Let’s talk about fear…

fear

Yesterday I gave a guest lecture to a product design class for entrepreneur minors about well.. fear, specifically in regards to startups, and the fears that consume the people that dare to create them.

I exposed 5 primal fears that I feel occur in startup entrepreneurs.  They are: desire, doubt, debate, destroy, and dread.  So why talk about fear?  Because its an underlying thread that is ever present, attacks, consumes and often destroys entrepreneurs.  Yet its a rarely discussed or covered topic really- we’re all so happy about starting, luckily we’re still frighteningly human, and oh so fragile.

Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 5.16.33 AM

Desire is the first fear that entrepreneurs feel.  Its that undeniable urge, that all consuming aspect that you are right.  You want this thing so bad, you see it, you longingly want this reality to be here, now, true.  Our desire in creating next is ultra powerful and massively destructive.  Desire fuels light and the dark on both your shoulders- the angel and the devil, and well your big idea in the mix.  Its a foundational fear, special and primal to you, to your mission, to your quest.  To mitigate this fear is to listen to data, listen to reason, to observe the pattern outside yourself.  Desire can be timely or deadly.

doubt

Is the idea right?  Is the product correct?  Is the prototype good enough?  Are my customers right?  Do i have the proper product fit?  Am I in the right city?  Right region?  Right partner, investor, should I be listening to dan ramble?  Is this idea gonna fly?  Should I be working instead?  Doubt is the second sort of primal foundational fear, its the little person inside freaking out, all the time.  While Desire drags you into the bar, Doubt is freaking out over the bar tab.  Mitigating doubt takes practice, and a building of ones confidence through practice and learned experience.  The more you do, the more you practice, the less doubt impacts you in my opinion.  Conviction is the spear of destiny to doubt, you can slice through doubt in a second, you believe, nothing else matters- you could say thats desire talking but, not always true.  Doubt is very much, in you.

debate

Debate is likely the most destructive of the five fears i’m listing.  Debate is often the source of new data, new learnings, or pokes and prods to try something new, but more so debate is everyone and everything coming down on you.  Its external forces causing your desire to go on the offensive and ramps up your doubt engine like mad.  Debate is largely untimely, meaning 9 out of 10 debates do you no good.  Humans are hard wired to debate, to critique, we are walking streams of opinions.  Debate is a foundation for garbage in garbage out meaning if you start the debate on less than favorable footing, you’re likely to get a less than favorable output, which feeds into your doubt and can alter company, product, personal product or direction.  Columbus loves to debate.  Everyone in Columbus is an armchair quarterback and as much as we don’t want it, we do, because we want connection, we need conversation, we can’t do this grand thing in a vacuum, at least not all the ideas.

destroy

To destroy is to start to turn on each other, early on, often before the biz is real, before a prototype exists, etc.  The destruction of those around you, partners, friends, family, you will do it.  You will choose, you will destroy.  I found it oddly whimsical that just 1hr after my talk I caught up a past attendee of Startup Weekend, who was feeling the destroy aspects of a startup team imploding before investment, before product, before real adoption.  Destroy is the gateway drug or possibly the side effect of micromanagement.  Desire fights for your position, while doubt builds the case and ultimately green lights destruction.

dread

I always recall my early days at TCO where I would meet with many local entrepreneurs, and recall one of them telling me “i got 8 months.. and then i’m dead.”  The sense of dread was completely transparent to me.  He knew it, he saw the fate that was to be.  When startups run out of cash, they often, if not always, die.  He had 8 months of cash and then, dead.  Taking cash often creates dread.  There’s alot of romancing the stone happening in the startup scene, the thrill of manifesting an idea out of thin air is a rush, then building a proto, then playing the part all the way up to the guy or gal that is willing to give you coin at the altar, and of course thats your moment, your window, your party, and many feel the dread as soon as they take it, as if everything before that was fun, but now, its serious, you owe.  Dread manifests itself in other ways as well, product iterations aren’t always fun, interacting with others, isn’t always fun, raising money- talk to 10 entrepreneurs and get taste for what its like to split yourself in half, spending 8 hour days on building a product, managing people, getting customers, and then another 8 hours a day raising money, getting rejected or jumping through a few dozen hoops.  This is the world.

Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 5.17.12 AM

So the first half of the talk was fears, and then I broke into 2 concepts I feel help address, tackle and defeat or disarm those fears- intrinsic momentum and hustle.  To me intrinsic momentum a natural rolling state of believability.  Its already apparent, obvious.  I feel most great opportunities are simply leveraging the obvious, cashing in on the intrinsic momentum already in play.

Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 5.17.25 AM

 

Twitch is an example of intrinsic momentum to me.  Gamers shared their games on youtube long before twitch came along.  In the observation of this, justintv pivoted to cater to this already evolving, present, and growing audience.  The product was straightforward, obvious, the customers were already there.  They simply made it better.

Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 5.17.38 AM

Finding ideas that roll, they stick, they are obvious, perhaps not tech enabled yet, but obvious.  Guiding user behavior not changing it, huge win material.  Especially for a non-resilient first time entrepreneur.  Sure once your conviction engine is online 24/7, go for that ground breaking total behavior change idea, you’ll need the energy and the money to do it.  Intrinsic momentum ideas and concepts often harbor super fans, twitch is another great example of finding and leveraging super fans.  Super fans, super users, like employees whom you never pay – are the gods of your service, they are more powerful than any ad campaign.  Momentum gives you a vehicle for noise, and noise and can be leveraged by hustle.

Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 5.17.46 AM

I ended the talk on hustle, the definitive metric that separates entrepreneurs.  A bad idea with hustle can increase the opportunities to be great, while a great idea with lack of hustle can equally miss or even erode opportunities and fail.

Following the talk I received alot of questions, how to raise money, what does Columbus offer young entrepreneurs, the allure and pull of the valley, and more.

Its always fun to talk to students, next week I have the privilege to speak to a Buckeye Leadership class on pitching a concept.    I’m in the height of lecture madness, one talk a week from now till mid November.  Good times!  You can find my FEAR talk, here on slideshare along with our SHOP prototype paper I use with students, faculty, and staff to ideate a concept.

 

 

2015 predictions thus far…

So how am I doing thus far on my 2015 predictions?  Am I close?  Way off?  2015 feels pretty much done for me.  Fall is here and then winter and then like hello 2016.

So lets look at what I said and where we are now…

  1. We Believe.
    There is a aura of belief unfolding on campus today.  Its safe to say that commercialization has taken root in the university.  More people believe in the potential of what they’re working on.  We’ll seen even more positive energy toward “we can do it” in terms of ideas to market hustle.  Its across the board from the highest pillars of senior leadership to the deans, chairs and faculty and staff.  And of course the students, always the first to believe I think, they will continue to impress.

    As of August 30th?  – I think this is fairly on target.  I’ve noticed alot more press on campus on innovation to market aspects.  The fact that colleges are thinking in startup weekend and hackathon like events at the leadership level is a big sign.  Also the community is on board.  Plus the university added some nice measures to fuel the fire, Accelerator Awards, etc, all helping.

  2. Medical / IT led innovation will continue to dominate.
    Startup health is just getting up to speed.  2014 was a big year for mindfulness, wearables, software, data analytics, and more when it comes to health care.  2015 will continue to be very loud on the innovation around health.  Between the new Neuromodulation Center to the new James cancer center spinning up, a sea of innovation, opened doors and possibility will follow.  Plus digital health is beginning to cross the threshold in adoption in both practice and common placement with medical centers and in administrative and doc acceptance.  Add the applicability in terms of next generation compliance/adherence and you find a sea of opportunities.  Note many solutions will be more “risk mitigation” orientated.

    As of August 30th?  – Portfolio, plus what press around campus is covering, this is still very much true.  Startups and overall “deals” we’re working on at TCO easily slide over 60% focused on health care technologies and concepts.  This isn’t to say its the total pipeline of ideas in from the colleges/centers etc, its more that the buyers, intersection of interest tends to be leaning in this direction.  And theres multiple initiatives across the state and the region to support this push.  Disrupting health is still and continue to be game on.

  3. In the Groove on Process.
    2014 was an epic year for commercialization and startup process.  The team jelled under new leadership and really pressed into often difficult territory and laid down many processes and norms and procedures on how to do things, how to make things GO.  2015 will see these efforts streamline and get in the groove.  Process is a big part of success when it comes to starting, when it comes to doing, when it comes to alignment and more.  I see us all in the groove for next, let’s do this!  The new Acceleration Award will help many fill in the gap from clinical trials to prototyping, this will compliment general areas of hustle across campus to make, validate, realize and net traction.

    As of August 30th? – Yes but always need more.  Commercialization is more and more like playing a game of “Civilization”, meaning its not enough just to intake IP, evaluate IP, and stage IP for consumption, you also have to show how that consumption could work, then guide those new to consumption what consumption and or the opportunity in that consumption is or could be.  You can’t be a vending machine, it doesn’t work. The region needs more players and you have to help create and educate the players and the could be players at the table to take advantage of the now, the moment, the next.  Thats alot of work.  Thats well beyond the initial charter of the TCO office.  Yet we’re seemingly responsible for the total outcome of success often projected from a range of sources, though its not like we all have exterior commentors.  However, do not be dismayed, this the job you signed up for- and we wouldn’t want it any less.  Being at the cross roads of invention and opportunity is one of the greastest places on campus to be.  Its yours to crave into next.

  4. Collaboration Frontier.
    Bigger and better collaborations are afoot.  Thats not always a good thing as they tend to be well, involved… but I see more incubators, more collaborative partners, more groups unifying for what could be, more and more thinking, more people coming to the table, especially as more believe in the effort, and the end game.

    As of August 30th? – Subtle moves and kinda goes back to #3.  Hasn’t happened on a large level yet.

  5. New IP Frontiers.
    I believe Athletics, Sports Medicine and Arts & Sciences will be new pools of IP frontier.  Not to say its where the big deals will be but these areas will not be “unknown” any more in terms of IP.  Data Analytics will continue to be in the crosshairs as well but it needs time to nurture.  While the demand for Internet of Things is apparently everywhere, I think that area will unfold slowly as well.  Some of the best IP opportunities I see are based around areas the university has extensive “frequency”, by flow, opportunity, context, expertise.  Also what the market thinks is hot NOW tends to be “oh yeah that, we did that like 5 years ago…” meaning the academics and research folks are further in future than you realize.  Like NEXT on campus is likely more Quantum Computing than say IOT, or VR, etc.  Not to say its not there, but the fringe of next isn’t mainstream- IOT is going mainstream, in labs, dude we’re working on warp drive (ok maybe not but some amazing stuff, definitely!).

    As of August 30th? – We’ve barely scratched the surface of athletics IP, and really TCO can’t do everything, we need leadership from that side of the campus to connect and help us rock it, cause there are a few billion ideas in there.  IOT, internet of things did and is taking off at TCO, we often don’t classify the IP like that though I’d say theres 7-12 techs that are solidly in the IOT space, and they all have deals on traction so yeah, thats good.  Nada on quantum computing, thats probably stuck in the research/new frontier, we dont recognize what we’ve done as IP yet.  Same with VR, see little on that front, anything that does pop gets sucked into the open source void, which isn’t to say it has no opportunity but more to say the perception is that is should be free- people forget that many of the valleys greatest startups are built on free models.  Analytics connected to health continues but its mixed- its about the questions and problems and insight you want from that space.  We need more that just tools that are fast, we need stakeholders that have questions, or more so we need pattern sensing AI thats connected to pending regulation, opportunity, or infrastrcture changes coming.

Five, 2015 Predictions for the Central Ohio Startup Scene

  1. Traction and Exits.
    Central Ohio startups formed 3-5 years ago will be more notable, recognizable and piling on the traction front.  Some will be exiting.  Of course we rarely hear about the startups that tried and died.  But I see more talk of traction, more tale of how, the people of Columbus will rally to support and exits, mergers and acquisitions will be afoot.  Some of these starts are down right tactical meaning their time for epic glory is coming, provided their ramen will last.

    As of August 30th?  – Exits haven’t occurred at least to my knowledge, there has been bit ones that I know of but not the ummph or booms we’d like to see and hear about.  Traction is happening for those startups that have received significant funding.  Its been a pretty “steady as she goes” year for Columbus startups.  

  2. City of Design.
    Columbus is booming with agencies.  Columbus has always been a “design” town but it will be more known and notable in 2015 as the many more agencies spin up, mid sized ones expand into larger agencies, and the pool of talent coming out of the schools kicks of more doers, believers, thinkers and so on.  Columbus is becoming a magnet for hip, interesting, arts, maker, doable, hustle.  The frame of “design” is changing as well as it bleeds into any and all biz related the space- software, PR, creative, maker, experience, research, you name it!   How this factors into the startup scene?  Well more shops crafting and coding meaning more code made here for here.  Plus the talent pools and spill overs forming new groups will be continual.

    As of August 30th? – We’ll Columbus is awash of new dev firms, that is true.  But this was more a notion I had when i saw the rise of ad firms and folks like wondersauce coming to town and what not.  I think its not so well baked on my part.

  3. Power Struggle in the Tower of Influence.
    As more people believe there are more to be told the message.  Of course the message varies and we’ll see that unfold in 2015 as the game of influence.  There are new players in town.  Even more to come.  The battle of influence from everything to how to start to why to start is underway, its been brewing for awhile but the game is getting thicker.  We’ll see more events, more conferences, more blogs, more chatter, more well, everything.  Its not just for VC tho, from casual players to private equity, just about everyone is eyeing on what they see as next in Columbus Ohio.  The long game is definitely apparent.  The prize is what’s ahead in 10 years.  2015 will be a good year for opinion and voices on the subject, as the hustler audience doubles so does the demand for worthy content and commentary.  So influence will be unfolding on multiple tiers, incubator, state level, life style, funding, making, retail, you name it, there is room for curation, authority and influence.

    As of August 30th? – Hasn’t happened, most cause there are few challengers to the norm.  

  4. CASH continues to be tight.
    The golden goose of every would be startup is CASH, who can provide it?  Well in 2015, cash will be present but it will still be tight.  Just because Forbes writes an article on Columbus every other month doesn’t mean the midwest just gave us all a blank amex card.  New currency will be passed around from mentorship to space to networking power but CASH will still serve the golden key of survival for many.  Which will make our scene hard to grow within, meaning we’ll be talking out our related states and valley partners to help bridge the valley of death every new business must cross- onward to traction!  The ideas built on transactions today will SKYROCKET in Columbus and serve as early leaders of the space.  The State of Ohio will continue to fuel and encourage the scene as well, and I suspect it will double down in some ways providing more CASH for solid people with ideas that can prove the rainbow of cash on the other side.  More people will turn to crowd funding, angels and more cash enabling ideas to get their start as well.  The big question is whether or not Columbus finds a way to help the big disrupters cross the gap without big cash- which could happen.. if we reduce the impact of where cash goes.  For example the pending tax free zone coming for startups, combined with affordable talent and great ideas and long term players betting on 2025, maybe we can grow that base for the big disrupters.

    As of August 30th?  – True.  Cash continues to be tight for startups.  People continue to tell me this isn’t true, and thats from folks that have money and or wish to communicate that all is well.  Reality is, money is still tight.  The requirements for money are increasing tight if not overly laborious, course its not like i’m giving out funds.  But I see plenty of startups struggle and thats basically the model really, unless you convince others, or do the obstacle course or give away a big chunk of what you’re doing.  Its not just that there’s few cash outlets, there’s few cash prospects on the horizon too.  Everyone credits DRIVE Capital with signaling the new era of VC vesting in columbus but thats pretty much a myth.

    DRIVE is good for the region but it wants overwhelmingly good/obvious/already have traction plays to invest in.  Traction like customers.  DRIVE is growth cash, double down on customer acquisition cash, sizable opportunity with a ball rolling down hill at mach 11 cash.  If you’re starting, you’re on your own in columbus, unless you play startup columbus, and take your lumps like everyone else and or work the system, and or be insanely inventive, or pick a model that doesn’t rely on cash from others.

  5. Foundational Testing.
    With CASH continuing to be challenged and or tight, there will be more foundation testing happening- what the heck is that?  Its basically a means to piece together the fate of a tech/startup without vesting in it.  We’ll see alot of this happening with new incubators spinning up.  It follows along with more people believing as well.  While CASH is tight, hope is boundless and there will be more support (with the hope of influence) to direct the herd of “potentials” into rivers of foundational testing.  This will lead to mixed results.  Testing is good, but so is leaping off the cliff and doing.  Columbus will split between a sea of doers, often insanely crazy or delusional, and later reflected upon as brilliant, to safety net of validation, which can yield good safe results but at what costs?  There is middle ground and we’ll see that play out but get ready for the ride!

    As of August 30th?  – True.  Concept Academy is positioned as Rev1’s gate on this notion of foundational testing.  You favor well in CA and money as a conversation is considered.  I’m continually motivated by the right model for doing a startup, the two sided market is daunting if not impossible in Columbus, the aggerated/organized thing that is yours to organize and improve, i like, the b2b because they better or gov will penalize them, i like as well, the b2c cause like you can and its timely fad, iffy, the b2c because we’re all mobile now, iffy, the b2c cause c wanted b, better.  Finding the model for this town is key to getting funding in this town.  I think MVPs still rule, you gotta show more than a notion of a biz model, you need to show more than a notion for a solid team, you gotta show more than a notion of a concept, you gotta make it.  YOU have to scale it back tho, feel like andre the giant inside but you appear as mouse for the moment.

    Overall, I feel like I’m mixed on predictions.  Most are on target while others are meh.

 

Making Stuff Matters

 

I’ve been busy lately.

Busy closing the gap- making conversations matter, turning them into manifestations of future visions, road maps to be, while at the same time helping champion crazy ideas, skunk work projects that my gut says will be hugely fun and awesome, all the while participating with the team and making deals happen.

I know its working because my brain has been on fire lately with ideas, strategy, prototypes and goodness.

taste? of course..

Working on..

– software store, going well, working on intake for that

– deals done recently, kinect telehealth rehab startup, foreign language assistance edu startup, mouse lab management on an ipad startup,

– deals in the making, greenhouse management software, more healthcare EMR tools, seriously kickass wound management platform, more and more software, cyber security, math education, oncology tools, UAV for AG, etc

– prototypes, a few patient experience/satisfaction apps, dermatology inventory management platform, outbreak simulation tools, patient discharge app,

– student developers are rocking along side our main dev Paul, who is leading/managing well

– new design intern is KICKING ASS and that is great!! storyboard/ideations are happening VERY fast, me like!

– special projects, best part of the job really, DREAM and help envision next

inspired by?

– lately inspired by new conversations with Pelotonia, James Cancer Center folks, healthcare is evolving at a RAPID pace, so much goodness to come!

– inspired with the level output on storyboards to prototypes, feeling good about them helping the “deal” side of things

– special projects, DAFNi in particular which I’ll ramble about some day

– events/judging/speaking, a few engagements lined up, across the board from the usual startup to wellness events, to other

– music, tunes have been in my head lately, along with rich visual dreams

– new engagements with College of Arts & Sciences, finding some great momentum there

– working up the HACK scene across campus, more on that soon

– thinking, tweeting, CREATING, and writing alot

what’s next?

– continued momentum, double downing on the SPEED of connective goodness

– special projects become more and more SWEET with every iteration of code

– sharing the kudos/inspiration with my team and SHOP devs

– ramping up the tale of success and FAILs so we can collectively learn how to rock on

– working on the intake for software ideas, sure I have “enough” to work on, but I know i don’t see 70% of whats happening on campus, you see something that you think COULD be next, tell me, we have a mission people, make this university BAD ASS!

 

 

 

10 Predictions for 2015

future-crystal-ball

 

Its December 15th and as we ease on into the famed xmas week of insanity and xmas shopping, hanging with family and thinking about the end of 2014 and the new year of 2015 approaching, I always scribble down my predictions for the year ahead.   They’re predictions, based on notions, trends, gut thinking, essence in the air of what I’ve seen, what has come to pass and what I foresee as next.  Loosely based on science, a bit based on patterns, much of it based on the sheer gut.

Last week I jolted down 10 predictions.

  • 5 for Ohio State and the state of technology transfer scene in 2015
  • 5 for the Central Ohio startup scene in 2015

Let’s go!

Five, 2015 Predictions for the Ohio State Technology Commercialization Scene

  1. We Believe.
    There is a aura of belief unfolding on campus today.  Its safe to say that commercialization has taken root in the university.  More people believe in the potential of what they’re working on.  We’ll seen even more positive energy toward “we can do it” in terms of ideas to market hustle.  Its across the board from the highest pillars of senior leadership to the deans, chairs and faculty and staff.  And of course the students, always the first to believe I think, they will continue to impress.
  2. Medical / IT led innovation will continue to dominate.
    Startup health is just getting up to speed.  2014 was a big year for mindfulness, wearables, software, data analytics, and more when it comes to health care.  2015 will continue to be very loud on the innovation around health.  Between the new Neuromodulation Center to the new James cancer center spinning up, a sea of innovation, opened doors and possibility will follow.  Plus digital health is beginning to cross the threshold in adoption in both practice and common placement with medical centers and in administrative and doc acceptance.  Add the applicability in terms of next generation compliance/adherence and you find a sea of opportunities.  Note many solutions will be more “risk mitigation” orientated.
  3. In the Groove on Process.
    2014 was an epic year for commercialization and startup process.  The team jelled under new leadership and really pressed into often difficult territory and laid down many processes and norms and procedures on how to do things, how to make things GO.  2015 will see these efforts streamline and get in the groove.  Process is a big part of success when it comes to starting, when it comes to doing, when it comes to alignment and more.  I see us all in the groove for next, let’s do this!  The new Acceleration Award will help many fill in the gap from clinical trials to prototyping, this will compliment general areas of hustle across campus to make, validate, realize and net traction.
  4. Collaboration Frontier.
    Bigger and better collaborations are afoot.  Thats not always a good thing as they tend to be well, involved… but I see more incubators, more collaborative partners, more groups unifying for what could be, more and more thinking, more people coming to the table, especially as more believe in the effort, and the end game.
  5. New IP Frontiers.
    I believe Athletics, Sports Medicine and Arts & Sciences will be new pools of IP frontier.  Not to say its where the big deals will be but these areas will not be “unknown” any more in terms of IP.  Data Analytics will continue to be in the crosshairs as well but it needs time to nurture.  While the demand for Internet of Things is apparently everywhere, I think that area will unfold slowly as well.  Some of the best IP opportunities I see are based around areas the university has extensive “frequency”, by flow, opportunity, context, expertise.  Also what the market thinks is hot NOW tends to be “oh yeah that, we did that like 5 years ago…” meaning the academics and research folks are further in future than you realize.  Like NEXT on campus is likely more Quantum Computing than say IOT, or VR, etc.  Not to say its not there, but the fringe of next isn’t mainstream- IOT is going mainstream, in labs, dude we’re working on warp drive (ok maybe not but some amazing stuff, definitely!).

Five, 2015 Predictions for the Central Ohio Startup Scene

  1. Traction and Exits.
    Central Ohio startups formed 3-5 years ago will be more notable, recognizable and piling on the traction front.  Some will be exiting.  Of course we rarely hear about the startups that tried and died.  But I see more talk of traction, more tale of how, the people of Columbus will rally to support and exits, mergers and acquisitions will be afoot.  Some of these starts are down right tactical meaning their time for epic glory is coming, provided their ramen will last.
  2. City of Design.
    Columbus is booming with agencies.  Columbus has always been a “design” town but it will be more known and notable in 2015 as the many more agencies spin up, mid sized ones expand into larger agencies, and the pool of talent coming out of the schools kicks of more doers, believers, thinkers and so on.  Columbus is becoming a magnet for hip, interesting, arts, maker, doable, hustle.  The frame of “design” is changing as well as it bleeds into any and all biz related the space- software, PR, creative, maker, experience, research, you name it!   How this factors into the startup scene?  Well more shops crafting and coding meaning more code made here for here.  Plus the talent pools and spill overs forming new groups will be continual.
  3. Power Struggle in the Tower of Influence.
    As more people believe there are more to be told the message.  Of course the message varies and we’ll see that unfold in 2015 as the game of influence.  There are new players in town.  Even more to come.  The battle of influence from everything to how to start to why to start is underway, its been brewing for awhile but the game is getting thicker.  We’ll see more events, more conferences, more blogs, more chatter, more well, everything.  Its not just for VC tho, from casual players to private equity, just about everyone is eyeing on what they see as next in Columbus Ohio.  The long game is definitely apparent.  The prize is what’s ahead in 10 years.  2015 will be a good year for opinion and voices on the subject, as the hustler audience doubles so does the demand for worthy content and commentary.  So influence will be unfolding on multiple tiers, incubator, state level, life style, funding, making, retail, you name it, there is room for curation, authority and influence.
  4. CASH continues to be tight.
    The golden goose of every would be startup is CASH, who can provide it?  Well in 2015, cash will be present but it will still be tight.  Just because Forbes writes an article on Columbus every other month doesn’t mean the midwest just gave us all a blank amex card.  New currency will be passed around from mentorship to space to networking power but CASH will still serve the golden key of survival for many.  Which will make our scene hard to grow within, meaning we’ll be talking out our related states and valley partners to help bridge the valley of death every new business must cross- onward to traction!  The ideas built on transactions today will SKYROCKET in Columbus and serve as early leaders of the space.  The State of Ohio will continue to fuel and encourage the scene as well, and I suspect it will double down in some ways providing more CASH for solid people with ideas that can prove the rainbow of cash on the other side.  More people will turn to crowd funding, angels and more cash enabling ideas to get their start as well.  The big question is whether or not Columbus finds a way to help the big disrupters cross the gap without big cash- which could happen.. if we reduce the impact of where cash goes.  For example the pending tax free zone coming for startups, combined with affordable talent and great ideas and long term players betting on 2025, maybe we can grow that base for the big disrupters.
  5. Foundational Testing.
    With CASH continuing to be challenged and or tight, there will be more foundation testing happening- what the heck is that?  Its basically a means to piece together the fate of a tech/startup without vesting in it.  We’ll see alot of this happening with new incubators spinning up.  It follows along with more people believing as well.  While CASH is tight, hope is boundless and there will be more support (with the hope of influence) to direct the herd of “potentials” into rivers of foundational testing.  This will lead to mixed results.  Testing is good, but so is leaping off the cliff and doing.  Columbus will split between a sea of doers, often insanely crazy or delusional, and later reflected upon as brilliant, to safety net of validation, which can yield good safe results but at what costs?  There is middle ground and we’ll see that play out but get ready for the ride!

Usually I have a few more as well.. like..

  • stocks
  • tech trends
  • startups to watch

but yeah.. we’ll get to that later.  Happy Holidays and Happy New Year!

 

Can venture capital disrupt academia?

Via the A16z Podcast about evolving trends in venture capital investing in academia. This is key podcast for leadership across all colleges, ILO and TCO offices, great big thinking here.

It’s a myth that startups happen in isolation. Those legendary two people in a garage are often building on deep and basic research — long funded by government and conducted in universities — that has come before it. But with the advent of the internet, what’s the future of peer-to-peer collaborations and startups-as-“science experiments”? Can venture capital disrupt academia… and vice versa? And finally, what’s the secret to universities like Stanford making money off the entrepreneurial ideas coming out of them? (Hint: It starts with a ‘p’. But isn’t what you think.)

a16z’s new professor in residence Vijay Pande interviews Marc Andreessen at our recent Academic summit on these topics, as well as ‘regulatory arbitrage’; how to mix humanities and science; and what major Marc would have done if he were 18 today.

 

The Ackerman 660 Project

buildingImg

 

Sometimes I laugh at some of the truly crazy ideas I come up with.  This week I went to a meeting at 660 Ackerman to talk to an inventor around some algorithms in management engineering, cool stuff, brilliant guy, great team and super engaged department.  It was a fun meeting, the energy was excellent, we gotta a plan, a mission, we’re gonna try- because if we don’t try, we got nada.

BUT in the elevator going down, leaving the building i couldn’t help but stare at the directory in the elevator- every floor, various departments, all around the management services, departments etc for the hospital/cancer center etc.  Sometimes intellectual property is not obvious- transfer offices are hard wired to find IP and patents in the labs and benches of our core R&D offerings on campus, but here, in this building I see a different kind of IP.

The IP of process, the IP of expense, the IP of transactions, patient experience, revenue cycle management, billing, customer management, data analytics, workflow optimization, strategy on how to save millions and spend it wisely…. this building is full of IP, it holds 2 startups maybe more we just haven’t found them yet.

But they’re here, I know it.  Even better they’re all likely to be enabled through software, which is CHEAP considering its power in wielding the ability to manifest NEXT.

I studied that floor department listing more closely, yeah… i nodded and the elevator doors opened, people were getting in and I was there just staring that this directory… eventually I had to get out of the elevator.

Hackathon, yep, you heard me, hackaton, this whole building needs to do one massive floor by floor challenge hackathon, each floor is responsible for serving up big ideas they see, big opportunities they believe could be huge, and the whys behind that, and the notions of how’d they do it, each floor of 660 ackerman, needs to battle it out with the other floors, together creating one massive say, day long or week long hackathon- they dont need to code, merely serve up the big idea, they compete with the other floors, we do our own shark tank, have teams manifest their pitches, I’ll help each one of them do it, me and my team, you got it, then lets see, bring forth the ideas i know that are in that building.  Make it fun, make it engaging, enable the guy or gal that has seen the same problem over and over and over, step out of the cubical and say “ummm i got an idea to fix this” because the beauty of that idea is that FIRST, we, Ohio State benefits from that innovation, and then second, we take it to market, and third, we change the culture and we enable people to show us the next, and they want to be heard.

Now how to pull this off?

Well thats like a proposal, then a conversation, then a meeting, and so on.  Would everyone participate, maybe yes, likely no, but without trying you get nothing, I’ll keep trying.  Plus it’d be a hugely awesome feat if we could do it… really WE can, just gotta say, do lets go for it.

Nothing motivates people like annoying problems, or well cash, but while a cash prize could be done, we really want the annoying problems and the experts to fix them to stand up.

Easily over half of commercialization is “noticing” what could be, and then being crazy enough to go for it.

I notice you 660 Ackerman, I will keep digging!

Investor Momentum

A few months ago I attended a Startup Grind session at TechColumbus where Wil Schroter of Fundable fame was talking about his new startup Fundable.  Overall great stuff, Wil is one of the true unique’s in Columbus. He has a defined style, and is very much to the point typically on what he’s working with.

In the QA session of the talk a question was asked about how young startups get investment, its a classic tale really, how do you net attraction and Wil dropped a line I haven’t forgotten since he uttered it… “you have to work on accumulating enough investor momentum” essentially, you need to be visible, and net attraction and double down on it, rapidly increasing your chances to actually get investment.  Its work work work but there’s tactics as well.

Walking away from that and thinking about my own pipeline of things i’m working on at TCO, I reframe that notion of investor momentum into “deal momentum”, what can I do to ensure that this tech I’m working on nets a deal.  I do everything I can to fuel it forward, deal momentum, the more I think about it, the more critical it is.  Sometimes ya gotta drag the whole party, you me, the faculty, etc kicking and screaming into that deal momentum gateway.  And the goal is unified, one goal, one mission, deal.

Of course the receipe for a deal is tricky, its like 2 parts ip, 4 parts alignment, a dash of paperwork, and a whole lotta go go go.

The past 2 months at TCO has seen massive momentum for my pipeline, things are looking good, deals yet, no, but deals to be yes.

Traits of Successful TVSF Rounds

Every friday I take a sec and fumble through my stack of witty dan’ism’s, assorted ah ha’s and bit brainstorm notes.  They’ve been piling up, so here’s some notes I took at recent meeting where the State of Ohio Third Frontier folks came to visit and talk to us here at TCO about basically, what makes for a successful TVSF proposal.  Which is hugely important stuff.  For the university, actually any university in the state, a successful TVSF round Phase 1 which is 50k match and Phase 2 100k award is a BIG BIG BIG deal, its typically the kickoff point for many would be startups that we’re working on.

Now you have to get this money, its just nice to have money given that its a big win, few if any strings and its like do good for Ohio, make jobs, and we’ll help ya do it.  However, there is one bit thing, your proposal needs successful “traits” as I would call it.

These are my RAW notes, so dan’ism’s are fully included, no charge, as are my interpretations on what I heard.

You can read more about Ohio Third Frontier’s program here, which btw, is a really kick ass program.   For transfer offices we get windows of opportunity to apply for Phase 1 (usually early early stage funds, funds that need to be matched either by the university or another party) and Phase 2 (start a new biz funds, this the grail startups chase, and for good reason, 100k few strings, and go go go).  Phase 2’s are typically an indicator for follow on support funding as well.  Getting a Phase 2 is like shooting a flare gun in Columbus, or for VC its like the Bat signal, people notice, and incubators, accelerators and related funds engage as everyone is looking for the deal to be.

My notes are focused more around Phase 2, because my deals, what’s in my pipeline are typically technologies that while they could be direct licenses and we’re always working that, are also startup worthy targets.  Sometimes you need to go startup to get a big licensee to pay attention, at least thats what I think.

Keep in mind that these “traits” I talk about are not slam dunk material.  Its not a check list, its a “have the right mindset”.  TVSF btw stands for Technology Validation Startup Fund.  To apply, you have to write a 6 page proposal, explaining all the usual aspects of why you, why this tech, how you make money, etc etc to the TVSF board which is has its analysis and reward recommendations done by a third party.

Traits of Successful TVSF Proposals

1, links, so the gist here is give the reviewers MEAT in the proposal, give them places to go, things to do, they will research, give them link material.  They did say they don’t always look at them but the point is that if ya got’m throw them in.

2, anticipate the problems you’ll have and how you will handle them, Every startup is filled with a degree of BS.  You will have problems.  Stating those problems and how you handle them, gives the reviewer a better sense of whether or not you’re delusional in what you’re doing.  Accepting a challenge and noting where the challenges are and then how you’re the one to tackle them and with x method- is what they want to see.

3, litmus, do you lack the acumen?  Here the reviewers I get a sense is a bit like #2, I mean these guys are gonna add it up as well and if the risk is just too wonderland material, passing is unlikely- which is one of the big questions I hear alot in the university setting- would typical “I can’t believe” startups of the valley really fly here.  Like would AirBnB ever get TVSF if we rewinded way way back to the start of that biz?  Would the midwest take the risk?  Any my notion is no.  And the question is- is that bad?  Thats where the real debate seems to be.  But thats for another blog post.

4, budget narrative, the budget needs more info, explain it better, what you need and why vs the typical, we need x for doing stuff.

5, 90% of TVSF Phase 2 proposals fail on the biz model, I’d add that the model fails for a few reasons, 1 it bad, 2 it doesn’t exist, 3, you’re crazy see #1, 4, its ok for you but for TVSF

6, too many gaps in the biz model is bad, again this goes back to you recognizing where the issues are and calling them out in the proposal with the overwhelming awesome hammer of how you’ll rock them

7, notable biz leads engaged, Ok lemme state this, to me TVSF folks never came out and said it, but its in my impression that having notable mentors/VCS in your proposal increases the odds of “mmm yeah, could be good”.  I figure the state kinda doesn’t like risk that much, if at all, but if there’s a so and so on there, well i know so and so… and comfort comes and it doesn’t feel as risky though its sure as heck is.

8, partners and first customers are KEY, While so and so is good, what’s even more convincing is a first customer, partner that is gonna either test and validate your concept, or be your first paying customers.  Nothing brings money to the table faster than “I have orders can can’t meet demand!”.

9, be CLEAR, well written proposals are noted.

10, common pitfalls, a pure license deal where theres a sense you wont generate jobs or grow, ROI that is not apparent or so far way meaning that you’re a project but not a biz yet, location issues- you intend to take the operation out of state, parent company doing well but this new arm or new company thats related to the big company needs the funds- basically red flag

Where Proposals Fall Down

  • path to market issues (#2, #3, #5, #6)
  • lack of company backing (#7 #8)
  • Proof to raise additional funds (#7)
  • Have customers (#8)
  • Have people that want to invest (#7)

So what do my notes tell me.  RISK is risky.  State of Ohio is pretty decent at taking risk but it likes to shore up the odds as best it can and for good reason, thats our tax bucks afterall?  Even so, the other compelling clarity is that you need people to make things work in Columbus.  Out a 100 startups that apply, nearly all of them need a sense of overwhelming traction to them in the sense of venture and mentors engaged, first customers, and a compelling prospect for state funds.

The more I look at my notes the more I feel the pain on my side of the fence.  Need more entrepreneurs.  Have tech, yes lots, have entrepreneurs to help craft the gap between tech to realized opportunity, not so much.  Some of the tech i have is obvious in its model, obviously those ones go quicker than the bigger more risky ones.   But alot of the things I have are dog food techs, they’re techs I love because the university swims in the context, it feels the problem and has addressed it and will feel the problem every day, hour and minute of the day.  In any given time frame here at TCO there are some 15 startups in states of possibility but without entrepreneurs they are well.. challenged.  Heh.  Mostly cause we don’t give up too easily.

Personally I’m as much of a fan for biz models as i am successful traction metrics (see TPS report earlier blog post), I’ll take startups that are converting on users, netting traction and getting sitting on a defined “sauce” any day.  A model will appear in time.  Usually its there already but its not as $$$ obvious, like big data, etc.

But back to the notion of Air BnB would it ever been “funded” via something like TVSF?  I suspect not.  Mostly because we’re talking state funds, and they need more.  But I think they want the challenge- amaze them.  Thats the gist really.  You need to show that you need TVSF, you need x, you need y and why you’re the one to bet on.  Vision, conviction and the power to make a convincing argument is powerful.  Additionally in Columbus, for these funds, you gotta use the network.  Which means you need to let people in and you need to make room for them in your brain.  Get ready for thoughts and opinions, win some lose some and don’t lose yourself.

Take-aways for faculty remain the same, the invention is one thing, the value/market is another, lets work together to cross that gap.

WearGood pitch analysis

A couple of weeks ago I had the pleasure of judging the first WearGood hackathon event in Columbus.  Held at TechColumbus and put on by the CivicHacks team the event was “challenging”.  David All is resilient guy.  While I love wearable tech, I thought a hackathon with wearable tech would be challenging- because the average startup weekend is hard to see results.  But David and Jennifer and his whole team rocked it, even with low participation in the overall event.  

Let’s talk about participation.  After doing events like Wakeup Startup, Ignite Columbus, Startup Weekend, and the hackathons I put together at TCO, participation in my view is a luck of the draw.  You never really know you have it until the the last week or so before the event.  In some ways I think of events around this notion that do I have enough friends to make it worth while, if yes, do it, if no then risk it and be happy regardless with outcome.

Events are about leading.  They’re about telling the planet, “we’re supposed to be going this way” they are filled with RISK.  You need to embrace the audacity within and go for it and that sounds cool but sucks big time when no one shows.  We’re not mighty morphin power rangers, we’re people with feelings, we want traction, and when we work so hard and don’t get it, it sucks.  So huge congrats to the WearGood team for pressing thru and making it happen with low participation numbers.

41u91nME9sL._SY300_

The Teams

I was seriously impressed with the teams, writing software in 24hrs is challenging, doing a wearable hacked thing, that sounds even harder.  Sometimes its hard to judge these teams.  I feel bad for judging teams like this because the act of creation itself never seems to get a break.  I mean its hard enough willing something into existence and then being cross examined by folks who debate your biz model.  In some ways I wish we wouldn’t discuss biz models and instead speak to traction and only that.

Anyways.. the teams.  (via weargood site)

STEPLITE – FIRST PLACE

StepLite solves a medical challenge by deploying wearable technology to alert the person wearing the device when pressure is placed on the bottom of the foot.

Why it got first place?  Why did this pitch win?  Well for a few reasons I figure, one, its healthcare, and right now investors love anything healthcare.  Second it worked, and the use case, the primary user was the creators husband.  It was nice to see tangible working thing right there doing its job.  It was also simple, understandable, a narrative that worked.  It didn’t talk about a 64 billion dollar industry of feet, it spoke to this person in this room needs this thing right now.  And they willed it life and there it was.  So it just had all the right nuts and bolts to make it go.  I loved that it kept working throughout the other pitches as well.  The team was new, or at least felt new, they felt coachable.  Product still has a ways to go but the size of the market, the applicable need and such all seemed good.

THE BAND – SECOND PLACE

The Band solves the identity problem in homelessness by using NFC technology to provide a profile that can be easily accessed from a wearable band.

What about this pitch?  Well this team took the Frankencup award from me and BigKittyLabs.  The prototype worked, and I like software feats of amazement in short time frames.  I also liked the “data” aspect of this play and its “infrastructure” opportunity.  If done well, and nets adoption, this concept would get acquired for organizing, enabling a whole new market.  However, later I thought.. you might not need hardware at all and simple go with biometrics and use fingerprint id and just do away with yet another thing people can use and or traffic to exploit the system.

SHAKE UP – THIRD PLACE

Shake Up addresses unemployment and entrepreneurship by bringing the act of swapping business cards to a wearable device in a fun and engaging way.

What about this pitch?  This one i was surprised got into the top 3.  I think it did because it looked the most “built”  The pitcher had the item on his hand with wires and all it feel the most cyber.  But I dunno for me its another kickstarter project, go for it, but i’m not sure about the biz per say.  But by all means go for it.

PAVLOG

Pavlog is an app that connects wearable technology to the Internet of things to create a personal marketplace for all of your connected habits.

What about this pitch?   This pitch felt familiar, if you’ve followed the quantified self scene there are alot of companies connecting health to habits and the like.  Pitch wise I felt I needed to see more on this one to get the gist of where it was going.  Its an idea that I’d continue to work on though- but at an insurance/accountable care angle so that what you end up has sustainable traction to it.

COMPASS

A wearable device can be used to educate by gamifying field trips and unlocking interesting content.

What about this pitch?  Geocaching concepts are coming back.  This one had an interesting twist where by kids gain from location based education aspects, like, challenges of go to COSI, go here, go there etc.  It’d be another idea that could work, but needs baked.

REFRACT

Refract is a public art installation that uses wearable technology to interact with mind-bending glass/light displays.

What about this pitch?  Cool idea from the hackable aspect.  I think this one would do well on Kickstarter, but it screamed expensive infrastructure to get going and be a biz.  But thats where kickstarter can help maybe.  I liked the idea of citizens hacking/updating city public art installations.

LIGHT IT UP

Events can use the Light It Up wearable technology to synchronize massive, personal light shows.

What about this pitch?  This felt like something that RedBull would sponsor.  Needed to be baked more, but they pulled off the tech demo.

Overall great event, look forward to seeing more from the Civic Hacks team in the future!

The Traction Potential Score – Part 1

It’s been a busy summer.  Even while students were away the halls of TCO were packed with inventions, patents, and hustle.  The machine of invention is relentless.

I did alot of ideation this summer, which is one of my favorite things to do at TCO.  Take something, shape it, make it better.  Course I still like the dance, the art of the deal, and the ramp up to awesomeness.  But ideation lets you create.  And that has me thinking about new ways to triage and assess ideas.

I look back on successful techs that I have been a part of that turned into deals for the university and I think about common aspects in and around those deals and techs, what are the factors that made those things fly, or was it all by chance?  For as much as I perceive and believe that some technologies are more valuable then others, I can’t help but think of the crazy things that come out of Silicon Valley that no sane person would believe had any potential and in mere years some of them have become juggernaughts of disruption and billion dollar pay days.

I like to think that part of my skill set is believing and overcoming the odds of no that befall all technologies attempting to get to market.  Its like a mission.  And it is a roller coaster.  And its pretty unpredictable.  And all these things I think freak out just about everyone in for the journey. You need to be insanely resilient to start a biz.  You have to have more optimism than most and you have to know your customer, your product, the market and have a nose for traction.

This has me thinking about triage and assessment of technologies in a new light.  Of course there’s the basics of assessment, how big is the market, who or what is the gold standard and the competition questions.  Then there’s patents and protection.  None of my deals have ever had any protection, no patents in my neck of the woods, not to say i don’t like them, but I tend to favor techs or shall i say i’ve had more success with techs that had inherent momentum to them, ie traction potential.

On the way home today from work, coming out of an ideation session with a team of inventors part of the Arts & Sciences CAPS group, where we dabbled with some feature mapping and tales of traction, got me to thinking that traditional assessment is good but in software, for me, what I need to see is “traction potential” or a TPS, yes thats right Office Space people, I need a TPS report.  What is that technologies Traction Potential Score?  It should be noted that i’m solely speaking to a tech’s TPS score in the view of a deal to be, not a TPS score in the sense of its overall success in the market.  Tho they are related, like anything however, especially in making things come to life, there are phases, ie the journey.

How do you compute a Traction Potential Score?

Well for me, first we have to qualify what I like to work with.  It has to be copyrighted content, software orientated, and or problem that is addressable by software.  So what I need to see is either software thats been made, or content that could be something and or a problem articulated with a notion that software could fix it.

Then there’s factors that get weighed in the mix.  Some are more critical than others.

They are: Team, Alignment, Audacity, Conviction, DogFood, Enablement, Narrative, Sauce, Customer, Baselines.

Team, people matter.  I often hear this from investment, they lead their investment based on people first not technology.  Why?  Because you want to bet on the person with the idea to overcome the journey and pitfalls ahead.  This is why so many investment groups end up placing their own people into deals i figure, control is one aspect i’m sure, but its also a sense of can the guy/gal at the helm take the hit that will hit hard- hr, tech, customer – related fails etc.  For us at the early stages of idea, tech, to license arena, team matters in that licensing is also a journey.  So a team needs to be there hand in hand to get the job done.  The university is not a solo quest.  You need people to make things happen.

Alignment, likely the most important thing early on in getting traction.  If you are aligned you’re ready to do things, crazy things, you’re ready to dream and fail, you’re willing to get back up and pitch, you are willing to be smashed, twisted and then wham you just re-take shape and are good to go.  You align well with others.  You may not always agree, but you’re in it.  With teams are not aligned, all traction stops.  This is a big deal because you’re trying to drive the ball down the field and if the team isn’t working the ball stops and the clock runs, and runs, and runs.  What’s worse is that the team can falsely project that alignment is there but its not thus you don’t realize the clock is running and the ball has gone no where.  For TCO alignment doesn’t come easy.  We’re often a rock in a hard place by a factor of 10.   We’re attempting to help inventors navigate a sea of constraints, legal, conflict, protection of the tech, situational awareness of whats needed to make the tech to go further, optics, politics, dynamics, people stuff, you name it.  But successful deals are born on the backs of alignment.  Sometimes we can’t control the alignment because its outside parties, our would be license’s are often at odds with the universities directive.  This is to be expected really, you don’t want to fault someone for being hustle orientated, you want the economic engine to roar and go fast.  In the end, to me, thinking about TPS, alignment is a big factor.  Luckily it can always be address and tweaked thru communication, best practices, and willingness to bounce back.

Audacity, I use this word alot.  I like techs that have the audacity to change things.  They say, why walk when you can teleport across the room.  Thats a cool tech, lets harness that one and run with it. Audacity helps the marketing and competitive conviction of a concept.  It feeds the essence of the software to change your perspective of what you thought “was” before.  In the valley, everything is change orientated.  Investors love change, to a degree, especially in the sense that this change brings on the potential for new standards, new real estate of which they own or are a player of.  Techs need a degree of audacity.

Conviction, follows alignment, but is really centered on the sheer will factor of a tech.  Sometimes I see techs that communicate conviction.  Then I meet the people that invented them and I see conviction in their eyes, their mannerisms, the way they quickly attain alignment, become a part of the team, and invent additional IP nearly on the fly or manifest it for the one goal, to make this tech move, make it fly.  These people are self starters.  They are the mover and shakers the university is working to cultivate, to unearth and likely find.  Odds are they are already known in their groups and departments, but not always.  A big part of the resiliency you need to go.

DogFood.. heh, this refers to the likely-hood that the university or inventor will use the technology themselves. I still stand behind the notion that some of our biggest deals to date are based on the Dog Food factor, ie, we ate it ourselves.  This is great for the traction score because you’re gonna do the idea regardless of commercialization.  This allows the TCO to work in parallel of your efforts.  Plus its a nice big indicator of interest to biz leads when they realize the university is going to see it thru.  Of course most take that wrong though.  They see that the university needs that thing they made, cool, i’ll license it and sell it back to them, awesome- but thats not how it works.  It hasn’t happened on my watch at least.  Plus thats the wrong thinking I want from a biz lead.  I want them to think about new customers, beyond the buckeye walls.  What is good however is that technically their is a first customer, the university, and that in marketing and telling people the tale of why they need x thing is huge early on.  So many startups fail to get a first customer, in techs with high Dog Food factor, we got you covered on that.  The Dog Food factor also means the tech has more widgets and wheels, there’s more meat on the bone, and that makes the IP richer and a better healthier hand for the university, meaning more likely to net $ in my opinion.  A strong Dog Food factor also means the administration, the higher ups stand to benefit more in that these techs represent a often infrastructure need that is converted into cash.  I also like them because the university is a sea of possible context.  I tell people Ohio State is a city.  You name it, we have it.

Enablement, how well is the technology currently enabled.  Meaning, do you have code, do you have an app, do you have content?  Traction is about speed, time, time to get to market, can you get it, you have to iterate and roll, fast.  If the tech has no current enablement, thats unfortunate, it doesn’t rule it out of the TPS, though likely downs the score a bit.  Some IP is tricky, its conversational, its someone recognizing the need, and that seems meh at first until you realize theres more to that need. I often gravitate toward ideas with code however but are part of a story that I see enabled.  There are a handful of techs that purely content and or just stories of customers and needs, that I see the end game on.  I already see the software.  I know it can be made, thus it factors into my enablement score be it lower often than sitting on existing code.  Its hard to explain, but sometimes you see it, you know everything to make, and its not hard to you, you still people to make it, but you see it.  Thats why i think I like prototyping so much, is because seeing it in my mind and then seeing it in code, no matter how crude is an amazing feeling of awesome.  In those instances I become inventor in some ways.  I enjoy helping people see their ideas realized, its why I’m at TCO.

Narrative, can the tech be spoken to in a narrative form that people get.  What most people don’t realize is that whatever big idea you’ve got, if you can’t articulate it in 5 minutes or less, odds of you netting any traction is near zero.  Its not to say we want noncomplex ideas, its just that our audience does.  I still recall my first day at TCO going around campus leaping from complex context to complex context.  It was crazy, insanely complicated battery technology, polymers, to medical this and that.  A primary TCO mission is to inform the planet of the insanely awesome invention we have at Ohio State, to do that, techs have go from complex to meaning in marketing.  And its a super fine line.  You dont want to dumb it down but you also dont want to alienate.  A conversation of huh is still better than no conversation, so i’ll take a huh any day, but when the other party declines to connect based on confusion, thats not good.  In 5 minute pitches, the audience actually views the speaker more than the deck.  So the narratives are key.  People have heard this before, the elevator pitch.  But whats more accurate in todays scene is the taxi pitch, meaning you’re pitching to people distracted, looking to get in another vehicle to take them somewhere, and you need to have enough appeal for them to either pass on the taxi or invite you in for the ride.  Techs with a low narrative score can hinder traction because the language of understanding is unknown.

Sauce… hmmm this is like techs having an angle to them.  I love it when I come across a tech/idea that has angle.  The angle refers to a secret sauce aspect of the idea, like for example, pending law changes will impact this market causing these people to freak out because this will be mandated.  Building for that pending change, regulation etc, is a nice angle.  It doesn’t rule out others can target it as well, however.  Sometimes sauce is purely technology awesomeness, xyz tech does it better than anything out there, or maybe its the patent.  Every tech has a sauce, the special, the one thing the inventor pulled from the heavens and infused into their creation.  Sometimes we can’t see the sauce, but we feel it as it moves thru the vibes of the inventor, its fuels their conviction, and we get it, and more so it plays to narrative in a big way.  TCO isn’t meant to be an all knowing league of extraordinary people (though we are) we’re about having the right mixture of people to take IP further, and the mission is not to run these new companies, tell established ones what to do, but help set them and the IP in motion.

Customers.  Ya gotta know the customer.  You have to have a sense for who they are.  I like to know what they eat for breakfast, I wanna know frequency of use with the said thing you made for them.  I want to know what inspires them.  What they read, who they hang with, and why they want your product.  With customers come a sense of transaction, which in itself is a worthy factor but I bundle it in with Customer.  Transactions, moments of engagement between customers and your said thing is what drives your IP in the end.  That value that customers see in your IP, and transact accordingly is the crowning achievement of commercialization.  Can an idea with no customers have traction?  The crazy thing is yes.  Why because technology is an ever oozing entity in itself.  Technology is like force and things like the internet help spawn patterns of random weirdness, like strange fragments or residue left over from human interaction, I believe sometimes these fragments themselves are things that get traction regardless of a known customer or not.  Whats more crazy is that those things snowball, especially online and they themselves reveal whole new markets and customers that feed them.  This is the power of software, especially when it fades to near zero cost, technology doesnt ask why, and there for it breeds an army of doers that don’t ask why either.  That lack of why or lack of customer orientated thinking runs rampant online and cannot be underestimated.  It doesnt appear in our halls too often however, as inventors invent IP typically for a reason, but we as an org, as a university, need to champion discovery, we have to nurture the possible, especially the force of technology, its a cult.  I mean you can ignore it, but why?  There’s a hundred would be Zuckerbergs on campus, why and what would the university stand to gain in limiting the dreams of people? Nothing. So dream on customer or not I say.  But for our TPS score, we like ya to have a customer in mind.

Baselines.  Are there norms to compare to?  Baselines are like competition but I don’t want to use that word any more because it spooks people into the wrong line of thinking.  Too many times would be startup or inventor thinkers get caught on the its gotta be something that no ones done before mindset.  They obsess over newness, but that is a terrible pit of badness.  For me on the traction score, if you have no competition, that is a huge red flag.  With no known baselines, you’re really on to something or you’re in a scary unknown un-investable space because with no baselines, ummm whats up or down?  Plus the “i gotta be the only one” thinking is really really bad for the whole traction story, for the narrative it means you’re super unknown, for enablement it means the tech is either really hard to understand, and or going down a path of squiggly uncertainty because we’re not customer focused as much as being totally new and unique focused. But is there a line of good competition and bad?  Yes but its case by case basis really. Baselines include more than competition, they speak to the norms or patterns in and around the tech, perspective of market, market size, willingness of that market to embrace new things, typical costs, team makeups, likely investors in that space etc.  Computing this factor is tricky as well, its like a gut score.  There’s some but not overwhelming odds.  The perception of ODDS against you is also dangerous, which is why you need a high conviction, audacity, enablement and alignment score to overcome those ODDS, which are purely suggestive, its not like you feel them, they are thrown at you by others.  When you pitch an idea, you pitch it a 1000 times to a sea of nos until you net that ok lets talk.  Through pitching you gain confidence, more data, and help hone your narrative, heighten your sauce, brag about your dog food and shine thru enablement.

Traction is a battle, but going forward I’ll be thinking more about the TPS report!  The next post will be applying the TPS to some past deals and ones i’m working on now to thinking about TPS in terms of what I see in the valley and more.