What is lacking in Singapore? Let’s start from student enterprise first

NES

Reading Bjorn’s short entry on “What is lacking in Singapore”, a few thoughts came to mine. On some level, I have answered some of the questions through my earlier article “Finding the Golden Path: Can Singapore be a Silicon Valley?. A revised version of this article will be published in a technology innovation magazine.

Coming back to the question, here are few cents worth to the issue. If I am going to summarize all my thoughts, it will be in one statement: Bootstrap the resources and build the software first. What do I mean by that? Let’s start from NUS first, and I believe that my argument can extend to the other universities if they are really ready to build successful student enterprises. Honestly, I am yearning for a challenge from the other local universities (and notice that I don’t call them by names).

The software lies in the people. People management is important. Only through that, you can harnass teams to make big leaps and vision. The important thing is that you find a good team to promote the culture you want. Ultimately, the beliefs of society is determined by herd behaviour. At least one aspect on the culture I would like to see is the following belief:

Build your own brand and not follow other brands

Before I came back to NUS, my first choice of working with a student enterprise is the NUS Entrepreneurship Society. While I spent my time in UK starting up my own company and doing my academic research, I took the time to mentor a very good team of students (the three co-leads of the 6th Start-Up@Singapore, who one of them is an editor of SG Entrepreneurs). I did not want to work with groups which have associations with famous universities and alliances. As an entrepreneur, you build things from scratch but adapt the experience and resources you have previously at your disposal.

Here is the problem of associating with some branded universities. If you keep harping on the fact that you are related to so and so famous group, the penetrating question I will ask you is “What is your organization’s unique selling point?”. Working with two branded and powerful organizations taught me something different. I have a lot of friends who ride on the brands and I don’t think that it’s a wrong thing to do. To be honest, I have to do that for my initial presence back here in Singapore because branding builds credibility. However in two years time, I told myself that this is not going to work. At the end of the day, people will give you the first recognition based on brand, but the later parts are built on your credibility, your ability and also your management and innovation. In order to make the mark, you need to separate yourself from the rest. You need to innovate. Imitation is simple, because you can ride on an existing organization’s idea. What a successful student enterprise needs to do is to innovate and do something which is not done before here.

At one point in time, branded student enterprise organizations (the ones I used to work with) started from scratch. So, something must have happened to turn them from nobody to somebody. I liked the lessons I learned from an organization from MIT which focusses on five things: consistency, big teams, branding, smooth leadership transition, and strong institution memory.

Consistency: We don’t do one big event once. NUS student enterprises have this strange idea that they make one big event and then the next year, forget about it. You innovate on existing structure and not innovate by keep re-inventing the wheel.

Big Teams: Stop thinking that a team is about you and your friends. The team is about gathering people from diverse backgrounds and having a professional and accountable organizations. You create a big company with the team you have and not the team you want to have. You only create the team you want to have, when you become successful.

Branding: It’s not putting your logos, but evangelize on the aims, vision and the how-to mantras of your organization. Branding is not a process, but a mindshare. Most people think that a brand is a logo, a tagline and some nice souvenirs that you can give to people. That’s wrong. A good organization from MIT I know tells people that they are the best in the world not by giving souvenirs, tagline and logo, they do that by having people from the leader to the last man who goes around telling people why they are great. That’s branding.

Smooth Leadership Transition: You need to make sure that the next leader follows with the vision that is set down from the predecessors.

Strong Institutional Memory: That’s important. You have to start the alumni process now, and help to set up a way where the founder of the organization can interact with the student leader of the 16th generation. The organization in MIT I talk about have their 2nd generation leaders helping them out even 14 years later. It’s the sharing of knowledge and how you avert in making the mistakes of the past.

Author’s Note: I welcome a debate if anyone is game for that. Attached is a picture on the branding efforts made by the team of dedicated students in NUS Entrepreneurship Society:

Technorati Tags: Entrepreneurship, , , ,

No related posts.


triplepoint-job-board-ad-wanted-developers-500x

Comments

  • Bjorn: Ditto. 100%.
  • i don't dispute the fact that a successful team has to go beyond your friends and immediate social circle. I am with you on that. It is very natural to hire your own friends that yuou know well and can use the familiarity and trust of an existing friendship as the bonding glue especially when you are bootstrapping or working out on a very ucertain, high risk venture that have no realisable payoffs in the short term. I did that with my first startup with a bunch of sec sch friends and I remember Nvidia CEO Huang Jen Hsun mentioning that he hired his own friends too in his ventures because they were the only ones willing to believe in his crazy ideas and work for low pay. =)I had no issues at all ensuring pple behaving professionally and separating friendship from professionalism during the course of work. Maybe i am lucky? But i believe it can be done and pple our age are mature enough to do that.

    But I do not advocate starting off finding pple you do not know but possess talents you need. I think starting with friends is preferred, because talent does not equate character & integrity (for non-friends) and talent is not necessarily non-existent for friends. Provided the assumption stands true that the right talents is available among one's friends, I would strongly prefer going with my own friends instead of someone else unfamiliar who might have bigger talents than my friends.

    THis is of course, within the context of a very early-stage startup, where iteration is the name of the game and uncertainty the only constant. I believe in this because i also believe in a highly collegial work culture that i believe can only develop naturally as an extension of one's existing social networks.

    In any case, it is natural to hire one's friends because they represent "shortcuts" for HR purposes. i would prefer working on my rev model and product rather than spend time going to networking events finding random pple i do not know but which i know are capable. EVen if a startup is founded by a group of unfamiliar pple, I am sure the second circle of hires are highly likely to come from within their own separate group of friends.

    As the startup matures, the need to hire greater talents gets more important and this is the time when founders realize they really dun have too many friends. However, with the right culture already set, you will ensure that new hires fit in and have a higher chance of being assimilated.

    My two cents.
  • BL
    Bjorn,

    My point is actually simple. If you want to build a big team, you should be trying to gather and find people who you do not know, but possess complementary set of talents.

    Let's go back to the point about "your friends and you". I am not going to dispute that in 95% of the cases, we assemble student teams based on asking our friends and people who you know in your clique. It's normal and I don't think that we can do away particularly, we live in Asia where relationship is an important trait. Initially, you may assemble a team with a group of friends, but if subsequently you need to build a big team, this approach will not work.

    This sets up two problems for yourself particularly in student enterprise: 1. your friends can make excuses and behave unprofessionally and not accountable, 2. it's hard to hire new people unless they are from your circle of friends.

    While I lament about the student teams I mentor at times not trying to hire people during our events, I would say that networking events are the best place to hire new people and of course, people who you don't know.

    The best is to assemble people from different disciplines and use their skills to complement the different aspects of the team. We are tweaking the way on how our student teams work based on our experience here in Singapore.

    It sounds counter-intuitive because you have no idea who these people are and how they behave. The worst is that you are not even sure whether they are competent or they are suitable to work with you. That's why it's a good exercise while you are students, to learn to work with unfamiliar people to get a sense of how the world is like.

    I did a startup by only meeting the other founders of my startup in UK on the day before the deadline of the competition. They were told by many people that I would be vital to their team, and I just met up with them. We felt that our interests aligned and we went on to get it started. We succeeded after going through constructive conflicts and struggles and made it work. Importantly, all of us put the organization before us.
  • Thanks for the link karma. I thought the point about big teams was contradictory. DO you mean big teams should be about u and ur friends or about amassing pple of the right, complementary set of talents?
blog comments powered by Disqus