Varun Purandare

What do you do when a radical new technology puts your main product right in the crosshairs of disruption? Listen to David Okuniev — co-founder of Typeform | Ask awesomely — discuss the challenges of innovation within existing structures. David shared a game-changing insight: Radical innovation is really, really difficult to do inside your own product. He emphasized the need to break free from the constraints of familiarity and embrace change from outside the box. Henrik Werdelin and I have both seen our fair share of this in our respective careers. What struck us most was how David leveraged structure to overcome the innovator’s dilemma. By creating a culture of experimentation and providing space for bold ideas, he propelled Typeform beyond incremental improvements. What other hacks have you seen or employed to help your organization overcome the innovator’s dilemma? Share your stories below! 👇 And if you want to dive deeper into our conversation, click the link in the comments to catch the full podcast episode!

4

2 Comments

About a year ago, in September 2023, I left full-time employment to start working on Openseed VC 💜 This decision came during what is arguably the toughest --- fundraising environment for emerging managers since 2015. It was a leap of faith, driven by conviction and supported by an army of backers who, through their capital 💰, well-wishes 🤗, and goodwill, made this venture a reality. A LOT can happen in a year. As I reflect and journal co-incidentally on today, my birthday, I’m struck by how much we have achieved so much in just twelve months: In the spirit of counting my blessings, I spelt it out; - Built a compelling fund brand and strategy 📈 - Fundraised from LPs 🤝 - Structured and incorporated the fund - Received regulatory approval and incorporated - Reached the first close of the fund 🔒 - Had a strong public launch 🎉 - Built a lean team and onboarded advisors 🧑‍🤝‍🧑 - Recruited 60 operators for the operator network 👥 - Received 850 founder applications 📑 - Conducted 200 founder calls 📞 - Made two investments in Europe 🌍 & Africa 🌍 Just a year ago, Openseed VC as a fund didn't exist, and I am so excited for what's to come! We aren't just building a fund; we are creating an innovative financial institution that is the first investor in talented, experienced, and diverse operators from day zero. This is just the beginning; it's day zero for us too. ✨ If you're hesitant to take the leap to pursue something you know you were born to do. Something you realise has a high opportunity cost and high upside, yes- high risk of failure, but if not pursued you know you’ll regret it—maybe this is a sign. A year from now, a year will have passed anyway. A LOT can happen in one year. It’s also coincidentally my birthday today, so I will be celebrating on two fronts! :) Grateful, and thanks again to every single person who contributed to my journey🎊 #openseedvc #operators #founders #europe #africa #futureofcommerce #futureofwork #futureofhealth #oneyear

412

68 Comments

Great episode for early stage VC's and capital allocators to check out. https://lnkd.in/ekz7JHJd #vc #fundraising #venturecapital

11

At Kearny Jackson, founders constantly ask us what we look for in founding teams. I’m sharing the rough framework that my partner, Sriram Krishnan, outlined to assess founders as a pre-seed/seed investor. This is also how I judge whether someone is “biased for action” or “biased for thought.” I get along well with the former and not the latter, but that’s a story for another day. Level 1 - Speed of communicating Whether by text or email. Quick turnarounds, “acknowledged receipt” types of folks. Not being speedy is not necessarily a bad sign; it can also mean they’re busy or don’t care about you or your email. Usually “closes the loop” and, most importantly, tries to leave no email unresponded. Level 2 - Speed of rewriting deck or memo Founders who pitch one version of the deck and share an updated version after the pitch the same day with slides that address the questions asked during the pitch. Or founders that iterate on positioning and strategy quickly based on input and ship a new version of a deck within days. Some founders use a static deck when presenting (i.e. the same deck for weeks on end), but some are more dynamic and change/pivot/edit when new information or tactics come to light. Level 3 - Speed of talking to or onboarding design partners Founders who not only speak to 50-70 potential prospects within a short time frame but also ones who onboard X design partners very quickly. I’ve seen some founders pitch an idea in week one and sign up four design partners in week two. That’s pretty impressive regardless of what is being built and shows they can execute. Level 4 - Speed of shipping new code, new features, new products, or new pivots This is the holy grail. This is what every early-stage investor means by execution velocity. In the world of early-stage startups, the big fish don’t eat the small fish. The fast ones eat the slow ones. And how quickly you ship code represents how efficient or productive you can be in a resource-constraint environment. All investors would preferably want to see how founders execute with code, but (A) founders don’t always have product during the seed/pre-seed rounds, eg. figma designs, mock-ups, ideas, etc (B) so investors have to rely on other signals to decipher whether you can execute on 4 so levels 123 above will hopefully inform them on that.

137

9 Comments