Category: People/Team/HR

Posted on

If 198 Pieces of Unsolicited, (Possibly) Ungoogleable Advice for Founders Were Not Enough

windmill

This is my third iteration of the 99 series for founders. You can find the first two here and here. The premise for this series was simple. The best, most insightful, unsuspecting lessons are hidden in the deepest, darkest corners of the internet. Hell, many more are hidden in rooms behind closed doors. The goal of this 99 series is to unveil those. Advice you’ve likely never thought about, and most likely have never heard of.

While you don’t need to read all the below at once, it’s helpful to keep the below at your fingertips for when you do need them. As always, unless the advice is not cited, all advice has been backlinked to its source, in case you want the longer, sometimes more nuanced version.

To make it easier for you, I’ve also pooled the advice in categories, depending on your needs:

  1. Fundraising (22)
  2. Governance (5)
  3. Hiring/Team/Culture (44)
  4. Product/Customers (23)
  5. Competition (1)
  6. Legal (2)
  7. Expenses (1)
  8. Secondaries (1)

P.S. Have I started the next one in the 99 series for founders? Yes, I have. Stay tuned!

Fundraising

1/ “Once you take venture capital, the venture capitalist’s business model is your business model. You’ve got to get liquid at a number that makes sense for them. High valuations are good because you take less dilution. Et Cetera. But the reality is that when you have a high valuation, that starts to eliminate your options. ” — Chris Douvos

2/ The employee option pool is easier to negotiate than asking an investor to take less ownership. The pool at the time of term sheet comes out of founder/team’s equity. If the pool becomes completely allocated post-investment, you need to go back to the board and ask for a larger pool, and everyone (you and VCs) gets diluted then.

3/ Beware of the “senior pari-passu,” which means that that investor gets paid paid back before everyone else on the preference stack AND they get equal footing with all the other investors. The thing to watch out for isn’t necessarily for the mechanics of the term itself, but the fact that if you let one investor have that in this round, every subsequent round, investors then will ask for that as well.

4/ Repeat founders often ask for co-sale right immunity (usually 15%) when putting together term sheets. Co-sale rights are usually provisions investors add in to prevent you, the founder, from liquidating before a liquidity event. The rights dictate the when you want to sell your equity, the investor has first dibs to buy your equity AND if not, they can also sell their equity alongside you. Because there are additional provisions, most buyers may not want to put in all the work to diligence just to have an existing investor buy your equity. And also, if your existing investors are also selling, it sends a negative signal to potential buyers.

5/ If any corporates own more than 19.5% of a company, they have to write you off as a subsidiary of the corporate and report your losses as their losses. So they’re less valuation sensitive and care less for ownership.

6/ You’re likely not the only one in market with your solution. If a competitor raises a massive round, that’s market validation. And not a reason to change your pitch. You should only change your pitch if your customers are opting for your competitor, but not if VCs are talking about your competitor. If VCs ask about your well-funded competitor, say “My customers don’t bring this up with me. But rather they bring up incumbents and this is why we’re tackling this space in full force.”

7/ “Once you have $500k+ raised, spend 2/3 of your time on funds, 1/3 on small checks.” — Ash Rust

8/ Beware of SAFE overhangs. You probably don’t want to raise more than 25% on SAFEs in comparison to the next priced round. — Martin Tobias

9/ Don’t say “The market is so large, there are room for many winners.” To a VC, that’s code for “This founder is getting their ass handed to them by competition.” — Harry Stebbings

10/ If a large number of your employee base do not have the experience of being in a startup, “make a choice about how/when/if to be transparent about the things that are happening (good and bad) and the level of startup experience within the group will be a critical factor in whether the decision to be transparent turns out to be a good one.” — Javier Soltero

11/ To fundraise, even if your last X number of months sucked, you need to show just three months of great growth prior to the fundraise. — Jason Lemkin

12/ Rough benchmarks for enterprise revenue growth for things to be interesting to VCs (— Jason Lemkin):

  • Before $1M ARR, growing 10%-15% a month
  • Around $1M ARR, growing 8%-10% a month or so
  • Around $10M ARR, ideally doubling

13/ “An investor is an employee you can’t fire.” — Vinod Khosla

14/ “Things that break the rules have a bigger threshold to overcome to grab the reader’s attention, but once they do, they tend to have a stronger, and more dedicated following. Blandness tends to get fewer dedicated followers.” — Brandon Sanderson on creative writing, but applies just as well to pitches

15/ “Great worldbuilding with bad characters and a bad plot is an encyclopedia. Great characters and a great plot with bad worldbuilding is still often an excellent book. […] The fact that time turners break the entire universe of Harry Potter wide open does not prevent that from being the strongest book in the entire series.” — Brandon Sanderson on story plots, but also applies to markets and founding teams. Replace worldbuilding with market. Replace characters with team, and plot with product-market fit or founder-market fit.

16/ In all great stories, the protagonist (in the case of a pitch, you) is proactive, capable, and relatable. Your pitch needs to show all three, but at the minimum two out of the three. — Brandon Sanderson

17/ “Data rooms are where fund-raising processes go to die.” Prioritize in-person and live conversations. When your investor asks you for documents, ask for 15 minutes on their calendar so you can “best prepare” the information they want. If they aren’t willing to give you that 15 minutes, you’ve lost the deal already. — Mark Suster

18/ “Second conversation with a serious investor is usually around what are you trying to prove and who are you trying to prove that to.” — Fund III GP

19/ “Set your own agenda or someone else will.” — Melinda Gates

20/ “The ‘raise very little’ strategy only works if you’re in a market that most people believe (incorrectly) is tiny or unimportant. If other people are paying attention, you have to beat the next guy.” — Parker Conrad

21/ Beware of stacking SAFEs. And be sure to model out that you as the founder(s), won’t dip below 50% ownership before the Series A. This is a more common problem than most founders think. Inspired by Itamar Novick.

22/ “Before you send a single email or take your first call, you should have a fully-researched pipeline CRM with a minimum number of qualified target investors.” — Chris Neumann

  • Pre-Seed: 100 – 150 qualified target investors (a mix of angel investors and VCs)
  • Seed: 80 – 100 qualified target investors (mostly VCs)
  • Series A: 60 – 80 qualified target investors (all VCs)
  • Series B: 40 – 60 qualified target investors (all VCs)

Governance

23/ Find your independent board member before shit hits the fan (usually when your investor representation and you the founders disagree). Because by the time you find an independent board member when things go south, your investor will recommend someone who’ll most likely take their side. Board members recommended by VCs usually have long standing relationships with investors and are likely to sit or have sat on other boards with that investor previously. And because they have a longer standing relationship with that VC, they will likely side with the VC when there’s a disagreement.

24/ “Board members can’t make companies but they can destroy companies.” — Brian Chesky

25/ Ask your prospective investors how long they plan to be at their firm. The worst thing that can happen is you bring on a board member and they switch firms after a year, then you’re left with a someone you didn’t pick. It’s probably also a good idea to let the investor have their board seat, contingent on them working at that firm. — Joseph Floyd

26/ Consider incorporating the company in Nevada or Texas, as Delaware courts are becoming more judiciously activist. Especially consider this if you are either politically exposed or you want more leeway and protection as a founder. — Elad Gil

27/ “When you build with other people’s money, you don’t just owe them outcomes—you owe them truth. And selling your cash to a zombie isn’t a strategy. It’s a story you tell yourself to avoid facing the music.” — Lloyed Lobo

Hiring/Team/Culture

28/ “If you raise a lot of money, do a hiring freeze and don’t hire anybody for 90 days. Money’s not going to solve your problems. You are going to solve them.” — Ryan Petersen

29/ “If you had to hire everyone based only on you knowing how good they are at a certain video game, what video game would you pick?” — Patrick O’Shaughnessy. People’s choices can be quite revealing. You can likely ask the same question for any activity/sport/topic of choice.

30/ “I hate surprises. Can you tell me something that might go wrong now so that I’m not surprised when it happens?” — Simon Sinek. A great question on how to ask weaknesses without candidates giving you a non-answer.

31/ Beware of candidates who can’t stick to a job for at least 18 months. — Jason Lemkin.

32/ Beware of candidates who love what’s on their resume. You want to be sure you’d hire them even if they didn’t have those logos/titles. — Jason Lemkin.

33/ Beware of candidates who don’t have good reasons to leave their last job. Or any job for that matter. Also watch out for candidates that leave because of salary. — Jason Lemkin.

34/ As soon as you raise capital, you should move out of a coworking space. Because as long as you are there, you cannot shape your company’s culture when the culture of the rest of the coworking space is more prevalent. — A VC who was the first institutional check into 5+ unicorns

35/ “First time founders brag about how many employees they have. Second time founders brag about how few employees they have.” — Dan Siroker.

36/ 20 years of experience is more impressive than 20 one-year experiences for deeply technical problems.

37/ 20 one-year experiences is more impressive than 20 years of experience for cultural (consumer) problems.

38/ Great founders don’t delegate understanding. Senior execs aren’t hired until founders themselves prove out the playbook.

39/ Inspired by Marc Randolph. Set boundaries around your work. Ask yourself, do you want to be starting your 7th startup and their 7th wife/husband? If not, be uncompromising with boundaries around work and life. Usually, I see most founders not have that versus most tech employees, who set boundaries almost in the opposite direction.

40/ “My two rules of thumb for CEOs (and all leaders) are:

  • ‘if you feel like a broken record, you’re probably doing something right’ and 
  • ‘always craft your comms for the person who just started this week.'” — Molly Graham

41/ At Starbucks, no matter what seniority you are, every employee has lowercase titles. And it isn’t a typo.

42/ If you don’t know how to hire a 10/10 CTO looks like, find a world-class CTO then have them help you interview CTO candidates. It’s important to nail this right in the beginning no matter how long that takes. — Jason Lemkin

43/ “People duck as a natural reflex when something is hurled at them. Similarly, the excellence reflex is a natural reaction to fix something that isn’t right, or to improve something that could be better. The excellence reflex is rooted in instinct and upbringing, and then constantly honed through awareness, caring, and practice. The overarching concern to do the right thing well is something we can’t train for. Either it’s there or it isn’t. So we need to train how to hire for it.” — Danny Meyer

44/ Prioritize references over interviewing when hiring. “Executives have more experience bullshitting you than you have experience detecting their bullshit. So it’s like an asymmetric game where you’re a white belt fighting a black belt and they’re just going to punch you in the face repeatedly.” — Brian Chesky

45/ At the end of a candidate interview process, try to convince them out of joining the company. If you only paint them the rosy picture of joining, even if they join, they’ll joined disillusioned and with expectations that this job will be a country club, which it shouldn’t be.

46/ One of the best job ads out there by Ernest Shackleton, a 19th/20th century Antarctic explorer: “Men wanted for hazardous journey, small wages, bitter cold, long months of complete darkness, constant danger, safe return doubtful, honor and recognition in case of success.”

47/ “The health of an organization is the relationship between engineering and marketing. Or in enterprise, the relationship between engineering and sales.” — Brian Chesky

48/ “Great leadership is presence, not absence.” — Brian Chesky

49/ “I want the guy who understands his limitations instead of the guy who doesn’t. On the other hand, I’ve learned something terribly important in life. I learned that from Howard Owens. And you know what he used to say? Never underestimate the man who overestimates himself.” — Charlie Munger

50/ “If you pay great people internally, you can push back on the external fees. If you don’t pay great people internally, then you’re a price taker.” — Ashby Monk

51/ “Expect 60% of your VPs to work out — and that’s if you do it right.” — Dev Ittycheria

52/ Be generous with startup equity for your first 10 employees, “as much as leaving 30% of the pool to non-founders.” Be willing to give your early engineers 3-5% of equity, as opposed to only 50-100 basis points. — Vinod Khosla

53/ “A company becomes the people it hires. […] Experience has shown me that successful startups seldom follow their original plans. The early team not only determines how the usual risks are handled but also evolves the plans to better utilize their opportunities and to address and redefine their risks continuously.” — Vinod Khosla

54/ “I often tell pensions you should pay people at the 49th percentile. So, just a bit less than average. So that the people going and working there also share the mission. They love the mission ‘cause that actually is, in my experience, the magic of the culture in these organizations that you don’t want to lose.” — Ashby Monk

55/ “Innovation everywhere, but especially in the land of pensions, endowments, and foundations, is a function of courage and crisis.” — Ashby Monk

56/ “You stay obstinate about your vision; you stay really flexible about your tactics. […] Nobody ever got to Mount Everest by charting a straight path to the peak.” — Vinod Khosla

57/ Questions to ask a candidate by Graham Duncan:

  • What criteria would you use to hire someone to do this job if you were in my seat?
  • How would your spouse or sibling describe you with ten adjectives?
  • I think we’re aligned in wanting this to be a good fit, you don’t want us to counsel you out in six months and neither do we. Let’s take the perspective of ourselves in six months and it didn’t work.  What’s your best guess of what was going on that made it not work?
  • What are the names of your last five managers, and how would they each rate your overall performance on a 1-100?
  • What are you most torn about right now in your professional life?
  • How did you prepare for this interview?
  • How do you feel this interview is going?

58/ Empower your entire team to be owners in the success of your company. “Take ownership and don’t give your project a chance to fail. Dumping your bottleneck on someone and then just walking away until it’s done is lazy and it gives room for error and I want you to have a mindset that God himself couldn’t stop you from making this video on time. Check. In. Daily. Leave. No. Room. For. Error.” — Jimmy Donaldson “Mr. Beast”

59/ “CEOs are pinch hitters. We should be working on the things that nobody else can or nobody else is.” — Jensen Huang

60/ It’s only after you’ve seen excellence first hand do you no longer need to outsource the recognition of excellence to others (brands, titles, other references).

61/ “When you’re speaking with backchannel references, you know that some of these are also mentors to the candidate, and accordingly will have influence. They’ll likely call the candidate right after your call anyway to tell them how you’re thinking about them. So ask the pointed questions you need to, but then take 10 mins at the end to also tell this person what you’re building, why it could be a special company, the momentum you have in the market and why you’re particularly excited about the candidate for this role. Get the reference excited about this opportunity for the candidate.” — Nakul Mandan

62/ “Every meeting with a great candidate is a buy-and-sell meeting, and you want to build their excitement about you to its peak right before you make the offer. Making the offer too early—before they’re fully sold—can be just as bad as losing momentum by moving too slow on someone you know you want.” — Samantha Price

63/ On co-founders being in the same boat with no Plan B… “We actually wrote this in the shareholder’s agreement and it lived there all the way until the IPO. If one of us took another job or a side hustle or took any income from any other source, we should have to give up our shares. We wanted to be fully committed. If we’re going to fail, we’re not going to fail for lack of effort.” — Olivier Bernhard

64/ “You have made a mis-hire if your Customer Success leader doesn’t understand the pains, needs, and desires of your customers as well as you do within 90 days.” — John Gleeson

65/ Ask a candidate to explain a technical challenge and to talk through how they’d approach it. Then ask them to think through how they’d do it again – but in half the time.” — Keller Rinaudo Cliffton / Sarah Guo

66/ “Your org chart either accelerates or impedes your velocity. Conway’s Law inevitably shapes output—teams structured for pace will produce systems designed for pace.” — Sarah Guo

67/ “Just look at ARR per Employee. It’s the canary in the unicorn coal mine.” — Lloyed Lobo

68/ While your co-founders should excel in areas you lack and love growing further on that wavelength, they must also at some point in their career want to grow in the area you excel in. Otherwise, they’ll never truly appreciate the work you do. And unspoken expectations lead to quiet resentments.

69/ “I find most meetings are best scheduled for 15-20 minutes, or 2 hours.  The default of 1 hour is usually wrong, and leads to a lot of wasted time.” — Sam Altman

70/ “Strategy is choosing what not to do.” — Peter Rahal

71/ When hiring talent, ask yourself: Are this candidate’s best days ahead of her or behind her?

Product/Customers

72/ The best way to slow a project down is to add more people to it.

73/ “Never delegate understanding.” — Charles and Ray Eames

74/ There’s this great line in a book I was recently gifted by a founder. “There is only one boss — the customer. And he can fire everybody in the company, from the chairman on down, simply by spending his money somewhere else.”

75/ A community or 1000 true fans built without big brands and logos is far more impressive than a community built by leveraging someone else’s brands.

76/ If your value prop is unique, you should be a price setter not a price taker, meaning your gross margins should be really good.
A compelling value prop is a comment on high operating margins. You shouldn’t need to spend a lot on sales and marketing. So the metrics to highlight would be good new ARR/S&M, LTV:CAC ratios, payback periods, or percent of organic to paid growth. — Pat Grady

77/ “If we don’t create the thing that kills Facebook, someone else will.” — Mark Zuckerberg, via a red book titled Facebook Was Not Originally Created to Be a Company, given to every employee pre-IPO

78/ The best sales people are often those who communicate the most with the engineers and product team. They tend to understand the product the best. Rule of thumb should be 80% inside, 20% outside. — Former founder with a 9-figure exit

79/ “Concentration of force is the first principal strategy. Spreading yourself too thin means not concentrating resources on the sales you could win because you are spreading time on lower quality prospects. Doing 90% of what it takes to win doesn’t result in 90% of the revenue, it results in zero. You must pick the battles you can win and win the battles you pick.” — Rick Page

80/ “One of our clients said this about a large defense contractor with multiple subsidiaries: ‘having business at one business unit not only doesn’t help me at the next one, it actually hurt me. They hate each other so much that if one business unit is for me, the other ones are against me. But they are all united in one value: they hate corporate. So the potential for working my way to the corporate offices and coming down as their worldwide standard is impossible in an account like this.” — Rick Page

81/ “Pain doesn’t come from the business problem, it comes from the political embarrassment of the business problem. If the pain or lost opportunity is not visible, then it’s not embarrassing and it will not drive business buying activity to a close.” — Rick Page

82/ “Mr. Prospect, we’ve announced a 6% price increase. We’d hate to see you buy the same proposal later at a higher price, so we really need to get this business in by the end of the quarter to secure this price. — Not only is this technique predictable, but after months of building value for your solution, you have now commoditized yourself. You have turned it from value to price on order to close business at the end of the quarter. Once you have offered a discount, you have announced what kind of vendor you are and the only question now is the price. Let the games begin.” — Rick Page

83/ “You must refocus off the imagined political benefit of a lower price, and on the longer term benefits of the overall project. ‘Mr. Prospect, how are you measured and what you will be remembered for three years from now won’t be the price, it will be the success of the project. If this goes well, the cost will be a detail. If the project goes poorly, no one will say ‘well at least we got a bargain.”” — Rick Page

84/ “Try not to take no from a person who can’t say yes.” — Rick Page

85/ Stacking the bricks, a Steve Jobs’ concept. If you have a pile of bricks and lay them on the ground, then no one will notice the ground. If you stack them up vertically, you create a tower; and everyone will notice the tower. Consider this when you have product features, launches and fixes.

86/ As of Q4 2024, it takes about 70 days to close a $100K contract for enterprise customers. Use that as your benchmark. If you’re faster, brag about it. If you’re slower than that, figure out how to close faster. — Gong State of Revenue Growth 2025 report

87/ Beware of “annual curiosity revenue.” “AI companies with quick early ARR growth can lead to false positives as many are seeing massive churn rates.” — Samir Kaji

88/ Your job is to get to innovation retention before your incumbents get to innovation.

89/ If you didn’t help create the proposal with your customer, you’ve already lost.

90/ People don’t change when they’ve made a mistake. People change when there’s a public embarrassment of them making a mistake.

91/ Know your customers intimately. Go visit your customers as often as you can. In fact, get as many passes / office keys to their offices as possible, and spend time with them.

92/ “Every other week, we have a customer join for the first 30 minutes of our management team meeting: they share their candid feedback, and ~40 leaders from across Stripe listen. Even though we already have a lot of customer feedback mechanisms, it somehow always spurs new thoughts and investigations.” — Patrick Collison

93/ “I see a lot of b2b startups moving to multiyear pricing from monthly or annual. I think this is usually a bad idea. It hides customer delight issues. It lengthens sales cycles. Overall, it just reduces the signal startups need.” — Brian Halligan

94/ Customers will still highly rate your customer service even if they didn’t get what they wanted if you show you care. That you care for their plight, and you really try to help them get what they want. — Simon Sinek

Competition

95/ “When you get outreach from multiple VC associates out of nowhere, your competitor is out raising and they’re just doing their homework.” — Siqi Chen

Legal

96/ “If you’re selling the business, tell as few people as possible and do everything you can to make sure past employees or former business associates do not find out.” Beware of moths who can start lawsuits. — Sammy Abdullah

97/ When you’re working with boutique investment banks, to protect yourself in case the banker sues when you choose to go with a different buyer… “Make sure the banker contract says they only get paid on intros they make directly and have a 6 month tail. Terminate any banker agreement as soon as they’re no longer working and the process is over; do not let these agreements linger.” — Sammy Abdullah

Expenses

98/ “Never buy a SaaS product owned by private equity unless you have to. Main exception: if founder is still CEO. Why: Impossible to cancel, Price increases out of the blue, Lose any real customer success, Innovation slows down or even ends, Support usually terrible” — Jason Lemkin

Secondaries

99/ If you’re planning to sell founder secondaries, beware of signaling risk. Sometimes, you do have a major life event that needs capital (i.e. buying a home, having a baby, hospital bills, etc.). If you are to sell, don’t sell until the Series B. “And even then I’d suggest titrating up… 2% at A, 5% at B, 10% at >=C.” — Hari Raghavan

Photo by Jonny Gios on Unsplash

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.

Posted on

Stress and Ambition

stress, founder stress

“The thing about working with self-motivated people and driven people, on their worst day, they are pushing themselves very hard and your job is to reduce the stress in that conversation.”

It’s something Nakul Mandan from Audacious said in a Superclusters episode earlier in Season 4. And a line that’s been gnawing at me for the past few weeks. Particularly, “your job is to reduce the stress in that conversation.” So it got me thinking… Are the entrepreneurs I back stressed (enough)?

I know what you’re thinking. But before you come at me with pitchforks and torches, here me out. If you get to the end of this essay and still feel as strongly, feel free to take a swing at me.

First off, let me define some terms in the above question. An “entrepreneur” is someone who starts something that doesn’t exist in the world already. To me, that is a startup founder, a local restaurant, an emerging fund manager, and so on. I use this term pretty liberally. “Enough” is in moderation. A balance of feeling the pressure and urgency, but not enough to make one go insane. By definition, entrepreneurs — people who dare challenge the world and create something that hasn’t existed before — are ambitious. And ambitious, action-oriented doers are, to Nakul’s point, often hard on themselves. So everything in moderation. As a friend once told me, if you’re doing anything ambitious, a third of your days will be epic. A third will be okay. And a third will absolutely suck. As long as your days feel like that proportionally, you’re on the right track.

So… are the entrepreneurs I back stressed (enough)?

Let’s start with no. Are they the underdog still, pre-product-market fit, stagnating, losing market share, and/or in a crisis?

If not, carry on. It’s okay to not be stressed all the time. In fact, it’s probably not helpful to be stressed all the time.

If so — that they are the underdogs, stagnating or in a crisis — AND they’re not feeling stressed, I do wonder from time to time. And I’d be lying if some part of me didn’t feel buyer’s remorse. Because that means one of three things:

  1. They’ve lost their ability to care. About the product. The market. The team. Or simply, their own ambition. That’s the worst.
  2. Conversely, they don’t feel comfortable enough to be vulnerable with me. And that, in part, not to sugarcoat things, is because of me.
  3. They never cared enough or were ambitious enough in the first place. And that’s something I have to take back to the drawing board so that I learn the next time around.

Nevertheless, regardless of which of the three, it warrants a conversation. A difficult one. One where I try to understand their current motivations, what’s changed. If their motivations still hold true, then I, in Danny Meyer’s words, add “constant, gentle pressure.” For those curious, Chapter 9 of his book. Nevertheless, my job is to give them the activation energy to hopefully get them back on track.

If things change, great. I eventually go back to the first question. Are the entrepreneurs stressed? If not, then I let them on a few things:

  1. I’ll spend less time time with them to prioritize the rest of my portfolio.
  2. If they have any of the money left, they can keep the money. FYI, if it wasn’t my personal angel money, but someone else’s capital (of which I’m a fiduciary), depending on how much they have left, it may lead to a different conclusion. But in general, I view it as a write-off.
  3. Wish them the best of luck in their next chapter.
  4. If they feel the fire burning again (for good reason), they should let me know. And I’m happy to have another conversation.

Now… what happens if the entrepreneurs are stressed. Then I try to figure out if it’s anxiety or stress. Let me define.

Anxiety is caused by things you cannot control. For instance, the market. Other people you cannot control. Or black swan events. Stress, on the other hand, is caused by things you can control. Your own mistakes. Mistakes made by people you hired. Volume of work that needs to be done. Procrastination. Mistakes that can be actively mitigated. For instance, missing the deadline for a quarterly report. Missing payroll due to insufficient funds. Layoffs. Bad performance. Media, publicity, and perception. Something Danny Meyer calls, “writing a great last chapter.” As Danny Meyer puts it, “the worst mistake is not to figure out some way to end up in a better place after having made a mistake.”

If it’s anxiety, my role is to calm the founders. Be the mental support they need. Help them see the bigger picture. Build contingency plans.

If it’s stress, my role is to help them build an action plan. Help get key decision-makers and doers in the same room. Get the founders in front of advisors who can help them think through key considerations and check their blind side (assuming it’s not me. Most of the time it isn’t.). Of course, you need to timebox “thinking” time. There’s a great saying. “There are no right choices; only choices we make right.”

And finally, help the entrepreneurs execute the plan. Sometimes, that requires getting my hands dirty. And that’s what I’m here for. To increase the metabolism of the organization. Or at the very minimum, leadership. Stress is often caused by indigestion of tasks that need to be done.

Alas, the job of an investor, given we’re not in the driver’s seat, that we don’t always have complete information, is to reduce the stress of the founder when we have that conversation. More often than not, ambitious founders are hard enough on themselves.

Photo by Francisco Moreno on Unsplash

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.

Posted on

Developing Taste as an LP

taste, donut, bite

Brian Chesky did a fireside chat recently where he talks about how he hired for roles at Airbnb, especially in the early days. To which, I highly recommend you checking the above link. Lots of nonobvious lessons worth noting. One thing especially stood out. Probably due to the recency bias of having a few friends text me who were thinking about investing in their first fund.

“Executives have more experience bullshitting you than you have experience detecting their bullshit. So it’s like an asymmetric game where you’re a white belt fighting a black belt and they’re just going to punch you in the face repeatedly.”

In a similar way, a lot of new LPs in venture have also yet to develop their taste for quality in the venture asset class. If you’ve never hired an executive, you have no idea what a great executive looks like. And if you’ve never invested in a fund, or seen a few, you have no idea what a great fund looks like. Most GPs, given the volume of LPs they pitch to, have more experience bullshitting you as an LP than you have experience detecting their bullshit.

And that’s okay. Everyone starts off this way. So the question then becomes how do you develop taste?

  1. Talk to as many as you can. Don’t overoptimize for quality. You have no idea what quality looks like, so don’t delude yourself that you do. Ask friends who they’ve talked to. Ask Twitter. And ask the GPs you talk to who are friends they respect who are also building a fund. Hell, try your luck at asking certain “influencers” in the space if they have recommendations. Realistically, if you raise your hand and say you’re an LP, GPs will flock to you. In 2024, deal flow, as measured by quantity, isn’t really hard for any LP out there.
  2. Prioritize references.

On the first point, as is the advice I give most first-time angel investors investing in startups, don’t invest in the first startup you see. Unless it’s for a reason outside of financial gain. To support a friend. To learn. For impact. To give back. All great reasons. But not if because your friend told you to.

Along the same thread, don’t invest in the first fund you see. Talk to at least 30-50 fund managers. Get a good understanding of what the average fund looks like. What is actually special about a GP versus what they say is special. Most of the time when someone claims that they are the special one, they usually aren’t. For instance, only [insert big name fund] invests with us. Or we are the only [insert industry or function] fund. Hell, if anyone gives you any sort of superlatives, they’re usually wrong. Only. Always. Best. Most. I’m sure there are more, but the rest are escaping me.

Secondly, prioritizes references over your initial judgment when interviewing and doing diligence. Dan Stolar from Colibri and I had a conversation recently about references, where the questions you ask are paramount. If you’re short on time, I’d recommend starting from the 25:50 mark.

In short, to existing LPs, ask:

  1. How did you get to conviction?
  2. Who else did you talk to that were comparable to this GP before you reached an investment decision?
  3. Is there anything you learned about the team after you made the investment?
  4. What kind of person do you think they should bring onboard either in the next fund or after they get to a close?
  5. Would it be possible to share your investment memo with me?
  6. What were some of the pushbacks or hesitations when this deal reached your investment committee?

To LPs more broadly:

  1. What are your primary motivations to be an LP in venture?
  2. How do you think about portfolio construction?
  3. Who are the GPs you’ve talked to that seem to stand above the rest? And why?

To co-investors/other GPs:

  1. How often do you share deals with this GP?
  2. How often do they share deals with you?
  3. Who are your top 3 emerging managers that you love seeing deals from and why?
  4. Is there an emerging manager you would hire to be a partner or GP at your firm if you could?
  5. How would you rate this GP on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being perfect?
    • What would get this GP to a 10?
  6. Did you or have you considered investing in their fund?
  7. What are some of this GP’s hobbies that I might not guess?
    • This shows you how well people know each other. You can also use this question for other reference archetypes.

To former colleagues and friends:

  1. If you were to hire someone under this GP, what traits or skillsets would you look to hire for?
  2. I hate surprises. Is there anything that could go wrong I should know now about this GP, so that I wouldn’t be surprised when it happens?
  3. Who is someone you would hire or work together again in a heartbeat?
    • Notice if they mention that GP. You don’t have to probe as to why they didn’t mention if they didn’t. But worth noticing. Also probably worth talking to that person they did mention to keep a strong talent network around you.

Obviously the above list isn’t all-inclusive. But nevertheless I imagine they’ll be good starting points. Also, I want to note that going deep is often more insightful than going wide.

Remember, almost everyone is incentivized to say good things about others. Or at least, there is little to no incentive to talk smack about anyone you know. So finding the best way to ask questions that unearth different perspectives and facets of a person is important.

Funnily enough and unintentionally, last week I wrote a similar post from the perspective of a GP, this one happened to be more for the LP.

Photo by Thomas Kelley on Unsplash

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.

Posted on

Anecdotal Telltale Signs of Exceptionalism

dune, sand, great

I’ve been lucky enough to meet a number of founders and fund managers over the years. Many of which I probably have no business of meeting and getting to know. And I count myself fortunate every day to have the opportunities to do so.

Nevertheless, and as an FYI, all of this is completely anecdotal. Maybe at some point I’ll find data to support this. Hell, maybe there’s already data on this. But as is the perk of this blog, I get to write about just things on my mind.

Per some recent conversations with friends, having already shared with them, thought I’d share the below. Some telltale signs I’ve noticed in founders and fund managers that are world-class before the rest of the world knows it:

  • Highly responsive. It’s insane to think about this given their busy lives. But the folks I’ve been lucky to invest in and (gosh darn it) passed on who’ve gone on to create hundreds if not thousands of jobs respond remarkably fast. Sometimes within minutes of me sending them a message/email. But on average before half the day is over. I will say I’m personally slipping here a bit as of late. But I guess, that just means I’m not world-class by my own definition. Many seem to be night owls, at least when they’re still hustling. I’m not personally sure if they’re working deep into the night, but at least, they’re responding to me at 2AM, and I’m trying to figure out what they’re doing then.
  • They exercise in the morning, or have a morning routine that they do every day without fail, even when on vacation. It could be writing, journaling, making that morning cup of espresso just right, or making breakfast for their kids EVERY morning. It’s ritualistic, so that they perform just as well on the first meeting of their day as they do their last.
  • Operationally disciplined. They’re really good at saying no. They set clear boundaries. Often times, boundaries that most people have not heard of. And many, even after hearing them, may find bizarre or strange. But in an odd way, they make a lot of sense if you give them the time of day. I was calling a friend recently on this, and he was sharing that he’s not the kind of friend that most people want. He doesn’t show up at birthday parties or celebrations. He also doesn’t post to socials regularly to congratulate friends on promotions or otherwise. But he aimed to be, and ends up being the first call friends make when shit hits the fan. And because of that practice, he can be laser focused on his priorities every day.
  • They’re really good at using analogies. In many ways, it’s the classic 7-year old test or the grandma test. They’re extremely high context individuals in a lot of different disciplines. And if I were to define it (not original, but I forget the attribution, might be Tim Urban), high context individuals are those that are well-versed on a given subject. Low context folks are those are out of the loop. For example, a PhD in neuroscience is high context on how different reward systems affect dopamine, but possibly low context on Marvel Cinematic Universe lore. And when someone is high context in not just one area but in a lot of areas — in other words, people might call them polymaths, or at the very least, well-read — it’s easy for them to pull analogies in ways that best help relay what they want to say to the other person’s ears. Like a crypto founder (probably one might be able to guess who) who once described to me one-way hash functions as putting fruits in a blender. Or Josh Wolfe who describes the battle of ethics in a company a battle between intentions and incentives. Or that society is a constant battle between deception and detection.
  • They ask really good questions. Questions you’ve likely never heard asked before. And many can get to proficiency on any subject quite quickly. Largely, probably because of how they think and how they eventually arrive at an answer.
  • Words are used intentionally and with specificity, and rarely, if ever, use amorphous terms and superlative adjectives. Like success, community, unique, compelling, unfair advantage, best, better, and so on. And if they do, they are quick to define what they personally mean when they use those words.
  • They have the memory of a steel trap. They can quote books, shows, movies, interviews, news articles, people and more as if they have a supercomputer as a brain.
  • They’re multi-disciplinary. Related to the above, in order to be able to spit analogies like rap lyrics and to exhibit strong memory, they consume an ungodly amount of information from all different corners of the world. Their friendships and relationships and experience and information diet are not one-dimensional. Their interests cannot be defined simply. They’re intellectually curious about many things. Many of which may not have a throughline to each other, at least at face value.
  • There is an interesting paradox of exceptionalism. You must see great to have a serious fighting chance to be great. Exceptional people are often mentored by other deeply exceptional people. And if not mentored, they were allowed to operate in close proximity to each other, where the “future exceptional” person has absorbed best practices and mindsets like a sponge. It’s why very early employees at transformative companies tend to outperform even after the original experience. It’s why mafias and alumni networks exist, but early vintages are disproportionately stronger than the latter ones. That said, with the myriad of quality free content out there in the world right now (99.9% of which is noise as you might imagine), the five people you spend the most time with may not have to be people you know personally yourself. Just that you spend more time with these minds than others who are less than exceptional. For the people who aren’t as lucky to be surrounded by exceptionalism from the get-go, having a distinct point of view and clarity on exceptionalism is key, and a deeply engrained understanding that you still have a long road ahead.
  • They’re transparent with their incentives. If they have an ask, whether it’s through a text or email or 10-minute call, they mention their ask first (with grace), and waste little time at the beginning of the conversation with pleasantries. Sometimes, they’ll schedule another call/meal just to catch up, without any ask. In many ways, there are only two kinds of “meetings” on their calendar. The 10-15 minute one and the 2-hour one. None else.
  • They attribute a great part of their success and progress to date to luck. They never let themselves forget that some of their greatest moments started with just being at the right time at the right place with the right people.
  • Related to the paradox of exceptionalism, they also recognize and attribute a big part of their thinking to such mentors. Exceptional people attribute their exceptionalism in large part to learning from exceptional people and being open to it.

Photo by Linhao Zhang on Unsplash

4/12/2025 Edit: Added in “memory”, “multi-disciplinary”, and “paradox on exceptionalism” as traits.

4/15/2025 Edit: Added “transparent with their incentives.”

4/25/2025 Edit: Added “attribution to luck” and “recognition and attribution to mentorship.”

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.

Posted on

DGQ 22: If you were hiring someone underneath this person, what skills would they have?

hire

I’ve had Harry’s episode with Peter Lacaillade under my saved episode list on Spotify for a long minute. And Benedikt Langer‘s semi-recent piece on Embracing Emergence finally got me over the activation energy to listen to it. (Sorry, Harry)

But I’m so glad I did. In it, Harry shared a question he likes asking “If we were hiring someone underneath me to support him, what skills would they have?” In many ways, it’s the same as another question Doug Leone shared on his podcast as well. What three adjectives would you use to describe your sibling?

It comes down to simple purpose of trying to ask about someone’s weakness without asking them “what’s your weakness?” Why does it matter? When you’re too forward with your question, say the weakness one, recipients always end up finding ways to explain their “weakness” as a byproduct of their strength, or not really sharing a true weakness. “I’m too honest.” “I work too hard.” And so on.

While the above set of questions may not work for everyone, and probably even less so now that Harry and Doug shared it in a public arena, I can’t help but appreciate the linguistic gymnastics to find the right combination of words that gets one the answer they want. Nevertheless, I’m sure there are many more on this planet who still have yet to be exposed to those questions.

Similarly, I find it to be a damn good question to ask when doing references on potential investments. The truth is every founder or GP one invests in will have weaknesses. And that’s okay. Everyone’s a human. But in reference calls, there are two hurdles that one most overcome in their diligence:

  1. Getting the reference to share an honest assessment of the person they know. This is especially hard when these are on-list references. In other words, references that the person being diligenced is providing themselves. Naturally, this list is full of people who are almost guaranteed to say positive things about said individual. Besides, there is absolutely no incentive to badmouth another person. Neither do most people aim to do so.
  2. How high on the priority list is this person’s weakness? Can I get conviction on this deal even if I were to accept this weakness? Does it matter as much in a Fund I? Fund II? Fund III? If they need to hire someone to fundraise for them, is that a question of ability or network? And how crucial is it not only to the firm’s survival, but also their outperformance? If they need to hire someone to manage their calendar, that may be lower on the priority list of risks for most LPs.

Nevertheless, I find Harry’s question a great one to ask former colleagues, occasionally portfolio or anti-portfolio founders.

Photo by Clem Onojeghuo on Unsplash

The DGQ series is a series dedicated to my process of question discovery and execution. When curiosity is the why, DGQ is the how. It’s an inside scoop of what goes on in my noggin’. My hope is that it offers some illumination to you, my readers, so you can tackle the world and build relationships with my best tools at your disposal. It also happens to stand for damn good questions, or dumb and garbled questions. I’ll let you decide which it falls under.

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.

Posted on

DGQ 21: What’s going to get you excited to be at this business in 5 years?

watch, time

This one was inspired by Harry Stebbings’ episode with Dan Siroker that I tuned into earlier this week. In it, Dan describes his most memorable VC meeting, which happened to be with Peter Fenton at Benchmark. Where Peter asks Dan, “Dan, what’s gonna get you excited to be at this business in five years?”

In sum, what are your future motivations going to look like? Nine out of ten times, it’s likely not going to be exactly the same as the one today. And given that it will look differently, can you still stay true to the North Star of this business as you do today? What’s gonna change? What’s gonna stay the same?

For the most part, the people and the problem space are likely to stay the same. The product may look quite different though. And it’s highly likely that in five years, you would have found product-market fit. So, that’s Act I. Is it the advent of the next chapter of what your company could look like that gets you excited? Hell it might be. You can then tackle a bigger problem. A larger market. An adjacent market. Or what Bangaly Kaba calls the adjacent users. For some founders, it’s the market they always wanted to tackle, but couldn’t when they realized their beachhead market must be something else.

While I can’t speak for everyone, here are some of the answers I’ve personally come to like over the years. From either founders or fund managers:

  • There is no other industry that offers the same velocity of learning that this one provides.
  • I want my company’s legacy to outlive my own. And I want to empower the next generation of builders with the resources and the power to solve the greatest needs of our generation.
  • I want to go home and tell my my wife/husband/kids that I lived my fullest life today. And this is what gives me endless joy.
  • Act I was solving a problem I faced. Act II is solving a problem others face in our space.
  • Getting on the phone with a customer and hearing how much our product changed their lives makes me really happy.
  • If I’m not regularly putting the firm’s reputation on the line, we’re not trying hard enough. And I live for that challenge.
  • I want to build a world where people don’t settle for “It is what it is.”
  • No one else is solving the problem I want to solve in the way that I believe it should be solved.
  • I want to continue to be a superhero, a role model, for my daughter/son.

In many ways, it’s quite similar to the question I ask first-time GPs or aspiring GPs about their motivation.

Things in venture exist on long time horizons. For founders, it’s at least 7-9 years before an exit. For fund managers, it’s 10-15 years per fund. And that’s just a single fund. Anything more is longer. So in order to compete against the very best, you need to have long time horizons. You must have the resolve to stay the course. As Kevin Kelly says, “The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing.”

Along the same vein, there’s also a Jeff Bezos quote I really like: “If everything you do needs to work on a three-year time horizon, then you’re competing against a lot of people. But if you’re willing to invest on a seven-year time horizon, you’re now competing against a fraction of those people… Just by lengthening the time horizon, you can engage in endeavors that you could never otherwise pursue.”

Photo by Luke Chesser on Unsplash

The DGQ series is a series dedicated to my process of question discovery and execution. When curiosity is the why, DGQ is the how. It’s an inside scoop of what goes on in my noggin’. My hope is that it offers some illumination to you, my readers, so you can tackle the world and build relationships with my best tools at your disposal. It also happens to stand for damn good questions, or dumb and garbled questions. I’ll let you decide which it falls under.

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.

Posted on

A Jerk’s Guide to Being Kind

dog, bully, fight

First off, my lizard brain that optimizes for immediate gratification thought “A Jerk’s Guide to Being Kind” would be a fun title. Clickbait-y (kinda). Great for SEO. So I used that as my prompt for this public journal entry. 🙂

So, if you didn’t come for a public apology and how I say no, I’ll see you in next week’s blogpost.

Secondly, I was reading Chris Neumann’s blogpost this week, aptly named “The Beginner VC’s Guide to Not Being a Jerk.” And realized, holy frick, I’m a jerk. In it, he describes five things that VCs do that come off as jerkish.

  1. Don’t Use Possessive Adjectives
  2. Don’t Multitask When a Founder is Pitching
  3. Don’t Badmouth Founders
  4. Don’t Mansplain
  5. Don’t Ghost Founders

And of the five above, I know I’m an offender of three of the above. Using possessive adjectives. Multitasking. Ghosting. Probably in that order from most frequent to least frequent. (Sorry, Chris. Sorry to founders I’ve done this to.) The first two I don’t do intentionally, nor do I do the either of them often.

Not sure if it makes too much of a difference, but rather than say “my company” or “our companies,” I do say “our portfolio companies.” Just with one extra word in there. Occasionally, will let it slip when I’m trying to shorten the sentence I’m saying.

I know I’m more prone to multi-task when I’m not the only investor in the room, and definitely when I’m not the primary investor. Again, don’t do it often, but it happens. And I never do so when I’m the only other person in that conversation. 99% of the time I do let the founders and GPs I talk to know that I’m just taking notes of our conversation. Personally don’t use the AI notetakers, but that’s a discussion for another day.

And ghosting. My goal is to get to inbox zero every day. And I really do my best not to ghost. But three things will always happen:

  1. Some email or text always ends up slipping through my inbox. Either it goes in spam, or during certain days, I’m bombarded with hundreds of emails and it slips through the cracks. And I do give every founder and GP who pitch me the right to re-surface past emails if it does slip through.
  2. If the email or message seems like it came out of an automation or mail merge AND I’m not interested, I do let it drop. I read EVERY email for sure. But if that email looks like the same one that you send to every investor, those have been going straight into the archives more and more. That also means that some emails just read like it’s an automated email even if it doesn’t, and it slips through.
  3. There’s a shortlist of people who have abused my old personal policy of responding to every email I get. And so for those people, I’m not sorry if I do ghost you. That said, it’s a pretty short list of people (probably 30-40 people as of now).

And lastly, well, I’ve made founders pitching me cry. Not something to brag about. But in sharing what I thought was honest feedback, I made tears flow.

So, in summary, I’m probably a jerk.

In my mind, a jerk is someone who prioritizes their own beliefs and priorities to the point that they either intentionally ignore or severely de-prioritize others’. Although I try my best not to ignore what other might want or need, but I do often prioritize my own. So to add on to all the above, I’m sharing some situations where my jerkiness comes out and what I say in those moments.

When having tough conversations

I actually learned this while listening to Lenny’s podcast with Matt Mochary. When I need to let someone go. When I need to call a friend out on their bad behavior. Or when my partner and I get into a fight. “Preface hard conversations with: This is going to be a difficult conversation. Are you ready?”

In addition, I also preface with how long I think the discussion will take. “May I have thirty minutes of your undivided attention?” And what the topic will be on. No point in blindsiding the other person.

It helps set the stage. And if the other person needs more time, they have the option to back out. Moreover, all tough conversations are 1:1 conversations. At least for me, even if it relates to many, I start notifying them all on a 1:1 basis.

When trying to leave a conversation at an event

This one also isn’t original. I learnt from a friend of mine who is far more eloquent than I am. Not all conversations at events are created equal. And sometimes, at an event, especially a networking event, my goal is to say hi to the event host or to talk to someone else on the floor. And in between, I may find myself in another serendipitous. Case in point, yesterday, I ended up meeting a founder who sold his last company for $500M exit to a large Fortune 50 company in the parking lot and who was figuring out his next thing. Serendipitous. And super fun, but I was going to be royally late for another event if I stayed chatting in the parking lot.

So, when I need to leave a conversation, instead of excusing myself to go to the bathroom or get more food, I’ve learned to say, “I’d love to ask you one last thing that I’d beat myself up tonight if I didn’t ask before I need to go say hi to XXX.”

One, it timeboxes the next few minutes of the conversation. Two, I’m still interested in the individual and I want them to get the last word before I head out.

For 1:1 conversations

I usually let people know at the very beginning of the conversation that I have a “hard stop” at a specific time. Which 90% of the time is true. Usually another meeting. Or I have just way too much work on my plate that I need to get to.

When turning down a meeting (for now)

I wish I had more time in a day to talk to awesome people. I also wish I had more energy in a day to talk to awesome people. But unfortunately, I only have 24 hours in a day. And well, I’m an introvert. As in, I enjoy writing this blogpost you’re reading right now since 5AM in the morning than telling someone in a live conversation what I will end up writing here.

As such, if I’m interested in meeting at some point, I usually say something to the tune of: “I would love to meet, but if I do so within the next XXX weeks / months, I would have failed in my promise to the people I care about. So if you’ll allow me to be a good friend / family member / supporter of my existing projects and investments, could we revisit this in YYY weeks / months?”

Other times to save everyone’s time, since I won’t find my interest levels gravitating towards said topic, I let people know it just isn’t of interest to me in the foreseeable future, and that their luck may be better elsewhere.

When turning down an investment opportunity

This is actually something that was inspired by one of Jason Calacanis’ podcast episodes. And while there are many things I may not agree with him on, I really like the phrasing he uses to turn down founders who push back against his investment decision. And I’ve added some lines that best fit the way I talk. Which I also included this in my 99 series for investors.

“I always have to accept the possibility that I’m making a mistake. The venture business keeps me humble, but these are the benchmarks that the team and I all believe in.”

In closing

Sometimes I think it’s inevitable to appear as a jerk to some people out there. While one can try to reduce the splash damage, the truth is sometimes what you have to say may not be what the other person wants to hear or see. But as long as you hold yourself to a high degree of integrity and do so in as kind of a way as you can, I think that’s all that really matters.

Often times, I do believe it’s more important to be kind than nice. I hope the above helps.

Photo by David Taffet on Unsplash

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.

Posted on

The Job Description of a Great Founder

night, sky, search

As people were coming back from the holidays, I had the chance to catch up with two friends earlier this week on two different occasions. One who built a company hundreds strong. The other is someone who’s seen the rise and fall of civilization again and again.

The former told me, “The greatest litmus test of a leader is their ability to train another leader.”

The latter told me something they had learned from a successful founder. “I lift as I climb.”

Both equally as profound. But to take it one at a time…

To train another

I’ve mentioned on this blog before that A-players hire A-players. And that B-players hire C-players. C’s hire D-players. And so on. A-players can tolerate working with B’s, but not C’s and D’s. So at the end of the day, the A’s leave, and all you’re left with are B’s and below.

While that statement makes sense in broad strokes, the truth is from an investor’s perspective — hell, just an outsider’s perspective — no one knows if you’re an A-player or not at first glance. Or at least it’s really hard to tell. Maybe there are people who are smarter than me out there who can tell at a glance. At the end of the day, seeing others execute is a great way to tell, but that takes more than one meeting usually.

And sometimes the easiest way to see is in doing reference checks. Seeing who else is on the team that they hired and trained. Seeing who they hired in previous roles. And if those other folks they’ve trained have gone to do amazing things, that’s usually a good sign that the person in question knows what an A-player looks like. And if it’s consistent enough, knows how to mint stellar leaders.

I lift as I climb

One of the greatest red flags I often see are founders hiring experienced (often expensive and brand-name) executives, sales reps, and product managers super-early in the startup lifecycle. Especially before product market fit. And often the biggest expectation for these early hires is to do:

  1. What they themselves couldn’t do
  2. And/or what they themselves don’t want to do

Both happen to be cardinal sins at the early stage. Why does the above matter?

Because if you’ve never done the job yourself, specifically building/managing the product and getting to your first customers:

  1. You don’t know how to set realistic targets and benchmarks for that role
  2. Given how crucial early customer feedback is to the product and the company, you’ll miss out on key customer insights if you’re not in the trenches yourself.

The goal of the afore-mentioned early hires is to refine your playbook, not build the playbook from scratch. And if that doesn’t appeal to you as the founder, then you might not be ready to be one.

And this is the exact reason I love the line “I lift as I climb.” For every time you figure something out, an inflection point for the company, a key customer discovery/insight, a sales script that closes twice as well as the last one, your rising tide raises all boats. But you cannot lift if you don’t climb first.

In closing

For those of you tuning in from the video and audio universes, you know I’ve been thinking a lot about succession planning as of late. Largely motivated by my conversations with Ben from Next Legacy.

And Courtney from Recast.

So naturally, when I was catching up with both of my friends, their words found refuge in the questions I was seeking answers to.

And when all’s said and done, what I look for in a founder who’ll create a multi-generational company is the same in what I look for in an emerging manager who’s planning to build a multi-fund firm. And in a way, what a young professional might look at when betting their career on a startup.

Photo by Vincent Chin on Unsplash

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.

Posted on

Non-obvious Hiring Questions I’ve Fallen in Love with

read, book, child, question

Recently, I’ve been chatting with a number of GPs and LPs looking to make their first hires. Many of whom hadn’t built a team prior. Now I’m no expert, nor would I ever claim to be one. But I’ve been very lucky to hire and work with some stellar talent.

They asked me how I think about interviewing, selecting, as well as onboarding. I’ll save the last of which for a future blogpost, but for the purpose of this one, if you frequent this blog, you’ll know I love good questions. And well, I get really really nerdy about them. So, as I shared my four favorite, nonobvious interview questions as of late with them (some I’ve used more than others), I will also share them with you.

I won’t cover the table stakes. Why are you excited to be here? What skills are you a B+/A- at? And what are you A+++ in? Why you? Etc.

If you had to hire everyone based only on you knowing how good they are at a certain video game, what video game would you pick?

I recently heard Patrick O’Shaughnessy ask that question to a guest on his podcast, and I found it inextricably profound. While the question was directed at Palmer Luckey, who has a past in video games, the words “video game” can easily be replaced by any other activity or topic of choice and be equally as revealing. Be it sports. Or an art form. Or how they grasp a certain topic. Even, putting them in front of a Nobel Prize winner and see how quickly they realize they’re in front of one.

The last example may be stretching it a bit, but has its origin in one of my favorite fun facts about the CRT — the cognitive reflection test. Effectively, a test designed to ask the minimum number of questions in order to determine someone’s intelligence. But in a parodical interpretation of the test, two of the smartest minds in the world, Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, decided to make an even shorter version of the test to measure one’s intelligence. The test would be to see that if one were to put you in front of Amos Tversky, one of the most humble human beings out there despite his intelligence, how long it would take you to realize that the person sitting across from you was smarter than you. The shorter it took you, the smarter you were. But I digress (although there’s your fun fact for the day).

The reality is that any activity that requires a great amount of detail, nuance, resilience, frustration and failure probably qualify to be mad-libbed into that question. Nevertheless, it’s quite interesting to see what someone would suggest, and a great way of:

  1. Assessing how deep a candidate can go deep on a particular subject,
  2. How well they can relay that depth of knowledge to a layperson, and
  3. How they build a framework around that.

I hate surprises. Can you tell me something that might go wrong now so that I’m not surprised when it happens?

Simon Sinek has always been one for great soundbites. And the above question is no exception. It’s a great way of asking what is one of your weaknesses. Without asking what is your weakness? Most, if not all hiring managers are probably accustomed to getting a rose-tinted “weakness” that turns out is a strength when asking the weakness question to candidates. It is, after all, in the candidate’s best interest to appear the most suitable for the job description as possible. And the JD doesn’t include anything about having weaknesses. Only strengths… and responsibilities.

At the same time, while the weakness question makes sense, when there is an honest answer, I’ve seen as many hiring managers use the associated answer to discount a candidate’s ability to succeed in the role, before given the chance. While this is still throwing caution to the wind, for one to be open-minded when asking this question, at the very least, you’re more likely to get an honest one. At least until this question becomes extremely popular.

Another version, thought a lot more subtle, is: What three adjectives would you use to describe your sibling?

I won’t get into the nuances here, but if you’re curious for a deeper dive, would recommend reading this blogpost. The TL;DR is that when we describe others (especially those we know well), we often use adjectives that juxtapose how we see ourselves in relation to them.

What did you do in your last role that no one else in that role has ever done?

This is one of my favorite professors, Janet Brady’s, favorite questions, and ever since I learned of it, it’s been mine as well. Your mileage may vary. Of particular note, I look for talent with entrepreneurial natures to them. Most of what I work on are usually pre-product-market fit in nature. In other times, and not mutually exclusive to the former, requires us to re-examine the status quo. What got us here — as a team, as a company, as an industry, or as a citizen of the world — may not get us there.

And there is bias here in that I enjoy working with people who push the boundaries rather than let the boundaries push them. And I love people who have asked the question “What if?” in the past and has successfully executed against that, even if it meant they had to try, try again.

What haven’t you achieved that you want to achieve?

Steven Rosenblatt has always been world-class at hiring. By far, one of the best minds when it comes to scaling teams. For a deeper dive, and some of his other go-to questions, I highly recommend checking out this blogpost.

When you’re building a world-class team, you need people to self-select themselves in and out of the culture in which you want to build. Whether it’s Pulley’s culture of move fast and ruthlessly prioritize to build a high-performance “sports team or orchestra” or On Deck’s non-values, it’s about making it clear that you’re in not because you’re peeking through rose-tinted glasses, but that you know full well, that you will be confronted by reality, yet you still remain optimistic. To do that, you need:

  1. A tight knit team who hold the same values
  2. And folks with a chip on their shoulder

The latter is the essence of what Steven gets at with the above question. And does one’s selfish motivation align with where the company wants to go and what the role will entail.

Photo by Aaron Burden on Unsplash

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.

Posted on

Retaining your Best Talent (Part 2)

spark, keeping the spark alive

This is an addendum to the blogpost I wrote back in April of this year. Catalyzed by something Seth Godin recently shared. Which led me down a rabbit hole, and eventually to this sequel.

Seth Godin shared some fascinating perspective recently. “Turnover is a good thing when we are doing human work, not a bad thing. And what I would do if I was running a real company is I would say the first thing you’ve got to do on your first day is update your LinkedIn page and keep it up to date. And we’re going to have a resume job finding seminar every two weeks here. I don’t want you to stay here because you can’t get a better job. I want you to stay here because the conditions we’ve created, the work we are doing is worth you staying here for. And then I would listen.

“If I’m not creating the conditions where the people who I need to be dancing with want to stay, I have to change the conditions, not curse the people who are leaving.”

Which reminds me of a great Jerry Colonna dictum, “How am I complicit in creating the conditions I say I don’t want?” While the line is meant to be applied to an individual’s own awareness of how their environment is partly a product of their own design, it is equally as powerful in organizational design. Have you created an environment that lends itself to turnover? Is that by intention or lack thereof?

While I’m not urging founders to be less disciplined with their burn rate, Precursor’s Charles Hudson found one interesting piece of data recently. He wrote, “You cannot save your way to success. Our portfolio companies that graduated from pre-seed to seed typically spent more per month than those that failed to graduate. This result was consistent with what I’ve observed; the companies finding product-market fit spend more to keep up with growth and customer demand.”

While the above may be true when you graduate from the pre-seed to the seed, by the time you get to the A, it’s about securing great talent.

But let’s say your star talent has left (meaning that they passed the equivalent of Netflix’s Keeper test or any of these other culture tests). The one thing you DO have to be wary of is the morale of those who stay. Has your team members leaving broken the morale of the company? How fast can you get the team to bounce back?

To set some context, Frank Slootman defines winning as breaking the competitors’ will to fight. “In a world of software, you break the enemy’s will to fight when you are hiring their people because they have given up. They’d rather be with you than they are with the other company, because it’s too hard and too painful and they’re not making any money. So, ‘I’m going to join the winner instead of stick with delusion.'” And in Bezos’ words, “when the last person with good judgment gives up,” your team’s will has been broken.

Each team member leaving has a non-zero chance of creating this snowball effect. As the founder, maintaining culture and momentum is important. As Bob Iger once said, “[The] most important measures of success for a CEO [are] internal satisfaction, investor relations and consumer support.” In my experience, the first of the three is often far less obvious to first-time founders than the latter two.

So how does one maintain internal satisfaction?

The truth is there’s no one right answer. So, instead, I’ll share some tactics I’ve seen work well.

  • The last day for someone should be on Friday. It gives teammates the weekend to unwind and doesn’t affect their work ethic in the weekdays immediately after.
  • Set up 1:1 time with all their direct reports and who they reported to (if the latter person isn’t you) within the week after that person’s last day. While the obvious next steps may be to figure out the new chain of command and reporting structure, the first conversation you have with them should be about how they’re feeling and not about company goals. And have an honest, unfiltered conversation here. Which also means you need to share how you’re feeling as well. Don’t sugarcoat anything. Smart people see through lies very easily.
  • Offer each direct report to that person a mentor. Either internally in the company or externally. For the latter, there is immense value in helping your team member grow and getting an advisor or someone in your network you respect to get more involved in the company through monthly/quarterly mentorship.

As always, hope you find this helpful.

Photo by Ian Schneider on Unsplash

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.

Proudly powered by WordPress