How To Staff A Startup With (Almost) No Money

How To Staff A Startup With (Almost) No Money

Struggling entrepreneurs around the world are in deep envy of Nick D’Aloisio’s business acumen. Last month, the 17-year-old sold Summly, his news-aggregation app, to Yahoo for a reported $30 million! If and when D’Aloisio starts another company, it will certainly be, to put it mildly, well-funded.
Of course, most entrepreneurs do not have access to that kind of cash. The average business takes years to break even, let alone post a profit. Two-time entrepreneur Jordan Eisenberg, founder of UrgentRX warns that, “Few things in a start up are more important than carefully managing cash. At the beginning, before you have investors, it is not unusual for you (and possibly employees) to forego salary for extended periods of time. Do whatever it takes to build your product and get it to market.”
While the founders of a company might be willing to forgo a paycheck for months on end to get their business up-and-running, their employees may not be so eager to make that sacrifice. To get workers to go along, cash-strapped entrepreneurs have to get creative.

Non-Monetary Incentives

Many startups simply do not have the money for any kind of traditional compensation plan. That's why so many entrepreneurs try to leverage equity. Taking on co-founders or compensating employees with a stake in the company can be a viable initial fix, but it isn’t always sustainable.
Fortunately, there are other low or no-cost alternatives to get people to do work on your startup.
StartupDigest, for instance, champions the Curator Model. The company finds talented individuals to manage or “curate” the digest for their home cities. Curators receive no financial compensation, yet management insists volunteers line up to lend a hand. Why? Because the platform lets curators distribute digests in their own names. It’s a win-win transaction in which no money changes hands.
As long as a curator is not a potential competitor, it allows collaborators to self-promote/and leverage the company's rolodex in exchange for some form of labor. When an employee or partner wants to spend his or her time performing tasks you need done, the need for monetary compensation can drop out of the equation.
Colleges and universities can also provide free labor in the form of interns. Offering mentorship in exchange for help at the office can pay divdends, especially since many college students bring a deep grasp of social media and other technological chops that make them capable of much more than just making coffee.

Life Hacks

Sometimes startups need to hire real paid employees. To land high-caliber talent at a rate you can afford, make your startup worthy of others' personal investment.
‘Life hacks’ don't cost a lot of money, but can make working at a startup more desirable than a better-paying position at a staid old-guard firm. Silicon Valley companies like Google and Facebook are well known for providing employees with everything from in-house chefs to daycare. Those are expensive, but ther are other tactics available:
• Flexible scheduling: Startups aren’t a 9-5 job so let employees come in when they want.
• Remote working: Forget Marissa Mayer. If employees are productive at home, let them work from there when they need to. At least they won't leave to go work at Yahoo.
• Public recognition: Praise in front of others for our efforts is an innate human need – leverage it to build loyalty!
Focus on offseting lower wages with fun, engaging and accommodating perks that don't cost the company a lot of money. It's the best way to compete for the talent you need.
Not evey candidate will sign on to a vow of poverty to work at your company, but there are people out there ready to take a bit less in order to become part of something special.

The Smart TV Is Dead. Long Live The Second Screen

The Smart TV Is Dead. Long Live The Second Screen

People want their television to work like a TV. Sending tweets on Twitter, posting photos on Facebook and browsing the Web are best left to smartphones and tablets. Indeed, more than 40% of U.S. households with Internet-enabled TVs haven't even bothered to hook them up to the Web, according to market researcher NPD Group.
This is not the future TV manufacturers expected.

RIP, Smart TV

In 2010, reimagining TVs as computer hybrids with big screens for the living room seemed to make lots of sense. Why not play games, run applications and surf the Web from the same box that shows movies and programming from a cable or satellite provider? Proponents quickly dubbed the new device the "smart TV."
Intel, sensing a new market for its microprocessors, was a huge supporter, saying the smart TV "could be the most significant change in television history." Yet by end of 2011, Intel had abandoned the smart TV business to focus on smartphones and tablets.
The main problem was that what Samsung, LG big TV makers delivered was a mishmash of applications that had nothing to do with watching TV — the main reason people gather around the big box in the first place. Unsurprisingly, very few consumers wanted to spend more for supposed next-generation television sets that included a bunch of features they didn't want in the first place.
Today, the TV is evolving much differently. Internet video now comes to the set via other devices such as the Apple TV, Roku and Boxee Box. Nearly six in 10 consumers who own an Internet-connected high-definition TV use such services to supplement pay TV subscriptions, NPD says.
As for other once-vaunted "smart TV" activities — reading or posting on Twitter or Facebook, reading digital books or magazines, video calling, shopping or gaming — well, they attract well below 10% of such people.

Second-Screen TV

Video is clearly what people want on their TVs, so pay TV providers have turned theirattention to tablet apps. Instead of shipping expensive set-top boxes, service providers want people to use tablets to find movies, see what friends are watching and browse their favorite programming.
The apps will add to the enjoyment of watching TV by providing player stats in a baseball game or actor bios and behind-the-scene clips from the users' favorite shows. These apps could yield be a goldmine of subscriber data that can be fed to advertisers who could then turn around and use the information to target advertising.
Having an app that knows your viewing habits could be useful when you're traveling. Imagine connecting your tablet to the TV in a hotel room and immediately having the same viewing experience you have at home.
"The TV needs to be more like a docking station," Paul Gray, analyst for DisplaySearch, an NPD company, told me. "It needs to play nice with these mobile devices."
Panasonic is one of the first manufacturers to ship televisions capable of communicating wirelessly with a tablet. Rivals will surely follow suit, as manufacturers emphasize seamless integration with mobile devices.

Dumb Monitors Need Not Apply

To call these sets "dumb monitors" would oversimplify things. A lot of good engineering is needed to provide reliable interoperability with any tablet or smartphone, irrespective of whether it runs Android or Apple's iOS.
"I do contest people who say that TV ends up as sort of a big dumb monitor," Gray says. "You actually probably need quite a lot of intelligence, but it's kind of under the hood."
TV manufacturers, however, are still stuck in the same box they've long tried to escape: Their products are mostly all alike and thus hard to differentiate. Shifts in broadcast technology — such as NTSC to HD, and before long, HD to 4K — or screen technology (LCD vs. LED, for instance) enable some innovation, but once things shake out and picture quality is comparable across models, TV sets once again become commodites. That leaves Panasonic, Samsung, Sony and the rest with price cuts and not much more to lure buyers.
Commoditization is the curse of the consumer electronics industry. TV makers will look for ways to add value after the use of second-screen apps become mainstream. The trick will be to avoid another failure like the smart TV.

This Is What The Next Generation Of Programmers Looks Like

This Is What The Next Generation Of Programmers Looks Like

The next killer app just might be developed by a girl still in high school. 
Meet Kira Becker, Emily Moschella, Tara Abrishami and Anna Venetianer. Not one of them is older than 16, but they’re already accomplished programmers. 
The four have spent the past five months developing Navi Car. Since they attend Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, a magnet school that attracts gifted students from all over the Washington, DC, area, their commutes are often lengthy. The girls all have active after-school lives, including tennis, track & field and theater, but it’s not always easy to get where they need to be. 
So the girls decided to solve their commuting problem by building an Android app. Since January, the four friends have spent weekends and afternoons making their app a reality with the help of a free programming tool, MIT App Inventor. 

Building Apps To Solve Problems

Not everyone feels adept enough to build an app to solve his or her problems. But for the next generation of programmers, it’s second nature. 
“Technology is becoming more and more accessible. I definitely think people will be making their own apps in the future for exactly what they need them for,” said Venetianer. 
Encouraged by a teacher, the girls were spurred to enter their app in a programming contest specifically for high school girls, the Technovation Challenge. Under the name Team Round of APPlause, they’ve been selected as one of the top ten global finalists. On Thursday, they visited Twitter HQ in San Francisco to have their app judged. 
Although the very existence of a programming contest just for teenage female participants reveals the severity of the gender gap in computer science, the girls said they never felt like they were doing anything groundbreaking. 

Girls Coding: Not Unusual?

“Being in the community that we are in, everyone is so supportive. there are so many other girls [at Thomas Jefferson] interested in computer science and tech in general,” said Abrishami. “I guess a lot of people are impressed and proud of us, but nobody thinks it's unusual.”
As sophomores in high school, none of the girls have made a decision about whether or not they want to pursue computer science careers. But if app building appears as accessible to others of their generation as it does to them, the future of programming looks very bright