A few months after we moved to Boulder, I was informed by sage, experienced people of the wonders of dumpster diving at the end of Spring semester. When all the students go back to their moms and dads for the summer. I heard fanciful stories that instead of giving stuff away or selling it, students just put all their things in the dumpsters, including unused detergent, soap, lightbulbs, etc.

At first I thought eww. Because dumpsters in Australia are so filthy even the most hardened drunk won’t venture into them. And I’m not ‘that’ person.

But as time wore on, and I guess as I saw more and more of the type of behaviour the students here have, I thought it would be worth ‘having a look’. And now we’re moving to a larger place (yay) where nothing other than the house is rented (fail), it’s time I got stuff like bookcases, desks, cutlery, linen and stuff. (Please note: most some of these I would not get from a dumpster. Even I have limits.)

Giving the coathangers a second chance. Life's tough.

So last weekend Elisabeth and I went out. For a drive. Down some alleys. To sight see. (This may or may not be related to the fact that the local newspaper ran a story on how it is illegal to take things from dumpsters. So we were ensuring we weren’t going to do anything illegal – like recycling stuff people were throwing into landfill – because that would be bad. You’re welcome, Boulder sheriffs.)

Coathanger rescue is socially responsible

Funnily enough, on our sightseeing tour of the alleys of Boulder, we came across a mass of coathangers. Just sitting next to a dumpster. That’s totally NOT dumpster diving, and coathangers appear to eat each other in our houses, so we liberated these from the alley. You’re welcome, alley.

Whoops! Elisabeth nearly falling into a dumpster. (Yes, this was posed, officer. But it's okay because it's awesome.)

And then we continued our sightseeing (because you know, it’s a side of Boulder I had not seen yet and as a startup mum I’m always one step away from living in an alley), and before I could warn her of it being directly in her way, and possibly because she was distracted by her constant talking, Elisabeth tripped and nearly fell into a dumpster. It was just craziness – how irresponsible, leaving the dumpster right where anyone could just trip into it. What is this world coming to? I was very worried, so I got up there too – but I didn’t fall in. Because I’m smart. I held onto the edge. And guess what? Insanely, someone had obviously accidentally thrown out about 50 brand new tshirts all still in their folded sizes, 10 XBox front covers (still in packaging), 6 very nice yellow satchels still in their brand new packaging, hundreds of packaged EA sponsored CU Buffs banners and about two billion brand new library bags – all branded EA Sports.

So we liberated this brand new, still in its original packaging stuff. It literally filled my (rental) car boot. Did I already say it was brand new? We kept a few for personal use, and put the rest into a donation bin for abused and neglected children – which is where they should have been put in the first place. You can see about half of it (yes, just half of it) in the featured pic. Jed asked me why I did this. I told him I kind of have an issue with people not recycling, but I have an even bigger issue with things going straight from the factory line into landfill.

I’m sure the person who put them in the dumpster probably was on their way to one of the many donation bins around Boulder, but fell into the dangerously placed dumpster with them, just like Elisabeth did, and needed to let all this brand new stuff go so the person could scramble to safety. That’s totally understandable. (Oh, and there was also a small black coffee table in there. So we liberated that too. It now is in our little loungeroom and holds all our game gear.)

Nice coffee table that someone accidentally left in the same dumpster. (Picture entirely posed, officer. I swear.)

We were invigorated outraged by this experience, so we thought we’d check to see if other dumpsters or things around them looked dangerous. So we could warn people or fix it. Because we are nice people and that’s just how we roll.

Why Craigslist is helping the world be socially responsible

I’d seen an ad in the Free section on Craigslist (which is like the Trading Post for Aussies, but it’s entirely online, and in fact Craigslist exists in Australia but nobody really knows about it) for a couch someone was throwing out, so we used the reliable GPS (rather than the unreliable Elisabeth’s memory for directions to streets – it’s Pearl, then Spruce, then Pine, woman!) to find out whether the couch was liberated or not. It had been so we were happy, thinking of the couch being set free, loved, somewhere. But right near where the couch had been (and totally not in a dumpster because they were too big) were a very nice large IKEA bookcase, and a tv set with remote taped to the top, and a sign that said “Free. Still working well.” (The sign was on the TV, because of course the bookcase didn’t need a sign. It was obvious that it worked. Maybe you don’t need this kind of explanation.) Well, to leave them behind was inhumane. So then the car was full.

Then I came home and got a little itchy which could totally have been my brain working overtime thinking of little things you need a microscope to see that bite a lot and leave you with an illness, which might explain the big headache I had this week. But I had a shower and washed my clothes and now I wasn’t itchy any more. So maybe the headache is an aneurysm after all, because I had that all week. But I don’t have it now. So maybe it’s only an aneurysm from Monday to Friday. I don’t know. I’ll have to think that through a some more.

Where are they now?

The TV. Which is obviously not in a dumpster.

Until we move next month, the tv is sitting on the floor in the middle of our little loungeroom. Which is not ideal, but in another way it kind of is. Because it is in the way of the tv we currently use and the signal from the remote doesn’t read if you’re sitting on the couch. Which of course, you always are if you’re watching tv. But I’m not moving it because it’s fun to watch family members try to make the signal reach the tv without getting off their butts, by waving their arms around and swearing a lot. It’s better than the show they’re trying to tune to. And that crap’s why I know God exists.

By the way, on a serious note: If you are Electronic Arts, then you should know that someone who obviously worked for you, probably in promotions, and lived in Boulder threw a mass load of your branded stuff into landfill. That’s a freaking massive fail. And if you’re that person, you should be banned from living in Boulder. You’re anti-Boulder. And, by the way, so is the ridiculous rule of Boulder authorities that says we can’t recycle other people’s things. It’s anti-everything good. You might want to rethink that.

No related posts.

It’s hard to believe it’s nearly a year since I started as one of the inaugural founders accepted to the Founder Institute. Since then, lots of debate has happened related to these type of accelerator programs and women. (The irony is that while I publicly recognized it a year ago, the debate today is being discussed by men.)

Accelerator programs are interesting animals. Being Boulder based, it was natural for us to apply for TechStars last year. My startup was a finalist for the program but we ended up not going in because our idea was not yet far enough along for it to be on the same type of schedule as other companies they were considering. (As it is, we are still working on our launch – a number of reasons are behind that, but it should happen in the next few weeks.) In any case, we had also applied to the Founder Institute (FI) and after all three of the founders on (what is now) TribeVibe had gone through the interview and the 3-hour long examinations, all three of us were accepted.

My take is that TechStars focuses on the company primarily, while FI truly focuses on founders. TechStars does not interview founders individually but rather as a team, and the company idea needs to be pretty well complete. Instead, the FI exams and interviews are performed separately. Additionally as an early stage accelerator, we each undertook ideation and early stage investigations on at least three ideas (even though we already had one solidly constructed coming in). Finally, for two thirds of the program we were separated into other teams – founders of a single company were not placed together. (I was president of my first group, and Jed was president of his. That was interesting.)

These strategies for me, as a woman with two male co-founders, was really great. It pressured me to do the all the key requirements of the startup, not just what I was comfortable or a ninja in. It gave me input to numerous other companies that was valued. I was a founder, same as every other founder in the program. (To that time by outsiders I had regularly been identified as a founder in name only, married to the actual founder. That all changed with FI.)

Also importantly, I was able to do the program remotely, while my co-founders attended the sessions in person. I have children and this flexibility in the program was more vital even than being given $6K per founder going in (FI gives founders no money at the start).

The only disappointing thing is that there was only one female mentor in the entire program while I was there. Other programs also operate with a great imbalance between male and female advisors/mentors. You’re not going to convince women they’re welcome in programs when the most successful ones are not held up to the same level as the males. The best way of getting more women into your accelerator is not to ask the startup women to sign up – but to demonstrate real commitment by having a roster that includes 50% female speakers and mentors. They really are not that hard to find, and it’s kind of like “if you build it, they will come.” I believe all the accelerators need to do more than simply invite women or say “we welcome everyone to apply” and follow it up by making public the number of women in their programs – on both sides of the table.

As it was, the flexibility in the program, the individual recognition of founders (rather than companies) is, I believe, what led FI to having a far better number of women startup founders as part of its inaugural cohort (although it was still less than 10% of enrolments). As a graduate, I would absolutely recommend FI, particularly to women. Not only have I had a fantastic opportunity with a recognized accelerator and some great mentors, but I have connected with some very strong startup women who were part of my cohort – and been recognized by the men in the program as having talent and ability as a founder in my own right. I am not convinced an accelerator focused on the team would have provided that.

I also personally now hold interest in the warrant pool of quite a few great companies, and have a stack more confidence. In a startup environment full of hip 20-something dudes, that’s a real win.

Thanks to Scott for encouraging me to post on this topic. Scott is about to begin FI Denver this semester. He wrote about the difference between incubators here. Additionally, Chirag Pancholi from my cohort also wrote about FI here.

Related posts:

1. Focusing on founders – the Founder Institute
2. Why women in tech need to stop whining and start to nurture our own
3. How to create a stir – write about women in startups

Dear SXSW attendees:

I know you’re all excited. You’re going to spend a whole heap of time being all geeky and fun, and drinking and stuff. Talking about startups, design, innovation, music… ooh I’ll bet you’re all tingly.

My husband is one of you. He’s kid-at-Christmas excited. He loves Texas and had a ball there last year. As a startup geek guy, he can’t wait for a whole week of indulgence.

Good on him. I hope he has a great time.

But now to the point of this post – apart from his blue eyes and salt-and-pepper hair, my husband has an Australian accent.

I have seen the way females respond to a male with this shrimp-on-the-barby quality. It’s a little over the top. During SXSW women go a little nuts for startup guys – add the accent, and it’s all downhill for the startup widow wife.

Unlike some other (better known) startup guys who think it’s okay to flirt and carry on while away from home, as long as they “don’t go home with anyone at the end of the night,” (I’m not naming names, but you freaking well know who you are – and people do talk about you, by the way), it’s not going to cut it with me.

Stop whining, woman. What’s the point?

I’m not going to SXSW (someone has to stay here and look after the kids and write a thesis), so… I’m running a Where’s Waldo-style competition on my husband for attendees of SXSW. Let’s call it my little contribution to citizen journalism.

Ooh, a competition from a mom blogger? (Who’d have thought, right?) But how do I WIN?

This is Jed. Print it out. Keep it handy. (Note the wedding ring.) Some call it stalking, I call it love.

All you have to do is find my husband, Jed (gorgeous guy – see the pic – with accent). Take pictures of him, and post them on whatever social network you use (Brightkite, Twitpic, Flickr, whatever). Tag them ‘Jed’. You can then tweet me the link (@Mediamum), or post them in the comments for this post. Each entry will get a number, and I’ll draw a winner using the Random Generator tool. The winner will get a $25 gift card from the place of their choice. The more pics you take, the more opportunities you have to win.

I love my husband. If I squint a bit, he looks like Mark Harmon, and that’s something too good to lose.  I’m sure you understand.

Thanks, and I hope you rock the world at SXSW. (Don’t make me come down there.)

*Jed has given his blessing for this competition to happen. He thinks it’s funny. That will be the case unless everyone there starts taking his picture. Then I’ll be the one laughing.

**Do not chew me out for being a loser wife. I love mah man and no biaitch is gettin’ in mah way (hair flick). That said, he has my blessing to drink and talk and stuff. Just as long as his hands are in plain view at all times.

Related posts:

1. How to avoid people using location-based social media
2. The future of higher education – crowdsourcing reappointments
3. More than deputies: A definition of journalism for the 21st Century

It has been my absolute privilege to be on the Executive Committee of the CU New Venture Challenge (CUNVC) for 2010.

The CUNVC is focused on providing entrepreneurial support, mentoring and cross-campus collaboration for startups that include students and faculty, across the University of Colorado.

The goal is to provide some real support and eliminate some of the smoke and mirrors involved in really giving a entrepreneurialism a go, no matter what field of study you are involved in. As a result, over 20 teams submitted final business plans this year, for companies ranging from high-tech startups through to outdoor recreation and music.

After months of fantastic workshops and crash courses, the semi-finalists are getting ready to compete on Thursday, and on Friday we are having a fantastic afternoon featuring our four top teams, who will be competing for the prize money.

The four finalists will be pitching to a panel consisting of venture capitalists, angel investors and serial entrepreneurs. The teams will be trying to win the prizemoney of:

First place, $6000

Second place, $3000

Third place, $2000

There will also be a special prize of $200 for the company deemed by the judges as their choice. The competition is going to be tough, and these teams are going to be well worth seeing. The best news is that the finals are open to the public. Join me on Friday 12 March, at 2pm at the ATLAS Building at CU (room 100) to see these finalists impress the judges.

Come along, and let them know how appreciated and important innovation and entrepreneurialism are.

Related posts:

1. The chick flick of startup founders
2. The Startup Kid
3. How to create a stir – write about women in startups

Usually, I don’t consciously pay for content. I say ‘consciously’ because if I click on a link and there’s a paywall, I won’t do it. I also don’t subscribe to any newspapers or magazines (online or in ‘dead tree’ format). Basically, the quality of the content I’m seeing doesn’t make me want to pay for more of it.

Mr Murdoch does have the right idea. Getting people to pay for content is definitely a way forward. But News Corp. is missing the biggest opportunity they have. It’s a global organization, and while about 1% of their content producers are the best in the world, they are still.. the best. Why doesn’t News identify that globally based 1%, and put it in a paid-for format? At a really, really high price?

If Mr Murdoch thinks that I, or anyone else, will pay for the other 99% of his writers who are complete crap, then he’s mistaken. I’d rather read the far more professional blogs, with the diversity of opinions and transparency News cannot offer.

After freelancing, creating content for a few different publishers it also appears that organizations don’t like to pay their contributors. Waiting six months for a payment on any work done is not a viable business model. I don’t know why some people think it’s all hunky dory. And it’s been this way for many years.

So I don’t pay for content, and I’m wary of accepting any freelance job at all these days. Because I simply don’t like waiting to be paid when my time is better spent on more pressing things.

But my kids? That’s another thing entirely. I currently pay for three social network memberships. And while I’m a member of about 15 social networks, none of these payments are for me. They’re for my kids. My kids totally expect to pay to get access to information, community and technology. They’re growing up with a pay-for-it frame of mind. At the moment it’s a mum-pay-for-it model, and I’m fine with that because the quality of content accessed by my kids on networks like Club Penguin is really worth $5.95 a month. It’s a vibrant community, with great quality stuff. If organizations continue to treat them this way, by the time they’re my age they’ll be paying for content, and believing they should.

But a key part will be getting rid of the 99% of crap for adults and creating something worth subscribing to. We need a Club Penguin for grown ups.

Sidebar: For the “something shiny” HCI people: Twitter with penguins. Now we’re talking.

Related posts:

1. More than deputies: A definition of journalism for the 21st Century
2. Don't think influence, think resonance
3. Disrupting the barriers of media in the 21st Century

To be influential in social media takes effort. It doesn’t just happen. You can’t buy it. It’s not advertising.

So if that’s what it’s not, how can organizations and people get to be really influential? Here are the steps to influence. When you and your brand get it right, that’s when you get to influence others.

Find Relevance

Your first mission is to produce content that is relevant to the people you’re seeking to influence. That sounds pretty obvious, but so many people and companies don’t really have a great snapshot of their target market. They’ve spent so long with basic demographics that are ballpark indications of who their market is that they’ve lost touch with the real personalities of these people. In social media we’re no longer talking about eyeballs, or about mass market publications that look after great big segments of a market. Instead, you’re looking at individuals. Yes, those individuals tend to move in packs – they’re communities of similar people. And those communities have some people with bigger voices. But that can change in an instant, and one bigger voice doesn’t mean they influence everyone in that community. They are individuals first and they are all powerful. Some will love your brand, others won’t care much, and others might detest your brand. Spend some time working out who they are, what their interests are, and what they really think before even trying to produce content for them. Be relevant.

Find Resonance

Readers of my blog know I love to talk about resonance. You can create all the good quality content in the world but if it’s not hitting the mark and connecting with people in a solid way, you’re not getting social media right. It’s a massive error to think that simply creating good content leads directly to influence. You need more than that. You need to produce content that makes people talk about you. Retweet you. Post the article to their Facebook account or write about it on their blog. When they do that, they’re demonstrating their personal involvement with your content, and that’s what you want. Not just for the eyeballs to hit your page, but for the message to be meaningful to them. To the extent that they’ll tie their name to it and go talk about it elsewhere.

You need to create resonance.

One caveat here, particularly for brands and companies running them, is to be aware that to achieve resonance you need to really understand your audience, and remember everything you say reflects on your brand. I wasn’t kidding before with step one. These people have opinions, are smart, engaged and want to work with others in this space – but don’t think you can control the conversation or give half-assed engagement or try to pretend you’re not the person representing the brand, even if that’s not your intention. A great example is the furore surrounding Nestle right now on Twitter. The good news is that while you’ll get called out for crappy behavior of any kind, the social media community wants you to get better. They will celebrate with you when you do, and they’ll be your loudest proponent. If you really listen, and really work with the community instead of trying to manipulate it you’ll get there and find resonance (I’m kinda hoping Nestle eventually realises that.)

Nirvana – Influence

When you’ve achieved the first two steps, that’s when you can seek to be influential. And you’ll see results. You can invite people to play with your new stuff and be confident that because you have resonance with them, the brand will be welcomed enough for people to want to try it out.You can be a thought leader. You can gain a few minutes of peoples’ time to talk about stuff, and they’ll really listen to you.

It doesn’t matter if you have a personal brand or the biggest brand on the planet. Everyone wants to be influential. Using social media is a great way to discover influence through resonance with a target audience you may have forgotten. Rediscover people. Don’t treat social media like other forms of promotion. It still sits in your toolkit, along with other areas like advertising and sales promotion, but it works differently. Get it right and you’ll find the opportunities you are looking for, with the people who matter most.

Related posts:

1. NestleFamily, breastfeeding and social media
2. Should some brands stay out of social media?
3. Glade's sweet smell of good social media PR with Edelman

The new buzzword in social media appears to be Influence. According to conferences, some marketers it’s what people want. To influence others.

This is a mistake. It demonstrates a very shallow, one-sided view.

(cartoon from xkcd.com)

Talk to most people in social media for example, and they’ll tell you the truth. What they’re doing is looking for, and responding to resonance, not influence.

What all of us seek in social media is Resonance.

The influence part happens afterwards.

In social media, you can’t influence someone unless they want to be influenced.

Guess what… if traditional media had understood the need to find real resonance with its market, it wouldn’t be in the situation it is today.

Resonance. It’s what creates meaning. Just like the rice here.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nO0bSSXmr1A&feature=related#watch-main-area]

Related posts:

1. Disrupting the barriers of media in the 21st Century
2. The three steps to being influential in social media
3. I'll pay for content when there's Twitter with penguins

I’m writing for the online news site, Examiner.com as the Boulder Startup Examiner.

Why? Am I insane? Don’t I have enough to do?

I felt compelled to do it. Boulder is a wonderful town, with a fantastic tech community of people. It’s a really big community, for a small town. It’s exciting, vibrant and smart. It’s full of incredible people. And they’re all doing their own thing.

We’re all working with a similar environment. We see lots of familiar people every week, and there are lots of tech events focused on the community. But we have different lives, experiences and industries. There are lots of people here I’ve never met – and when many of those people are ones I’ve heard of and I know have heard of me in our ‘small’ community, that’s disappointing. We have a wealth of things to draw on that don’t get any focus, simply because there’s no professional journalism covering it.

So that’s what I’m trying to do with my Examiner role. I’m treating it as I would a professional journalistic venture. It’s not personal (that’s what my blog’s for). It’s actual journalism. The way I used to do it. It’s amazing how you never forget. And I’m really enjoying it.

I’m putting together a plan of writing one article a week on five different topic areas. (Let’s see how my time management works with that!) Today’s topic area was Women in Tech. I’ll be writing on that once a week. And today’s story relates to how women who work in Boulder startups simply don’t seem to have the same networking opportunities the men of Boulder do. A pretty self-evident post, I thought. I got to interview some wonderful women (another bonus of working on Examiner is chatting with local startups I’ve never run across, or have only met briefly!). I said to Tara and Grace I wanted to focus on women in Boulder startups. It wasn’t their idea, it was mine. And they came to the party. We had a lovely chat over coffee last week. I recorded the chat, and I wrote the piece.

It seems to have hit a bit of a nerve with some people in various elements of social media, and I couldn’t be happier. I believe the article is respectful of Boulder, the community and both men and women. If you read beyond the headline (as any journalism school will explain, the headline is just the foothold into the story) you get a balanced view of women in startups here in Boulder.

I invite you to read the article yourself, and leave a comment. I now know I’ll definitely be covering women in startups in Boulder every week. Because it’s a great topic, obviously close to my heart. And nobody else covers it.

Related posts:

1. More than deputies: A definition of journalism for the 21st Century
2. Disrupting the barriers of media in the 21st Century
3. I'll pay for content when there's Twitter with penguins

Sometimes I get reminded why I’m doing this.

There’s so much going on right now. I’m exhausted a lot of the time. I have no idea how Jed keeps this relentless pace up. No wonder I’ve called him robot boy for so long.

Today I managed to squeeze in coffee with my good friend, Mark (@soctechnologist) after my first meeting for the day, and before I came home to hit more screen time. During our chat, we talked about something that happened in my TheFunded class last night. One of the mentors asked who planned on building the next billion dollar company. Many hands went in the air.

But I hesitated.

Why? As a startup founder, I run across lots of other startups whose focus is on the dollar. That’s what they’re interested in. That’s what lots of people create their lives around. For many people, being involved in a startup is kinda like taking an entry in the lottery – it’s that kind of gamble. For some it’s that gambling addiction that keeps them in there. It’s all about the payout. Money is the focus. Startups for them are like a drug.

But not me.

As I said to Mark today, heck, if money was my focus I’d still be living in Sydney, in my house with my secure job (that I loved), our two cars. My family. My friends. My dogs. I wouldn’t have packed it all up and moved here. I didn’t do it for a gamble. While I enjoy the odd flutter, I don’t buy lottery tickets.

I explained, looking around the enormous room we were in at all the people sitting with their coffee and lunch, that if we asked everyone in that room who had used a search engine on their computer the last time they were on it, I’ll bet every hand in the room would go into the air (and in fact, I bet all of them would have said Google was the search they had chosen). People are automatically going to look for stuff online. They do it automatically. That’s what the internet is for, right?

I then said if we asked all those same people who created content at any point in the last week, a minimal number of hands would go up. And I’m talking about any kind of content. Video, audio, text. A reply or comment on someone else’s creation, even.

Everyone looks for stuff, but a tiny percentage actually create it. And that’s bad.

The democratization of media – the real power of the internet – happens when people create content, not just when they search and read other peoples’ stuff. Democracy is not just about the infrastructure being there, it’s about people using it to interact and get involved.

I am jumping into this startup because my focus is on making creating content easier – for everyone. The internet won’t be fully democratized until everyone has a real voice, and the barriers to using it are minimized. Scribetribe.us will provide the whole world with that opportunity. From a small perspective, right here in America, I want to empower that homeless guy brandishing a cardboard sign outside the supermarket who has access to the internet at the local library for free, to have his presence felt. I want him to be able to more easily build his own blog, interact with others, get onto Twitter. Have a voice.

Imagine what an impact that would have.

And then take it across the world. That’s what I’m a part of. That’s the vision.

As I said to both my team last night and to Mark this morning, I’m probably best described as the chick flick of startup founders. I’d really like to be able to stop scrounging for quarters, but that’s not why I’m doing this. While others in startup land might be chasing the big money payout, my focus is elsewhere. And you know what? I’m more than happy with that.

Related posts:

1. The Startup Kid
2. Focusing on founders – the Founder Institute
3. Where's the vision in your startup?

There are numerous seed and incubator programs in operation, all geared towards getting startups on their feet, funded and on their way. Most of these programs have a similar framework. Startups pitch an idea, and the program decides which are the best investments for their time and money. The incubator then works with that handful of startups and focuses on helping them get going over a few weeks or months, with varying amounts of money, visiting mentors, speakers etc. In return they get a piece of the startup’s pie.

Incubators are a prized involvement for a startup so the application process is highly competitive. For example, in 2009, Boulder-based Techstars’ third year, they received 527 applications from all over the world. The program then had the daunting task of whittling it down by about 90%.

A new type of program entered the fray this year. Silicon Valley-based The Founder Institute, headed by Adeo Ressi, launched The Funded, an incubator which features interaction with a range of mentors, all geared towards helping get startups off the ground. However, the Funded has a different perspective than most others.

You’re more than welcome to go through the program in detail if you follow the earlier link, but to me the key aspect is that The Funded’s program focuses on the founders themselves, not just one startup idea that they have. Looking at most successful entrepreneurs today, many of them have ideas that ultimately didn’t work out – but The Founder Institute believes that one failure doesn’t automatically make them a bad selection for an incubator. Instead, focusing on working with people who have all the particular founder qualities necessary to build great companies is far more likely to produce dividends.

The Founder Institute invited people to complete an application outlining themselves and their startup idea (like the other incubators do). But after that, those applicants deemed to have the most promising/fitting qualities were invited to undertake a 5-part test. As a result, there are startups in all sorts of different areas, at all stages of development. The test we each sat was produced by the Founder Institute in collaboration with other specialists – the idea is to gain a quantifiable reflection of those who are most likely to ‘make it’ based on their personality and IQ traits (of course, much of the results of this will not be apparent for a while yet – we have to launch ourselves to see the outcomes).

Undertaking the test was a real adventure.

Each of our three founders was invited to take the test. It was delivered online, parts of it were timed, and one whole section was on vocabulary. It reminded me a lot of a cross between an IQ test and the GRE exam. There was even some math (shudder) – and questions that looked like they could have needed to include math but didn’t (IQ). It took about 1.5 hours to get through it all, and we sat it independently (I did mine at 6am before the kids got up. Jed did his that evening after I’d gone to bed.)

The funniest part was that scribetribe’s founders had a phone conference to talk about various things the evening after we’d all done the test. It was done and over. But Jed, Daz and I were still talking about the questions. “What did you put for this?” “Oh, I ran out of time in that section.” Littered with shared laughter, there was a really serious, telling side of us all in our focus on having done the best we possibly could. It really showed to me how there are little aspects to our personalities which complement each other’s, help us work really well together, and at the same time amplify each other’s particular strengths. It was very interesting to see how competitive Jed and I can be with each other (but he cares more than I. I would never repeatedly point out that I got a question right that he didn’t. Even though I did ) Just as you would in high school, we worked out the answers to the few questions we could remember and reflected on our (well… my) agony in not being able to make sense of others.

At the end of it all, all three of us were accepted into the program, which has just 75 founders for 2009, its inaugural year. All the founders are broken into smaller working groups to work on each week’s assignments, to discuss and brainstorm – it’s fabulous because all three of us are in different working groups, and are contributing and receiving complementary information in those smaller brainstorms. We also, of course, all work together one day a week, have classes with mentors focused on particular areas from ideation to accounting to marketing.

Even funnier than the test? The fact that after each of us had our first working group meeting, I said to Jed, “my group voted me president.” Jed replied, “so did mine.”

We are each thrilled to be part of the Funded – it’s providing each of us with things we need to really make an incredible company together. And with our focus, energy and excitement, Scribetribe’s alpha launch at the end of this summer is going to be phenomenal.

Related posts:

1. Why the Founder Institute is great for women
2. The chick flick of startup founders
3. How to create a stir – write about women in startups

Running a startup isn’t easy on anyone.

The glorious trails of successful entrepreneurs are littered with the scars of broken relationships and bitter resentment of cold dinners and missed birthday parties.

It takes a special kind of relationship to weather the storms of startup life.

At Darling Harbour, Sydney.

It takes a special kind of kid too. A kid who will understand that daddy or mummy can’t make it to every school function. That we can’t afford summer camp.

It takes a special kid who will say okay through his tears as he’s torn from his Australian home, his dogs, his school friends, because he knows that what we’re working on isn’t a normal sort of job like his friends’ parents have.

This week we have begun graduation celebrations for Harry as he completes year 5. I got to make a dedication to him the other day at school, as did all the other parents in his class to their kids.In typical startup style, I did this one alone because Jed’s in Silicon Valley at the moment. The Kleenex was really getting passed around that circle.

Why so much Kleenex? It was his teacher’s fault really. She got us to close our eyes and think of when we were having our child, their infancy, and years in elementary school. And then open our eyes and take our turns to speak from the heart to our child in front of everyone (you could pass if you wanted to, but nobody did – this is Boulder, after all ).

Now, I cry at the drop of a hat. I can’t walk into that darned school without automatically tearing up it seems (sigh). But for this dedication, while others were a bit of a mess, I hardly cried at all.

And while it surprised me at the time, I know why.

Harry is an incredible kid. He was made for the startup life. I won’t be a bit surprised if he ends up living it himself. (Good grief, I hope he scores a partner as well as his dad did ). Harry’s adaptability is remarkable. Many kids would have resented the move to the US, and that would have been understandable. Not Harry, even though he misses Australia very much.

Harry's idea of cleaning up his room

He’s no angel though. He has a cheeky side and he’s a daredevil. I was told of his decision to ride a waterfall while hiking, stopping just short of a massive drop – nearly giving everyone watching a heart attack. And we will never forget him barrelling down Eldora mountain on a snowboard without a single turn and nearly hitting a bus in the car park – grinning afterwards.

Everyone who knows us as a family will agree that Harry is the one who most wears his heart on his sleeve. He hugs everyone. Repeatedly.

He is honest and open. But he can’t sleep if he’s feeling bad about something – he has to get up and talk it through. And he has a strength of character and self-belief which overcomes every obstacle. He’s never said “I’ve had enough.”  He just keeps going. It’s that tenacity that is so inspiring and awesome.

And I can’t cry about that. I can’t cry about changes at all – for Harry the world is his oyster, and he’s loving the adventure. He doesn’t care that much about stuff he hasn’t accomplished yet – he’s just going to keep trying. And he’s not concerned about being the best at everything. He just wants to give it a go.

Last week his performance on drums at the big 5th grade concert that combined musicians from 3 schools was incredible. He was on time with every beat. He enjoyed it. And he’s such an individual, he wore his lucky hat too

I can’t wait to see what he tries his hand at, and surprises us with, in Middle School. They’re gonna be lucky to have him. As are we.

Congratulations, Harry. We’re so proud of you, and grateful for all you give back to us every single day.

Related posts:

1. Hiking with Harry
2. Why my family loves Boulder
3. The chick flick of startup founders

What’s your vision?

Recently there have been discussions over ‘how long is too long’ from developers a little less than happy being part of a startup that is not yet paying them ‘what they’re worth’ or even getting involved in a startup that doesn’t pay them from the outset. Startup widows are also holding their spouses accountable for not having ‘made it’ yet.

The problem with this thinking is that the focus is on the payout, not on the journey or the goal. Their focus is on a timeframe. What’s acceptable, what’s not.

What’s your vision?

Deciding to get into the startup life is like jumping off a cliff. You prepare really well, you’re excited, and the people around you admire your decision. But after that, you’re relying on your own vision. And that’s where people begin to lose it.

When we decided to launch our startup in the US, I wish I had a dollar for every person telling me how ‘lucky’ I was. I find that weird. Lucky? No. Gutsy? Yes. Committed? Yes. Adventurous? Yes. Passionate? Yes.

I share a vision. (Please check out the difference between a corporate mission statement and vision statement here.)

So what’s my vision?

My vision is one in which we create technology that makes a real difference to peoples’ lives and changes how they view technology and communicate with each other. We’re going to provide the tool that restructures the way people create and interact with technology and communicate with each other online. (Oh yeah, this is a change-the-world thing!)

I’m into equity – not the financial type, but the equity of access and use that will make people want to create content instead of just consume it. I want it to be easier for them. I lust for the day people do more than just search for things online. I lust for the day that everyone – you – truly feels able to produce content and interact with it because they can fit doing it into their day. I lust for the day that it makes as much sense for them to create content and really interact with other peoples’ content as it does right now to Google something.

The prospect of being a founding part of the company that makes this happen excites me.

You’ll note that no aspect of this vision includes a timeframe. Even though I want it to have happened ‘yesterday’ purely because I am so darned excited about it, I haven’t said ‘we have to make this happen within xx years or else I’m out’. It also doesn’t include a financial payout. Sure we have to live, but it’s amazing how your expenses tend to meet your means. Ramen noodles taste good . Free public education is good education. Without wanting to sound like a Monty Python skit, I am proud to say I have really actually walked two miles in the snow with bags of groceries, and I didn’t die. The bus is usually my transportation, and sometimes if I’m lucky, a friend’s car.

It’s about what you’re willing to do to see your vision come true. It’s living the dream and enjoying the journey. It’s the reality of working with a startup.

As I’ve said before, startup life is like nothing else. It’s not a job. And when it feels like a job, when you start measuring ‘success’ by time and money, it’s time to do everyone involved with the startup a big fat favor and get out – because it’s not just about you. It means you don’t share the vision. Maybe you really never did.

Related posts:

1. The chick flick of startup founders
2. The Startup Kid
3. Vale Randy Pausch: Decide if You're Tigger or Eeyore

After the passing of an inspirational man, Professor Randy Pausch, I’ve decided to write a number of posts on what struck me in his Last Lecture. If you haven’t seen this lecture, I wholeheartedly recommend getting a cup of tea, and taking an hour to watch it. Then watch it again a week later. There are myriad messages in it.

The thing that teared me up with this lecture was this statement: Decide if You’re Tigger or Eeyore. How do you go through life? Randy says he has fun. The Dean at the university asked him to ensure he told people to have fun, and he says it was like asking a fish to talk about water. He knew no other way.

I found real resonance with that. Just like Randy, if you meet me IRL you kinda know which way I lean – I’m Tigger.

As I discovered last semester, for some stuff I simply don’t know how to be anything other than Tigger. My personal relationships, my work and teaching - for the most part I’m Tigger. Joy of Life, that’s me.

One student challenged me to be “normal” for just one class. She believed it wasn’t possible. She was right. Why? Because I don’t know what “normal” is! I really tried, too!

Even the (very quiet, sedate) dentist commented last week “You are always so enthusiastic, it’s really catching.” Then this week when we saw him again, he was almost bouncy himself. (Admittedly, that was a little scary.)

I figure hey, why be gloomy or even just emotionless and methodical in anything you do? If you find the fun in stuff, then doesn’t that rub off? Even if it’s not inherently a fun activity? For example, there’s nothing more fun than squashing the recycling with my 8-year-old to try and fit it in the bin.

But sometimes I have put conditions on my enthusiasm. And that sucks.

When we first launched our startup in Australia, I was the fish-wife. I complained every step. Eight years later, it has (touch wood) been doing great here, but I really didn’t help it along. I lacked the vision and the faith, and instead felt the fear.

There is security in fear. It’s calm and reliable being Eeyore. 

Now we’re going to the US, I’m exactly the opposite. And there are many reasons for that, which another post will explore. But it’s not because I feel a greater sense of security. With a start-up you can do everything right - in fact, better than right - and still have it fail.

I’m positive about it because I’m finding my security elsewhere and choosing to not be fearful. I’m not Eeyore. It’s a choice, just as Randy said, “Decide if you’re Tigger or Eeyore.”

It’s when you let go of fear that you get the vision. Tigger has vision.

Related posts:

1. Just us Talking: When should kids get to decide for themselves?