Category Archives: Entrepreneurship

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

WHY MILLENNIALS KEEP DUMPING YOU

An Open Letter to Management

by Lisa Earle McLeod

Attracting and keeping top millennial talent is a burning issue for leaders. Millennials are 35% of the workforce. By 2020 they’ll be 46% of the working population.

Some of our most successful clients — organizations like G Adventures, Google, and Hootsuite — are filled with millennials who are on fire for their jobs. Yet many organizations struggle to attract, and retain, top millennial talent.

One of us, Elizabeth, wrote this letter, to share insights about what top-performing millennials want and how leaders can ignite the “energy of a thousand suns.”

~ ~ ~

An Open Letter to Management:

You hired us thinking this one might be different; this one might be in it for the long haul. We’re six months in, giving everything we have, then suddenly, we drop a bomb on you. We’re quitting.

We know the stereotypes. Millennials never settle down. We’re drowning in debt for useless degrees. We refuse to put our phone away. We are addicted to lattes even at the expense of our water bill. Our bosses are not wrong about these perceptions. But, pointing to our sometimes irresponsible spending and fear of interpersonal commitment isn’t going to solve your problem. You still need us. We’re the ones who’ve mastered social media, who have the energy of a thousand suns, and who will knock back 5-dollar macchiatos until the job is done perfectly.

I’ve worked in corporate America, administrative offices, advertising agencies, and restaurants. I’ve had bosses ranging from 24 to 64. I’ve had bosses I loved, and bosses I didn’t. I’ve seen my peers quit, and I’ve quit a few times myself. Here’s what’s really behind your millennials’ resignation letter:

.

-1- You tolerate low-performance

It’s downright debilitating to a high achiever. I’m working my heart out and every time I look up Donna-Do-Nothing is contemplating how long is too long to take for lunch. I start wondering why leadership tolerates this.

Is that the standard here? No thanks.

Fact: Poor performers have a chilling effect on everyone.

.

-2- ROI is not enough for me

I spent Sunday thinking about how I can make a difference to our customers. Now it’s Monday morning, what do I hear? Stock price. Billing. ROI. Suddenly, my Monday power playlist seems useless. I’m sitting in a conference room listening to you drag on about cash flow.

I was making more money bartending in college than I am at this entry-level job. You say I’ll get a raise in a year if the company hits a certain number? So what? I need something to care about today. Talk to me about how we make a difference, not your ROI report.

Fact: Organizations with a purpose bigger than money have a growth rate triple that of their competitors.

.

-3- Culture is more than free Panera

Don’t confuse culture with collateral. Yes, I am a cash-strapped millennial who really appreciates free lunch. But I don’t wake up at 6AM every day to play foosball in the break room. I’m not inspired to be more innovative over a Bacon Turkey Bravo.

I need to be surrounded by people who are on fire for what we’re doing. I need a manager who is motivated to push boundaries and think differently. Working in a cool office is really awesome. So is free lunch. But a purposeful culture is more important.

Fact: A culture of purpose drives exponential sales growth

.

-4- It’s ok to get personal

Treat me like a number? I’ll return the favor. This job will quickly become nothing more than my rent payment. I’ll start living for Friday and counting down the minutes until 5. After a few months of that, I’ll probably have a drunken epiphany and realize I want more out of my life than this.

Then I’ll prove your assumptions right. 8 months in, I’ll quit and leave. Or worse, I’ll quit and stay, just like Donna-Do-Nothing.

That’s not good for either of us. Here’s what you need to know:

I was raised to believe I could change the world. I’m desperate for you to show me that the work we do here matters, even just a little bit. I’ll make copies, I’ll fetch coffee, I’ll do the grunt work. But I’m not doing it to help you get a new Mercedes.

I’ll give you everything I’ve got, but I need to know it makes a difference to something bigger than your bottom line.

.

Signed,

A Millennial

~ ~ ~

.

The millennials are telling us what we already know in our hearts to be true. People want to make money; they also want to make a difference. Successful leaders put purpose before profit, and they wind up with teams who drive revenue through the roof.

.

This article was co-written with Elizabeth McLeod, a millennial and cum laude graduate of Boston University, and daughter of Lisa Earle McLeod.

Lisa Earle McLeod is the creator of the popular business concept Noble Purpose and author of the bestselling books, SELLING WITH NOBLE PURPOSE and LEADING WITH NOBLE PURPOSE. Lisa is a sales leadership consultant and keynote speaker who helps organizations improve competitive differentiation and emotional engagement. www.mcleodandmore.com

This article previously appeared in Forbes

Image credit: Lisa Earle McLeod

.

Also by Lisa Earle McLeod:

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, Big Corporations, big money, Chicago Startup, Chicago Ventures, Conflict, Consulting, Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship and Politics, Impact Investing, Innovation and Culture, jobs, new companies, Social Entrepreneur, Startup, startup company, vc, Venture, venture capital

TO BE OR NOT TO BE HACKED?

by William Shakespeare,

alias Moises J. Goldman and John Jonelis

.

Hamlet—To be or not to be hacked? That is the question. Whether ‘tis nobler to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of phishes, gouged by creatures who boast no scruple, nor affect any purpose higher than foul destruction—and by opposing, end them?

[Editor’s translation—Hackers are a bummer. This is war.]

 

William “Moises” Shakespeare

.

Or may say ‘tis wiser to remain in dungeons rank and old—to sleep, perchance to dream—ay, there’s the rub. For in that sleep, what dreams may come? The internet makes cowards of us all.

[Editor’s translation—Should I upgrade the robustness of my internal infrastructure and firewalls?]

.

Horatio—But soft, me lord, to think upon the many turns a kindom make.

Betwixt two means shall we choose to take.

[Editor’s translation—There are two good options.]

 

Hamlet—Ay, the dilemma. To guard an angry pack of dogs that tear and rent and hack away till strength and blood be spent—or flee? How wouldst thou fight, Horatio? I would not hear your enemy say you could do it. Nor shall you do my ear that violence.

[Translation—Don’t feed me a pack of lies. If we encrypt all sensitive data and cyber-secure our network we still can’t achieve fail-safe.]

.

.

Horatio—Hear me lord; I make my case:

Should bits and bytes habitate high Cloud

A kingdom’s gold to free?

No arms, no knights, no castle wall to tug a purse’s string so proud!

‘Stead exult in markets, foul of hogs and sheep and goat?

Entice the sorcerer to play in darker art, in unknown moat?

To raise a legion—conquer lands anew beyond the sea?

And so extend a kingdom’s reach?

[Option #1: The Cloud is cheap.  Save your money for marketing, R&D, and expansion.]

.

Hamlet —Methinks this boy hath soundly grounded thought. He makes PaaS-ing SaaS at learning dearly bought. It takes no brain to buy his train of thought.

[Seems like a no brainer. The Cloud.  Platform as a Service—Software as a Service. Let’s do it!]

.

Horatio —But soft, me lord, I fear foul play!

This Cloud by wild winds be cast astray.

It boasts no force to hole such gauze with tumult and in fray,

And by doing so, steal treasury of intellect away.

‘Tis best, to build yon castle walls of stouter stuff, some say.

Keep bytes and treasure close and spend on fodder and on hay.

[Option #2: The Cloud is way too vulnerable to attack. Update your in-house network.]

.

.

Hamlet —Wouldst thou squeeze gold from a lark? Something is rotten in the state of Denmark. But harken thee—where may best advantage be? What odds see ye?

[That equipment’s really expensive! What’s the probability of getting hacked either way?]

Horatio —Sorcerers be that wouldst draw

Straight crook from snarled oaken saw.

[Mathematicians use probability trees.].

.

Hamlet —O cursed spite that ever I was born to set it right! 

[I hate math!]

.

Horatio —Of haste take not. Outcomes be but three.

Take heed of which I shew to thee.

[No big deal. There are only three probable outcomes.]

Hamlet—Hold, varlet! A fourth ye lacked—that one repent and not be hacked.

[Hamlet has noticed a missing variable: An enterprise upgrades internal systems and yet escapes hacking.]

.

Horatio—‘Tis true M’lord, yet is it moot?

Foes be met; nought ground ‘neath heel o’ boot.

Complication wears poorly on thee.

There be no guarantee.

This outcome we call 1-P3…….(1)

.

Hamlet—Ha! There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

[Maybe I’m not as dumb as I look.]

.

Horatio —‘Tis sooth, my liege—I seek not to deceive.

Perchance I draft a map—deeper knowledge ye may tap.

Yon magic shall appease;

Thy grace’s ire set at ease.

[I’ll make it simple, so even you can see. Take a look at this probability tree.]

 

M’lord do you see?

If systems new and hacking lacking,

Probability is simply 1-P3.

[The probability of an internal network not getting hacked.]

.

Hamlet—What make I of this wonder? To ask a fool is to blunder.

.

Horatio—Magic formula ye seek, to make right your decision?

Fortunately, Shakespeare knows it with precision.

[Be cool. I got this.]

Look here, dear Ham, and spy yon enterprise,

Floating on the Cloud ’tis wise.

Not to hack or nick sharp blade.

We dig our likelihood with spade.

‘Tis thus: P1+(1-P1)(1-P2)=1-P2(1-(1-P1)………(2)

[The probability of not getting hacked on the Cloud.]

.

Hamlet [Aside] Madness in great ones must not unwatch’d go. A screw is loose. He rhymes like Dr. Seuss.

[Horatio’s gone bonkers.]

.

.

Horatio —But hark—magicians work dark secrets in a day

That mortal man can plumb no other way.

I spell it in a cypher so you see

The final answer to this mystery.

[Here dummy, I’ll spell it out for you.]

.

Hamlet—Indeed, this must I see.

.

Horatio—Floating on a Cloud,

Yon enterprise two chances escape plunder,

To hide from doom, not hacked asunder.

The Cloud foul Russian must attack rapaciously

Before cursed knife shall reach its mark with certainty.

[If your enterprise is on the Cloud, hacking is a two-stage process. The Cloud may get hacked. But even then, your enterprise may escape damage.]

.

To ride the Cloud in skies of blue, equation (1) must be less than (2).

Hence:  1-P3<1-P2(1-P1)…….(3)

We boil down that poison thus, and there we gain the clue.

If fates would their due, we sing this song,

Our enterprise will float along.

And thus:  P3>P2(1-P1)

 [This is the absolute condition for an enterprise to go to the Cloud.]

 

.

Hamlet—Dost thou think me easier play’d on than a pipe? For ‘tis sport to have the enginer hoist with his own petard, an’t shall go hard.

.

Horatio—M’lord salves the ego with a threat.

Is this the way your friends are met?

But hear me, sire, ‘tis plain to do.

I will write it out for you.

Be ye not a foe to the way the numbers go.

Ye shall recall the probability of hacking free be 1-P3.

If wise man, on gauzy Cloud his merit bent,

To the tune of 80%,

The numbers shew:  1-P2(0.2)

[Here ya go, Mr. Bigshot CIO—if the probability of not getting hacked on the Cloud—P1—is 80%, then 1-P2(1-0.8) hence 1-P2(0.2)]

.

Hamlet—Still it be Greek to me.

.

Horatio —Here, my lord, I will unravel

The way that ye must travel,

To the ending of thy quest.

Be in knowledge, not in jest.

[Gotcha!]

.

Hamlet—Get it over before I die.

.

.

Horatio —Here’s an end so ye may rest

Like bones inside a chest.

If P3>(0.2)P2 be true,

To the Cloud get ye hence,

Else makest equipment new

And play yon cards close to thy vest.

[This is how the CIO makes the decision.]

Hamlet[Aside] This be a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy. He rhymes obtuse like Mother Goose. Yet I shall the effect of this good lesson keep as watchman to my heart.

[Translation—Good! Let’s get some pizza.]

[Curtain]

[DOWNLOAD ARTICLE IN PDF FORMAT]

.

NOTE – This example follows similar logic and Decision by Professor J. Sussman used in his lecture to the Engineering Systems Division entitled, DID BELICHICK MAKE THE RIGHT CALL?

[READ BELICHICK PART 1 – PDF]

[READ BELICHICK PART 2 – PDF]

.

About the Authors

Dr. Moises Goldman is uniquely involved with STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). He is a member of several advisory boards at MIT and is a founding member of the TALENT program at IMSA.

John Jonelis is a writer, publisher of CHICAGO VENTURE MAGAZINE and NEWS FROM HEARTLAND, author of the novel, THE GAMEMAKER’S FATHER. BFA, MBA from Kellogg.

.

Photography and Graphics – John Jonelis, 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 App, Big Corporations, big money, Characters, Data, Economics, Education, Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship, image of risk, IMSA, Information, Innovation, Internet, Internet Marketing, MIT, MIT Enterprise Forum, MIT Enterprise Forum Chicago, MITEF, MITEF Chicago, Mobile App, picture of risk, picture risk, Risk, Software, Startup, startup company, vc, Venture, venture capital

THE BIG LITTLE TRAP

by Scott M. Anderson

An investor, Sally, recently heard two pitches. The first was from A-Dot-Co, which will produce polka-dot jellybeans using a new patented process. The second was from BetterBean, will produce purple jellybeans using a trade secret method which improves existing manufacturing processes.

Having spent several years owning a candy company, Sally was interested in both opportunities.

Jellybean T

Sally knows that the jellybean market is large and well established. With a few regional exceptions, she knows the annual market growth has been 3% for many years.

sales projection MS Office

Accordingly, she was a bit surprised to see strong growth projections in the presentations from both A-Dot-Co and BetterBean. More diligence would be required.

Sally asked both companies to submit detailed materials in support of the projections they presented. She was particularly focused on the factors responsible for revenue growth. Since the market is large and established, Sally knew that growth for a new entrant must come from either expansion of the overall market or from switching behavior (customers switching from established providers to new providers). She was hopeful that the detailed support material for each revenue projection, would reflect management’s understanding of these market dynamics.

 

A-Dot-Co

A-Dot-Co

Sally received the following support detail from A-Dot-Co:

A-Dot-Co Revenue

She knew from prior experience that the total candy market was very large and she was glad to see the jelly bean sub-market in excess of $2 billion. There would be plenty of upside for A-Dot-Co. She was also glad to see that in year 5, the founder did not expect to exceed 1.0% of the market. Any larger share percentage would require major resources and additional funding rounds.

However, before investing, Sally still needed more information on the detail behind the market share projections. She scheduled a follow-up call.

On the call, A-Dot-Co was very enthusiastic. It went like this:

Sally: “Thank you for your revenue detail. I have some follow up questions. How do you expect to land nearly $2 million in revenue in the first 2 years?”

Founder: “A-Dot-Co is well positioned to achieve our revenue goals. We have a seasoned team who formed many candy company startups in the past.”

Sally: “That’s great. But how do you intend to land $600K of sales in year 1?”

Founder: “My team has deep knowledge about the jelly bean market. We only need a mere 0.03% of the market to land the projected $600K! Surely there are enough polka-dot jelly bean eaters out there to achieve this projection!”

A-Dot-Co’s founder fell into The Big Little Trap.

trap MS Office

 

The Trap

The Big Little Trap occurs when a founder believes his future projections are achievable because the market is so big and the market share percentage is so little. Specifically, that the sales goal will be very easy to accomplish because the market goal is such a small percentage, such as 0.03% with A-Dot-Co. (“It’s so small that anyone can reach it…as easy as falling off a log!”) In fact, the Trap victim might further say that the percentage is so tiny, that it may take only a few customers to reach it, and “…clearly the market has more than just a few customers!”

The response to an enthusiastic Trap victim: “I’m glad you’re excited. Name the customers!”

 

BetterBean

BetterBean

BetterBean submitted the following detail to Sally:

BetterBean Revenue

 

As before, Sally was glad to see confirmation of the jelly bean market. (They must have used the same market study). But she was even happier to see customer detail behind the revenue projection.

target market MS Office

The detail reveals several important items:

  1. BetterBean knows his target customers and may already have relationships established with them.
  2. Knowing BetterBean’s target customers should lead to a more efficient operation by helping the company prioritize the company’s limited time with its important customers over less strategic prospects.
  3. BetterBean has applied the 80/20 rule—at least 80% of the revenue is derived from specific, identified customers. The remaining revenue will come from other customers, currently unknown. Forecasting is an inexact science and to communicate over-precision in the detail implies the founder may be taking his projections too seriously. BetterBean has not been overly precise.
  4. When—not if—BetterBean misses its projections, the detail will provide insight as to why the projections were missed. The “why” is more important for fixing future revenue projections.
  5. BetterBean is more transparent than A-Dot-Co. Specifically, BetterBean’s founder has shared his target customer list, perhaps with the hope that Sally may have contacts to be leveraged at those customer accounts. Conversely, A-Dot-Co has shared no customer detail, suggesting that its founder may not know who his customers will be. This is concerning if true.

 

Decision Time

Sally rejected the opportunity with A-Dot-Co. It fell into The Big Little Trap—and didn’t even realize it. The lack of transparency did not generate confidence in the company’s management team.

Sally proceeded with further diligence on BetterBean.

The Big Little Trap grabs victims all the time. Like Sally, an investor should consider the market size, but only in the context of the startup’s upside potential. As she observed, there’s, “…plenty of upside for A-Dot-Co.” However, market share is not the justification of year-to-year or month-to-month revenue goals. Market share is best seen as a byproduct of sales efforts.

The jellybean example is fictitious, but the Trap is very real. Watch for The Big Little Trap at your next pitch session. See if the founder falls into it!

 

About the Author

Scott M. Anderson is a principal at Anderson Financial Services, LLC and has been performing cash projections for decades as an investment banker, a workout specialist, and recently, as an advisor to investors and startups. He can be reached at scott@andersonfsllc.com

Graphics from MS Office

 

This article appeared in NEWS FROM HEARTLAND

NEWS FROM HEARTLAND – The Journal of the Heartland Angels is published tri-annually for its members. We encourage reproduction and quotation of articles, if done with with attribution. Copyright © 2017 Heartland Angels. John Jonelis, Editor – John@HeartlandAngels.com

FOR MEMBERSHIP IN THE HEARTLAND ANGELS, contact Ron Kirschner Ron@HeartlandAngels.com

FOR FUNDING, apply online. Go to www.HeartlandAngels.com

NEWSLETTER SITE – View past and present editions at News.HeartlandAngels.com

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, big money, Chicago Startup, Chicago Ventures, Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship, Heartland Angels, Innovation, Invention, investor, new companies, pitch, Startup, startup company, vc, Venture, venture capital

THE SUM OF ALL PARTS

Optimizing Human Behavior with a STEM Model

by Moises Goldman PhD

 

The Human Conundrum

For the last 15 years I have given numerous seminars aimed at optimizing executive and managerial performance in technology driven firms. The goal is to optimize departmental performance resulting in the larger optimization of an entire firm. As the theory goes: If the whole is the sum of the parts, and each part is optimized, then the whole is optimized.

These experiences have challenged my ability to communicate with people involved in STEM fields. This group represents a highly gifted segment of the population, and they tend to be very results driven. How does one reason, interpret, and convince scientists to modify their own behavior?

At first, I struggled with the appropriate lingo. I pondered how to describe my ideas using managerial jargon. I realized that I needed another language—a language that both empirical and intuitive thinkers will readily grasp and put to good use.

Then my eureka moment came to me. STEM initiatives are defined by basic human bevavior and not the other way around.

To some, this may seem counterintuitive, so let me elaborate. If we first accept and understand any given issue at hand through basic human reasoning, we can then interpret it in a STEM format. Once we do that, we can use the tools of science to bring about an optimized outcome. Let me add some clarity with the following example:

.

Kalman Filtering

My Ph.D. is in Inertial Navigation and my Masters in Control Systems. I spent many years as an executive in the aerospace industry and came to be expert in Kalman Filtering, a complex mathematical algorithm used in the guidance and navigation of aerospace vehicles. It occurred to me to apply this knowledge to the human equation.

Kalman Filtering is also known as Linear Quadratic Estimation (LQE), but it’s not necessary to go into the math here. I will attempt to make this example clear and concise. All we need is a simple diagram. I’ll describe it in layman’s terms and then apply it to the human condition.

The diagram below describes the guidance control of a space vehicle. The vehicle is at position “time-zero” or T(0). We want to get to position T(1,000,000). We calculate the location of our target relative to our present location. We recognize that any internal disturbance, such as bad sensors, electronics, and perhaps bad computations must be eliminated. (We get rid of them.)

  • We predict the trajectory of the vehicle over a short increment of time.
  • We measure the actual flight path against our target and factor in real environmental conditions (noise), such as wind speed, meteorites, etc.
  • We correct our trajectory.

The vehicle is now at T(1)—a very small part of the entire trip. T(1) is the next starting position. The algorithm repeats, bringing the vehicle to the next position T(2), then T(3), and so on. We iterate—continue to perform the same steps—predict, measure, correct—to optimize the overall trajectory to the target—T(1,000,000).

Perhaps you recognize this as a description of the way a child learns to walk. It’s commonly called a feedback loop. It governs behavior in many human pursuits. It’s the way our central nervous system directs us to negotiate a curve while driving down the road. It’s the way a baseball player catches a ball and executes a play. It’s how a circus performer walks a tightrope. It’s the way we all learn optimum behaviors.

Our minds perform this function intuitively through ordinary mental concentration, focus, or attentiveness. Concentration is an iterative process and the higher the number of iterations, the higher the degree of accuracy.

.

Optimizing Human Behavior

If we can model our human behavior and reasoning in STEM format then we are able to optimize it. As an example, let’s choose a simple human behavior and describe it using Kalman Filtering:

Behavior—Tomorrow I’m taking a final exam; I need to arrive at 8 am—the target.

Method—My class always meets at that time, so I already know approximately when to wake up. Since there cannot be any internal disturbances, I eat a good dinner, plan my breakfast and what to wear to school. I give myself time to study and get to bed early. I set my alarm for 7 am. I’m at position T(0) on the diagram.

  • Prediction—I estimate the time it takes to get ready and walk to the exam. (About the same as a normal day.)
  • Measurement—I reach the door and glance at my watch. It’s raining and I’m running late.
  • Correction—I grab an umbrella while at the same time speeding up my pace.

I get to the exam location on time, and the algorithm repeats itself for the next activity (assuming my intention is to optimize the next behavior).

.

A Simple Model for STEM Communication

It’s amazing how simply human behavior can be optimized using a STEM model—whatever the circumstances may be.

We know our current state. [We are on a diet, T(0).]

  • We predict the meal that we are going to eat. [A nice juicy zero carb steak.]
  • We eliminate any internal errors [If we’re cooking it, we make sure all the ingredients are there; check the labels for carbohydrate count; grill in working order; plates and glasses, etc.]
  • We set out to eat, then get a call that we’re needed immediately somewhere else. We make a correction. [Either we eat extremely fast or put the meal away for later, at T(1).]

.

Optimizing Complex Behavior

Now let’s apply this same optimization process to a non-linear human behavior—investing in the stock market. We have some money to invest, T(0), in a given company stock. We eliminate all the internal disturbances by doing our homework. We read quarterly statements, look at the fundamentals, research the competition, analyze price and volume activity on a stock chart, and interpret technical indicators such as MACD and Slow Stochastics.

  • We predict our next move—[buy the stock]—T(0).
  • As we are getting ready to buy the stock we hear news of the latest unemployment report and we realize it will have a direct effect on the stock we are buying. We must correct. [We buy more, less, a different stock, or sit tight. Which correction we use will have a direct effect on the optimization.]
  • We decide to buy more of the stock. Now we are at T(1), and must predict T(2)—[sell, hold, or add to position].

.

Achieving Greater Accuracy

The more we are able to reduce the size of T (time), the more we increase the Kalman iterations, and the better the optimization. In human terms, optimization is inversely proportional to the size of T, and directly proportional to Intelligence. Please note that human thinking is continuous in time, so the smaller our intervals, the closer we approximate a continuum.

As you see, I found my language for communicating optimization of human activity in any given organization. It is an amazingly powerful tool.

.

MORE FROM MOISES COMING SOON

.

Moises Goldman at IMSA

About the Author

Dr. Moises Goldman is uniquely involved with STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). He is a member of several advisory boards at MIT and is a founding member of the TALENT program at IMSA.

 

Kalman Diagram—Moises Goldman

Portrait of Moises & Chicago Globe—John Jonelis

Other graphics—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 Big Corporations, Data, Education, Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship, Financial Markets, IMSA, Innovation, Innovation and Culture, MIT, MIT Enterprise Forum, MIT Enterprise Forum Chicago, MITEF, MITEF Chicago, new companies, Startup, startup company

THE TRUMP EFFECT

WHAT THE NEW ADMINISTRATION MIGHT MEAN FOR HEALTH CARE

By Erik Clausen

Several months have passed since the U.S. Presidential election, and…we’re still here, folks. After years of political rhetoric and theatrics, and a few months of uncertainty, we are starting to gain some clarity around exactly what the new administration and its policies might mean for the life science industry and, by extension, marketers within it.

Most importantly and as a wise man wrote before the election, “There is no need for panic.”

the scream EdvardMunch

Edvard Munch – The Scream

Now that the rhetoric has momentarily quieted, we need to balance Trump’s desire to make dramatic policy changes with the realities of the legislative process and with the expectations of a public that benefits from life science and healthcare innovation. Widespread policy changes take time to implement and often require strong Congressional support, even with a Republican-controlled House and Senate. The recent defeat of the health care bill is a case in point.

In other words, as we look at the major policy changes that are likely to affect life science marketing in the years ahead, we need to recognize that there will be time to adjust marketing strategies and tactics accordingly. This may even mean building multiple marketing plans to address different contingencies.

fear MS Office

 

Possible repatriation of US dollars

U.S. pharmaceutical companies have substantial funds tied up in accounts overseas due to punitive tax laws. The administration has proposed, as part of his economic stimulus plan, to dramatically reduce this tax rate and encourage those dollars to come back to the U.S.

In theory, by lowering the tax burden on these businesses, the economy will see an uptick as businesses are encouraged to invest. These companies benefitting from tax relief would in turn reinvest those dollars domestically in the form of new deals, R&D, acquisition and job creation.

Since pharmaceutical and instrumentation companies typically grow based on acquisition, we could see a resurgence in life science M&A and dramatic increases in the value of emerging biotech, diagnostic and tools companies. No doubt, these topics are top of mind at industry gatherings like the January 2017 J.P. Morgan Healthcare conference.

dollars MS Office

If this move does have the immediate and positive effect on the life science sector as promised, it would give corporate brand managers and marketers much to do to position their companies correctly to take full advantage of the M&A environment.

Of course, this assumes that the financial boon to corporations is reinvested or used for acquisition and not simply distributed to shareholders. Increased deal-flow will lead to increased budgets. This will undoubtedly bring increased noise in a busy economy. Therefore, we should focus on building long-term brand equity in an expanding GDP and economy.

 

Corporate tax rate reduction

The administration will also propose in the President’s Budget Bill, a much lower corporate tax rate. This plan would significantly reduce the cost of capital and reduce the marginal tax rate on labor.

By most analyses, these incentives could increase the U.S. economy’s size in the long run, boost wages, and result in more full-time equivalent jobs—including in the life science sector. The question remains, what the estimated reduction in federal revenue will mean for federal funding of medical and scientific research. Such grants often precipitate early discovery that soon become commercialized.

 

tax tax tax MS Office

The size of the proposed tax breaks for corporations are, simply put, Huge.” But if the administration can actually get it through Congress, it has the potential to give corporations exponential buying power, increase cash flow, build up inventory, and re-invest in technology. Dismissing any possibility of a bubble and or the rich simply getting richer, these tax breaks should create jobs and boost all sectors of the economy, including life science and healthcare.

 

Reforming the FDA

In his 100-day plan, Trump specifically cited, “…cutting the red tape at the FDA…” as among his highest priorities. In the plan, he stated that, “…there are over 4,000 drugs awaiting approval, and we especially want to speed the approval of life-saving medications.” We can only assume that such reforms would also have a direct effect on approval and clearances for new medical devices and diagnostic tests, as well.

An accelerated approval process at the FDA could potentially have a positive effect—at least in the short-term—on the life science sector. With therapeutic candidates and devices moving more rapidly through review than anticipated, biotech, pharmaceutical and device companies in mid to late stage clinical phases could see increased valuations of companies with early approvals.

fda MS Office

Additionally, this could encourage earlier stage companies to get more ambitious about moving candidates to the clinic and could make would-be acquirers more bullish.

In the long term, if that accelerated review brings products to market too quickly, it could threaten public health, cause another costly set of reforms, and damage the brands of those companies.

 

What does the new agenda mean for marketers?

While it will take some time to feel the effects on any proposed legislation or policy changes, the administration will tie everything back to growing the economy: no small challenge. A lot has to come together with or without a cooperative Congress. The President will have to build a consensus.

marketing MS Office

For now, as marketers we need to do what we’ve always done—assess market opportunities, pinpoint our target audiences, develop smart strategies to reach and influence their behavior, and measure outcomes. Certainly, researching the impact of policy decisions is part of that research, but acting too quickly on proposed policy changes only fuels uncertainty.

And, if there is one truth in the market, it doesn’t like uncertainty.

screaming robot MS Office

In the end, even if the President is able to pass a fraction of what he’s proposing, it should lead to economic prosperity and marketing opportunity in our industry.

Now, if we could just turn off his Twitter account, we might make social media great again, as well.

 

chempetitive group logo

About the Author

Erik Clausen is part of the Chempetitive Group, a Chicago based marketing initiative for pharmaceutical, chemical, biotechnology, diagnostics, and medical devices.

This article was previously posted online

Graphics: THE SCREAM courtesy www.EdvardMunch.org

All other graphics from 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 angel, angel capital, angel investor, Big Corporations, big money, Economics, Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship and Politics, Free Trade, Heartland Angels, Innovation and Culture, investor, jobs, Marketing, new companies, Startup, startup company, vc, Venture, venture capital

CHICAGO—THE BEST INCUBATOR IN AMERICA?

by Denny O’Malley

Recently, Inc.com published an article about the best cities for early-stage companies. The premise: Chicago is the surprise winner.

Why would that be? San Francisco and New York are both beautiful, thriving cities that dramatically represent the diversity of American ideas. San Fran—younger, more venture-oriented, with beautiful natural vistas. New York—the classic, bustling private and public equity concrete jungle.

What do they have in common? It costs a kidney to pay rent for a closet. Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under 1871, angel, angel capital, angel investor, big money, chicago, Chicago Startup, Chicago Ventures, Economics, Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship, Heartland Angels, Innovation, Internet, Internet Marketing, Mobile, Mobile App, Mobile Marketing, new companies, Software, Startup, startup company, Taxes, the chicago machine, vc, Venture, venture capital