Category Archives: Entrepreneurship

What? 53,651 Early adopters traction DNE main stream adoption?

A very insightful post by Dare Obasanjo (a fellow Nigerian).

In his post, reminiscent of the book that he cites, Crossing the Chasm, he lays out a few points why targeting and solving problems for the early adopter crowd does not ensure success, nor mainstream adoption.

First, let’s define the audiences.

Early Adopters are risk takers who actually like to try new things.

Pragmatists might be willing to use new technology, if it’s the only way to get their problem solved.

Conservatives dislike new technology and try to avoid it.

Laggards pride themselves on the fact that they are the last to try anything new.

This drawing reflects the fact that there is no smooth or logical transition between the Early Adopters and the Pragmatists. In between the Early Adopters and the Pragmatists there is a chasm. To successfully sell your product to the Pragmatists, you must “cross the chasm

Some technology trends that haven’t reached mainstream adoption:

*Blog Search: A few years ago, blog search engines were all the rage. You had people like Marc Cuban talking up IceRocket and Robert Scoble harranguing Web search companies to build dedicated blog search engines. Since then the products in that space have either given up the ghost (e.g. PubSub, Feedster), turned out to be irrelevant (e.g. Technorati, IceRocket) or were sidelined (e.g. Google Blog Search, Yahoo! Blog Search). The problem with this product category is that except for journalists, marketers and ego surfing A-list bloggers there aren’t many people who need a specialized feature set around searching blogs.

Social bookmarking: Although del.icio.us popularized a number of “Web 2.0″ trends such as tagging, REST APIs and adding social features to a previously individual task, it has never really taken off as a mainstream product. According to the former VC behind the service it seems to have peaked at 2 million unique visitors last year and is now seeing about half that number of unique users. Compare that to Yahoo! bookmarks which was seeing 20 million active users a year and a half ago.

RSS Readers: I’ve lost track of all of the this is the year RSS goes mainstream articles I’ve read over the past few years. Although RSS has turned out to be a key technology which powers a number of interesting functionality behind the scenes (e.g. podcasting) actually subscribing and reading news feeds in an RSS reader has not become a mainstream activity of Web users. When you think about it, it is kind of obvious. The problem an RSS reader solves is “I read so many blogs and news sites on daily basis, I need a tool to help me keep them all straight”. How many people who aren’t enthusiastic early adopters (i) have this problem and (ii) think they need a tool to deal with it?

Here’s an excerpt reminiscent of what I wrote in my post, Blogger v. Reality: Crossing the Chasm:

1. Just because you wish something to be true, does not make it so.

If you think I’m referring to the great twitter debate, it’s probably because I am. (Don’t know what Twitter is?)

However the one overriding theme is that all of these recent entrants is that they solve problems that everyone [or at least a large section of the populace] has. Everyone likes to communicate with their social circle. Everyone likes watching funny videos and looking at couple pics. Everyone wants to find information about topics they interested in or find out what’s going on around them. Everybody wants to get laid.

If you are a Web 2.0 company in today’s Web you really need to ask yourselves, “Are we solving a problem that everybody has or are we building a product for Robert Scoble?”

That also reminds me of a famed Josh Kopelman quote:

Too many companies are targeting an audience (Techcrunch circa May 2006) of 53,651.

Startup Community: The Chicken or the Egg?

(This is completely unrelated to Kara Swisher’s Chicken or Egg post today.)

A few days ago, I wrote a post that generated a bit of very insightful, relevant discussion to this ongoing push towards innovation, community, and entrpreneurship within IST and the greater Penn State area.

I’d like to talk about what has been accomplished.

1. Several Penn State companies have launched within the past few years and are on their way to being successful.

2. In the last year, the formal entrepreneurial community has had a big boost via Lion Launch Pad, Blue Lion Networks, Invention 2 Venture, Ideablob, Ideapitch, and a few news-worthy events for Penn State co-founded teams.

3. In the past few months, the informal entrepreneurial community has had a big boost via blogs like IST Building, Matt Maisel, PSU startups, and get-togethers, like the one we had at the Indian Pavilion. With ideas like one Varun has been tossing around about informal TED gatherings to watch and discuss the videos, I’m sure this will only grow in the next months.

4. Next year will kick off with not one, but two, major startup events for the community.

5. A major VC firm is opening up an office in State College.

(Just kidding on no. 5)

No doubt about it, for a ship this big, no matter how hard you tug on the sails, it takes a long time to get it moving in a different direction, but I believe the steps are being made.

It’s important, however, that we not point to the small successes as proof Penn State is headed in the right direction. I often find, the more you lean on past successes, the more complacent you get, thinking that you’ve done enough already, when that is rarely and hardly the case.

That said, one interesting discussion point is the Chicken vs. Egg debate.

Does the chicken — (this case a Venture Capital firm/ major business plan competiton, and in general, an entrepreneurial platform that can support and help create sustainable businesses)– come first, or is it the egg? (Egg being a successful company that launches).

There was an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal, of which I’d like to share snippets before I provide my own thoughts.

The title, interestingly enough, is “Facebook Ignites Entrepreneurial Spirit at Harvard” and here are some excerpts:

Egg:

Mr. Adler is just one of the Harvard students who have caught start-up fever since Facebook, founded when Mr. Zuckerberg was at Harvard in 2004, exploded in popularity. Other recent Harvard-born start-ups include Internet companies Kirkland North Inc., Drop.io Inc. and Labmeeting Inc. And Facebook has become a model for these start-ups on many fronts, from the look of company Web sites to their corporate strategies.

“I would not hesitate for a second to say Facebook’s a motivator,” says Paul Bottino, director of Harvard’s Technology & Entrepreneurship Center. “Facebook creates would-be Facebooks.” He says a start-up contest this year attracted 55 entries, up from 10 to 18 for past contests.

It takes time …

And the idea of a college start-up culture isn’t new to Silicon Valley. Stanford University leased land to Hewlett-Packard Co., started by Stanford alums, as far back as the 1950s. Today, Stanford President John Hennessy is a board member at Cisco Systems Inc. and Google Inc., two companies that began as projects at Stanford. Yahoo also began as a Stanford project.

Harvard, though, has long had a relatively sleepy start-up culture and has shunned a cozy relationship between academics and industry. “Harvard is very noticeably behind,” says Paul Graham, a partner at Y Combinator, a Cambridge, Mass., and Mountain View, Calif., company that invests in start-ups, including Scribd and Kirkland North.

Chicken:

Now, Harvard is taking steps to get ahead. In 2000, the university loosened a rule prohibiting students from running companies from dorm rooms, but it still required that start-ups notify the university of their existence and “gain approval.” Last year, it discarded the notification-and-approval rule, although some restrictions still exist.

In the past eight years, Harvard has introduced more classes, clubs and contests for entrepreneurs. Mr. Bottino says those decisions weren’t directly related to Facebook, but he acknowledges that Facebook’s success has given Harvard students a more-entrepreneurial bent.

I personally believe the process runs in parallel; that is, it’s not a case of the Chicken or the egg, but rather a bit of both.

The push to entrepreneurship happens, from within the student community, graduate community, faculty community, and general region community meanwhile the entrepreneurs themselves, like Boxtr founder and PSU student Rory Spangler, continue to build successful companies.

Without a doubt, a college-focused world-wide product like Facebook would increase interest at Penn State, but I argue 10 successful smaller-scale companies would have the same impact, if not the same use.

All that said, and I must say I am not particularly concerned for selfish reasons whether or not PSU engenders a successful enterpreneurship jumping pad — I plan on turning the company I recently co-founded into a successful, sustainable business, whether or not a single Penn State company ever forms.

That being said, I believe firmly in an equal playing field (although I realize the world is not a fair place); I believe every person, and most definitely every Penn State student, should have the opportunity to pursue their dreams, and more importantly be encouraged to reach those dreams and have a platform to do so.

For those particular ones with the entrepreneurship bent, let’s hope we can all keep building a community that will see that platform be built.

Nurture vs. Nature: Is Entrepreneurship born or developed?

Shall I start this post with a quote?

“The common denominator of success — the secret of success of every man who has ever been successful — lies in the fact that he formed the habit of doing things that failures don’t like to do.” Albert E.N. Gray, exceprt from a major address at the 1940 NALU (National Association of Life Underwriters) annual convention in Philadelphia.

There’s been some debate throughout history, with whether a certain trait or characteristic is innate, or whether its developed. A scientist may call it a discourse on Nature vs. Nature.

With the advent of entrepreneurship — the term at least, the practice of it has been around since the origins of humanity of course — that discourse has extended to it.

Is an entrepreneur born or is he or she developed?

A friend sent me an email today saying “I am becoming convinced that entrepreneurs are born and cannot be made. Not good if you teach entrepreneurship.”

A very interesting argument to be sure, based on this person’s experiences with start-ups, but I’m not sure I wholly agree.

I think, it’s a combined force of nature and nature.

Some have it in them sure, some entrepreneurial characteristics. I’d say a bit of a rebellious nature is probably necessary. Also some confidence (this helps to whither the tough times), resilience, and a general vision and the will to gut it out.

But is the “habit of doing things that failures don’t like to do” innate, or can it be developed?

If only I had an audience to pitch this to, we could have some valuable discourse, unfortunately I’m not a beggar and I won’t be riding any wishes :).

A habit, of course, can be formed, and I believe the same is true with entrepreneurship. It is more a habit and a way of thinking than it is an actual characteristic that one is born with.

Some are most likely born with a greater propensity to develop this habit (just the way some are born with a high propensity to be alcoholics), but I wouldn’t bet that entrepreneurs cannot be developed.

At the heart of this question is whether or not a man can change his destiny. If he can’t, then he is destined to be and to do the path laid out before him. (i.e. he can’t be an entrepreneur)

And if we can change our destiny … ?

Startup advice from George Bernard Shaw

George Bernard Shaw was certainly an interesting fellow, but who would have thought the “ardent socialist” would have such good advice for entrepreneurs.

A bit of background, courtesy of Wikipedia:

George Bernard Shaw (26 July 1856 – 2 November 1950) was an Irish playwright. Born in Dublin, he moved to London at the age of twenty and lived in England for the remainder of his life.

Although Shaw’s first profitable writing was music and literary criticism, his talent was for drama, and during his career he authored more than sixty plays. Nearly all of his writings deal sternly with prevailing social problems, but are leavened by a vein of comedy to make their stark themes more palatable. Shaw examined education, marriage, religion, government, health care, and class privilege and found them all defective, but his ire was most aroused by the exploitation of the working class; his writings seldom fail to censure that abuse. An ardent socialist, Shaw wrote many brochures and speeches for the Fabian Society. He became an accomplished orator in the furtherance of its causes, which included gaining equal political rights for men and women, alleviating abuses of the working class, rescinding private ownership of productive land, and promoting healthful lifestyles.

“Imagination is the beginning of creation. You imagine what you desire, you will what you imagine and at last you create what you will.” (”Make something people want”)

“An American has no sense of privacy. He does not know what it means.There is no such thing in the country.” (This certainly applies to the consumer web, e.g. Google, Facebook, Twitter, et. al)

“Few people think more than two or three times a year; I have made an international reputation for myself by thinking once or twice a week.” (Release early, release often)

“Gambling promises the poor what property performs for the rich–something for nothing.” (It takes more than pure luck to create wealth)

“If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach a conclusion.” (Don’t worry about the economy and how that affects your ability to raise money)

Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it. (This certainly applies to people’s entrepreneurial convictions)

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man. (Product/Market fit — some products create new markets, while others are a solution looking for a problem)

There are two tragedies in life. One is not to get your heart’s desire. The other is to get it. (Success, in and of itself, won’t make you a different person than you were without it)

“People are always blaming their circumstances for what they are. I don’t believe in circumstances. The people who get on in this world are the people who get up and look for the circumstances they want, and, if they can’t find them, make them.” (Take the opportunity because ain’t nobody gonna drop it in your lap)

“The golden rule is that there are no golden rules.” (Nobody has all the answers)

“We have no more right to consume happiness without producing it than to consume wealth without producing it.” (Make meaning)

You see things; and you say, ‘Why?’ But I dream things that never were; and I say, “Why not?” (The Ultimate Startup mantra — there ain’t no statues erected for a skeptic)