What would I say to a 1000 techies (at MIT)?

I was jotting down some thoughts on what would I say if I was speaking to 1000 techies at a place like MIT. Since I am not speaking to them anytime soon, I will share them here . Obviously there is a lot more to say than the few points below.

1. Techies should focus on Big ideas. Big problems. Big markets. There are 7 billion customers worldwide for most innovations we can come up with.
2. Geographies matter less now than ever before in today’s globalized world. Technologies developed in US/Europe are bringing people closer the world over, e.g. Facebook and Twitter are helping people connect as far away as Brazil and Ghana, and are providing momentum to political movements in places like Iran. Similarly, technologies scaled in India and China  are bringing cheap clean power to the West, e.g. Suzlon.
3. Techies are often worried about sharing their ideas with others in case they are stolen. While there is an important role for intellectual property (IP), and proper IP advice should be taken in order file patents etc in time, in general good ideas become better when shared with others. Techies should find trusted advisors in their professors, experienced entrepreneurs and helpful investors who can guide, advise, and not just show but help form a path to success from the early stages on.
4. Technology and Engineering design are helping shape peoples’ lives, livelihoods and futures everywhere: from the IPhone use interface innovation to the design of a car for the masses (i.e. Tata Nano). It is often at the intersection of multiple disciplines that the most creative, and valuable solutions are found.
5. There is no bad time for entrepreneurship and for people to start companies. Entrepreneurs are eternally optimistic, cautiously skeptic, and driven to succeed. The best entrepreneurs have emerged in the most difficult economic times.
6. Techies should focus on solving real world problems. It is not just rewarding in a financial and moral sense – but it is also intellectually stimulating. I could not be more excited about the opportunity I have at General Catalyst to interact with young, bright, aspiring and inspiring entrepreneurs. In that spirit I want to highlight ENTER – a program I am proud to have founded that is devoted to breaking down the barriers of communication between aspiring student entrepreneurs, venture capitalists and seasoned executives and CEOs. Join the fledgling group on facebook at http://bit.ly/3m8Tx.

What about the entrepreneur contributes most to startups’ success?

I read two very interesting articles this week on entrepreneurs. Thanks to MM and JC for sharing them.

Paul Graham (of Y-Combinator fame) writes on his blog that “Determination” of the founders is a good proxy for high likelihood of success. He then goes on to provide “The Anatomy of Determination”. See the full article here.

We learned quickly that the most important predictor of success is determination. At first we thought it might be intelligence. Everyone likes to believe that’s what makes startups succeed.

…

If determination is so important, can we isolate its components? Are some more important than others? Are there some you can cultivate?

The simplest form of determination is sheer willfulness. When you want something, you must have it, no matter what.

…

Being strong-willed is not enough, however. You also have to be hard on yourself. Someone who was strong-willed but self-indulgent would not be called determined. Determination implies your willfulness is balanced by discipline.

…

If this is true it has interesting implications, because discipline can be cultivated, and in fact does tend to vary quite a lot in the course of an individual’s life. If determination is effectively the product of will and discipline, then you can become more determined by being more disciplined.

…

Ken Zolot defining a new world order: Lab for startups

Ken is a dear friend, and as strong an advocate and supporter of startups as one can find around here. And not to miss, he has had an amazing training at MIT where he led several initiatives in entrepreneurship and startup development.

Here’s an article he wrote in Xconomy about his new role with the Kauffman Foundation:

A New World Order for High-Growth Firms

Ken Zolot 3/24/09

Many of my friends and neighbors may have noticed that I haven’t been in town as much lately, and that I’m spending more and more of my time in Kansas City. So why would a hardened MIT denizen who used to think that distant travel meant going to Porter Square now be flying back and forth to Missouri every week?

It’s because the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, which is headquartered in Kansas City, is pioneering new ways to advance our entrepreneurial economy. Kauffman’s president Carl Schramm inspired me the other day when he noted in a CNBC interview that all net job creation over the past thirty years has come from companies less than five years old. So what can we do to keep startups flourishing? I am delighted to be joining the Kauffman Foundation team as a senior fellow as we look out over the economic future and embark on a new approach for increasing both the number of new companies formed and the chances of success for these ventures.

This new initiative is called Kauffman Laboratories for Enterprise Creation. The mission of Kauffman Labs is to create more large-scale, high-growth firms. As someone with a combination of practical experience building companies, and academic experience teaching innovation and entrepreneurship at MIT—not to mention a passion for helping people build great companies—I’m very pleased to be a part of this initiative. It’s a perfect way to continue the work I started at MIT’s Deshpande Center for Technological Innovation.

Global heroes: Entrepreneurs

Link to Economist article

A special report on entrepreneurship

Global heroes

Illustration by Nick Dewar

IN DECEMBER last year, three weeks after the terrorist attacks in Mumbai and in the midst of the worst global recession since the 1930s, 1,700 bright-eyed Indians gathered in a hotel in Bangalore for a conference on entrepreneurship. They mobbed business heroes such as Azim Premji, who transformed Wipro from a vegetable-oil company into a software giant, and Nandan Nilekani, one of the founders of Infosys, another software giant. They also engaged in a frenzy of networking. The conference was so popular that the organisers had to erect a huge tent to take the overflow. The aspiring entrepreneurs did not just want to strike it rich; they wanted to play their part in forging a new India. Speaker after speaker praised entrepreneurship as a powerful force for doing good as well as doing well.

Back in 1942 Joseph Schumpeter gave warning that the bureaucratisation of capitalism was killing the spirit of entrepreneurship. Instead of risking the turmoil of “creative destruction”, Keynesian economists, working hand in glove with big business and big government, claimed to be able to provide orderly prosperity. But perspectives have changed in the intervening decades, and Schumpeter’s entrepreneurs are once again roaming the globe.

Since the Reagan-Thatcher revolution of the 1980s, governments of almost every ideological stripe have embraced entrepreneurship. The European Union, the United Nations and the World Bank have also become evangelists. Indeed, the trend is now so well established that it has become the object of satire. Listen to me, says the leading character in one of the best novels of 2008, Aravind Adiga’s “The White Tiger”, and “you will know everything there is to know about how entrepreneurship is born, nurtured, and developed in this, the glorious 21st century of man.”

This special report will argue that the entrepreneurial idea has gone mainstream, supported by political leaders on the left as well as on the right, championed by powerful pressure groups, reinforced by a growing infrastructure of universities and venture capitalists and embodied by wildly popular business heroes such as Oprah Winfrey, Richard Branson and India’s software kings. The report will also contend that entrepreneurialism needs to be rethought: in almost all instances it involves not creative destruction but creative creation.

Biofuels/biochemicals, automotive, Green Tie Gala

A few articles that focused on some of the sectors that I am looking at these days. Check them out…

Xconomy:
Never Mind That Bailout: Venture Funding for Auto Innovation Accelerates As Startups Race to Leave Detroit in its Own Dust by Bruce Bigelow
Plunging Oil Prices Require Alternative Fuel Startups to Take a Long View by Bruce Bigelow

C|NET
Eyes turn to auto start-ups’ funding, aid requests by Martin LaMonica

with Governor Duval Patrick (MA) at the annual NECEC Gala

And finally, a nod of thanks to the New England Clean Energy Council for inviting me to their first annual Green Tie Gala. It was a great event, a celebration of the ‘energy’ present in the New England area to promote and commercialize clean energy technologies. New England has certainly become the hot bed of cleantech startups, but more importantly, the Massachusetts government has shown its leadeship by staying way ahead of the everyone else in sponsoring, promoting and providing support to clean energyand energy efficency initiatives in the region.  Kudos to Nick D’Arbeloff, Trish Fields,  and the rest of the NECEC team.

Water: the next frontier in energy innovation….

Finally Bill Aulet takes the leap and writes about Water. He is both knowledgeable and spends a lot of time thinking about these issues…so when he writes, I pay attention. Click here for what I wrote on water a few months ago.

My comment to Bill:

I was hoping somebody would write on water. Thanks. While the average were running after nanotech/biotech deals 5-8 years ago, the cunning were starting to see environmental tech on the horizon. Now that the average are running after energy deals, the smart should be thinking about water.

I don’t mean any offense to those in the industry, but you are dead-on that the decision makers in the water business are slow, relatively non-techie, and risk-averse. Having worked in the next slowest industry, i.e. automotive, I can imagine how hard it is to sell into it. But is there a way to approach the customers directly who would be more willing to pay than the middle-man thinks? I can tell you my family in urban Pakistan would pay a lot more for clean water (and are more used to it) than an average American.

It is interesting that some of the issues faced by water innovators parallel those in energy: (a) geographical distribution of markets, (b) centralized vs distributed systems, (c) scalability issues, (d) mismatch between rhetoric and action at governmental level, and (e) lack of entrepreneurs/investors who are willing to stick with long-term endeavors.

I agree with your comment above that the water-energy nexus could be great for both. Energy companies could end up investing in water innovations while water companies would look for cheaper energy sources. I think we need to take energy and water technologies to regions where they are needed most to develop them fast and cost effectively, i.e. developing countries in Asia, Africa etc. And lets find long term investors (maybe the Middle East investors fit the bill) who are less scared of playing with commodities in such markets.

The Next Big Thing in Energy Innovation and Investing? Let’s Talk Water

Bill Aulet 5/20/08

Energy innovation and investing are exploding right now. Technological breakthroughs are seen as perhaps the greatest hope to solving our dire energy challenge. However, what is often overlooked is the link between finding or creating new sources of energy and the effects on food and water.

Indeed, if you think of energy as a coin, the flip side is water and food. The scary thing is that food and water are both lower on Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs—i.e., they are more fundamental to human survival. Yet, the current rush to create new sources of energy—including “clean” energy—may have potentially disastrous tradeoffs on our food and water supplies. Going forward, trading off energy creation for water—meaning creating new sources of energy that depend on heavy use of water, as many do—will be less and less acceptable. That’s why the most exciting opportunities in energy entrepreneurship and investment lie in strategies that create more water or energy without adversely affecting the other. Xconomy for more…