MINDdrift - inside the mind of an entrepreneur - David Hauser

I always enjoy visiting Chicago. It has its own local culture, great restaurants and other things to do at night, and is pretty easy to get around (but then again, I grew up in Manhattan, so I suppose it's all relative). It also has a history as a city people came to with very little, and with hard work, started businesses and made lives for themselves.

The rich history of Chicago makes it a great location for the Global Student Entrepreneur Awards (GSEA). I had the good fortune of visiting Chicago again November 6-9 to participate in the final judging for the GSEA competition. I was also in the city to attend the Collegiate Entrepreneurs Organization (CEO) conference, where I received their Young Entrepreneur of the Year Award. I was honored to receive the award from CEO, as well as have the chance to speak to college students about entrepreneurship.

Talking to people just a few years younger than myself about entrepreneurship can be weird, but I feel like I've learned a lot in a short amount of time. When I was getting ready to deliver my acceptance speech at the CEO conference, I knew I wanted to say something that would be relevant and meaningful to the 1000+ college students sitting in the audience. I think a lot of people in college are under so much pressure to "stay on the right track" that entrepreneurship and risk is sometimes frowned upon. But my message is that "staying on the right track" is different depending on who you are, and learning how to take a calibrated risk--like launching a business--can be a crucial learning experience for a young person and budding entrepreneur.

Mahatma Gandhi said, "Be the change you want to see in the world." Quotations like this find their way into many different cultures, languages, and institutions and that's because there is a kernel of truth to the statement--it's the truth of human experience, trial and error--whatever you want to call it. Because this is just a blog and not a novel, I'll just share one of the most important lessons I've learned as a young person and as an entrepreneur, which is based on the quotation above: use any freedom you have--whether you're young or old--to be an agent of change. It's the only way to make your mark in the business world, and beyond. Is there a population that would benefit from a service (big or small) you've been thinking about offering? Do it. Does your business model make impossible for you to grow as a company? Change it. I wanted to get across to the young entrepreneurs in the audience in Chicago that life is now. When you graduate from college, there's no one at graduation who shakes your hand and says, "OK, you can start your life now." While it's important to stay on track in school and cultivate those connections that only college can offer, you have to also find the track that's right for you. College isn't one size fits all and it shouldn't be, because everyone's different.

Being an entrepreneur means seizing the enormous opportunities before you, and taking calibrated risks that will help you make your dreams a reality. No one is ever going to give you the "right" circumstances or the "right" amount of money to build your ideal business--work with what you've got, and it will take you somewhere. Even if it's not exactly where you want to end up, you've made progress towards your goal. For me, being a young entrepreneur was about finding the right track for me. I was never going to find it by asking a professor in college or taking classes in business without ever having any experience launching a start-up of my own. It's true, not everyone should (or could) start a business while in school--people have different responsibilities and priorities--but it's all about finding the path that's right for you, not taking the one that everyone else travels down.

This post is about something I have really strong opinions about: work. Some people hate going to work, and for a variety of reasons. When people hate going to work, they aren't productive and when they aren't productive... Well, you get the point.

One of the reasons I think people hate going to work is that the companies people work for have no identifiable core values. At the end of the day, if your employees don't know the company purpose and the values (which are non-negotiable tenets of the way you do business) then you've failed them--you've given them no reason to get excited about coming into work each day, and no reason to relate to the goals of your company.

This is a topic I'll continue to write about, but today I wanted to share this video with you. It's from Atlassian, and John Rotenstein and he has made an awesome video which highlights--in Atlassian employees' own words--what their core values are. The Atlassian core value that's one of my favorites is "DFTC": "don't fuck the customer." Yup, that's right. It's such a basic concept--don't make it harder for the customer to do anything--but it's pure genius. It's also a "big picture" concept that anyone can understand why pursuing that goal is important. Roteinstein's video is a great example of how vital core values are to a company because it shows how employees take them to heart, and incorporate them into their lives--and all in their own words. It also shows that it's not just about getting a project done, but also creating a work environment that makes people comfortable and understanding that changes that you make to anything have to work for the customer.

Anyway, I'm done writing. Watch the video and you'll see why it's no surprise the staff at Atlassian enjoys coming to work each day. We (my company, GotVMail, that is) happen to be a happy customer of Atlassian as well, using JIRA, Confluence and a few other applications.

As a syringe filled with this year's flu vaccine pierced my flesh this morning, I thought about how much things have changed since the flu vaccine shortage back in the fall of 2004. At that time, only people who were considered "high risk"--if they were elderly or had a chronic illness, for example--were encouraged to get the vaccine.

Four years later, there is no flu vaccine shortage in the United States. I've heard ads urging people to get the vaccine on the radio, and seen some on TV. Apparently, they're working: I decided to get the shot for the first time in years (and I'm not in any of the "high risk" groups), and the nurse that administered my flu vaccine told me tons of people have been coming in for the flu shot. I travel a lot and thought the vaccine would be a good idea "just in case"--but the ads I heard on the radio kept the idea of getting a flu shot at the forefront of my mind. So, it seems the ads have served their purpose: everyone wants to get vaccinated now, including me.

And, according to Google, people want to know about the flu, too. On November 11, Google launched Flu Trends, which allows users to see if their state has a low, moderate, or high threat of the flu virus based on how and when people search for information about the flu. Google's theory is that people who look for information about the flu online are likely suffering from the virus as well. Google points out, "Of course, not every person who searches for "flu" is actually sick, but a pattern emerges when all the flu-related search queries from each state and region are added together". According to CNN, the Google project was completed in partnership with the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

Depending on how you look at it, this factoid could be either alarming or reassuring: according to the CNN article mentioned above, "In the 2007-08 flu season, Google accurately estimated current flu levels one to two weeks faster than published CDC reports in each of the nine U.S. surveillance regions...". It's no surprise that a government agency can't compare to Google in terms of efficiency, but it's still a little surprising (and scary?) that this also applies to agencies that are entrusted with matters of public health.

The comic below from Dueling Analogs was sent to me this morning, and it was a good laugh. Two of the characters featured are from the television commercials Apple produced in which PC's are depicted as arcane and institutional machines, and Macs as the undeniably cool and anti-establishment computer of choice. The third character is something Apple never added to the official commercials: the Linux operating system personified. Linux is an open source operating system that in many circles is considered superior to Mac or PC operating systems (full disclosure: Mac's OS is loosely based on some of Linux). Why? Because Linux allows individuals everywhere to collaborate on it using the knowledge of groups to produce an operating system that has been refined an infinite amount of times, and by different brains. Obviously this system would be perceived as a threat to Mac and PC operating systems if they were personified, and of course, let loose in a white-walled room with no windows (like the Apple commercials). Anyway, a funny little bit of geek humor for you today.

Yesterday LinkedIn launched several profile applications for users based on OpenSocial. What I really like about LinkedIn is that it's not for kids (or kid-like behavior) or MySpace users looking for a new playground.

If you know me, you know I'm not a fan of Facebook, or similarly ubiquitous social networking sites. I don't have any desire to receive "hatching eggs" that turn into baby dinosaurs or bright yellow chicks. I also don't want to post shout-outs to people I already know, simply for the hell of having everyone see what I wrote on someone's "Wall." Unlike Facebook, I see LinkedIn as having a distinct purpose: to grow and solidify your business or career network. And now LinkedIn is offering more tools to help move the site beyond simply a place for amassing contacts and recommendations from colleagues.

With new applications like TripIt, BlogLink, CompanyBuzz, and Amazon Booklist, LinkedIn has given us more ways to strengthen our existing connections, and grow new ones--all with a distinctive business slant. Here's a very quick rundown of my two favorite tools from the release:

With TripIt, I can enter information about my travel plans both past and present and the application uses my itineraries to find similarly travelled individuals, if you will. Plus, it allows your contacts to see where you are at any given time (based on the information you enter; again, a good safeguard against stalkers--just kidding!-- and generally having too much info "out there"). By having all of your info, TripIt makes it easy to see when you and your contacts are in the same city or country for a business meeting or an informal meet-up.

Have a blog like me? Rather than simply linking to it from your LinkedIn profile and hoping people bother to check it out, BlogLink puts your blog posts right on your profile with very little effort.

What I find most annoying about Facebook is the pointlessness of many of the applications. You can add an application like "Cities I've Visited" to your profile, but because Facebook has a very unclear purpose (I know, I know, it's to "make friends," but isn't that rather ambiguous these days?), you're never sure how you should use the tool other than to brag that you've travelled to hundreds of cities to people who bother to even look at that part of your profile. I know there will be lots of people who disagree with me about Facebook, but I guess I just don't see the point of posting all of your personal information on a site without getting too much out of it--other than, perhaps, a hatching egg?

The Official Google Blog reports that they'll finally be helping out fools like me who often hear songs on YouTube videos that they'd love to have on their iTunes playlist, but unfortunately, have no idea the identity of the artists that create them. YouTube users who like a song on a video will now be offered "Click-to-Buy" links which the blog claims will be "unobtrusive."

While I think the "Click-to-Buy" idea is great, I also think it might be helpful to the music industry (and, of course, YouTube) to use music recognition software like Shazam or Midomi to automatically link the music/content for purchase. Many people think Shazam does a better job of recognizing songs overall, according to GigaOm, but I suspect that the debate will soon be eclipsed by a larger issue--the issue of how this technology can continue to remain relevant and become useful to us in generating new sources of revenue through YouTube videos and the like.

How could any of the players in this arena take it to the next level, technologically speaking? As it stands right now, any time a song is in a YouTube video, the content producer must go in and tag their content (in this case, a song). Wouldn't it be easier if the process could be automated so that anything in a YouTube video could be identified by applications such as Shazam or Midomi (or an as-yet-uninvented Google app) and automatically tagged? If the technology is already there, then it might be easier than having content producers "claim" a song in every YouTube video.

In a sea of competitors offering the same service, companies that want to survive (and thrive) simply have to put their unique stamp on goods and services. Essentially, they must do business differently.

So what exactly is "doing business differently"? A really good example comes courtesy of JetBlue, the airline that prides itself on offering a friendlier (and funnier) flying experience. Part of what makes the company so different is that they really do live up to their friendly image, and flying is therefore a bit less stressful. And TV at every seat does not hurt either.

But what really makes JetBlue different is their desire to take calculated risks.

Case in point: JetBlue recently announced that they'd be expanding their services at a time when other airlines are cutting costs and putting the brakes on new projects. Is this a mistake? If the risk is calibrated properly, my answer is "no." Why? JetBlue has done their homework, and that's the first step in evaluating whether or not a potentially risky move could spell disaster or not.

Nicole Wong of the Boston Globe profiled JetBlue on October 21st, revealing the company's plans to make Boston one of three cities integral to their expansion project. It's all due to the unique composition of the market in Boston: you've got a steady supply of students flying in and out of Logan every day, with no signs of slowing, and a solid amount of business travelers, such as myself. In addition, the article points out, there's a growing demand for shuttling groups to and from events across the country. Boston boasts successful sports teams on both the professional and college levels, as well as biotech companies moving key team members, both of which require a plane to get them where they need to go. For JetBlue, it's a lucrative market that has the potential to become even more so if they play their cards right.

But JetBlue isn't just expanding without doing a little maintenance. It appears they're willing to do what it takes to pull in customers that don't already rely on their 26 non-stop flights out of Boston, more than any other carrier out of Logan. Doing what it takes will, according to JetBlue, include boosting in-flight internet access, as well as doing a better job of promoting some of JetBlue's amenities such as refundable fares and substantially more flights than competitors. According to the Globe piece, JetBlue's Chief Executive, David Barger said, "The business customers are saying, 'Give me at least three [flights] a day, or four a day, or five a day,'". The customers spoke, and apparently, JetBlue listened.

I know from personal experience that it's hard to find a non-stop flight to a preferred destination out of Logan, but when I do find it, it's usually from JetBlue. In fact, I regularly fly from Boston to Austin, Texas, where GotVMail's second outpost is located. I've never been unhappy with JetBlue's services, so the idea that they're only going to improve upon them is exciting.

JetBlue's approach is reminiscent of that taken by Southwest Airlines, the airline that originally did things differently (an idea discussed at length in Mavericks At Work). Both JetBlue and Southwest take the institutionalized quality that other airlines often have, and make customer satisfaction and freedom their primary concerns. During times in our history when it seems like businesses are thinking of anything except the regular person just trying to visit their family or close a deal on a business trip, that's a pretty smart move.

Mark Cuban his putting his money where his mouth is. After offering up $50 million of his own money to to buy into a fund created by the treasury comprised of all the assets and related items from the bailout, Cuban's hot on the trail of the U.S. government with BailoutSleuth.com to see if, in fact, we're really doing anything different from what we did to get ourselves into this financial mess. As it turns out, argues Cuban, we're really not (what a surprise!).

For example, the U.S. government has awarded its first contract after the bailout to Bank of New York Mellon Corp., and instead of opting for transparency (which would be ideal given that the lack of it created the crisis in the first place) and revealing how much they're paying the private corporation to manage the bailout transactions, they've blacked out all of the information pertaining to payment. So much for learning from your mistakes!

Even though I haven't gone "back to school" for a few years now, I'll always associate September with returning to classrooms and the general excitement associated with starting a new school year. Although I was fortunate to return to classrooms that boasted ample school supplies and a bevy of resources, many kids don't have access to simple things like pencils and textbooks. I'm reminded of how serious a problem this is by my own sister, a teacher in an inner-city classroom. Many of the classrooms at her school and many others just don't have the funding to stock their classrooms with the items their kids need.

Thankfully, there is a way people can help. DonorsChoose is a website my sister introduced me to a year ago. This is how it works: teachers post "projects" on the site. These projects are essentially descriptions of what teachers across the country need to complete a specific project in their classroom--one person recently posted a project with a request for a CD player so she could finally play a set of educational programs for her students. Another teacher works at a school where almost the entire student population has a mom or dad serving in the military, and wanted some art supplies so the kids could express their emotions through drawing and other art projects. These are just a couple of examples in a vast array of requests on DonorsChoose

Recently, I was going through my RSS feeds when I stumbled upon a TechCrunch post about an auction for a copy of a Google Chrome comic book. The comic book, created by Scott McCloud, was one of only a few printed and given to select media. According to TechCrunch, the proceeds from the auction they were sponsoring would go directly to DonorsChoose! Being the geek that I am, the thought of having my own copy of the Google Chrome comic book was appealing. But the prospect of bidding on the comic book and being able to donate that money to DonorsChoose made it even more so. I am happy to report this morning that not only did I win the comic book with a winning bid of $1,600, but another bidder won a second copy with another bid of $1,575. The best part? All $3,175 are going directly to DonorsChoose.

Beyond helping schools and getting a cool piece of geek memorabilia, the folks at Google were kind enough to let us know after the auction closed that the comic book would be signed by creator Scott McCloud and many of the team that created the application. For a geek who wants to do something good, it just doesn't get any better than this.

A couple of years ago, a GotVMail employee asked me if he could have a second monitor to increase his productivity, specifically stepping through and debugging code (that's the entrepreneurial spirit!). Within a week of giving him the second screen, I had requests from another quarter of the company asking for a second monitor for one reason or another. I didn't think anything of this request, and as the months flew by, the percentage of employees with two screens shot up to 90%. A year after setting up the second monitor for the employee who asked for one, I got the "ultimate request": "Can we make dual monitor setup part of our standard employee desktop build process?"

My answer? Well, I didn't have one right away. But it was time to think about the impact having two monitors made on productivity compared with the cost. That's when I realized I probably should've done this before supplying 90% of our employees with a second monitor (funny how that works).

The benefit of having two monitors is pretty straightforward: more screen space to do more things. While I can't monitor (no pun intended) the other "things" people do with their second screen (i.e., frequent checks of Facebook or MySpace profiles, along with healthy doses of reading on CNN, for example), I think can tell if having two monitors produces the same amount of productivity as just one monitor, or if it exceeds it, by just paying attention.

In the process of making my decision whether or not to institute the new "two screen policy" for all employees, I took an inventory of my own workspace: two 21" Dell monitors sit on an Ergotron mount which allows them to float above my desk. My Outlook is always open on the right screen and the entire left screen is for work. For me, this set-up just works. I can compartmentalize my on screen activities, and feel like my attention is focused solely on one project even when I might have about ten other things going on at the same time. If it works for me, I want to make that option available to my team, too.

If something like this has the potential to allow people to compartmentalize their work (and let's face it, a little of their play) then why not institute the policy? I know from personal experience that I was wasting a ton of time switching around from Firefox to Outlook, Word to Excel. Over the course of a day, this really adds up, and also crowds one screen. For those in engineering and operations, the multiplication of windows seems to be endless, and requires a solution such as viewing on two screens. So my answer to the "ultimate request" ? Yes.