Management Newsfeed Update

A few years ago I wrote a post on how to get a job in venture capital.  It was lucky enough to get broad distribution and remains my most viewed and linked to post.  I’ve had a number of questions about it over the years and have tried to respond to people who wrote in to ask my opinion about their VC job search.  One of the most common questions I’ve received runs something like: "I get it - finding a venture job is hard.  I still really want to try and I have a 5+ year outlook on this.  What should I do during that time to work towards my goal of landing a venture job?"

Of course the real answer depends a lot on the individual asking - where they are in their career and life, where they live, what their educational and work background is, etc.  That said, let me try to provide a few ideas.

Go to business school.  As much as it pains me to say it the fact is that it’s a lot easier to get a job in venture capital if you have a degree from a top business school (pains me not because I don’t have many VC friends who attended such schools, but because I have many that have not, and I don’t personally feel not having a degree from Harvard should be such a barrier to obtaining a venture job).  While there are a lot of reasons to go to all sorts of different business schools and while many very successful venture capitalists have either never been to b-school or didn’t attend a top 10 school - if you’re intent in attending school is to land a job in VC you are MUCH better off going to a top school.  MUCH.  I know of several firms that simply won’t even consider associate candidates that haven’t attended a very short list of top chools (Harvard, Stanford and a few others).  In fact, going to a non-top 10 business school could actually hurt your chances vs. not going at all. Not fair, I know (and I didn’t attend b-school at all, so who am I to even suggest this) but true.

Work for a start-up.  This may seem obvious, but almost no matter what your background if you’re trying to build a resume to land in VC, having start-up experience is extremely helpful (preferably from a start-up that ends up well).  As a practical matter, it’s helpful to have this experience as a VC - it will give you insight on what works and what doesn’t in the start-up world; will test whether you really like start-up environment and potentially expose you to venture finance and other areas of company formation and growth that will serve as a helpful backdrop to your venture career.  In addition, if your company has institutional investors, you will hopefully get the opportunity to spend some time with your would-be peers which may help jump-start your eventual search (make that happen - its one of the key reasons you took the job working for a start-up in the first place!).

Start a company of your own. If you can’t find a start-up you’re excited enough about to join, why not start one of your own?  Many successful venture capitalists have started their own companies.  Its a great way to gain operating experience, test out your technology ideas and, of course, meet venture capitalists.

If you’re early in your career (and/or have the inclination), work for a bank or consulting firm.  Like going to a top business school, having banking or consulting on your resume is an indicator to potential venture employers that you’re smart, aggressive, willing to work hard and well trained.  Having been a banker myself at the start of my career I’m not entirely sure these adjectives always apply, but there is clearly a bias in the world of finance towards these types of jobs as training grounds.  It will also bring you into contact with people who are likely to have networks that include venture capitalists as well as potentially up your chances of getting into a top school (see the first point above).  This is especially true if you’re thinking of later stage venture or private equity who - much more so than early stage venture - tend to look kindly on the training one gets in these jobs.

Put yourself out there. Union Square Ventures famously asks potential applicants not to send in a traditional resume, but instead to point to the applicant’s various activities around the web (their blog, articles they’ve authored, companies they are helping out with, etc).  While this may be an extreme example of a firm valuing the online presence of potential colleagues (and one that has worked very well for the firm), having a visible profile online that you can reference and point to will be helpful in many a VC job search (especially so if the firms you are seeking employment from invest in these areas, as USV does).  Your online activity can and should extend to reading and sometimes (thoughtfully) commenting on the blogs of the now vast list of VCs that write a blog.  These sorts of interactions are just one way to start to engage in a conversation with people in the industry you might one day work with.

I attended the annual dinner of the Atlantic Council of the United States on Monday night in Washington, DC. Tony Blair, former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, delivered the keynote address. His central thesis was that the world needs to move beyond alliances based on interests to an Alliance of Belief. He argued that there are certain universal values that are common to humanity and key to governance in the 21st century. Among these are freedom and justice, which must be the foundation for our way of life. Mr. Blair went on to say that these values need to be accepted as universal rather than Western, particularly by those in the Middle East. “We are in a battle of ideas,” the former Prime Minister said. “We must explain what we stand for and why, to address concerns so that we forge an alliance of conviction.” He added, “The idea that the West suppresses Muslims and Muslim culture is absurd. We must confront this myth and persuade Muslims of our acceptance of diversity.” He went on to espouse a combination of force and attraction, going beyond the minimum needs of security toward a better mutual understanding.

The next day, I heard Dr. Henry Kissinger, former US Secretary of State, describe a quite different theory of governance, one premised on balance of power. He suggested that as Asia is emerging as the new center of gravity, there is the potential for a 19th century system of interlocking alliances (think of Metternich’s Europe post Napoleon). The interests of the world “should be to prevent the emergence of an Asian bloc,” he said, by maintaining close connections between US, Europe and the three key nations of China, India and Japan. Dr. Kissinger did acknowledge a gap between the economic organization of the world which embraces globalization and the political organization which resists this logic in favor of preserving the status quo via protectionism and nationalism. He agreed that there are issues such as environment and energy that can only be solved on a global basis. But his basis approach is one of interaction of elites in business and government, establishing rules to be followed by others, a classic application of the pyramid of influence.

So here is the contrast between the new and old worlds on government or business management, between soft power and hard power, the multiple stakeholder model of Blair versus the realpolitik of Kissinger. A traditional approach to issues management for business is to create an alliance of interested parties who can bring special influence to bear on the legislative process, often times aimed at slowing regulation. I am reminded of the incredibly humorous section of “Thank You for Smoking” novel by Christopher Buckley, in which he describes a regular meeting of the alcohol, firearms and tobacco lobbyists, who describe themselves as the Merchants of Death. This was the period of the “inside game” when the right connections in Washington, often shaped by political contributions, helped business to shape the political agenda. In the new world of transparency and wisdom of crowds, companies have to be prepared to make their case to the outside world. There will need to be different sorts of alliances, with civil society and communities, with employees and passionate consumers. Without an informed debate, politicians will bow to the path of least resistance and will remove business’ license to operate at the first sign of problems. Our job as PR people must be to introduce the views of the non-traditional stakeholders, to sit at the policy-making table to shape outcomes not just communication.

If you are a regular reader of this blog you know that I love platforms in general and Facebook in particular.  And since I’ve been thinking about messaging recently (see my post yesterday on Twitter as my new instant messenger) I’ve been noticing the increasingly varied methods I use to communicate.  I’m curious if others have also experienced a trend away from old school email. In particular I’m seeing an increase in the volume of messaging on Facebook - from Jeff suggesting on my wall that I try out Twhirl (in response to a tweet about a Snitter problem I was having) to old high school buddies re-connecting through direct message. And I’m not even a heavy Facebook user.

A few months ago my partner Jason conducted a poll of online behavior of a few hundred undergraduates at his alma matter (unscientific for sure, but still extremely interesting).  Among the things discovered was that among this group about 20% were almost exclusively using Facebook as their main messaging platform.  A friend told me recently that his kids (14 and 17) laugh at him about sending email (all of their messaging is done over Facebook).  Definitely a trend to pay attention to.

I’m curious what others experiences have been.  Let me know.

I’ve been off instant messaging for years.  There was nothing about it that I found appealing or that added to my productivity. 

I realized this morning that Twitter has become my new IM. I publish what I’m doing (and as a result people know if they can reach me or not, whether to try me at my office or on my cell, etc.).  I stay in touch with my friends and colleagues by following what they are up to (and therefore know how to get in touch with them if I need to).  Through following and being followed I keep up with more people and don’t have to "check in" as much because I know what they are doing, where they are traveling and who they are spending time with.  And of course through Twitter’s direct message feature, I’ve literally replaced IM by enabling people to get in touch with me directly and quickly (and I pay way more attention to a Twitter DM than I ever did to IMs; they also show up on all of my computing devices so they are more likely to find me that IM, which seemed to route messages randomly among my various IM clients and whatever machines I had that happened to be "online" at the time).

Nicely done, Twitter.  Nicely done.

I was out at the Microsoft Mountain View campus a few weeks ago for an event hosted by their venture relations group.  I had the chance to meet Chris Liddell, MSFT’s CFO, along with 3 of their divisional CFO’s.  It was a pretty wide ranging discussion from how they are thinking about M&A to several strategic area of focus to how the divisions are working together on projects that cross divisional boundaries.

The thing that struck me the most was not the WHAT of their thinking, but the HOW.  I participated in a break-out session with Tami Reller, CFO of Platforms and Services division (which includes their search and online advertising properties).  There were about 15 of us in the group (including 4 or 5 from MSFT) and we quickly went deep on a few areas of particular interest to this division.  This is a $17.5 Bn (with a b) operating unit for MSFT. While I know that MSFT is as beurocratic as the next large software company, what really stood out to me in this conversation (and, in fact, the entire day I spent with MSFT management) was how fluid and innovative their thinking was (at least on these subjects).  They think about and talk about their business like many of our portfolio companies do - looking for market trends, leveraging existing assets and competencies and with a view to a return on their investment.  Sure - you have to tack on a handful of zeros to the numbers in their business plans, but at heart they are engaged in the kind of thinking (at least as it relates to their online properties) that is going on in conference rooms in venture firms and start-up companies all over the world.  It was a good reminder to me that even within large organizations you can think and act much more nimbly - at least if you want to.

Sometimes It’s Best to stick with what you know.

Three steps to getting the most from the team you inherit.

I spent an hour yesterday morning with Brian Tierney, former PR man, now publisher of the Philadelphia Inquirer and Philadelphia Daily News. Earlier this week, at an Edelman University class, I moderated a discussion with three senior journalists, John Fund of the Wall Street Journal (a national paper), Ellis Henican of Newsday and Robert George of the NY Post. Here are a few of the most important trends:

1) Newspapers remain “the best way to get ideas across,” according to Henican. Most bloggers are linking to stories that originate in mainstream media, he added. But Henican acknowledged that “newspapers are no longer a sufficient platform for journalists who want a voice in the public conversation.” He appears on Fox (as George does on CNN and Fund on Sunday morning public affairs TV) because “people think I am a better writer when they see me on TV battling Bill O’Reilly (a conservative anchorman on Fox) “You cannot have a career on the talent side of idea-driven media without being on multiple platforms.” Fund especially likes going on radio because “you have to listen to the content; people are more likely to retain the key facts.”

2) Newspapers see themselves as offering news analysis. Fund noted that, “In almost every story that has a headline, the facts are already known. We add the interpretation. We are no longer in the Olympian objective authority role.” Mr. George suggested that this trend was “back to the future” in that 19th century American journalism was highly opinionated. “Hearst even got America into the Spanish American War,” he noted.

3) Newspapers are finding new ways to make money on the advertising side, to fill the large hole left by the demise of classified employment ads. An example is the sponsorship of the PhillyInc column, a gossipy take on business, by Citizens Bank or the Inquirer Express back page summary of the news sponsored by Commerce Bank. In both cases, these were new editorial products.

4) Publishers are following the example of their magazine brethren in developing campaigns for advertisers. An example is an upcoming promotion for Miller Beer in which the Inquirer Media Lab did the creative work, Tierney said. Advertising revenue from auto dealers, retailers, real estate and cinema is somewhat diminished from peak levels of year 2000 but not significantly so.

5) There is still large pass-along readership so that the true numbers for the Philadelphia Inquirer and Daily News total audience is 1.2 million (about 2.5 multiple on the 370,000 Inquirer circulation and 3 multiple on the 150,000 Daily News circulation). One important statistic to remember: 52% of Americans pick up a newspaper every day, about 70% of those over age 18, even more on Sunday (Inquirer circulation is twice as large on Sunday)

6) Within 18 months, there will be printers on the market that will allow a bound personal version of a newspaper, according to Mr. Fund. “People love the idea of choice; your newspaper, with the stories you want at the length you want them.”

7) The web versions of local newspapers are seeking to create micro-communities (Tierney is particularly excited by the potential of Philly.com, which offers content from both of his papers but also consumer generated content) around music, food and health.

This emphasizes to me that media plans should be anchored by local media. My father, Dan Edelman, recognized the power of local media by creating the media tour in the early 50s, taking the show “on the road” by booking spokespeople in markets around the US. In fact, many of the local columnists are seeking stories that are national in importance but have a local angle (note my interview with Cheryl Hall of the Dallas Morning News on the Edelman Trust Barometer from earlier this week). I would appreciate your comments as always.