Bigger isn’t always better, better is better

There is a long-running belief that things grow or die. In startups and in business, growth tends to mean more topline revenue.

But growth doesn’t have to mean more topline revenue. Growth can also mean improvement, better; better product, better systems, better processes. Here’s the thing (I always have a thing), better almost always leads to bigger, naturally.

The challenge with focusing exclusively on topline revenue when you want to grow is that problems nearly always scale faster than solutions.  When you throw dollars into marketing and sales, without a healthy, underlying business, the top line will grow, giving you false positive feedback, which leads to you to keep spending. However, problems are being created, and are scaling faster than the revenue, and eventually those challenges will consume the company leading to its ultimate demise. For instance, you can’t see that the CAC to LTV ratio no longer works – or maybe it never worked and you figured that by spending more in different niches, it would eventually work. Or maybe you don’t even know what the unit economics actually are, and you’re scaling a business that fundamentally doesn’t work. Or you can’t see that there’s disagreement on the direction of the company at the leadership team level. Or you can’t see that while growth is happening, customer returns/dissatisfaction and churn are happening at a faster rate than before. Or your team spends more time firefighting than driving results, creating incredible inefficiencies and destroying the bottom line (not to mention the employee turnover).

But if you focus on better, the company’s topline revenue often will grow naturally without any additional sales and marketing effort, and often with the same, dare I even say lower, costs – making the business itself healthier in all dimensions.

For instance, a focus on a ‘better user experience’ will ultimately result in:

  • Fewer customer support calls
  • Fewer bugs
  • Happier customers
  • Fewer refunds
  • Higher lifetime value, more renewals
  • Lower churn
  • Higher referral rates, increased virality coefficient or network effects
  • Happier employees
  • All of these items equal less cost, or more revenue, or both.

The better approach indeed takes more time to flow through your company compared to the let’s just throw more marketing/sales dollars at it approach – but it absolutely leads to a healthier, more successful company. And when it’s healthier, it will ultimately lead to bigger top-line revenue.

Now, I’m not saying you shouldn’t spend more on marketing/sales when you want to grow, but I am saying that you should take a hard, long, honest look at the business before you do so. 

Before you decide to scale the business:

Understand the unit economics and the levers of the business first. What are your unit economics? $1 spent in sales/marketing = how much in revenue? If you don’t yet know your unit economics or the levers that drive the business, you are not ready for growth. You absolutely need to know these metrics before stepping on the gas, otherwise, you’re just burning cash and praying for a miracle. Not sure how to go about this? Check out the book Levers by my dear friend Amos Schwartzfarb for a crash course.

Look for areas in the business to improve.  Here are common ones:

  • Product market fit – are you really in the best market for your offering?
  • Removing bugs (everyone’s least favorite – but reduces customer support costs and improves customer satisfaction)
  • Improving UX, steps, clicks, intuitive workflows, etc
  • Become obsessed with reducing the number of customer support calls because customers just get it, and it just works.
  • Become obsessed with how much customers love your product. What features can you remove (not add), or what niche can you focus on, to improve the love.
  • Removing steps in any process you have internally – this will reduce employee time spent on ‘tasks’
  • Removing policies – policy is never a good substitute for holding people accountable for good judgment, and it slows everyone down.
  • Identify redundancies in the business and remove them.
  • Look for gaps in the business “it’s not my job” and fill them.
  • Push reversible and inconsequential decisions down in the business as low as you can get them 
  • Improve alignment – is everyone incentivized similarly, or by the right things? Make it so.
  • Simplify – what areas can you simplify? Org structure, processes, policies, product.

Monitor the unit economics and key levers as you work on areas to improve, you should see movement! Maybe you started at a $1 marketing/sales spend = $3 revenue ($1:$3), and through your efforts it grew to $1:$4. Hell yeah! Be a little patient though, it can take 6-12 months to flow through the system.

Once you decide to increase sales and marketing spend, keep an eye on those levers and metrics – when you see the ratios start to head south, hold or reduce spending, and investigate. Don’t just keep throwing money at it.

The one exception to this is when your company is very early stage, and you have little to no revenue. But then your focus isn’t on ‘growth’, but rather finding out if you have product market fit (PMF). Don’t confuse the two. A doubling of your customer base or revenue doesn’t necessarily mean PMF. The best measure of PMF that I’ve seen is called the Sean Ellis test, whereby >40% of your customers would be ‘very disappointed’ if they couldn’t use the product anymore. Now, you need a customer base large enough to have statistical significance, and in most mathematical circles, that’s >30, however, I recognize if your customer base is large enterprises, that might be challenging.  But I digress.  If you’re still in PMF mode, do not, I repeat, do not focus on growth. Focus on PMF. Don’t focus on growth until you’re sure you have PMF.

However, there is a play that says “grow at all costs”, and on extraordinarily rare examples, this play works because you can have market effects. Grab as much of the market as possible, which will kill the competition, and then focus on quality later. But for this play to work, you have to be in a winner-take-most market, you have to be extraordinarily well funded, with low-to-reasonable valuations, and very understanding and aggressive investors who commonly invest in the next rounds even if the fundamentals of the business aren’t yet healthy, in a highly stable or growing market cycle. Given all of that is out of your control, you literally cede control of your future and company to fate. Your success lies in the hands of luck, not skill. If it were me, I’d want to stack the odds in my favor by building a healthy business before focusing on growth.

This year, as you’re working on your budgets and strategic plans, consider a focus on quality, a focus on better. Then enjoy bigger happen naturally, with lower costs and headaches, and more pride in what you’ve built.

Play to win, don’t play to not lose

I recently gave a talk to a room full of founder/CEOs about how to leverage your board of directors by shifting from a reporting board to a collaborative board.  It can be tricky, but for those who do it, the company and the founder can grow wings. Part of the shift involves trusting your board and bringing them into your confidence, being vulnerable with them, and asking for their help and input when things aren’t working.  This can be scary for most CEOs because the board usually has the power to remove him/her. However, if you have the right board members, and if you create the right dynamic at the board level, this usually won’t be the outcome.

One founder in the room raised his hand to challenge me. He said, and I’m paraphrasing here, “That’s a lot of ifs and usuallys. Why would I take that risk? If my board can fire me, why would I risk being fired and losing my company by admitting weakness and vulnerability?”

I love this founder for asking that question – it’s at the heart of why most CEO’s don’t go to their board with challenges.

Here’s the thing: There’s a difference between playing to win, and playing to not lose. 

Let me tell you a quick side story. I played volleyball in high school and club ball in college. I’m short, so was never going to be really good, but I loved it. My freshman-year dorm was across the street from a frat house with a sand court in the front yard, and I was dumb enough to ask to play with the guys who were much taller and more skilled than I was.  They were nice enough to let me participate, and for a whole year I spent every day after school and all my weekends there. Eventually, I got good enough to hold my own, and we competed in a few sand tournaments. I never won, but placed decently, and even taught the volleyball class at the University for a while.  

Fast forward 20 years, I started a couple of companies, had a couple of kids, moved a couple of times, and made 100+ investments, raised a couple of funds, traveled an inhumane amount, had a ludicrious number of direct reports, helped grow Techstars… basically, I had zero free time to do things I loved like play volleyball.

So recently, I decided to pick it up again. I found myself on a co-ed, indoor sand team. I was pretty nervous to start, but hey, I’m decent at this sport, so I figured once I got my legs under me again, I would be okay. Well let me tell you – I was bad, so embarrassingly bad. I shanked every pass. Put every attack in the net. Dove and missed every ball. Lost every overhand serve. It was so bad that one teammate asked me to serve underhand, a big hit to my already fragile ego.  It’s been a long time since I felt that humiliated. We lost every game that season and were relegated to the lower league, largely because of me.

Astonishingly I was invited to play the next season (I’m 100% sure it was because they couldn’t find anyone else), so I swallowed my pride, said yes, and started practicing, figuring my ego needed to practice sucking in public. Luckily I got better and better. I wasn’t anywhere near as good as I was 20 years ago, but at least I wasn’t an embarrassment anymore. Yet I continued to serve underhand – because I was so afraid of losing the serve. A killer overhand serve will earn you points, but a bad serve will earn the other team points. You can win whole games on a killer serve alone. When I practiced, my overhand serves were killer. They were strong and hard to return and my team kept asking me why I wasn’t serving overhand in the games, but the truth was I was afraid to choke. I didn’t trust myself anymore and I didn’t want to cost us the game. I was playing to not lose, I was not playing to win. Despite my conservatism, our team placed #1 in that division and got promoted back up to the higher league, but, I didn’t get invited back to the next season because I didn’t help win games. I just helped not lose them. And quite frankly, I don’t blame them; they wanted to win.

This founder’s question is like my underhand serve. It’s playing to not lose. And when you’re in the high-stakes game of entrepreneurship, especially if you’ve taken venture capital, there are only 2 outcomes, winning, and losing. So if you’re playing to not lose, you will likely, eventually, lose. 

Here are common behaviors I see founders take that show they are playing to not lose:

  • Not being honest with the board
  • Stacking the board with friends rather than skills/knowledge/wisdom/networks/courage/honesty
  • Not asking for help
  • Trying to be good at all things
  • Not having a difficult conversation with a co-founder, leadership team member, investor, yourself
  • Not asking for feedback
  • Dismissing other people’s feedback
  • Needing to win disagreements
  • Not hiring people smarter/better than they are
  • Hiring up, and scaling up before true product / market fit
  • Trying to raise more capital because you hired/scaled faster than you should have before you have product market fit, and you’re now out of runway
  • Trying to keep the business alive when there’s clearly no real business, and burning through all the investor capital without returning any of it
  • Not making a major decision
  • Micromanaging, not trusting your team
  • Using policy as an excuse or crutch for not developing judgment

There are infinite ways that playing not to lose manifests but at its core is fear; fear of failure, fear of loss. The trouble with this behavior is that it almost always manifests that which you are exactly trying to avoid. For instance, not being honest with the board will eventually lead the board to not trust you, which will either cause them to not vote with you or they will try to remove you as the CEO. It just takes longer, but in the interim, you’ve burned all the bridges and not gotten the help, trust, and support you needed to turn the issue around.

Don’t mistake playing to win as ruthless, win-at-all-costs actions; that simply isn’t true either. You might win a battle, but you will eventually lose the war. Playing to win does mean taking risks, but it means taking calculated risks intentionally, collaboratively, and intelligently. In the land of startups, a win-win-win outcome is possible because together you can create more value than you othewise could apart.

Here are excellent playing-to-win behaviors:

  • Recognizing your weaknesses and staffing for them
  • Asking for help, asking for feedback
  • Admitting a mistake, asking for forgiveness
  • Build and manage a board of directors that can be as influential as your leadership team
  • Make a hard decision, even if unpopular
  • Hold people accountable, especially yourself
  • Taking a big swing, that’s calculated, intentional, aligning, and collaborative, with tailwinds
  • Having a scary conversation with someone
  • Conserving every f’ing penny until you have product market fit
  • Keeping your day job/not raising money until you have product/market fit
  • Shutting the company down and returning capital to investors when you can’t see how you’re going to make it work
  • Saying NO to distractions
  • Being generous with equity with the *right* co-founders, employees, investors
  • When people disagree with you, get curious, not defensive
  • Investing in your own professional development
  • Identifying the one thing your business can be best in the world at, and going hard at it. Don’t make marginally improved products/services.
  • Recognizing when you aren’t best suited for your role in the company anymore

Of course, all of this is situationally specific, and the true answer to any question is “It depends” – but I ask you – are you playing to win? Or are you playing to not lose? Are you serving underhand? Or overhand? What can you do or stop doing to shift to a winning orientation? I encourage you to ask that question, not only of yourself, but together with your team and your board.  “What could WE do, or stop doing, to help us shift from playing to not lose, to playing to win”. What a powerful way to reorient and kick off a new year.

The Confidence Coefficient

I’ve had this theory running around in my head for a while now, and I’ve finally broken down and written a blog post about it.  It’s called the Confidence Coefficient and what that means for your startup, and anything else you feel like tackling in your life.

The notion is around how your confidence levels can impact your success.

Read about the Confidence Coefficient here – a guest post I recently did for UC Berkeley.

I’d love to know your thoughts and whether you agree or not.

How to get into TechStars…

techstarsbadgeSo I’m thrilled to announce that I’ve accepted the role of GM for TechStars Boulder this summer! I’ve been at it for 3 weeks now and I’m having a blast. The one question I keep getting is ‘How do we beat all the competition and get into TechStars?’. While I’m truly new to the program, I think I can share a little insight about what gets everyone excited.

1. The Team: If there are 2-4 of you, and you’re all rockstars, we get excited. Rockstars know how to execute. They’re bright, driven, creative, and have accomplish tons in a short period of time on this and/or past projects.

2. Hunger: Your team has to really want this – and communicate that with us. Walk the line of annoying. Just saying you want it doesn’t count, you have to show us by working your ass off to hit your milestones.

3. Idea: You’ve come up with something innovative, new, & exciting. While a good team will always trump a good idea, the combo is thrilling.

4. You listen: TechStars is a mentor-driven program. We try to surround you by the best and brightest to help accelerate your company. You have to know how to listen to input (sometimes negative), sort through the noise, and execute quickly on the best advice.

5. You Execute: I’ve said this in almost all of the above points too, but thought it imperative to call it out on its own. Millions of people have hundreds of good ideas. It’s not the good idea – it’s the ability to execute on a good idea that makes all the difference. Hell you can execute on a bad idea and that’s better than not executing at all. Learn how to get stuff done quickly, cheaply, and effectively and you’ll not only go far at TechStars, but whatever you do in life.

If you haven’t applied yet, you better hurry! Deadline is March 21st!