The moment everyone's been waiting for, the final draft of my thesis is finally available through issuu. Check it out!
Enhancing Entrepreneurial Learning: Designing a System that better enables knowledge and experience transfer from business mentor to entrepreneur
Showing posts with label Entrepreneurial Learning. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Entrepreneurial Learning. Show all posts
Thesis Defense: Enhancing Entrepreneurial Learning
The following slideshare is my master's thesis defense. Even though there's 51 slides, the run time was roughly 12 minutes.
After presenting the mentor system
during my thesis defense, I received feedback on two major areas of
the system that will help guide its development. The first area is
learning for the entrepreneur and the second area is determining the
outcome of the mentor system.
One of the challenges of the mentor
system is measuring the actual learning that is going on within the
mentoring session. For the entrepreneur, the learning occurring
during these mentoring sessions is dependent on their stage – idea
stage, launch stage, or operating business stage. As part of the
design for the mentor system, the system needs a set of metrics for
measuring the appropriate skills for each of these stages. Measuring
these basic competencies for each stage, while the entrepreneur has
progressed from the idea stage to launch stage and finally to an
operating business, will determine whether the learning will actually
result in an increased business success. In other words, the
entrepreneur will be making less mistakes.
As a part of learning from a mentor and
having discussions and feedback, the entrepreneur should make less
mistakes over time. Being able to know when an entrepreneur changes
their mind from going down one road to another can be one indicator
of learning. Another indicator is measuring for the conversational
themes. If these conversational themes were present within the
mentoring conversation, then the precursor for learning is present.
However, without measuring entrepreneurial behavior we can not be
certain if learning took place. For example, if we look at a
classroom full of math students, we can measure how they are learning
by testing them against a set of standards. We begin with an entry
exam, to see how much they know on the subject. The lesson is taught
and a second exam is administered on the same subject. If fewer
mistakes were made, it's assumed that learning has occurred during
the lesson. I think this same example can be applied to
entrepreneurship in the sense that learning is measured over time,
not with a single set of questions. A reduction in mistakes can not
be measured by a single exam. Obviously, asking entrepreneurs to take
a single survey as they are starting their businesses is not the
right way to go about measuring learning. Finding the appropriate
mechanism for this will take some time and will guide the development
of this project over the next few months. I think this feedback will
effect the follow-up section of the mentor system by determining the
questions that need to be asked.
The second area of thesis committee
feedback is determining the outcome of the mentor system. This means
that I need to explicitly communicate the value this system delivers
to its different audiences – entrepreneurs, mentors, and local
mentoring organizations. This ties directly with the value
proposition because it will determine the expectations of each
audience before they use the mentor system. At the moment, it seems
the best course of action is to go directly to the users in order to
determine what the mentor system should accomplish. If we look at
entrepreneurs, we realize they want a successful business. Non-profit
local mentoring organizations want to help more entrepreneurs because
they receive federal funding that requires them to help as many
entrepreneurs that seek them out. Mentors want to be able to give
back and see an eventual impact as a result of their mentoring. The
needs and wants of these three different intersect at helping
entrepreneurs start and continue to operate sustainable businesses.
At this intersect, I believe we can define the outcome for the mentor
system.
Mentoring Data: Extracting Useful Information, Pie Graphs and Bar Graphs
About two weeks ago I had a meeting with Richard Genzer. He recommended I transform the mentoring timelines into pie graphs and correlate them to the post-mentoring session follow-up I've been doing with the entrepreneurs. Once I've collected data, this type of correlation could allow me to come up with a theoretical breakdown of an optimal mentoring conversation. Also, by simplifying the data into pie graphs allows for quicker communication at a lower resolution, and will hopefully become easier to notice patterns.
The following series of images shows the transformation of the timeline into a pie graph and a bar graph. The first image is a legend that gives a greater description of the various conversational themes.
Back to Table of Contents.
The following series of images shows the transformation of the timeline into a pie graph and a bar graph. The first image is a legend that gives a greater description of the various conversational themes.
 |
| Legend |
 |
| Mentoring Session 1 |
 |
| Mentoring Session 2 |
 |
| Mentoring Session 3 |
Back to Table of Contents.
Mentoring System, Iteration 4
I met with Garrett Melby a few weeks ago to receive feedback on the third iteration of the mentoring system. Some of the crucial pieces of information that I needed to better understand includes the business readiness intake, how mentors would sign-up for the service, how mentors and entrepreneurs would follow-up once they had an advising session, and how best to communicate the entrepreneurs request for mentoring.
The diagram below shows the next iteration of the mentoring network with feedback incorporated into it, and I've also been wrestling with a possible logo, brand, and mission statement for this thesis project. The current name is talKIN (it's a play on 'kin' referring to community). The mission statement is a conversation focused mentoring and advising community for entrepreneurs. The rest of this blog post will cover the different areas I received feedback on and various other details that have shed insight into better designing a mentoring network.
The business readiness intake is a two step process. First, the entrepreneurs from the original candidate group funnel themselves into idea stage, launch stage or operating business. This first part of the business readiness intake also asks for the elevator pitch and contact information. The second part of the filter has two components. The first component takes the idea and launch stage entrepreneurs and has them meet with an early stage strategist. The purpose of meeting with an early stage strategist is to help the idea and launch stage entrepreneur discover their problem areas, understand where to they need to focus, and where they need the most help. The second component takes the operating business and has it self-diagnose where its problem areas. The reason the idea and launch stage entrepreneurs meet with an early stage strategist is because entrepreneurs at this stage, do not yet know how best to focus their efforts or even the order of actionable steps to start a business.
When mentors from the different local mentoring organizations sign-up for this service, they choose based upon a sliding scale, their expertise and interests. Some of these areas include business development, customer development, finance, fundraising, legal, marketing, operations, product development, sales, and team. The mentor also chooses the industries they've worked in, provides their schedule, and how long they would like to have a mentoring session. Finally, the mentor chooses whether they would like to meet early stage, launch stage, and/or operating businesses.
Communicating to the various mentors on the network about the entrepreneur's problem areas is a delicate matter. To prevent mentors and advisers from fishing and to make sure that the entrepreneur feels safe about communicating the problems they're experiencing, the request for mentoring becomes a request review. The request review is less detailed and only presents the different areas the entrepreneur needs help without describing the problem the entrepreneur is experiencing. The request review is then sent out to mentors that match based upon industry, schedule, meeting duration, expertise, idea stage, launch stage, or operating business. Once a mentor agrees to meet, the mentor receives an email with a greater description of the problems the entrepreneur is having. Another detail is that a mentor can see whether another mentor has already agreed to meet, so they don't double book a session with the entrepreneur. This will prevent a waste of resources.
After the mentoring session comes follow-up. At this time, we ask the entrepreneur to give feedback on whether they found the conversation useful based upon the ideas discussed with the entrepreneur. For example, we would the entrepreneur whether they conversation moved him or her to action, or whether the ideas seem like good ideas when they acted on them. Furthermore, it seems vital that feedback is incorporated from both the entrepreneur and mentor about each other, but figuring out whether these will be positive or negative screens has not yet been determined.
Back to Table of Contents.
The diagram below shows the next iteration of the mentoring network with feedback incorporated into it, and I've also been wrestling with a possible logo, brand, and mission statement for this thesis project. The current name is talKIN (it's a play on 'kin' referring to community). The mission statement is a conversation focused mentoring and advising community for entrepreneurs. The rest of this blog post will cover the different areas I received feedback on and various other details that have shed insight into better designing a mentoring network.
The business readiness intake is a two step process. First, the entrepreneurs from the original candidate group funnel themselves into idea stage, launch stage or operating business. This first part of the business readiness intake also asks for the elevator pitch and contact information. The second part of the filter has two components. The first component takes the idea and launch stage entrepreneurs and has them meet with an early stage strategist. The purpose of meeting with an early stage strategist is to help the idea and launch stage entrepreneur discover their problem areas, understand where to they need to focus, and where they need the most help. The second component takes the operating business and has it self-diagnose where its problem areas. The reason the idea and launch stage entrepreneurs meet with an early stage strategist is because entrepreneurs at this stage, do not yet know how best to focus their efforts or even the order of actionable steps to start a business.
When mentors from the different local mentoring organizations sign-up for this service, they choose based upon a sliding scale, their expertise and interests. Some of these areas include business development, customer development, finance, fundraising, legal, marketing, operations, product development, sales, and team. The mentor also chooses the industries they've worked in, provides their schedule, and how long they would like to have a mentoring session. Finally, the mentor chooses whether they would like to meet early stage, launch stage, and/or operating businesses.
Communicating to the various mentors on the network about the entrepreneur's problem areas is a delicate matter. To prevent mentors and advisers from fishing and to make sure that the entrepreneur feels safe about communicating the problems they're experiencing, the request for mentoring becomes a request review. The request review is less detailed and only presents the different areas the entrepreneur needs help without describing the problem the entrepreneur is experiencing. The request review is then sent out to mentors that match based upon industry, schedule, meeting duration, expertise, idea stage, launch stage, or operating business. Once a mentor agrees to meet, the mentor receives an email with a greater description of the problems the entrepreneur is having. Another detail is that a mentor can see whether another mentor has already agreed to meet, so they don't double book a session with the entrepreneur. This will prevent a waste of resources.
After the mentoring session comes follow-up. At this time, we ask the entrepreneur to give feedback on whether they found the conversation useful based upon the ideas discussed with the entrepreneur. For example, we would the entrepreneur whether they conversation moved him or her to action, or whether the ideas seem like good ideas when they acted on them. Furthermore, it seems vital that feedback is incorporated from both the entrepreneur and mentor about each other, but figuring out whether these will be positive or negative screens has not yet been determined.
Back to Table of Contents.
Mentoring Conversations Visualized: More Data, New Discoveries
Two more mentoring sessions recorded, analyzed, and visualized! The first infographic is a conversation between an idea stage entrepreneur and a mentor. It's also a first time meeting between this particular mentor and entrepreneur. The second infographic is a conversation between an entrepreneur that's built a prototype and a mentor. The entrepreneur and mentor depicted conversing in the second infographic have been meeting for several months now and have an established relationship.
 |
| Idea Stage Entrepreneur |
 |
| Prototype Stage Entrepreneur |
When comparing these two conversations with the first mentoring conversation I visualized, which was a first time meeting between an idea stage entrepreneur and mentor, the similarities are mostly in how the conversations begin. The entrepreneur has to bring the mentor up to speed about what he or she has been doing for the past month or so before the mentor can provide any strategic advice. This part of the conversation is highlighted in burgundy. Furthermore, another similarity is the total amount of time taken up by current/past strategy. It takes a significant portion of the mentoring session to bring the mentor up to speed on what the entrepreneur has been doing and is currently doing. I do not yet know if it's good or bad that it takes somewhere between 10 - 15 minutes to discuss current/past strategies.
One noticeable difference between these two mentoring sessions and the first mentoring session is the amount of questions asked by the mentor from the first mentoring conversation. I think the difference in the amount of questions asked has to do with the mentoring/advising style of the mentor.
The part I'm still struggling to figure out is how to measure an effective mentoring/advising conversation. Looking at the infographics, I'm not yet sure I can see or point to markers that comprise an effective mentoring conversation.
Even if I can't figure out how to measure an effective mentoring/advising conversation, implementing a prototype will show one of three things: positive deviation from the norm, no deviation from the norm, or negative deviation from the norm. A positive deviation will be when a prototype aids in facilitating knowledge transfer. No deviation will be when the prototype did just as well as there being no prototype implemented into the conversation. Negative deviation is when the prototype hinders knowledge transfer from mentor to entrepreneur. In other words, designing a prototype for these conversations will either lead to something good, something bad, or absolutely nothing...
You can see one possible prototype here, or another prototype here.
Back to Table of Contents.
What is a Mentor?
There are many types of mentors, from those that form relationships with young boys and girls to executives of large companies that guide promising new managers. The types of mentors this thesis is concerned about are experienced entrepreneurs "who actively contribute time, energy, and wisdom to startups" (Feld, 42). These mentors usually play an important role within their respective startup community (Feld, 42).
Mentors are different from advisors in their relationship with the startup. Even though an advisor and a mentor may have similar experiences, an advisor "has an economic relationship with the company he is advising" (Feld, 42). This difference between advisor and mentor stems from their motivation to contribute their experiences to the startup. The mentor's rewards from putting in time and energy is not a clear return on investment, but is a return on involvement. A return on involvement, the new ROI, is another way of saying that you're willing to "give before you get." Both Startup Communites by Brad Feld and The Rainforest by Hwang and Horowitt address the same cultural norm about entrepreneurs using different verbage. This norm, which extends to entrepreneurial mentors, is the willingness to give some of your time, energy, or wisdom to a startup or the community without having a clear return on your investment.
An infographic quantifying the relationship between a mentor and entrepreneur can be seen here.
Source: Startup Communities by Brad Feld
Back to Table of Contents.
Mentors are different from advisors in their relationship with the startup. Even though an advisor and a mentor may have similar experiences, an advisor "has an economic relationship with the company he is advising" (Feld, 42). This difference between advisor and mentor stems from their motivation to contribute their experiences to the startup. The mentor's rewards from putting in time and energy is not a clear return on investment, but is a return on involvement. A return on involvement, the new ROI, is another way of saying that you're willing to "give before you get." Both Startup Communites by Brad Feld and The Rainforest by Hwang and Horowitt address the same cultural norm about entrepreneurs using different verbage. This norm, which extends to entrepreneurial mentors, is the willingness to give some of your time, energy, or wisdom to a startup or the community without having a clear return on your investment.
An infographic quantifying the relationship between a mentor and entrepreneur can be seen here.
Source: Startup Communities by Brad Feld
Back to Table of Contents.
Philadelphia Tech Startup Community
When I first began my thesis about mentors enabling entrepreneurial learning, I spent several months interviewing people looking for an area to focus within the Philadelphia Tech Startup Community. I began noticing patterns in the roles people played and eventually grouped their roles.
I then refined how everyone was interacting into a polished diagram, which aided as a tool to further discover where I should focus my thesis.
I then used this map as an interviewing tool to have interviewees show me where they perceive different resources to be allocated, for example, funding and mentorship. An example of one such interview is depicted below, a lengthier post about these interviews is here.
Finally, I went back to my studio and put the interviews all over the walls and again began looking for patterns and began drawing conclusions. A post about the analysis of these interviews is here.
View Table of Contents.
I then refined how everyone was interacting into a polished diagram, which aided as a tool to further discover where I should focus my thesis.
I then used this map as an interviewing tool to have interviewees show me where they perceive different resources to be allocated, for example, funding and mentorship. An example of one such interview is depicted below, a lengthier post about these interviews is here.
Finally, I went back to my studio and put the interviews all over the walls and again began looking for patterns and began drawing conclusions. A post about the analysis of these interviews is here.
View Table of Contents.
Thesis Committee Presentation: Mentoring System
My presentation to my thesis committee went well this past Wednesday. The final pieces of research and prototype implementations that need to occur are only a few months away. Two major steps that need to be taken is to collect ten to twenty more recordings of mentoring conversations and visualize them. The purpose is to create a baseline measurement before implementing the request for mentoring form. Creating a baseline will let me measure whether the request for mentoring form is effective or ineffective at enabling knowledge and experience transfer from mentor to entrepreneur. An example of one such conversation visual is shown below:
A few minor steps that need to be taken includes fleshing out the design for the different pieces of the mentoring system. I used prezi to present a poster of the mentoring system to my thesis committee, which you can interact with below. The only piece from the mentoring system that's reached a state for implementation is the request for mentoring form. The other pieces that need to be designed include the business readiness intake, the match-making system, the follow-up form, and the mentor sign-up form.
A few minor steps that need to be taken includes fleshing out the design for the different pieces of the mentoring system. I used prezi to present a poster of the mentoring system to my thesis committee, which you can interact with below. The only piece from the mentoring system that's reached a state for implementation is the request for mentoring form. The other pieces that need to be designed include the business readiness intake, the match-making system, the follow-up form, and the mentor sign-up form.
To thesis Table of Contents.
Mentoring System: Iteration 3
I've been working on making the mentoring system easier to read and understand the flow of entrepreneurs and mentors before and after they meet for a mentoring session. Any feedback is appreciated.
Back to Table of Contents.
Back to Table of Contents.
Mentoring Progress Report
The mentoring progress report is another building block for a mentoring system. The purpose of the progress report is to create a simple way for mentoring organizations to keep track of the businesses they're mentoring.
I imagine the progress report being filled out at least once a month or before an entrepreneur requests for mentoring. The first iteration of the progress report is below.
I imagine the progress report being filled out at least once a month or before an entrepreneur requests for mentoring. The first iteration of the progress report is below.
If you take a look at the mentoring system below, the mentoring progress report is section six: follow-up.
Back to Table of Contents.
Visualizing Mentoring Conversations
To discover a way to measure the efficacy of a mentoring session, I listened and re-listened to a recording of a mentoring conversation. I was trying to discern themes in the conversation to help make it easier to compare different mentoring sessions. I noticed five major themes: questions, examples, application, current/past strategies, and future strategies.
Questions are denoted by red lines, and appear every time a questions is asked.
Examples: Real world examples are used in several ways by both the mentor and entrepreneur. They’re used to learn from competitors’ strategies. Some times examples of potential customers are discussed to notice how a market segment may be profiled for product-market fit. Other times, they’re metaphorical to convey a concept about human nature and business strategy.
Application: Whenever an example is presented in conversation, it is then applied to the entrepreneurs current situation.
Current/Past Strategy: Current/Past Strategy denotes whenever the mentor or entrepreneur discuss where the entrepreneur’s business currently is or has been.
Future Strategy: Future Strategy is a discussion about steps that can be taken to move the business forward.
The following two infographics are my first attempt at visualizing a mentoring conversation. They are both visuals of the same conversation, however, the larger graphic includes the questions asked by both the mentor and entrepreneur.
This second infographic of the mentoring session is too busy and requires a simpler way to convey the key questions asked by the mentor.
Back to Table of Contents.
Questions are denoted by red lines, and appear every time a questions is asked.
Examples: Real world examples are used in several ways by both the mentor and entrepreneur. They’re used to learn from competitors’ strategies. Some times examples of potential customers are discussed to notice how a market segment may be profiled for product-market fit. Other times, they’re metaphorical to convey a concept about human nature and business strategy.
Application: Whenever an example is presented in conversation, it is then applied to the entrepreneurs current situation.
Current/Past Strategy: Current/Past Strategy denotes whenever the mentor or entrepreneur discuss where the entrepreneur’s business currently is or has been.
Future Strategy: Future Strategy is a discussion about steps that can be taken to move the business forward.
The following two infographics are my first attempt at visualizing a mentoring conversation. They are both visuals of the same conversation, however, the larger graphic includes the questions asked by both the mentor and entrepreneur.
Noteworthy Observations:
1. During the course of this mentoring conversation, there seems to have been a shift between the 18:00 to 22:30 minute mark, where the mentor begins providing strategic advice. I believe this shift occurs because the mentor has figured out what to focus on with the entrepreneur, and where to delve deeper in order to sketch next steps for the entrepreneur to tackle.
2. Towards the end of this mentoring session, 31:30 and onward, the entrepreneur shifted towards applying what he’s learning from the examples to his own business. This is particularly noticible when the applications appear without a preceding example on the entrepreneurs side of the conversation. The entrepreneur is taking the example the mentor has provided and is directly applying the pedagogical purpose of that example.
This second infographic of the mentoring session is too busy and requires a simpler way to convey the key questions asked by the mentor.
Back to Table of Contents.
Context for Mentoring: A Mentoring System
My meeting with Aaron Mclean went well. I presented the first version of the mentoring system to him and he provided feedback and filled in missing information about how the match making system could actually work. I took my notes from the meeting and created a second visual showing the complexity of the mentoring system. I've realized that the Request for Mentoring form is a small piece of the puzzle. The following visual is still a rough sketch, it's missing a few more pieces: the business readiness intake and the follow-up form still need to be designed. The match making system will need front-end mock-ups and an architectural sketch of the back-end system that will make everything electronic.
Our discussion also went over what the business readiness intake would look like and how to measure the efficacy of a mentoring conversation. I learned that the business readiness intake is dependent on the entrepreneur's level of commitment and passion for the business, but will also be greatly influenced by their stage in life. The entrepreneurs life stage is determined by whether they're in college, graduated, married, single, children, siblings nearby, etc. All these social pieces of information reveals the entrepreneurs competing commitments, responsibilities, available social capital, and safety nets. To measure the efficacy of a mentoring conversation, I learned, is based on asking questions during the mentoring conversation to make sure the mentee is following. From observing mentoring conversations, this seems to be true.
Update: Another key element I've finally gotten around to designing is the follow-up section, which I'm currently calling the Mentoring Progress Report.
More to come...
Back to Table of Contents.
Request for Mentoring - Iteration Six
After test out iteration five of the request for mentoring form with a few entrepreneurs and also getting more feedback from mentors, there are three changes made since the last version. The first change is removing the value proposition section and replacing it completely with the elevator pitch section. A few of the entrepreneurs that filled out the previous version wrote the same first sentence for their elevator pitch and value proposition. The value proposition is redundant and has now been removed. The second change is adding a clear distinction that sections 4 - 7 refer to the strategic area that the entrepreneur has chosen. Entrepreneurs that had filled out the previous version were not correctly attributing the past objectives, past strategies, results, and future objectives with the strategic area they had chosen. Adding a clear distinction now clears up that confusion. The third change is the addition of section eight: questions. In discussion with a mentor from Cofounders Bridge, he pointed out that it's valuable to know what an entrepreneur is expecting from a mentor. To communicate this expectation, it has been framed as a series of two to three questions the entrepreneur needs to ask the mentor.
Back to Request for Mentoring page.
Mentoring Network: Rough Sketch
After presenting to my thesis committee, one of the pieces of feedback I received was that I was too focused on just the conversation between the mentor and entrepreneur. They asked me to take a bigger perspective to understand to structure of the system around the request for mentoring form, and how the different pieces of the puzzle would then fit together.
To answer this question from my thesis committee, I had to go back to my notes I took while meeting with Garrett from Good Company Group. While Garrett and I were discussing applications of my thesis research, he sketched out a rough framework of a mentoring network. He pointed out four major segments to this mentoring network.
The first segment includes all possible entrepreneurs that are interested in mentoring, which means that the first segment also has to create a filter that weeds out entrepreneurs that aren't committed to their business and moving it forward.
The second segment is the group of entrepreneurs that have passed the initial business readiness filter. This group of entrepreneurs may then submit requests for mentoring when they want to have a mentoring session. However, a key factor that Garrett pointed out is that mentors are a valuable resource, their time is valuable so it shouldn't be wasted. To ration mentoring to the group of entrepreneurs in segment two, we can look at three possible areas to design a mechanism that prevents over-usage of the mentors. The first area is frequency and is determined by the amount of times an entrepreneur meets with mentors. The second area is feedback from the mentor to the mentoring network, letting the mentoring network know that the entrepreneur did not value his or her time. The third area is price, which basically means the entrepreneur would have to pay a small sum in order to meet. For example, this could be from purchasing the mentors coffee, to paying ten to twenty dollars. The purpose for price is to create a sense of value of the time the mentor spends with the entrepreneur.
The third segment includes the organizations within Philadelphia, or any other startup ecosystem, that acts as an interface between the mentors and the entrepreneurs. Essentially, the matchmaking group receives the request for mentoring form from the entrepreneurs in segment two, and then sends it off to the group of mentors in segment four. The organizations in segment three can also provide a space for the mentor and the entrepreneur to meet and discuss the entrepreneur's business.
The fourth segment includes mentors from various areas including business development, customer development, finance, fundraising, legal, marketing, operations, product development, sales, and team. Furthermore, there would have to be a hierarchy in place that would allow for a time manager to know the schedules of all the mentors from each mentoring area. The time manager would then distribute out the request for mentoring form to the mentor that has time to meet.
Finally, the match is made and the entrepreneur meets with the mentor.
To second iteration of the mentoring network visual.
To Table of Contents.
To answer this question from my thesis committee, I had to go back to my notes I took while meeting with Garrett from Good Company Group. While Garrett and I were discussing applications of my thesis research, he sketched out a rough framework of a mentoring network. He pointed out four major segments to this mentoring network.
The first segment includes all possible entrepreneurs that are interested in mentoring, which means that the first segment also has to create a filter that weeds out entrepreneurs that aren't committed to their business and moving it forward.
The second segment is the group of entrepreneurs that have passed the initial business readiness filter. This group of entrepreneurs may then submit requests for mentoring when they want to have a mentoring session. However, a key factor that Garrett pointed out is that mentors are a valuable resource, their time is valuable so it shouldn't be wasted. To ration mentoring to the group of entrepreneurs in segment two, we can look at three possible areas to design a mechanism that prevents over-usage of the mentors. The first area is frequency and is determined by the amount of times an entrepreneur meets with mentors. The second area is feedback from the mentor to the mentoring network, letting the mentoring network know that the entrepreneur did not value his or her time. The third area is price, which basically means the entrepreneur would have to pay a small sum in order to meet. For example, this could be from purchasing the mentors coffee, to paying ten to twenty dollars. The purpose for price is to create a sense of value of the time the mentor spends with the entrepreneur.
The third segment includes the organizations within Philadelphia, or any other startup ecosystem, that acts as an interface between the mentors and the entrepreneurs. Essentially, the matchmaking group receives the request for mentoring form from the entrepreneurs in segment two, and then sends it off to the group of mentors in segment four. The organizations in segment three can also provide a space for the mentor and the entrepreneur to meet and discuss the entrepreneur's business.
The fourth segment includes mentors from various areas including business development, customer development, finance, fundraising, legal, marketing, operations, product development, sales, and team. Furthermore, there would have to be a hierarchy in place that would allow for a time manager to know the schedules of all the mentors from each mentoring area. The time manager would then distribute out the request for mentoring form to the mentor that has time to meet.
Finally, the match is made and the entrepreneur meets with the mentor.
To second iteration of the mentoring network visual.
To Table of Contents.
Thesis Committee Presentation and Feedback
Late last week, I had my thesis committee meeting. The people on my committee include Sharon, Jonas, Jeremy, and Angel. The expertise they bring to the table includes entrepreneurship, design, and writing. I had presented a summary of the thesis work I had been doing over the past two months. You can see the slides I used on slideshare:
There were two main takeaways from the feedback they were giving me. The first important piece of feedback is that I did not make explicit the jumps I made from observations of mentoring sessions to the request for mentoring (RFM) form. The second takeaway is that I did not show the system that would have to be in place to support the RFM.
There were two main takeaways from the feedback they were giving me. The first important piece of feedback is that I did not make explicit the jumps I made from observations of mentoring sessions to the request for mentoring (RFM) form. The second takeaway is that I did not show the system that would have to be in place to support the RFM.
Request for Mentoring - Iteration Five
Over the past week and a half, I met with Sean Steinmarc from psGive and he filled out the fourth iteration of the RFM. I took the completed RFM to Aaron Mclean, a mentor who has open office hours, to see if he can actually provide business advice and pose relevant questions based upon the information that was on the form. I learned from meeting with him that the RFM doesn't provide enough context to the information the entrepreneur provides. The context that needs to be added is similar to an elevator pitch, where the entrepreneur describes the market and problem, the competitors and market size, the solution their making, etc. The following image shows the next iteration of the RFM, it incorporates the elevator pitch section.
Back to Table of Contents.
Back to Request for Mentoring page.
Back to Request for Mentoring page.
Request for Mentoring - Iteration Four
Having email out the third iteration of the RFM, I received feedback from Todd, founder of Side Arts and program and marketing director for the Corzo Center. He noticed there are two ways the RFM could be interpreted, influencing how it's used. The first interpretation is a filtering tool for the mentor, to evaluate whether she would want to meet with the entrepreneur. The second interpretation is as a tool for following up.
I think both interpretations are valid because they are both part of the interactions between mentor and entrepreneur. I think the first interpretation is the one that should be focused on because this thesis is about how mentors and entrepreneurs identify each other. Creating a secondary tool, or modifying the RFM to afford a simple way for the entrepreneur to follow-up on objectives with the mentor will increase the scope of this thesis, which will hinder me from completing my thesis on time.
Back to Table of Contents.
Back to Request for Mentoring page.
I think both interpretations are valid because they are both part of the interactions between mentor and entrepreneur. I think the first interpretation is the one that should be focused on because this thesis is about how mentors and entrepreneurs identify each other. Creating a secondary tool, or modifying the RFM to afford a simple way for the entrepreneur to follow-up on objectives with the mentor will increase the scope of this thesis, which will hinder me from completing my thesis on time.
Back to Table of Contents.
Back to Request for Mentoring page.
Request for Mentoring - Iteration Three
The third iteration of the RFM builds on top of the second version by using the same graphical language and information hierarchy. The greatest change you'll notice is providing greater scaffolding for the entrepreneur's input - specifically, it's the addition of the ten strategic areas that mentors can provide business advice. These ten areas were determined from a survey of ten startups, which involved asking these startups how they describe their own problem areas. Doing this survey and meeting with Garrett from Good Company, a mentor to startups, informed the changes to language being used.
You'll also see the addition of the value proposition because of the need for the mentor to understand the startup's problem and opportunity as succinctly as possible. The user's input is further constrained in order to streamline the entrepreneur's input and the reading of the RFM by the mentor. Finally, two managerial changes include the addition of "email address" and 'phone number."
Back to Table of Contents.
Back to Request for Mentoring page.
You'll also see the addition of the value proposition because of the need for the mentor to understand the startup's problem and opportunity as succinctly as possible. The user's input is further constrained in order to streamline the entrepreneur's input and the reading of the RFM by the mentor. Finally, two managerial changes include the addition of "email address" and 'phone number."
Back to Table of Contents.
Back to Request for Mentoring page.
Request for Mentoring - Iteration Two
The second iteration of the RFM builds on top of the first version, and takes into consideration information hierarchy by graphically guiding the entrepreneur's eye from title to question to answer. You'll notice an addition of an icon that visually represents the interaction between mentor and entrepreneur. There is less wasted space and slightly more scaffolding guiding user input when compared to the first iteration.
Back to Table of Contents.
Back to Request for Mentoring page.
Back to Table of Contents.
Back to Request for Mentoring page.
Request for Mentoring - Iteration One
The first iteration of the RFM captures the areas that the entrepreneur fills out ahead of the mentoring session. As the first version, this is the first attempt at putting the mentoring patterns observed into a physical form.
Back to Table of Contents.
Back to Request for Mentoring page.
Back to Table of Contents.
Back to Request for Mentoring page.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)