I chatted today with a friend who’s in a different industry. I enjoy talking to people outside of start-ups and tech for a different perspective. Our conversation naturally touched on the current macro state. He shared something interesting: in his industry there’s always demand for quality, regardless of what’s going on in the world. People putting out a quality product aren’t affected by the macro environment.

My buddy makes a great point that founders should be mindful of. If you’re solving a problem with a quality product that creates value for customers, customer demand will be there. And with authentic customer demand comes the potential to build a large company—you will be able to get capital from investors to scale.

Focus on quality and things will likely play out in your favor, even in a questionable macro environment.

Earlier this week, I shared my takeaway from an interview of coach Mike Tomlin. A friend read the post and pointed out something else that we had a great discussion about. Tomlin shared how impactful working with Tony Dungy was. Tomlin was a 28-year-old new coach in the NFL and also a new father. He was nervous and not sure if he had what it took to succeed in either role. He specifically pointed out that a big part of his nervousness was due to not knowing what to expect—he’d never worked in the NFL and wasn’t raised in a two-parent household.  

Tomlin had dreams and aspirations and was working hard to make them happen. But he didn’t know what it looked like to be a successful NFL coach or a good father. Dungy showed him not only what each looked like but also what it looked like to do both at the same time. Dungy led by example, which gave Tomlin proximity to success and changed the trajectory of his career and his life.

Tomlin is a great example of the impact of proximity to success. When you can see people to whom you relate succeed, it starts to make the impossible feel possible!

Some solutions to problems that have the biggest impact on our lives seem obvious once we’re using them—though not before. Summoning a stranger to pick you up in their car or renting a room from a stranger both seem unremarkable now that we’re doing both. But a few years ago, they were nonobvious opportunities that many thought had no chance of succeeding. Uber, Airbnb, and a variety of other impactful solutions have changed how we live our lives and are each worth billions of dollars.

Evaluating a nonobvious opportunity for investment is hard. It requires investors to focus on what they stand to gain if things go right, not all the possible reasons for failure. And before investors can evaluate these opportunities, they have to find them.

I suspect that more nonobvious opportunities from great founders with the potential for outsize returns exist, but the network problem in VC prevents them from being funded. If this problem can be solved, I see more solutions being built that will have a material positive impact on society and create outsize returns for the limited partners that back these founders.

Today marks the end of my one-hundred-nineteenth week of working from home (mostly). Here are my takeaways from week one hundred nineteen:

• Vacation – This week felt like it was moving slowly. Lots of people were out on vacation or trying to get back into the swing of things.
• Half-day session – I spent half a day hunkered down in a conference room working on a project with someone. We got more done in that one day than we would have in two or three weeks’ worth of meetings. This was a good reminder of the value of focused in-person sessions.
• No meetings – Another week with no meetings for an entire day. Keeping this up through the end of the month to establish the habit.  

Week one hundred nineteen was a slower-paced week. Looking forward to next week.

Had a great chat with an investor today. We discussed why some founders struggle when they transition out of big organizations. He shared an observation with me: Employees working at larger companies who don’t have founder friends but want to be a founder tend to focus on working hard at work. They miss the mark on building an outside network—so, when they start their company, they don’t know anyone who can help them.

As I listened to this investor, I thought about my early days as a founder. I quit a job in a big company, only to realize that I didn’t know anybody who was building a company. It felt like I was the lone man on an island. I eventually sought out other early startup founders, we formed a cohort, and my trajectory changed completely.

If you aspire to building a startup, start seeking out people who are building companies or who support people building companies. They will be instrumental in helping you navigate the entrepreneurial journey.

I watched an interview in which coach Mike Tomlin described how he stays at the top of his game. After winning two Super Bowls, he still has the same fire he had when he first became an NFL head coach fifteen years ago. Tomlin shared something that really stuck with me. He resists comfort. In fact, he tells his team, “Don’t seek comfort,” because special outcomes—outsize outcomes—are the result of being uncomfortable. He explained that he views thinking back to his success as a Super Bowl champion as seeking comfort. So, he ignores his past success and the comfort it breeds.

Tomlin may ignore his track record, but it’s impressive and speaks to his credibility as a coach and leader.

Growth often comes from being in uncomfortable situations. You’re forced to think about and do things that are unfamiliar. Succeed or fail, you’ll learn from those experiences. I really like how Tomlin is intentional about resisting comfort. It tells me that he’s a learner and constantly looking for ways to improve himself and the team he leads. It makes sense that after fifteen years, he’s still at the top of his game.

If you’re aiming to do something special, consider asking yourself, “Am I resisting comfort—or seeking it—when I make decisions?”

I was talking with a buddy today about his business. He shared how his solution works. At its core, he’s bringing together existing pieces to create a new solution. What he’s doing is highly complex. As we chatted, I thought: This isn’t a tech company, but it’s still innovative.

Innovation is the introduction of something new. The new thing doesn’t have to be driven by, or be, technology. In the case of my buddy, he’s taking pieces that already exist and combining them in a new way. Even though these pieces are readily available to everyone, no one has combined them the way he has. His innovation is in how he’s combined the pieces and managed the complexity of doing so.

He likely doesn’t think of himself as an innovator because he isn’t building a tech company, but he is an innovative founder.

Innovation doesn’t happen only in tech. Anyone can be an innovator if they solve a problem in a way that hasn’t been seen before. Even if it’s just combining existing things in a new way.

Happy July 4th!

I hope everyone had a safe and healthy holiday!

I was sharing my journey with someone this past week. I said that a critical part of it was meeting other early-stage founders and forming an accountability group of sorts. The person I was speaking with probed a little about why that group had such outsize influence. The answer was that the group wasn’t just talking about starting companies, they were taking action. And not only were they acting, they were executing at a high level. The results spoke for themselves.

Looking back on it, I can see that being so close to smart people doing amazing stuff was transformative. They showed me what was possible and made me push harder for what I wanted. I didn’t want to get left behind by my peers, so I leveled up.

My takeaway is that finding other entrepreneurs whom I could relate to was helpful—but finding the ones doing great things was positively transformative. Being in the presence of people doing amazing stuff increases the chances that you’ll do amazing stuff too.

Who in your circle is doing amazing stuff?

I read an old Amazon shareholder letter recently. In it, Jeff Bezos outlined how he thinks about decision-making. He broke it down into two categories:

Some decisions are consequential and irreversible or nearly irreversible—one-way doors—and these decisions must be made methodically, carefully, slowly, with great deliberation and consultation. If you walk through and don’t like what you see on the other side, you can’t get back to where you were before. We can call these Type 1 decisions. But most decisions aren’t like that—they are changeable, reversible—they’re two-way doors. If you’ve made a suboptimal Type 2 decision, you don’t have to live with the consequences for that long. You can reopen the door and go back through. Type 2 decisions can and should be made quickly by high judgment individuals or small groups.

This framework simplifies how to think about decisions in a way that most can easily grasp.

I agree with most of Jeff’s thinking, except around speed. I think the appropriate speed for type 1 decision-making depends on the stage of the company. Jeff says type 1 decisions should be made slowly. That’s not a great approach for early-stage founders, who should be careful and thoughtful about their type 1 decisions but shouldn’t aim to make them slowly. They should try to get to 70% to 80% confidence as quickly as possible and decide. If the decision is wrong, you learn and improve your decision-making going forward. If you never make a decision or decide too slowly, you could be dealing your company a death blow.

I’m going to start think about my own decisions as type 1 or type 2 and aim to improve how quickly I make type 1 decisions.