
Kawasaki on Why Your Startup is Dead if You Can’t Enchant - ValentineC
http://firstround.com/article/Kawasaki-on-Why-Your-Startup-is-Dead-if-You-Cant-Enchant
======
moron4hire
Your startup is more likely dead because you're comparing yourself to
Facebook, not because it's not enchanting. There are a gazillion and a half
CMS operations out there, and they all seem to make enough money to keep
going. CMS is not enchanting. Not even Medium. If you want to be successful,
look to be sustainable, not play the business lottery like Twitter and
SnapChat.

And the rest of the advise in here is just pat. People will be more likely to
buy from you if they like you? You don't say! You should anticipate problems
ahead of time? Well I'll be!

Why is your business failing? It's probably because you don't understand your
customers. It's probably because you never talked to them in the first place.
Here is an exercise that actually works: go outside. Go to the nearest local
business you can find. Talk to a person who works there, bonus if it's the
owner. Browse the store. Introduce yourself. Make up a story about being new
to the neighborhood and needing a shower head or something if you have to. Get
them talking about themselves. Ask them how long they have been there.
_Establish a repoir_. Pay attention. People will tell you the problems they
have. They are always looking for a solution. Just listen, and you will
discover it. No, you can't do it from your desk. Get on your feet and go
outside. In half an hour of talking to a real, potential customer, you'll have
more good business ideas than from 6 months of sitting around with your
partners brainstorming ideas.

Then do it again. Make this your Saturday morning habit. Go to every coffee
shop or dog grooming business or what have you in your area and talk to anyone
you can. Be "that" guy who talks to strangers in public places. It works.

I'll even save you a little time and tell you what people don't want: They
don't want computers. Whatever they like doing, it's most likely not anything
called "computing" and they just want more time to do that thing but find
themselves too often distracted by "computing" to do it.

~~~
ivanplenty
Agree on whole comment and about the need to connect with customers, but there
is a subtlety with this line I would ask you caveat:

> Whatever they like doing, it's most likely not anything called "computing"
> and they just want more time to do that thing but find themselves too often
> distracted by "computing" to do it.

You're right, but unfortunately there are a lot of instances where the data
_initially_ shows otherwise. One naive way of looking at Google glass, for
example, is that the early adopters did want wearable computing... and from
that conclusion other electronics manufactures should make more types of
wearables: watches, pedometers, shoes, etc. Surprise, surprise... many of the
wearables have failed (looking at you Samsung) despite based heavily on the
initial market research because they didn't actually do anything useful.

~~~
RyanZAG
Isn't that just failing to listen to the customers you talked to? As in, they
got half of it right - they talked to customers. They just didn't get the
listening part right.

In the case of wearable computing, customers didn't say they wanted to wear
their phone on their arm or strap a phone to their heads. They wanted hands
free, no fuss, error free access to information. Same market as stuff like
Siri or Kinect. The problem is simply the implementation. Trying to tap on the
little watch screen is god awful. Trying to get Siri to understand what you
want as soon as you try to ask for something useful is almost impossible. The
implementation falls down hard - hard enough to be unusable.

Same thing for mobile browsers. I remember really wanting a pocket version of
internet explorer because of how useful it would be. Actually using it on the
old Windows Mobile devices was basically impossible though because the
implementation was terrible and unusable. Today however, I use my mobile
phone's browser all the time because the implementation is good. There was
nothing wrong with what I was asking for - quick pocket access to the web -
but there was a lot wrong in what Microsoft thought I wanted - a handicapped
version of their web browser that didn't work.

Talking is not listening or understanding. Wearable computing will definitely
be a major hit once someone works out a good implementation.

~~~
ivanplenty
I would upvote you, but alas new to posting here.

Yeah, agree that listening was the culprit. I guess what I'm saying is that
many of the young people hear "I want a mobile version of my browser" and go
off to build the windows CE version based on your literal desires. The fix to
that doomed behavior isn't better listening, per se, because that connotes if
you hear every word you understand what the customer really wants.

Most great products address an _unarticulated_ need. In many ways, these
unarticulated needs are NP Complete: They are hard to find solutions in
polynomial time but are extremely easy to verify.

------
gatsby
Not directly related to this particular article, but these First Round Review
posts are fantastic. No affiliation with First Round here, but I highly
recommend subscribing to their newsletters if you're at a tech company.
Whether you're a junior engineer or a senior business exec, there's something
for everyone:

From board meetings ([http://firstround.com/article/The-Secret-to-Making-
Board-Mee...](http://firstround.com/article/The-Secret-to-Making-Board-
Meetings-Suck-Less))

...to equity grants ([http://firstround.com/article/The-Right-Way-to-Grant-
Equity-...](http://firstround.com/article/The-Right-Way-to-Grant-Equity-to-
Your-Employees))

...to product thoughts ([http://firstround.com/article/42-Rules-to-Lead-by-
from-the-M...](http://firstround.com/article/42-Rules-to-Lead-by-from-the-Man-
Who-Defined-Googles-Product-Strategy))

They're really nailing it.

------
jmduke
I was kinda iffy going into this article: I like Guy Kawasaki's stuff a lot,
but it can tend to be a bit on the fluffy side, and "enchant" is one of those
words that sends shivers down my back. Still, the actual meat and bones of his
definition of 'enchanting' is solid and goes into a level of granularity
significantly more actionable than "figure out a way to get your users to
spend ridiculous amounts of time on your app, just like Twitter and Facebook
did."

~~~
interstitial
I think we've moved into the post-enchantment era, where non-enchanting, ping-
anxiety is king. People are addicted to the social feedback.

~~~
AsymetricCom
Those are not the kind of customers you want, long term.

~~~
jbigelow76
You only need them long enough milk a few billion dollars out of some other
sucker.

------
soneca
I found it interesting that I agree a lot with the title and disagree a lot
with all the rest of the article.

First: "There are studies funded to measure hand firmness and eye contact
because they're indicators of authenticity and enthusiasm."

Really?? I understand the importance for the CEO to be likable, even if he is
an asshole. Steve Jobs had that precisely because of his authenticity and
enthusiasm. But why make such an effort on faking it if you can _be_ it?? What
a sad life to fake evey handshake. Authenticity must need a bit of practice,
because we are kind of trained to "lie to please". But with some diligence,
one can start to be a little more self-confident and authentic, caring less
about others might think (see that this the exact opposite of faking
handshakes?). And enthusiasm should be natural too. If you are not
enthusiastic with the product you are creating, you shouldn't be creating it.
Or at least you should expect and accept that it will no "enchant" anyone and
work hard to be just profitable.

If I understood it correctly, the first part of the text tell to "dress to
match your audience" and practice your handshakes in order to be more
authentic. In other words, go through a great length of faking to be
authentic. That was just a weird advice.

I will try to enchant, be authentic and enthusiastic by rejecting every advice
Kawasaki gave here. I think it is the logical thing to do.

~~~
goldenkey
I agree. I'd say the real lesson to learn here is to be _observant_ of your
handshakes and other social acclimates. All of those things will appear
confident if you practice awareness and true fulfillment and backing of what
you are doing. Deception and deceit, ulterior motives, are what _kill_
genuineness. So put your mind in the positive zone when meeting potential
partners. They may want to take you for a ride but probably less so if they
like you. And thus, perception without deflection, is a true rule of executive
sportsmanship.

------
asibehar
As head of SW Engineering for that video company offering the rev split, I
just wanted to point out that the Eepybird video linked earlier in the article
(Diet Coke and Mentos fountain), actually launched exclusively on Revver and
financial reward was one of the big motivations for their decision to release
it on Revver instead of Youtube. In fact, they filed numerous DMCA takedowns
for all the unauthorized uploads to Youtube. There are numerous other examples
of the same occurring with other creators.

While I do agree that financial motivations are usually less compelling than
social and ego-driven motivators, there are times in an industry's evolution
where they do matter, especially in trying to establish a new professional
class. Would Lyft, Sidecar, and UberX drivers exist for fame and glory alone?

Revver was about a lot more than the just the rev-split - we were building an
open network that rewarded video creators for their efforts and sought to let
them to make a living performing the craft they loved.

------
mathattack
I liked his practical comments on how to manage upwards. Execute for your
boss, do quicker prototypes, and give bad news fast.

~~~
interstitial
Yes, you don't often find articles directed at underlings on HN. That's old
school Napoleon Hill.

~~~
mathattack
Some of the best client service advice I was given was along this vein. "If
you want the client to trust you, do everything they give you a little better
and a little faster than they expect. They will trust you with more work, and
eventually will trust your advice."

------
pshin45
If you liked this article, you should also check out his hour-long talk at
Stanford (March 2011) which touches on many of the same topics while going
into a bit more depth:

[http://ecorner.stanford.edu/authorMaterialInfo.html?mid=2669](http://ecorner.stanford.edu/authorMaterialInfo.html?mid=2669)

------
vertr07
People still listen to Kawasaki after he became a human spam-bot on every
social media outlet?

------
AndrewKemendo
Much of this is great advice and I really like the idea of the pre-mortem.

The only issue I have with this article is the point about not going to the C
suite. I think that can be true of many services, especially ones that are
free or low cost so that the users are actually building the momentum and can
adopt the product at their level.

Where it falls short is when you need a strategic partner or if you are
looking for a big enterprise sale. The middle and lower levels provide the
execs with the validation and market fit but don't have the authority to make
those kinds of purchases, so you are largely wasting your time if the
executives are not in the room.

------
ojbyrne
Kind of interesting, considering that PageMaker got killed by QuarkXPress, and
Aldus is no longer with us.

