Reinventing the Board Part III: The Agenda

This article appeared in Xconomy on January 17, 2012.

CEOs, investors, and board members frequently complain about ineffective board meetings. Steve Blank, Jeff Bussgang, Brad Feld, and Fred Wilson each have suggested board meetings could be improved by changing the format, process, or content.

Having good meetings starts by having the right people in the room (as discussed in the first installment of this series) and in having a good chair or facilitator for the discussion (as highlighted in the second). The board then can create the right agenda with a relatively simple, three-step process.

First, the chair and CEO should circulate the key questions and proposed agenda a week prior to the meeting, or even start collecting agenda items at the end of the prior board meeting. Most importantly, this helps everyone avoid wasting time creating dozens of slides that the board doesn’t value. It also allows time for reflection and input from other board members.

Read the rest of the article by clicking here >>

Reinventing the Board Part II: The Role of the Chair in Increasing Board Effectiveness

I wrote this article for Xconomy, which published it on November 15, 2011.

Technology companies’ boards of directors need better leadership. I made a case last month about reinventing the board of directors by treating the board as a team and doing annual assessments against company needs. Boards that are structurally more aligned with their company’s operations are better able to help them achieve success-or at least reduce the board’s contribution to company failure. That said, it’s hard for a CEO to do this alone. Even with a well-organized board, a lot of board meetings also are under-effective, ineffective, or worse, really stink.

Enter the effective chairperson.

The non-executive chair of the board has three responsibilities:

1. Set the board agenda for each meeting;

2. Run the board meeting; and

3. Manage board terms and help recruit new members.

Read the rest of the article by clicking here >>

And here is a brief on-line presentation highlighting the role of the chair and dynamics with the CEO.

Reinventing the Board of Directors

I’ve been thinking for a long time that all too often companies lack a way of discussing how to construct boards and how to evolve them. I recently created a presentation about reinventing the board and presented the following seven-minute, abbreviated version to the Board of Trustees of the Massachusetts Technology Leadership Council. It’s meant to start a discussion about ways to manage boards.

Please comment, critique, and add. More materials to come soon.

Entrepreneurs: the Investors’ Customer

In many businesses, it can be hard to figure out who your customer really is. On-line media businesses, for example, often are a point of confusion. They bring an audience together with advertisers who want to reach a particular demographic. Even if the subscriber pays a fee, the vast majority of the revenue usually comes from the advertisers; they are the principal customer. The audience is the “product” sold to advertisers, and entrepreneurs building these businesses change content on their site to attract and maintain an audience with different characteristics, depending on what advertisers want and what they are willing to pay.

Free and “freemium” internet software businesses further cloud the issue because what heretofore companies sold for a price (such as Quicken financial software) are now available without charge (Mint.com, for example). While the software didn’t change much, the business model did, and so did the customer from the end user to highly targeted advertisers.

So too, it is with investors and entrepreneurs. Because “customers” are usually the ones offering up the cash, the flow of money makes it appear that the investors are the customers. Entrepreneurs should cater to their needs both in seeking investment and as they grow the business. Typically these come in the form of lengthy diligence requests, indecision or even requirements as to the company’s basic operations such as location. Venture investors have so many requests for money and choices about where to invest that they seem to be the ones holding the value.

There are many businesses, however, where success comes from being highly selective about who your customers are. High-end consultancies and agencies, for example, are known by their customers. Think Hollywood agents and investment banks.

In a similar vein, entrepreneurs are the investors’ customers. Not every entrepreneur–only a few, according to industry statistics, generate most of the returns–but those few that the investors want to back. Investors’ processes need to serve these customers from how communications are handled, to an efficient and effective diligence process, to how value is created in the long run. In the end, the cash flows are supposed to reverse, with the successful entrepreneurial venture paying back many fold the cash that was provided early on. Then, the customer relationship is clear.

You see this on “hot deals” were there are multiple venture investors chasing the same company. I would suggest, however, investors should seek to be equally responsive to all companies. A quick “no, thank you,” is much better than a lack of response or lengthy indecision.

At CommonAngels, we continue to refine our processes to meet the needs of the entrepreneurs we seek to back. We have introduced our new seed program, picked up the deal pace, streamlined meeting formats, continue to improve diligence processes, and are enhancing post-investment communication with all our stakeholders.

No business is perfect, and we’re continuing to seek to improve. We welcome corrections and compliments as well as your further feedback and suggestions.

Three Ways to Blow Your Venture Round

This is a post I did a couple years ago for Xconomy, which I think is still very relevant today. I’ve lived these mistakes too many times with entrepreneurs and venture capitalists. By paying closer attention to them, I hope we can avoid them more in the future.


Nobody likes to fail. No entrepreneur or venture capitalist thinks a particular venture is going to be the one to fail. As veteran venture capitalist Bob Crowley at the Massachusetts Technology Development Corporation says, “we’ve never made a bad investment; just investments that have gone bad.” If we as investors or entrepreneurs thought the odds were stacked against us at the outset, we wouldn’t pursue new ventures.

In reality, however, they are. And, rather than just accept that the risks are high and failure happens, there are many things we can do to better the odds of success.

Only about 1 in 100 companies that pursue venture capital money get it. Probably the worst thing you can do right after the financing is then to blow this precious resource. Yet, there is tremendous pressure to scale the company for a large market quickly. Here are the top three catastrophes I have seen first hand and heard from veteran venture capitalists time and time again over the years:

  • Hiring the right CEO at the wrong time
  • Scaling the sales force prematurely; and
  • Building the product ad nauseum

Click here to read the full original post > >