Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots

Latest Episodes:

429: 5x with Tarush Aggarwal Jun 30, 2022

Show notes

Tarush Aggarwal is the Founder and CEO of 5X, the modern data stack as a managed service that enables companies to answer business questions without having to worry about building data infrastructure or bringing in the right data engineering team. Chad talks with Tarush about the modern data stack movement, choosing things that make sense on behalf of their customers, and building a team culture at a company with a fairly large time zone distribution. 5x Follow 5x on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, or LinkedIn. Follow Tarush on Twitter or LinkedIn. Follow thoughtbot on Twitter or LinkedIn. Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Tarush Aggarwal, the Founder and CEO of 5X, the modern data stack as a managed service that enables companies to answer business questions without having to worry about building data infrastructure or bringing in the right data engineering team. Tarush, thank you for joining me. TARUSH: Chad, thank you so much for having me on the show. Really looking forward to being here and hopefully adding some value for your listeners. CHAD: Yes, I'm sure that they will. I think many companies are either thinking about how they build their data infrastructure or thinking about how they leverage data for their business now. So 5X provides a path for them to do that, and I'd love to dive in. How does 5X, like I said in the intro, enable companies to get started without having to worry about building this infrastructure themselves or this team themselves? TARUSH: Yeah, totally. It's a great question. Just to kind of zoom out for a quick second, the data space has been really hot for a few years now, and there's this area often called the modern data stack, which is really led by a few vendors mainly around this concept of the data warehouse, reporting tools, and modeling, and ingestion. And this is really a new area for the data space, which has really become popular. So you also have, you know, ten years ago, you had Hadoop and Spark, and all of these different data tools, which in general have become less popular, and the modern data stack movement is one of the big movements happening. So at a macro level, we have this new movement. If you zoom in, this movement happens to be one of the most fragmented movements. So what that means is for each different layer, you have different vendors. And so, even if you want to do something today as simple as building dashboards, you have to first ingest this data. In your average company, you've got [inaudible] at different sources. You need to put it in. You need to then store it, you need to model it, and then you can build a dashboard. CHAD: You also need to make all the different choices about which ones you're going to choose at every level. TARUSH: Exactly. At each of these levels, you have multiple billion-dollar companies today competing. So the thing about fragmentation of the space and, you know, I think data along with maybe DevOps and security are probably the most fragmented spaces. The thing about fragmented spaces is that they are great for extremely savvy customers; think of large tech companies who have 100% data teams. But for 90% of businesses, if you want to get value from data, it makes it much harder because you have to sign multiple contracts with these vendors, architecture, set up security. So what 5X very, very fundamentally is doing is we're business-focused. We allow you, you know, in a month or two, you better go to 5x.co and add your credit card, and you will have business analytics out of the box. And we can help you make some of these decisions as to what are the best vendors for your price points, for your use cases and give you an end-to-end platform so that you aren't worrying about signing these bills and sort of setting it up. You're focused on your business outcome and your business use cases. CHAD: Where did...I happen to know, but because I did my research for the episode. [laughs] But you were at WeWork leading data at WeWork, right? TARUSH: Yes. CHAD: So I imagine you faced this problem and saw this problem firsthand, right? TARUSH: You know, I've been fortunate that I've spent my career in the data space. So back in the day at Salesforce and now and most recently at WeWork. And companies like this, in general, are aggressively hiring and aggressively growing these teams. So at WeWork, we had 50 people working on stitching together the platform and finding the best vendors, and being involved in that. So at WeWork, we were really focused on building our own version of the platform. I think what's interesting is ever since I left and especially over the last 24 months, where the sort of startup space has become so active, I'm still getting pinged on LinkedIn like every day or two with companies looking to get started. And over a period of time, you see the trends that everyone is reinventing the wheel. What do I do first? What's the first use case? What infrastructure do I need? How do I set this up? So the idea of this really came less from WeWork, where we had the team and the expertise. It came more from the other 90% of the companies that don't have the resources that WeWork had, at least at that time. CHAD: So what do your customers of 5X typically look like then? Are there particular industries or data needs? Or on the tech side, on the development side, what do their development teams look like interacting with 5X? TARUSH: That's a great question. And again, at a macro level, data is a global phenomenon. It's not industry-specific. Now, different industries have different requirements. So obviously, as a consumer, what you need to collect, the tools and infrastructure you need are quite different from a B2B business. So there is this concept that for each vertical, what stack makes sense, and that's, again, something which we can do. Typically, our customers have found some sort of a product-market fit. They have a business, and now they're looking to go scale the business to get to either entering growth phase, or an optimization phase, or a profitability phase. And in each of these phases, data plays a vital role. So they are at this point where they know that they want to get value from it. They might even have a data team with 4,5,10 people. And they really might have figured out their first use cases and had the basic dashboards. And, inevitably, they come to this question of what now? What do we do now? So that's one large sort of vertical. And then the other one is they want to go do it. They want to go invest in data, but they have no idea how to do it. And in that case, they're looking at us not just the platform, but we also have this concept of on-demand talent. Today, we're interviewing thousands of data engineers a week. We get to hire the top 1%, and we pre-train them on different stacks. And then, companies can integrate these lead engineers at a weekly level or completely on-demand and use that to go build out the dashboards. We have never thought of replacing data teams for companies. But it's really interesting to see that some of the early-stage companies are using our platform and our on-demand talent to literally do end-to-end data as a service. CHAD: So at 5X, you're actually providing those team members, those consulting services? TARUSH: Yeah, so we look at it less from the consultant point of view, you know, a consultant typically you would go, and you have your statement of work, and that's going to be a three-month project, and it might be a fixed price. And sort of inevitably, they're looking to...they don't work with hundreds of thousands of companies, a few of them might, but in general, we work a little bit differently. So we have this concept of on-demand talent. So we have these engineers who we hire, and we pre-train them and essentially build software to basically allow people to add these engineers on top of the platform and sort of use them. So they work in one-week sprint cycles. It's fully on-demand. So you can have a group of engineers for one week and the next week not have that. And typically, consultants don't work in that way. And we don't really do the statements of work, and here's what's going to happen. These engineers are sort of put into these things what we call pods, and pods are three engineers and a product manager. And they operate on these one-week sprints. You can use this end-to-end team or these engineering pods to go build out your use cases, which is similar to what a consultant on the services model does, but we do it in more of a platform-first approach. CHAD: That's really interesting. I've had some guests on before where they talk about doing consulting or doing services on top of the recurring revenue platform that they've built or not doing it because it's not interesting to them or that their investors say like, "Don't get into that TNM business time and materials business. You want to focus on recurring revenue." How have you balanced that in your business? TARUSH: The reality is that it doesn't matter which vendor you are in the modern data stack space. You might be Snowflake, or you might be Tableau, or you might be Fivetran or DBT. These are just some of the popular ones. Each of these vendors is just one small part of the stack. And what that means is that they don't have a services model and [inaudible] investors happy. But in reality, it's because they don't have end-to-end stack exposure; you know, there's no company today which knows what their stack looks like. Snowflake doesn't know what their entire stack looks like. I mean, Snowflake [inaudible] its success in engagement because they just want [inaudible] And what 5X is is, you know, we've had to spin these stacks up from scratch for mid-market companies. You'll be able to map your stack. So you might have a few pieces. We can help you see what's missing. But again, because we have visibility end-to-end, having that services model, if you want to call it, makes a lot of sense because, ultimately, we're focused on adding business value. And no one's doing data for the sake of doing data. And no one is doing it to build a 50-person data team. They're doing it ultimately to enable the business. So given that we have this end-to-end scope, we look at our on-demand talent as a massive value-add of using the 5X platform is that you have this ability to get engineers end-to-end that are pre-trained on the platform. So we like it a lot. And we think it's a competitive advantage for us. CHAD: How opinionated is the 5X stack, the default stack? Can you make a lot of choices within it? Are you using lots of different things? You already mentioned Snowflake, Tableau. So it sounds like you're choosing the things that make sense on behalf of your customers. TARUSH: Yeah, so for launch, we're focused on the core BI stack, which is ingestion, storage, monitoring, reporting, and in this stack, also we have picked the best-in-class vendors so Fivetran, Snowflake, DBT, Preset. In some ways, the usual suspects which you think of as you're looking at the stack. Now our goal and really what we're building is this program called the Certified 5X Program, and that's for vendors. And that program allows us to integrate with different partners and do things like account provisioning, configuration, user management, our billing agreement, workflow setup. And as we integrate with more and more vendors, the idea is to really have a single form for the modern data stack. So, in ingestion, for now, we might be using Fivetran since they're the [inaudible], but the idea is we're also talking to Plausible, and Airbyte, and Stitch, and all of the other vendors. So at some point, we really kind of pick and choose between any of them. So the idea is, again, there could be a set of different stuff for a company, which is extremely budget-conscious, and if you're looking more for enterprise capability to use a different vendor in that same category. So ultimately, we're enabling customer freedom in the next few months. At launch, we'll have a smaller selection. But as we get into Q4 and as we get into the next year, we have the next 10-15 vendors lined up who are going to be part of the certified 5X program, and that allows us to add more and more optionality in terms of existing categories. And then, we also will focus on adding new categories like reverse ETL, or data lineage, or augmented analytics. CHAD: I love the idea of being focused for launch, saying these are the biggest things that we need to hit. How long did it take you to get to launch? When did you start working in earnest on 5X and get to a public launch? TARUSH: We've been working on this since last June. So we're 11 months old now. What we really did initially is go build relationships with these vendors. And the first thing we did is we started off more as a services business where we sort of built this automatic interview process where we were interviewing hundreds of engineers a week and adding these engineers and training them on the platform. We would go set up the platform for the customer in a semi-automatic manner. So we have been operational. We're probably working with 15-20 customers at this point, but we did it in a sort of semi-automated way. And over the last few months, as we understood more and more what their needs are, we are transitioning to a platform-first company instead of a services-first company. CHAD: So that means that you were able to be public and start getting customers fairly early on in your journey. It's only been 11 months since you started. And when did you get your first customer? TARUSH: 11 months ago. CHAD: [laughs] So at what point did you find investors and raise money and start to build a team? TARUSH: We've been fortunate enough that we were producing revenue on day one just looking at the services aspect of the business. So we needed a very tiny fundraise back in October, a very small amount. And now that we're getting closer to the platform launch, we might be announcing something soon. CHAD: What did you take money for if you were revenue-generating? Was there something specific that caused you to take it and that it was for? TARUSH: So if you kind of zoom out again and look at this whole concept of building out, you know, I think if we focused on services and focused on growing that part of the business organically, there's no real need for that. But the idea now is we're having a 20-person platform team, building out these integrations, building up software for even things like board management, hiring. The main task today is sort of engineering. So we raised capital to double down on the platform vision and become a platform first. Mid-Roll Ad: I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the…

Full show notes at the publisher

428: LGBT YouthLink of CenterLink with Deborah Levine Jun 23, 2022

Show notes

Deborah Levine is the Director of LGBT YouthLink at CenterLink, which supports, strengthens, and connects LGBT centers. Chad talks with Deborah about working on something new called imi: a free digital research-backed mental health tool intended to support and help LGBTQ+ teens explore and affirm their identity and learn practical ways to cope with their sexual and gender minority stress, founding Q Chat Space, a digital LGBTQ+ center where teens join live-chat, professionally facilitated, online support groups, and how over the time that she's been doing work in LGBTQ+ spaces products and online interaction have changed and evolved. CenterLink Follow CenterLink on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, or LinkedIn. LGBT YouthLink Q Chat Space HopeLab Follow Deborah on LinkedIn. Follow thoughtbot on Twitter or LinkedIn. Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel, and with me, today is Deborah Levine, Director of LGBT YouthLink at CenterLink, which supports, strengthens, and connects LGBT centers. Deborah, thank you so much for joining me. DEBORAH: Thanks, Chad. I appreciate you inviting me. CHAD: So I was first introduced to you and to CenterLink through the Q Chat Space product. And that's still going, right? DEBORAH: Yeah. CHAD: But you're working on something new called imi. DEBORAH: Mm-hmm. We actually just launched imi on June 1st. CHAD: Congratulations on the launch. DEBORAH: Thank you. Yes, it went pretty smoothly. [laughs] CHAD: That's good. So, what is imi? DEBORAH: So imi is a free digital research-backed mental health tool. It was developed by Hopelab in partnership with CenterLink, and the It Gets Better Project, as well as hundreds of LGBTQ+ young people across the U.S. It's a little hard to describe, to be perfectly honest. It really is intended to support and help LGBTQ+ teens explore and affirm their identity and learn practical ways to cope with their sexual and gender minority stress. And we really hope that the tool is helpful, relevant, inclusive, and joyful. It is a web app, but it operates...it's not a lot of reading. It's listening, and doing, and thinking, and really giving youth an opportunity to explore and consider ways that they might help support themselves. CHAD: That's great. And I suppose it's even a compliment to your prior work at CenterLink and with Q Chat Space, which is an online support community. DEBORAH: Yes. CHAD: People can use both. DEBORAH: Exactly. We actually engaged in a partnership with Hopelab because we recognize that though youths were really excited about and engaged in the support groups that Q Chat Space provides, those are synchronous, and they happen once or twice a day. They last for an hour and a half, but that's all there is. So if you come to the website when a chat isn't happening, then there's not much to do. And we wanted to be able to provide youth with something else, and imi really fills that gap. CHAD: So when it comes to the product itself, how long was it in development for? DEBORAH: Great question. Of course, there was the pandemic, so there were some delays related to that. But it was about two and a half years from when Hopelab first approached CenterLink until the actual launch date. CHAD: That's a fairly significant amount of time. DEBORAH: It is for when you're working, I think if we were only tech firms, but both Hopelab and CenterLink are nonprofits. And the process included a lot of steps. So we actually had a prototype pretty early. But because we wanted to make sure that we did put something out into the world that actually had the impact we were seeking, we did a randomized controlled trial. We had 270 youth, half of them using a similar-looking website with just resources and the other half using imi. And we did that randomized controlled trial as well as a test of marketing. Those were both pieces that extended our timeline. And then ultimately, we also wanted to launch during Pride Month, so we timed it for that. CHAD: This idea of a randomized control trial is pretty incredible to me. A lot of product people wouldn't necessarily do that; maybe certain companies do. Why do you think you went in that direction? DEBORAH: So our goal is not to make money. And ultimately, if that was the goal, then we put something out, we see if people are using it and using it at the rate and the ways...I'm a social worker, so my business lingo is going to be limited. [chuckles] But that's the way to test it. And if youths use it but don't have any impact or potentially even harms them, which is not the case usually; it's just neutral, but if it doesn't have any impact, it's not worth our time. And so, a randomized controlled trial really allows us to see whether or not it's working and then to make changes if it's not. We're testing not only whether it works in terms of the impact but also whether or not youths were interested and wanted to use it. And those are important elements for us before we're going to go out with something. CHAD: That's great. That's what I was thinking you [chuckles] would probably say. In your work, correct me if I'm wrong, but your main demographic that you work with is youth. DEBORAH: Yes. CHAD: You alluded to this earlier, but how do you make sure that you're building products and things that they want to use? DEBORAH: For sure. So it's really about involving them in the process. Going back in time to Q Chat Space, the idea for Q Chat Space actually came from focus groups we did with youth. It wasn't an adult who thought this is a good thing to do for youth. We really went to them to see what it was about and then kept youth involved in the process. We had youth involved in the design process. We had youth involved in the conceptualization and design and continue to this day to have a Youth Advisory Board who participate in Q Chat Space chat and give us feedback. And when we want to change something, we look to them. And similarly, with imi but we have even more resources. We have, over time, including the randomized controlled trial, involved over 600 youth in the production and creation of imi. And really, the process was so deeply embedded with the youth that we used the language of co-creation and really make sure that youth are saying exactly what it is that they want and need and that they'll be willing to do. So we did qualitative research in 2019 with over 350 youth initially all across the United States, all the way to Anchorage, Alaska, and to Birmingham, Alabama, and a bunch of places in between. And of those interviewed, 61% identified as racial and ethnic minorities. We really did want to make sure that this reached those youth as well as trans and non-binary and gender-nonconforming youth. So we always oversampled or over-included those youth. And we also engaged with organizations that serve youth and know youth in a daily way, a lot of LGBT centers, and other organizations as well. And really, again, focused on organizations that are made by and are focused on QTBIPOC or queer and trans youth of color. CHAD: Over the time that you've been doing this work, has expectations around online interaction, what products are, how youth will use them, has that changed? Has it been evolving? DEBORAH: It certainly has been evolving. I mean, I think it's an interesting question. I'm not sure of the timeframe that you're asking. In terms of the work that I've done, I started doing digital health education in 2007. And I remember very well because the person who interviewed me and became my boss said, "You don't have to even know anything about technology. Don't worry; we'll figure that out." CHAD: [laughs] DEBORAH: They didn't expect, and to be honest, I say to people all the time that if somebody came to me now with a resume that I had in 2007 for one of the jobs that I did then, I would not have hired them. Things have changed dramatically. I mean, that's obviously 15 years we're talking about. Things have changed so very dramatically in the last 15 years. But even I would say thinking about Q Chat Space, because Q Chat Space launched as a pilot in 2018 and then launched nationally in the summer of 2019, and then the pandemic hit 7-8 months later. And the concept of a digital support group we had to explain that to people at Q Chat Space. And now, post-pandemic, we don't have to explain that anymore. And if anything, we have to differentiate ourselves in ways that we never had to. The irony of Q Chat Space, in particular, is that it was started both because youth identified the need but also our member centers, the LGBT centers, often had inquiries from youth who couldn't access them in person, and many of them started satellite programs, but still, you know, a 13-year-old you could live next door and not be able to get. There are other barriers besides location and distance. And so, at that point, centers really wanted to do something digitally, but they couldn't because they didn't have the resources. They didn't know how to do it, or they were concerned that it would start and then youth from all over the place would be contacting them. But in a matter of weeks, maybe months, once the pandemic set in and the kids were...just like school figured out how to do things, the LGBT centers did as well. And so now Q Chat Space is one of many virtual programs with many different mechanisms. But I think it's really shifted, and youth are more open to it. Not that they weren't before, they definitely were, but they know more. There are less questions about what's this? What's going on here? I think there's a broader definition of what a virtual experience can look like because youth have been participating in synchronous and asynchronous and in text-only and video, and it's just there are so many ways. In terms of imi in the last couple of years, all over the pandemic, but imi itself, I think, actually, the landscape for imi hasn't changed. But interestingly enough, Hopelab actually came to us with another product that they had already developed and they were hoping to use as the backend, which was a chatbot. They had created something called Vivibot, and it was helping young cancer survivors build resilience. And we know that resilience is an important quality for any person, but particularly: youth, it's important to develop it. And when someone's young, it's easier, not that it's easy. [laughter] And they thought that they would be able to use that technology, but ultimately the testing with young people really revealed that they didn't want a chatbot. If you check out imi, which is imi. guide, you can see that there are actually several chat experiences within that are the last remnants of that initial chatbot that we started with. But youth weren't interested in a chatbot, and I think that's one thing that's changed is that they have much higher expectations for automated communication. I formerly worked at Planned Parenthood. They have a great product called Roo, that's a chatbot. We talked about it before I left there. I wasn't there when it was started. But there are high expectations for what a chatbot can do. And I think there's also just an understanding, oh, this is a bot, and that's okay. Versus a few years ago, maybe people wanted to pretend that it was a real person. And now it's like, no, it's fine that's it's a bot. I understand, and it's okay that this kind of conversation can happen with a chatbot. So there are a few things that I think have changed, but I'm also not a trend person. [laughter] CHAD: No, that's okay. That's great. So when it comes to...we talked a little bit about the timeline and the process you went through to arrive and launch imi. With multiple parties all bringing things to the table, how do you tend to manage the products that you work on? DEBORAH: Sure. So Hopelab, really, I give almost all credit to Hopelab. I mean, I was really pleased to partner with them. And I definitely feel that CenterLink and It Gets Better bring a lot to the table. But ultimately, Hopelab did something I haven't seen happen very often, which is really helping nonprofits work together in a collaborative manner. It's a struggle. I think nonprofits are competing for funds and donors. And it's a little bit more difficult to collaborate. But Hopelab really led this process and took us all through it and made sure to really put youth at the center, which I think is the force that we all have to remember when we do have conflicts between nonprofits is that we're all in the same missions, and missions that match each other in terms of helping the community. Mid-Roll Ad: I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: Do you have people...when it comes to a project like this, are you hiring people? Is it a full-time team working on it? How does it tend to usually shape up? DEBORAH: No. [laughs] It doesn't shape up like that. At this point with imi, Hopelab really focused on what our current capacity was. They're continuing to support us in a lot of ways. And they do have a full team. But the product that they're handing over to me, me as a non-techie social worker, I can manage it. It's on Squarespace. There are a lot of integrations, but they have made sure that those are things that I can really manage. I mean, I'm not a non-techie, really. I'm underestimating myself. I'm under-selling myself. But ultimately, I am going to manage that with...I have a staff person who works full-time on Q Chat Space, not a technical person. They're really there to support facilitators and the youth as an administrator and manager, and that person will help me with promotion. But otherwise, imi is a tool that is out there and doesn't...I mean, we'll update it and make changes. But ultimately, it's not a team once it's launched. But the development, yes, it was about 14 people more or less throughout the last two years. CHAD: I think that that's great and really important. Software isn't cheap. It's not easy. And if you're put in a position where you're putting...I don't know the right word; burden comes to mind. Like, the burden of future work and maintenance and investment in an organization that maybe isn't set up to do that that could be a problem. DEBORAH: Right. Now talk to me in six months or a year, and I'll know more. [laughter] But that said, even…

Full show notes at the publisher

427: BrainStation with Johanna Mikkola Jun 16, 2022

Show notes

Johanna Mikkola is the Co-Founder and CEO of Wyncode Academy, recently acquired by BrainStation, whose project-based programs have helped over 100,000 professionals launch new careers in the tech industry. Chad talks with Johanna about creating a digital skills training bootcamp, the hiring and training market and challenges, and prioritizing inclusion and diversity in the student population. BrainStation Follow BrainStation on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, or LinkedIn. Follow Johanna on Twitter or LinkedIn. Follow thoughtbot on Twitter or LinkedIn. Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. And with me today is Jo Mikkola, the Co-Founder, and CEO of Wyncode Academy, recently acquired by BrainStation, whose project-based programs have helped over 100,000 professionals launch new careers in the tech industry. Jo, thank you for joining me. JOHANNA: So excited to be here. Thank you. CHAD: I actually think that the weather we're calling from today might not be so different. It's very warm and sunny, and everything in Boston. So I'm pretty happy today. How are things where you are? JOHANNA: That's great. We're coming to you live from the 305 in Miami, and it's turning into summertime here, which means it's pretty hot and sticky. But I'm originally from Finland, so I can't complain. CHAD: [laughs] JOHANNA: The novelty after eight years of living here has not worn off on me. I do enjoy the sunshine and the palm trees. CHAD: That's great. So we'll definitely circle back and talk about Miami and the tech industry there and everything. But before we do that, I'm curious; you have recently been acquired by BrainStation. Let's rewind a little bit to getting started with Wyncode and what brought you to creating a digital skills training bootcamp. JOHANNA: It's been quite the journey. It all started back in 2013, and at the time living in Toronto. I, at that point, had been working at the National Hockey League in Toronto for eight years and had just joined the management there on the hockey operations officiating team, which was an amazing chapter of my professional journey, and I love all the individuals that I worked with there. But I got to a point in that career where I didn't quite know what the next step would be professionally, and I was looking at getting an MBA. But at the same time, while I was working at the NHL, I was helping lead an internal software build project. And it kept coming to the forefront for me that wow, hockey is being disrupted by technology or technology is being very integrated into something I thought, you know, I didn't think I would see that happen. And at the same time, my co-founder, who's also my husband, we're both from Finland. His name is Juha. He was an entrepreneur in the e-commerce sporting goods space, and he actually had joined a coding bootcamp in Toronto, an early one. And as he was going through the process, we were both kind of at this inflection point professionally about what we were going to do. And so everything he was learning, the transformation of individuals he was witnessing first-hand, him experiencing that himself, and me being a non-technical business person leading a technical project at the NHL, we were like, wow, we're on the cusp of some serious change in the world, and we want to be part of that wave. So we were like, where can we go and be first to market to provide this life-changing, career-changing education and, in turn, really dive into not only education but also the technology space? And ultimately, we landed on Miami. We had actually looked at Austin, Texas, and Los Angeles as options as well. But we arrived here in Miami, and it was very like a Hollywood thing. We were sitting at the coolest cafe in Miami at the time. We were here on Christmas holiday. And we, on a napkin, started writing ideas and brainstorming. You know, founders get very excited about logos and brainstorming names, or at least I do. CHAD: [laughs] JOHANNA: And it all came together really quickly. That was December 2013. We attended a startup meet-up here. We met four key players in this ecosystem, some of which are major drivers today, like the Knight Foundation and Endeavor. We heard their vision, and what they were doing, and how much funding was being put at the time into building a tech ecosystem in Miami. And we were like, wow, we want in. So we went from concept to launch in three months’ time. And it was a pretty exciting ride. I mean, so much happened in that time [laughs], and obviously, the acquisition came early last year. And so we've kind of seen it go full circle. And for me professionally, I went from being a startup founder working very regionally, being somewhat nationally known but being a strong regional player, to being a global player overnight with BrainStation. So that also has been really exciting. CHAD: At thoughtbot, we helped create a web development bootcamp around the same time actually. JOHANNA: Love that. CHAD: And that was for Kaplan, and they ended up purchasing Dev Bootcamp and then shutting it down. So I have some experience, and not only that, but thoughtbot has hired a lot of people from bootcamps into our apprentice program. JOHANNA: Love that. CHAD: So, from a hiring and training perspective, I think it's great. From a business perspective, it seems to have been a very challenging market. How did you weather that? JOHANNA: Oh yeah. I mean persistence, unwavering commitment to the people we worked with, and the people we were helping gain these skills to change their careers. And like with any startup, there are moments where it's like, wow, you know, this is a big challenge. How are we going to overcome this? But we've always had the mentality of if there is a will, there is a way. And don't get me wrong, it doesn't always work out. But fortunately, now that I have hindsight, I can say that that mentality resulted in where we are today, and it was very positive. And I have the really fortunate position of looking back on those stressful moments and seeing the lessons now, which is such a gift and maybe also alludes to me being old, I don't know. [laughter] But it really was a great journey. And I mean, the challenges started in the beginning for us, which is turns out it was a federal offense to operate without a license in the state of Florida, you know, lots of details to talk about there. But come full circle, we ended up being the first coding bootcamp to be licensed by a State Department of Education in the entire country. So even though other people were operating in their states, it was different statutes, different legal requirements. And so, we were the first to be licensed. And as a result, we actually helped advise some of those other big names that we all see in the coding landscape to explain how it worked for us. And shout out to the Florida Department of Education and Commission for Independent Education for working with us to make it all come together. But it started off with a very exciting beginning getting that letter, which was essentially telling us to shut down before we had even begun. [laughter] And it all worked out. And we have a great relationship with them. And we learned a lot there. And I will say just in the coding landscape, what ended up happening and what's happened with a lot of for-profit education is there was a huge opportunity, and there still is. People really genuinely need these skills. They really need this vocational training, and the companies hiring really need this talent, as you know firsthand. And so a lot of people jumped in and saw that there was money to be made because professionals and maybe also people who can afford it...there are a lot of financing companies that came in. And so the thing that started wavering is the quality in terms of the training. And that's one of the things that you just, you know, one of the things we were unwilling to compromise at Wyncode and also why BrainStation, I like to say, is our soulmate because they feel the same way. To go from zero to software engineer or zero to UX designer (We also teach data science and digital marketing.), it really takes high-quality education, high-quality educators, and a high-quality network to do that at the level that we want to do that. And then the other thing that a lot of people fell into is this desire to scale really quickly, so take in too many students which quality goes down, open too many locations, quality goes down. And to be the best, you got to learn from the best, and that means learning from software engineers, product designers, individuals who are really highly sought after right now. So, in the same way that software companies are facing talent issues, for us, that was also a key piece for us to solve and work out. We're really fortunate that in the space of education, this is such rewarding work. We build such amazing relationships with the people coming through the programs and, in turn, are contributing so much to our local ecosystems that it hasn't been that hard to attract amazing talent to be our educators because it is so rewarding. They're getting an opportunity to apply their craft to something they love and really shape the minds of future technologists. And it's just a wonderful thing to watch and be part of, so really fortunate to be in that space. CHAD: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's one of the things that has made the space challenging is you come into it with the desire to have that really high quality, but there's a cost to that. And if you don't scale the number of students, you might have trouble covering that cost. How did you balance that? JOHANNA: In the early days of Wyncode, it was easy because we were self-funded, and we were growing organically. So we were quite conservative about how we scaled and how many people we took on, and we stayed very true to that. And honestly, we stayed very focused on the state of Florida. So at one point, we actually had three locations; we had Miami Beach, Fort Lauderdale, and Miami, and we scaled them down to have a large HQ in Miami. Because we saw that when the team was together, and the community was together, the overall experience from network to learning was better because we were self-funded. And then, later, when we had partners who were committed to quality, we were able to make decisions for the sake of quality instead of profitability. And then now with BrainStation, I mean, BrainStation is an incredible company. It's been around for ten years. It has been very successful. And right now, what we've been able to do is invest. BrainStation is in a position where we're investing in different pilots to see what things will make learning even better than it already is, although I will say it's at a really high quality right now. And so we're in a fortunate position where, of course, it still needs to make sense. The unit economics needs to make sense. But we're also doing everything we can to continually iterate and make it a great environment for people to learn in. And I think that has come with taking the approach that we're in a long-term marathon. We're not in a sprint with what we're building right now. And I think a lot of the companies in this space that ran into issues were really sprinting to a certain scale, which is a way of operating that we haven't operated. CHAD: Well, so based on what you've said so far, I can make certain assumptions about how you answer this next question. JOHANNA: [laughs] CHAD: But I think it's an important topic, and so I want to make sure even if it's obvious that we talk about it and that's how to bring in students, how to scale the business while still prioritizing inclusion and diversity in the student population, in your organization. What sort of attention did you put on that? JOHANNA: Yeah, so this is a really key one. I mean, in the early days of Wyncode, we were able to do things in a different way than we are now with BrainStation. But I would say Miami is naturally a very diverse and international ecosystem. And so, from the beginning, we really wanted to see that reflected in the people who were in our programs because I knew that would, in the long term, provide so much value to building a great ecosystem. And so, in the beginning, we partnered...we worked very hard to partner with The Knight Foundation to launch what was called The Future Leaders of Tech Fellowship. This is an example of something we did with different groups throughout all the years and continue to do today, but I'll use Knight as the example, which essentially was a full-ride scholarship for underrepresented individuals in technology. So the first iteration we ran of that was a full-ride scholarship because we thought that was the main barrier. Then we realized that a lot of these individuals who hadn't had the means before and didn't necessarily have the educational training needed a little extra training, and they needed to start working right away. So what we created was a pre-program for them. It was a full-ride scholarship, and then it was a guaranteed three-month paid internship at a tech company. And of all the people who went through that program, the majority transitioned, with the exception of two, transitioned into full-time salaried roles. And those are incredible stories that are truly life-changing. But I think the important thing there and what we learned over time is people need support, financial and educational, and they need time. So obviously, in an accelerated learning program, you want things to go as quickly as possible but through the help of partners and making it work for certain communities, we were able to do that. We also partnered with the YMW...it's the Women's...YMCA for women. I cannot remember the acronym right now. CHAD: WYMCA. JOHANNA: Thank you. Thank you. We provided a program in-house for them specifically. CHAD: No, it would be the YWCA. [laughter] JOHANNA: Yeah. CHAD: Sorry to interrupt you. JOHANNA: I'm sorry. I'm not doing you all a good service here. But it's an amazing organization here in Miami. And that was geared specifically towards women from disadvantaged backgrounds, giving them the education they needed. And with that group, we had actually a 70% success rate, which was wonderful. Those are individuals who had no options for any type of white-collar position, many of whom we still keep in touch with today. So, in the beginning, with diversity and inclusion, we were doing things at a smaller scale, very specialized, and very catered to make sure that they were successful in the hope of eventually building more momentum to do this. And the work very much continues. So BrainStation, larger company, we have a lot more firepower in terms of what we're able to do. So we've partnered with companies like Ernst & Young, Shutterstock, Microsoft with our Impact Scholarship, which is also full-ride scholarships for the underrepresented communities in technology, and that's been really successful as well. And, again, education is really rewarding, but it's also really rewarding to see, in particular, those success stories. CHAD: Yeah, one of the things when I speak at bootcamps or when I talk to apprentices who are joining us, I often reinforce or remind them that they bring something to the table, which is really special. I started programming when I was in middle school. I went to school for computer science. Aside from a brief stint as a dishwasher and a checkout person at a grocery store, this…

Full show notes at the publisher

426: Marvelous with Jeni Barcelos Jun 09, 2022

Show notes

Jeni Barcelos is the Co-Founder and CEO of Marvelous, the world's most beautiful all-in-one teaching platform. Chad talks with Jeni about what makes Marvelous different from other teaching platforms out there, the importance of elevating women to leadership positions, and why applying for and getting accepted into an accelerator program was the right path for the company. Marvelous Follow Marvelous on YouTube, Instagram, or LinkedIn. Follow Jeni on LinkedIn. Follow thoughtbot on Twitter or LinkedIn. Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Jeni Barcelos, the Co-Founder, and CEO of Marvelous, the world's most beautiful all-in-one teaching platform. Jeni, thank you so much for joining me. JENI: Thank you for having me, Chad. I'm excited to be here and excited for our conversation. CHAD: So I'm really excited to dig into more about Marvelous as well. So why don't we start there? What makes Marvelous different than other teaching platforms that are out there? JENI: Marvelous is different in that we prioritize design, I would say more than any other competitive platform. And we also prioritize live events in a way that I think is pretty unique. So we started in the wellness space. We primarily are serving wellness creators, although all kinds of other creators use our tool as well. So we specifically built Marvelous with the goal of serving their unique needs, which involves a lot of teaching live classes and having a really great community space where students and clients can build relationships with each other. And then, because our audience has a particular design aesthetic and is non-technical, we've created the tool in a way that makes it really easy to make something look beautiful very quickly and simply. CHAD: So what caused you to differentiate yourself based on design? JENI: I think just personal preference and aesthetic, to be honest. As we were building the platform, I realized very quickly that people were choosing us...one of the big reasons people were choosing us was because of the simple nature of the user interface and because of the design that it produced. And so we decided really early to prioritize that. And I would say it's also just I care deeply about design, and I don't like the idea of using tools that make that an afterthought. And so I thought if I'm going to use it, and I do, I mean, we definitely dogfood our own platform and teach our own courses, we run our own communities there, I want it to look beautiful. [laughs] I want it to be a place that people enjoy spending time. We all spend more time, I think, than we want looking at screens. And so when you are going to engage in that practice and engage with other people on the internet, I think it's really nice to do it in a space that feels welcoming, and gentle, and beautiful. CHAD: So you have a co-founder, Sandy. Are either of you designers or have a background in design? JENI: Nope, not at all. Although I was one course away from minoring in art history in school. [laughter] No, I'm a lawyer. So I'm the opposite of a designer, although I think there's a part of me that thinks of myself as an artist. I wish that were my identity. CHAD: So, given the importance of design that you discovered, how did you go about executing on that? JENI: Hiring really great people, I would say, and having a really critical eye. And so, there's a tremendous amount of feedback that goes into our process. And now we have a head of brand in our company, and she can hold space for that design across both marketing and within product. So that hire, I think, has been critical for us to be able to maintain that as a priority. CHAD: Where were you in the product life-cycle and business stage where you were able to hire really great people? JENI: I would say within the last two years. So we are one of these startups that was in the right place at the right time when COVID hit. So luckily and unluckily, maybe we grew really fast in the wake of the pandemic, the beginning of the pandemic. And so that positioned us to hire pretty rapidly over the last two years. And that's when we really had the resources and the capacity to bring in that level of talent. I'll say our creative director was working with us for many years before that but just in a part-time capacity so, you know, running her own agency. And we were hiring her out as we could because we were bootstrapped. And so it wasn't until we reached a certain level of growth where we could bring her on as a permanent fixture in the company. CHAD: Yeah, that's often a way that I hear from founders to help get things off the grounds, particularly if you know of someone and would love to work with them and you know what they can produce, but you just can't afford to bring them on full-time as a member of the team at that point. Contracting with them, working with them part-time can be a great way to get that started. So let's rewind even further and tell me about the fateful day where you and Sandy first met each other. JENI: Yeah, so we first met in Colorado Springs at an entrepreneurship event. And it was for an online program we had both been in that was teaching us how to start a SaaS company. And we are two of the only people that had actually done it and gotten to paying customers within six months, which was a pretty audacious goal, I would say to go from being non-technical and having no experience in the startup world to having a product or at least an MVP with paying customers within six months and no funding. So we were 2 of maybe 5 or 6 people out of 550 in the program who did that. So we automatically kind of gravitated towards each other. And we were two of the only women also in the program. So we met at that event and got to know each other over the course of a number of days and retreated together. And then we just started really being accountability partners to one another as we were each building our own companies independently. And then that went on for another year, year and a half before Sandy joined my company. CHAD: Okay, so you were already working on Marvelous? JENI: Yeah. It had a different name at the time, but yes, I was six months into it when I met her. CHAD: How did you convince her to do that? JENI: We were actually growing...for a solo founder, we were growing to the point that I couldn't manage the company really on my own anymore. And so I applied to an accelerator just because I felt like I had other kinds of career experience but had, again, zero background in tech startups. And so, I came from teaching at a law school and building and scaling a nonprofit. And my background was in politics prior to that. So I had no idea what I was doing. Like, I didn't know what I didn't know, and so that thought scared me. And I just wanted to go immerse myself in an environment where I could ask a lot of questions and have access to resources and mentorships. So anyway, I applied to an accelerator and got accepted contingent on having a team and having co-founders. And I was like, [laughs] well, that's why I need to come here because I don't know how to do that. Like, I don't know how I would do that. And so I reached out to Sandy because I mean, she had been more closely involved in the company than anyone else because we were constantly working together online and going on Zoom and helping each other build our companies. She knew more than anyone else really what was involved. And she was always commenting how she wished she had started [chuckles] a company like this because it's just in the sector. Her background is in clinical wellness, and Marvelous really was serving yoga and wellness teachers. And so I said, "Well, why don't you come on board? I need to have at least one co-founder." Well, I was told I needed to have two, but I convinced them actually to accept me into the program with just one. So Sandy and I went into the accelerator together. CHAD: I feel like that's a great sign that you were able to convince them to bend the rule. [laughs] JENI: Yeah, I mean, I think that's actually my MO in life. So I also applied and got into graduate school at Yale without taking the GRE. So I have a history of these kinds of convincing arguments, I guess. CHAD: [laughs] JENI: And I'm a lawyer, right? So I was made for this. [chuckles] CHAD: Yes. You sound like a very enjoyable person, though. So I find it hard to believe that you're... [laughs] No, I'm kidding. JENI: I'm a human rights lawyer. So the only person I've ever represented in court was a pod of killer whales. So I'm a human rights and environmental attorney. So I'm not a corporate attorney by any means. CHAD: So some people might describe going after things, bending the rules as ambition. And I was reading some of the things that you've written, so I'm not pulling this out of thin air. But I know that you talked before about how sometimes ambition, particularly from female-identifying people, can be seen as a problem. Why is that? JENI: I mean, the short answer to that is the patriarchy of which we're all a part. Both men and women and non-binary people are all impacted greatly by the patriarchy. I mean, I think it's how girls are socialized. So that's a whole, I think, a whole other podcast conversation to have. But I mean, just even recently, I have a young daughter, and she was told not to raise her hand as much in school because she was so eager and raises her hand for every question that's asked. And that's unacceptable to me. But I was also told those things. And I think just men and women are judged very differently in our culture, and that's just a fact of life. I mean, just look at, I mean, this is maybe opening up a can of worms. But if you just look at the way the Elizabeth Holmes trial played out versus so many other startup stories, and yes, there are differences, but it's really common in our culture to villainize female ambition and to look at it as problematic. CHAD: Yeah, you're absolutely right that this is a whole podcast topic in and of itself, but I think it's an important one. But I'm curious; it can feel angering and powerless when something like that happens at school or in a system where it's very hard to control it or change it. But when it comes to your own company, you are in charge. So what have you done to try to make this different at Marvelous? JENI: Well, I would say elevating women to leadership positions to the extent that we've been able, I mean, we're definitely a female-run company. We make decisions. Also, just even the way we provide benefits and salaries, it's in my mind done from a more holistic standpoint than I would say a lot of other small startups are doing. We prioritize people and their families and try to treat people like human beings versus just kind of pawns in our scheme to build a company, I would say. It's not perfect. But I really think that so much of what goes on around kind of the women in tech stories so much of that and the women in fundraising stories has to do with women or non-binary people really having to prove themselves to a degree that is unrealistic in order to have the same treatment or the same opportunities as white men. So we are obviously very acutely aware of that. And so, in our own company, we're still very small but always trying to elevate the opportunities that women and people of color have in our company. CHAD: And as you said, this permeates. It's systemic. And so, what might you do when you have a male manager with the best of intentions in a female-led company? I'm of the opinion that it's not enough to just assume that, oh, well, in that environment, this stuff won't happen because it is so ingrained. So are there other things that we can do as founders, as people, and leaders, as a company to create an environment where it's better for everybody? JENI: I definitely don't have all the answers for this. But I would say we've put a lot of attention into coming up with core values that we really strongly affirm and reaffirm in the company and make sure that everyone is aware of those. I also just I'm constantly watching what's going on and noticing subtle cues when people start to pull back from contributing or some voices are much louder than others; just trying to notice that and not wait for something to be brought to my attention. I think so much of it is also the culture, and it's hard in a situation like ours where we're a fully remote team with people across the world with their own different, you know, they're bringing their own cultures and their own values to the company. I mean, it's definitely hard. It's harder than I ever would have expected to get people on the same page. And, I don't know, I don't have really good advice other than to say the founders should really agree on the core values. And then, those core values should be shared constantly. And I think it starts with the founder or the co-founder and the leadership team holding everyone to those values and standards. CHAD: So as someone who, like you said earlier, you're not a software developer, you're not a designer, yet you are working on this idea and bringing it out into the world. How did you manage to do that? What did the very early steps look like for you? JENI: So I started a company when I was essentially on maternity leave. I naively thought that that would be like a fun, little hobby project for me to start a tech company. Partly because I was spinning off what had really been a research project that was funded and incubated at a major university. I was spinning that off into a nonprofit with another co-founder, another lawyer. And I spent a great deal of time and energy fundraising and was constantly going and having meetings or drinks or dinner with people or even flying out to different foundations and meeting with donors. And I was like, this is for me who...I have a body of work and have developed expertise as a climate change expert. And that word is problematic but, you know, someone who knows quite a lot about climate change in the law, edited one of the major textbooks in the area, taught some of the first curriculum on energy and the environment. I was constantly having to just go out and raise money all the time and mostly from people who had cashed out of tech companies. So I was in Seattle at the time, you know, Microsoft and Amazon. There are a lot of people with significant wealth, and those are the people that are donating to organizations. And so I just thought I'm as smart and capable as these people. Like, why don't I have a revenue source that helps to fund the work that I want to do in the world? Which was a lot of human rights law and environmental law that's really underfunded really at that intersection of climate change and human rights. And so I thought, well, I'm on maternity leave. I'm really interested in the wellness industry. I see it really being broken. I had gone through yoga teacher training like right at the tail end of law school just for my own mental health and wellbeing. And I just saw all of these friends and colleagues of mine struggling, and I just thought something wasn't quite right. So the first thing I did was I decided I'm going to try to build something to help them. And I set out to interview 75 yoga studio owners or managers in North America and did some research on the biggest markets at th…

Full show notes at the publisher

425: SweetProcess with Owen McGab Enaohwo Jun 02, 2022

Show notes

Owen McGab Enaohwo is the CEO and Co-Founder of SweetProcess, a business process management software that helps management teams and employees easily document procedures, implement processes, and manage tasks. Chad talks with Owen about taking specific root issues and building software around them, overcoming resistance to the core idea of documenting processes, and the importance of having the freedom and ability to be empowered to make changes to organizational documents that outline how you do your work. SweetProcess Follow SweetProcess on Twitter, Facebook, or LinkedIn. 52 Sample Standard Operating Procedure Templates Follow Owen on Twitter or LinkedIn. Follow thoughtbot on Twitter or LinkedIn. Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel and with me today is Owen McGab Enaohwo, the CEO and Co-Founder of SweetProcess, a business process management software that helps management teams as well as employees easily document procedures, implement processes, and manage tasks. Owen, thank you so much for joining me. OWEN: Thanks for having me. I really appreciate you inviting me as a guest on here. CHAD: I could only return the favor as I recently went on one of the podcasts that you run over at the SweetProcess. I'm happy to have you on the show. OWEN: Great, great. CHAD: Let's dive in a little bit to SweetProcess. You know, it's a tool for documenting process. And I'm curious what led you to founding SweetProcess and creating this product? OWEN: That's a great question. So what happened was SweetProcess was actually founded in, I think, the fourth quarter of 2013. And before then, I had an agency where I would provide entrepreneurs in the U.S., so small to medium-sized business owners, with back-office support, basically, people in the Philippines doing back-office support for them here in the U.S. And so people had read these books that were very popular at that time, The 4-Hour Workweek, or the World Is Flat. And then suddenly they realize that being able to hire people abroad and outsource work was not limited to only the larger companies like the telecoms and all that that would go and hire like 150 or more people in these countries working at their phone support 24/7 and all that. So these books exposed small business owners to the idea that even they themselves can do it on a smaller scale and outsource a lot of their work. And so that's what I was doing. But the issues that I ran into was that first of all; they were coming to me with this idea that the moment they hire that immediately the person will hit the ground running and start doing the work magically, not realizing that for that to happen, there needs to have been documentation in place. Because first of all, the person you're hiring is in a different country, different culture and all that. There's that that you have going against you. But then also, they're not even with you physically where you can say you can teach them by talking to them while they're next to you. So they're in a whole different location. So the more clear your instructions are in terms of having standard operating procedures in front of them, the more easier and quickly they're going to deliver the results you want, and so that was the first thing. The second thing was they were very busy wearing so many hats. They didn't have time to document these procedures that we needed to do the work for them. So we came up with this strategy where we would meet with our clients at the time online on Zoom, not Zoom; Zoom wasn't the thing at the time. It was...what was it called? Skype. CHAD: Skype. OWEN: Yeah. So we would meet with them online, and we'd have recorded sessions with them where they would walk us through what they were doing then record those conversations. And then, someone else on my team would take this conversation and document standard operating procedure step by step from what they told us. Now, on the backend, the issue we had was to do this documentation and have tools in place so that people can actually have one place where they could go and find all these documents for our clients. It was either we were using enterprise-level tools that were first of all hard to use for my team talk less of the clients. So these tools were not even built for small to medium-sized businesses. Or we were basically hacking to get a bunch of free tools to achieve that purpose of documentation and having one place where people can go find stuff. So in the back of my mind, I was like, man, there has to be a better tool that does this. And so fast forward, I was invited as a guest on to Mixergy. It's another very popular podcast for tech startups. I don't know if you know of him. His name is Andrew Warner. And so, he has two versions of the podcast. The first version is the one where people go in there and talk about the biography of their business or themselves and how they were able to build a tech startup that sold for millions or whatever. And then the other version of the podcast was one that was behind a paid subscription where people come on; they're experts, come on there and talk about specific topics like very concrete-sized topics that people are paying him to learn from. So people could come on here to learn about sales, marketing. In my case, I was brought on there to teach the listeners how they can basically document procedures and processes so that you can hand over work and no longer be the bottleneck in their business. Lo and behold, my co-founder, Jervis, who is a programmer and now my co-founder and CTO for SweetProcess, listened to that course that I did for Mixergy. He reached out to me and said he has an idea he is working on similar to what I was talking about, the whole way of simplifying documentation. And he just had some questions about this idea he had in his head. And being the kind of person I am, open to conversation, I said, "Okay. Let's go ahead. Let's meet." So we had a conversation. And after our conversation, I was like, "Dude; I'm running into the same issue that you're talking about right now because we do this for our customers. We do the documentation for them. But the tools are not the way they should be. Instead of me just giving you ideas on how to do that, and then you go from here, would you be interested if we go ahead and work together and build this software together and build this as a company together?" And he was excited. He was like, "Okay, let's do it." And then I said, "Okay, instead of jumping ahead to build the software, one of the things I want to do is avoid a situation where the software ends up being hard to use and feature-bloated like the other software that we are running into right now. Why don't we spend some time having conversations with potential customers to totally understand this problem of documenting procedures and having one place where employees can go to find stuff and how employees can collaborate together to improve stuff?" So I wanted to really understand the problem by talking to people. So we spent like about a month or so. I spoke to more than 30 different people running different companies just to get the ideas of the problems they were having with this very specific topic. And we came back, we analyzed all the conversations, and we were able to put down a list of root-specific problems that people were having. Because people will suggest features of what they want, but if you drill down and ask them deeper and deeper like, "Why this?" You know, just going into the problem they have and try to get to the root why behind it, then you will end up having a situation where you find a bunch of specific things that are similar between all the different people you spoke to, but they are not saying the same features. So we took those specific root issues that we were coming across, and we were able to now go ahead and build our software based on that as opposed to launching a software where at the time with a lot of competitors has not as much features as they had. But we focused on simplicity. We focused on solving the root issues and getting rid of a lot of the complex stuff. Like, for instance, some of the software were focused on having some kind of feature and technology sets where it was focused on the business consultant or the expert person on the company who's going to come and document stuff. But we said, "No, the owners of the business don't care about that. It's really more about how does this help them. They don't care about the terminologies and all that." So we got rid of all the bloat and all the stuff and just focused on simplicity based on having these conversations that we had with the people that I spoke of earlier and also based on my own experience using these harder-to-use software. CHAD: Well, I really appreciate and commend that because it's a common pitfall. I'm a big believer in building software for yourself that you really understand and a product that you yourself are going to use. But some founders, when faced with that, they'll be like, "Well, I don't need to talk to anybody. I'm the customer. I know everything that is needed. And let's just do what I know we need to do." So to be in a position where you were able to take a step back from that and talk to some other people and make sure you were on the right track, that's really great. OWEN: And besides the fact of talking to people to help us streamline and simplify the software, another thing we did was open my eyes to the idea that this problem we're solving basically run across multiple different verticals or industries besides the industry I was in. The industry I was in was basically the outsourcing industry, trying to help people outsource their back-office support. But I realized that the problem was even people that actually want to use the software for documenting didn't really care so much about outsourcing work. It was more about employees they have internally being able to do work predictably and at the scale they wanted it, delivering results that they wanted, and hence they needed that documentation. So without having these conversations, you don't get to see these things that you didn't know going in. CHAD: Actually, that touches on one of the things I was wondering about, which is the market for your product is essentially every company in the entire world. [laughter] So, with such a huge potential market, are there things you've identified as who your ideal customers are or what kinds of customers come to SweetProcess on their own, what stage they're at, those kinds of things? OWEN: Great question. So what we've realized is from the customers who stay 24 months or more with us typically are the much larger companies that have over 20 employees based on the data we have. So what we found is the smaller companies, we encourage them to use SweetProcess because we always want people to start early in the process of documenting procedures. But what you realize is that these smaller companies...let me backtrack. So the software solves that problem of having documentation in place and collaborating together to improve these documents over time. And that's really because they are trying to make sure that from a production standpoint of delivering the results to their customers, they have all these instructions. And so their employees can carry out those tasks that they cannot automate. Those tasks that need to be done by human beings, employees can carry it out predictably. Now, that's them trying to deliver output to their customers. When a company is less than five employees or even less than ten employees, they don't have so much issues or worries with production. Their main biggest issue is how to get customers, how to get sales in the first place. So their focus initially is more on okay; let me figure out a system for sales. Let me figure out a system for marketing and all that. But on the other hand, when you already have 20 or more employees, to a large extent, you have figured out your sales pipeline, your marketing pipeline, and all that. And now you really want to make sure that the people you've hired can hit the ground running and do work predictably and deliver the results you want. So that's why it makes sense that these companies that have more employees tend to be the ones that have the need for the software, for what we do. CHAD: Who ends up often finding and championing SweetProcess within an organization? Is it typically someone in a leadership position like a CEO? OWEN: Great question. So it breaks down based on the size of the company. And now I'm giving you all the juice because my competitors are listening to this now. CHAD: [laughs] OWEN: But anyway, it is based on the size of the company. It's like if it's between 20 or let's say between 10 to 20-30 employees, most likely it's the CEO who has this pressure that, hey, I need to make sure that employees can go to one single place and find step by step instructions on how to do their work. I need to make sure the onboarding can be done faster. I need to make sure that if anybody leaves this company, we're not scrambling to figure out how work is done. So they start looking for a tool like SweetProcess. Now, beyond that, let's say 30 to maybe 100 employees, it's now like the CEO, not the CEO but the Chief Operating Officer, someone who the CEO has hired onboard as the person in charge of operations at the company. Now, once we get beyond that 100 to, let's say, 1,000 employee kind of thing, we're now looking at someone that is a level below the COO, the Chief Operating Officer, and those usually are the operations manager. So that's how it works; it's based on the size of the companies. It's either the CEO that's reaching out to us or the Chief Operating Officer or someone who's an operations manager at the larger companies looking to...and especially with the operations manager thing, it's usually they're trying to bring in SweetProcess to start in their department or whatever and then usually to scale-out besides their department to other parts of the company. CHAD: How do you reach those people? OWEN: So you mentioned something that the fact that the problem we solve cuts across the board, different verticals. It's not industry-specific. So that's a good and bad problem to have. Because if you're only selling to a specific industry, all you got to do is basically be everywhere anyone who is in that industry is at, all the podcasts, all the trades, and everything, just basically be there, and that's it. But because the software we sell cuts across different industries, it's kind of harder to do that. So what we decided to do is focus more on creating content around the problem itself so that when people are looking for how to solve their problem, they're able to find us regardless of the industry they are in. Mid-Roll Ad: I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. An…

Full show notes at the publisher

424: Boulevard with Matt Danna May 26, 2022

Show notes

Matt Danna is the Co-Founder and CEO of Boulevard, which powers next-gen salons and spas. Its mission is to modernize the technology while improving the daily lives of professionals and the clients they serve. Chad talks with Matt about discovering a problem and then making the jump to working on it, overcoming hurdles in terms of continued growth, and deciding to invest in building their own hardware by creating Boulevard Duo: a point of sale credit card reader. Boulevard Boulevard Duo Follow Boulevard on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, or YouTube. Follow Matt on Twitter or LinkedIn. Follow thoughtbot on Twitter or LinkedIn. Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Matt Danna, the Co-Founder and CEO of Boulevard, which powers next-gen salons and spas. Matt, thank you so much for joining me. MATT: Thanks so much for having me, Chad. Great to be here. CHAD: One of the things that I was interested in learning about Boulevard is it's a large product that does a lot for salons and spas. And so, I'm interested in talking with you about the process of getting to where you are today. But why don't we get started by giving folks an overview of everything that Boulevard does for salons and spas? MATT: Yeah, absolutely. So Boulevard offers what we think is the first and really only business management platform that's really focused around the client experience. We work with businesses that help all of us look and feel our best. And it's a really special industry to be powering where there's a really close sense of that human touch and that human element. We try to use technology to help automate and relieve the day-to-day operations as much as we can for these businesses so that they can focus on providing that world-class client experience and deepening relationships with their clients. CHAD: And tactically, that's online booking, scheduling, payments, schedule management, all that kind of stuff that goes into running. MATT: Yeah, absolutely. So it goes all the way from, like you said, scheduling to we are a fully integrated payments solution to even have time clock kind of commission reporting. And so it really goes from managing everything front of house all the way through back of house. And happy to share more about how we ended up building such a wide and deep product because it's definitely an interesting story. CHAD: So you were not in the salon industry prior to Boulevard, is that right? MATT: That's correct. CHAD: So, how did you end up getting brought into this industry? MATT: So the founding story...so my background is in software engineering, but I ended up turning much more into a designer over time. So I've been naturally drawn to building technology for creative individuals. And so, at my last startup, which was called Fullscreen, it was a startup here in LA. We were helping YouTube creators make better content online, helping them monetize on YouTube, understand their audience. And this was in the days where YouTubers couldn't monetize directly. They needed to go through a network. And so, we created this proprietary technology offering that really helped them understand how to build their audience and further monetize. So the original founding story was that I met my co-founder of Boulevard at Fullscreen. His name is Sean Stavropoulos. And I was the VP of Product. He was the VP of Engineering. And the kind of inception moment was that there was this week where Sean's hair was a complete disaster. CHAD: [chuckles] MATT: And as a great colleague, I was making fun of him [laughs] and telling him like, "Dude, you need to go get a haircut." And he said to me that he kept forgetting to call his salon during the day to make an appointment, and at night when he remembered to do those types of things, the salon is obviously closed. And we were just thinking how much friction there was as a client of these businesses in the booking process and that we didn't understand why you had to do basically so much work in order to be a client. It just was incongruent with what was going on in other industries and kind of restaurants and everything going through this digital transformation. Our hypothesis was that they must still be on pen and paper; they haven't adopted technology yet, and that's why you need to call to make an appointment. And we started thinking a lot about this problem and started obsessing over it. [laughs] And there was a weekend that we were hanging out, and we ended up walking into a few different salons and spas in a neighborhood that we were hanging out. And we did a bunch of research and asked them a lot of questions. We said we were UCLA students working on a research project. CHAD: [laughs] MATT: Which was a pretty smart move because everyone loves talking to students, and we weren't trying to sell them anything. We were trying to learn more. And so, a good research tip is just to state you're always a student. And we ended up learning. And we were super surprised that they were all using technology. All the technology that these businesses were using were also capable of online booking. And so we were like, "Okay, none of this makes sense. Like, you're making your customers call you, but you have these capabilities." We were like, "Do you need help embedding it into your website? Like, why don't you use online booking" And their answer would be, "We absolutely cannot use online booking, no way," which made us even more curious. And so what we ended up learning was that self-care businesses, you know, salons, spas, nail salons, you name it, they're generally running on pretty thin profit margins like in the 5% to 10% neighborhood because their labor costs are so high relative to their sales. And the other important piece that we learned was that the front desk has outsized control over the revenue that the business makes simply by how they place appointments on the calendar. And so when you call to make an appointment, they're looking up to see if you have a client file, to see if you've been there before, what services did you get? Who were they with? How long exactly did they take? They're also looking to see when they could fit you in. And they're doing double booking, triple booking whenever possible so that staff can be with multiple clients at once and double up. And then they're also making sure there are no gaps between appointments. And so they're doing basically this yield optimization, schedule optimization on the fly. And none of that was taken into account if customers self-booked using any of the solutions available on the market. And so we thought that seems like a straight-up technology problem to solve that these businesses needed an online booking solution so customers can have that convenience and self-booking whenever they want. But it also needs to take into account some of that business logic that the front desk follows so that they don't get gaps in the day and have a really sub-optimal and inefficient calendar. And so that's where we thought we could provide some particular value that would be unique in the industry. And that was what we focused our MVP on, was that very thing, having an intelligent scheduling solution. CHAD: It seems like it's a pretty big leap for the director of product and director of engineering at a startup to discover a problem like this and then actually make the jump to working on it [laughs] and making it real. Was there something in particular that happened? Why did you do that? [laughs] MATT: Yeah, I mean, we had a, you know, being executives at the startup and really loving the team, loving what we were doing, our mission. But I think one of the motivators and catalysts was when we were doing this field research. And we ended up going out to a couple of hundred businesses over the course of several weekends to learn even more about this problem area. But one of the things that was so evident and clear was that all of the technology in the market that these customers, these businesses were using, they were negative NPS scores. They were like, "Oh, we use, you know, X, Y, or Z solution, and we really don't like it. It's so hard to use." You would see the red in their eyes when they would talk about this technology." And we're like, "There's something very powerful here." And we weren't exactly sure at the time was it legacy technology not keeping up with modern needs of these businesses and the growing expectations from end consumers, or was it user error problems? And we had come to the conclusion that it was really a lack of innovation in the market from existing vendors. And that got us particularly excited, and we formed a lot of conviction, so much conviction that we made the leap to start working on this. So we transitioned out of our full-time executive day jobs, and we ended up doing a little bit of consulting work while we were doing a lot of product discovery. So for about six months, we were doing three days a week on Boulevard and a couple of days a week on consulting. So it was a nice little part-time way to keep paying the bills but also then be able to spend a significant amount of our brain space thinking about this opportunity and what problems we wanted to solve. CHAD: So maybe I'm just off base here. And I'm not trying to get you to say that something was wrong at Fullscreen. But it strikes me there needed to be something going on, in my mind, maybe I'm off base, for you to even before deciding to make that leap, though, to spend your weekends going to salons and doing interviews. MATT: Yeah, I think this is how most companies are started is by founders who are trying to solve a problem that they're exposed to. So everyone is always trying to build companies that are solutions for problems that they have. And we just, I think, got excited by this problem. And my background being in building technology for the creative individuals, like, I got really, really excited. And Sean took some convincing that this was worth it and that this could be a thing. CHAD: Was it an aspiration for you to find something that you could use to found your own company? MATT: No, no. CHAD: And then why were you doing it? [laughs] MATT: I think it felt like the right thing to do. I never considered myself an entrepreneur, and I really still don't. I think of myself as a builder, and I love building things. And this was in a way for us to think about, like, oh, let's build a company and turn this into a massive business. We saw that there was a particular pain point that was experienced from both consumers and businesses and that we could provide something special. It felt like it was something that only we saw, which I think made it feel even more compelling to work on. And so we didn't know if we were crazy at first. We always had this question of like, why hasn't anyone figured this out? This seems so obvious. I still don't know why we're the only ones that have any type of kind of logic on top of the schedule in that sense. But we saw it as a unique opportunity to build something really special and provide a lot of value to consumers and businesses. CHAD: Well, that's super interesting. So once you decided and you started working on Boulevard, how did you decide what to focus on first? And how did you set your market for what the first version was going to be or a target for what the first version was going to be? MATT: So, we focused on the businesses that had a front desk. So those are generally the ones that really struggled with getting the most out of every minute possible in the day. And so we focused on what were typically mid to upper market single locations to start, and we got introduced to a salon owner through a mutual friend. They were based in New York, and it was just a two-person salon. And so, we built our MVP to be able to support their day-to-day functions. And they were using some other system, so we kind of had to get to a place where there was general feature parity to support them. So we built up the features that we needed, and then we launched them, transitioned them off their previous solution. And then we did all this in person and then hung out with them for about a week or two after to babysit the system, make sure there weren't problems. We were iterating in real-time. Sean and I were releasing code. And from there, we got an intro to our second customer through another mutual friend. CHAD: How long did it take you from when you started to when it was live in that first salon? MATT: It took about nine months. CHAD: And were you self-funding that based on the consulting that you mentioned? MATT: Yeah, self-funding. And then, after we launched with the first business, Sean and I actually both liquidated our 401Ks. And we didn't have the time to continue to consult. So we bootstrapped the company and put our life savings into it once we had traction from our first couple of customers. And that's when we started to hire our first employees to help us continue to accelerate development and that kind of thing. CHAD: So again, liquidating your 401k is a pretty big step. MATT: Yep. CHAD: Did you try to do external fundraising before doing that? MATT: No. At that point, not yet. We wanted to really validate the concept on our own dime. And then, when we had paying customers and a decent customer base, we did a friends and family round. And then, once we achieved a certain milestone, we joined an accelerator, which is based in Los Angeles called Luma Launch. And we were part of that accelerator for about six months. And then we raised our series seed following that. We went from liquidating our savings, living like college students, ramen noodle budget-type to once we felt good about the value we were providing, had the case studies and the customer feedback, and had a pretty awesome MVP to show to investors; that's when we decided to fundraise. CHAD: How nervous were the two of you? MATT: Very nervous. [laughter] I mean, it's one of those both of us come from really, really humble families, and there was no safety net. And so we were all in. And I think often from when there's a lot of constraints; you have to find creativity. We were all in. We were working all the time on this, really gave it everything we had. And in hindsight, it was a good decision. But it could have easily been a terrible decision. [laughs] CHAD: I mean, this is one of the things with founding stories is we talk to the people who are successful. [laughs] So, would you recommend this path to other people? MATT: I think if it's something where you could see providing unique value to the world and that you have lots of validation from real people, not just your friends but from prospective customers...it was when we were talking to real businesses where they would say, "This is something we would use and pay for." And so, after hearing that dozens and dozens of times, that matched with the negative NPS scores with their current solutions. That's where we were like, "This can be something pretty special." So I wouldn't recommend building in isolation and making that leap of faith without really doing your diligence on the opportunity. But yeah, I think everyone, at some point, if they have an idea or a problem they want to solve, should give it a go. Mid-Roll Ad: I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's Age…

Full show notes at the publisher

423: Reign Ventures with Monique Idlett May 19, 2022

Show notes

Monique Idlett is the Founder of Reign Ventures, a seed-stage investment firm, and previously the Co-Founder and CEO of Mosley Brands and Mosley Music Group, home to a multiplatinum roster of artists. Chad talks with Monique about how the music industry is like the startup venture capital industry, understanding that representation matters, having a data-forward approach, and appearing on the TV show Undercover Billionaire, where entrepreneurs are given 90-days and nothing but 100 dollars to go undercover and build a thriving million-dollar business for a small town in the US. Reign Ventures Follow Reign Ventures on Twitter, Instagram, or LinkedIn. Follow Monique on Twitter or LinkedIn. Follow thoughtbot on Twitter or LinkedIn. Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Monique Idlett, the Founder of Reign Ventures, a seed-stage investment firm, and previously the Co-Founder and CEO of Mosley Brands and Mosley Music Group, home to a multiplatinum roster of artists. Monique, thank you so much for joining me. Now, you left Mosley Music Group about three years ago to focus exclusively on Reign Ventures. How is the music industry like the startup venture capital industry? MONIQUE: There is no difference in the way I see a pipeline of amazing talented founders. We're truly looking for those exceptional founders that we can help develop, put up that bumper system. The end product in the music industry was the music we were consuming, the experiences through the live art form. And in the startup world, that end product is the success and the ability to scale a real solution that this company has solved with amazing, talented people. So to me, it was a nice, easy transition, and it made sense. CHAD: Are there ways in which it's different? MONIQUE: Oh my goodness, yes, lots of ways that it's different. The difference is that music is an art form. For me, music is the universal language. I believe that I've traveled the world. And I've been to places where there were language barriers, but when a song, a popular song, came on, the language barrier was gone. In the startup world, there may be several people trying to create and penetrate a problem area in a vertical or a category. And we may not have the ability in the startup world to have several of the same sounding things from a business model. They may not all work. And so you're dealing with the emotional capacity on the music side. And on the tech side of things you're truly dealing with, can you really solve this problem? We're solving problems, not just emotional connections from the music industry perspective. And also, it's a lot slower moving. We have a project in the music industry, and it may have a cycle. And now it's an even shorter cycle with technology. You may be able to create an entire project in just a couple of weeks. In the startup world, in the business side of things, you may not see the development for two to three years. So the patience is definitely...I've had to apply a lot more patience and understanding of being able to scale a business versus just a project-driven entity. So it's a little different, but the end result is all the same. Creating real great solutions for real problems, whether it's through an art form or whether it's through a business model, is all similar to me. CHAD: So, do you have a particular investment strategy or focus at Reign? MONIQUE: We do. Erica and I currently we are the largest two female Black-owned VC fund. So one of the things that we felt ten and a half years ago when we started investing together is investing has just been done...venture has been done wrong. There's a reason why less than 3% of funding collectively was...still to this day; it's about 3.2. But over ten years ago, when we started, only less than 3% of funding from VC was going to women, all women, and Black and Brown founders. And so literally, we were like, the problem is that we're not having enough investment or a lens on women and people of color. And we want to do it the way it should have always been done: investing inclusively. We are proud to say that we invest in all founders, all exceptional founders. And yes, we have a lens on women and people of color because they've been under-capitalized and under-resourced and under-everything. And so the reality is that we want to set the tone of how it should always look and the world is inclusive. Diversity is not an issue; the equity and inclusion side is an issue. And we want to keep being that example. CHAD: That's great. Do you feel like, or in your experience, have you found that these founders were already out there and they just were being passed over? Or were the problems so systemic that they weren't even getting the opportunity to even be out there? MONIQUE: I think there are always exceptional people out there; that's number one. And I think it's a two-prong problem: yes, the pipeline, the access. So there's the lack of access for these types of founders that has absolutely been an issue, the lack of resources, the lack of access. But the other side of it is that they have just been overlooked and not allowed into the rooms. There are exceptional people in this world that don't only look like one type of person. And the reality is that we have access to them. And so yes, both of those are an issue, okay. But the reality is that we have exceptional founders of all types of people. There are amazing people in this world. When you sit behind a computer, and you run an algorithm, and you only go to only your network of what looks like you and comfortable, then you are what we call missing out on a ton of opportunity. So Erica and I are founder-friendly. We go where the founders are. CHAD: I've come to learn and understand representation really matters. Being able to see yourself is really important. And it's something that because I look like what I look like, I had the privilege to not realize how important that is because there are so many people in power that look like me. I can imagine it's super refreshing to a lot of the founders that you work with to be talking with you and sitting across the table from you and seeing that and talking to someone that understands them. MONIQUE: Yes. I think that having someone to relate to on all levels, personal, professional is a very important concept. And I remember starting my career at USA Today; not only was I different in age because most of my colleagues were 40-plus, and I was in my young 20s, they were mostly male and definitely particularly only Caucasian. I was the first African American executive on the marketing and sales side. And I remember feeling very isolated and very lost and not knowing who I could turn to that would understand some of the things I was actually going through. And so yes, founders, it eases the founder's mind when they can talk to me and know that hey, I didn't always look like this from this perspective. I grew up in income-based housing in New Jersey. I understand where you come from. Yes, I understand what it's like to be a Black woman; I am one. But also the other side of it is that when we have founders who are Caucasian male. We like to have conversations of inclusion from the ground up with them. "Did you think about this consumer base? Do you know that you might have to message different?" These are things and conversations that people are not having if you're only talking to one type of person. And so, I think that what Reign Ventures is doing is allowing for comfortable conversation and then execution. CHAD: That's great. You started with a $25 million fund in Reign, and you're well beyond that now, right? MONIQUE: Yes, yes. So our current fund is a $50 million fund, and then our next fund will be...we're going for the stars and trying to raise $100 million. CHAD: Wow. I've talked to a few people who are either interested in starting VC or who have done it before. And what do you use to judge how much or how large of a fund you'll be building? MONIQUE: So we like to think of what we want the outcome to be. And so, the long-term goal of Reign Ventures is to have a billion-dollar under asset management. That has not been done by two Black females before. And so we understand if we do that, if we look at the long-term goal, if we do that and count backwards, here's what it will take to get to that billion dollars under asset management. So yes, the size of the fund will have to increase. But we also know that that means we're creating amazing companies and supporting amazing founders with Reign Ventures. And so we look at the size as our ability to have a larger stake and the ability to have follow-on capital for all of the companies that are doing amazing. I would tell anyone who is looking to start a venture fund that Erica and I (Erica is my business partner.) she and I started and wrote our thesis over ten years ago. And we actually deployed our personal capital for the first nine years so that we could create a data room and so that we could understand what it meant and felt like to have skin in the game so that we can learn truly where we sat well with a thesis. And it ended up being we do really well with consumer tech and SaaS, you know, B2B SaaS software. And so, I would say that it's not an easy journey to start a venture fund. Truly understand what you want your thesis to be. Truly understand that you're going to hear the word No way more than you will hear the word Yes. This is someone else's investment. This is accountability. And try it and understand it before you just start raising money. CHAD: You sort of alluded to this earlier; you said increasing the size of the fund is going to allow you to make bigger investments and follow-on investments. So do you also see you investing in more companies? MONIQUE: So we like to have a 20 to 25 cap strategy per fund. And what we do is we take 25% of the capital for the earliest investment, and then we save 75% of it for the follow-on round so that we maintain our equity stake. Because we're founder-friendly, so we always want to be in that board room. We always want to roll up our sleeves with the founders and so maintaining whichever early equity we have, which is usually the way the fund is structured, between around 10%. It allows us to not just do more companies; it actually allows us to really double down on the portfolio itself and make sure that we're staying and growing with the founders. CHAD: How involved are you? Are you personally involved? Do you split the portfolio up, and each person takes a few? Or how do you typically do it? MONIQUE: We truly, truly do take my 25-plus years in the music industry. We take that very bumper system approach of we're here to help develop the raw talent and, on the tech side of things, the actual founding team and the evolution of the company. And so I usually take the board seats. Erica, she comes from finance, and she's been doing finance banking for over 25 years. She's been doing early-stage investing for 16 of those years. And so, she helps with the finance cap strategies. How do we get you from your seed stage to your A in 12 months? How do we get you from your A to your B? So she's very, very involved with the financial models and running several of those and working with the founders on who's on your cap table? Okay, so intentionally and strategically, who's missing from your cap table? Let's work on that. And then I'm always the one working on taking the board seat. I'm the one working with the vision, the strategy. I'm an operator, so I have a most extensive network. And so I'm the one aligning them with our resources, our network. And you know, yeah, we're very, very involved. And I think that when you're dealing with seed-stage because that's the stage we're in, it's the riskiest. We try to de-risk the company, the founder, the founding team as much as possible. So we are as involved as the founder wants us to be. We do not make founders feel guilty for not having the largest team. We're like, "Okay, what do you need? Let's get you that." And that's where we like to play. We don't see ourselves going into anything past the seed stage. CHAD: Is there a limit to how many companies that you're able to personally work with? And how do you scale, Monique? MONIQUE: So the cool thing about our fund is that all of the companies are intentional. Half of our companies are consumer tech. So they mostly need pretty much the same type of things, even if they're in different verticals. The other half is SaaS. And so the reality is that they're in different stages. They're growing at different stages. And we, first and foremost, create a founder community that supports each other. That's number one. Then we have an LP community that supports not just Erica and I but our founder community. So we look at investing as from a holistic community. We drive community, and that is the way that we're able to actually still have a sustainable business model with Erica and I. And we have a team. We don't do anything by ourselves. We have an entire team dedicated to the growth of our portfolio companies. CHAD: Speaking of that team, what does that team look like now in terms of the different roles on it? And how big is it? MONIQUE: So currently, right now, we have about four full-time. And then, we have a couple of interns who work on the data science side. And then we also have in-house from just Monique from my particular business model side; we have an HR. We have financial operators, and then we have contractors and partners. And so, at the end of the day, there isn't anything that our founders need that we can't source for them internally or externally. CHAD: Who was the first person you brought onto the Reign team, and why? MONIQUE: Her name is Naya, and she actually has worked for me on my foundation side for a few years. She's was an engineering student at University of Miami. And once she graduated, she was now getting her Master's in Data Science. And we felt like being able to report properly on our founders, the companies that were applying that we actually could not invest in but were investable, we'd like to keep track of that. And so, we felt like having someone who could really handle the data side of Reign Ventures was one of the more important hires. And then, we also hired a full-time social media person who handles the content. We have a monthly podcast called The Series A. They oversee that so all communications on our portfolio companies and Reign Ventures as a whole. So those were the first two hires. And we're currently prepping to hire for the summer a full-time associate that will be out of the New York office. We have offices here in Miami, across from the University of Miami, and then we have offices in New York. CHAD: That's cool. The data aspect of that is super interesting to me because I think that I talk to a lot of people, and a modern VC firm is certainly doing that. But there are still ones out there that don't have that data-forward approach that it sounds like you do. MONIQUE: Well, we need to make sense of all of this. So we need to make sense of the idea of how many founders are applying? What is the demographic makeup of them? Who is this founder? Where are they coming from? What markets are they coming from? Because we do invest just only in the United…

Full show notes at the publisher

422: Verge HealthTech Fund with Joseph Mocanu May 12, 2022

Show notes

Joseph Mocanu is Co-founder and Managing Director of Verge HealthTech Fund, which invests globally in seed-stage healthcare technology startups relevant to emerging Asia that focus on disease prevention and management, digital therapies, and health system efficiency. Chad talks with Joseph about the healthcare landscape in different places of the world, funding criteria for companies, and how the pandemic has changed prospects for the fund and the market in general. Verge HealthTech Fund Follow Verge HealthTech Fund on LinkedIn. Follow Joseph on Twitter or LinkedIn. Follow thoughtbot on Twitter or LinkedIn. Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel, and with me today is Joseph Mocanu, Co-founder and Managing Director of Verge HealthTech Fund, which invests globally in seed-stage healthcare technology startups relevant to emerging Asia that focus on disease prevention and management, digital therapies, and health system efficiency. Joseph, thank you for joining me. JOSEPH: Thanks so much, Chad, for having me. CHAD: So you have been focused on emerging Asia healthtech for a little while both at Verge HealthTech Fund, and prior to that, how did you get involved in this space? JOSEPH: I wish I had a really cool, deliberate story that made it sound like it was a smooth transition from point A to point B. But I simply have to owe it to an opportunity to transfer to the region through my old employer which is Oliver Wyman, a global management consultancy. So I joined this consultancy in 2011 after doing my Ph.D. and MBA really to understand how to be a better investor, which, again, sounds a little bit backwards. But I had worked at a hedge fund in China just after my MBA, and I learned that they use management consulting techniques to add value to their portfolio companies. And I thought that's a great skill to learn. And it'd be great to even learn it in English and doing it in healthcare 100% of the time. So I had joined Oliver Wyman in 2011 in Toronto office back home, where I spent a lot of my life. And they asked me one day if I wanted to transfer to the Singapore office to help start healthcare over there. And when I went to Singapore, of course, it's this futuristic city, really well planned. It's got a lot of fine names and a reputation globally of being a modern cosmopolitan place to do business. Some people refer to it as Asia-lite. But the surrounding areas have a lot of issues when it comes to their health systems. I knew this from an academic perspective, having studied about the region before moving to Singapore but seeing it firsthand was a completely different experience. At the time, I was working for primarily pharmaceutical clients, helping them with market access and other commercially relevant activities. And they were faced with a fundamental challenge of trying to sell their product, which was usually placed in the premium category to markets that had difficulty affording this. And not only did it have difficulty affording this, it had difficulty in delivering it as well as in using the product appropriately, making sure it gets to the patients when it's needed at the right time, at the right dose. And so they were looking for partners. They were looking for partners on the ground that could assist with this delivery education, the technology, and the financing around it as well. Now, there was a real shortage of said partners on the ground. At the same time, there were also insurance companies that wanted to expand their business. They also realized that the policies tended to be a bit simple, and they tended to resemble one another across competitors. And also, to manage increasing claims, they had a tendency to increase the premium that they charged. This was not possible to do indefinitely. And at some point, they needed to actually manage the medical conditions, which you're probably seeing more and more of in the U.S. and in Western markets, less so of in this part of the world. And then lastly, you had conglomerates and investors who said, "Hey, we hear healthcare is going to be a pretty hot field. How do we get started? How do we invest?" And all of this basically set me on a mission of target hunting. And during the course of this, well, I met a lot of interesting companies, a lot of them really, really early in their journey and really too small for any of my clients to find a meaningful way to engage with them. And unfortunately, they couldn't get to the point where they are relevant and large enough to engage with without a lot of capital. This is where, you know, you'd have a nice investment ecosystem coming in to fill in the gaps. This, unfortunately, did not really exist at the time. And I had the hubris of thinking that I could do something about it by being an angel investor and starting to support these founders directly, which, thankfully, seemed to work to a certain degree. It worked to the point where one day, I woke up, and I realized I had 13 angel investments, 9 of which were in healthcare technology, and not a lot of money left in my bank account to do other things with. CHAD: Uh-oh. [laughs] JOSEPH: Yeah. And at the same time, I also realized that the work that those founders are doing is a whole lot more impactful than me sitting up until 3:00 o'clock in the morning every night writing PowerPoint slides or begging analysts to write the PowerPoint slides that would more or less sit and collect dust on my clients' shelves for various reasons. So I came to the realization that I need to do this full time. I didn't have, you know, $10 million in my pocket as reference to spending all my money on angel investments. So I realized that I have to use other people's money, and the way to do that is to join a fund. Now, the problem with that idea is that there weren't any funds that were doing this, like really, really early investing in healthtech companies in the region that was really geared to helping solve some of these really big access challenges. So then I realized I had to start a VC fund that did this and only this. So that's really kind of a long-winded introduction as to how I got started with this. CHAD: Yeah, I want to come back to the process of actually starting a VC fund in a bit. But I'm curious, were the companies that you were doing angel investment in and now doing seed-stage investment in do they tend to be local companies, or do they tend to be international companies that are planning to solve a problem locally? JOSEPH: It's funny you ask that. At the beginning, they were local. Well, actually, if I really were to take a step back, the very first angel investment I made was for a mentee, and she was based in Toronto. But I'd say that the first true angel investment I made, you know, it was in Singapore, first and foremost, because I was there. And then I started branching out. I started making investments in the Philippines. I started looking at companies in Taiwan and other parts. And actually, that opened my eyes to the fact that there may be other companies around the world that are trying to solve a problem that may not necessarily be in my own backyard. So I started to, you know, cheekily, I sent my wife to tech conferences around the world. And she herself is an entrepreneur from the tech industry; hardware was her specialty. And we started identifying companies from all over the world. And the second angel investment where I was the very first investor was actually from a company in South Africa with similar challenges. So the things that we saw as major health system deficiencies or maybe shortages in infrastructure and human capital were very much true not just in Southeast Asia but in a lot of parts of the world. And we noticed that while there were different reasons for why they ended up in that position, the outcome was similar. CHAD: I'm not sure that everyone listening has a good sense of what the healthcare landscape actually looks like in these different places of the world. So let's take insurance, for example; what is the insurance landscape, generally speaking, in Southeast Asian countries? JOSEPH: So, in Southeast Asia, we do have insurers. I mean, private insurance is certainly there. But it's just not -- CHAD: Do most companies have public insurance, too, like universal healthcare? JOSEPH: That depends on which country you're in. Now, the one interesting thing about our entire region is that they've all committed to universal healthcare coverage. I would say that the implementation thereof has been heterogeneous; let's put it that way. Out of Southeast Asian countries that are not Singapore, I'd say that Thailand probably has the strongest public healthcare system. And in fact, they even do health technology assessments, which is really looking at the true cost-effectiveness of a new intervention versus what's currently done in practice to make decisions as to whether they're going to pay for it. And they cover a pretty high percentage of their population with this. And then there are other places where the financing mechanisms are in place, but you don't necessarily have the doctors or the hospitals where they need to be to address the needs of the population. Still, we are dealing with places that are not fully urbanized. And in fact, a good deal of the population is still working on the pharm, basically. One of the other complexities of our region is that just between the Philippines and Indonesia, which together has a combined population of 380 million at least, maybe it's 390 now, you've got 25,000 islands, and not all of those islands tend to hold major tier-one cities, even though they can hold a lot of people. And if there is one thing about healthcare that seems to be a universal truth is that highly skilled workers like to live in the rich cities. CHAD: And so what I'm hearing is that on an individual island, if there's not a major city there, the access to the actual healthcare might be really limited. JOSEPH: That is exactly it. CHAD: In these economies in these countries, it's typical to have private insurance layered on top. But the pharmas probably aren't doing that, right? JOSEPH: Oh, no, no, unfortunately not. There are some pilots of trying to do co-ops or collective insurance or micro-insurance policies. But again, when you look at the amount of premium that they could pay in, the kind of coverage they get is pretty basic. CHAD: So, how does that landscape influence the solutions that startups are creating? JOSEPH: Well, first and foremost, you've got to try to get some sort of mechanism by which you can seek care without having to travel too much. And I think that concept is extremely familiar to all of us thanks to the global pandemic that I hope we're coming out of right now, although there's always a new strain surprising us. The idea of basic telemedicine is one that can have a great deal of impact in these populations. But even before that, just understanding the importance of healthcare, like, what the concept of healthcare is, what the concept of the modern medical system is, is something that a fair number of people never really had awareness of. And I'll call out an example country, and I try not to call out too many examples. But Indonesia did a really good job of educating people about the concept of healthcare when they promoted their universal healthcare coverage. Even if they didn't have the ability to deliver it as well as they wanted to or as widespread as they wanted to, at least they got people paying attention to this concept called health. So awareness is really the first step. The second challenge is all right, so you know health exists. When do you know when you need it? Where are you going to find a doctor? How do you know if a doctor is even good? And how do you know that the products that you're going to get are appropriate? So there are so many challenges that you have to face when you are in a lack of access situation. CHAD: I assume you're getting pitched on a lot of ideas coming to your fund, a lot of startups. Correct me if that's wrong. [laughs] JOSEPH: No, no, that's absolutely true. So one of the blessings and curses of being one of the very few super early-stage healthtech venture funds out there is that there aren't many of us out there. And when we started...let's just put it this way, if I could find a fund that was doing what I wanted to do, I would have sent my CV in, and I couldn't. And starting a fund was basically the last thing I wanted to do, having never worked at a VC before or ever raised money in my life before. So I still think that we are the only truly global impact-oriented seed - I hate the term pre-seed, but I'll use it because of the audience's familiarity with it- investment fund out there right now for healthtech. So by virtue of that, we do see a lot of companies. CHAD: So what are some of the criteria? JOSEPH: So I'd say some of the criteria that we look for is number one, are you solving a real problem? And we define a real problem by the breadth of the problem, like, how many people are suffering from it or how systemic is this problem if it's an infrastructural one? And depth being how severe is this problem: is it life or death, or is it a minor inconvenience? So first and foremost, it's got to be solving a real problem. Second, it's really around the team. You need a lot of clinical, technical, and commercial experience in order to pull off a healthtech startup successfully. And even before that, we want to understand why are you doing this? Because this is not easy. I'd say on a scale of 1 to 10, doing a startup is like an eight, and then doing a healthtech startup is like an 11. It's slow; it's technical, it's regulated, it's super risky. And health systems are very pathway-dependent in the intent to not have many things in common with one another. So it is really, really hard. So we want to know the motivation. Are you going to stick through the thick and thin, or are you doing this healthtech startup because you think healthtech is cool or hot this particular period in the market cycle? So that's another criterion. Another criterion is, well, what's your edge? I mean, okay, you can have a great team, and I think that is definitely a prerequisite. You can solve a problem. But do you have something that could make sure that you are going to be competitive and remain competitive? CHAD: Given the barriers to market entry that you just outlined, do most of the companies that you're investing in have any sort of traction already in the market, or where are they in the product development or business development cycle? JOSEPH: I'm going to give the ultimate cop-out answer of it depends. CHAD: [laughs] Yeah. JOSEPH: But I will qualify that by saying it depends on whether it's hardware or software, and it depends whether it's regulated or non-regulated. So if you are a software company that's unregulated so, what does this mean? It could be like a marketplace. It could be health education. It could be some telemedicine in a loosely regulated market. We'd really like to see user traction. We'd really like to see revenue even. However, if you're a device company and you need to get FDA before you can earn a single dollar, we're okay with it being a science experiment or a prototype on the table as long as the science part of it has been de-risked. So if we know that the fundamental scientific principles are sound, then w…

Full show notes at the publisher

421: Benchmark Labs with Carlos F. Gaitan Ospina May 05, 2022

Show notes

Carlos F. Gaitan Ospina is the Founder and CEO of Benchmark Labs, which provides IoT-based weather forecasting solutions for the agriculture, energy, and insurance sectors worldwide using proprietary machine-learning software. Chad talks with Carlos about creating the company, the hardware they're producing and what it is doing, and where the machine learning comes into play. Benchmark Labs Follow Benchmark Labs on Twitter, Instagram, or LinkedIn. Follow Carlos on Twitter or LinkedIn. Follow thoughtbot on Twitter or LinkedIn. Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Carlos Gaitan, the Founder and CEO of Benchmark Labs, which provides IoT-based weather forecasting solutions for the agriculture, energy, and insurance sectors worldwide using proprietary machine-learning software. Carlos, thank you very much for joining me. CARLOS: Thank you for the invitation, Chad. It's a pleasure to join you here. CHAD: You work in a variety of different industries with weather forecasting solutions using machine learning. I'm really curious, at a high level, how did you get to where you created Benchmark Labs today? CARLOS: Oh, thank you, Chad. That's a great question. I think that in many ways, it's a combination of life experiences and lots of user feedback. As a background, my mum worked for 28 years in the National Federation of Coffee Growers in my native Columbia. And we experience basically the effects of weather, La Niña, El Niño, local conditions, pests on the coffee growers. I remember growing up looking at the price in The New York Stock Exchange if the pound of coffee was going to be more than $1 or not [laughs] and so on. So, you know, we had a very severe drought in Colombia, and Colombia was heavily dependent in hydropower at that time. And I remember that we even had to study with candlelight and move to a spring savings time for the first time in the country. The country is in the equator, so you can imagine moving the clock was unheard of. So since then, I was always passionate about hydrology, the water cycle, why this happened, how weather can affect the economy at that level that people have to change their working habits. I did civil engineering hydrology, then studied these new applications of machine learning technologies, hydroinformatics, did my studies there in Columbia, my bachelor's, my master's. Then I was fortunate to go to The University of British Columbia to study my Ph.D. in Atmospheric Sciences. And then, after I finished, I moved to The United States to work at the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton with close collaboration with the NOAA, the USGS. And that gave that perspective also of understanding how weather climate models were done at the Department of Commerce level but also to understand the users on how they interact with weather data or climate data and what were the needs that they were expecting from the National Weather Service and the Department of Commerce and NOAA that not necessarily were fulfilled with the current information. So then I moved to the private sector, joined a hardware company, and met my co-founder of Benchmark Labs there then moved to California to work on consultancy of climate change assessments. But since the time at the Department of Commerce, it became very clear that what farmers and what users wanted was weather information that was more actionable, that was tailored to their specific location, especially for specialty crops. Think about wineries, or coffee growers, orchids, stone fruits; they depend heavily on weather, and the information from the National Weather Services was just too coarse for them. And sometimes, there are huge errors in terms of temperatures that were recorded from their farm versus what the National Weather Service was doing. And that's why we decided to create Benchmark Labs to basically solve that problem, correct those errors, and give the information that the users needed when they needed it. CHAD: Did you ever just consider becoming a TV weather person? CARLOS: [laughs] CHAD: It seems it may be easier. CARLOS: [laughs] Nah. That's a very good point. CHAD: [laughs] CARLOS: And I have great respect with my colleagues that went into forecast meteorology and TV persons. I remember some of my lab mates practicing in front of a green screen when we were doing the Ph.D. CHAD: [laughs] CARLOS: That was an interesting scenario. [laughs] However, growing up in Colombia, the weather forecasts were not very, let's say, accurate to a certain extent, and we did the opposite than the weatherman suggested. CHAD: [laughs] CARLOS: So I guess that steered me towards following that path. [laughs] CHAD: So it totally resonates with me this idea that, you know, especially for...I've been on the West Coast before where you go over a hill and the weather it's like 20 degrees hotter and sunny and on one side of the hill, it was cold and foggy. We went on a great company trip many years ago to visit some Napa vineyards, and I was surprised by that. So I can imagine how that local information just doesn't match the global information that farmers might be getting. So what is the hardware that you're actually producing, and what is it doing? What does it look like? CARLOS: [laughs] Great question. So I will go back to your story about Napa and Sonoma, and the reality is that's exactly a problem that growers face; national weather agencies give averages over a big region. They divide the world in boxes, and everybody inside of a box receives exactly the same forecast. And if you are especially in the coast or you're in specialty agriculture, you understand that weather changes with elevation. Depending on which side of the mountain you are, you could receive all the rain or no rain at all. If you are near the shores, you could also get more wind, different types of clouds, all of those situations affect the conditions at the farm. And going back to the situation of Napa and Sonoma, Burgundy or the Mediterranean Basin, they all believe in the value of what they call the terroir, that is what makes also unique their products. They're indigenous, and they understand at a very fundamental point how the local conditions from the soil, from the vegetation, makes their farm unique. So what we do is we use IoT sensors, basically hardware sensors that monitor environmental variables. We refer to them in the atmospheric science world as weather stations. I had a talk with some users when I said the term weather station. They imagined a big construction or a building with a TV station on a radar or something. But in this case, there are IoT devices that are totally portable, the size of a Wi-Fi modem in some cases. And we use those sensors as ground truth that will basically tell us the local conditions. We use the information from the National Weather Services and the information from those IoT sensors and correct the forecast as they come. CHAD: And is that where the machine learning comes in because it's actually correcting the forecast being received? CARLOS: Exactly, our machine learning aspect of it is fully operational, non-linear correction of weather data as it comes in from the National Weather Services to correct it to the conditions that are experienced at the farm level, at the sensor level. And a farm could be also an agricultural farm, or it could be a solar farm, a wind farm. Or, as we talk with some users in ski resorts that actually they consider as snow farmers, it's also affected by microclimates. So at the end, it is about providing value to all these areas affected by microclimates that are not being resolved correctly by the current generation of forecast from the National Weather Services. CHAD: Are most customers able to get the coverage that they need with one weather station, or are they deploying multiple ones? CARLOS: So that's a great question, and the answer probably is it depends. Our customers, original customers, have thousands of stations over multiple fields under management. For specialty crops, it's common to have multiple IoT sensors in one acre. For other scenarios, they might have only one station or one sensor every 10 acres or so on, so it depends on the condition. It depends on how technologically inclined are the users if they already invested in these IoT sensors or if they are looking into buying IoT sensors and then scaling up the number of sensors in their farms. CHAD: How do all the sensors report their data back? CARLOS: That is a very interesting question because they are, let's say, tens of hardware manufacturers globally. We also created kind of a Rosetta Stone that puts all the sensors to communicate to our back-end systems. We integrate different languages of each hardware manufacturer. It has its own ways of naming the variables. So we do the translation in our end. We receive the data via an API. These IoT devices are Internet of Things in many ways because they transmit data via Wi-Fi, satellite internet, you know, cellular. CHAD: Cell, yeah. So different manufacturers might have different ways of actual communication, not just the protocol, but one box might be using Wi-Fi, and another one might be using a satellite. CARLOS: Exactly. And sometimes, many manufacturers give you the options of connecting even using Wi-Fi or Bluetooth for IoT sensors that are near, let's say, a farm that has internet connectivity. If they are on the field farther away, they might need to get access to a data plan from a cellular carrier, 3G usually or 5G. In some areas, there is limited coverage so far. And if it's a very remote area, there are options to get satellite coverage. CHAD: Now, I'm asking somewhat naive questions based on my understanding. And so if I start butting up against proprietary information, just tell me, "No." That's totally fine. CARLOS: [laughs] CHAD: So when we're thinking about the amount of data coming in from all of these different weather stations that your customers have, is it a lot of data? Is it a lot of data points? CARLOS: [laughs] It's a great question. So in many ways, yeah, each weather station communicates at different frequency. Sometimes what we are offering now is hourly transmission rates, but we also have access to government stations that sometimes only refresh once per day. So yes, it's a lot of data coming in, most of the data from the weather stations. Fortunately, it can be transmitted as a txt file, or it's only for one location. So the files are not big, but they are many per day. And so, we have probably done millions of operations already to assimilate data and provide the forecast. While on the other hand, The National Weather Service provides one forecast for the globe, let's say every...some models are every hour, other models are every six hours, and so on. So that is more, let's say, a bigger data set because it's a global data set that then you have to query to extract the information locally that is relevant for your servers, for your users. CHAD: Yeah. And I think it's neat how this is all happening centrally from all the data coming in, right? CARLOS: Yeah, exactly. We get data coming in for each specific location. We do the corrections, and we provide the forecasts. So there are lots of operations involved in the data handling activities, pre-processing, post-processing, but it's very rewarding at the end to provide the forecasts that are tailored to specific locations. And we had seen users that they basically told us, "Okay, we are using provider B or C; can you beat them? Show us that you can beat them, and the contract will be yours." So we showed them, and then they are like, "Yeah, that's fantastic. This is exactly what we have been looking for, information that is more accurate for our farms," so yeah. CHAD: Now, does your system correct itself based on what actually happened in an area after the modified forecast goes out? CARLOS: That's not a very relevant question because some of the models are static. I used my experience when I did an internship in Environment Canada, and I found that they were adjusting their models, let's say four times per, at least the operational models they had, four times per year. They kind of tweaked them to the local, let's say, spring, summer, fall, winter conditions. In our case, we make our models to correct themselves as more data comes in so they can adjust to weather events and have short-term memory, let's say, of what they will wait heavily on and forget the distant past. CHAD: I mean, it seems obvious, not necessarily easy but obvious, that you've made a prediction about what the weather is going to be, and you have all the data coming in from the stations to confirm whether your prediction was correct or not. So I'm sure it's not easy to adjust the model based on that. CARLOS: [laughs] CHAD: That seems obvious to me. CARLOS: Yeah, it's just a different approach in many ways. As you said, it's obvious because the users usually care about a specific location, at least our users. We understand that for national security or aviation, they require a model that provides coverage over a wider area, like sometimes continents. But for agricultural users, they care about their farms, and the farms will not move in space. So -- CHAD: Well, technically, they are moving in space; it's just the weather goes along with it. CARLOS: [laughs] So yeah, I guess that it's just a different way of tackling the problem. We focus on doing these forecasts to each specific location instead of having a forecast done for the whole globe that could be used in many different locations or for many different industries, but it's not necessarily tailored to any industry-specific or location-specific. CHAD: Yeah, that's great. Mid-Roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We do one-on-one coaching sessions and also monthly group meetings. We start with goal setting, advice, and problem-solving based on my experiences over the last 18 years of running thoughtbot. As we progress as a group, we all get to know each other more. And many of the AgencyU members are now working on client projects together and even referring work to each other. Whether you're struggling to grow an agency, taking it to the next level and having growing pains, or a solo founder who just needs someone to talk to, in my 18 years of leading and growing thoughtbot, I've seen and learned from a lot of different situations, and I'd be happy to work with you. Learn more and sign up today at thoughtbot.com/agencyu. That's A-G-E-N-C-Y, the letter U. CHAD: So have you managed to bring it full circle now, and are there coffee growers in Colombia that are using your solution? CARLOS: [laughs] I hope so. We have talked with coffee growers for sure. They care about temperature gradients. And I really think that going to Colombia as we scale will make the whole platform easier to use. I think that we can go full circle soon, sooner rather than later, into Colombia. We got support from the World Trade Center here in San Diego to do commercialization assistance to translate our solution from English to other languages. So we will be tackling Spanish, French, Italian in the very near future because it's important to offer the forecast…

Full show notes at the publisher

420: mRelief with Dize Hacioglu Apr 28, 2022

Show notes

Dize Hacioglu is the CTO of Chicago’s mRelief, which offers an easy-to-use platform that helps families connect to SNAP food benefits. Since it was founded in 2014, the non-profit mRelief has helped 2.8 million Americans unlock $1 billion in food stamp benefits. Chad talks with Dize about how the platform helps people navigate the often complicated food stamp benefits system, what her role as CTO looks like as a CTO who codes, and how she hopes to help facilitate the growth of the mRelief program and team. mRelief Follow mRelief on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, or LinkedIn. Follow Dize on LinkedIn. Follow thoughtbot on Twitter or LinkedIn. Become a Sponsor of Giant Robots! Transcript: CHAD: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Chad Pytel. And with me today is Dize Hacioglu, the CTO of mRelief, an easy-to-use platform that helps families connect to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Since it was founded in 2014, the non-profit mRelief has helped 2.8 million Americans unlock $1 billion in food stamp benefits. Dize, thanks for joining me. DIZE: Yeah, thank you so much for having me. CHAD: And thank you for all of your work at mRelief. It's a big help to everybody. DIZE: It's my pleasure, and it's really an honor to be able to do the work that we do. CHAD: Speaking of that work, tell me a little bit more about what the platform actually does for people. DIZE: So mRelief is an easy to use platform that's accessible over text messaging or web that helps folks find out if they qualify for SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, and helps them apply in certain states or connect with community-based organizations who can help them apply if they'd like further assistance. CHAD: So it's a pretty focused product, right? [laughs] DIZE: Mm-hmm. CHAD: But I'm sure that there's a lot going behind the scenes in order to make that pretty focused product happen. Is that right? DIZE: Yeah, that's right. That's right. Yes, there are a lot of moving parts. CHAD: [laughs] So what's involved in figuring out whether someone is eligible or not? DIZE: So there are actually a few patterns that we've discovered as we've been expanding our work from just one state where we were just in California for a while and then expanding it nationwide. We found that eligibility typically falls into a couple of different buckets. So we've been able to turn that into code that helps guide people through the typical questions of eligibility and takes them through the flow based on their state's eligibility of requirements. CHAD: I guess my next question was going to be without mRelief; how difficult is this for folks? DIZE: So I think most folks typically apply hoping that they're eligible, and they'll only really find out after the application process has been complete. They may have wasted time at the office, time filling out the application, time waiting for a phone call from the office only to find out that they are not eligible. CHAD: So you mentioned you started just in California, and you've been expanding from there. You mentioned there are patterns that you found. How different are things state to state? And what does your growth trajectory look like throughout the United States? DIZE: The biggest differences between states are income limits, the threshold that a family has to fall under in terms of monthly gross income to be able to qualify. So that has been a big data collection research project that we've done to be able to expand to all 50 states. And from their past eligibility, applications also differ from state to state. There's no one platform where you can fill out the same questions that are asked. CHAD: I was just doing an onboarding call with some folks who are joining the thoughtbot team. And on the call, there was one person in the United States, three people who live in different countries in Africa; I think one other person in Europe. And sometimes, when I'm doing the onboarding calls with them, I have to explain how disjointed things are in the United States and which things are state by state because it surprises people. Well, one, it surprises people who aren't in the United States that we don't have certain standard benefits like sick time in the United States. And then it also surprises people how much is actually determined by the state that you live in, even with...because SNAP is a national program, right? DIZE: Correct. Yeah, it's federally funded. CHAD: Right. So even with a federally-funded program, it still comes down to certain things being different in certain states, which is often really daunting and surprising to people. DIZE: Yes, totally, totally. And it also gets even more complicated in some states like California and maybe even Texas, where it's county-administered, so each county has a different process. Sometimes they have different applications even between counties in the same state. CHAD: So is there a reason for this other than making it hard for people to get the benefit? [laughter] That might be a political question. I just totally exposed my -- [laughter] DIZE: I think that's a very valid question because I think we've seen instead of cutting benefits completely, administratives put up to dissuade people or make it more burdensome for people to access benefits as a way of keeping them from benefits nationwide, not just like any specific state. So I think that's a very valid question. CHAD: But it's possible that there are other reasons, right? So, for example, like, oh, it's administered locally, or income levels are different in different places, and so it needs to be...I was just curious whether there were other reasons. DIZE: Yeah, I'm actually not sure about the reasoning. CHAD: Yeah, fair enough. Fair enough. DIZE: [chuckles] CHAD: So you joined in 2017. DIZE: Yes, I did. CHAD: And Emily started in 2014. DIZE: That's right. CHAD: So what were things like when you joined? DIZE: Well, I joined a team of two, and the two folks that were already on the team were the co-founders, Rose Afriyie and Genevieve Nielsen, and I was also joined by another co-worker who was hired at the same time as me. And we were only doing work in California, helping folks find out if they're eligible, helping them apply for CalFresh, which is the name for SNAP in California, and helping them through the post-application process like interviewing, collecting documents, getting a Lift ride to the office to get their card. So we were really focused on the end-to-end process in one specific, again, county because it's county-administered in California. CHAD: So in just one county. DIZE: Yeah, in San Francisco. CHAD: And was there a tech platform at the time? DIZE: Yes, we had our screener, and we had our simplified application. CHAD: Had the founders created that? DIZE: Yes. CHAD: Okay. And how did they focus on...they're not in California, they're in Chicago, right? DIZE: Yeah, we're based in Chicago. CHAD: So why California and why that particular county? Do you know? DIZE: I think it was an amalgamation of things (I don't know if I used that word right.), but they attended Y Combinator early on in the development of mRelief. So through that, they were able to get connections to the San Francisco Human Services Agency, who was our first big contract and allowed us to really develop the end-to-end process. CHAD: So you joined as the third/fourth person on the team? DIZE: Yes. CHAD: And it may be obvious, but I'm going to ask the question anyway. What drew you to joining? DIZE: I've always loved coding. For a long time, I felt at a loss how to combine my love of coding and wanting to pursue coding as a career with my desire to try to make a positive social impact in the world. And I don't think back in 2017; I was really aware of the civic tech space. In perusing job descriptions nationwide, I stumbled across mRelief on Idealist, and it sounded like the perfect match. And I remember feeling like this is my dream job. I can't believe I get to do this work and code at the same time. CHAD: [laughs] So you joined as a software developer at the time. Did you have aspirations to be CTO when you joined? DIZE: No. [laughs] No, I remember looking at Genevieve, our former CTO and co-founder, and thinking I have no idea how she does her job and never thinking that I would find myself in this position. And it's been a massive learning experience and also a growth opportunity for me. CHAD: What are some of the things that you needed to grow into or to learn in order to get to that point? DIZE: I feel like most of the learning happened after. The biggest thing that I learned to prepare me to go into the CTO role was basically a very comprehensive understanding of our codebase. I think most of the skills or what I need to succeed in this role came after. CHAD: Well, actually, let me ask a related but different question. CTO actually differs in different organizations. So, what does your role as CTO actually look like? DIZE: It definitely does. And I think my role has even changed a bit in the year and a half or a year and three months that I've been in this role based on the growing team that we have at mRelief. But my day-to-day basically looks like working with our product team to plan for new features. I like to code, so I try to do some coding at least every day and also general oversight and, I guess, strategic thinking. CHAD: One way in that description that stands out to me, you know, some other CTO might describe their role as very much not working on the code, very much not even really working with the team or product, and more focused on the executive level of the company or the needs of fundraising or something like that. So it sounds like you're very much still product-focused and oriented towards working on the product. DIZE: Yeah, I think that's driven by a selfish desire to keep coding. [laughter] CHAD: You're talking to someone who is in the exact same spot. There are times where I feel guilty about that. DIZE: Yeah. [laughs] CHAD: Here's my justification, [laughter], and I'll be curious in terms of your justification. I've done this for 19 years now. And I'm pretty confident that I would have burned out a long time ago if I didn't spend time coding. It's part of what I find rejuvenating and what I love to do. It doesn't mean that I can always afford to work on something for four hours straight, but it's part of what has made me be able to enjoy this work for so long. DIZE: Yeah, I completely relate to that. If I wasn't coding, I don't know how long I could sustain myself [laughs] with so much responsibility. How do you find that balance? CHAD: Well, I think part of it is freeing yourself up to not feel guilty so being really clear with others. Like, if someone asks for something from me, being like, yep, totally, I can do that. I can get it done by this day and pretty aggressively planning out my work or time, blocking my calendar and making it clear when I'm going to be able to have that thing for them. And if that timeline doesn't work, then they can tell me that, and I can adjust. But that goes a long way towards when I am having a coding session that lasts half a day or something like that; I cannot worry or feel guilty that someone's waiting on me for something or that it's not what I should be spending time on. DIZE: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. CHAD: What about you? Have you found things that work for you? DIZE: I have been trying different things. I've been doing a lot of YouTube deep dives on productivity blogs, just different ways of thinking about prioritizing work and making sure that things get done. But I really like your point about allowing yourself not to feel guilty. And I do like to remind myself that I don't want to take the fun out of my job. I want that for other folks on the team, and I also want that for myself. CHAD: The other thing that is on my mind when I'm doing something is there's this stereotype of the CTO who codes and makes a mess of things that the other people have to clean up. DIZE: [laughs] Oh no. I didn't know about that. CHAD: You know what I'm talking about? DIZE: No. [laughs] CHAD: Oh, no, no? It's like, oh, the CTO made commits at 9:00 p.m. last night. I guess I have to...and the build is broken. DIZE: Oh no. CHAD: I guess I have to...[laughs] so, does that describe you or no? [laughs] DIZE: Oh my gosh. I'm definitely seeing myself in that description a little bit. [laughs] CHAD: Oh no. [laughs] DIZE: Literally, I was up last night pushing code to production, but I think it's okay. [laughter] I mean, I hope that that's not me. [laughs] CHAD: I try to avoid that because, you know, I want to feel like my work is useful and valued and not creating more work for other people. DIZE: Yeah, definitely. I agree. [laughter] CHAD: Tell me more about the tech stack for mRelief. DIZE: So we use React and Rails. We're hosted on Heroku. Yeah, very basic. CHAD: I heard that you use some thoughtbot stuff, so I assumed that it was Rails. DIZE: [laughs] Yes. Yeah. CHAD: That's great to hear. DIZE: Yeah, I was messing with Paperclip this morning, actually. [laughs] CHAD: Oh, well, Paperclip is deprecated. I'm sorry to tell you. [laughs] DIZE: I know. [laughter] I had to fork it this morning to make a change. CHAD: I still stand by that decision. I think it's important as sort of a community contributor that we signal overall direction and coalesce behind what's built into Rails once it was there. DIZE: Okay, that makes a lot of sense. CHAD: But yeah, was Rails in use when you joined? DIZE: Yeah, we're using the same stack. CHAD: How much has it grown over time, the codebase? DIZE: I don't really know. CHAD: That's interesting that you don't know. [laughs] DIZE: When you say grown, like, I guess how is that measured? CHAD: Oh yeah. I mean, is it more complex now than it was when you joined? DIZE: Yes, definitely. Yeah, we've added new products that had never existed, and the fact that we've expanded to more states and our screener is nationwide that's added a lot of complexity. CHAD: So, do you have ways that you manage that complexity, either in the code or in the business? DIZE: What would that look like? [laughter] How would you manage that complexity? CHAD: Well, I think it's a little dependent on where the complexity is coming from. So, for example, the screener is nationwide, you said, and so does the screener change based on where you're located once you start to fill it out? DIZE: Yes, yes. The first question we ask is zip code. CHAD: And then how does all of that branching work in the state-specific logic work? Is it all one big jumble of if statements and code, or is it factored out in some way to help keep that as clean as possible? And if the answer is it's all one big jumble of if statements, that's totally fine. [laughs] DIZE: I was actually going to say both. [laughs] Because I think because of the patterns that we were able to establish, and the eligibility logic between all states, there's definitely some if branching, but there are enough shared concepts that we can keep it all in one to two files that are not too long. Mid-Roll Ad I wanted to tell you all about something I've been working on quietly for the past year or so, and that's AgencyU. AgencyU is a membership-based program where I work one-on-one with a small group of agency founders and leaders toward their business goals. We…

Full show notes at the publisher

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected