I

I admit to be totally biased as I am naturally a big fan of the power of reviews. However, I need to highlight this little feature in the new Qype personal page called ‘Insider Tips’. It does not show me the reviews of my friends, but it shows me places that are liked by people who like similar stuff I do. I really have no idea how they do it – too remote for that – but the results are truly amazing for me. Every time I reload this, I see places I always thought might be cool, but have not checked out yet.

Two rather philosophical thoughts come to my mind.

  • One is the one I mentioned in the headline: It is not who you know. It is what people like who behave like you also like. Amazon has done this in an amazing quality. “People who bought this also bought…” I am very proud that Qype is proving to be able to do this as well. By the way this also contradicts the tradional power of your social graph.
  • The second thought: What we thought initially when we launched Qype in 2006, that the person who shares her views gets something back, is now being executed on in a material way.

Check it out.


I spend quite some time these days coaching friends, former colleagues or fellow entrepreneurs about “what should I do next“. There are some interesting parallels in these discussions. Strikingly, the self-imposed limitations of what people feel they can do constrain people’s choices in an amazing way. And this is true for any income group. Despite the fact that single mom with a low wage job has fewer choices than the millionaire several times over.

I found over time that many people can not simply tell you what they love best. But when you ask people why they are unhappy in their job, it is rarely because they don’t love what they do, but  more often because they feel they can not do things the way they want, or because the someone as a boss who does not value them and their achievements.

In this context, stumbling upon this very inspirational blog post from Cal Newport, author of a study guide, (thanks, Dave Ambrose for the link) has structured my thinking on career achievement amazingly.

Newport quotes work from Edward Deci who found that

“To be happy, your work must fulfill three universal psychological needs: autonomy,competence, and relatedness.

  • Autonomy refers to control over how you fill your time. As Deci puts it, if you have a high degree of autonomy, then “you endorse [your] actions at the highest level of reflection.”
  • Competence refers to mastering unambiguously useful things. As the psychologist Robert White opines, in the wonderfully formal speak of the 1950s academic, humans have a “propensity to have an effect on the environment as well as to attain valued outcomes within it.”
  • Relatedness refers to a feeling of connection to others. As Deci pithily summarizes: “to love and care, and to be loved and cared for.”

So for students, Newport argues that they should find something the really like and then become excellent at it. This will nearly always enable people to find a work environment where they can achieve a great sense of autonomy, competence and relatedness. Newport:

Your love of a subject will grow with your level of competence and autonomy

This also explains why many CEOs are unhappy in their jobs. Even if they are competent, the often suffer from a lack of autonomy. And if you encounter an entrepreneur who is unhappy, you can check with him whether his level of autonomy is where it should be.



Spent – Sex, Evolution and Consumer Behaviour by Geoffrey Miller

I’ve been postponing to write about this book simply because I still am overwhelmed. Geoffrey Miller works in the field of evolutionary psychology which brings him extremely close to the currently very fashionable field of behavioural economics. And I am extremely intrigued to learn why we all actually behave the way we behave.

Particularly, I am spooked by the way I behave. On the one hand I have my ZEN inspired days. Less is more, breathe. The most important things in life are free. On the other hand, I have days where I crave things like powerful cars, the next watch, a slightly bigger living room. We all know how this works, I guess.

Miller’s book is all about behaviour, particularly about our spending behaviour. It put me at ease with myself. It explained to me why I behave the way I behave.

Geoffrey Miller manages to explain, why some people buy Hummers (without condemning them) and why others blog – all in the same book.

The book is extremely well written, funny, witty, well researched. There is no reason why you should not go and buy it now (use the link below, so I can afford more conspicious consumption). I was laughing loudly in my airplane seat when I read the story about Gérard, the Cro-Magnon and modern man from the future.

But just as an exercise, let me try and summarize from memory:

  1. Most of the objects we buy, are signals that we as hypersocial animals send about ourselves. Conspicious consumption, can be broken down into conspicious waste (Hummer SUV’s), conspicious precision (the Rolex watch) or conspicous reptuation (here comes facebook into play).
  2. There are only six defining (and mostly stable) personality traits everybody has: Intelligence (G), Openness (O), Conciencousness (C), Agreeableness (A), Stability (S) and Extraversion (E), combined and to memorize them better: GOCASE, like I can go along or wherever with that person…
  3. Evolutionary, it is very important to communicate your personality traits and relative fitness indicators to others, either the real ones or the ones you want others to believe you own. This happens not only when girls by mascara or boys go to Gyms but as least as importantly,
  4. We spend most of our time buying and displaying other fitness indicators as well. Intelligence (blogging for example, discussing books about behavioural economics), Openness (displaying our political views), Agreeableness (driving a Prius instead of a Hummer, or driving the BMW if we want to express that we are less agreeable), Concienciousness (by sticking to a hobby that requires meticulous attention to detail), Stability, or Extraversion (think about that pink hat that Girl wore at the party or facebook again). All this is mostly just signalling to others. If I buy a rifle, I could as well say: I am not dramatically open, and my agreeableness has it’s limits. Much easer to buy the rifle.
  5. Without being judgemental, Miller  then goes on and suggests that very often instead of buying all these things to say something about ourselves, we very often much rather could talk to people, which might work better (and would also dramatically improve our resource efficency in my view). His lists of things in life that really matter are a nice reminder.
  6. Getting even closer to behavioural economics, Miller gives a lot of support of a tax system that taxes consumption more than creation (work).

Only on the last pages, the nice and easy pace of the book accelerates a bit and the professor is released. Seems like he liked to squeeze just a couple of more thoughts in.

But that does not diminish the fact that when I started reading the book on Kindle*, and I tried to mark the best quotes and passages, my ‘notes’ section quickly got to more than 20% of the book. I am a big fan.

Buy at Amazon (DE):

* a purchase I made to show off my intelligence (reads), openness (to new technology) and whatever -


When I founded Qype more than four years ago, I always dreamed that this should be a Pan-European business, not just a German one. I remember vividly how hard it was, particularly in the UK, to get early traction. Since then, we have launched in a total of 8 countries.
Today, the Qype team surprised me with a visualisation of what we have achieved. Europe-in-Reviews
Particularly the South of England, the Baleares, Isle de France and coastal regions are shining as brightly with reviewed businesses as the most densely populated areas of Germany.


Tech Tour is not that well known. It is an association that hosts regular events to expose promising startups to the most important VCs in Europe. The good thing: unlike other events, it is totally free for startups and comes with no strings attached. For every event, 25 companies are invited to present.

My experience with tech tour was quite good. Qype was selected both for past events in Montreux in 2007 and in Berlin in 2008. Following those events, we got quite a few enquiries from VCs we did not know we would appeal to.

To be considered for this year’s Tech Tour Web and Mobility Summit 09 in Montreux on November 18-19, please apply here by September 20, 2009

This year, I am part of the selection committee. Quite eager to see who will be coming.


I deliberately took a while while to decide how I want to work and where to get involved. I pondered to join a VC (too far away from the business) and looked at direct investments in other people’s ideas (sometimes felt I could come up with better ones myself). I enjoyed the last couple of months with discussions with fellow entrepreneurs, venture capitalists and would be founders and now it is time for the next steps.

I said that I would only be interested in businesses which make life easier for everyone, make markets more efficient and disrupt the status quo; or help reduce emissions.

So here is the news:

We have identified several business concepts that fit the abovementioned criteria. True to what I said earlier, neither of them will involve dating or gambling. None of the concepts is a clone of something that works somewhere else, so there is considerable risk involved, but also ample opportunity.

For all businesses, we will be looking for entrepreneurs to launch and manage them. They will be able to count on input and advice, and will get enough freedom to run their businesses. And they will get reasonable shares to make them real entrepreneurs. Upspring will provide ideas, know how, infrastructure and seed funding.

So from now on, we will be scouting the market for real founders with

  • great business accumen,
  • team spirit,
  • lot’s of potential
  • at least 2, but no more than 5 years of job experience.
  • An excellent business education
  • and demonstrated entrepreneurial skills.

Locations will be Hamburg and Berlin. Do contact me via xing if you know of someone. If you want to apply, send a CV via Xing.


I have heard this so many times recently, so it is quite refreshing to read this article by some VCs: The real reasons why people do not get funding. Rarely told. (Thanks to Paul Jozefak for the link).


Cem Basman brought this interesting article from Harvard Busines School to my attention: There is a new study out that measures the success of first time entrepreneurs versus repeat entrepreneurs.

Quote:

Successful entrepreneurs in the study had a 34 percent chance of succeeding in their next venture-backed firm, compared with 23 percent for those who previously failed and 22 percent for first-timers.

This is not to say that I am about to start a new venture, but it does make me think ;-)


Whenever I work with web entrepreneurs, the discussion quickly goes onto one point:


What is it that your company does better than anybody else?

In an era with unprecedented low barriers to entry, and where competition is absolutely global, answering this question correctly and then executing on it becomes more important than ever. And it is surprising how easily we are all being drawn away from that.

Take Qype for example: Qype is successful because it only focuses on local reviews. We had to develop a local search for each market, just to make reviewing simple. Qype reviews are easy to find via Google, on your mobile phone. That is what Qype does really well. Whenever we ventured out of this area, for example with local Groups, we found that we just could not focus the same amount of energy into this.

Nearly every great company stands for one thing they do exceptionally well.

  • Doodle.ch is a fantastic example of this. It does one thing extremely well and is being used for just this: Agree on something, mostly a convenient time for a meeting.
  • Facebook is (and will be) successful in essence, because it will continuosly strive to deliver the best product to connect with your friends. Whatever form this may take. And they have the resources to do so.
  • While a BMW is a car like any other, BMW make the experience for people who like driving just better.
  • Ryanair is fantastic at lowering their costs for flights. Even to the point that they seem to only buy new planes in an economic downturn.
  • Many German Mittelstand companies simply turn out the one product and do that better than everyone else, legions of books have been written about this phenomenon.
  • You know if a company stands for something if it does one thing really well. And here I find too many startups trying to do too many things at the same time, becoming mediocre in each one.

    In the old marketing days, this was called a USP, a unique selling proposition. But today you have to live up to it. And that means focusing all your efforts on this one thing.


    Recently I am spending my reduced work hours doing two very different things.

    1. Educate myself on the current status of sustainable entrepreneurship. Meetings with people from NGOs such as Greenpeace, communities dedicated to sustainable or social projects (Utopia, betterplace.de, reset.to) but also Clean Tech funds, startup investors and green entrepreneurs.

    I have given myself some time to see where the biggest lever is for me.

    2. At the same time, I am being approached by quite a few, mostly German, startup CEOs and founders for business advice, and sometimes funding. While I struggle to make coaching a viable business model, and this takes up too much time, the feedback I get for this has been actually extremely rewarding.

    It is amazing how efficient a two hour coaching seems to be when you have just gone through the same questions yourself and often have done the same mistakes just a couple of months before:
    - what is the core of the business?
    - what do you do better than anybody else?
    - who are your customers?
    - how do you acclerate revenue
    - structure of the team
    - where to look for funding
    - what do investors expect?

    While I will be continuing to distill the most effective form of engagement for me with some of these companies,
    I will try and distribute some of my experience via this blog.