•
Monday's sudden departure of Jay Adelson as CEO of social news aggregator Digg has raised a few eyebrows in the tech community as some rumors imply that it may have been a decision made by the company's board. Regardless of the nature of the breakup, it got me thinking about the dichotomous relationship some startups have between founders and CEOs, and which, if either, is more expendable. Sponsor Digg was originally founded by Kevin Rose in 2004 and Adelson, who had experience as founder and CTO of a few companies in the 90s, was given the CEO role while Rose became "the face" of Digg. Many startups have used this same leadership role leaving the passionate entrepreneurial founder as a separate executive from a business-minded CEO. A similar situation has happened at Twitter , with Evan Williams becoming CEO in place of Jack Dorsey who remains as chairman of the board. This seems to separate the single-focus CEO from a serial entrepreneur with other interests. Since founding Digg, Kevin Rose has founded Pownce and WeFollow as well as personally investing in several other companies while Jack Dorsey has used his time to found the mobile transaction platform Square . For the majority of startups, I would think the concept of the free-wheeling founder would be less common, and other times, founders choose to also be CEOs. But in the case of the startups that have two separate people handling founder and CEO duties, who is more vital to the company? In these cases, founders usually start their company and hire a CEO when things start to pick up and they can't handle everything by themselves. While CEOs do lot of the corporate navigating, the founder, with his passion for the product, is often the forward facing driver of the company. With this argument, I think that losing a CEO over a founder is a better loss than vice versa. Of course, all businesses are different, and people leave for different reasons, and decisions like this should be taken on a case-by-case basis. However, VCs often talk about how they invest in founders just as much as they do ideas, so for a company to lose that passionate individual that the investors initially trusted might send bad signals about later investments. I'd like to hear what you think about this issue, and whether you think either a CEO or a founder is more or less likely to stay when someone needs to go. If you have personal experience with the dual relationship of CEO and founder in a startup, please share you experience in the comments below! Photo by Jim Merithew, Wired.com Discuss
The rest is here:
Founders & CEOs: Who Is More Expendable?
Tags:
ceo,
companies-while,
investors,
Kevin Rose,
passionate,
Startups,
tech,
time
•
Doing research to attract more women to our Mobile Summit on May 7, 2010 , I revisited some of ReadWriteWeb's past articles on gender and tech. In January, we discussed " 'Sexy Girls,' Smart Women and Tech " in an open thread where we asked for readers' opinions and had an open discussion on women's issues, like whether it's true that some good-looking women get flaunted as sex symbols, while other women get overlooked, are underpaid and not taken seriously. Sponsor Commenters, among other really interesting discussion points, asked for stats to back up statements. In Harvard Business Review Magazine this month I stumbled across a rather depressing recent study [ PDF download ], which, on the bright side confirms that looks have little to do with pay scale, ability to secure a leadership role, or smarts. However, on the dark side, it showed gender still very much does matter. Findings of the study show women's transcendence to leadership roles has not occurred, inequality remains entrenched in terms of pay, career advancement, as well as career satisfaction. Shockingly, study respondents weren't just any other Joanne or Joe Schmo in the workforce. The study tracked the smartest and brightest grad students from elite MBA programs, around the world, from 1996 to 2007. These are motivated and talented men and women. In the words of Harvard Business Review, "Pipeline's Broken Promise, examines the past two decades in which leaders have counted on parity in education, women's accelerated movement into the labor force, and company-implemented diversity and inclusion programs to yield a robust talent pipeline where women are poised to make rapid gains to the top. " The survey took into account experience, time since MBA, first post-MBA job level, industry and global region of work at the time of survey, and found that: Men were twice as likely as women to be at the CEO/senior executive level. Men's pay out paced women's. Men significantly outpaced women moving up the career ladder when starting out in similar level roles. These findings are not specific to any industry, including technology. Even I was shocked looking across this Microsoft org chart . For some reason seeing things in list format made the differential of men to women in Microsoft management even more striking. Note this isn't for lack of women candidates as women make up almost half (49.9% in October 2009) of the workforce - no, we aren't leaving work to have babies either! I am stereotypical myself. I personally have clawed my way all the way to middle management after 20 years working in the tech industry, while men younger than I hold more senior roles. Is this simply because I am a woman? These findings would say, "Well, yes." So what is it about men and women? Will there ever be a time where women aren't looked on as women in the tech industry, but just as smart people with skills that fit a certain role, best? I personally know a lot of extremely smart women, all of whom that have had to go out on their own to make it above the glass ceiling. So is it just men in management holding us back? I find this study pertinent, not just to my own work experience, but also as we are a month away from the Mobile Summit in San Francisco on May 7 . Looking to encourage a stronger female presence, we felt compelled to get out and ask women and men alike the following questions: Who are the most fascinating women working on the mobile Web? As a fascinating woman in mobile industry and working on the mobile Web, what topics would you find of interest? And yes, finally... Why do you think women when compared to men are STILL underpaid, less likely to be in a senior role, and less likely to be satisfied with their careers? Your thoughts and comments please. Also see these related articles on other websites from Clay Shirky , Jeanne of Feministing , danah boyd and Gina Trapani , which have some interesting comments and counterpoints on why the glass ceiling still exists. Photo by Faakhir Rizvi . Discuss
See the rest here:
Open Thread: Women in Leadership Roles Yet? No. But Why?
Tags:
career,
careers,
labor,
mobile,
pdf,
smart,
study,
tech,
time,
women,
words,
workforce
•
Thanks to the growing popularity of mobile augmented reality (AR) applications such as Layar and Wikitude , as well as countless advertising campaigns from corporate giants, AR is beginning to make its way out of the shadows of obscurity and into popular culture. Once an experimental technology left for expert engineers, AR is becoming more and more accessible to both developers and consumers of the experiences. Now, the greater AR community has another feather for its cap as Time Magazine has recognized it as one of its 10 Tech Trends for 2010. Sponsor "One challenge for 2010 will be harnessing the growing ubiquity of webcams and smart-phones to make augmented reality useful as a tool in day-to-day life," writes Time's Dan Fletcher, pointing out the U.S. Postal Service's virtual box simulator that helps customers determine what size box to use by holding the item they are shipping up their webcam. Unfortunately, Fletcher merely skims the surface of AR in his 10 part article published Monday, and in doing so he unintentionally labels players in the mobile AR space as "gimmicky." I can see how it would be easy for someone investigating AR iPhone apps to be overwhelmed at the plethora of apps that let you shoot things in an augmented first-person perspective, but it is still disappointing that he failed to notice the quality apps in the space. But hey, it's still great for us augmented reality fans to see our beloved emerging technology receive national notoriety in a publication such as Time, so we'll take what we can get. AR snagged the #4 position on Time's list, but when you look at some of the other trends listed, you notice that AR is already taking advantage of most, if not all of them. Time's #1 tech trend for 2010 is location, and it points out the growing popularity of services like Foursquare and Gowalla . Mobile AR applications have been taking advantage of location data since day one and it continues to play a crucial role. After location comes "building platforms, not websites," which Layar has been developing with their third-party POI data-sets and their upcoming layer marketplace . Good thing "frictionless payments" is another trend to watch for in 2010, otherwise Layar's marketplace would be ahead of its time. Also on Time's list is social gaming, and social objects, immediately reminding me of Tonchidot's Sekai Camera app which lets users leave AR objects in physical space for people to interact with through the application. One could argue that AR uses all of the other nine technologies featured on Time's list with the exception of the iPad, which unfortunately has no camera with which to augment our realities. On a related note, Layar co-founder Claire Boonstra was named to Laptop Magazine's list of the most influential women in technology . Alongside Boonstra was Google 's Marissa Mayer, Caterina Fake of Flickr and Hunch fame, and Melinda Gates. This, as well as Time's inclusion of AR on their tech trends list, is great exposure for augmented reality. If you'd like to learn more about how companies are using augmented reality for marketing in both desktop and mobile-based experiences, be sure to check out our latest premium report on the subject which was released earlier this week. Discuss
More:
Augmented Reality Among Time's 10 Tech Trends for 2010
Tags:
application,
augmented-reality,
Caterina Fake,
Claire Boonstra,
experiences,
growing,
laptop,
laptop-magazine,
Marissa Mayer,
mobile,
postal-service,
space,
tech,
trends,
webcam
•
A group of researchers have proven something we already expected to be the case: your Twitter follower count is somewhat of a meaningless metric when it comes to determining influence. To reach this conclusion, the researchers examined the Twitter accounts of over 54 million active users, out of some 80 million accounts crawled by their servers. They then went on to measure various statistics about these accounts, including audience size, retweet influence and mention influence. The conclusion? Those with the largest number of followers may be "popular" Twitterers, but that's not necessarily related to their influence. High follower counts don't always mean someone is being retweeted or mentioned in any meaningful ways. Sponsor The findings from this research project have been published in an research paper available here on the project's homepage . How the Data Was Analyzed The data the researchers had access to is astounding: 54,981,152 user accounts, 1,963,263,821 social (follow) links and 1,755,925,520 tweets . In order to collect this massive store of data, the researchers contacted Twitter and asked permission to crawl Twitter's service. Twitter granted them access and white-listed the IP address range for the 58 servers that were used in the data collection. In total, the crawler was able to scan 80 million Twitter accounts during the month of August 2009. Only 54+ million of those accounts were actually in-use at the time, which, in and of itself, is an interesting finding about how many people create a Twitter account and then abandon it. Only 8% of the active accounts were set to private, so they were ignored during the data analysis. The researchers also used the Twitter API to gather additional information about a user's social links and tweets. The study focused on the largest part of the Twitter network - the "single disproportionately large connected component," notes the paper, that contained 94.8% of users and 99% of all links and tweets. Within that large network of "in-use" accounts, the researchers further narrowed down the data to focus on the "active users." These users where those who had more than 10 tweets and had a valid screen name that could be retweeted by others. (Interesting - it's possible to have an account and not a screen name?) That left "only" 6,189,636 active users out of the initial 80 million to examine. To measure the influence of these 6+ million users, the researchers looked at how the entire set of the 52 million users interacted with these active users. The Three Measures of Influence After examining the data, the researchers found that the most followed individuals spanned a wide variety of public figures and news sources and included accounts like CNN, New York Times, Barack Obama, Shaquille O'Neal, Ashton Kutcher, Britney Spears and others. However, the most retweeted users tended to be content aggregation services like TwitterTips, TweetMeme, and, interestingly enough, they counted the tech blog Mashable as an aggregation service, too. Other heavily retweeted users included Guy Kawasaki, the humor site The Onion and again, The New York Times. Meanwhile, those users with the most "mentions" - not a direct retweet including the original content of someone else's tweet, but just a casual mention of their name - were celebs. These three measures of influence - followers, retweets and mentions - has surprisingly little overlap when looking at the top influentials. The top 20 lists from these three categories only had two users in common: Ashton Kutcher and Puff Daddy. The researchers also examined the ability of Twitter users to influence others. They determined that the most influential users hold significant influence over a variety of topics, as opposed to being experts in just one area. Examining the 233 "All-Time Influentials" Out of the 6 million active Twitter users, the researchers picked the top 100 users in each of the three categories. Due to the overlap, there were only 233 distinct users on these lists. These were dubbed the "all-time influentials." Some of these accounts belonged to news organizations or celebs, but others were just regular users. Regarding that last group - it appears that those users who limit their tweets to a single topic are the most likely to increase their influence scores. In the end, what the researchers found was that follower count alone is not necessarily a worthy measure of determining influence. Other factors come into play as well. Although some heavily-followed accounts are also mentioned and retweeted a lot, just looking at audience size doesn't reveal an account's ability to influence and impact the Twitter universe. According to the project's homepage, the researchers are hoping to make the data they collected available to the community at large. Before doing so, they will discuss it with Twitter in order to determine that their data sharing plan agrees with the company's policy. They plan to have an update on this situation - possibly the data itself - by May 2010. Discuss
Original post:
The Million Follower Fallacy: Audience Size Doesn't Prove Influence on Twitter
Tags:
api,
Ashton Kutcher,
barack obama,
cnn,
data,
humor,
largest,
project,
research,
researchers,
tech,
time
•
Would you broadcast information about your credit card transactions publicly on the Internet? That might sound frighteningly irresponsible, but serial entrepreneur Phil Kaplan says his new social network Blippy does that and represents the way of the future. I thought he was crazy - until I sat down and talked with him today at SXSW. In just a few minutes Kaplan melted my skepticism and got me excited about what Blippy is doing. You may have read about Blippy on sites like TechCrunch , Venturebeat and CNN . Kaplan shared a few things with us today that haven't been published anywhere else though, and the story of Blippy is generally interesting. Here are seven things you probably don't know about Blippy, a very far-out social network. Sponsor 1. Users can manually review each item before it's published or set up certain substreams that do different things - like automatically publish my iTunes transactions but ask me before publishing my Amazon purchases. Kaplan has two credit cards, one with a Blippy sticker on it to remind him that purchases made with that card are posted immediately to the web. 2. It's not about the money. Kaplan says he wants Blippy to be a way for offline activity to publish online conversation. The things you buy are often convenient signals for activities that are important to you. The conversations that go on around the items are quite interesting... at least on Kaplan's profile. He can buy a movie on iTunes and find a conversation about it swarming around his automatic Blippy post before the opening previews are over. Other users often don't see any comments on their activity at all. Jason Calacanis sees some good conversation. 3. Blippy now sees $2 million worth of user transactions streaming through the site per week, Kaplan says, and has seen close to $15 million in transactions total since it launched publicly January 15. 4. Kaplan doesn't think sharing credit card data is that big a deal. He cites LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman's argument that people will share anything if there's enough of a benefit to sharing it. Friendster was the first site where people used their real names on the Internet, and people weren't comfortable with that at first, either. "The more insane someone thinks something is, the more value they put on the data. People say 'I can't believe you're doing this, it's so insane I'm going to jump out the window!' Then I ask them, 'Do you want the data?' And they say 'Yes!'" 5. Data portability: Kaplan is working on a Blippy App Programming Interface and "it's going to have everything." Data caching policy is something "we have to think about still." Imagine a website that recommends recipes based on the food it knows you have in your refridgerator. That's one example of the kind of service that could be built on top of Blippy. 6. Aggregate data analysis isn't something Kaplan is personally interested in , he says. It's hard to believe but he says he'll leave that kind of thing up to third parties using the Blippy API if they want to. The company will focus all its energy on making Blippy a good experiene for users. Really, that's what he said. 7. Location data is something Blippy sees but doesn't expose right now. Kaplan says it's coming, though. He thinks the current location-based social networks need to deliver more value to users, and says that's something Blippy can do. People these days produce all kinds of data streams, Kaplan says - from Facebook to Twitter to Smart Grid utility use and electronic medical data. Some of those streams you wouldn't want to be public about at all, but some of them you can benefit from partially exposing. He thinks that at least some of your credit card transactions are better shared than kept private. Time will tell whether or not other people agree with him. Discuss
Visit link:
The Meaning & Future of Blippy, the Credit Card Data Social Network
Tags:
api,
Blippy,
cnn,
credit,
facebook,
internet,
kaplan,
people,
Programming,
skepticism,
tech