Blog

Continuing with last week’s post The ‘Why’ Around Job Changes in Interviews, another interview question I like is “What’s the most common area for improvement you hear in 360 degree reviews?” Yes, this is a variation on the standard question “What’s your greatest weakness” or “Where do you need to improve”, but it’s much more applicable in that it’s specifically referencing what another person has said about the candidate. It’s outside-in and more applicable than the standard introspective responses (e.g. my weakness is that I work too hard).

Here are a few thoughts on asking a job candidate about 360 degree review improvement feedback:

• Candidates shouldn’t sugar-coat their 360 feedback and should present it in a thoughtful, non-defensive manner
• Context of the feedback is important, so the manager or direct report that provided the feedback should be included
• How feedback has changed over time is also of note as different stages of a career result in different areas of improvement

Asking candidates about their 360 degree review improvement feedback is an important question during job interviews. Finding out why candidates made the career decisions they did, and what their co-workers identified as areas of improvement, are critical in assessing the individual.

What else? What are some more thoughts on the 360 degree review improvement question for job interviews?

Last week I was at a non-tech event where everyone at my table was talking about startups and angel investing. Every single person at the table had written a check, and that wasn’t even related to the purpose of the event. As another investor I know calls it, “the tourists are in town.” Tourists, as we all know, come in to a generally unfamiliar area, spend a small about time and money, and then move on. Tourists enjoy the newness and novelty, and then continue on with their normal way of life.

Most angel investors are tourists.

When the current boom times in the startup world end, many of the tourists will go home and we won’t see them again. This is normal. This happened before in the late 90s with the dot com bubble, and will happen again with the boom (much less dramatic this time around but still noticeable).

Entrepreneurs would do well to note that the amount of angel money currently flowing through the system is unusually high, and to plan accordingly.

What else? What are some more thoughts on tourist investors in town?

Managing inbound requests to meet up and help out fellow entrepreneurs is always an internal struggle for me. I want to help, but I’ve also found that the majority of the first-time meetings aren’t a good use of time. Personal referrals from trusted friends are always the best, especially when a Simplified One Page Strategic Plan is required prior to meeting (or paying it forward). Last week I heard a new idea: we can meet when you have two other people come with you that are committed to the startup.

Here are a few thoughts on requiring an entrepreneur bring two other committed team members as part of meeting:

• Convincing other people to join the startup requires leadership and passion — two critical traits of successful entrepreneurs
• Many meeting requests are an effort to validate the quality of the idea (which is bad to do), so having two other team members on board means that many potential employees/co-founders were already pitched, thus increasing the chance of a refined idea
• Involving two other people creates a greater level of seriousness and effort when compared to just kicking around an idea, thereby reducing some of the noise

The next time an entrepreneur asks to meet, tell them you’ll meet once they have two other people committed to the startup that will also attend the meeting — you might be surprised how many can’t meet this requirement.

What else? What are some more thoughts on the idea of requiring two additional team members come with an entrepreneur requesting to meet?

Tonight I had the opportunity to hear startup pitches at the Harvard Business School New Venture Competition regional final at the Atlanta Tech Village. Being a regional final, this group represented the best HBS-affiliated teams from around the Southeast. Here are five quick presentation tips for startup pitches after seeing tonight’s event:

1. Tell a Story – Most of the pitches were product-heavy and not story-oriented. The winner of the event told the best story and made the problem/solution most relatable.
2. Invest in Slides – Slides should be visually compelling, even if the investment is modest. Everyone in the audience knows immediately if they’re homemade.
3. Don’t Read Slides – One of the presenters read multiple slides to the audience, word for word. Ouch. Engage with the audience and don’t read to them.
4. Max 10 Words Per Slide – Slides to be used as handouts are different from slides for a visual presentation. For presentations, don’t use more than 10 words per slide and ensure a sufficiently large font such that the furthest person in the room can see it.
5. Infuse Passion – Excitement and genuine enthusiasm need to come through when pitching a startup. If the pitch isn’t passionate, don’t do it.

Overall, the idea is to passionately tell a story with supportive slides. Pitching a startup is more involved than that but this is a good start.

What else? What are some more presentation tips for startup pitches?

Recently, I was talking with an entrepreneur about his company. They just launched a new initiative and he shared with me a few of the details. Then, he said something that stuck with me: money and energy are separate considerations. Meaning, most entrepreneurs, at least initially, focus more on a lack of money as the inhibiting resource. Then, as the business grows, energy becomes even more of a consideration as the company has more money and staff is more specialized.

Here are a few thoughts on money and energy as separate considerations:

• Startups have an ebb and flow where it’s clear that sometimes team members have extra energy and sometimes they are burnt out
• Startups flush with cash realize that balancing energy is tougher because it’s less quantifiable and more based on the human element
• Most projects require both money and energy, and leaders would do well to think through the energy component as much, if not more, than the money component

When planning, ask the hard questions about the costs, as we all do, and then spend time thinking through the current energy of the team. When energy is applied to a new project some other project always has its energy reduced.

What else? What are some more thoughts on money and energy being separate considerations?

Back in 2001, while an undergraduate in college, I spent a good bit of time meeting with angel investors in an effort to raise money for my startup. Not knowing much, I wrote an extensive 30-page business plan outlining every aspect of the business (I even made the mistake of paying a lawyer, yes a lawyer, to give me feedback on the plan — ouch!). At one of the meetings, the angel investor offered up a line that has stayed with me ever since: most angel investors have deep pockets and short arms.

Of course, the joke is that even though angel investors are wealthy (deep pockets), investing is a hobby for them and they don’t write that many checks (short arms). Here are a few thoughts on angel investors with deep pockets and short arms:

• When pitching angels, ask how many tech startup investments they’ve made in the last 24 months (it’s good to know if someone is truly active as many angel investors aren’t actually active angel investors)
• Find out what size check they typically write as well as their areas of interest
• Ask how they typically add value, if at all, for startups they invest in
• Inquire as to their decision making process and what, if any, red flags they see with your potential deal

While most investors — angel, VC, and other — have a combination of profit-motive and fear of missing out, angels, more so than other groups, are driven by the desire to help entrepreneurs and to be a part of something interesting. Regardless, deep pockets and short arms still holds true today, just like it did almost 15 years ago.

What else? What are some more thoughts on the saying that angel investors have deep pockets and short arms?

I remember it clearly: we were less than a year into Pardot and a venture capitalist reached out to us asking to talk. Excitedly, we set up a time for the call and waited anxiously for the date. Finally, the day arrived and we talked for 45 minutes only to realize that it wasn’t a good use of our time: the associate’s firm requires potential investments to have at least $5 million in annual recurring revenue whereas we had less than a million.

Here are a few thoughts on calls from VC associates:

• Associates cast a wide net and engage with as many entrepreneurs as possible, regardless of whether or not they’re a good fit yet
• While associates source deals for the partners, most of the firm’s investments come from referrals and existing partner relationships — not from associates cold calling
• Know that associates aren’t the decision makers at the firm and that they spend a huge amount of time cold emailing and cold calling startups (not too different from a sales rep)
• Before taking a call from an associate, ask a number of qualifying questions, and only take the call if raising money is on the horizon (remember that the best time to raise money is when you don’t need it)
• If getting ready to raise money, associates can be a good testing ground and opportunity to practice the pitch
• Make an ask at the end of the call to be introduced to three portfolio companies that might be potential customers

In the end, most entrepreneurs shouldn’t engage with associates unless they’re going to raise money in the near-term and they’ve pre-qualified the firm to ensure it’s a good fit. Too often, entrepreneurs get excited when a VC associate reaches out and it’s not actually a good use of time.

What else? What are some more thoughts on entrepreneurs and calls from VC associates?