However, many startups ignore the underlying reason and value for status updates and many big companies can easily avoid status meetings with a little bit of effort.

There is a value to status meetings!? What are you nuts?

Nope! Not talking about status meetings – status updates is where it is at.

Status updates can and should be sent by email every day. By everyone. Including the CEO.

For a status update to have value, it must:

• Be explanatory as to the reasons work was done. If the reason can’t be articulated — why was it done? (“Did X so that Y feature could be turned on in the next release”)
• Be forward looking. The status update must be usable as a planning document. When will the new feature be completed (in man-hours)
• Enable bad process to be discovered. Is something impacting all 10 developers 30 minutes/day? Solving that annoyance will save 5 man-hours a week!

The status email should have:

• successes (include “in progress” work): Brag. Celebrate successes. Explicitly indicate if:
  • work is completed as far as the sender is concerned
  • work is at a good resting point/milestone. Many times a task does not need to be “completed”, because “completed” means completely done as opposed to “major roadblock removed”
  • work still needs to be done on the task.
• planned work for next work period, with best guess time estimates/completion date. Include next time available (very important for part-time people). Plan out tomorrow today.
• frustrations arose that caused time to be “wasted” – use this to help spot problems with processes. The sender is NOT asking for help, but rather is calling out process issues.
• roadblocks that help is needed to solve. The sender must provide enough detail to form an actionable question or request. All details that the sender has discovered about the roadblock must be written. Writing out the problem with all the known information:
  • anyone trying to help does not have to duplicate already done research
  • sometimes leads directly to an “obvious” next step
  • might enable someone else to immediately provide an answer with little to no additional questions.

We are lucky in that we have lots of friends at Google so when we need to do weird things (like – ahem – port my Google Voice number from my Gmail account to my Google Apps account) we are able to find someone to do the magic for us. Or when the Google Apps Migration for Microsoft Exchange tool crashes in the middle of the night on a mailbox migration that is 10 hours into its conversion, we can find our way to someone that actually works on this tool who makes some changes to the backend processor that fixes the problem. And, when this happens on another mailbox migration, we can get to them again to help us fix the problem while they debug the tool for our error case.

Now, there is a Google Enterprise Customer and Partner Site and there is plenty of Google Apps enterprise level help on the web. But that’s not the issue. At 7am, when the guy doing the migration checks in and sees a error message that says something like “Failure: While migrating Email for user=xxx@foundrygroup.com to Google user=xxx@foundrygroup.com Error:80041065? you kind of want to call 1-800-HELPMERIGHTNOWBEFOREANYONESHOWSUPATTHEOFFICE

OMG, yes. And sometimes even when you know someone on the inside “nothing can be done”. Case in point, ‘amplafi@gmail.com’ (I am the Founder of Amplafi) is unavailable because a former business partner created the account and then deleted it. Can’t get that email, “no solution”.

I am sorry, but an enterprise-level organization finds a solution to something this simple.

When given a choice, no sane business owner should rely on Google for a mission-critical app. Such a business has a serious risk exposure to Google, and minimal-to-no legal recourse. If that app is removed/deleted due to some mysterious ToS violation, or Google does an upgrade that breaks the business’ app, or just that Google suffers an outage, the business is helpless to rectify the problem.

Any number of problems could arise, including Google (or some other DMCA takedown law firm) deciding that the app violates the DMCA. Businesses need to have the escape routes to the single-supplier problem, especially a single supplier that will not take phone calls.

Do I use Google. Sure. I love gmail. But Google does not host my apps (I stay away from appengine for example), and them most definitely do not control my email domain. My email gets forwarded to gmail.

I had coffee last week with one of my ex students. 30 months ago he raised a Series A venture round from two name brand Silicon Valley VC firms. It was early in the day, but he looked tired. “I need some advice about my board. I get along great with one of the VC’s, but the other one, Bob, is making my life miserable. Nothing I do is right in his eyes.” He looked pained as he continued. “We never had any personal chemistry, and it’s gotten so bad in the last six months, our board meetings are just hell. They consist of Bob beating me up regardless of whether the results are good or bad. I can’t tell if he’s trying to get me to quit, fire me and bring on a new CEO or is just a miserable human being.”

I have some thoughts about the problem:

1. Document Bob’s behavior over the next 3 Board Meetings.
2. Document Bob’s assertions and suggestions in a neutral way IN THE OFFICIAL BoD MEETING MINUTES.
3. In following meetings, have the previous minutes available as powerpoint slides to instantly throw up on the projector.
4. Confront Bob with his agreement in previous BoD meeting about future goals. This prevents Bob from “moving the goal posts” about what is acceptable company performance.
5. When Bob offers a criticism avoid addressing the criticism, but require that Bob articulate why the issue raised is an important issue.
6. Agendize the meeting with allocated time for each discussion item. Timebox Bob’s ability to dominate the meeting. Require that any item that goes over time be deferred for further discussion until the meeting’s end.
7. Put controversial items at the end of the meeting. This avoids having the energy of the meeting be sapped by Bob’s negativity. Near the end of meetings, people want to leave and get on to their next appointment. The other directors are likely to excuse themselves leaving just Bob and the founder. This denies Bob an audience.
8. Schedule other meetings (preferably customer meetings) just after the BoD meeting so the founder has a graceful way to insist that the BoD meeting must end.
9. Privately, confront Bob about what he hopes to accomplish through his objections. If he can’t articulate a positive result if his “advice” is followed he can be diminished. Bob may have a valid issue that Bob is raising in a poor manner.
10. Reach out to Bob before the meeting and manage him privately and get him on board without the public confrontation at the actual meeting.

My hope is that this would turn a negative, destructive Board Member into a more positive contributor. Thoughts?

First Prize is an Cadillac El Dorado. Second prize is a set of steak knives. Third prize is you’re fired.

In my experience, the organizations that try to promote individual rewards and incentives destroy team cohesiveness.

For example, one company I know of was very proud of their individual reward mechanism. The problem was that:

1. “hard” work / long hours got rewarded.
2. only one person / dept. got rewarded.

So:

1. there is no incentive to spot a problem ( and proposed a solution ) before it was a crisis.
2. a winner-take-all mindset people were indifferent to trying to achieve a reward because the reward was like winning the lottery,
   1. there was little connection to effort put into reward achieved.
   2. Someone had to work harder than everyone else in a visible way
   3. work for a well-respected manager who could advocate for his person being rewarded.
   4. the reward was individual-based so heroics overcoming crisis were rewarded, not crisis prevention.

While firemen are important to put out the fires that occur, good organizations rely on the fire inspectors that look for problems before the fire starts. Once a crisis ( fire ) occurs damage is already being done.

In Founders At Work, Max Levinson talks about how Paypal survived because even before fraud was at crisis levels, Max started building systems to prevent and stop fraud. Paypal’s competitors were reporting fraud rates in the 20% range. Because of Max’s work, Paypal never had fraud levels that high. Max was not being “heroic” but his “fire inspector” work prevented a fire that consumed Paypal’s competitors.

Do you reward your fire inspectors?

1. they are paid enough to have a decent life
2. someone else is not paid much more than they are. (esp. if that other person is not as good technologically)

Human beings, are by nature, social. In fact, many of the best reward systems are structured around a non-cash reward system. For example,

1. a trip to Europe instead of a cash-equivalent
2. A speaking opportunity at a major conference.
3. Sabbaticals.
4. Cool gifts ( free iphone, high-powered flashlight).
5. Public recognition.
6. Opportunities to work on new technology.
7. Complements.

“Paying and rewarding” is NOT and should NOT be viewed in terms of dollars but rather in terms of raising social prestige. Money as a reward mechanism usually does not work for creative people ( or works poorly).

Watch Dan Pink at TED talking about motivation:

Mr. Hitzig is savvy when it comes to Web design and marketing. He has a great domain name. He utilizes social media extensively with presences on Twitter, Facebook, MySpace and LinkedIn. His content management system gives him the power to perform a number of search-engine optimization operations, and he has worked hard to get the best possible online search placements.

But when it comes to selling online — the only metric that really matters — the site thus far has failed to deliver. “We are on our third Web site, and it is definitely the best one yet,” Mr. Hitzig said. “We are actually quite pleased with it. However, our conversion rate is dismal.”

As laid out here:

But we don’t have to take his word for it. The Crazy Baker has gotten lots of television exposure — with his brownies touted by both Martha Stewart and Rachael Ray. Those mentions drove enormous traffic to the site. But even the people sent by Martha Stewart and Rachael Ray didn’t buy. “A recurring low point,” said Mr. Hitzig, “is when we get a great mention, such as on ‘The Rachael Ray Show,’ and we got a lot of hits, but only one order. We still get hits from the Ray show, but they don’t convert.” So what’s the problem?

That then ends with this plea:

And please tell us what you think: What are the site’s best and worst features? What’s missing? What’s confusing? What would be the best way to market this site? But most important, please help us answer this question: Why aren’t more people buying the products online?

What is wrong? In my opinion, everything except the technology. The marketing person in charge (and probably the web designer) should be fired.

Mr. Hitzig should look in the mirror as well.

These are the issues:

1. Product mix. The Crazy Baker is not crazy enough. With a name like Crazy Baker, I am expecting wildly unique products. Instead Crazy Baker sells Brownies. Perhaps very good brownies, but brownies that look exactly like brownies that I can make myself. Yawn.
2. Presentation. Once again with a name like “Crazy” Baker, I am not expecting a generic look. Why are you calling yourself “The Crazy Baker”?? The story should be on the front page. I am expecting something a little off the wall. Mr. Hitzig should look at woot, Trader Joes, Zappos, and BlendTec (look at the “Will it blend?” videos) for inspiration. Lose the boring typeface and get a little crazy.
3. Don’t bury the reviews. Customer reviews should not be buried. Look at Zappos’s website and notice how reviews are promoted to the front page.
4. Newsletter. The Crazy Baker asks for an email address to send a newsletter. However,
   • no offer attached to giving an email address – I suggest a 10% discount on the first order, free shipping, something.
   • How often is the newsletter being sent?
   • Are there any specials offered in the newsletter?
   • Is there any information in the newsletter? For example, baking tips or recipes? Something that would keep a person subscribed until they are ready to buy.
5. Use of Social Media
   • Twitter The days of people using twitter to announce bowel movements are over. Business are expected to use twitter to announce special deals, offer timely information, or offers. The CrazyBaker twitter offers no real content or compelling reason to follow.
   • Facebook. The facebook page is a little better because facebook is a chitchat forum. But it still feels light. There is no real compelling reason to buy anything. Nothing driving a purchase. Mr. Hitzig should consider offers to people who “like” the Crazy Baker’s facebook page.
6. Videos. Mr. Hitzig should realize that he is not selling a visual product, he is selling an olfactory and gustatory product, he needs to convert this aspect of his product to a visual presentation. Specifically, he should create web videos that shows and describes how good the product tastes and smells. These videos should be authentic (i.e. not staged):
   • how he makes his product,
   • showing random people appreciating and commenting.
   • video clips from TV mentions,
   • how to select quality ingredients (i.e. the ingredients that The Crazy Baker uses)
7. Reset expectations and ask for help. Research other food, non-competing companies selling through a web site. What conversion do they see? It could be that the conversion Mr. Hitzig is seeing is in fact quite good for his industry. He should network and ask for suggestions. Perhaps he could start with popchips
8. No Call To Action. There should be a daily special with a “Buy now” button on the home page.
9. A/B Testing! Just because you like the website doesn’t mean it is better. Try creating different websites (maybe only different in styling) and see which version results in better conversion.

However, overall I feel the problem is not with the technology but rather the marketing.

This is an example of egregious abuse of power by BurstNET against Blogetery.com. Blogetery.com hosts 70,000 wordpress blogs. Apparently, a few of those blogs had “an al-Qaeda hit list” and “bomb-making” instructions on them. So for the possible sins of a few, 69,999 innocent blogs are shutdown with no recourse.

You can read BurstNet’s lame press release here.

Any web service that allows user-generated content ( so pretty much any site that isn’t a static site) would be subject to a draconian response by BurstNET. What is especially egregious is that BurstNet is not letting Blogetery get access to any of Blogetery’s data!

Continuing, from the New York Times Bits blog,:

And Kurt Opsahl, a staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group, said the “tragedy is that thousands of blogs will be taken offline for no good reason.”

Mr. Yusupov said he had backed up some of the blogging site’s data, but not all. And he said he was trying to negotiate with BurstNet to get the data so he could restart the blogging site with another hosting service. “This has been a big hassle for me,” he said.

In the New York Times Bits blog,:

Mr. Marr of BurstNet said the Blogetery server did “not get a lot of use or traffic,” suggesting the number of active users of the free blogging site was probably a tiny fraction of the 73,000 Blogetery claimed.

So basically, Blogetery is a small business and is therefore “not important”. Important news to any small business considering using BurstNet:

BurstNET thinks small businesses are not important

Stay away, stay away! You cannot run a business where at the arbitrary whim of the hosting provider you can be shutdown, especially if the hosting provider will not supply your data so you can go elsewhere!

For similar reason, I stayed away from GoGrid (and now BurstNet).

Update ( 28 July 2010 ) :

A last interesting point from CNET about how Burst.NET feels about their customers’ data (aka don’t use Burst.Net for mission-critical purposes):

Joe Marr, chief technology officer of Burst.net, stressed again that the reason for the service termination was that the materials the FBI alleges belonged to terrorists are a violation of Burst.net’s terms of service. He noted that typically, Burst.net does not return data to customers booted for TOS violations.

Violations of the Burst.NET Terms of Service result is losing all your data!

Excuse me????
Use Rackspace