The career dilemma for startup entrepreneurs
Posted: July 11, 2012 Filed under: Uncategorized Leave a commentLeaving your day job to launch a startup is a big and difficult decision to make. It is made especially difficult because the skill set needed to run a startup is very different from the one you need to make a career in BigCorp, probably even more so if you have a technical background (like me).
How are they different? This is a gross oversimplification but let’s say there are three main activities performed in any company:
- Producing. In a software company this is what the developer or designer is doing. They build stuff.
- Managing. This is all the overhead activities that comes with more people, larger projects and multiple offices. It’s everything from managing customer requirements, writing change requests and setting salaries.
- Selling. Selling is the act of bringing your product to your customers. For simplicity’s sake I include marketing here.
If you have technical background and want to make a career in a large company, most likely you will end up managing something or someone. Unfortunately, very few large companies have good career paths for technical roles. Even worse, “programmer” is usually at the bottom of the food chain and a so called “architect” will be spending more times in meetings with PowerPoints than actually producing (coding). I have spent years managing requirements in large telecom projects, for example.
When it comes to selling, very few people in a large organization work with actually driving and increasing sales. It’s usually a question of managing existing customer relationships. So, the skills needed look like this:

A corporate culture where managing is the most important skill will be characterized by endless meetings, a lot of document overhead, lots of middle managers (often competing with each other in political struggles) and long decision times (often months or even years).
In a startup, on the other hand, there are basically just three roles: hacker, designer (both producers) and hustler (sales). The skills in a startup look like this:

Yes, managing will be important some day in the future, but not when leaving the corporate career path and starting something new.
So there is the dilemma: you’re not just saying goodbye to your corporate salary, you’re also saying goodbye to skills that will reward you in the corporate career ladder. A hard choice.
Of course another way to look at it is: do I want to spend the rest of my life having endless meetings, working with document overhead, fighting political struggles with middle managers and spending most of my days without moving the needle?
Perhaps the choice isn’t so hard after all.
What is entrepreneurship and how does it relate to innovation?
Posted: April 28, 2012 Filed under: Uncategorized Leave a commentI love this definition of entrepreneurship:
Entrepreneurship is the pursuit of opportunity without regard to resources currently controlled.
Compare this to the following definitions of the word “innovation”:
“Change that creates a new dimension of performance.”
-Peter Drucker
“The introduction of new goods (…), new methods of production (…), the opening of new markets (…), the conquest of new sources of supply (…) and the carrying out of a new organization of any industry”
-Joseph Schumpeter
“Innovation is a new element introduced in the network which changes, even if momentarily, the costs of transactions between at least two actors, elements or nodes, in the network.”
-Regis Cabral
“The three stages in the process of innovation: invention, translation and commercialization.”
-Bruce D. Merrifield
So then what is the relationship between entrepreneurship and innovation? Two sides of the same coin? Perhaps. Entrepreneurship takes the perspective of the individuals or the organization that drives the change while the innovation is the change itself. While they are not the same they certainly walk hand in hand.
Passive founder deadlock
Posted: January 11, 2012 Filed under: Startup, Uncategorized | Tags: entrepreneur, founders, Startup, startup founder 1 Comment
Startup Founders are connected like toes on a foot. Photo by me.
A “deadlock” is a state in a computer program where parts of the program is waiting for other parts to finish who in turn are waiting for the other parts. The result is a freeze where nothing happens. This has probably happened to your computer some time.
A similar situation can occur in early stage startups. Before a startup gets funding or revenue the only thing that drives it is the passion of the founders. But, the passion in every individual founder is deeply connected to the passion of the other founders. You need to have a passion balance equilibrium otherwise the startup will freeze just like the computer program!
As an example, you’re three founders, you get started, energy is high and you’re all excited to do this thing. Then after a while one of the founders starts drifting. Maybe her daytime job takes too much time. Maybe her spouse doesn’t like that she spends all her free time working on your startup. Maybe she just lost interest, the reason doesn’t matter but the fact is that you are now extremely close to a passive founder deadlock situation.
Her drain in energy will drain the other two founders as well. It’s Sunday evening and you have the choice between playing with your kids or working on your startup. Why should you sacrifice your spare time when the other founder don’t? You go play with your kids (a wise choice anyway). The startup dies.
The same situation can occur in later stages, when funds are limited. As long as your startup doesn’t have its wings in the air passive founder deadlock is probably your number one risk.
So, how do you prevent it? At the end of the day, you can’t. This is simply one of the facts of life for a startup. But you can limit the risk somewhat.
- Of course you should make sure you have written agreements between the founders. This sets the baseline of what you expect from each other. It should also describe how a breakup should be done.
- Too much administration can kill the passion too but some simple way of tracking who does what will help you see early on if someone is dragging behind. A Kanban board is an excellent tool.
- One rather extreme way is to define an equity value for each task that needs to be performed and then split the equity after the task has been done based on who contributed the most to finishing the task. With this approach all the founders together make a list of what needs to be done and decide on an equity value for each task. When the task has been done the founders meet to “split the boot” with the founder who contributed the most getting the most equity. The downside with this approach is that you will spend a lot of time arguing over who did what and how much they contributed but if it works out it’s probably the fairest way to do it.
- Do the startup alone is one way but the chance of success is even smaller with this option so this is not recommended.
- If you’re OK with not an equal split of equity you can appoint one of the founders as “CEO”, give her more equity and the authority to be the driver of the startup. It’s then her task to “hire” co-founders and pay them with equity for the work they do. This approach also has downsides.
- Of course the best way to solve this is to just simply get your wings in the air as soon as possible. You really should hate being in the startup phase.
What do you think is the best approach to prevent passive founder deadlock?
Jobs of the future: services, super-brands and startups
Posted: October 23, 2011 Filed under: Uncategorized Leave a comment
The machine and the man. Photo by me.
Automation is killing the job market, not China. That’s the message in this post recently posted on Hacker News.
I’m not sure I agree.
I can see two very clear trends when it comes to where new jobs are created.
One is the shift from industry jobs to service jobs.
Did you know that globally, farming has been the most common profession since basically the dawn of civilization up until about a decade ago? Now it’s service jobs.
Humans helping other humans, this is a type of jobs that will never go away because humans have qualities (“the golden scarcities“) that machines can never possess regardless of if they pass Turing tests or not.
Forget the factory worker, I want to see more hairdressers, singers, gardeners, interior decorators, designers, artists, coaches and ocularists.
The second is the bleeding edge of innovation and super-brands that have shorter and shorter lifespans. The share of the economy belonging to the mega-corps is decreasing. Smaller and faster is the way of the future. This is the era of the startup economy. The only thing that will remain big are the brands – mindshare.
So there you have it: services, super-brands and startups.
That’s what the economy will look like the next 50 years. Heck, it’s what it looks like today!
At least the part that’s working.
Photos from SSWC 2011
Posted: August 17, 2011 Filed under: Uncategorized 1 CommentSweden Social Web Camp is an unconference held on an island in the Blekinge archipelago in souther Sweden. I’ve written about it before so this time I will just post a few photos I took. Perhaps I will get back with a longer post for this years edition, there was a lot to digest.
You can find my Flickr-set here and the group with photos from everyone here. There are currently 1346 photos in the group…
These are the ones I took and that I’m pleased with.

Jocke in the tree.

The Brit (there can be only one).
All the photos (except two that didn’t upload for some reason) are also on Google+.
Wealth
Posted: April 4, 2011 Filed under: Uncategorized Leave a comment“Wealth is the ability to fully experience life.”
– Henry David Thoreau
2010 in review – this blog in numbers
Posted: January 2, 2011 Filed under: Uncategorized 3 CommentsThis blog is hosted on WordPress.com and they just sent a summary over last years activities on the blog.
Hm. Only 14 blog posts. I need to speed up this year. Hopefully, that would increase the visitor count as well. Also, there seems to be a bug in the mail generator. I didn’t have 2 visitors on my busiest day, March 3, I had 2709 visitors that day (I was on the front page of Hacker News).
The WordPress.com stats mail below:
The stats helper monkeys at WordPress.com mulled over how this blog did in 2010, and here’s a high level summary of its overall blog health:

The Blog-Health-o-Meter™ reads Wow.
Crunchy numbers

A helper monkey made this abstract painting, inspired by your stats.
A Boeing 747-400 passenger jet can hold 416 passengers. This blog was viewed about 13,000 times in 2010. That’s about 31 full 747s.
In 2010, there were 14 new posts, growing the total archive of this blog to 136 posts. There were 3 pictures uploaded, taking up a total of 379kb.
The busiest day of the year was March 3rd with 2 views. The most popular post that day was It’s going to take five years.
Where did they come from?
The top referring sites in 2010 were news.ycombinator.com, reddit.com, Google Reader, twitter.com, and blog.inklingmarkets.com.
Some visitors came searching, mostly for kinds of money, different kinds of money, ola ahlvarsson, bredbandsbolaget, and blocket omsättning 2009.
Attractions in 2010
These are the posts and pages that got the most views in 2010.
It’s going to take five years March 2010
9 comments
Build a system, not a product December 2009
30 comments
Different kinds of money June 2010
2 comments
Money is failure September 2009
4 comments
Your business idea as a promise August 2009
The Art of Profitability
Posted: January 21, 2010 Filed under: Uncategorized 1 Comment
This was one of my favorite books 2009. The book was written in 2002 by Adrian Slywotzky. It’s an unusual business book, written in a storytelling style.
It’s a classic teacher-student story where we get to follow a young man being tutored by an experienced entrepreneur. A very light read filled with nuggets of wisdom.
Hello Sweden, where are you? .se FAIL
Posted: October 13, 2009 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: .se-fail, iis, internet Leave a commentHow stable is the foundation that the web is built on? You kind of wonder after the incident last night where the entire .se-domain was unreachable for about 30 minutes. I still had problems accessing some sites this morning.
Apparently something went wrong during a maintenance routine at the Swedish Internet Foundation.
“For an unknown reason, an extra .se was added to the end of web addresses.”
I wonder what the cost of that little “woops, hey, it worked before” is. Considering how our lives are weaved in to the web to an ever larger degree, it is worrisome that things can go so utterly wrong.








