Category Archives: Big Corporations

CONTROLLED DESIGN MANAGEMENT – Part 3

By Moises J Goldman & John Jonelis

Our business culture has evolved and attitudes have re-aligned.  In sharp contrast to the past, creative employees have finally gained the acceptance and respect they deserve for the crucial role they play in organizational success.  The business climate is faster-paced, than ever—rapidly changing, and multicultural.  Staunchly individualistic leaders backed by a computer savvy workforce characterize our high tech companies, and increasingly, our entrepreneurial ventures.  It is important to appreciate that sequential charts of managerial jargon are no longer well received.  Such things impose uniformity, and uniformity is anathema to today’s creative workforce.  Under these circumstances, it is extremely challenging to manage product design using yesterday’s managerial paradigms.

This is the third of four installments.  We’ve explored the history and current state of modern management philosophy.  Now, we will introduce an entirely new mode of thought—the Controlled Design Management Model.

To be meaningful in today’s culture, any shift in management strategy must meet certain critical standards.  It must be intuitive, adaptable, focused, practical, and measurable.  These are the goals we will set out to achieve.

  • Intuitive and Adaptable – No rigid chart or schematic to implement.
  • Focused – A practical structure, which zeros in on workflow.
  • Practical – Departments will implement the model themselves.
  • Measurable – Management can track progress.

In order to achieve these goals, we must build self-optimization into the product cycle and to meet that end, we base our new thinking on Control Systems Theory, as used in such places as computerized system controls and inertial navigation systems.  We call it the Controlled Design Management Model.  For the purposes of this paper, we will circumvent the complex mathematics of Control Theory and present the ideas in an intuitive format, reducing key concepts to graphical form.

Controlled System

At its most basic form, a Controlled System is a process by which an objective or Input generates an outcome or Desired Output.  Suppose, for example, that the system is a bicycle factory and we are trying to build a super bicycle.  If the factory, as a system, behaves appropriately, then the factory will output the desired output – a super bicycle.  If, on the other hand, the factory does not operate appropriately, the output will be an undesired outcome – perhaps a tricycle.  It will be useful to reduce this to graphical form.  (See Figures 3a and 3b.)

Figure 3a – Controlled System

.

Figure 3b – Uncontrolled System

This may seem rather simplistic, so let’s build on it.  To make the system self-optimizing, we add a feedback loop to the above diagram. (See Figure 4.)  When the desired outcome becomes equal to the desired objective, then the error (or difference between objective and outcome) will be zero.  Else, corrections are made (called “pivoting” in Lean Theory) until we eventually arrive at the MVP or initial product deployment. 

Figure 4 – Simple self-optimizing Controlled System

Let’s see what this elementary flow chart accomplishes.  We plot the input and output of the above system, where Time is the X-axis and Magnitude is the Y-axis and produce a graph.  The process swings back and forth until it navigates the optimal path.  (See Figure 5.  Note the similarity to an internal navigation system.)

Figure 5 – Self-optimization through a feedback loop

From Figure 5, we surmise that the output reaches steady state, at t(1) which is when the desired objective is equal to the desired outcome, rendering the error equal to zero.  The behavior of the output prior to reaching t(1) is called the transient response and beyond t(1) is called the steady state response.

  • Transient Response is composed of idea, concept, feasibility, and definition (from the Traditional Model).
  • Steady State Response is composed of Deployment, Growth, and Maturity (from the Traditional Model) and the release of the Minimum Viable Product or MVP (from the Lean Model).

Transient Response relates to the problems of developing a product or process.  It might look like the following example:  How can we make an elevator reach the twelfth floor more quickly?  In actual practice, it may stop at any number of floors on the way, and even overshoot floor twelve before coming back to open the doors for you. Any number of solutions may be proposed.  We examine goals, stretch technology, and make tradeoffs.

Steady State Response deals with entirely different concerns.  The MVP of an optimized elevator schedule is ready to launch.  How can we standardize, market, deploy, and improve the new design or schedule?

Can we control how fast the outcome will reach its objective?  The answer is yes.  Goldman, Shieh, and Chen proved this many years ago by using the Second Cauer Form of continued fractions expansion.4, 5  Let’s look at it in graphical form.  By applying a few minor modifications to Figure 4, we have a self-optimizing module:

Figure 6 – Controlled Design Management Model

Figure 6 differentiates Transient from Steady State responses and adds an Internal Disturbance, representing noise due to poor product design, faulty test equipment, poor engineering, and other considerations. The optimization process reduces such noise closer and closer to zero via the process of a feedback loop.  Mathematically speaking, this is the same controlled system as in Figure 3(a), but this representation depicts the separate influences of the transient and steady state responses.

A New Perspective

What advantages does the Controlled Design management Model offer over the Lean and Traditional Models? The first is simply knowing which phase of the model contributes to the transient portion—idea, concept, feasibility, development—and which phase contributes to the steady-state portion—final deployment, growth and maturity of the design. For management, this is critical.

  • By controlling the part of development that contributes to the transient response, management can optimize the rise time and minimize time to deployment.
  • By controlling the factors that contribute to the steady state response, management can optimize the deployment, growth, and maturity of the product.

A mid to large organization includes many and varied departments through which product development flows from idea generation to maturity. What are some of the advantages to our new model?

  • By describing our model in the language of the digital age, each individual department can easily put it into practice.
  • Each department is responsible ONLY for what it can control. Each is given a unique decision input and desired output.
  • Each department can optimize its output using the model. This, in turn, yields an optimized organization.  An optimized organization is, quite simply, the sum of the optimized departments.

Next, we’ll demonstrate these ideas with a practical example.

Coming next: Part 4

 Go back to PART 1

 Download full paper (PDF)

.

References

  1. Deming, W. Edwards (1964) [1943].  Statistical Adjustment of Data. Dover. ISBN 0-486-64685-8. LCCN 64-24416. (1966) [1950].  Some Theory of Sampling. Dover. ISBN 0-486-64684-X. LCCN 66-30538.
  2. William Ouchi: “Theory Z” How American Business can meet the Japanese Challenge.  Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1981
  3. Lean was originated by Eiji Toyoda and Taichi Ohno of Toyota Motors.   Ohno, Taiichi (1988), Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production, Productivity Press, ISBN 0-915299-14-3
  4. C. F., L. S. Shieh, Joint Automatic Control Conference, Michigan, p 454
  5. Shieh, L.S. and Goldman, M. J., 1974 I.E.E.E. Trans. Circuit Syst., 21, 341
  6. The Hollow Corporation, Anita Campbell, Small Business TRENDS (2012)  https://smallbiztrends.com/2004/04/hollow-corporation.html

Graphics

Flow-charts by Moises Goldman and John Jonelis.

Graphics from MS Office.

About the Authors

Dr. Moises J Goldman holds an MSEE and a PhD in Engineering Systems from UCLA, specializing in large-scale systems, process optimization, and product innovation. MBA from MIT Sloan, specializing in strategic planning and business development.  His focus is on periods of challenge and change, including startup, growth and restructuring.  Goldman served as CEO, COO, and CTO in diverse industries and developed business across the USA, Germany, Spain, Mexico, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, and Brazil, working with small firms as well as branded giants such as Lockheed, Rockwell, ATT, America Movil, GM, Ford, Scotia Bank, and HSBC. Sits on several boards where entrepreneurship and innovation are the primary goals.  Consults to merging companies during the integration phase as well as startups, helping them become going concerns. Member of several advisory boards at MIT.  Founding member of the TALENT program at IMSA.  Dr. Goldman can be reached at Moises.Goldman@outlook.com

John Jonelis patented seven products and developed dozens more in the field of air pollution control.  Created the Revelation suite of trading algorithms.  Private equity investor.  Artist.  Writer, and publisher of Chicago Venture Magazine and News From Heartland—the Journal of the Heartland Angels.  Author of the novel, The Gamemaker’s Father.  Illinois Wesleyan BFA, 1974.  Kellogg MBA 1989.

Copyright © 2019 Moises Goldman & John Jonelis. All rights reserved. Quotation with attribution is permitted for educational purposes.

Chicago Venture Magazine is a publication of Nathaniel Press www.ChicagoVentureMagazine.com Comments and re-posts in full or in part are welcomed and encouraged if accompanied by attribution and a web link. This is not investment advice. We do not guarantee accuracy. Please perform your own due diligence. It’s not our fault if you lose money..
.
.

1 Comment

Filed under angel, angel capital, angel investor, Big Corporations, big money, Chicago Startup, Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship, Innovation, Innovation and Culture, Invention, investor, MIT, new companies, Startup, startup company, vc, Venture, venture capital

CONTROLLED DESIGN MANAGEMENT – Part 2

by Moises J Goldman & John Jonelis

In the early 2000s, after the internet bubble burst, it became abundantly clear that the US needed a new competitive edge.  A product management philosophy took hold, called Lean—Lean Development, Lean Manufacturing, Lean Planning, Lean Sigma, Lean Start-up. 2  Lean is a management philosophy that considers any part of the enterprise, which does not directly add value to the final objective, as superfluous—be it product development, customer service, or for that matter, the entire enterprise.  It examines all processes and eliminates the ones that do not add value to the end objective.   Lean is an attempted departure from the traditional way of doing business.  It found favor in the US and, to one extent or another, became a dominant model.  This is the second installment of a four-part article about managing creative enterprises. 

Lean

In Lean Management, a project is broken into two phases.  Phase 1 – Stealth Mode – represents the alpha version of a product.  The nascent prototype is tested in the internal company environment.  Further development leads to a beta version for which certain companies, by invitation, test the product before release to manufacturing.  Phase 2 – Market Mode – represents the completion, approval, and release of an MVP—minimum viable product—which then goes through a correction phase that includes bug fixing.  At the same time, a company will test features. This includes, by implication, changes to marketing plans, sales strategies, etc. (See Figure 2.)

Figure 2 – Lean Development Mode

The Lean Model does a superb job of describing the modern way of thinking about the product cycle, but the same thinking that governs the Traditional Model drives it.  As before, it finds expression as a high-level sequence.  It provides a manager no road map to improve a situation, and instead depends entirely on personal talent and resourcefulness to win the day.

Traditional vs. Lean

Lean presents certain points of emphasis that distinguish it, such as the MVP, but the irony is that when we compare the Lean Model to the Traditional Model, we find that they are basically the same.

  • Idea, Concept and Feasibility” in the Traditional Model are no different from “Objectives, Ideation, Definitions, and Mockups” in the Lean Model.
  • “Preliminary Business Case, Definition, and Final Business Case” in the Traditional Model are not any different from “Proof of Concept and Alpha Version” in the Lean Model.
  • “Development” and “Deployment” in the Traditional Model is the same as the “MVP and Releases X” in the Lean Model.
  • “Initial Growth” in the Traditional Model is the same as “Release 2.0 and Releases 2.X” in the Lean Model.
  • “Maturity” in the Traditional Model is no different from “Release 3.0 and Releases 3.X” in the Lean Model.

Obviously we could point out more similarities and the reader may ask what we have gained out of the so call Lean Model.  The answer is actually quite profound: A significantly different perspective on the same thing. 

New management models may induce radical change in various ways, but companies will always consist of people, their ideas, and a structure.  A commercial concern can be described as the organized creation and distribution of products and services.  That probably will not change.  So we are dealing with the same basic material, but the point of view and emphasis makes the difference between one model and the next.  The change in perspective can be highly valuable and the ramifications extreme.  Compare for a moment some of what has already been discussed:  Japan’s renaissance in the 1980s, JIT, Lean, and the Hollow Corporation.  But we can do better.

The Current Environment

Today, automation is reversing the problem of cheap overseas labor and increasingly bringing manufacturing back to our shores.  We are only at the beginning of this new cycle.  Meanwhile, a new entrepreneurial economy is bursting forth.  Design is moving to center stage.  Our business culture has evolved and attitudes have re-aligned.  In sharp contrast to the past, creative employees have finally gained the acceptance and respect they deserve for the crucial role they play in organizational success.  The business climate is faster-paced, than ever—rapidly changing, and multicultural.  Staunchly individualistic leaders backed by a computer savvy workforce characterize our high tech companies, and increasingly, our entrepreneurial ventures.  It is important to appreciate that sequential charts of managerial jargon are no longer well received.  Such things impose uniformity, and uniformity is anathema to today’s creative workforce.  Under these circumstances, it is extremely challenging to manage product design using yesterday’s managerial paradigms.

Along with previous models, Lean has proven its worth.  But once again, current conditions call for an entirely new point of view—a clear and simple model that works with creative organizations that have no patience with past modes of operation—a model that adapts to most every organization regardless of mission and organizational structure.  We all seek efficiency and excellence in our design and manufacturing processes, and we emphasize these objectives more than we do any others.  Today, for the release of any complex product, we need a new model that optimizes and controls efficiency and excellence.

The Controlled Design Management Model

At their root, all the models that have gone before are based on the same kind of thinking—the placing of categories in the right sequence.  Now we will come at the problem from with a different set of criteria and a different mode of thought.  We will lay aside any disputes between high-level models, and in fact adapt to most any sequential life cycle that an organization embraces.

The next article will describe this radically new way to manage creative organizations.

Continue to PART 3

Go back to PART 1

Download full paper (PDF)

.

References

  1. Deming, W. Edwards (1964) [1943].  Statistical Adjustment of Data. Dover. ISBN 0-486-64685-8. LCCN 64-24416. (1966) [1950].

Some Theory of Sampling. Dover. ISBN 0-486-64684-X. LCCN 66-30538.

  1. William Ouchi: “Theory Z” How American Business can meet the Japanese Challenge.  Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1981
  2. Lean was originated by Eiji Toyoda and Taichi Ohno of Toyota Motors.   Ohno, Taiichi (1988), Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production, Productivity Press, ISBN 0-915299-14-3
  3. C. F., L. S. Shieh, Joint Automatic Control Conference, Michigan, p 454
  4. Shieh, L.S. and Goldman, M. J., 1974 I.E.E.E. Trans. Circuit Syst., 21, 341
  5. The Hollow Corporation, Anita Campbell, Small Business TRENDS (2012)  https://smallbiztrends.com/2004/04/hollow-corporation.html

Graphics

Flow-charts by Moises Goldman and John Jonelis.

Graphics from MS Office.

About the Authors

Dr. Moises J Goldman holds an MSEE and a PhD in Engineering Systems from UCLA, specializing in large-scale systems, process optimization, and product innovation. MBA from MIT Sloan, specializing in strategic planning and business development.  His focus is on periods of challenge and change, including startup, growth and restructuring.  Goldman served as CEO, COO, and CTO in diverse industries and developed business across the USA, Germany, Spain, Mexico, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, and Brazil, working with small firms as well as branded giants such as Lockheed, Rockwell, ATT, America Movil, GM, Ford, Scotia Bank, and HSBC. Sits on several boards where entrepreneurship and innovation are the primary goals.  Consults to merging companies during the integration phase as well as startups, helping them become going concerns. Member of several advisory boards at MIT.  Founding member of the TALENT program at IMSA.  Dr. Goldman can be reached at Moises.Goldman@outlook.com

John Jonelis patented seven products and developed dozens more in the field of air pollution control.  Created the Revelation suite of trading algorithms.  Private equity investor.  Artist.  Writer, and publisher of Chicago Venture Magazine and News From Heartland—the Journal of the Heartland Angels.  Author of the novel, The Gamemaker’s Father.  Illinois Wesleyan BFA, 1974.  Kellogg MBA 1989.

Copyright © 2019 Moises Goldman & John Jonelis. All rights reserved. Quotation with attribution is permitted for educational purposes.

Chicago Venture Magazine is a publication of Nathaniel Press www.ChicagoVentureMagazine.com Comments and re-posts in full or in part are welcomed and encouraged if accompanied by attribution and a web link. This is not investment advice. We do not guarantee accuracy. Please perform your own due diligence. It’s not our fault if you lose money..
.
.

1 Comment

Filed under angel, angel capital, angel investor, Big Corporations, big money, Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship, Innovation, Innovation and Culture, MIT, new companies, Startup, startup company, vc, Venture, venture capital

CONTROLLED DESIGN MANAGEMENT – Part 1

By Moises J Goldman & John Jonelis

Today’s business culture is more strongly creative and entrepreneurial than at any time in history, posing new organizational opportunities and challenges.  That calls for a new way to think about and implement design management.  Using the language of the digital age, this article introduces a new perspective, applying a radically different technique to the management of the creative process, and then demonstrates an intuitive working model that functions in any modern organization.  This is the first installment of a four-part article. 

Current Management Models

Management models have undergone disruptive changes over the years.  The early 1980s was a time when Japanese productivity achieved the highest level anywhere in the world. At that time, productivity had fallen in the USA, and many felt that America could and should learn from Japan.  There was a real call to break from the Traditional Model of product management.

Curiously, the Japanese renaissance was, in large part, the product of an American—the pioneer W. Edwards Deming.  He espoused high product quality coupled with a humane approach to managing people.  He laid out a complex set of principles to realize those ideals.  Deming built his approach on different assumptions than the Traditional Model.  I had the pleasure of working at a company founded on his principles.  This was rare in the USA, but the Japanese implemented his theories with fervor.  Much can be said about the details, but when you boil it down to its simplest terms, Japanese success was actually based on three broad factors:

  • A focus on a strong corporate structure
  • Long-range staff development
  • Consensus decision-making

These factors led to lower turnover, higher job commitment, and higher productivity.  This initiative was then adapted for use in the USA by William Ouchi and became known as Theory Z.1   For a time, Eli Lilly, Rockwell International, General Motors, Westinghouse and many other large corporations embraced this new dogma.

But this new paradigm clashed with the ideas of western management and the expectations of an American workforce.  Theory Z didn’t gain lasting traction in America, where the Traditional Model continued to dominate.  Why the cultural clash? It has to do with the way we think—more particularly, the way in which we picture or imagine a process.  Figure 1 lays out the Traditional Model of product management in graphical form:

Figure 1 – Traditional Product Management Model

The Traditional Model can be expressed as a high-level sequence and it is, quite simply, one specific mode of thought.  To its credit, it does an excellent job of defining a product life cycle.  Everything is placed neatly in a row.  There is a defined beginning and end.  But the weakness of this model slows many organizations that use it and it does nothing to improve or optimize a process.  The inherent top-down mode of thought is a limiting factor, and is also limiting to the models that grew out of it or rose up in reaction to it.

New Paradigms

Nowhere was the contrast with Japan greater than in automobile manufacture.  Japan, long known for its cheap, low-quality vehicles and other junk, began to crank out the best-made cars, electronics, and other products in the world.  Meanwhile, Detroit remained mired in the concept of planned obsolescence.  Consumers took notice and they voted with their wallets.

Then Toyota rolled out Just-in-Time Manufacturing (JIT) as a way of reducing the cost of inventory.  Among other changes, JIT heightened the awareness of design management itself.  Eventually America had to adjust if it was to compete with the Japanese, and the resulting chaos changed the way we do business today.  Companies began to adopt JIT, and increasingly moved toward a new ideal—the Hollow Corporation—also known as the Virtual Business.6

At its extreme, the Hollow Corporation is an organization stripped of almost every function.  Brand means everything and the company makes nothing.  Everything is measured in money, and profit is the only goal.  A simple example of a hollow corporation is an American clothing designer taking on a European-sounding name and making designer clothing in China for sale to the world.  As this trend grew, companies outsourced more and more functions.  This intensified the importance of brand marketing and marketing for globalization.  While this was going on, America was busy transforming itself into a service economy.

Globalization Matures

But industry discovered that it was not only possible but also cheaper to manufacture products overseas and ship them back to US shores.  Whole industries moved their factories offshore—especially to China.  The entire textile industry left.  Tool and dye left.  Electronics manufacture left.  With time, others followed, including crucial smokestack industries such as steel.

The next logical step was to offshore project management and product development.  Creative and physical design had always been a key competitive advantage in the USA.  Its business world smugly expected it to remain so.  But due to the ability to collaborate across the internet, actual design began to take place at multiple locations across the globe, with products for sale to the world—and with great success.

These trends were not without intriguing and sometimes counterintuitive aspects.  Businesses made adjustments.

  • Many US electric generation utilities sold off their physical power plants in search of greater profits as distribution networks.
  • Fluctuation in the currency market led Japanese automobile manufacturers set up production facilities in the USA, closer to the end consumer and using American workers—and still, American manufacturers struggled to compete with them.
  • US automobile manufacturers and other industries abandoned the policy of planned obsolescence and over time learned the new culture of quality.
  • South Korea began to design and manufacture high-quality goods—from pianos to automobiles to mobile phones.
  • China began outsourcing to the Vietnam and other third world countries in search of even cheaper labor.

Lean

In the early 2000s, after the internet bubble burst, it became abundantly clear that the US needed a new competitive edge.  A product management philosophy took hold, called Lean—Lean Development, Lean Manufacturing, Lean Planning, Lean Sigma, Lean Start-up. 2  Lean is a management philosophy that considers any part of the enterprise, which does not directly add value to the final objective, as superfluous—be it product development, customer service, or for that matter, the entire enterprise.  It examines all processes and eliminates the ones that do not add value to the end objective.   Lean is an attempted departure from the traditional way of doing business.  It found favor in the US and, to one extent or another, became a dominant model.

The next article will compare and assess Lean in light of previous models.  Then we will introduce an entirely new way to manage creative enterprises.

GO TO PART 2 – LEAN

Download full paper (PDF)

.References

  1. Deming, W. Edwards (1964) [1943].  Statistical Adjustment of Data. Dover. ISBN 0-486-64685-8. LCCN 64-24416. (1966) [1950].  Some Theory of Sampling. Dover. ISBN 0-486-64684-X. LCCN 66-30538.
  2. William Ouchi: “Theory Z” How American Business can meet the Japanese Challenge. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1981
  3. Lean was originated by Eiji Toyoda and Taichi Ohno of Toyota Motors. Ohno, Taiichi (1988), Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production, Productivity Press, ISBN 0-915299-14-3
  4. C. F., L. S. Shieh, Joint Automatic Control Conference, Michigan, p 454
  5. Shieh, L.S. and Goldman, M. J., 1974 I.E.E.E. Trans. Circuit Syst., 21, 341
  6. The Hollow Corporation, Anita Campbell, Small Business TRENDS (2012) https://smallbiztrends.com/2004/04/hollow-corporation.html

Graphics

Flow-charts by Moises Goldman and John Jonelis.

Graphics from MS Office.

About the Authors

Dr. Moises J Goldman holds an MSEE and a PhD in Engineering Systems from UCLA, specializing in large-scale systems, process optimization, and product innovation. MBA from MIT Sloan, specializing in strategic planning and business development.  His focus is on periods of challenge and change, including startup, growth and restructuring.  Goldman served as CEO, COO, and CTO in diverse industries and developed business across the USA, Germany, Spain, Mexico, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, and Brazil, working with small firms as well as branded giants such as Lockheed, Rockwell, ATT, America Movil, GM, Ford, Scotia Bank, and HSBC. Sits on several boards where entrepreneurship and innovation are the primary goals.  Consults to merging companies during the integration phase as well as startups, helping them become going concerns. Member of several advisory boards at MIT.  Founding member of the TALENT program at IMSA.  Dr. Goldman can be reached at Moises.Goldman@outlook.com

John Jonelis patented seven products and developed dozens more in the field of air pollution control.  Created the Revelation suite of trading algorithms.  Private equity investor.  Artist.  Writer, and publisher of Chicago Venture Magazine and News From Heartland—the Journal of the Heartland Angels.  Author of the novel, The Gamemaker’s Father.  Illinois Wesleyan BFA, 1974.  Kellogg MBA 1989.

Copyright © 2019 Moises Goldman & John Jonelis. All rights reserved. Quotation with attribution is permitted for educational purposes.

Chicago Venture Magazine is a publication of Nathaniel Press www.ChicagoVentureMagazine.com Comments and re-posts in full or in part are welcomed and encouraged if accompanied by attribution and a web link. This is not investment advice. We do not guarantee accuracy. Please perform your own due diligence. It’s not our fault if you lose money..
.
.

3 Comments

Filed under angel, angel capital, angel investor, Big Corporations, big money, chicago, Chicago Ventures, Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship, IMSA, Innovation, Innovation and Culture, Kellogg, MIT, Northwestern, Sloan, Startup, startup company, vc, Venture, venture capital

A STOLEN STORY

by John Jonelis

“Tell me a story, Uncle John!”

“A story eh?” My pal Loop Lonagan got in big trouble telling stories to Jim Kren’s little girl. “Y’know, Princess, in this case, maybe discretion’s the better part of valor.”

“But I always get a bedtime story. I can’t sleep without a bedtime story. Please, Uncle John! Pleeeeeeeeeze!”

How can a guy turn this kid down? “Okay Princess, just lay back and pretend you’re sleepy.”

“Make it a Christmas story!”

“Hmmm.” After a moment, one occurs to me—one I can steal. “Okay Princess, here goes. There’s this bright guy I know. Immigrant entrepreneur. I mean, Princess, he comes to this country and founds a startup company.”

“I know what it means.”

“It’s high tech. Agricultural analytics. Starts it during the dot-com crash around the turn of the century. Despite the lousy economy, it takes off big-time, goes public and makes me and the other investors real happy.

“His two sons work for him to build up the business. They’re his key employees and make fair salaries. The company adds a mobile app, enhanced AI, and thrives right through the 2008 recession. Years later, it’s still strong. Stock keeps going up-and-up.”

“That’s not a Christmas story, Uncle John! That’s business stuff. You sound just like my daddy.”

“Hold onto your red fur hat—I’m just getting warmed up. Papa loves those boys more than anything—wants them to run the company when he retires. Lost his wife years ago and these two are all he cares about.

“Now let’s look at the younger son. He knows he’s gonna inherit a lot of stock some day and can’t wait to get his hands on it. He feels trapped and longs to run his own life while he’s still young. So on Christmas in 2006, he announces he wants his inheritance—right now. Like most kids that age, he’s full of himself—not seeing things from his fathers point of view, maybe not considering all the ramifications of what he says. But it’s kinda like telling the old man, ‘I wish you were already dead so I had your money.’”

“That’s not nice.”

“No it’s not and it gets worse. The young buck’s not interested in the company at all. Not planning to stick around. Just wants to cash out and enjoy life.”

“This is a bad boy, Uncle John.”

“Ah Princess, don’t be so hasty to judge. You don’t know what’s really in his heart. Now the company’s listed on Nasdaq, and Papa still owns 40% of the shares. He says to himself in his broken English, ‘That what they want? Okay!  Is Christmas!’ There’s a family trust set up, so he simply transfers his stock—all of it to the two boys.

“Right away, the young colt sells his stock on the open market. With all that loose cash, he feels rich. So he moves to Vegas. Lives the wild life. Gambling all night. Show girls. Maserati. Yacht. Private jet. Hangs around with movie stars. And lots of foolish investments that don’t pay off. He never calls or writes home. Doesn’t visit the next Christmas.

“Now the older brother is still working at the company. But as you might have guessed by now, the old man is really the brains of the outfit. The shareholders—especially that big VC firm that owns a lot of stock with a seat on the board—they all want to keep Papa running the company. The board of directors votes to keeps him on as CEO, with a fat salary—bigger than he ever paid himself.

“Now I want you to notice something: That move wrankles the older brother. He secretly wants to run the show, but there’s nothing he can do about it. So he hoards his shares and bides his time. He stays at his job, working harder and harder, trying to prove himself. Doesn’t like it that his father’s salary is coming out of his share of the company. Can’t wait for the old geezer to croak so he can slide into that big desk.”

“Ugh! How horrible! This brother is worse than the other one!”

“Right Princess. Pappy doesn’t have a clue what’s cranking through this guy’s mind. The kid works hard. He’s dependable. Therefore, he must be a fine boy, right? But he’s so secretive—so sour—never smiles—and for some reason that Pops doesn’t understand, the other one still holds a soft spot in his aging heart.

Back to the younger buck: By the second year, this kid’s portfolio takes a dive, and at the same time, he’s going through money like water. Kid starts looking for work. After all, he was a big executive at a successful company. Impressive LinkedIn resume and all. But now it’s the great recession of 2008 and all he can get are temporary consulting jobs. He forms a startup company, crunching numbers for big investment houses and actually raises some capital. But not enough. Goes belly up within the year. Figures he’s a failure and he’s ashamed to let his father know how bad things are turning out for him. So he doesn’t visit the family that Christmas either.

“By the third year, he’s broke, can’t pay the rent, and gets evicted from his hotel suite. Most of that year, he’s living in his car and scrounging food, feeling mighty low.

“Don’t cry, Princess.”

She sniffs. “This is a terrible Christmas story.”

“Wait and see. Finally, the kid hits rock bottom and comes to his senses. I mean—hey—he’s starving to death. He decides to go home. Even newbies at his dad’s company make a decent living. He’ll confess everything to his father—his failure, his waste—he’ll apologize and beg for a part-time job. Nothing special—maybe an internship or some low-level gig on probation—something like that. He knows it’s more than he deserves.

“Out of the blue, Papa sends him an invite to Christmas dinner and a plane ticket that year, so he texts that he’ll come. Spends the whole flight practicing his confession.

“On Christmas Eve, the old man gets restless; hires a limo and goes out to make a few preparations. Phones his secretary with special instructions. Stops at Mens Wearhouse and lotsa other places. Gets to O’Hare and hangs around for hours. I mean, this guy hasn’t even heard from his boy in three years! When the kid finally walks out the concourse, Papa runs to him, throws his arms around him, hugs him tenderly, tells him he’s glad he’s home. The kid hasn’t changed clothes in a year. Stinks to make your eyes sting. No luggage. Papa leads his son to the limo, arm over his shoulders, and tells his boy he loves him.

“In the back of the limo, the boy stammers out his practiced confession, tears streaming down his face, but his father will have none of it. ‘Stop—no more!’ he shouts. If there’s anything this kid ever learned, it’s to obey his father’s commands. Papa breaks out two tumblers and a bottle of Drambuie and leads the conversation into fond recollections and good times. Does most of the talking and the kid can’t help but laugh at some of the memories.

“Limo stops at the Union League Club and they take in a steam and swim and shower. The kid opens his locker to find a new shirt, jeans, sport jacket, shoes—the works. He can hardly believe it and again stammers out his confession.

Enough already! I not hear it!’ says his father, and the old man’s word is always final.

“When they get home, the place is full of Papa’s close friends and dear customers—maybe 300 people. A twelve foot tree sparkles with a million lights.  A live band pumps out Christmas music.  The aroma of good food fills the house. A caterer lays out an amazing number of enormous turkeys with stuffing and potatoes with gravy, and cranberry sauce, wine and all the trimmings. All that food takes up the big table in Papa’s baronial dining room and they set up a buffet line. People enjoy their meal milling around, indulging in lively conversation. When everybody eats their fill, out comes the pumpkin and mincemeat pies, ice cream, coffee, and brandy. The band leads the crowd singing carols. Take it from me: this is a great party! I for one, enjoyed every minute of it.

“Now the older brother works late at the office that night, as usual. One of the guests notices him out front, pacing in the snow. Papa runs out to him—doesn’t even stop to put on his coat. Begs the boy to come in and join the party. But the kid spits out words in anger: ‘I work for you day and night! I never refuse to do anything you say! Do you ever throw a party for me? But when this worthless bum—this son of yours—shows up, after squandering your money on women and gambling—you celebrate like some kind of idiot, disgracing us in front of all our friends and customers!’

“Papa hugs him and speaks softly to him in his native dialect. ‘On you I depend always. You are good boy. You own all my company stock. But your brother is home! After three years he come home! We must celebrate! Is like he come back from dead!’

“But the older brother won’t be consoled. He curses and shouts, ‘He should be dead,’ and gets in his car and drives off.”

I smile at Princess. She doesn’t look sleepy at all.

“What happens then?” she says.

I sigh. “The old man—Uncle Ludditis, in case you hadn’t guessed already—he eventually retires and opens that bar he always dreamed about.  Rents me the back room for my magazine.  The older brother takes over as CEO and forces the younger one out.

“Uncle John!  That can’t be the way it turns out!  It’s not fair!”

“Why not?  Those are the consequences of their decisions.  The older one holds onto his 20% share of the company so he finally runs that show, a rich miser living alone.  The younger one learns from his mistakes, finds employment elsewhere, marries a good woman, raises two wonderful children.

“And Princess, their father loves them both deeply, no matter what.  His love is all he has left to give and he’s not stingy with it.  Close your eyes now.  Merry Christmas.”

Story credit: Jesus Christ, The Parable of the Prodigal Son –Luke 15:11-32

.

More Christmas Stories:

BEST GIFT

A LOOP LONAGAN CHRISTMAS

THE BUM IN ME

.

Chicago Venture Magazine is a publication of Nathaniel Press www.ChicagoVentureMagazine.com Comments and re-posts in full or in part are welcomed and encouraged if accompanied by attribution and a web link. This is not investment advice. We do not guarantee accuracy. Please perform your own due diligence. It’s not our fault if you lose money.
.Copyright © 2017 John Jonelis – All Rights Reserved
.
.

Leave a comment

Filed under angel, angel capital, angel investor, App, Big Corporations, big money, Conflict, Donatas Ludditis, Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Culture, investor, Jim Kren, loop lonagan, Mobile App, Relationships, Startup, startup company, vc, venture capital

GET YOUR OWN ‘BOTS

OR RISK BEING PUT OUT OF BUSINESS BY THEM

by Howard Tullman

Don’t fear the bots. They’ll free your company from unprofitable and tedious work. Yes, some jobs are going to be displaced. But the ones that are left and the new ones the bots will create will be more productive and way more interesting.

I realize that it’s a little frightening for many of us when we hear some of the intimidating statistics about headcount reductions in more and more industries that are being driven by the growing deployment of what we’re generically calling “bots.” But I don’t think bots are so bad for business. I realize that, while the major shifts are just beginning, we’re already talking about the displacement of thousands of analysts and adjusters in the insurance and finance industries as well as hundreds of highly-paid attorneys in sectors of the banking business. The sooner you figure out how to incorporate and deploy these little time- and money-savers, the better off you and your business will be. And that goes for businesses of all sizes.

Excepting some of the folks who will be replaced by these efficient and energetic little wonders, it will be a break for the better. Honest. No one in their right mind will miss any of the boring, repetitive and utterly useless tasks that are a painful part of too many of our jobs. If your tasks can be reduced to a set of instructions and rules that need to be repeatedly and flawlessly executed, we’ll soon enough find a program or a machine to do that work better, quicker and more accurately than you– and to do it 24/7 as well. No one argues with that part of the equation. We’d all love to be freed up from our chores and be doing exciting, creative and constructive work.

The rub comes in the rest of the story – the ratio and the scale of the jobs being eliminated as compared with the new jobs available to replace them. To quote Bruce Springsteen, in My Hometown, “Foreman says these jobs are going boys and they ain’t coming back.” Take a look at the hospitality business as a simple example. Airbnb is closing in on Marriott’s $42.7 billion market cap (it’s already worth about $10 billion more than Hilton), but the employee headcounts of these companies are in different universes. Marriott employs more than 225,000 people, Airbnb about 3,500– yes 3,500 employees. And I’m not just picking on Marriott. Hilton has about 170,000 team members. You can argue that some of those people are doing different and allegedly irreplaceable functions. But in the end, the real question is whether the customer/guest’s needs are being more than met. None of Marriott’s guests really cares about whatever it is that fills the day for those extra 400,000 workers. I’m not even sure that most of their managers know what makes up their day.

When you couple the substantial reductions in the workforce with the readily-demonstrated and clearly impressive gains in productivity and lower operating costs that we’re also seeing, it’s clear that there are major bumps in the road ahead and significant disruptions in the ways business has traditionally been done. This is especially true because the vast majority of these changes are neither complicated in regard to the technologies nor costly in terms of the required capital. Low-hanging fruit abounds. JP Morgan Chase reports eliminating more than 350,000 hours of legal document review time per year by employing bots and smart contracts.

When I use the term “bots,” I’m not talking about anything as challenging as truly intelligent agents or even anything autonomous. I’m talking about simple lines of code– and not that many– that can successfully execute instructions and directives or commands that are well-established and documented by humans. I hate to call any of this stuff artificial intelligence. At best it’s augmented and extended intelligence. The intelligence being extended is ours; the folks being augmented are us. We’re talking about systems and tools that will help us perform routine tasks with minimal supervision or ongoing direction, and essentially automatically, upon request. Every business still has some of these pockets of obvious inefficiency and it’s mainly ignorance of better options and inertia that keeps them from realizing immediate improvements and significant cost savings. Your business does too, and the sooner you do your own audit and analysis, the better off and more competitive you’ll be. (See Use a Mirror to Mind Your Own Business First)

There are opportunities everywhere, but the sweetest spots for almost any business seem to fall into four recurring buckets. Forget about chatbots and retweeters. Focus internally first where you can get the biggest bang for your buck and where you can ride on existing rails. The people providing support and resources in this emerging space are few and far between right now, but they tend to target these critical areas: HR, Finance, Operations and Sales. I know, you’re already saying, “well duh, that’s just about the whole business”, so trim it down to HR and Finance and start there. Eat the elephant one bite at a time.

One of the best providers is an 1871 alumni organization called Catalytic/www.catalytic.com/> whose tagline says it all: “Do more of what you love, and less of what you don’t.” They are smart enough to understand that they are in a “rinse and repeat” business so that each time they build a new process bot they create the ability to provide a version of that same solution to thousands of other businesses more efficiently, more rapidly, and less expensively. They talk about concrete client results delivered in days, not months or years.

And, to be successful, you need a plan that’s ongoing and iterative and that’s always targeting and attacking the dumbest things you are doing. In many cases, it’s an approach that follows the same basic steps: digitize and dump the paper; speed up the flow and the inter- and intra-departmental handoffs; automate as many steps in the process as possible; measure the results; and do it again. It needs to become a habit and a mantra of your business—always moving to raise the bottom and improve the average.

It’s interesting to watch the adoption cycle as well. It’s both competitive and contagious. The more you do; the more your people will want to do and, interestingly enough, you’ll have them bringing suggestions and ideas to you for next steps–forward integrations into other programs like Word and Excel, for example—instead of sitting on their hands and bitching about the bots.

The dashboards and the flow charts that you now have access to provide levels of actionable information and data that were never available before. Frankly, these are the exact tools that you need to move your business forward. Managing by exception rather than brute force is the only way to spread your scarce and costly resources around.

 

 

Howard Tullman is the father of Chicago’s 1871 incubator.

Read his bio on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_A._Tullman

Check out his websites at http://tullman.com/  and http://tullman.blogspot.com/

Or just type his name into your favorite search engine.

.

This article previously appeared in Inc.

Image Credits – Getty Images, MS Office

Chicago Venture Magazine is a publication of Nathaniel Press www.ChicagoVentureMagazine.com Comments and re-posts in full or in part are welcomed and encouraged if accompanied by attribution and a web link. This is not investment advice. We do not guarantee accuracy. Please perform your own due diligence. It’s not our fault if you lose money.
.Copyright © 2017 John Jonelis – All Rights Reserved
.
.

Leave a comment

Filed under 1871, angel, angel capital, angel investor, Big Corporations, big money, chicago, Chicago Startup, Chicago Ventures, Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship and Politics, Howard Tullman, Innovation, Innovation and Culture, startup company, vc, Venture, venture capital

THE JOB INTERVIEW WITH WILLIAM SHAKES

by Mark T Wayne

We’re here to interview some reprobate named William Shakes for the job of special correspondent. I do not know why I’m a part of this. No sir! Perhaps it’s the strange nature of the recruit. Perhaps it’s because Jonelis recommended this particular…person, and does not entirely trust the judgement of Jim Kren, his assistant editor. (Shakes bears an uncanny resemblance and must be related in some way—maybe) Perhaps it’s because that execrable Lonagan creature is the only other help Kren could muster. But we need more writers, so here I am, eager and helpful as always, ready to lend any assistance within my power.

Mark T Wayne

Kren consults a wrinkled scrap of paper. I believe he’s reading questions from a list. “So, uh…your name is William Shakes. Is that right? Tell me about yourself.”

What kind of softball question is Kren pitching? There sits Shakes in frilly regalia, looking like something out of an Elizabethan play. He probably came here straight from an all-night costume party, roaring drunk, and Kren asks a fool question like that. Wait, I believe the man is transparent enough to respond to such utter inanity.

  • “What’s in a name?” he says with dignity. “That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. We are such stuff as dreams are made on. But if it be a sin to covet honour, I am the most offending soul alive.” Spoken fluently and with aplomb! And in a well-modulated voice!
  • Loop Lonagan looks at the man slack jawed. After a moment I hear him whispering to Kren. “What didee say?” Kren fiddles with his paper and mutters to Lonagan, “Idiot! I was gonna ask you that!”
  • My value to the proceedings is now clear. Not to mention that I recognize the true and somewhat illustrious identity of this candidate. “Gentlemen, Mr. Shakes expresses the sentiment that his name and his fame do not matter; that he brings to the table a strong imagination and boundless creativity. He’s proud of his accomplishments and liable to brawl with anyone that displays the audacity to criticize his work. (Also, gentlemen, notice that the man carries a sword.)”

“Why,” Kren asks testily, “didn’t he just come out and say what he meant?”

I express the opinion that’s precisely what he did.

Lonagan shrugs and grins at his boss. “Ain’t got no problem with it.”

William Shakes

Kren reads the next question:

  • “What is your greatest accomplishment?”
  • Shakes sits there in that hot scratchy outfit, seeming at ease. “Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them,” He says. “The play’s the thing. Thirty Seven there be, wherein I catch the conscience of the king and posterity.” The man runs off these lines without breaking sweat.
  • More muttering and both Kren and Lonagan turn to me. I clear my throat. “He’s considered the supreme writer in the English language and highly respected throughout the known world. Among other things, he produced 37 highly prized major works of written material that have captured the attention of world leaders.” (Privately, I take violent exception to the widely-held belief regarding his supremacy as a writer.  Such accolade is more aptly applied to myself. But I refuse to squabble.  Honour is at stake. Yes sir! I will do nothing to lampoon this interview!)

A brief dumbfounded silence. Then the barely vocalized sounds of approval indicate that these two examples of lower life are suitably impressed by the response. I warm to the task! Kren scans his page of questions.

  • “What major problem have you had to deal with recently?”
  • Shakes: “A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool. It is not in the stars to hold our destiny but in ourselves. We know what we are, but know not what we may be.”
  • I immediately translate: “He says he’s learning not to underrate himself. As a result, he never shirks a task, even if he feels inadequate. Because of that, he’s consistently surprised by hidden talents.”

Lonagan finally gets up the nerve to ask a question himself:

  • “Are you one o’ deeze team players?”
  • Shakes: “Prithee, it be thus. Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none.”
  • Me: “Ditto that.”

Loop’s dog Clamps. No known photograph of Lonagan exists, but they look a lot alike.

Lonagan again:

  • “What’s yer biggest weakness?”
  • Shakes: “If you prick us do we not bleed? If you tickle us do we not laugh? If you poison us do we not die? And if you wrong us shall we not revenge?”
  • They both sit there stunned, so I venture another paraphrase: “He says he’s only human, subject to the same vices of body and character as you two.”

Kren throws up his hands, then with an obvious effort, composes himself, and manages to appear grave and somewhat skeptical. Then he plods on.

  • “How do you think you can add value to our magazine?”
  • Shakes: “There is a tide in the affairs of men, which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune. Omitted, all the voyage is bound in shallows and in miseries. On such a full sea are we now afloat. And we must take the current when it serves, or lose our venture.”
  • Lonagan: “What didee say dat time?”
  • I happily translate: “He says the magazine could go on the rocks due to poor staff and lousy management. But we’re at a critical stage right now and must take full advantage of it while the opportunity is ripe.”

That last answer emits a bit of grumbling between the two louts. Those fellows have no idea who they’re dealing with. Lonagan asks what I can only assume expresses the issue that bears most tenderly on his feeble mind:

  • “How much money d’ya want fer dis gig?”
  • Shakes: “While I am a beggar, I will rail and say there is no sin but to be rich; and being rich, my virtue then shall be to say there is no vice but beggary. If money go before, all ways do lie open, but the comfort is, you shall fear no more tavern-bills.”
  • I immediately insinuate myself: “He says he doesn’t come cheap, but he never pads the expense account.”

Kren utters a deep sigh and hits him with what I am sure is his final payoff question:

  • “Why should I hire you?”
  • “Our doubts are traitors and make us lose the good we oft might win by fearing to attempt.”
  • I try not to bust out laughing. “He says, don’t be a ninny.”

Kren and Lonagan stare at each other. Face it—they botched the interview. There is nothing remaining to discuss. No sir! Jonelis wanted this relic on staff. These goons found no reason to reject the man.

Kren shrugs. “Show up tomorrow for work. Eight o’clock sharp.”

Shakes gives a bow and a flourish. “Good night, good night! Parting is such sweet sorrow, that I shall say good night till it be morrow.”

As William Shakes nobly marches out, I can barely contain my mirth.  But tomorrow, the man will stand on the sidewalk for hours.  Our office rents space in the back room of a fine establishment and Ludditis doesn’t open the bar till the potato pancake connoisseurs crowd in for lunch.  Kren’s revenge.

 

Read the first in this series – TO BE OR NOT TO BE HACKED.

Image Credits – John Jonelis, Public Domain
.

Chicago Venture Magazine is a publication of Nathaniel Press www.ChicagoVentureMagazine.com Comments and re-posts in full or in part are welcomed and encouraged if accompanied by attribution and a web link. This is not investment advice. We do not guarantee accuracy. Please perform your own due diligence. It’s not our fault if you lose money.
.Copyright © 2017 John Jonelis – All Rights Reserved
.
.

1 Comment

Filed under angel, angel capital, angel investor, Big Corporations, Characters, Chicago Startup, Chicago Venture Magazine, Chicago Ventures, Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship, Jim Kren, loop lonagan, Mark T Wayne, Startup, startup company

CHICAGO TECH’S NEXT CHAPTER

At Tempus, Ocient and Catalytic, Chicago’s most prominent entrepreneurs are moving on to their next big thing.

by Jim Dallky

Chicago tech is growing up.

One sign of a maturing tech ecosystem is the success of a city’s serial entrepreneurs, and recently we’ve seen some of Chicago’s most high profile founders and technologists move on to their next companies, and tackle big industries like the Internet of Things, cancer research, and artificial intelligence.

Uptake - ChicagoInno

Look no further than Groupon founders Brad Keywell and Eric Lefkofsky. Keywell brought Uptake1 out of stealth in 2015, and the fastgrowing IoT startup has already raised $45 million at a $1.1 billion valuation. Lefkofsky left his CEO role at Groupon last November and, as we first reported in July2, has since been working on Tempus3, a healthtech startup that’s “building the infrastructure to modernize cancer treatment.”

 

Ocient - homepage

Also in July, Cleversafe founder Chris Gladwin, who sold his data storage company to IBM in 2015 for $1.3 billion, unveiled4 his next startup Ocient5. Gladwin has yet to make Ocient’s product plans public, but the software company expects to “ultimately hire hundreds of local employees.”

 

pushbot - website

Sean Chou, the former CTO and employee No. 2 at Fieldglass—which sold to SAP for more than $1 billion—recently, launched Catalytic6, a startup building chatbots for businesses. The company’s platform, Pushbot, helps enterprises “build, run, and improve your processes.”

 

bright - website

You can also look at Jeff Judge, the founder of Signal (acquired by BrightTag in 2014) who’s now building business metrics platform, Bright.7

Kickstarter cofounder Charles Adler is giving entrepreneurs, creatives and makers a better place to work with the Center for Lost Arts8; Motorola veterans are spinning out to create new hardware startups like John Renaldi’s “invisible wearable” company Jio9; along with many, many other founders who are on to their next project and have committed to building in Chicago.

“Certainly, as a community, I think we are maturing,” said Illinois Technology Association CEO Fred Hoch. “It’s being driven a lot by those serial entrepreneurs that are coming back and doing their next thing.”

Hoch described how the city experienced an “excitement period” 3-4 years ago where a lot of startup activity was taking place but, “a lot of bullshit was being developed…things that don’t have a long-term revenue stream.” Chicago’s strength as a tech city is in B2B, Hoch said, and Chicago tech has started to get back who it is as a community. “What’s happened over the last 18 months is that we’ve come back to realize who we are,” he said. “[Entrepreneurs] are not thinking about dog-walking apps. They’re thinking about big things that affect businesses nationally and globally.”

1871 CEO Howard Tullman added that Chicago also has a handful of who he calls “benchers,” successful entrepreneurs who are taking some time off but will likely “be back in the action in a reasonably short time.” This list includes Fieldglass founder Jai Shekhawat, AKTA founder John Roa, and Roger Liew, the former CTO of Orbitz. Tullman also said that 1871 isn’t just full of first-time founders. There are dozens of serial entrepreneurs working out of the Chicago tech hub.

“People don’t understand that the 1871 members aren’t remotely all first timers,” Tullman said. “We have several dozen serial entrepreneurs working here and building their next businesses who are smart enough to avoid making sizeable infrastructure and other capital commitments until they determine whether the dogs will be eating their new dog food…we are definitely seeing a wave of more seasoned, more talented and more aggressive serial entrepreneurs—all working in Chicagoand, largely using their own resources to start the next group of great tech businesses right here.”

Of course, as Chicago’s tech community matures, it doesn’t come without growing pains. Some of the city’s most prominent startups have gone through layoffs in recent months, with Avant firing 60 employees and Raise trimming 15% by cutting 45 people. And the city is still well behind other markets like New York and Boston when it comes to total venture funding.

tempus - website

Tempus

 

But Chicago is proving to be a city where entrepreneurs are willing to double down after successful exits, and that’s good news for the future of Chicago tech.

“We’ve come a long way in the last 10 years,” Hoch said. “[Entrepreneurs] are choosing to stay and be a part of this community because it’s a strong community now.”

 

About the Author

Jim Dallke is the Associate Editor of ChicagoInno of Streetwise Media, where this article previously appeared.

This article appeared in News From Heartland

 

 

Links cited:

Graphics and logos from company websites and ChicagoInno

Chicago Venture Magazine is a publication of Nathaniel Press www.ChicagoVentureMagazine.com Comments and re-posts in full or in part are welcomed and encouraged if accompanied by attribution and a web link. This is not investment advice. We do not guarantee accuracy. Please perform your own due diligence. It’s not our fault if you lose money.
.Copyright © 2017 John Jonelis – All Rights Reserved
.
.

Leave a comment

Filed under 1871, angel, angel capital, angel investor, Big Corporations, big money, chicago, Chicago Startup, Chicago Ventures, Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship, Howard Tullman, Innovation, Innovation and Culture, Invention, investor, new companies, Startup, startup company, vc, Venture, venture capital