Policy Wonking

Dan Managan and Bob Kronbauer - Hockey Day In Canada Photo by KrisKrug

Wojceich Gryc has an interesting post on the policies that he’d like to see the federal government implement to improve the startup ecosystem. The 5 key points are:

Market Access Tax Credits
Legal/Tax Advice for Market Access
Sales-Oriented Startup Accelerators
Global Benchmarks
Global Branding

Not a bad list of things that could improve the startup ecosystem. However, I’m not sure they are not all necessarily things for consideration as governmental policy. Specifically, I have issues with 2, 3 and 4.

Legal/Tax Advice for Market Access

Entering new markets, particularly foreign markets, can be daunting. There are legal, regulatory, tax and other questions. And I would argue that the Canadian government already has a Crown corporation, Export Development Corporation, dedicated at lead to helping manage the financial risk of accessing new markets. Is there a step-by-step guide for emerging technology companies? (Let me know if you find one). There are access to the Trade Commissioners who continue to have a strong presence in the Bay area, New York and Austin, Texas.

The remaining advice and guidance about legal, regulatory and tax risks on entering new markets is provided by third-party services firms. I’ve worked with the teams at KPMG, Deloitte, PwC and others on Canadian/US tax law and the implications for my firm. Also advice from Canadian and US counsel including BennettJones, CognitionLLP, LabergeWeinstein, Fenwick & West, Wilson Sonsini and others. You need to find lawyers and accountants that have experience with the risks and solutions and can provide you cost-effective advice.

Sales-Oriented Startup Accelerators

An accelerator feels like a red herring to me. Wojceich is 100% correct, companies should focus on focus on key traction metrics (see Getting Traction and Funding, Valuation and Accretive Milestones) including sales/revenue. But the idea that an accelubator is going to help you focus on driving realistic forecasts, and achieving milestones or traction feels lazy/wrong/not the right approach.

A startup is a temporary organization used to search for a repeatable and scalable business model. – Steve Blank

Depending on the type of business model, it can be okay to delay monetization. But if your business model is to sell software or software-as-a-service you need to determine if people are willing to pay you for it. I would argue rather than giving up 7% of company to an accelubator, you’re probably better to read David Skok’s Building a Sales & Marketing Machine and try to recruit an advisor that has experience selling to your idealized target segment. There are a lot of great sales advisors/board members including: John MacDonald, Howard Gwin, Andy Aicklen, etc. Most are accessible. Are they interested in working with you? On your business? Maybe, you need to convince them you’ve built something worth their time and social capital.

Global Benchmarks

Who gives a shit about where we fall on global benchmarks? It’s probably relevant as part of the next point, Global Branding, but I just can’t imagine that an understanding of the global startup benchmarks matters. Larger investment, more successful companies and exits probably have a larger impact on the overall startup ecosystem. It would be more interesting to see the creation of a Kaufmann Foundation with a focus on entrepreneurship.

“we develop and support programs that provide entrepreneurs with the education, tools, skills and connections they need to start and grow businesses. We also work to create a more entrepreneur-friendly environment, including lowering barriers to success and raising awareness of the important role entrepreneurs play in the economy” – Kaufmann Foundation

I’m unclear why federal, provincial or municipal policy should be based on a set of rankings provided by a private corporation. It just feels ill-informed view of the role of government and policy in managing the lives of citizens. But I am not a policy wonk and my understanding on the creation and execution of policy in the administrative branches of government approximates zero. (Take this free opinion for what it is worth, or at least what you paid for it).

The Greener Grass

It’s great to see entrepreneurs in the trenches think about the system and the support they need. It’s a honest view of the things that would help entrepreneurs improve their corporate performance, reduce their expenditures and risks.

I love the idea of a similar SR&ED tax credit for market access. Supporting companies as they experiment with distribution and monetization models is a great idea. Plus improving the Canadian brand through Startup Visa, Maple Syrup Mafia, The C100, and other activities is an amazing activity. It builds on the efforts that we as individual founders to support the ecosystem. Focusing on traction including customer acquisition, revenue growth and building a scalable business., I love that too. Using global metrics as a baseline to evaluate your business (see StartupCompass’ Navigating your Startup to Success) should quickly give entrepreneurs both the measures and the desired outcomes to compare against.

I don’t think it is going to be government policy changes, it is going to be founders and startups building successful companies that will ultimately improve the ecosystem.

Photo Credit: Photo by Kris Krug Some rights reserved by kriskrug

A Perspective on Investor/Mentor Whiplash

Some rights reserved by nocklebeast

The other day Fred Wilson posted an opinion and some tips on Investor/Mentor Whiplash. He took the position that that is a big problem for accelerators as well as early stage and seed environments. Brad Feld took this as a bit of a misunderstanding on accelerators, he insists that TechStars creates an environment where early stage companies can learn to manage the whiplash. Brad Feld states:

I disagree with Fred. It’s not a big problem. It’s the essence of one of things an accelerator program is trying to teach the entrepreneurs going through it. Specifically, building muscle around processing data and feedback, and making your own decisions.

On the surface this seems correct. A problem (one of many) new founders face is the overwhelming barrage of mentorship (good and bad) and information mixed with the inability to filter. An accelerator should be able to provide the environment where a strong group of peers with some guidance can help to build the “muscle around processing data and feedback.” In the last 6 years I have noticed that is a common problem founders face and their ability to manage it is important to their success. It wasn’t until I experienced the whiplash myself a 2nd and 3rd time that I fully appreciated the damage it can do even if you are prepared for it.

Generally what I tell early stage founders:

Only talk to customers once you have something to show them — but that shouldn’t take you a long time, don’t go heads down for months. Asking people what they want and not focusing on something specific they can touch/feel is a path to busy work and infinite sadness.
Avoid the mentor parties/socialization. Find two (or three) good people with opposing views and bounce specific data off them but only when you have done something that requires fresh eyes to advise you how to interpret the results.
Focus on what isn’t working when getting feedback from mentors. Founders need to be positive but you need to focus on the bad things when talking to your close mentors that have been through it already. If they can’t help you with the tough stuff why are you spending a lot of time with them?
Don’t expect a direct answer. Experienced mentors know you are the best person to run your company, not them, and they have developed a way of not telling you what or how to do things but instead challenge you to figure it out in a positive way.

Whiplash from mentors doesn’t just happen in startups, it happens everywhere people are giving you advice or have something to gain by influencing the decisions you are about to make or the opinion you develop on something.

Being prepared and learning to manage the whiplash isn’t just the essence of accelerator programs, it is the essence of education that culminates in the top level you can achieve to filter information – a phd program. At the phd level the filter muscle is almost too strong but that is a topic of a whole other blog post.

The scary thing for entrepreneurs is that accelerator programs are too often run by people that don’t know how to effectively educate people and/or they have something to gain financially by the decisions founders make.

I think this *is* a big problem in accelerators. I wonder if the ability to teach that skill to founders (or select founders that already have that skill) is the difference between a successful accelerator (which is really only TechStars and YC) and one that isn’t (pretty much everyone else)?

[Editor’s note: This post was originally posted on Jesse Rodgers’ Who You Calling a Jesse blog on July 31, 2013.]

Courting Advisors – A Guide for Founders

Editor’s Note: This article was written by Danny Robinson and Boris Mann. Danny is a founder of Perch and long-time entrepreneur who has built companies on both sides of the border. Boris Mann is a managing director at Full Stack, a napkin capital investment firm in Vancouver. Both Danny and Boris are investors in Contractually .

Some rights reserved by Orin Zebest

One of the great things about the tech industry is the generousity of people, who have ‘been there and done that’, to share their time with entrepreneurs. The energy of sharing, connecting, approachability and equality makes startups so attractive.

Lately, there is an increased demand for attention and engagement of advisors and mentors. And, in speaking with other advisors in the community, there is a feeling that some entrepreneurs are exploiting the system and taking advantage of the good will of others. It’s not necessarily intentional or deliberate. Entrepreneurs are trying to get meaningful advice to maximize the outcomes of their companies for the least cost.

There are increasing demands on advisors, and it is partially the role of the advisor to manage their workload and volunteer time. But it is also the responsibility of entrepreneurs to understand the circumstances of when to ask someone to join your advisory board and when not to.

A Quick Guide to Recruiting Advisors

When a founder feels like he/she could use advice from someone experienced in a certain area. Whether it’s getting go to market strategy, product design, fund raising, corporate structure, making introductions, or simply adding credibility to the company (though don’t overplay the advisory board when raising capital – see Mark Suster’s post). Getting an advisor to help you out with skills that you don’t have inside the company is a great way to move forward.

One of your early “asks” to anyone you meet is to help introduce you to a potential advisor
1 – 3 official advisors is a good number to aim for initially

Finding an Advisor

It is the responsibility of a founder to source and reaches out to an advisor and asks to meet. There is no obligation for anyone to become an advisor. This is like a dating process. The goal is to build a relationship over time, where there is value for both the advisor and the founder in the role.

Leverage your existing personal and professional networks to connect with individuals that have shared interests
Use LinkedIn and Clarity.fm to identify and connect with potential advisors.
Attending local events, joining an incubator, and working at co-working spaces are additional ways to get introduced to potential advisors

Advisor Expectations

As an advisor:

You meet for coffee, get on the phone, and get to know the entrepreneur and how you can help. Maybe your personal skill set isn’t relevant, but you know someone else that would be a great advisor / investor / customer / channel / whatever.
You don’t expect compensation up front, you don’t lead with paid consulting offers (this is a huge red flag)
You show you can be helpful first in moving the startup forward.

There is no obligation to engage with a startup. You should not expect compensation and you should always create more value than you extract.

Standard Advisory Board Terms

But back on the founder side, here’s where it seems there is a bit of a problem in Canada: no follow through.

After accepting and otherwise being happy with the advisor’s help, you should reward them with an offer to officially join the advisory board.

Our guidelines for standard advisory terms are as follows:

0.1% – 2% depending on the level of advisor.
- The level depending on the advisors’ stature in the community, but also their level of involvement. 0.5% is a good level to think about starting from, and 2% is extremely rare unless the advisor is directly helping close customer deals or raise money.
Do not offer cash.
- It’s extremely rare that there would be a cash component. If cash is requested from the advisor, walk away, and look for a more sophisticated advisor. For further clairty, if the advisor will be in putting multiple hours per week, they’re not an advisor, they’re a contractor, in which case, cash compensation may be appropriate (see Brad Feld’s Compensation for [Advisory] Board Members).
Options vest monthly over 2 year period.
Either can terminate upon 30 days written notice.
For pre Series A companies, the strike price is set to about 10%-20% that of the last round of financing, or pre-financed companies, the strike price should be about 10% of the estimated value of the company.
Advisor agrees to one phone call or in-person meeting per quarter.
- But no need to dwell on the terms of what they will do for you. Your initial meeting should be representative of what you will get in return, so pay no attention to getting specific on the details here. If it’s not working out, you can both get out of the deal anytime.
Generally, you should expect your advisor to follow up on your meeting with thoughts and links and verify that he/she will make the introductions promissed and in general do what they said they would.

Assuming the advisor accepts, entering into an agreement like this will explicitly link your success to theirs, and add their credibility to yours. Vesting them in your company’s success spreads out your champions, and creates more winners for the community at large.

As a startup founder, you’re going on a long arduous journey and you’re going to need a lot of help along the way. Building a strong set of advisors will be one of your first “asks”. These are people that can complement your skillset and fill gaps on your team, and add credibility (sometimes called social proof or traction), especially for first time founders.

If anyone has helped you in a meaningful way, and you have simply not known the proper etiquette, I encourage you to retroactively offer up advisory board options. Let’s make sure that us friendly Canadians are known for our official follow through, as well as our friendliness.

We’ve worked with Contractually to host an Advisory Agreement template that we’ve used for years.

You can sign up for Contractually [Ed. note: Both Boris and Danny are investors in Contracutally] and use it directly with their free plan, or be old-school [Ed. note: at StartupNorth we prefer old skool] and use it manually.

Thanks to Fasken Martineau for making this template available.