Jeff Bezos recently published his latest Amazon shareholder letter, which discusses an interesting management tactic called Pay to Quit.

Pay to Quit is a program that offers associates at Amazon Fulfillment Centers a $2k (and up to $5k) cash bonus to quit their jobs with the goal to…

After reading Tony’s culture book I’ve loved the idea of paying people to quit.


It has now been 150 days since Fab completed its 2013 restructuring which saw us cut our operating expenses by two-thirds and go from more than 750 employees to around 300 today.

Since then, armed with tens of millions of dollars, a great brand, loyal customers, a passion for design, an…


Buzz Aldrin:

The former astronaut shares his views on the importance of innovation, collaboration, and leadership to the success of any project.

Read More >

#honest #truth from the #spacedude (Buzz Aldrin was a childhood hero of mine. And he still is.)

A short debate on project vs. product management.

The other day I had a very good debate with a friend on the differences between project management and product management.

It was really educational for us both. It has helped me to evolve my perspective on the value and application of project and product management.

The 5 key attributes of our debate are:

  1. Product management is focused on the project while project management is focused on the timeline. Winner: Product Management.

  2. Product management is concerned about the what and the why, while project management is worried about the when and by whom. Winner: Product Managment.

  3. Product management thinks about how the product is perceived by the customer while project management is concerned about how a project looks to management. Winner: Product Management

  4. Product management helps to refine a product though the effective use of evolution and revolution of ideas, while project management helps to set expectations and to put something in the customers hands. winner: tie.

  5. Product management tends to get sidetracked on the “what if…" while project management limits time, keeps things within budgets and restricts scope creep. winner: project management.

When the dust settled, it came down to the core fact that for a company, team or individual to be successful, it is more important to have good product management than it is to have good project management.

Overall, I’ve recommitted to the fact we need more effective product management no matter how small or large the organization is. Product management is simply more concerned about the customer than is project management.

For me that’s what the whole debate was really about; customer value.

What’s your opinion?


"Who wants to captain the boat? Anyone?"

It was the best of times. The organization was enjoying historic success. Revenue was abundant. Expenses were paltry. Employee morale was incredibly high. Shareholders were absolutely bullish about the future. What this organization desperately needed was … a strong leader to come in and take over.

Forget what you just read - it’s complete fantasy. Successful teams don’t need new leadership like failing teams. Mind you, if there was ever an opening for a new leader on a successful team, plenty of leaders would be interested in that role. After all, a smooth-sailing ship is pretty easy to captain through tranquil waters.

It’s the rough seas that call for the most skilled captains. The kind of seas that scare even the most seasoned of sailors. The kind of seas that cause you to think of when to head for the lifeboats and grab a life vest. The kind of seas that make you think of what was the last thing you said to your loved ones before you set sail. No one wants the helm in those situations … and yet, those are the situations that call for a strong person at the helm.

We have this beautiful, but inaccurate assumption that leaders are carefully bred and trained to assume the role of savior in these situations, but often the people that find themselves taking the lead are the people who, for some inexpiable reason, didn’t flee in fear when faced with overwhelming danger.

Bad times call for good leaders. Bad times call for brave people. Who is the best leader for these situations? Most often, the person who’s crazy enough to take the helm when everyone else has headed for the lifeboats.

Who’s crazy enough to lead in bad times?

The Entrepreneurial Paradox

By definition entrepreneurs undertake to build whatever they are building at considerable risk to themselves. They do what humans are not naturally evolved to do, which is break free from the pack to try something different—something that might not work and may leave them exposed and on the edge, away from the apparent safety and security of the pack.

Mostly entrepreneurs take these risks not because they have to put food on the table, but because they are driven to and because they sense opportunity. When you break away from the pack a lot of your support mechanisms fall away. There is no hiding, no camouflage, there is only truth.

The truth scares people, but it turns out that the truth is at the heart of every opportunity that is realised. Once you’ve gone deep enough to really understand the problems you are trying to solve and once you have found a way to ask and answer the right questions with honesty you are that much closer to realising the potential of the opportunity before you.

I was working with a group of clients recently and we came to some hard conclusions together about the direction their startup was headed and the story they were telling. To their enormous credit they immediately embraced the pivot, understanding that their business would be stronger for it in the long run.

The paradox of course is that it’s even harder to be honest with yourself when you are out there on the edge, exposed and vulnerable, but going to where the pack fears going is where the opportunity lies.

- a fantastic definition of a startup and the paradox of the startup mindset shared from the story of telling.


make this right Facebook. you were once just like FiftyThree



FiftyThree’s story began with Paper. What began with three guys building an app out of a New York City apartment has gone on to become one of the most celebrated applications on iOS, defining mobile creativity and winning Apple’s 2012 iPad App of the Year. Paper embodied our belief that technology should support the human need to create. It’s a beautifully simple app that lets anyone capture their ideas and share them over the web. For millions of creators around the world, Paper is where they call home for their ideas—100 million, in fact, over the last two years. Paper has come to represent endless creative potential, and we couldn’t have asked for a better beginning to our story.

Stories have twists.

So it came as a surprise when we learned on January 30th with everyone else that Facebook was announcing an app with the same name—Paper. Not only were we confused but so were our customers (twitter) and press (1,2,3,4). Was this the same Paper? Nope. Had FiftyThree been acquired? Definitely not. Then, what’s going on?

We reached out to Facebook about the confusion their app was creating, and they apologized for not contacting us sooner. But an earnest apology should come with a remedy.

Stories reveal character.

There’s a simple fix here. We think Facebook can apply the same degree of thought they put into the app into building a brand name of their own. An app about stories shouldn’t start with someone else’s story. Facebook should stop using our brand name.

On a personal level we have many ties to Facebook. Many friends, former students and colleagues are doing good work at Facebook. One of Facebook’s board members is an investor in FiftyThree. We’re a Facebook developer, and Paper supports sharing to Facebook where close to 500,000 original pages have been shared. Connections run deep.

What will Facebook’s story be? Will they be the corporate giant who bullies their developers? Or be agile, recognize a mistake, and fix it? Is it “Move fast and break things” or “Move fast and make things”?

We’re all storytellers. And we show care for each other by caring for our stories. Thanks for supporting us.

Georg Petschnigg
Co-Founder and CEO

What a great response to a bully move.




love this

via (@cdixon)

Really great quote (for the part of my personality that I let indulge in snark).

I think of Machine Learning in a similar light. Many machine learning tactics are 1970s statistics dressed up in code. There is one novel improvement in ML: what was previously manual inputs into an algorithm like linear regression are now fed back into itself in a recursive way in the ML era. But all the math that powers most of ML fits the simple expression: “Everything old is new again.”

Ha. There’s a similar formulation in there for “growth hacker” for anyone who’s ever, you know, marketed a product.



People in the US blame immigrants all the time for stealing jobs. In Georgia, they started cracking down on farmers who hired illegal immigrants to pick blueberries — and the farmers ended up losing 75% of their production. It turns out no one else felt like doing manual labor out in brutal heat…





Does money make you mean? In a talk at TEDxMarin, social psychologist Paul Piff shares his research into how people behave when they feel wealthy. (Hint: badly.)

To learn more, watch the whole talk here»

Hazards of being wealthy?

This is supported by other research, also from Berkeley:


(via futuramb)