Category: Everything else

Here are 3 lessons I’m hoping to internalize from “The Power of Moments” by Chip and Dan Heath.

1. EPIC – Elevate, Pride, Insight, Connection – and paying attention to transitions and milestones. Great moments trigger one of –
   • Elevation: That moment when you reached the top of a hill you were trying to climb and saw the view for the first time or when someone blew you away by their inspiration or thoughtfulness. Typically this involves surprises (e.g. an awesome customer service experience when things went bad), raised stakes or sensory appeal. (Nugget: Companies spend a disproportionate amount of time dealing with customers who give 1 and 2 out of 10 in feedback surveys. Elevating the positives – 4-6 – earns you ~9x more money and benefit than fixing the negative.)
   • Pride: That moment when you received a standing ovation or recognition for something you did.
   • Insight: When an insight crystallized and changed how you saw the world. These moments don’t come easily – they often require us to “trip” over the truth thanks to powerful experiences or questions.
   • Connection: When you felt deeply connected to everyone around you.

And, we are most likely to trigger one of elevation, pride, insight and connections during transitions, milestones and “pits” (or negative experiences). Interestingly, First Round Capital had a nice article about how Warby Parker excels in making moments matter by paying attention to every part of the employee lifecycle. That was a textbook example of putting these ideas in action.

2. Excellent mentorship = High expectations + Assurance + Direction + Support. This applies to great parenting as well. The key step in this is process is giving direction by designing levels. Designing levels that get people excited to make progress is what video games do well. Fitbit is a great example of using levels to motivate users too – 10,000 steps was an arbitrary landmark until Fitbit came along.

3, Responsiveness is the key to strong relationships. Relationships are about shared values. A group’s humor reflects these shared values – it is why inside jokes are a key part of every functioning group. The key value that strong relationships share, then, is responsiveness – i.e. that you are attuned to the other person.
For example, the simple idea to get physicians to ask patients “what matters to you as part of this treatment” revolutionized children’s healthcare in Scotland. Physicians and patients connected like never before because they’d taken the time to understand each other.
The question for us – Do we understand what matters to the people we care about? Deep questions, thus, are a great way to get to know people and can be powerful relationship building moments.

In the spirit of meaningful endings, I’ll end with a paraphrased quote from the book I’d shared a few weeks ago. It summarizes the importance of moments beautifully.

In the short term, we often choose to fix problems over creating moments. In the long term, that backfires. Moments are not a means to the end, they are the end. They are what we remember in the end.

Strategy is best understood when you take a holistic look at what is going on. It is hard to parse the complete rationale for good strategic moves in isolation. But, take a step back, zoom out and the view becomes a lot clearer. That is definitely the case when weighing moves in ride sharing these days.

News broke this week that Uber is planning on selling its South East Asia unit to rival Grab. This is similar to what they did in China with Didi. So, it seems to make sense.

But, in the spirit of stepping back, let’s take a look at the state of global ridesharing relationships.

Once you look at this, is it any surprise to hear Uber might be partnering with Grab?

Uber, Softbank, Didi, Grab are part of a web of relationships that brings together some of the biggest global ridesharing players. This is particularly important for Grab at a time when its battle with Go-Jek is intensifying in Indonesia – one of the most important South East Asian markets. Go-Jek is armed with a partnership with Waymo (Google’s autonomous car unit) thanks to its latest funding round.

Now, such battles in the ride sharing world are expensive and distracting. Why have Grab fight Uber AND Go-Jek? Especially when it is Softbank’s money at stake?

Didi is the global ride-sharing powerhouse. In an August note on cars titled “From Daimler to Didi,” I’d called out the fact that I was long Didi in the global ride-sharing game.

In the race to dominate ride sharing, Uber raised massive amounts of funding and attempted to obliterate its rivals. Didi, on the other hand, took a different approach. It first merged with its biggest rival in China, then persuaded Uber to get out of the country (in return for a 20% stake) and has since been using its war chest of funds to invest in ride sharing networks in South East Asia (Grab), the Middle East (Careem), Europe and Africa (Taxify). Didi may be creating the ultimate network of ride sharing services.

For the longest time, ride-sharing seemed to be a battle between two opposing styles personified by Travis Kalanick of Uber and Jean Liu of Didi. While Travis focused on a testosterone fueled fight, Jean Liu used her considerable deal making acumen and an almost collaborative approach to competition to sway the pendulum decisively toward Didi.

In the ride-sharing world, 2017 was as much about the self-destruction of Uber as it was abotu the rise of a dominant Didi. A newly added $9.5 Billion Dollar war chest has since been deployed to make acquisitions like 99 Taxis in Latin America, investments in bike-sharing, car-sharing and autonomous cars. Didi – without question, is the world’s foremost ride sharing superpower.

Didi has handled its rise with style and PR smarts. The firm’s PR engine has ensured all attention has been focused on Jean Liu, its popular President. Jean Liu, with her impressive deal making acumen, has also been the anti-Travis figure that ride-sharing and Didi needed. Here’s an example excerpt from a recent piece on Wired that served as both a profile about Didi’s ambitions as well as Jean Liu –

Where Uber and its US peers talk of upending established economic models, she wants Didi to be seen as a calming force. “You talk about why we’re different from Silicon Valley firms, why we don’t just talk about disruption,” she says, suggesting some tech companies are insulated from the real-world risks her drivers and passengers face. “When you order something from an e-commerce company you don’t expect to be killed or robbed, right? In this business, you do.”

“You cannot afford to be disruptive, if you haven’t thought about everything,” Liu says finally, summing up the anti-Uber philosophy that will guide her during the battles ahead. “I think the key is: be humble. And be open minded. And not to think you know everything.”

Very. Smart.

So, what lies ahead in the world of ride-sharing? I suspect the Softbank playbook would look something like –

• Uber does indeed go ahead with selling its Asia Pacific operations to Grab.
• Uber also sells its India unit to Ola to focus on North America and Europe.
• Didi, on the other hand, would have plenty on its plate with China, South America (99 Taxis) and Africa (Careem, Taxify).
• Over time, we’d see more consolidation with Didi possibly buying Grab and operating à la P&G/Unilever/Volkswagen.

As it stands right now, the main obstacle to the success of this global ridesharing happy family dream is Waymo.

Why Waymo matters – understanding the real battle. To understand why Waymo matters, we must step back further. There are two massive upcoming changes in the world of transportation –

• Internal combustion engines to electric
• Human driven to autonomous

While traditional car companies are focused on staying relevant in the era of the electric car, the end-game is likely going to be all about ensuring survival in the age of the autonomous vehicle. Here, it helps to take apart a useful speculative analysis by Ark Invest on the revenue per mile from autonomous cars. They predict the following –

• 70% of revenue goes to fleet operators (e.g. Avis, taxi companies)
• 20% of revenue goes to platform providers (e.g. Waymo, Baidu, Tesla, etc.)
• 5% to hardware manufacturers (e.g. traditional car companies)
• 5% to lead generators (e.g. Didi, Lyft, Uber, etc.)

However, these are just revenue projections. Traditional car companies and fleet owners stand to simply provide the commoditized hardware. The winner, in terms of profitability, is going to be provider of the software platform. With more autonomous test miles In California in 2017, Waymo is perfectly positioned to be that platform.

But, that’s assuming ride-sharing companies (and traditional car manufacturers) are content being “lead generators.” Everyone will want to move up the food chain.

This is also where ride-sharing companies are uniquely positioned to compete with Waymo/Google. Building the world’s best machine driven platform requires engineering prowess AND vasts amounts of data. Google may boast the engineering prowess but ride sharing companies possess treasure troves of data. While Google will get a taste of some of that via its partnership with Go-Jek and Lyft, it will be be tough to compete with a partnership that shares data across Didi, Careem, Taxify, Grab and Uber.

And that, to me, is the game Softbank is playing to win.
—
Links for additional reading

• Uber planning to sell South East Asia unit to Grab – on CNBC
• Waymo Go-Jek – on Reuters
• Didi buys 99 – on Bloomberg
• Didi raised $9.5B in 2017 – on Quartz
• From Daimler to Didi – on Medium (prior Notes by Ada)
• Didi’s global ambitions (part Jean Liu profile)- on Wired
• Autonomous car revenues per mile – on Ark Invest
• Autonomous miles in California – on The Verge

I’ve found that the best way to recharge creative muscles is to spend time doing things where others’ feedback just doesn’t matter.

We learnt recently that the onset of molars is a period that most toddler’s parents remember for a while. It is a toddler’s first experience with sustained pain over a couple of days and it is understandably hard for both the child and the parents.

During this experience, I found myself reflecting about the onset of my molars. I definitely don’t remember them. But, I’m sure that mustn’t have been easy for my parents. And, yet, I haven’t ever explicitly thanked them for my crankiness, crying fits and general annoyance (thanks mom). Neither would it have been the dominant strategy for my mom to expect me to do so.

It was then that I began to internalize one of the more fascinating lessons – and there’s no lack of competition – emerging from this parenting journey. Parenting would suck if we walked around with expectations. Parenting, like most – if not all – things we do, is a selfish act. And, having expectations is our attempt at pretending it isn’t.

Then again, this lesson isn’t really about parenting. A simple equation to understand what drives our happiness is reality over expectations. We work hard at improving the numerator by working hard on our careers and lives every day. In the race to do so, it is easy to forget that we can shape the denominator by working on our mindset.

As with all equations, it turns out that working on the denominator matters just as much.

Every role or educational program you apply to has preferences that aren’t expressed on the job requirements or course website. The most common of these kinds of preferences are demographics and stereotypes.

Demographic preferences are based on a combination of the biases and incentives of the hiring manager/team or admissions officer/team. It is typically an outcome of either a well designed diversity program or plain old bias.

We’ll address bias first. Bias is the most frustrating kind of unsaid preference. It is what women and minority groups faced for decades. It is when we say – “You may be qualified but we want someone who looks or speaks a certain way.”

Diversity programs exist today to right the wrongs of decades of the sort of bias mentioned above. Elite graduate school programs don’t magically hit their diversity numbers – they have a thoughtful plan and execute against it. From a societal point of view, I think an emphasis on diversity is a good thing as it provides a counter to privilege while also ensuring groups make better decisions (diverse groups do that). That said, in your own career journey, this can still be frustrating in the short term as you don’t generally control your demographic group.

Stereotype preferences, unlike demographic preferences, are typically rooted in bias that flows from the organization’s or team’s culture. However, this is one of those places where we must appreciate the nuance. In moderation, bias serves both sides well. Individuals who operate with values and processes that don’t work with the group are not going to have a good experience (and vice versa). But, the trouble here is that groups go too far with the bias too often. In their blind pursuit for cultural fit, they fail to appreciate the importance of cultural contribution.

The good news, if you are an applicant, is that stereotype preferences can be mitigated with good storytelling and good interview preparation if you believe you’ll be a good fit for the job/school. For example, if you are a former finance person looking to move into marketing, you would probably need to over index on your customer focus and empathy through the application process and under emphasize your analytical skills.

Now that we’ve understood both these preferences, let me go back to the reason for this post. As an applicant into companies and schools, I strongly believe in the importance of awareness of these demographic and stereotype preferences. You can get a good sense of this from speaking to folks within the team or organization. Awareness of these preferences is the foundation of a good application and preparation strategy.

I have spoken to multiple folks who get visibly get frustrated with me when I mention these upfront (and I always do). I can understand why – bias is frustrating when you are on the wrong end of it. And, I have been frustrated about these as an applicant myself. But, it is also important to recognize that the best way to work with reality is to understand it. And, we cannot understand it if we are unwilling to see it for what it is.

Besides, I hope that awareness of these biases as applicants will make us better admission officers and hiring managers when we have the privilege of being on the other side of the table.

The most common response to added scope or work I’ve heard from myself or others is – “I’ll need to stay up late to get this done.” Optimizing length, it turns, out is just one way to solve the problem and is the most limited tool we have at our disposal.

It is limited because we are capped – both in the short term and the long term. Even in the short term, there’s only 24 hours in a day, we need to get stuff done outside of work and we generally aren’t productive when we’re tired. In the long term, optimizing for length doesn’t work.

Intensity, or how much we get done in a certain period of time, on the other hand, is harder to optimize for. To understand why, let’s examine a couple of truths about intensity.

We work most intensely when we have clarity on why we we’re doing what we’re doing and what we’re looking to achieve. (focus) 
For maximum intensity work, we need to focus on one thing at a time. 
Our ability to sustain intensity is inversely proportional to length.

There are times in our lives when we may sustain long periods of high intensity work because we’re consumed by a mission. But, more often than not, the biggest challenge with intensity is that it is inversely proportional to length. We focus better when we’ve gotten sleep and time away from the problems we’re trying to solve.

The beauty about intensity is that it is a much larger multiplier on productivity than time. You can double your intensity with a bit of work – but, doubling your work day is generally not possible.

When in doubt, optimize for intensity over length.

PS: As a bonus, high levels of intensity flow from focus. Learning to work on the right things is the best productivity multiplier we have in our hands. But, solving for focus when you are still optimizing for length is a daunting jump. So, the first step is to switch tactics to focusing on intensity. Over time, we’ll inevitably move further upstream.

We learn more and better when we combine less consumption with more reflection and synthesis. But, that seems like a tall order when we’re surrounded by content and media companies or personalities wherever we go. One approach I’ve found helpful is to guide your consumption by making a commitment to creation.

Imagine you are interested in healthcare technology and aren’t finding the time or bandwidth to read and synthesize what is happening in healthcare tech. My suggestion would be to consider committing to sharing one blog post or social media share every week on a healthcare related topic.

To make that share happen, you will have to read more healthcare related content, reflect and synthesize. And, in a few weeks, you’ll begin doing this at a rate you’d never have thought possible.

There are three reasons why this will happen. First, you’ll begin forming a habit around reading and thinking about healthcare. Second, you’ll begin to distinguish between things you absolutely need to read and things you don’t. And, finally, as you learn and synthesize more, you’ll find yourself understanding more thanks to the mental models you develop. When we sense progress and insight, learning becomes fun.

The idea that you need to “stay on top of everything that going on” is a ridiculous idea made possible by the marketing efforts of media companies. You don’t. You need to stay on top of what you want or need to stay on top of. And, you can do that by committing to creating content on topics that matter.

As I sought more mindfulness in my life, I asked myself – how do I stay present and aware through the day? After a year or so of struggling with this question on a daily basis, I’ve concluded that mindfulness flows from productivity.

I define productivity = focus x intensity x time where –

• Focus is the continuous, iterative process of prioritization – or keeping the main thing the main thing.
• Intensity is the deep focus in the task at hand (similar to mindfulness)

The question I effectively asked myself in my quest for more mindfulness is – how do I maintain a high level of intensity through the day? 

And, as time passed, I came to realize that it was the wrong question. You cannot be present in the moment if you are aware you are solving for the wrong thing. And, you certainly cannot be present if you aren’t even clear what you are optimizing for.

The ability to stay mindful in the present moment flows from knowing that you are solving for what matters at that given moment.

Mindfulness follows productivity.

It has become commonly accepted that it is impossible to innovate and “think about the box” without experimentation. But, the trouble with experiments is that they don’t work if you aren’t willing to fail.

So, in a bid to unconsciously avoid failure and play safe, we talk about innovation without committing to experimentation.

And, the long-term result, funnily enough, is failure.

One approach to making failures acceptable, then, is to talk about it. Instead of focusing publicly on “wins,” talk about failures and lessons learnt. Instead of asking – “Did we win,” ask “What did we fail at lately and what did we learn?”

The more we talk about failure, the more acceptable it will become.

And, ironically, the easier it will become to avoid failure in the long run.

As human beings, we are wired to viewing others’ lives, jobs, education and possessions with rose tinted glasses. The proverbial grass always seems greener on the other side. And, we generally assume it is something about the other side that makes the grass grow better.

While that is true sometimes, there are often two other reasons. For example, things often look great from a distance. It is only when we get close do we notice the less flattering details.

Or, more likely, the grass might be greener because it is mowed, watered and fertilized better. Most things worth their while take work.