#2: You can’t half-ride a bike.

---

Throughout Jan I will be posting installments of the "12 entrepreneurial lessons I learnt from 2009" series

So far: Introduction , Lesson #1

---

While it may be official that you’ll never forget how to ride a bike, the chances are good you'll forget the mindset which allowed you to learn to ride it in the first place.

On a bike, there are two points of safety. Just two.
The first involves having both feet on the ground, your hands on the handlebars and a stationary bike. The second is ... well, riding the bike. As any kid knows, you can’t half-ride a bike. You can’t keep one foot skirting the ground just-in-case (you’re going to need both feet to pedal), you can’t very well run along the road Fred Flintstone style, and as for riding a bike very, very, slowly … well, you just try that.
No? Well trust me, it doesn’t work either.

It’s a momentum issue.
When you’re 7 or 8 you get this, there’s no middle ground. You have to commit to the act of riding the bike and accept that you may fall, or bail on the activity completely. Thankfully most 8 year olds think they’re Evel Knievel and don’t know the meaning of ‘caution’... Sadly, most Entrepreneurs aren’t 8 years old.

This time last year I was splitting my energy between freelancing as a marketing consultant, a PT sales role, speaking at business events and careers fairs, acting as a course-mentor to three entrepreneurs and participating in a couple of Enterprise UK focus groups, amongst other ephemeral opportunities (!) We’d just returned from The Earth Awards in New York and James was entering the final 6 months of a full time Masters Degree with curricular split between two Universities..

We clearly hadn’t fully committed to our business. Despite believing I was giving it my all, Red Button Design was at best a side project for the first few months of 2009. Yet, we hadn’t bailed on it either and at the time I truly thought I was making progress. As it turns out, I was standing over a stationary bike making ‘vrooom’ noises.

If you’re working to start a scalable business, you’re attempting to do something extraordinary. You’re doing something new, something better, more efficient or more attractive. How many of us, if we're honest with ourselves, can say we'll be better than established competitors in our spare time?

Of course, there are excuses. Damn good excuses for the most part. I'm not even going to start on the things I either haven't had, or have had to do, since I shunned paid employment to work full time on Red Button Design. It shouldn't be possible to survive indefinitely without a wage, yet making the impossible, possible, is only the first in the set of daredevil skills an entrepreneur needs. No matter how much effort and focus you devote to your enterprise, you're still putting yourself at risk of bumps, scrapes and that word that scares us Brits so deeply, 'failure'. I don't know how many times you skinned your knees learning to cycle.. I recall a fair few topples myself, but just take a quick look at your knees today, to see that the scars of failure heal.

So take a step back and if it's clear you haven't already decided, decide today. Commit or Bail?
...and if you're not going to give up that easily, then take a deep breath and pedal as fast as you can because it's my second lesson for 2010:

Commit or Bail. You can’t half ride a bike.

#1: A favour given isn’t necessarily a favour owed.

---

Throughout Jan I will be posting installments of the "12 entrepreneurial lessons I learnt from 2009" series I introduced last Friday

---

Let’s picture a reality in which you wrote a lovely blog piece about me.
Yeah, I know.. but imagine you had found a few kind words to say and strung them together into some elegant and witty prose; perhaps you linked to my blog, my twitter, the company site, even my Amazon wishlist* all entirely unprompted and of your own volition. That’d be nice of you, wouldn’t it?
And let’s say I even got a few customers from your efforts. That’d be really nice.

Now imagine you get in touch with me a few months later, you know how successful your post has been in driving me valuable traffic and you suspect you’ve helped increase my sales. You approach me at an event and ask me to endorse your new product on my, now pretty well eyeballed, site because.. y’know, you wrote that post a while back and it’d be kind of me to return the favour. You heavily imply that I owe you and speak as if my agreement is a given. As it happens however, as nice as you might be and as kind as you may have been, I don’t rate your product at all. Worse than that, I've actually only ever had negative experiences of it.

You’ve put me in a pretty tough position, torn between feeling indebted to return the gesture and my own integrity.

Will your previous kind actions weigh it into the balance of my decision? Of course! I’m nice like that. Do I consider a tacit agreement to have been made? No I do not. If you’re doing me a favour with the underlying motive of receiving something in return, you need to be upfront about it. State your proposition! If what you can offer is beneficial to me, and if what you want in return is agreeable to me, I’ll most likely agree to the trade. If what you want in return isn’t something I am comfortable to give then I’m not going to be swayed by a series of kind gestures impressing a sense of obligation onto my shoulders. That sounds... well, a little like bribery to me.

This lesson, of course, goes both ways. If you simply can't give me what I am asking for, no amount of me being lovely to you will, or should, persuade you to make that compromise for me.

More than once last year did I find myself going uncomfortably out of my way to help someone, motivated simply by a feeling of obligation to ‘hold up my end of the bargain’ when no such bargain has been made. Hence the first lesson I’ll be carrying into 2010:

A favour given isn’t necessarily a favour owed.


* Lesson #1b, it never hurts to try ;-)

No Regrets, Only Lessons From Another Year at the Fair

"New Years Resolutions" ..I've not checked, but I wouldn't be surprised if a week into 2010 this is still trending on Twitter. Come Jan 1st most of us make them, break them, then forget them. Starting with the infamous groan on New Year's Day "I'm never drinking again!" and rapidly cycling through a series of health & well being promises, visions of prolificacy, of rediscovering your work ethic, keeping better control of your finances and acquiring new skills.. every year the same core aims make our lists.

I duly made mine last year, 10 in total, which took pride of place pinned to my office wall all year. I managed to succeed at an impressive 5 of them, very nearly achieved a further 2, and made epic failures of the remaining three, (and no, I shall not tell you what they were!)

But between you, me, and the little thing they call t'interweb: 2009 was nothing short of an utterly rampageous year for me.

People seem to like to describe the lives of young entrepreneurs and their nascent businesses as if we were on a roller-coaster, and I get that, really I do! The highs, the lows, the thrills and anxieties undeniably come to permeate every aspect of your life. Yet last year, if proof was even required, served to deftly illustrate quite how over simplified this analogy is. There's not only a roller coaster in the entrepreneurial fairground, there’s the spiraling helter-skelter, a haunted house, a shooting gallery (always rigged) and a candy stand where we can prove, yet again, that entrepreneurs have 'eyes bigger than our stomachs'.. and don't even get me started on the caged-in cycle of the carousel, or the dodge ‘ems with at least one driver who thinks he’s in a bumper-car.. It's all at once exhausting and dazzling.

Through 2009 I struggled at times between being so goal orientated I became inflexible and unresponsive, and so open minded and eager to learn that I was led astray by every bandwagon and exciting new idea. A lot is made of the 'art' to keeping resolutions, very little do we consider the art of allowing ourselves not to achieve our set goals if the goals are no longer appropriate. There are so many things from 2009 I might respond to differently should they recur in 2010, certainly too many to list and keep on my wall. So I have only one resolution for 2010:
'Carry no regrets, only lessons'.

And in a series beginning next week I will blog 'The 12 entrepreneurial lessons I learnt from 2009'.

WARNING! Disconnection Will Cause Adverse Side Effects..

Happy New Year, I’m sure many of you have amongst your resolutions a commitment to learn something new? Well let’s start January off with a little bit of science*.

Here’s a little psychological experiment but do remember, kids, don’t try this at home!

Our participant for this particular experiment is called Amanda, like me. And, oddly, in almost every way imaginable, Amanda is like me.

Amanda has just moved into a new flat. She likes it a great deal but it’s not yet hooked up with a landline or broadband and all her neighbours have sensibly passworded their connections with unguessable passwords. That’s ok, however, because we have provided her with a Blackberry and a Dongle for her Mac.

For 6 days we leave Amanda alone to settle in and simply observe her routine. On the 7th day, at 9pm, we inexplicably stop the Blackberry’s data package, bar outgoing calls & texts, and disable the dongle.

What happens next?

A) Our participant fusses, half heartedly, for a few minutes with the devices before breathing a sign of relief, running herself a bath and getting an early night.

B) Our participant systematically troubleshoots the Blackberry, Dongle and the Mac to no avail before giving up and settling on the sofa with a book and some wine, breaking periodically to check and re-check all devices.

C) Our participant displays mild signs of distress and spends an entire hour shutting down all devices, trying to restart them in different combinations, checking and double checking all phone lines and connections as well as trying to call the relevant customer care lines only to remember the phone is non-functional before finally resorting to working on her flagged email list offline, queuing the completed emails to send, presumably from her regular Starbucks the next day.

D) Our participant displays signs of severe anxiety, continually checking all three devices, repeatedly turning them on and off again and futilely attempting to channel Angelina Jolie’s character from Hackers and connect to local protected networks. Resorting to distraction techniques fails as she attempts to stream The Big Bang Theory on 4OD, search for podcasts on iTunes and discover new music on Spotify. Disoriented, she wanders from room to room with the dongle and the Blackberry seeking a connection, apparently unable to set the devices aside and work offline productively. Finally she attempts to look for local 24 hour internet café’s, or a pub with wifi, by using Google before realising her mistake and lapsing into a catatonic state.

Answers on a postcard ;-)

All in all, the experience was a little too like the time my business partner attempted to discover if my caffeine addiction was psychological or physiological by switching everything I had to decaf without me knowing. When, by mid afternoon, I excused myself to head home ill citing my symptoms as migraine, nausea, mental fugue, inability to concentrate and unbearable lethargy, then he sought pity on me and confessed. A couple of medicinal venti, extra-shot, skinny cappuccinos later (his shout, obviously) and we were able to definitively conclude that the experiment did not need repeating. I didn’t quite get it legislated in the shareholders agreement but be warned, it doesn’t say “caffeine addict” on my business card for no reason and, after yesterday, “net addict” may be appearing beside it with the next print run..

Is there a moral to this rambling story? Perhaps a final thought about the increasing over-dependence of society on online and digital communication? Or perhaps an argument towards internet access as a human right?

I don't know, or care, I don't have time to think about that now I have the internet back in all its glory!


* If you really do fancy learning some creative-entrepreneur friendly science go check out the fabulous boys and girls of Prism Magazine

Thank-you & Happy Holidays

In the course of this year I have been deeply fortunate to have had the opportunity to meet a huge number of amazing and inspiring individuals from all over the world: entrepreneurs, business people, world leaders, designers, humanitarians, activists, scientists, engineers, free-thinkers, change-makers ... overwhelmingly smart, determined & formidable souls who rendered almost insignificant, the naysayers, bullies and worse.

So to everyone who inspired me in 2009; those who listened, shared their advice and their experience, to any who encouraged and all who spent their time, I'd like to let you to know that I'll be thanking each of you quietly by making every effort to spend 2010 mindful of whatever lesson you had to share.

Thank-you for your support. We, truly, couldn't do without you.

“Friends are helpful not only because they will listen to us, but because they will laugh at us. Through them we learn a little objectivity, a little modesty, a little courtesy; We learn the rules of life and become better players of the game”
- Will Durant

Happy Holidays everyone. x

Red Button Design appoints new non-executive director

Internationally award-winning social enterprise Red Button Design announced on Nov 27th 2009, the appointment of Peter Corke, MD of the marketing agency Willoughby Stewart and founder of The Ketchup Group, as its Non-Executive Board Director.

Pete has 10 years' industry experience covering a broad range of disciplines including new product development, sourcing, production and logistics management, marketing strategies, branding and design. His clients include large multinationals such as Costa Coffee and Fairline Boats, as well as start-ups and SMEs.

Announcing the appointment, Amanda Jones, Red Button Design's Chief Executive said:

"I'm thrilled to announce that Pete will be joining the board of RBD. He brings a vast amount of relevant experience into the company along with the capacity to both challenge and support the business while providing a great deal of enthusiasm on the way. We consider ourselves extremely fortunate to have found an individual who not only has the breadth of skills we were looking for but whose ethics and ideals match those upon which RBD was founded."

Pete added:

“I thrive on working relationships with companies and individuals with industry leading propositions, but the day Red Button Design walked through our door I instinctively knew it would be the start of something quite extraordinary! To be an integral part of Jamesʼ and Amandaʼs relentless pursuit of finding innovative solutions for humanitarian markets is an honour and one of my most exciting challenges to date.”

In his new role of Non-Executive Director Pete will actively participate in the work of Red Button Design, leveraging the diverse talents of the component companies within The Ketchup Group to make a creative contribution towards the launch of Red Button Designʼs flagship product and bringing an independent view to the table.

For additional information please view the full release

Why Making The Poor Pay, Pays Off

(a.k.a. The blog in which I purport to argue that the poorest and most vulnerable people on the planet should be charged for life-saving products and services)

This blog was originally written and posted on the UnLtdWord Blog as part of the 'SHOUT OUT for Social Enterprise' series.

---

For almost 9 centuries we have, in the UK, nurtured the idea of charity as an honourable activity that will win you respect from your neighbours, help you sleep soundly at night, enhance your CV and earn you kudos with the guy (/ girl / folks) upstairs. As a formalised notion it is viewed as a self sacrificing gift from the better off to those less fortunate, bearing the cost of providing otherwise unobtainable goods or services.

But, like any gift, donations are dangerous when they become expected and often not what was really wanted in the first place. For too long our love of charity has blinded us to the emerging realisation that the current donor/gift model is often no more appropriate a method to effect sustainable change in developing countries than relying on the novelty jumper, two sizes too small, sent by your great aunt at Christmas would be a wise provision for your long-term clothing needs. The jumper may be hideous (though she means well, of course) but since you politely say thank you and drag it out to wear it once a year when you see her, she never finds out how much you loathe it. Seemingly satisfied, she’s going to send you another next year..

So, for all the smiling images of African children receiving our gifts of aid I want you to hold in mind this alternative reality, because when the cameras go away and the charities have enough footage to satisfy their donor community, that novelty jumper goes straight to the back of the wardrobe.

Don’t take my rich, western, word for it either, take the following quote from one of my favourite articles on the matter:

“When free American maize turned up in Kenyan schools in 1984, thanks to Bob Geldof and USA for Africa, it arrived in gunny bags and presented itself at school dining tables: steaming yellow, not white like the maizeflour we knew as a staple [...] I must confess that I hated school food, anyway, and that yellow maize porridge tasted not that much worse than everything else we were forced to eat. But our speculation was powerful. It is American animal feed. And it started tasting a bit too earthy. It has been treated with contraceptive chemicals. And it started to taste metallic. It was sent to us because it has gone bad already. And it started to smell funny.
Soon, in the Njoro High School dining hall, vast amounts of yellow porridge went directly into the bins. Our teachers, normally violent fascists in matters of discipline, looked the other way. We had food fights with the porridge every evening, and the floor would be littered with the clumpy remnants of America's love.

("Pure Product" written by Binyavanga Wainaina for Harpers Magazine, June 2007 )

The inevitable reality is, be it food, water, fuel or mosquito nets, aid is managed most effectively where there is a price associated with it. Free is worthless and even ‘beggars’ will be ‘choosers’.

Ask yourself: so long as it doesn’t cost you anything to receive unwanted gifts where is your incentive to stop accepting them, and how do I know when to stop giving?

A fundamental truth of human nature demands autonomy; so much so that this will even be expressed to our own detriment. 35% of Sub-Saharan Africa's improved water sources are out of service at any given time, mainly due to poor maintenance. If the community had paid for that pump, had elected to install it and had invested time and money in it – do you think this figure would be so high?

Demanding a user pays a nominal fee for a product or service encourages autonomy, it becomes opt-in marketing and it’s far more valuable to all involved. Without it you create a market with no feedback loop. A charity works on a top down model, e.g. they look at a situation, evaluate the problem, raises funds from donors, procure a solution and deliver.

Done correctly, commerce and free market forces unavoidably establish communication channels. It is a more honest, empowering and, I would assert, cost effective model if an enterprise looks at a situation, evaluates the problem and offers up a solution; then, if no one purchases/contributes, modifies the offering until something of true value gets made.

If the enterprise can’t sell the product, they can’t evidence its desirability and they won’t break-even as neither end users nor those who provide any subsidy will back something that can’t be sold. Inevitably, if they don’t break-even the business goes under and natural selection weeds the offering out of a market that doesn’t want / need it. If a charity is similarly failing and doesn’t break-even – they raise more donor funding and remain in the market despite forces saying they should be gone.

If you want real world experience of why user buy-in is an absolutely essential modification to the traditional charity methodology, try this:

This Christmas it personally costs you to receive each gift, 10% of the gifts value. If you don’t pay, the gift goes back to the store and you get the cash.
I’d venture it’d cost less in total, reduce waste and more effectively provide what you really wanted.

(Almost) Everyone benefits if we allow market forces to empower the poorest populations to take responsibility for their own welfare. Those who don’t benefit don’t deserve to monopolise a multi billion dollar industry with ineffective product or service offerings simply because no one knows better (yet).

---

Please feel free to comment below or, even better, join the full debate at UnLtdWord!