptive”?

    The reality is we love “disruptive” because it’s elusive, multi-faceted and difficult to pinpoint until a startup enjoys success. Then, everyone can confidently say: “I know Instagram/Pinterest/Path, etc. was disruptive when I first saw it”.

    So, how do you define “disruptive”?

    Editor’s note: This is a cross post from Mark Evans Tech written by Mark Evans of ME Consulting. Follow him on Twitter @markevans or MarkEvansTech.com. This post was originally published in April 17, 2012 on MarkEvansTech.com.

  • Engagio: A Canadian Startup Story and the future of the Social Web

    Editor’s Note: William Mougayar is the CEO & founder of Engagio and previously founded Eqentia. He has 30 years of experience in the high-tech industry with large and small companies. He can be reached on Twitter at @wmougayar or by visiting his engagement profile at http://engag.io/wmougayar.

    Since we were funded in early January 2012, and especially after we announced it in mid-February, I feel like I moved out of the basement and into the ground level of a building. Indeed, being part of the “Funded Club” suddenly gives you a kind of peer respect and credibility that changes the game.

    We have been in the fast lane of Startup land. We produced a minimum viable product in 8 weeks and opened access to alpha users right away. 30 days later, we were funded with a $540K seed investment from 6 VC’s and Angels in the US and Canada. A month after that, we took down the alpha and beta status and opened the service totally. Four months after the first line of code was written, we’re starting to look like a mature startup with thousands of active users.

    But this story wasn’t really an overnight success. It was 3 years in the making, and it sucked being in that basement during these 3 years. But they were the best preparation for the next 3 months that changed everything about me as a Canadian entrepreneur trying to be one of many others that can claim to have been funded by reputable investors.

    I’ve been labeled as a tenacious individual. I’ve been called scrappy, and hard working. All true.

    David Crow (@davidcrow) asked me to pen a few lessons. Take what you want, and discuss the rest in the Comment section. After all, we are entering a phase of greater social engagement, and comments are often more important that the blog post itself.

    My start-up Engagio is pretty focused on one objective: letting users manage their online conversations across the fragmented Social Web and realizing relationships from these conversations.

    There’s a story behind our evolution, and it’s tightly related to the future of the Social Web.

    Start with Social Capital

    It started in the fall of 2008 when I became inspired by Howard Lindzon (@howardlindzon), founder of StockTwits as I heard him speak at Startup Empire where he recounted how he met venture capitalist Fred Wilson (@fredwilson) a few years earlier just by commenting on his blog. Howard explained the value of Social Capital as a critical by-product of the Social Web.

    The next day, I started commenting on Fred Wilson’s AVC.com blog, and gradually increased my participation because I was seeing increasing value from interacting with the other commenters. I firmly believed that every comment was an implicit linkage to a person and a potential relationship waiting to blossom.

    Since that day, I have written about 3,400 comments on AVC.com, – that’s an average of 3 per day, received 1,800 Likes, and made dozens of real world relationships with other frequent commenters I met on that blog. This proved that if you invest in building relationships online, there are long-term benefits you can gain. That’s Social Capital at work.

    Then in September of 2011, Fred nominated 2 members of his blog community as moderators, and I was one of them. The value of Social Capital became even clearer to me, as I was seeing the value of commenting and social engagement on the web working in my favor. But my social engagement was pretty scattered on the Social Web across other blogs and social networks, and I started to realize that this wasn’t manageable anymore.

    I thought there must be a better way to manage the multiplicity of interactions across the social web. So I came up with the idea for Engagio. It was a deceptively simple idea, one based on the fact that we are entering a phase of fragmentation of the Social Web. And we needed better tools to manage this fragmentation of conversations. I ran the idea of developing an Inbox for social conversations by Fred Wilson who liked it and encouraged me to make it happen. The next day, I turned to my team and we developed the first version of Engagio 8 weeks later.

    Lessons for Canadian Startups

    Engagio is my second startup, so everything I learned, did or didn’t do in the first one is embedded in this second one. You can’t fake experience, and you can’t manufacture lessons. They are in the scars, the notches on your belt, the stars on your shoulder and they are who you are.

    Here are a few lessons I’d like to share with the Startup North readers.

    1. Don’t polish a bad idea

    The simpler the starting point and the simpler you can articulate it, the better it is. If you’re spending too much time wordsmithing the positioning statement or messaging, maybe you need to change course. Polishing a bad idea won’t make it shine.

    2. Relationships don’t matter

    They don’t. You may have hundreds of relationships that aren’t giving you benefits. Few relationships bear fruit in terms of value offered. The relationship itself doesn’t matter, but the trust in it does, therefore trusted relationships do matter. I knew a lot of people, but few were really trusted enough that they would do something for me. With trust comes exceptions and a lot of doors open in front of you.

    3. Beware of selling to the enterprise

    Unless the enterprise user is behaving like a consumer, you’ll have a tough time selling to the enterprise unless you’re a large company already, or have raised a lot of money as a startup. As enticing as enterprise users are, selling them a solution that requires group approvals and long budget cycles will kill any startup, no matter how good their product is. The only way to penetrate the enterprise is by having a simple SaaS-based product that individual users can try and purchase on their own without asking anyone.

    4. Keep all relationships open

    Keep all your relationships on a cordial level, even with the jerk VC or fellow entrepreneur who didn’t respond to your email, or didn’t give you what you asked for, or was indifferent to your request, or ignored you intentionally. I’ve encountered each one of these situations, and it’s better to keep your head high and think they are the jerk, not you.

    5. Don’t believe your own story

    Let others believe in it. That’s more powerful. You need to step outside of what you are developing and believe in the reality checks that outsiders will give you. They will see things you don’t, especially if they are users.

    6. Growth is what matters

    Startup growth is measured in dog years, and you must have a sense of urgency about it. It’s the #1 priority of a startup. If you don’t grow daily, your chances of success diminish. A startup exists to make something out of nothing. You’re a creator, and you must start to occupy a space that didn’t exist before. Growth is a daily habit, not a quarterly goal.

    7. Get out of Canada

    The Lean Startup methodology advocates that the CEO must get out of the office. But in Canada, out of the office is not enough. You need to get out of Canada and go conquer the US market. The borders are so porous from a business perspective, it’s as if it wasn’t there. Use Canada as a base, but use the US as a springboard. Get a US address and act like a US company when you pursue clients, users, media attention, partnerships and capital. The barriers will suddenly appear lower.

    8. Go help someone

    If you’re having a good day and believe you’re making progress, go help someone that needs your help. You owe it to the ecosystem that made you where you are.

    Next time you’re on Twitter, Facebook, Google+ or a blog, don’t just share, re-tweet or like that piece of content or comment. Rather, engage with the other person, debate them, disagree with them, and start a conversation. You never know where it will lead you.

    Connect with me on Engagio.

    Editor’s Note: William Mougayar is the CEO & founder of Engagio and previously founded Eqentia. He has 30 years of experience in the high-tech industry with large and small companies. He can be reached on Twitter at @wmougayar or by visiting his engagement profile at http://engag.io/wmougayar.

  • Early stage companies don’t need money, they need customers

    Note: This is cross posted from WhoYouCallingAJesse.com by Jesse Rodgers, who is a cofounder of TribeHR. He has been a key member of the Waterloo startup community hosting StartupCampWaterloo and other events to bring together and engage local entrepreneurs. Follow him on Twitter @jrodgers or WhoYouCallingAJesse.com.

    CC BY-NC-ND-20 Some rights reserved by wallyg

    AttributionNoncommercialNo Derivative Works Some rights reserved by wallyg

    The popular belief in Canada is that the tech startup world has been fairly light on investment dollars relative to other industries in Canada. Because there is such a disparity in seed or angel round investment size in Canada vs the US people tend to point to that as a reason people go south. The perceived result of the funding problem (and likely the weather) is that there are 350 000 Canadians in the Valley. No one can argue the talent to build global calibre tech companies exists in Canada (or at least has Canadian passports) but you can certainly argue Canada lacks that certain something to keep them here.

    Five years ago Paul Graham observed that the total cost to get a tech startup started had dropped dramatically and will continue to do so.

    So my first prediction about the future of web startups is pretty straightforward: there will be a lot of them. When starting a startup was expensive, you had to get the permission of investors to do it. Now the only threshold is courage. – Paul Graham, 2007

    There is a lot of attention around getting young people money but does that help them? Does that keep them in Canada? I would argue that the ones that do need and can use capital don’t pull up stakes and leave town for the investment. They leave town (or the country) because they are missing something more valuable than money — customers, mentorship that helps them get customers, and a network of peers.

    Know thy stage

    The problem with comparing funding deal levels in Canada and the US is that it ignores the stage the company is in relative to the stage of US startups raising money for the first time. The Startup Genome report 01 and the Startup Genome Compass offers startups an excellent way to measure themselves against a benchmark of over 3 000 startups. In the report there is a table (shown below) that gives you some overall averages for all startups.


    From the Startup Genome Report 01.

    In last seven years of being involved in the Canadian startup community (mostly in Waterloo) and in the last three years leading what is arguably the best student focused incubator in Canada while founding my own startup. I saw dozens of companies peek into the Discovery phase, a few move on through to the Validation phase.

    What I have seen happen before the discovery phase:

    • Talk of raising money is used to pull in a large group of talent.
    • Focus is not on customers, it is on technology or raising money.
    • There is little help by way of mentorship that takes the time to understand the dynamic of the group.
    • Mentors focus on finding a way to get them money so they can work full time.

    What founders fail to do:

    • Define the problem.
    • Find out what people are looking for.
    • What else do they need in a system?
    • Determine what they might pay for it by getting them to pay for it and talking to our customers.
    • Measure, iterate, repeat.

    Startups need to focus more on customer acquisition and growth in Canada, enough talk about raising money

    There are so many business plan and pitch competitions one could make a career out of attending them. This gives a false sense of success because the ‘winner’ is determined on a lot of factors except their ability to actually get customers. The game becomes about (and has been it feels like) how to put together a report on an idea (business plan) and present in a way that makes you look confident.

    The game is really about getting lots of people to give you their money because you provide value to them. What makes you better than others is that you are chasing a much bigger problem that will provide value to a full percentage of the world’s population. Bonus points if you change the world.

    Note: This is cross posted from WhoYouCallingAJesse.com by Jesse Rodgers, who is a cofounder of TribeHR. He has been a key member of the Waterloo startup community hosting StartupCampWaterloo and other events to bring together and engage local entrepreneurs. Follow him on Twitter @jrodgers or WhoYouCallingAJesse.com.

  • Ladies Learning to Code is Not About Women

    There is this small but fierce not-for-profit called Ladies Learning to Code. It has pretty straightforward but profound ambitions: “designed to help girls see technology in a whole new light – as a medium for self-expression, and as a means for changing the world.” (Girls Learning to Code camp).

    I started my first tech company while I was still in grade school. That experience changed the path of my life forever and I was able to do that because when I was in 7th grade I started to learn to program.

    My family couldn’t really afford a computer, so I used the ones in the computer lab at school a lot. There was a math teacher, Mr. Murley, who would basically be there to open the lab and help teach programming 24/7. I also had some neighbours who had a computer and I would stay there until midnight many weekend nights.

    Learning to code early on taught me a few things I am forever grateful for. I learned that I could create whatever I wanted. At that age and in that time you really did have the sense that you could change the world with a few hundred lines of code. All you had to do was find something that was broken or an idea that had potential and you could just build it. I think you can build even more today and because there are better ways to distribute you can have an amazing impact.

    A lot of navel gazing here, I know.

    There is no more important challenge for the tech community in the next decade than to find a way to make programming accessible to as many children as possible.

    We need to do that for a lot of reasons. We need future employees of course, and we need a more tech-savvy population to market in to, but we also need a broader and more diverse pool of ideas and inspiration.

    We need kids to believe that they can change the world so that they can grow in to adults who do change it. There may be no better way to enable them to do that than helping them learn to code.

    So, when I saw Ladies Learning to Code for the first time I had no small hope that this wouldn’t be just about teaching women to program. My hope  is that we can take the model that works for Ladies Learning to Code and that we can find ways to apply it to help make programming a less mysterious endeavour for every curious mind out there.

    It’s true that not every child will want to program and I am sure only a fraction will pursue it as a career choice. I also know however that no child who learns will be unchanged. They will learn that they can create something from nothing, that there is nothing they can imagine that they cannot build, and that every tool they possibly need is available and free.

    My home province recently took the X-ACTO-knife to the public school IT budget. As if growing up in the most rural province in Canada doesn’t make it hard enough for kids to pursue a future in startups, software development or IT, now there is a provincial government which is actively dismantling IT in education. (Note: Premier Ghiz– who the hell thought that was a good idea?)

    I have little hope that our governments will figure this out in the next 20 years and so while school budgets are slashed by uncompromising governments, we have a job to do.

    Ladies Learning to Code gets us off to a fantastic start, but the work is just beginning.

  • Your Funnel is a Finite State Machine

    Editor’s note: This is a cross post by Joseph Fung (LinkedIn, @josephfung), the CEO of TribeHR (@tribehr). Joseph has recently raised $1MM from David Skok (@bostonVC) at Matrix Partners in Boston, MA. He is building and automating the SaaS metrics for TribeHR. He has a unique engineering view of sales and marketing that allows him to be nimble and correct his efforts based on real customer behaviour data. This post was orignially published on September 23, 2011

    The Enigma Machine CC-BY-SA-20 Some rights reserved by Tim Gage
    AttributionShare Alike Some rights reserved by Tim Gage

    I’m of the opinion that the startup journey is really just the process of repeated work between “a-ha” moments of key insights. The faster we get to new insights, the better we are at ongoing improvement. I’m writing this post to describe an a-ha moment that happened early on (although earlier would have been better) in the lifecycle of TribeHR.


    Figure 1: Exciting! An Arbitrary State Machine

    To engineers turned entrepreneurs: your customer acquisition funnel is a finite state machine.

    This statement implies three specific premises:

    • your funnel can and should be modeled as a Finite State Machine (FSM)
    • your funnel FSM should map to explicit in-app states
    • investors care about the funnel state as much as (if not more) than anything else in your app

    Your Funnel Should be Modeled

    This point is best described in terms of my experiences with TribeHR:

    When designing features within TribeHR, it was intuitive to think about our software in terms of moving objects through a series of states: a review was “in-progress”, “completed”, then “filed”; a vacation request was “pending review”, then “approved” or “rejected”. Similarly, the users of the system would also be moved through states – “employee”, “manager” or “admin” for example. When I thought about the marketing process, however, I treated “sales and marketing” as the entry point into the state machine – I saw it as the entry arrow rather than a separate series of states.

    Because we didn’t start by planning our marketing and sales states, it was easy to rely on 3rd party services for our definitions. Unfortunately, implementing multiple services led to confusion. Some customers subscribed using PayPal, others paid through our payment gateway, and others found us via third-party app stores – each system had a different way of defining the state of a customer, so simple numbers like “how many customers are active” was a difficult thing to determine. This was compounded by our shift from a freemium model to a free-trial model earlier this year.

    If we had clearly defined and tracked our states from the start (which we have since done) it would have been easier to map third-party terminology to our own, making analyses and improvements much easier. You can see the results of subsequent mapping in the diagram below:


    Figure 2: TribeHR Funnel as a Finite State Machine

    As you can see, our entry state is “trialing”, thus the primary objective of our website is to convert visitors and leads into trialing users (our lead nurturing program is a state-machine still being designed). Once someone is trialling, they have two potential transitions: they can become either a paid “active” customer or an “abandoned” trial. Once someone becomes an active customer (and ideally remain one for a long time) they will exit the state only as a “cancelled” or “suspended” account. By clearly defining our states in the above format, we are now much better equipped to modify our messaging and features to optimize the experience. Before identifying the above state machine, we wasted a lot of time manually analyzing and identifying states, often on a case-by-case basis.

    The “should” part of my assertion follows from my conversations with investors and advisors. I’d frequently be asked for information such as our conversion rate from trials to paid customers or our re-activation rate of suspended accounts – without a clear FSM, we’d have some accounts that occupied more than one state, which made answering these questions impossible. By defining our funnel/FSM we were then able to answer such questions with ease, which made a world of difference to our working relationship with investors and advisors.

    If you haven’t defined your Funnel/FSM yet – do so. If you’re early-on in your startups, ot might not be perfect, but it will save you significant stress, time, and effort as you continue to work with mentors and investors. If it helps, put the model up on the wall at your office – it’ll keep it top of mind with your team.

    Mapping to Explicit In-App States

    Once you finalize your model, it’s critically important that you then track these states explicitly within you app. For example, if you offer a 15-day trial, during which users have to cancel or continue, it might be tempting to calculate “trialing” customers as those who are subscribed and whose date subscribed value is within the last 15 days. While this calculation might yield a correct result, formulating queries becomes significantly more complex when you can’t simply evaluate whether a field “state” is set to “trialing”.

    These queries are important because as your company and customer base grow, you’ll need to generate reports and dashboards that highlight this information in near real-time. You’ll need to answer questions like what percentage of users that sign up for a trial convert to a paid customer, and how is it changing over time? As soon as you can answer that, you’ll then be asked to segment by lead source, user characteristic, or time window. For example how does that conversion rate over time vary according to lead source or engagement level?

    To put it into an example, below are two examples of queries that would generate a summary of states of a single cohort from January 2011, assuming a 15-day trialing period. The first uses explicitly defined states, and the second assumes you calculate a real-time trial period, and simply delete records when they terminate their account.

    Explicitly defined:

    SELECT COUNT(state) AS total_users, state
      FROM users
        WHERE date_registered >= "2011-01-01" AND date_registered < "2011-02-01"
      GROUP BY state;

    Calculated on the fly:

    SELECT SELECT COUNT(state) AS total_users, IF(date_registered >
        DATE_SUB("2011-02-01" , INTERVAL 15 DAY); "TRIAL"; "ACTIVE") AS state
      FROM users
        WHERE date_registered >= "2011-01-01" AND date_registered < "2011-02-01"
      GROUP BY state;

    As you can see, the query in the first is much easier to use and read, and it includes all states, whereas the second is challenging to use (even more challenging to modify if you have more states) and doesn’t track cancelled accounts.

    By structuring your database such that the state is explicitly identifiable, you’ll be able to generate queries much more readily, which will then let you automate standard reports (like conversion and churn rates) for dash boarding, and will allow you to more easily connect business intelligence tools to your database. The ultimate goal is to let your business-oriented team members manipulate the data as readily as you can.

    An added benefit of explicit states is that they act as assertions. Although it’s possible to determine that a customer is active by checking the date of their last successful payment, it’smuch better to have an explicit “active” state as you can then run automated tests to verify that your assertions are true. Having a recurring task that iterates through your customer base to confirm that accounts with a most recent payment made within the last month are correctly identified as “active”, is a good way to follow monitoring-driven-development approaches. Any assertion errors can help identify critical flaws in your system.

    Investors Care About the Funnel State

    Although this may seem obvious, it still needs stating. The platitude what get’s measured gets done has a corollary – what we care about gets measured. Technical founders often measure and know details like server load, traffic metrics, lines of code and number of commits or push requests. Because we innately care about those tasks, we tend to measure and follow them. What can’t be over-emphasized is how much investors, advisors and partners will care about your funnel states. Below is a representative subset of the metrics we’ve been asked to report at our board meetings – you’ll notice that none of them are related to in-app usage or infrastructure performance:

    • Total # Of Customers (overall and by customer segments)
    • Visitor-to-Trial Conversion Rate (overall, and by lead source)
    • Trials-to-Active Conversion Rate (overall, and by lead source and by segment)
    • Churn Rate (overall and by lead source)
    • Customer Acquisition Cost (overall and by lead source)
    • Average Revenue per User (overall and by lead source)
    • Life Time Value (overall and by lead source)

    Most of these numbers depend on measuring our customers’ states as well as various additional segments. Because our segments will vary frequently as we experiment and optimize with marketing campaigns, if we don’t have explicit (and easily determined) states, rapid iterations on our reporting become exceptionally difficult.

    Investors and advisors will assume that you have infrastructure running smoothly – you don’t need to hammer home evidence of it, so skip on reporting the infrastructure stats I mentioned earlier. For them to provide valuable advice, however, they need to be able to understand and trust the business metrics I listed. If you can speak as confidently about your Funnel/FSM as you do your application, and if you can deliver transparency into the funnel by automating reports and dashboards, you’ll build your investors confidence and trust in you as an entrepreneur.

    Bonus Reasons

    As a bonus, here are a few cool things you can then do once you have this funnel modelled and embedded within your software:

    1. More easily build dashboards with tools like Geckoboard
    2. Delegate data-mining and analysis to non-technical staff, by tacking on BI tools like Qlickview
    3. Automate segmentation and lists for automated email campaigns and lead nurturing using MailchimpPerformable, and others
    4. Simplify cohort analyses by customer segment

    If you have a state machine for your funnel or customer base, especially if it deviates significantly from mine above, please share it in a comment or an email to me. It would be interesting to see what approaches others are taking.

    Editor’s note: This is a cross post by Joseph Fung (LinkedIn, @josephfung), the CEO of TribeHR (@tribehr). Joseph has recently raised $1MM from David Skok (@bostonVC) at Matrix Partners in Boston, MA. He is building and automating the SaaS metrics for TribeHR. He has a unique engineering view of sales and marketing that allows him to be nimble and correct his efforts based on real customer behaviour data. This post was orignially published on September 23, 2011

  • On becoming Silicon Valley North…

    Photo by Loozerboy - Some rights reserved CC-BY-SA
    AttributionShare Alike Some rights reserved by Loozrboy

    I am a bit of a shrinking violet. And I hate expressing my opinion about things. Like most Canadians I’d rather apologies for things and be polite. But I hate when I get asked by journalists, policy makers and others about how do we make Toronto (or Waterloo, or Ottawa, or where ever), the next Silicon Valley. This is just such an asinine view of how macroeconomics works and the historical development of the ecosystem in Silicon Valley.

    We should not try to be the next Silicon Valley or New York City or Shenzen or anything. We are Toronto. We are Montreal. We are Vancouver. We are Waterloo. We are something different. We should reject the label because it makes us look like fools. But we should learn from Silicon Valley as entrepreneurs and policy makers to create an environment that helps stimulate a similar environment.

    This is an old conversation. Joey and I have talked about it in the past:

    Debunking the Myth of “The Next Silicon Valley”

    Let’s start by removing the first myth that Toronto, and you can substitute in anywhere, can be the next Silicon Valley. Toronto does not exist in a valley. Sure there are valleys, like the Don River Valley in Toronto but the concentration of technology startups in this location is fairly low due in part to the conservation and provincial protections.

    Silicon Valley was quoted in 1971 to describe the number of emerging semiconductor companies and the surrounding computing companies that were concentrated in the Santa Clara Valley between San Francisco and San Jose, California. As far as I’m aware there are a few companies in the GTA working in silicon like AMD. Ottawa might have been able to make a claim in the 1990s for the Silicon Valley North with companies like Nortel Networks, JDS Uniphase, Tundra Semiconductor, Newbridge Networks and others. But for Toronto, just not going to happen. Waterloo might also have a claim with Pixstream, Rapid Mind, MKS, Arise Technologies, Research in Motion, and others working in semiconductors, wireless, hardware and software.

    Silicon Valley might at best be a concept for the concentration of new economic wealth creation. It is hard to argue about the amount of wealth created in the Silicon Valley region. It has been called “The Greatest Creation of Wealth in the History of the Planet”. The number of companies and the rise of modern venture capital has created a circuitous loop, a self-fulfilling prophecy, of companies and entrepreneurs that can generate more wealth. It has created the Traitorous Eight, the PayPal Mafia, Xooglers, the Facebook Mafia, the Netscape mafia that created Opsware & Andressen/Horowitz, etc. There are lots of reasons that regions should want to emulate the economic development that is present in Silicon Valley.

    But the desire to emulate a region, does not mean that we should expropriate a label like “Silicon Valley” when in fact it has very little to do with the people, the environment, the economy that we are trying to build. I’m sure if we personified “Silicon Valley” it would be flattered, but we should be trying to be something different. We are something else.

    Zombie Economies

    No City has a Lock on Innovation by Fred Wilson (@fredwilson) refers to a great article by Chris Dixon (@cdixon):

    “The entire world is now a rival to Silicon Valley. No country, state, region, nor city has a lock on innovation in technology anymore.

    The Internet has made this so, and there’s no going back. We will see Apples and Facebooks get built in China, India, Brazil, Eastern Europe, Western Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and plenty of other places.”

    We are competing globally. Don’t believe me, look at the firefight that our most recent billion dollar Canadian technology company is in for customers, brand, and it’s own survival. We need to build global companies. There are a great number of advantages to living in Canada, but we seem to be lead to by organizations that are interested in fighting for government dollars to build innovation clusters rather than creating new entrepreneurs and new wealth. Instead we’re happy to build a zombie-economy of companies around programs like SR&ED that are often used and abused by consultants and companies to sustain companies when there are no markets, no profits, no brains, no future. All things considered, free money is free money and as an entrepreneur in Canada I would/do apply for SR&ED credits and encourage others not to leave this on the table. But from a policy perspective, it drives me crazy! I hear about academics that run mediocre companies with <$2MM in revenue but sustain because of SR&ED. They’d rather raise 50 cents of government tax credits than “pivot” and get to “product-market fit” because that would require getting customers and actually understanding that we’re in this to build successful, sustainable companies.

    SR&ED and credits from other programs (OMDC, New Media Funds, etc.) are economic realities of our ecosystem. It is capital that is available to entrepreneurs. It is potentially non-dilutive capital that can be leveraged for growth and operational efficiencies. It should be embraced and explored, but it should be understood in the context that every dollar of customer revenue is infinitely more valuable than any tax credit or government grant. We are in business. The role of a startup is to find a scaleable business model, you might not find it the first time and the freedom/flexibility that programs like SR&ED offer you is the ability to get it wrong, to pivot and to try again. These programs are not a life support system for a bunch of non-businesses (or the people that can’t find a scaleable business model).

    The Next Silicon Valley

    Who knows where it will be? Fred Wilson assumes that “we will see Apples and Facebooks get built in China, India, Brazil, Eastern Europe, Western Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and plenty of other places”. This is great news for Canada and Toronto. Toronto is a diverse immigration hub:

    • Between 2001 and 2006, Canada received 1,109,980 international immigrants. The City of Toronto welcomed about one quarter of all immigrants (267,855) to Canada during this period of about 55,000 annually.
    • Half of Toronto’s population (1,237,720) was born outside of Canada, up from 48 per cent in 1996.

    Much of what we think of as innovation, is really just the creative tension between differing viewpoints. Toronto is diverse. We are home to many different cultures, peoples, ideas and ideologies. We have the basis to be a gateway to the rest of the world as we transition out of the American Century into something new. We are an excellent breeding ground for the mashup of culture’s, people, and ideas. The next Silicon Valley might not be in Canada, but we could become the bridge between cultures.

    What can you do?

    “Fortune favors the connected entrepreneur.” @jcal7 #trueuniversity via @hnshah

    There have been some changes to the Canadian startup scene in the past few years that are critical to continuing to help Canadian entrepreneurs:
    1. Stop referring to any part of Canada as Silicon Valley North.
    2. Set your expectations high! Don’t aim to be the Facebook for Canada. Why? Because the Facebook for Canada is Facebook! You need to be trying to build global companies, and you might validate it locally first. You want to play in the sandbox with the big kids, you need to act like you can play with the big kids.
    3. Stop thinking it will be easier if you move to the Valley. If you really feel that your only solution or course of action is to move to the Valley, then go, and show me that you can make it there. Otherwise it is just hot air, and a regurgitation of some rhetoric you read on TechCrunch or VentureBeat. If you can make it Silicon Valley or Hollywood, you should go try and stop telling me that it is easier to make it there than here.
    4. Start talking about all of the other great companies in Canada. We can all be coopetition. Help your friends. Make frenemies. The more people talking about activities, startups and people in Canada the better. There are a tonne of great startups and we all need to be ambassadors for the community as a whole. End your pitch deck with: 5 most recent fundings of Canadian companies and 5 other startups in Canada any potential investor might be interested in.
    5. Support legislation that makes it easier for entrepreneurs to immigrate to Canada. Support Startup Visa Canada. This can’t and won’t hurt any of your chances of making it. To be protectionary or isolationist is silly. Embrace one of the things that makes Canada great.