Victor Wong

9 Lessons from Lean In for Entrepreneurs

Sun, 19 May 2013 08:07:00 -0700

After nearly all the women at PaperG read Lean In, I thought it’d be good to familiarize myself with the actual source rather than rely on the media’s reporting of it. It was particularly fascinating to me since I had never worked full-time post college in another work environment or for anyone else and as a result never faced or thought of some of the obstacles faced by women or junior employees in general. The founders of PaperG have always strived to build a more perfect company culture free of a lot of historical poor choices by legacy companies but that’s of course constantly under threat with every new hire, new process, or new policy we introduce as we scale up from our small group of founders to over 40 people now.

What I found in the book was actually largely relevant to anyone in business and not just women. Here were my takeaways for any entrepreneur who doesn’t want to read all the supporting anecdotes from the book in no particular order (and excluding some of the more women-specific advice):

Initiative is what matters. “Taking initiative pays off. it is hard to visualize someone as a leader if she is always waiting to be told what to do.”
Learning and adapting are critical. “There is no perfect fit when you’re looking for the next big thing to do. You have to take opportunities and make an opportunity fit for you, rather than the other way around. The ability to learn is the most important quality a leader can have”
You can’t make everyone happy. “When you want to change things, you can’t please everyone. If you do please everyone, you aren’t making enough progress”
Mentors should be treated as accelerators and not enablers of success. “excel and you will get a mentor” not “get a mentor and you will excel”
Don’t waste people’s time “catching up.” Contact mentors or acquaintances with insights or thoughtful questions only. You have to add value.
If you want to learn or you hate company politics, join a growing company even if the role isn’t perfect or defined. “If you’re offered a seat on a rocket ship, you don’t ask what seat. You just get on. When companies grow quickly, there are more things to do than there are people to do them. when companies grow more slowly or stop growing, there is less to do and too many people to not be doing them. Politics and stagnation set in, and everyone falters.”
Figure out what you want of people before you see people. That way you don’t waste precious time discussing general matters but instead focus on the specific opportunity or guidance they can actually help you with.
Framing matters as opinions can be more constructive and collaborative than insisting on one truth. “There is my point of view (my truth) and someone else’s point of view (his truth). Rarely is there one absolute truth so people who believe that they speak the truth are very silencing of others. Statements of opinion are always more constructive in the first person “I” form. Example: “I feel frustrated that you have not responded to my last four emails, which leads me to believe that my suggestions are not that important to you. is that so?’”
Show others you are listening by acknowledging their concern, especially if you’re disagreeing or proposing something different. “We all want to be heard, and when we focus on showing others that we are listening, we actually become better listeners”

Good Luck Being Mediocre in 21st Century

Wed, 01 May 2013 13:17:58 -0700

Good Luck Being Mediocre in 21st Century:

Thomas Friedman nails it on what will be different about living with the effects of the information revolution relative to living with the effects of the industrial revolution.

We now live in a 401(k) world — a world of defined contributions, not defined benefits.

If you are self-motivated, wow, this world is tailored for you. The boundaries are all gone. But if you’re not self-motivated, this world will be a challenge because the walls, ceilings and floors that protected people are also disappearing. That is what I mean when I say “it is a 401(k) world.” Government will do less for you. Companies will do less for you. Unions can do less for you. There will be fewer limits, but also fewer guarantees. Your specific contribution will define your specific benefits much more. Just showing up will not cut it.

The Economic Story of the Year: The Stock Market vs. the Labor Market

Wed, 10 Apr 2013 16:03:17 -0700

The Economic Story of the Year: The Stock Market vs. the Labor Market:

No matter how you want to break down the schism — 99% vs. 1%; wages vs. wealth; labor vs. capital; local vs. global — this is big economic story, now

Take More Photos

Sun, 31 Mar 2013 10:00:26 -0700

An entrepreneur recently recounted to me the time when he met with one of his major Sand Hill venture capital investors after closing his Series A round. He wanted to know what the secret magic was behind building a great company so he asked his investor to pull back the curtain and reveal the most important advice for an entrepreneur. The VC told him, “take more photos.”

Looking back, I wish I had heard this advice sooner. PaperG has gone through 7 offices (that we have a official leases for). In that time, the team has grown to 35 people. We’ve had a few folks leave to start their own companies or pursue other fields. So much is happening that it feels like it’s almost not worth capturing a particular moment.

Yet, when I look back, it’s amazing to see what has changed and remembering the moments that got us to where we are. And it isn’t just the photos of day to day life but also the pictures of how the website and products have changed that really matter.

I always wished there were more photos of Steve Jobs at Apple in the early days or of other great entrepreneurs. I’m sure they too thought “why bother?” but now future posterity (and themselves) don’t get the benefit of seeing what the early stages of these greats looked like.

I hope future startups heed the advice and capture all the moments on the way to becoming the next big things.

Photo from our first office’s conference room:

Not many photos in between then and now (photo from our newest conference room):

The amount of IKEA as a proportion of total furniture has gone down!

"Two things define you. Your patience when you have nothing, and your attitude when you have..."

Wed, 06 Mar 2013 09:49:53 -0800

“Two things define you. Your patience when you have nothing, and your attitude when you have everything.”

- (via yenchinschin)

Doubling Down: How Fedex Bet Its Future in Vegas

Mon, 04 Mar 2013 08:02:00 -0800

One of my favorite tales in business comes from the early days of Fedex. Here’s an account by one of the first employees:

By mid-July our funds were so meager that on Friday we were down to about $5,000 in the checking account, while we needed $24,000 for the jet fuel payment. I was still commuting to Connecticut on the weekends and really did not know what was going to transpire on my return.

However when I arrived back in Memphis on Monday morning, much to my surprise, my bank balance stood at nearly $32,000. I asked Fred where the funds had come from, and he responded, “I took a plane to Las Vegas and won $27,000.”

I said, “You mean you took our last $5,000 — how could you do that?”

He shrugged his shoulders and said, “What difference did it make? Without the funds for the fuel companies, we couldn’t have flown anyway.”

They were either going to be able to operate with the jet fuel or go out of business without the jet fuel. This is a quite literal example of gambling with the company’s future though sometimes it really makes sense to double down and take a big chance — especially when the outcome is effectively binary anyways.

Startups often have to make crazy bets because if they don’t, they are going to be obsolete or bankrupt anyways. It doesn’t mean they do it recklessly but they need to figure out when they face the same risk between decisions but can get better outcomes with one than the other.

To save the world, don’t get a job at a charity; go work on Wall Street

Thu, 28 Feb 2013 00:26:00 -0800

To save the world, don’t get a job at a charity; go work on Wall Street:

Fascinating perspective by a ethicist at Princeton on what leads to a bigger world impact:

“Top undergraduates who want to “make a difference” are encouraged to forgo the allure of Wall Street and work in the charity sector. And many people in finance have a mid-career ethical crisis and switch to something fulfilling.

The intentions may be good, but is it really the best way to make a difference? I used to think so, but while researching ethical career choice, I concluded that it’s in fact better to earn a lot of money and donate a good chunk of it to the most cost-effective charities—a path that I call ‘earning to give.’”

"We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope"

Thu, 14 Feb 2013 21:12:46 -0800

“We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope”

- Martin Luther King Jr.

Where the World Changes

Tue, 05 Feb 2013 19:25:00 -0800

I sometimes lose sight of how amazing the technology industry is. The economic definition of technology is an improvement of how to do things (whether it involves machinery, software, or means of organizing things). So at it’s heart, this sector is all about trying to change how the world does things for the better.

Since moving to San Francisco a few years ago, it’s been great immersing myself in the tech capital of the world. When you’re working on big, hard problems that perplex the world, it can feel lonely and almost laughable in your attempt to solve them but being surrounded by peers attempting to effect world changes, makes it easier. That’s why San Francisco is so great and what this video captures so well.

San Francisco is where the world changes. For anyone toiling out there to effect change through technology, this is where it’s at!

New Yorker: The twentysomethings are all right

Tue, 15 Jan 2013 07:20:20 -0800

New Yorker: The twentysomethings are all right:

Where you start out—rich or poor, rustic or urbane—won’t determine where you end up, perhaps, but it will determine how you get there. The twenties are when we turn what Frank O’Hara called “sharp corners.”

Jobs fight: Haves vs. the have-nots

Mon, 07 Jan 2013 10:00:07 -0800

Jobs fight: Haves vs. the have-nots :

Fascinating interview with venture capitalist, Marc Andreessen, on the future of jobs, societal inequality, and education:

“The spread of computers and the Internet will put jobs in two categories,” Andreessen says. “People who tell computers what to do, and people who are told by computers what to do.”

What they don't tell you about promotions

Thu, 27 Dec 2012 10:00:00 -0800

I always thought life is a game where for the most part, you have to figure out the rules to succeed. In school (aka. pre-real-life), the rules are clearly explained for how to succeed. You know when you’re taking a test and what the evaluation metric is. After that, it starts becoming harder to understand how to succeed.

At jobs, when you first start working, all you have to do is the work assigned. If you do it well and on time, you get a raise and hopefully a promotion. Eventually though, that isn’t enough and a lot of people find themselves puzzled about what they are no longer doing correct.

The game changes and no one tells you the new rules. I’ve seen law associates get frustrated when they don’t make partner even after they did all the paperwork and litigation right — all the i’s and t’s dotted and crossed. I’ve seen account executives at PR firms frustrated why they aren’t VPs after they get a lot of publicity for their clients.

There are two universal truths I find in promotions no matter what level though they get more and more important the higher you go up. First, the less your boss worries about you, the more he or she values you. Second, the more value you deliver the firm beyond your assigned work, the more likely you’ll get to the next level.

All managers are stretched thin. It’s like being a teacher in a classroom where you have some outstanding students and some challenging ones. You often end up teaching to the lowest common denominator to ensure no one gets left behind. The kids who can self teach or pick things up quickly are the ones who get the least attention and become a pleasure to teach. Employees who don’t need to be managed are the ones managers value a lot.

Not only can managers not spend much time helping people do their job but they actually don’t have as much time as you might think to come up with new ideas or work beyond the day to day and what’s been given to them. So people who can come up with projects and execute on them without direction are ones who are creating value for the firm and not just fulfilling on it.

Every industry has different things that a firm would value. A venture capital firm wants deal flow ultimately and not just due diligence done. An investment bank wants new trading ideas or M&A deals to work on — not just a pitch deck or excel spread sheet made. Law firms need new clients and not just good services to existing ones. Big multinational corporations need new $100MM+ products or partnerships. Startups need just about everything and can rarely rely on founders to come up with every solution to every emerging problem.

You can get by doing your assigned job well for a while even with titles like managers or directors but generally as you get to VP or higher, you aren’t given exact instructions from your superior and you’re just expected to deliver.

In fact, no one in these industries really ever sits you down and explains that to make it to the highest levels you need to start doing work outside of your day to day work. They don’t tell you that you need to be out there meeting new potentials business or keeping up with industry trends on your own time. They don’t tell you that you need to come up with a project to do your assigned work even better than was originally planned — cause they didn’t have the time to think of something better. They don’t even explain to you in a structured manner “here’s how you go about doing this work” since it’s not your job yet — you’re at best an apprentice who needs to keep an eye out to learn. They just don’t have the time to teach you that.

So if you want to get promoted, keep these things in mind. Your manager isn’t charting your career trajectory because your manager is just trying to keep today’s operations running smoothly. You need to do today’s work, but the more you can deliver on tomorrow’s needs, the brighter your future will be at the firm.

This is an expanded answer to my earlier one to the Quora question: “What are a few unique pieces of career advice that nobody ever mentions?”

"But I feel my job is mostly getting people not to think about our competition. In general I think..."

Tue, 11 Dec 2012 08:48:24 -0800

“But I feel my job is mostly getting people not to think about our competition. In general I think there’s a tendency for people to think about the things that exist. Our job is to think of the thing you haven’t thought of yet that you really need.”

- Larry Page, Co-founder of Google

Selling Form, Not Just Function

Sun, 28 Oct 2012 15:26:29 -0700

What makes customers happy? Most people think it’s simply delivering the solution that solves the functional problem of customers the best. For example, search engine marketing ads deliver prospective customers from point A (another website) to point B (your website) arguably in the most efficient manner and this form of advertising is widely now adopted. Yet, for many search engine marketing service sellers, they lose 50% of their customers every year.

Why aren’t these customers happy? It’s been baffling the local ad industry for years. I think it is because people can care more about form than function.

In an interview with the CEO of Prada there was a great anecdote about this phenomenon. Prada makes a variety of shoes such as ballet flats and high heels. In the city of Milan, most streets are made from cobblestone, making it incredibly uneven and difficult to walk on. You’d think that based on utility and function, the best selling shoes for Prada in Milan would be the most comfortable ones like ballet flats. However, high heels by far outsell everything else.

Form wins over function once certain utility is reached or after a certain spending level. More comfortable shoes may get a customer from point A to point B faster but they don’t give the same emotional feeling. Customers are purchasing based on the image they have of themselves by owning the product and the image others have of them as a result.

It’s the emotional experience that customers are purchasing — not the physical good. Prada has learned to sell esteem, not just a shoe. It’s the difference between Foxconn selling an assembly service and Apple selling an assembled experience.

In my company’s world of advertising, this lesson explains a lot. It turns out advertisers don’t just care about function of getting from point A to B (or in this case, getting customers from website A to website B). They care about form to a degree as well. Advertisers care about their image and how it portrays them to others and themselves.

Seeing your own ad out there in the world is fulfilling for ego. At PaperG, we’ve observed that customer who have seen their own ads are much happier customers than ones who don’t.

Everyone wants to be important. Everyone wants people to notice them. Display advertising gets customers from point A to B but like high heel shoes, it may not be the fastest way of doing things. It says something about the buyer. It tells everyone around them to pay attention. It’s a classic example of form over function. Search on the other hand is great in efficiency and functionality but provides almost none of the form that advertisers value. It could make customers much happier if it adapted some of its form.

I’m sure this insight isn’t limited to just advertising and fashion. So, when thinking about your customers and why they might not be happy with your efficient product, ask yourself:

Are you selling form at all or just function?

Winning on Product, not on Price

Sun, 23 Sep 2012 09:12:00 -0700

When I was an intern at an multinational bank, the managing director once took me aside and asked me if I could guess why one of the vice presidents was being promoted and the other wasn’t given that both just sold equally large multi-million dollar loan products to hedge funds. He explained that one of them won the deal even though he didn’t bid the lowest price for financing. The other guy won after offering the lowest price.

My boss gave me a powerful insight: Anyone can win on price. Not everyone can win on product.

To win on product, you have to differentiate which can be extraordinarily hard. A product is not simply the code or physical object that the customer pays for but it is the entire experience of purchasing it and using it.

For something as commoditized as providing cash like at the multinational bank, you have to sell the buyer on your reputation, ease of doing business, and network of additional benefits like other relationships. In essence, you are selling a better experience which commands a premium.

For advertising technology, many people see the different ad stacks as interchangeable. As a result, many people throughout the supply chain have been commoditized and primarily compete based on price. $5 CPM not low enough to win the business? Most people lower the price to win the RFP. Very few companies have resisted the temptation to race to the bottom in their attempt to scoop the deal. Everyone has lost out as the technology deteriorate and the only thing being optimized for is the pricing.

I’m always incredibly proud of my team when we win a deal and aren’t the lowest priced product. There have been a great many times when we’ve been $100,000 or more expensive than our competition — yet, we still win the deal because we offer the best ad tech experience for our media partners. We can offer best practices from our 100+ partners, best ad designs that work for 20,000+ advertisers, and best training from our experience with 3,000+ ad sales reps/ops. We’re offering the best in class service and technology so we charge for it, which customers can and do appreciate.

So if you want to know how good your whole product really is, see if you can be the more expensive option and still win.

Using Behavioral Economics, Psychology, and Neuroeconomics to Maximize Sales

Tue, 18 Sep 2012 09:44:56 -0700

Using Behavioral Economics, Psychology, and Neuroeconomics to Maximize Sales :

Great summary of learnings from different fields applied to how businesses sell

"Entrepreneurs are America’s new heroes. They have been provocateurs, risk-takers and innovators...."

Mon, 03 Sep 2012 16:01:07 -0700

“Entrepreneurs are America’s new heroes. They have been provocateurs, risk-takers and innovators. They have moved from land to industrial assets to ideas. They are now entering fields of social entrepreneurship, such as education. This is the latest social change in history.”

- John Doerr, venture capitalist at Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers

How The Federal Reserve Accelerates The Robopocalypse

Tue, 28 Aug 2012 10:17:02 -0700

The New York Times recently chronicled the rise of machines in manufacturing that used to be the domain of low wage humans. It noted that even tasks previously deemed too complex for machines to do or too subtle for mechanical manipulation have been solved by engineers. To a manufacturer, the advantages of using robots for any task that can be automated are well known:

robots don’t go on strike
robots can work 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, year round
robots don’t have to take breaks during their shifts
robots don’t have pension obligations

The primary disadvantage to manufacturers is high capital expenditures to purchase expensive equipment. This high cost translates to potentially higher hourly cost of production relative to using human labor. The cost is also upfront and inflexible since you can’t simply lay off and rehire a robot. Humans only require minimal upfront investment — just basic training — to do manufacturing/assembly jobs.

As a result, every manufacturer does an analysis to figure whether the high upfront investment in machines translates into enough production efficiencies compared to minimal investment in humans. On the whole, we’re still largely using people across all sectors and geographies; however, that could soon change pretty quickly. Obviously better engineered machines means more things can be automated but a surprising accelerator may be The Federal Reserve (The Fed).

To combat unemployment and economic stagnation, the Fed has kept interest rates at practically 0%. The idea is to make loans incredible cheap to stimulate investment by companies which should create jobs (enable companies to borrow cheaply to invest in expansion) and spur consumption (enable consumers to borrow cheaply to buy a car or house).

The unintended consequence is the cost of investing in machines has dropped to near 0%. As a manufacturer, I can get robots practically for free upfront, use them to produce goods cheaper, sell those goods, and then pay back the low interest loan. I am actually now much more incentivized to increase production through investing in machines than in people.

As a result, The Fed could be making unemployment worse inadvertently. It may be achieving its goal of stimulating the broader economy, but it may be exacerbating the unemployment problem which largely exists among unskilled labor which is primarily used in manufacturing and construction. It is becoming cheaper and cheaper to automate with robots than it is to hire people.

I just hope the machines will have the human decency to spare Ben Bernanke for all he’s done when they finally take over.

Behavioral bias: First is best

Fri, 24 Aug 2012 09:59:47 -0700

Behavioral bias: First is best:

IS THIS the first article you read today? If so, there’s a good chance you’ll enjoy it. The order in which people experience things affects their opinion of them: they tend to like the first option best.

Best Buy Should Buy Consumer Electronic Startups

Mon, 20 Aug 2012 10:54:58 -0700

The Wall Street Journal this weekend covered the trend of Silicon Valley start-ups focusing on consumer electronics rather than consumer Internet businesses. One great example cited is a “$359 kitchen appliance dubbed Nomiku, which people can use to sous-vide food—that is, cook meats and vegetables in airtight plastic bags in a water bath.”

This item isn’t sold anywhere yet because it’s still being made. It is in development and validated as a potentially great product idea thanks to crowd sourced funding. Nonetheless, it’s the perfect example of what huge retailers should be selling — products without UPC codes which Amazon can always underprice and outsell.

Traditional retailers need these products to sell but don’t know how to innovate on their own or figure out what will be a hit product. They should be funding their development or outright buying ones that are getting early traction — effectively strategically investing or acquihiring. By doing so, they will begin to tap into amazing cutting edge products, gain merchandising talent for years to come, and differentiate from Amazon.

Retailers have the enormous benefit of distribution for these products and can market them in a way few startups can hope by putting it physically in front of millions of consumers who don’t even know to search for these unique items.

When turnaround plans are discussed for traditional retailers like Best Buy, it’s just shocking to me that no one is talking about actually doing something other than cutting some cost or relabeling UPC products so shopper can’t price compare with Amazon. Best Buy needs to be selling amazing products that no one else has if it ever wants to take back marketshare and actually increase profits.

If retailers are daring enough to adopt this radical idea, we could start seeing a whole new frenzy around physical product startups as a result and maybe even a revival in traditional retailers’ fortunes.