Lessons Learned from Four Climatetech Entrepreneurs

I recently had the opportunity to participate in a panel of lessons learned from four climatetech entrepreneurs. It was organized by Trellis (formerly known as GreenBiz) and moderated by Chris Wedding of EFI, where I am a Fellow.

Video Recording of the Panel

It was a great discussion with other entrepreneurs whom I like and admire, and hopefully it was beneficial for its target audience of climatetech entrepreneurs and investors. Below is a brief summary of the questions I was asked and my responses:

What are 2-3 lessons learned from your prior startups with $300M+ of exits to date?

  1. The difference between success and failure all comes down to people – and your ability to lead them. I have been part of organizations which have failed because we had the wrong people in the wrong roles, and I have been part of organizations which have succeeded because we brought in better, more capable leaders. The job of a founder/CEO is to surround yourself with smart, motivated, diverse, values-aligned people, and spend your time/effort setting them up for success.

    A side effect of this principle is that, as a founder/CEO, you can build your dream team – indeed, it is your responsibility to do so. I maintain a list of people with whom I dream about working some day. I have worked with some of them in the past, and dream about joining forces again. Others I have known or admired from afar, and am always looking for opportunities to bring them into the fold.

    If you’re in this business long enough, you will have both successes and failures. Through the ups and downs, the main thing you will take with you from one adventure to the next is the relationships you build along the way.
  2. Play the long game. It is natural to obsess about the outcome of your current venture. Many ventures fail, though, and often for totally exogenous reasons that aren’t your fault. At the same time you are working on your venture, proactively collect new knowledge, experiences, and networks that will help set you up for success in your next adventure. Addressing the climate challenge is a long, complicated journey; even if you experience failure along the way, you will zig and zag your way to eventual success.
  3. Thinking of playing the long game reminds me of an expression: “A startup isn’t a sprint; it’s a marathon.” My experience and the experience of dozens of other moonshot leaders indicate that this perspective is categorically wrong. A startup isn’t a sprint, and it isn’t a marathon – it’s a frickin’ sprintathon. It’s a series of all-out sprints punctuated by crucial periods of rest, recovery, and redirection. This isn’t just semantics; it’s a fundamental shift in how we approach startup culture and performance.

How did your CEO role at Third Derivative – the world’s largest climate tech accelerator with $2B of follow-on investment in 200 startups – influence your work at DexMat?

You have to dare to do things differently. As a founder/CEO, you will be surrounded by people who tell you to execute familiar, known patterns – but familiar, known patterns are what got us into this climate crisis in the first place!

At Third Derivative, we innovated new models in several ways. We admired the climatetech accelerators that were already doing great work, but, as we continued to lose ground on climate goals, it was clear that they were insufficient. We envisioned a bigger/faster accelerator ecosystem, and everyone told us it couldn’t be done.

Most accelerators brought on cohorts of ~10 companies at a time; we had nearly 50 in our first cohort, and have continued to grow ever since. Most accelerators have physical locations; we went virtual to be able to serve the myriad worthy climatetech ventures around the world who couldn’t uproot to Boulder, Colorado. Most investors need to negotiate every individual term sheet; we convinced VCs with $9B to agree to a standardized set of terms to accelerate dealmaking. Today, four years after I launched Third Derivative, it has helped mobilized more than $2B into more than 200 climatetech startups – because we innovated new models.

Now we are doing the same thing at DexMat. Everyone’s climate roadmap includes maintaining a reliance on old, inferior materials – like steel, aluminum, and copper – that are really hard and expensive to decarbonize. However, DexMat isn’t trying to make those materials green – and there is only so green you can ever make them; we’re making them obsolete.

The lesson for founders, is to surround yourself with people – cofounders, employees, investors, and customers – who recognize that daring to approach problems with different solutions is a feature, not a bug.

We have all heard the quote “Culture eats strategy for breakfast.” What makes a good culture for a climatetech startup, and how do you shape it proactively?

I have found that what really works for climatetech moonshot startups is an “Explorer Culture.” This culture is:

  • Couragious (bold, ambitious)
  • Purposeful (commitment to mission)
  • Balanced (sustainable high performance)
  • Fun!

To build an Explorer Culture, you have to start with the right inputs – your team. I have had a lot of success in team building by hiring people who exhibit curiosity and humility. Most companies hire for role, and then try to squeeze people into their culture. I have had more success hiring for culture, and then training for role.

With a great team in place, you need to lay the foundation by building a psychologically safe environment. Psychological safety is the belief that one will not be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes. It seems counterintuitive that we need safety to enable couragiousness, but your team cannot take bold action without it.

Psychological safety can be measured – we use assessments designed by Amy Edmondson, a pioneer of the field – and the simple act of measuring it sends a message to your team about how important it is. It’s Management 101: what gets measured gets managed.

Once your baseline is established, you can then introduce interventions to improve psychological safety, and measure their efficacy. I have had success at multiple ventures with “Failure Fridays.” These all-hands meetings celebrate our failures for the week, and focus on the learnings that came from them. If you want anyone to volunteer to share their failure, though, you need to lead by example, which is why I always go first.

Upon a foundation of psychological safety, you can then build a truly high performance team by cultivating a feedback cultureabout which I have written in much greater detail.

Your team’s high performance must align with your organization’s purpose. My teams co-create mission-vision-values statements, and we revisit them frequently. Every new hire learns them during the hiring process, and then becomes a co-creator of the next iteration. When faced with a dilemma, we look to these statements as our North Star to help us make hard decisions from complex options.

To ensure that this high performance is sustainable – rather than leading to burnout and turnover – you need to create work-life harmony for your entire team. I have had success with flexible work schedules, flexible PTO, and repeated emphasis on everyone taking care of themself. Here it is crucially important to lead by example, so I include exercise, mental health blocks, and even naps on my shared calendar for all to see.

Finally, building, leading, and executing a purposeful venture should be fun. Sometimes it is hard to find room for fun when all of your work seems to be mission-critical – so you have to create room. Become your company’s Chief Fun Officer, or – if that isn’t your jam – appoint one. Or make it a rotating role! My ventures have had fun holding weekly tea times, and singing our performance updates.

How do you balance your parent and CEO roles?

There are so many similarities between growing startups and growing small humans! Here are a few principles by which I try to abide:

  1. Put on my own oxygen mask first: take care of my physical and mental health to ensure that I can be my best self to my family and my team.
  2. Create hard boundaries for family time that are respected by my team – and respect theirs as well.
  3. When with family, stay 100% engaged; resist the temptation to check in on Slack. I struggle with this one the most.
  4. Find areas of alignment: e.g. when my youngest child was born, executive 1:1s became joining me for a stroller walk.
  5. Automate/outsource all of the banal stuff that adds unnecessary cognitive load – scheduling, housework, etc. – so that I can focus on quality time with my family and team.
  6. ABL – always be learning. Children, partners, and startups all grow and change rapidly. Today’s optimized routine won’t be tomorrow’s. Maintain frequent, open communication about how it’s going with my partner and my team.

If you could put one message on a billboard for all other climatetech founders, what would it say?

You are not alone.

Solving climate is a big, hairy, audacious challenge. Together – and only together – will we build the sustainable, prosperous, equitable future. You got this. And we got you.

2024 Olympics Wrap-Up

Another Olympics has come and gone, so it is once again time to take a look at who “won” the Games by several different metrics. Per my previous posts, I continue to use a weighted scoring system to tally Olympic medals by country. This year I once again tracked not just the medal counts but also economic and demographic metrics for each country – you can see my full spreadsheet here – for my 2024 Olympics wrap-up:

In this 2024 Olympics wrap-up, the USA wins the medal count and weighted medal score!

Medal Score

The USA was the clear victor in medal scores, tying China in golds, and winning silvers, bronzes, total medals, and weighted medal score by double digits. The top performers by weighted medal score were:

  1. 374 – USA
  2. 305 – China
  3. 180 – France
  4. 165 – Great Britain
  5. 163 – Australia

USA, China, and Great Britain were #1, #2, and #4 respectively, in exactly their same positions from the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games. However, Russia wasn’t allowed to compete this year, creating room for host country, France, at #3. Japan, no longer the host country, dropped from the #5 spot and was replaced by Australia. Given France’s rise (from #10 in 2020) and Japan’s fall (to #6 in 2024), it seems that host countries enjoy home field advantage.

Mighty Small Countries

The leaders in these summer Olympics are all large countries; the leaderboard changes quite a bit when normalized by population (or by GDP). The top performers by weighted medal score per million citizens were:

  1. 71.43 – Dominica
  2. 40.00  – Saint Lucia
  3. 20.00   – Grenada
  4. 14.80   – New Zealand
  5. 7.00   – Bahrain

New Zealand’s weighted medal score per million citizens didn’t change much since 2020 (14.00), but it was eclipsed by a few much smaller countries that earned medals this year. Kudos to these countries for high performance despite having small athletic talent pools.

Even The Least Wealthy Countries Can Win

Accounting for the wealth, rather than the population, of each country by measuring their weighted medal score per GDP (PPP) doesn’t change the top five much:

  1. 5.0 – Dominica
  2. 2.0  – Saint Lucia
  3. 0.67   – Grenada
  4. 0.43   – Jamaica
  5. 0.27   – Georgia

GDP Per Capita Is Wild

However, normalizing weighted medal score by GDP per capita does yield some interesting results:

  1. 0.0122 – China
  2. 0.0047  – Kenya
  3. 0.0045  – USA
  4. 0.0044   – Uzbekistan
  5. 0.0043   – Ethiopia

Now those are some strange bedfellows!

That’s A Wrap

That’s a wrap for the 2024 Olympics wrap-up – congratulations to all competitors, countries, and fans! Now the countdown has begun to the Winter Olympics in italia!

Back In Track

Yesterday I raced in my first track meet in more than four years. It was a mixed success, but net-net a positive, and it felt great to be back in competition!

My last track meet was in January of 2020 – indoor championships for the US southeast region. I was slated to compete in the national championships the following March, but the COVID pandemic hit, and they were shut down. Later in 2020 we moved to a new state, where I wasn’t plugged into a local track club. In 2021 I had my spinal surgery, which necessitated a year of recovery. In 2023 we had a new baby.

Yada yada yada, I entered 2024 realizing that it had been years since I had competed in any running events, and I resolved to get back into it. I love competition, and find it really motivating for training. Earlier this year, my favorite training tool, Stryd, featured my comeback training in one of their videos:

Bryan Guido Hassin, a masters track athlete, uses Stryd to train smarter.

In March, I eased back into running competition by entering a local 5k race. It was a flat, easy course – just what I needed for my first in-person race in more than four years! If you scroll back far enough in this blog, you’ll see that I used to run 5ks in 20ish minutes. Way out of shape as I am, though, my goals for this race were much more modest: 30 minutes.

Stryd used data from my recent runs to advise me to run ~330 watts with a target time of ~28:30. I began the race that way, but couldn’t help myself as the adrenaline of competition took over. I ran each km a little faster than the previous, and, with a big kick at the end, finished in 26:30 with an average power of 336 watts. It was both the slowest 5k race I had ever run and one of the ones about which I felt the best. I was elated to be back competing again, and I was excited to have set a new benchmark on which I could set about improving.

There were no more races during the spring, and I was unfortunately out of town for the famous Bolder Boulder 10k, so I set my sights on a summer series of track meets held at the University of Colorado. These looked very similar to those I used to attend at the University of North Carolina – which are what got me into masters track competition in the first place.

I was out of town for the first meet of the series, but last night was the second. I signed up for the 100m, 200m, and 400m events, and, as with the 5k, I reset my expectations to line up with my current level of fitness and training. My goals for this meet were (in descending order of priority):

  1. Don’t get injured
  2. Have fun
  3. Run hard, and be proud of my effort
  4. 100m: 16s
  5. 200m: 34s
  6. 400m: 1:20

The good news: I ran the 100m in 14.2s and won my heat!

The bad news: I pulled my hamstring toward the end of the race, so I couldn’t compete in the 200m or 400m! Track spikes and adrenaline combined to have me running much faster than I had in recent memory, and that was a little more than my muscles could handle! I achieved goals 2, 3, and 4, but not 1, 5, or 6.

Still, it feels great to have a full-speed race behind me, and, of course, I love analyzing the data from it. My Stryd says I hit 749W during the race. That’s greater power than I’ve generated in recent memory – all those hill workouts must have been working!

It’s also interesting to look at how much bigger my stride is when running at top speed. The solid lines are my stride geometry (viewed from the side) during the 100m race; the much more compact dotted lines are during an easy jog:

My full-speed stride is much bigger than that of my easy jog.

I’ll spend a little time rehabbing this hamstring, and then will do more top-end speed work to refamiliarize my muscles with race paces. I’m not sure I’ll be back in competition shape for the next meet (in two weeks), but hopefully I will be for the one after that!

Rememberance of Earth’s Past Review

I have just finished reading all three books of the Rememberance of Earth’s Past trilogy: The Three-Body Problem, The Dark Forest, and Death’s End, and wow, this is the most epic, ambitious, thought-provoking sci-fi series I have read in a long, long time.

Following are quick reviews of each book, but the TLDR version is stop what you’re doing and read them right now!

The Three-Body Problem

4/5

This was really fresh! In some ways, it feels very Foundation-y (a sociological vs an individual story), but the backdrop of Chinese culture, history, and philosophy renders it very different than other sci-fi I have read.

For the most of the book, I was interested, but not compelled, and I wasn’t intending to read the rest of the trilogy. However, it really stuck the landing, and now I have already started the second book. I question some of the science and math, but the concepts are quite thought-provoking.

The Dark Forest

5/5

This is a phenomenal follow-up to The Three-Body Problem. While that book had me ambivelent for the first 80% and only really captured my interest at the end, this one had me engaged from the outset. It really expands the scope and scale of the first book and presents multiple convergent story lines that are deeply political and sociological, reminding me a great deal of The Expanse series. Highly recommended, and I can’t wait to finish the third book before watching the TV series adaptations!

Death’s End

5/5

Wow, wow, WOW! What an epic finale of this trilogy! This is easily one of the best series I have ever read, and certainly one of the most ambitious of all time. In this book I found my mind and imagination stretched into radical new directions. Occasionally I could predict what was coming, but often I would pause and reflect that I really had no idea how things would resolve themselves – or even if they possibly could. This final book could easily have been split into three or more self-contained books, but I appreciated the large, combined narrative.

Huge kudos go out not just to the author, Liu Cixin, but also to Ken Liu and Joel Martinsen, for English translations that captured the poetic imagery of the original Mandarin Chinese.

Conclusion

I cannot recommend this series highly enough. It starts slowly and will be particularly challenging for Western readers who aren’t accustomed to all the East Asian names, but stick with it, and prepare for your mind to be blown!

There is no way that a TV adaptation can do this justice, but I will try watching the Netflix series and the Chinese series as well.

DexMat’s Year of Exponential Progress

One year ago, I became CEO of DexMat and raised our Seed Round of funding. Today, at the end of the year, seems an appropriate day to reflect on DexMat’s progress – and what a rocket ride of exponential progress it has been!

The past year has been one of exponential growth–production capacity increase, sales growth, and cost reduction–for DexMat. Our Seed Round investors challenged us to hit five key milestones to de-risk our venture and demonstrate our capacity to reach financial and climate impact at massive scale. We have exceeded all milestones, which are reviewed below, so are now gearing up to raise our Series A early next year.
 
As a reminder, DexMat is a climate tech moonshot startup driving the next industrial revolution by displacing steel, aluminum, and copper with advanced, carbon-negative materials. 

Earlier this year we set out to accomplish big goals. Here’s what happened…

  • Build an awesome team and set that team up for success
    Team members:
    6  → 15

    We now have in place a talented, balanced team with diverse backgrounds, skillsets, and networks. Our culture and suite of tools/systems/processes for hybrid-enabled work have this team performing at an elite level, with 100% retention and 100% engagement score.
DexMat built a diverse, high-performing team to make exponential progress in 2023.
  • Scale up production capacity and reduce cost
    Production capacity:
    Increased 20x
    Production cost:
    Decreased by 90%

    We scaled annualized production capacity this year by 20x, while reducing cost by 90%.
  • Secure CNT supply
    Feedstock cost:
    Reduced by 70%

    Through supplier negotiations, we secured agreements for 10x the volume of CNTs we purchased in 2023, and at 70% lower prices. This brings our total cost of producing Galvorn down an order of magnitude from the beginning of the year, and keeps us on track to achieving cost parity with steel in four years.
  • Expand IP moat
    → 2 existing patents licensed from Rice
    → Executed new license for faster, less expensive, more sustainable production

    We secured two additional patent licenses and one license for proprietary know-how from Rice, and took steps to address potential infringement.
  • Pivot from opportunistic sales to proactive market development
    → NEW GTM Strategy
    → NEW Website
    → NEW CRM
    → NEW Marketing/Sales Processes
    → NEW Pricing Strategy
    → NEW $1.3M Grant Funding


    We developed a cogent Go-To-Market strategy, laid our marketing foundation with a new website, CRM, pricing strategy, and sales process, and we are already seeing the impact with increasing sales that we can attribute to specific sales and marketing investments. Additionally, we won $1.3M of grant funding to develop new Galvorn products, and completed applications for more than $25M of new grant funding in 2024.
DexMat’s really cool demo for NYC Climate Week

On behalf of the entire DexMat team, thank you all for your continued support; DexMat’s exponential progress would not be possible without it! I hope you enjoy a bit of a break this holiday season, because 2024 is going to be really big!

Taking Stryd Duo and Footpath to the Track

Today I finally had the chance to take the Stryd Duo and Footpath to the track. Having tested these new features last week on grass and pavement, I was eager to see what differences there might be on the track surface. I was also eager to see what differences there might be when running different directions on the track.

Easy Runs

After warming up and mobilizing, I did one easy lap around the track anticlockwise (typical track direction) – 3:00 and 249W – and then one in the opposite direction – 2:56 and 252W. My metrics were about the same as on grass and pavement (slight imbalance left/right), except that my Ground Contact Balance was 50/50 on the track (both directions).

Below is my Stryd Footpath visualization (side view) for the anticlockwise lap (solid) and clockwise (dashed):

Stryd Footpath visualization (side view) for easy track laps - anticlockwise (solid) vs clockwise (dashed)

Consistent with my grass and pavement runs, my left stride is more compact than my right going both directions. I had hypothesized that the left and right stride sizes might be inverted when going the opposite direction on the track, but that turned out not to be the case.

Looking at the top view, though, you can really see the directional difference:

Stryd Footpath visualization (top view) for easy track laps - anticlockwise (solid) vs clockwise (dashed)

Here you can see clearly that both my strides bias to the left (outside) when I’m running clockwise. The same effect is visible from the back:

Stryd Footpath visualization (back view) for easy track laps - anticlockwise (solid) vs clockwise (dashed)

This is why I try to run both directions on the track as much as possible, to work my legs in a much more balanced way.

All-Out Run

After my easy laps, I ran a 10-minute all-out run that was part of my training plan (anticlockwise – typical track direction). I made it just shy of 2km (5 laps) with 356W average power. This is hard for me to admit, as, even just a few years ago, I was running faster than that for many consecutive kms as part of long, easy runs. There are no two ways about it: I am out of shape.

Regardless, the 10-minute run provided interesting data to compare against the easy laps. There was no major change in the metrics, but you can see the difference in stride length below:

Stryd Footpath visualization (side view) for easy track lap (solid) vs 10-minute all-out (dashed)

One interesting phenomenon in this comparison is that, for my easy lap, my left stride extended out as far as my right stride. However, for my faster five laps, my left stride actually extended farther than my right. Let’s see how that looks from the top view:

Stryd Footpath visualization (top view) for easy track lap (solid) vs 10-minute all-out (dashed)

Wow, look at that significant asymmetry between left and right during the faster laps. I’m not sure if that is attributable just to running faster, or to the curvature of the track. It would be an interesting experiment to run at the same power going the opposite direction and compare the geometries made. Actually, it would be interesting to run the same power going straight, too.

The view from the back tells basically the same story:

Stryd Footpath visualization (back view) for easy track lap (solid) vs 10-minute all-out (dashed)

Actually, if we zoom in on the back view, we can see a very interesting phenomenon. Here I’m looking at just the first curve (solid) vs the first straight-a-way (dashed):

Stryd Footpath visualization (back view) for curve (solid) vs straight-a-way (dashed)

Wow, look how different the kinematics of curve running are from straight line running. In road races or cross country, these differences may not be that important but, in track, curves comprise 50% of most race distances! I have no idea what to do with these data yet, but having them at all is a great first step.

Final Thoughts

I have long been interested in more tools to help me at the track, because most tools – including Stryd historically, have been more geared toward longer-distance running. The new features of Stryd Duo and Footpath are a huge step (no pun intended) in the track and middle distance direction. Today’s brief runs were just the tip of the iceberg, but I look forward to more experimentation – and at greater intensity – soon!

Stryd Duo and Footpath Initial Impressions

Having used Stryd for running, training, and racing with power for more than eight years, I was excited when they announced a major new product update: the Stryd Duo and Stryd Footpath. Naturally, I was first in line to test out these new features, so here are my Stryd Duo and Footpath initial impressions.

First, adding this new functionality was very easy. I simply procured a second Stryd pod, added it to my right foot (The original is on my left foot.), added it to my Stryd Android app, and added it to my Garmin Forerunner 955 Solar. The two pods are essentially treated as a single device by Garmin.

The biggest change for me was moving from the Stryd Workouts Garmin Connect IQ app to the Stryd Zones Garmin Connect data field. I had long resisted this change but, now that I did it, the new Zones are better and more functional than the old Workouts app, and I’m glad I switched.

New Data

First things, first: I went on a very quick, easy treadmill run, wearing ultra minimalist Vibram KSO Evos – basically barefoot. Stryd Duo compares data from your left and right feet, so it can provide new metrics about your left-right balance. My data showed some interesting insights:

  1. Ground Contact Time (GCT) Balance: 49% Left / 51% Right. My left foot is making slightly shorter contact with the ground than my right.
  2. Vertical Ratio: 8%. I am bouncing up and down to the tune of 8% of my horizontal stride length. I’m not sure what a good benchmark for this should be.
  3. Vertical Oscillation (VO) Balance: 51% Left / 49% Right. The left side of my body is bouncing up and down a little more than my right.
  4. Leg Spring Stiffness (LSS) Balance: 51% Left / 49% Right. My left leg is giving a little more “pop” than my right – perhaps this is related to my increased bounce and decreased ground contact time on the left.
  5. Impact Loading Rate (ILR) Balance: 53% Left / 47% Right. My left leg is enduring more strain than my right. I wonder if that has implications for recovery, stretching, etc.

We all have running asymmetries, and mine seem pretty modest, but I still wonder what interventions I might consider to achieve more balance.

Footpath Visualization

Enough with the treadmill, though; I was eager to take the Stryd Duo outside and test it on a wide variety of running surfaces. Wearing Vibram Spyridon Evo trail shoes, I struck out to North Boulder Park. My first run was an easy jog on pavement (mix of sidewalk and asphalt) around the perimeter of the park – running anticlockwise. The new Footpath feature gives me a 3-D visualization of the path that each of my feet takes while running; this is the view from the back:

Stryd Duo and Footpath visualization from the back - easy jog on pavement

Very interesting: it seems that my left foot follows a more “compact” route in each stride, not lifting as high as my right. But could that be an artifact of my anticlockwise loop? I ran a second loop, retracing the same round clockwise. Stryd Footpath allows me to compare data from two runs, so here are both loops superimposed, anticlockwise in the solid lines vs clockwise in the dashed:

Stryd Duo and Footpath visualization from the back - easy jog on pavement, anticlockwise (solid) vs clockwise (dashed)

Interesting! Running clockwise shifted both of my feet a little to the left. However, again, my left foot doesn’t rise quite as high. For both loops, my Stryd Duo Metrics were nearly identical to those from my treadmill test, so the picture of slight asymmetry/imbalance was becoming more robust.

Comparing Different Surfaces

Next, I wondered how my stride might differ on different surfaces. I ran the same anticlockwise and clockwise loops around the park, but this time on the grass just beside the sidewalk. Below is a comparison of my anticlockwise stride from the side view, grass in solid lines and pavement in dashed:

Stryd Duo and Footpath visualization from the side - easy jog on grass(solid) vs pavement (dashed)

Wow, very interesting! My stride length is about the same, but my foot travels much higher in the grass than on pavement – which makes sense as I try to clear the blades of grass. Also, it seems that my foot doesn’t come quite as far forward, but pushes further backward on grass vs pavement.

Comparing Different Intensities

Now for the most interesting test: running at different intensities! I did two 100m striders on grass and two on pavement. Below is a comparison of my stride (side view) during the earlier easy jogs (272W) in solid lines vs the striders (613W) in dashed:

Stryd Duo and Footpath visualization from the side - easy jog (solid) vs strider (dashed)

Wow, what a difference! My strider stride length is more than 1m vs my easy jog, which is much more compact at 66cm. My strider back kick is 40cm off the ground vs 10cm for my jog. These differences are intuitive, but it’s illuminating to see the visualization.

Let’s look at the same two run comparisons from a different vantage point – overhead:

Stryd Duo and Footpath visualization from above - easy jog (solid) vs strider (dashed)

Wow again! Here I can see a pretty standard pattern for my easy jog (solid lines), and the same longer stride seen above for my striders (dashed lines). However, the overhead view reveals something novel about my strider form: my strides are diverging from the centerline, likely supinating each foot. This will be a coaching point to work on: keeping my higher intensity strides going forward and backward so as not to waste power side to side.

Finally, below is a comparison of the same two runs, but this time viewed from the back:

Stryd Duo and Footpath visualization from the back - easy jog (solid) vs strider (dashed)

I don’t even know what to say about those wild shapes of my striders (dashed lines), except that they likely correspond with the supinating pattern seen above. My biggest concern here is the asymmetry – again, something to work on.

So What?

Stryd’s new features are really cool for a data nerd like me. However, the question for new data and new tools is always, “So what?” How can I use this to improve my running, train smarter, reduce injury, etc?

A couple of areas for me to look into are my left/right imbalance when jogging – specifically lifting my left foot higher – and staying in the forward/backward plane when striding/sprinting. It’s hard to know what to make of these observations, though, without benchmarks or best practices to target.

Stryd’s new features would be most beneficial with coaching. I wonder if they might consider adding a remote/virtual coaching service and/or training to third party coaches on how to use/interpret these new data, and how to prescribe interventions based on them.

Final Thoughts

I still have a lot more testing to do (Today: hill sprints; this weekend: the track!), but Stryd’s new Duo and Footpath features are a quantum leap forward, likely the greatest single advance that I’ve seen from them since their launch eight years ago. These new features provide a great deal of the benefit traditionally reserved for complex/expensive camera, force plate, and sensor systems. Moreover, these benefits are not just accessible in the lab; they are “always on” whenever you are running. Kudos to the Stryd team (my neighbors in Boulder!) for introducing new innovations that have re-energized my enthusiasm for and use of their product – keep the innovations coming!

Overture Ventures Investor Day

It was truly incredible to join Overture VC in Washington, D.C., last week for their first-ever Overture Ventures Investor Day. 🏛

An Incredible Program

Overture brought together its limited partners (LPs), founders, and leading public sector officials including Ali Zaidi, Jennifer Granholm, Ben Rhodes, Jigar Shah, and Ed Markey for a conversation about climate. 🤝

It was especially gratifying to reconnect with Ben (a fellow Rice alum! 🦉), and to meet Jigar, from whom I hired my first Third Derivative employee, in person for the first time. It was also inspiring to meet other portfolio founders (two of whom are also in Third Derivative’s portfolio!) pursuing their own incredible journeys of impact. 😍

Making the Most of My Time in DC

Outside of our packed program, I managed to set up meetings with policymakers (Thanks to Lizzie Fletcher‘s and Randy Weber‘s staffs for making these meetings possible despite all the chaos in the US House of Representatives!) and with some of DexMat‘s funders at the US Department of Energy. I even managed to squeeze in a few runs around my old stomping ground – the monuments, the National Mall, and the houses of US government. My moving meditation through these important places re-energized and re-affirmed my commitment to building a sustainable, prosperous, equitable future for all. 🏃‍♂️

Takeaways

This gathering demonstrated that, when it comes to climate policy and technology, we’re moving faster than anyone could have imagined possible—and it’s still not nearly fast enough. ⏱

As Justin Dawe of Earth Force Technologies reminded us, one bad wildfire season can release an amount of carbon sufficient to undo much of our recent progress on decarbonization. 🔥

That is why we’re committed to moving with purpose and speed to build DexMat into a company that displaces dirty industries with carbon-negative materials at massive scale. 🚀

We couldn’t be more grateful and proud to have the support of Overture, Boundary Stone Partners, and others as we do so. 🙏

Building a Feedback Culture at a Startup

Creating a thriving feedback culture is beneficial – nay, crucial – within a startup. In a recent meeting of climate tech CEOs, I was asked to share my journey in establishing a feedback-centric environment during a particularly challenging time while leading a previous venture. Following is a summary of this discussion about the actions I took, the results, and key learnings along the way (sometimes only in hindsight).

The Fish on the Table: Unveiling the Unspoken

This previous venture’s team was full of high performers who craved feedback. However, the sudden shift to remote work during the pandemic made organic feedback more challenging. An expression we often used at IMD was that withheld feedback is like a fish under the table: if you just leave it there, it begins to stink! You have to put the fish on the table by offering direct, helpful, and ideally real-time feedback to your teammates.

Unfortunately, as teammates strived to be proactive about offering feedback in our new environment, several missteps were made. I found myself losing a lot of time to facilitating discussions between team members who had offered well-intentioned feedback to each other, but who had been hurt or offended by suboptimal communication.

It became evident that developing a feedback culture would not “just happen.” We would need to define the feedback culture of our aspirations and work proactively to develop it.

Psychological Safety: The Foundation of Feedback

Psychological safety is necessary for any ambitious, risk-taking startup to flourish. Moreover, a psychologically safe culture is a necessary antecedent to team members feeling comfortable offering – and receiving – constructive feedback.

The good news is that psychological safety can be measured. Using pioneering research from Amy Edmondson, we began anonymously surveying our team on a monthly basis to assess whether we even had the right environment to begin working on feedback. This also gave us the ability to track trends over time, reinforce areas where we were doing well, and identify / address areas that could use improvement.

Next, I had to lead by example. A startup’s culture is driven by its leaders, so I began proactively, intentionally leading with vulnerability. There is a lot of pressure on a startup CEO to be chest-thumpingly crushing it all the time, but instead I shared with the team my professional anxieties and even challenges in my personal life. Here I was trying to normalize not having all the answers all the time, and give others permission to communicate that as well.

More than just leading by example, I tried to create opportunities for others to follow that example. We began overtly celebrating failures (and the learnings that came from them) with an event called Failure Friday. I would go first, and then the dam would open up, as we all shared the many ways we had failed (and learned, and rebounded) that week.

Learning: As the saying goes, what gets measured gets managed, and measuring psychological safety is in and of itself a signal to the team.

Learning: There is no need to reinvent the wheel. We started by building our own psychological safety survey in Qualtrics. Later we discovered that some software – like Culture Amp – already has psychological safety built into their engagement assessments.

Delivering Feedback: A Delicate Art

In a global, multicultural, and multilingual team, with communications challenged by the pandemic, we sought to be very careful about how we delivered feedback, and settled on several rules:

  1. Ask before delivering feedback. It may not be a good time for the other person, which could render the entire exercise counterproductive.
  2. Be direct. No sugar-coating, like the terrible compliment sandwich.
  3. Follow a well-established formula: “When you [BEHAVIOR], it makes me feel [FEELING] because [TANGIBLE IMPACT].” This formula focuses on the behavior, not the individual, and provides examples of clear impacts on the person’s feelings (which are always valid) and their work. There are many such “feedback formulae” and I’m not sure this is any better or worse than the others, but we were more interested in beginning to experiment than we were in agonizing over some [likely mythical] optimal formula.
  4. Always offer feedback sensitively and in the spirit of aiding others – never while mad, never in retribution.

Learning: engage the team in building consensus / co-developing these guidelines rather than developing them in a vacuum and imposing them on others.

Receiving Feedback: Embracing Growth and Development

Feedback is a two-way street and how it is received is just as critical to its effectiveness as how it is delivered. Here again we settled on rules to address the remote, global, multicultural, multilingual communication challenges:

  1. When someone asks to give you feedback, check in on your emotional state. If now is not a good time, you can decline – but it is up to you to schedule another time for it.
  2. You may ask clarifying questions when receiving feedback, but not challenge or justify your actions. If you feel a response is necessary, you must schedule it for after you have had time to sit with the feedback.
  3. After receiving feedback, make time to sit with it and process it.
  4. “Thank you for the vitamin.” There is a saying that feedback is a “gift,” but I find it to be much more of a “vitamin” – it can be hard to swallow, but it is good for me! To recognize the positive intent of someone offering feedback, we ritualized the recipient’s response as, “Thank you for the vitamin.”

Learning: high performers often focus on critical feedback, but it is important to receive positive feedback with the same intentionality.

Building the Feedback Muscle

Establishing a feedback culture in this challenging environment would require deliberate exercise of the techniques above. We chose to crawl-before-we-walked by starting off with anonymized 360 degree feedback for everyone, including me. This was not a performance review; it was expressly to help us all improve as teammates. We gave the 360s high priority, carving out time for each teammate to take the survey, process their results, debrief together as a group, and debrief individually with their manager. Here again we began with a bespoke survey in Qualtrics and eventually migrated to using Culture Amp.

As the team demonstrated growing competence in providing anonymized, written feedback, we augmented this “feedback stack” by organizing periodic group feedback sessions. Each teammate would come to the session having prepared feedback for three “helpful” behaviors and three “not-so-helpful” behaviors for each teammate. They would then verbally deliver this feedback – and receive their own – in the group setting.

These group feedback sessions were emotional powder kegs, so it was crucial that we adhered consistently to the rules we had set out. If someone showed up having prepared less than the required number of feedbacks for a teammate, for example, they were not allowed to participate. We did not want any teammates to feel unfairly singled out. As with the 360s, we carved out time for each teammate to prep for the session, process their feedback, debrief together as a group, and debrief individually with their manager.

Learning: offer teammates coaching before the feedback sessions. No matter how formulaic you make it, inexperienced teammates can be more constructive in the sessions with a little help.

Learning: bring in a competent outside facilitator. It was inappropriate for me to facilitate and simultaneously participate in group feedback sessions. I also blundered when I deputized other leaders in our org to facilitate sessions, and they turned out not to be adequately prepared.

Reinforcing the Feedback Loop

The team rapidly leveled up in these structured processes, but our goal was to develop a culture of feedback in real-time, when it would be most effective. We began celebrating feedback whenever it was offered/received. We would literally stop a meeting, call attention to it (and sometimes offer feedback on the way it was given or received for a sort of “feedbackception!”), and then return to the regular discussion.

Of course, I tried to lead by example too – both by giving and receiving feedback publicly. I confess to “planting” a few feedbacks in which I had teammates offer me feedback in group settings so I could model receiving it in the moment.

Learning: leverage 1:1 feedback into learning for the group. If you are giving or receiving feedback – or even coaching someone else on giving or receiving feedback – ask if they would be comfortable taking the discussion public for collective growth.

Results: A Triumph of the Feedback Culture

The culmination of these efforts resulted in a thriving, high-performing team. Our team’s gelled performance became a key recruiting advantage for us and, to this day, many of those teammates still tell me it was the best team they have ever worked on. Our engagement metrics were through the roof, and we had zero employee attrition (during a time when everyone was worried about the war for talent). It was magical!

How do we know this was a result of culture, though? There was a pretty good natural experiment when we were acquired and the parent company changed the culture. Instead of psychological safety, there was fear. Instead of feedback, there was politics. The magic was gone. I was the first to go, and then more than 90% of our recently thriving, high-performing team left within one year.

My conclusion is that feedback culture really matters, and it can be intentionally developed. In a very short time span, we went from craving feedback to actively nurturing it, even amid the complexities of a pandemic. By prioritizing psychological safety, refining the art of giving and receiving feedback, and instituting structured feedback exercises, we generated incredible results.

We weren’t perfect, though, and we stumbled many times along the way. Many of the learnings I shared were painfully won! So, I’m curious what about this journey resonates with you? What other related ideas, techniques, or experiences do you have? Please share them in the comments so we can all learn and grow together!

I Like Al Gore – And He’s Wrong

Nobel Laureate Al Gore’s recent talk, titled “What the Fossil Fuel Industry Doesn’t Want You To Know,” has ignited a dialogue on the critical issues surrounding climate change. While it’s evident that Gore raises valid concerns, it’s essential to analyze his arguments in light of the broader context, current scientific understanding, and technological progress. This response aims to engage with key points from the talk and to offer a balanced perspective on the challenges and potential solutions.

  1. Acknowledging Valid Concerns: Indeed, Gore’s talk addresses crucial issues related to the climate crisis and the role of fossil fuel industries. His focus on the urgency of transitioning away from fossil fuels is well-founded, considering the alarming rates of greenhouse gas emissions. He also rightfully points out that fossil fuel companies have a long and storied track record of operating in bad faith when it comes to climate change.
  2. Carbon Capture and Fossil Fuels: Gore’s premise that carbon capture technologies could be used as an excuse to continue burning fossil fuels is a valid concern. However, it’s important to note that carbon capture isn’t solely intended to justify fossil fuel use. It also offers a bridge towards a carbon-neutral – or even carbon-negative future, especially in sectors where complete elimination of emissions is challenging.
  3. Net Zero and Warming: While Gore’s assertion that achieving net zero emissions could stop warming within five years is ambitious, it’s important to recognize that even reaching net zero today might not immediately halt the warming trend. Climate systems exhibit complex dynamics, and the effects of past emissions – including worrisome tipping points – could continue to influence temperature trends for years to come.
  4. Non-Linear Cost and Scale Curves: The discussion on non-linear cost and scale curves is a crucial one. Just as wind and solar technologies underwent significant advancements in the past two decades, the same could hold true for emerging solutions. Dismissing innovative ideas due to their current limitations might hinder the potential for breakthroughs that could play a vital role in combating climate change.
  5. Emissions Reduction Targets: Gore’s emphasis on achieving a 50% reduction in emissions within seven years is important, but it’s evident that more substantial reductions are required to avert catastrophic consequences. Longer-term solutions, even if they take longer to mature, should be explored and invested in to ensure a sustainable future.
  6. Balancing Self-Righteousness: While Gore’s passion for addressing the climate crisis is evident, the tone of his presentation could be perceived as self-righteous. He often evokes the position of a parent chastising a child for misbehavior, and I believe that was a major contributor to him losing the 2000 Presidential election. Effective climate communication requires fostering collaboration, acknowledging diverse perspectives, and encouraging collective action.

Conclusion: Al Gore’s talk highlights crucial facets of the climate crisis and the necessary steps to mitigate its impacts. While his arguments are thought-provoking, it’s crucial to consider the nuances surrounding each point and the rapidly evolving landscape of climate science and technology. Engaging in open discussions that embrace diverse viewpoints will ultimately pave the way for more effective climate solutions.