Shopify’s Tobias Lütke on Canada’s “go-for-bronze” mentality ironically echos long standing frustrations

Tobi has struck a vulnerable nerve with his painfully accurate comment that Canada has a cultural problem, a “go for the bronze” mentality.” He is not the first to point out Canada’s lack of clothing WRT commitment and investment in innovation and entrepreneurship. Canada frankly has never been keen on risk capital. It’s just not Canadian, eh? Tobi joins Richard Florida and other Canadians in making similar awkward observations. The greatest irony is that Tobi’s remark that we need an “Own the Podium” program for Canadian innovation, was first proposed by former UBC President Arvind Gupta in a Vancouver Sun editorial some 10 years ago. Predictably, nothing has happened since then, and nothing will likely happen now.

Source: Founder Tobias Lütke on Shopify’s lack of profits, Canada’s ‘go-for-bronze’ mentality and life as a multibillionaire – The Globe and Mail

Mayo615’s French Odyssey Week 2: Networking Tips

Welcome to a bonus Week 2 Update of Mayo615’s Odyssey to France.

I want to talk a bit about networking with new acquaintances or renewing old contacts.  Networking is often dreaded because it sounds like being disingenuous or insincere. Good networking is genuine and sincere. I made the point in Week 1 that communication skills are crucial, and they can be learned. Warren Buffett has said that “public speaking” is the most important skill he ever learned.  So let’s discuss a few ideas on how to make networking less stressful and more successful.  In this video, I will list three key things to remember when networking and expand on why they are so important. My UBC Management students will remember this from my Management Communication course.

 

Richard Florida Writes That Canada Is Losing The Global Innovation Race – Globe and Mail

Canadian Venture Investment Is In Decline

Canada’s investment in R & D Has Been Anemic For Decades Compared to OECD Nations

U.S. Tech Giants Are Exploiting Canada’s Talent Base At The Expense of Canadian Startups

My long-time business partner and I, one of us in Canada and the other in Silicon Valley, last year launched a business targeted at bringing immigrant entrepreneurs to Canada, Vendange Partners. http://www.vendangepartners.com.  We spent months analyzing and investigating the Canadian entrepreneurial ecosystem, particularly Vancouver and Toronto, Canadian immigration policy, and the Canadian venture capital industry. What we found was very concerning. Last December, I wrote a blog post here detailing our findings (read more below) that Canada was nowhere close to being the next Silicon Valley. With regard to venture capital, we found that there was a lack of adequate risk capital, which could be traced to deeply rooted conservative values in the Canadian financial industry. Immigration policy was a mixed bag, with a “startup” visa program that had become a magnet for immigration scams.  Despite these disadvantages, we decided to press ahead, and are making progress.

That said, I was very interested yesterday to read the article in the Globe & Mail by University of Toronto Professor Richard Florida, and Ian Hathaway, Research Director for the Center for  American Entrepreneurship, and Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institute. The article by Florida and Hathaway draws the same conclusions as my research, providing even more precise data to support their disturbing conclusions. It is not hard to find many additional articles on these issues.  Ironically, also yesterday, a LinkedIn connection shared a post by Sciences, Innovation, and Economic Development Canada with a very upbeat, positive assessment of venture capital for startups in Canada. This is the essence of the problem. Since I came to Canada years ago now, I have seen a pollyannaish state of denial about the true situation for entrepreneurship, immigration policy, and the lack of “smart” venture capital for Canadian startups. No amount of counter-evidence has changed this mistaken rosy outlook. Without a recognition of these problems, nothing will change.

 

READ MORE: Canada Woos Tech Startups But Canada Is Not Silicon Valley December 20, 2017, mayo615.com blog post

OPINION

RICHARD FLORIDA AND IAN HATHAWAY

SPECIAL TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL

UPDATED NOVEMBER 2, 2018

Solving Canada’s startup dilemma

Source: Solving Canada’s startup dilemma – The Globe and Mail 

Canada, we increasingly hear, is becoming a global leader in high-tech innovation and entrepreneurship. Report after report has ranked Toronto, Waterloo, and Vancouver among the world’s most up-and-coming tech hubs. Toronto placed fourth in a ranking of North American tech talent this past summer, behind only the San Francisco Bay Area, Seattle, and Washington, and in 2017 its metro area added more tech jobs than those other three city-regions combined.

All of that is true, but the broader trends provide little reason for complacency. Indeed, our detailed analysis of more than 100,000 startup investments around the world paints a more sobering picture. Canada and its leading cities have seen a substantial rise in their venture capital investments. But both the country and its urban centres have lost ground to global competitors, even as the United States’ position in global start-ups has faltered.

Overall, Canada ranks fifth among countries in the number of venture capital deals and sixth in venture capital investment, trailing only the United States, India, China, Britain, and Germany. That said, Canada’s share of the world’s venture capital investment is tiny, just 1.5 percent. And it has actually declined over the past decade and a half.

But start-ups and entrepreneurship are a local phenomenon: They happen in urban areas. The good news is that a dozen or so of Canada’s cities make the list of the world’s 300-plus startup hubs. And the three largest of them – Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver – rank among the world’s 62 leading global startup hubs.

Toronto, Canada’s top-ranked startup hub, is the only Canadian city to crack the list of the world’s top 25 startup cities. Vancouver and Montreal are in the top 50. Kitchener-Waterloo leads all Canadian cities in venture capital investment per capita, ranking 26th globally on that measure. It and Ottawa also rank among the world’s top 100 startup hubs in terms of capital invested, and Calgary is among the top 150.

The not-so-good news is that Canada and its startup cities are losing ground to startup hubs such as New York and London; Beijing and Shanghai; Bangalore and Mumbai; Berlin, Amsterdam, Stockholm, and Tel Aviv.

More worrying, Canada is failing to take advantage of the United States’ weakening position, which is attributable in part to its tighter immigration policies. While the U.S. continues to generate the largest amount of startup and venture capital activity, its share of the global total has been falling steadily, from more than 95 percent in the mid-1990s to about two-thirds in 2012, and a little more than half today. But the country that has gained the most ground is China, which now attracts nearly a quarter of global venture capital investment.

Exactly why Canada is lagging is unclear. A growing number of Canadian commentators suggest that the influx of large U.S. and Asian tech firms into Canada is sucking up tech talent that would have otherwise gone to local start-ups. But companies like Microsoft and Google are such powerful talent magnets that they are more likely to increase the overall supply. After all, San Francisco, New York, and London are homes to some of the biggest tech companies in the world, and they are also leading startup hubs.

Perhaps the brunt of Donald Trump’s anti-immigration policies has yet to be fully felt. Maybe it is because New York and the San Francisco Bay Area are close enough to lure Canadian entrepreneurs away, or maybe we are just not as entrepreneurial as we like to think.

Whatever the cause, Canada and its leading tech hubs must do more to grow their ecosystems, which already enjoy such clear advantages in talent, especially in the field of artificial intelligence, and their openness to immigration. Given the role that innovation and start-ups play in propelling economic growth and raising living standards, our economic future depends on it.

Richard Florida is University Professor at the University of Toronto’s School of Cities and the Rotman School of Management. Ian Hathaway is Research Director of the Center for American Entrepreneurship and a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution. They are authors of the Rise of the Global Startup City, released earlier this month.

READ MORE: Rise of The Global Startup City

Big Idea Social Entrepreneur: The New 21st Century Career

Late last year I wrote on this blog about my frustration with the lack of Big Ideas driving innovation. My rant was stimulated by a New York Times article on the grim underbelly of the “an app for everything” culture: people who were working on “small ideas,”  and losing their shirts in the process.  I also shared the thoughts of other entrepreneurial leaders, investors, and journalists, also bemoaning the fact that we seem to have lost our way, and are no longer thinking BIG.  This morning I stumbled on a post on the HBR Blog Network, entitled “Idea Entrepreneur: The New 21st Century Career.” I took some editorial license and added the words “Big”  and “Social” to my blog post, simply because the author was actually making the case for Big Ideas and Social Entrepreneurship, and the hopeful sign that there may be a re-emergence of people who care about Big Ideas.  Read my original post here, followed by the HBR Blog post.

The concept of “social entrepreneurship” has noticeably taken off with this generation of young people. While there some debate about the definition of “social entrepreneurship,” I am comfortable with the following explanation.

A social entrepreneur is a person who pursues novel applications that have the potential to solve community-based problems, both large and small. These individuals are willing to take on the risk and effort to create positive changes in society through their initiatives.

Examples of social entrepreneurship include microfinance institutions, educational programs, providing banking services in underserved areas and helping children orphaned by epidemic disease. Their efforts are connected to a notion of addressing unmet needs within communities that have been overlooked or not granted access to services, products, or base essentials available in more developed communities. A social entrepreneur might also seek to address imbalances in such availability, the root causes behind such social problems, or social stigma associated with being a resident of such communities. The main goal of a social entrepreneur is not to earn a profit, but rather to implement widespread improvements in society. However, a social entrepreneur must still be financially savvy to succeed in his or her cause.

I had the good fortune of working with the global social entrepreneurship NGO,  Enactus and a group of my students from the UBC Faculty of Management. We interacted with other social entrepreneurship groups as far afield as Perth, Australia, and Rotterdam in the Netherlands to develop our own project. Enactus categorizes projects by the potential for the project to become self-sustaining by the participants, and the original project volunteers working themselves out of a job. Our project was designed to meet the highest categorization within Enactus. We designed a roof-top hydroponic vegetable garden project that would produce high yield cash crop fruits and vegetables for the homeless community, managed by a local housing organization.  The end goal was to enable the homeless volunteers to take over the operation, generate income for themselves, and collaborate with the charity organization to enter into simple permanent housing.

Read more: What Makes Social Entrepreneurs Different?

Read more: http://mayo615.com/2012/11/18/app-development-booms-depressing-underbelly-what-ever-happened-to-big-ideas/

“Big” Idea Entrepreneur: The New 21st Century Career

Reblogged from the HBR Blog Network

by John Butman  |  10:00 AM May 27, 2013

Read more: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2013/05/idea_entrepreneur_the_new_21st.html

There is a new player emerging on the cultural and business scene today: the idea entrepreneur. Perhaps you are one yourself — or would like to be. The idea entrepreneur is an individual, usually a content expert and often a maverick, whose main goal is to influence how other people think and behave in relation to their cherished topic. These people don’t seek power over others and they’re not motivated by the prospect of achieving great wealth. Their goal is to make a difference, to change the world in some way.

Idea entrepreneurs are popping up everywhere. They’re people like Sheryl Sandberg (Facebook COO and author of Lean In), who is advocating a big new idea from within an organization. And like Atul Gawande (the checklist doctor), who is working to transform a professional discipline. Or like Blake Mycoskie (founder of TOMS shoes), who has created an unconventional business model.

In my research into this phenomenon (which forms the basis of my book, Breaking Out), I have been amazed at how many different kinds of people aspire to be idea entrepreneurs. I have met with, interviewed, emailed or tweeted with librarians, salespeople, educators, thirteen-year-old kids, marketers, technologists, consultants, business leaders, social entrepreneurs — from countries all over the world — who have an idea, want to go public with it, and, in some cases, build a sustainable enterprise around it.

The ones who succeed — whether it’s disrupting an established way of doing business as Vineet Nayar has done with his company or bringing a mindset change to a small community like Maria Madison has done in Concord, Massachusetts — share the following methods:

• They play many roles. They are manager, teacher, motivator, entertainer, coach, thought leader, and guru all rolled into one. Think Reid Hoffman (founder of LinkedIn and author of The Start-Up of You), Daniel Pink (author of Drive) or, in India, Kiran Bedi, leader of a worldwide movement to transform prisons and root out corruption.

• They create a platform of expressions and generate revenue to support their social activities. Idea entrepreneurs have to be exceptionally good at expressing their idea, and usually do so in many forms. They give private talks and major speeches, write books and blogs and articles, participate in panels and events, engage in social media — activities that can generate revenue (sometimes in considerable amounts), through a combination of fees, sales of their expressions, and related merchandise. Jim Collins has created a long-lasting enterprise supported by the sale of books and media, as well as fees for consulting, speaking engagements, and workshops.

• They offer a practical way to understand and implement their idea. Because people have a hard time responding to an abstract idea, the idea entrepreneur develops practices (and personally models them, too) that lead people to the idea through action. Bryant Terry, an “eco-chef” who argues that good nutrition is the best path to social justice, embeds his ideas in cooking methods and suggestions for social interaction around good food.

• They draw other people into their idea. The idea entrepreneur gathers people into the development, expression, and application of their idea. They form affiliations, build networks, and form groups. Al Gore created the Climate Reality Project Leadership Corps to bring his ideas about environmental sustainability to people around the world. Eckhart Tolle, a spiritual leader and author of The Power of Now, has established the online Eckhart Teachings Community with members in 130 countries. This inclusion of many people in many ways creates a phenomenon I call respiration— it’s as if the idea starts to breathe, and takes on a life of its own.

• They drive the quest for change. It is all too common that people with an idea for an improvement or a change to the world are satisfied to point out a problem, propose a solution, and then expect others to execute. The idea entrepreneur, however, sees the expression of the idea as the beginning of the effort — and it can be a lifelong one — in which they will continue to build the idea, reach new audiences, and offer practices that lead to change. Dr. Bindeshwar Pathak, based in Delhi, believes that world-class sanitation is necessary for India to realize its full potential. In forty years of idea entrepreneurship — spent in writing, speaking, travelling, network building, and technology development — he has influenced the way millions of people think and act.

People who have shaped our thinking and our society over the decades, even centuries, and continue to do so today — from Benjamin Franklin to Mohandas Gandhi to Hannah Salwen, an American teenager who modeled a disruptive approach to philanthropy — have followed the path of the idea entrepreneur.

These days, the model is well-defined and, thanks to the amazing range of activities we have for creating and sharing ideas, is within reach for just about anyone. If you have an idea, and want to go public with it, idea entrepreneurship can be one of the most powerful forces for change and improvement in the world today.

University degree no longer comes with promise of stable job

The unwritten promise of a post-secondary education has been to earn a degree in an applied field such as engineering and you’ll end up with a good, stable job, but the millennial generation is finding that can no longer be counted on. I have been thinking about this issue for some time. Last year, I posted an article on this blog by Robert Reich, Professor of Economics at UC Berkeley and former Secretary of Labor under Bill Clinton. I was stimulated to share that article by what I was seeing with my own students from the University of British Columbia and their struggles, and contrasting that with my own experience years ago, walking into my Silicon Valley dream career by sheer chance. That simply no longer happens. Grads must begin plotting out a plan early, no later than the beginning of their third year, and begin to execute on it in order to find an entry-level position commensurate with their education. Networking and cold calling are imperative, but as this article points out, even that may not guarantee solid employment. 

Source CBC News/Business: ‘It’s not a guarantee’: University degree no longer comes with promise of stable job

‘The millennial side hustle,’ not stable job, is the new reality for university grads

Recent graduates are finding a post-secondary education is no longer a guarantee of stable employment

By Nick Purdon and Leonardo Palleja, CBC News Posted: Mar 12, 2017 5:00 AM ET Last Updated: Mar 12, 2017 5:00 AM ET

Christian McCrave, 21, stands in front of his parents’ house in London, Ont. He moved back in when he couldn’t find a job after graduating with a degree in mechanical engineering. (Nick Purdon/CBC)

Twenty-one-year old Christian McCrave feels like he did his part.

He got good grades in high school and completed a four-year degree at the University of Guelph in southwestern Ontario. He studied mechanical engineering, in part because he thought it would land him a job.

It hasn’t.

“I actually thought that coming out of school that I would be a commodity and someone would want me,” McCrave said. “But instead, I got hit with a wall of being not wanted whatsoever in the industry.”

McCrave says he believed in the unwritten promise of a post-secondary education: work hard at school, and you’ll end up with a good and stable job.

Now, he’s not so sure.

“Being unemployed while having a degree is kind of a kick in the face,” McCrave said. “If anything, it’s a setback. You have all this debt and this degree, and everyone has one, but it doesn’t get you further in life sometimes.”

Since graduating last year, McCrave has applied for 250 engineering jobs, but he’s only had four interviews and no job offer.

McCrave isn’t alone. More than 12 per cent of Canadians between the ages of 15 and 24 are unemployed and more than a quarter are underemployed, meaning they have degrees but end up in jobs that don’t require them.

The latest numbers from Statistics Canada show that the unemployment rate for 15-to-24-year-olds is almost twice that of the general population.

McCrave has expanded his job search to include retail and recently applied to work at the local Sobeys grocery store near his parent’s house in London, Ont., where he has lived since soon after graduation.

“It’s a job. Something to feel accomplished from,” said McCrave. “As much as an engineer can be accomplished by cutting deli meats.”

Co-ops, apprenticeships key to employability

The challenge McCrave faces is experience: namely, he doesn’t have any. The most recent work experience on his resume is sales associate at Winners.

Sandro Perruzza, the chief executive officer at the Ontario Society of Professional Engineers (OSPE), is familiar with graduates like McCrave.

Since graduating, McCrave has applied for 250 engineering jobs but hasn’t had a single offer, he says. (Leonardo Palleja/CBC )

“He could have applied for co-ops or apprenticeships while he was at school — even if it delayed his graduation,” Perruzza said. “We strongly advocate co-ops. The fact is because of the sheer number of applicants these days, the ones who get the jobs have some kind of experience.”

Should McCrave land one of the retail jobs he’s applied for, he’ll achieve one of the hallmarks of his generation: underemployment.

‘With millennials, the idea is that we are lazy and that we don’t work hard and stuff is given to us.’– Christian McCrave, 21, engineering graduate

A 2014 Canadian Teachers’ Federation report found nearly a quarter of Canada’s youth are either unemployed, working less than they want or have given up looking for work entirely.

The number of engineers in Ontario who are underemployed is 33 per cent, according to the OSPE.

Still, McCrave says he often hears it’s his own fault that he’s unemployed.

“With millennials, the idea is that we are lazy and that we don’t work hard and stuff is given to us — the idea of the participation award,” McCrave said. “We didn’t want the participation award. We didn’t want to be told we are not good enough but here’s an award anyways. We want to compete; we want to succeed.”

‘The millennial side hustle’

Fast forward a few years in the job trajectory of the millennial generation, and you’ll find Clair Parker. Parker, 26, has a political science degree from Carleton University in Ottawa and a certificate in public relations from Humber College in Toronto.

“I live in an apartment, I have three roommates, and I don’t have benefits,” said Parker. “If I were the exception, I would feel upset about that because I would feel that I had done something wrong, but I am not the exception. I am the norm.”

Clair Parker might not be making direct use of her political science degree at her job as a bartender at a small Toronto brewery, but don’t call her underemployed. ‘It implies just the [job] title means more than what is going on in the workplace,’ she says. (Nick Purdon/CBC)

Parker’s bartending job doesn’t pay enough to make ends meet so she cobbles together enough money to live in Toronto by also working at a yoga studio and house sitting.

“I joke with my friends all the time about the millennial side hustle,” Parker says. “We all have different side hustles that we do to get money. So many people who would have worked in-house for a company before are freelancing now.”

The millennial side hustle (also known as the gig economy) means no steady job but also no safety net.

• The global scourge of precarious jobs
• As ‘virtual work’ grows, social programs may need a revamp

“If you have a toothache now and you are 24 years old, you freak out,” says Parker. “That’s going to be a couple of grand when you go to the dentist for the first time. I think people are going to feel really disenfranchised by the workforce and uncared for by the workforce.”

Parker works primarily at Halo brewery in Toronto, bartending and doing whatever else is needed to keep the small business running.

‘Being precariously employed takes its toll,’ says Ellis-Hale. (Leonardo Palleja/CBC)

“On paper, I am a bartender,” Parker says. “But anyone who has worked with a small business understands that it’s kind of an all hands on deck situation. You have a lot of opportunities to learn a lot of different things.”

Parker bristles at the suggestion that she is underemployed.

“I am not underemployed, and I kind of get offended when people say I am underemployed,” Parker says. “It implies that they know more about my situation than I know about my situation. It implies just the [job] title means more than what is going on in the workplace. It’s a huge assumption.”

While Parker probably could have gotten her job without five years of post-secondary education, she says her education will allow her to grow along with the business. She is banking on potential — her own and the company’s.

The university enrolment boom

The promise of higher education is alive and well in Canada. There are more university students than ever before. In 2015, there were more than two million students enrolled at Canadian universities and colleges, compared to almost 800,000 in 1980.

Kimberly Ellis-Hale has been teaching at Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, Ont., since 1998 but still has to re-apply for her job every four months. (Leonardo Palleja/CBC)

“With a good education, you will have a good future. With a good education, you will have a good job,” said Kimberly Ellis-Hale, an instructor at Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, Ont., who teaches sociology and other subjects. “And I think for past generations, it may have been [the case]. I think for future generations, it’s not a guarantee.”

Even though economic indicators that track employment reveal a trend toward more precarious jobs, Ellis-Hale says most of her students don’t see that as their future. She didn’t either, but that’s how things turned out.

‘I teach in a place that sells education as the path to a better and more secure life, and I don’t have a part of that life.’– Kimberly Ellis-Hale, contract faculty, Wilfrid Laurier University

Ellis-Hale is contract faculty, and even though she’s been teaching university courses at Laurier since 1998, she has to re-apply for her job every four months.

“I have very little job security,” Ellis-Hale said. “And being precariously employed takes its toll.”

Ellis-Hale’s two children are now grown up and live on their own, but she vividly remembers standing in the pharmacy when they were young trying to decide which child needed antibiotics the most.

• PBO report warns recent university grads are overeducated, underemployed
• Struggles of the young and jobless

“I couldn’t afford to purchase both of them,” Ellis-Hale says. “And how do you live with that? I teach in a university. I teach in a place that sells education as the path to a better and more secure life, and I don’t have a part of that life.”

Turning the promise into a guarantee

The University of Regina’s UR Guarantee program, launched in 2009, turns the unwritten promise of post-secondary education into an actual guarantee. If a student enrolled in the program doesn’t get a full-time job in their field within six months of graduation, they can return for a year of undergraduate study tuition-free.

“The reason we do this is we know that if students do all the things that are part of the program, they are going to be successful,” said Naomi Deren, associate director of student success at the university.

Noami Deren is the associate director of student success at the University of Regina and runs the school’s UR Guarantee program, which lets graduates return for a free year of study if they don’t get a job in their field within six months. (Leonardo Palleja/CBC)

Students from any department can enrol in the program and must complete career development training, including resume reviews and job interview seminars.

In their final year, students are required to network and complete a labour market overview in their chosen field. Their job search begins while they are still at school.

‘The average student doesn’t … do that preparation, isn’t thinking about their career in second year and is sort of left scrambling at the end of it.’-Naomi Deren, associate director of student success, University of Regina

“I really think that the average student doesn’t do all of that stuff, doesn’t do that preparation, isn’t thinking about their career in second year and is sort of left scrambling at the end of it,” Deren said.

Of the 120 students who have participated in the program only two have come back for the free year.

“Honestly, everyone else has found what they were looking for,” Deren said. “We have students who are teaching — they got full time contracts right out of university … We have students who are working in marketing, communications. We have a reporter for the Leader Post.”

Keeping students from dropping out

Jenna deBoth, 21, is in her fourth year of an education degree program at the University of Regina and all she can think about is graduating.

“I am so excited. I can’t wait to actually get out there and get a job,” she said.

Jenna deBoth, 21, says that without the University of Regina’s UR Guarantee program, she probably would have dropped out of university. Now, she’s about to graduate with an education degree. (Nick Purdon/CBC )

Still, deBoth, from the small town of Hudson Bay, Sask., almost didn’t make it past her first year of university. She credits the UR Guarantee program with keeping her from dropping out.

“I was absolutely terrified to be on campus because even though Regina is a small city, to me, it was huge,” deBoth said.

‘If I don’t get a job in my field? Well, I am gonna keep trying.’– Jenna deBoth, 21, 4th-year University of Regina student

DeBoth happened to see a poster advertising the UR Guarantee program. She signed up and within a few months, she was volunteering and had a growing circle of friends.

“We see ourselves in the beginning as high school guidance counsellors,” Deren said. “We make sure students are successful and are retained here at the university.”

Deren says retention rates among UR Guarantee students are 10 per cent higher than those of the general student population.

DeBoth hasn’t yet found a teaching job for the fall, and she admits she’s nervous about what’s out there.

“If I don’t get a job in my field? Well, I am gonna keep trying,” she said. “This is something that I am passionate about. I have made sure I have skills that will help me no matter where I go.”

Vancouver Technology Industry On Verge Of New Era

The Vancouver technology industry may well be on the verge of an extraordinary period of growth.  Global, national, and regional factors appear to be aligning in ways that could create an extraordinary economic opportunity for the Lower Mainland which could not have been anticipated.  Vancouver has been an endless topic of discussion about its comparability (or not) to Silicon Valley, the historical Canadian investment conservatism, and the lack of other resources necessary to create the “secret sauce” that makes a region achieve critical mass. That may be changing if only the convergence of factors is grasped and exploited.

In an expansion of regional cooperation, the University of British Columbia and the University of Washington today announced the establishment of the Cascadia Urban Analytics Cooperative.

Universities establish joint centre to use data for social good in Cascadia region

Media Release | February 23, 2017

University of Washington President Ana Mari Cauce, Microsoft President Brad Smith, and University of British Columbia President Santa J. Ono at the Emerging Cascadia Innovation Corridor Conference in Vancouver, B.C., September 20, 2016.

In an expansion of regional cooperation, the University of British Columbia and the University of Washington today announced the establishment of the Cascadia Urban Analytics Cooperative to use data to help cities and communities address challenges from traffic to homelessness. The largest industry-funded research partnership between UBC and the UW, the collaborative will bring faculty, students and community stakeholders together to solve problems, and is made possible thanks to a $1-million gift from Microsoft.

“Thanks to this generous gift from Microsoft, our two universities are poised to help transform the Cascadia region into a technological hub comparable to Silicon Valley and Boston,” said Professor Santa J. Ono, President of the University of British Columbia. “This new partnership transcends borders and strives to unleash our collective brain power, to bring about economic growth that enriches the lives of Canadians and Americans as well as urban communities throughout the world.”

“We have an unprecedented opportunity to use data to help our communities make decisions, and as a result improve people’s lives and well-being. That commitment to the public good is at the core of the mission of our two universities, and we’re grateful to Microsoft for making a community-minded contribution that will spark a range of collaborations,” said UW President Ana Mari Cauce.

Today’s announcement follows last September’s Emerging Cascadia Innovation Corridor Conference in Vancouver, B.C. The forum brought together regional leaders for the first time to identify concrete opportunities for partnerships in education, transportation, university research, human capital and other areas.

A Boston Consulting Group study unveiled at the conference showed the region between Seattle and Vancouver has “high potential to cultivate an innovation corridor” that competes on an international scale, but only if regional leaders work together. The study says that could be possible through sustained collaboration aided by an educated and skilled workforce, a vibrant network of research universities and a dynamic policy environment.

Microsoft President Brad Smith, who helped convene the conference, said, “We believe that joint research based on data science can help unlock new solutions for some of the most pressing issues in both Vancouver and Seattle. But our goal is bigger than this one-time gift. We hope this investment will serve as a catalyst for broader and more sustainable efforts between these two institutions.”

As part of the Emerging Cascadia conference, British Columbia Premier Christy Clark and Washington Governor Jay Inslee signed a formal agreement that committed the two governments to work closely together to “enhance meaningful and results-driven innovation and collaboration.”  The agreement outlined steps the two governments will take to collaborate in several key areas including research and education.

“Increasingly, tech is not just another standalone sector of the economy, but fully integrated into everything from transportation to social work,” said Premier Clark. “That’s why we’ve invested in B.C.’s thriving tech sector, but committed to working with our neighbours in Washington – and we’re already seeing the results.”

“This data-driven collaboration among some of our smartest and most creative thought-leaders will help us tackle a host of urgent issues,” Gov. Inslee said. “I’m encouraged to see our partnership with British Columbia spurring such interesting cross-border dialogue and excited to see what our students and researchers come up with.”

The Cascadia Urban Analytics Cooperative will revolve around four main programs:

• The Cascadia Data Science for Social Good (DSSG) Summer Program, which builds on the success of the DSSG program at the UW eScience Institute. The cooperative will coordinate a joint summer program for students across UW and UBC campuses where they work with faculty to create and incubate data-intensive research projects that have concrete benefits for urban communities. One past DSSG project analyzed data from Seattle’s regional transportation system – ORCA – to improve its effectiveness, particularly for low-income transit riders. Another project sought to improve food safety by text mining product reviews to identify unsafe products.

• Cascadia Data Science for Social Good Scholar Symposium, which will foster innovation and collaboration by bringing together scholars from UBC and the UW involved in projects utilizing technology to advance the social good. The first symposium will be hosted at UW in 2017.

• Sustained Research Partnerships designed to establish the Pacific Northwest as a centre of expertise and activity in urban analytics. The cooperative will support sustained research partnerships between UW and UBC researchers, providing technical expertise, stakeholder engagement and seed funding.

• Responsible Data Management Systems and Services to ensure data integrity, security and usability. The cooperative will develop new software, systems and services to facilitate data management and analysis, as well as ensure projects adhere to best practices in fairness, accountability and transparency.

At UW, the Cascadia Urban Analytics Collaborative will be overseen by Urbanalytics (urbanalytics.uw.edu), a new research unit in the Information School focused on responsible urban data science. The Collaborative builds on previous investments in data-intensive science through the UW eScience Institute (escience.washington.edu) and investments in urban scholarship through Urban@UW (urban.uw.edu), and also aligns with the UW’s Population Health Initiative (uw.edu/populationhealth) that is addressing the most persistent and emerging challenges in human health, environmental resiliency and social and economic equity. The gift counts toward the UW’s Be Boundless – For Washington, For the World campaign (uw.edu/boundless).

The Collaborative also aligns with the UBC Sustainability Initiative (sustain.ubc.ca) that fosters partnerships beyond traditional boundaries of disciplines, sectors and geographies to address critical issues of our time, as well as the UBC Data Science Institute (dsi.ubc.ca), which aims to advance data science research to address complex problems across domains, including health, science and arts.

Find other stories about: Cascadia Urban Analytics Cooperative, Emerging Cascadia Innovation Corridor Conference, Microsoft, University of British Columbia, University of Washington

Source: Universities establish joint centre to use data for social good in Cascadia region

Engineer Into The Workforce

Presentation given to today, to the UBC School of Engineering Capstone course

Engineer Into The Workforce from David Mayes

New Accelerate Okanagan Report On Tech Industry: Devil Is Again In the Details

Problems Persist With New 2016 Accelerate Okanagan “Tech Industry Analysis”

 Accelerate Okanagan should be commended for publishing a document, the stated goal of which is to “assist in attracting new talent, companies, and potential investors to the Okanagan, as well to inform policy makers and the media.”  Such reports are commonly used to promote a community or region’s economy. However, as with the earlier 2015 report, there are persistent issues, particularly with the industry definition and methodology of the study.  The result is questionable data and numbers that simply do not pass a basic “sniff test.” Accepting the results of this study as published may only serve to mislead community leaders on planning, and mislead prospective entrepreneurs considering relocating here.

I taught Industry Analysis at the University of British Columbia, and my entire career has been in high-tech in Silicon Valley and globally, beginning with many years at Intel Corporation, so my assessment is exclusively from a professional perspective. A PowerPoint presentation of my work in this area is posted on this website, under the heading Professional Stuff.

The report begins by explaining that the study was completed by an unnamed third party, apparently affiliated with Small Business BC.  A review of the Small Business BC website, staff, and services indicates the organization is almost exclusively organized and resourced to provide services only to individual small businesses. For example, scanning SBBC’s “Market Research” heading, it indicates that its services are focused entirely on smaller scale research for an individual small business, not a large scale analysis of an entire industry in a region.  Industry analyses of such scale are better suited to a local educational institution like UBC, with all the requisite skills and resources.  Though I have no inside knowledge, it seems reasonable to surmise that some degree of budgetary constraint and political influence were involved in the selection of SBBC, and a desire to emphasize local promotion over objective accuracy.

With regard to methodology and industry definition, the Report states that it follows the methodology of British Columbia’s High Tech Sector Report, the most recent of which is from 2014. A closer look at this methodology can be found on the provincial government website. A separate document is listed, “Defining the British Columbia High Technology Sector Using NAICS,” published fifteen years ago in 2001. My review of this document indicates that while it offers some useful discussion, it is seriously out of date and in need of revision.  A more professional approach would have required the development of a more current methodology relevant to the Okanagan situation. The BC methodology document does provide some very cogent cautionary remarks on high-tech industry definition and methodology:

The “high technology” sector is a popular subject of discussion and analyses, partly because it is viewed as an engine of growth both in the past and for the future. However, the high-technology sector has no specific and universally accepted definition. Defining and measuring the high technology sector can be done as part of basic research at the level of individual firms. A second, more “modest” approach uses pre-existing data collected on “industries” which are defined for general statistical purposes. The challenge is to determine which of these industries warrants inclusion in the measurement of the high technology sector.

The AO Report author seems to have accepted both approaches. Page 4 of the Report explains that the author decided to also include “the previous survey undertaken by Accelerate Okanagan.”  The previous AO survey was simply a Survey Monkey survey submitted by individual local businesses. The results were apparently compiled without additional professional judgment applied, or follow-up contact with companies by phone or other means and cross-referencing with the more “modest” macro data methodology mentioned in the 2001 BC document. IMHO, if my assumptions are correct, the Survey Monkey data should have been thrown out as unreliable, or regenerated with much greater scrutiny and judgment applied.

Then there is the issue of Kelowna as an employment market, as noted in the recently reported Bank of Montreal (BMO) and BC Business low national and provincial rankings of Kelowna’s employment market. These issues have also been reported in KelownaNow.  Hootsuite, whose founder is from Vernon, consciously chose Vancouver to start his company.  CEO Ryan Holmes openly admitted that he did not base Hootsuite in the Okanagan because he knew he would not be able to attract the necessary talent here. It is also important to note that a significant number of local business and community leaders met with the BC Labour Minister and reported that their primary concern was a lack of Temporary Foreign Workers, not economic development or the growth of the local high-tech industry.

The AO Report touches on these issues only very tangentially and indirectly in the closing pages. A more credible approach would have been to confront these local problems directly, citing the BMO report for example, and what AO and the community plan to do about it.  Clearly, there are unresolved and ignored contradictions with the AO report that damage its credibility and usefulness.

Finally, this week’s media coverage of the report has died down, having duly reported all the desired sound bytes, but a Google search shows that the media coverage has so far been nearly exclusively from the local Okanagan media which does not meet the stated goal of the AO effort to broadcast the promotion beyond the Okanagan.

Read the complete AO September 2016 report here:

Click to access Economic_Impact_Study_2015_Edition.pdf

MAYO615 REPOST from January, 2015:

AO Tech Industry Report Lacks The Rigor Necessary To Give It Much Credibility

Read the AO January 2015 press release and access the full report here

The AO report’s “economic impact” conclusions are based on 2014 Survey Monkey voluntary responses, which are problematic due to an apparent lack of critical assessment. The report does not follow the kind of rigorous industry analysis performed by leading technology consultancy firms like International Data Corporation (IDC) or Gartner. The definition of an “industry,” for example the “automobile industry in Canada,” involves broad activity around all aspects of “automobiles,” but at some point, firms like Kal Tire or “Joe’s Brake Shop” might be excluded from a definition of the automobile industry.  The report does not mention the rigor applied to this industry analysis, so the question is left open, “What exactly is the “tech industry” in the Okanagan?”  A well-defined $1 Billion industry is the mobile advertising industry in Canada.  Is that what we have in the Okanagan? By way of comparison, I reported on New Zealand’s Ice House tech incubator economic impact report, which has much greater credibility.  The AO report is essentially claiming that the Okanagan technology economy is more than twice the size of New Zealand’s…That’s too big of a leap of faith for me. Read New Zealand’s Ice House Startups Achieve Impressive Results and contrast it with the AO report.

Then there is the issue of Kelowna as an employment market, as noted in the recently reported Bank of Montreal (BMO) and BC Business low national and provincial rankings of Kelowna’s employment market. These issues have also been reported in KelownaNow. Clearly, there are unresolved contradictions with the AO reports.

Read More: Kelowna’s Low Jobs Ranking

Read More: Okanagan economy likely to worsen next year

I offer a summary view of “industry analysis” here: Industry Analysis: the bigger picture

What High Tech Industry in Kelowna?

Kelowna’s tech industry growth stunted by shallow talent pool

There is a lot of hubris and fantasy here in the Okanagan that no amount of reality can kill. Contrasted with that is a political faction that wishes for nothing more than the status quo. In yet another example of Kelowna’s long-standing poor employment market, and bizarre claims of being a technology industry hub, high tech employment in the Okanagan is being curtailed by the mass exodus of qualified graduates to employers outside the Okanagan. This is not new news as it has been happening for years. The employment and economic development crises are now so severe that it may take a decade or more to reverse.  A recent claim that the Okanagan high-tech industry produces $1 Billion in revenue, now seems particularly preposterous.  This situation underscores the challenges facing Raghwa Gopal, as the new Director of Accelerate Okanagan.  I see that Gopal has so far won a host of community awards and contributed to a local food drive, which leaves me asking which job he is running for, and which job he holds now?

Raghwa Gopal, Director of Accelerate Okanagan

FROM KELOWNA NOW:

A lack of skilled programmers is hampering Kelowna’s ability to establish itself as a technology hub.

According to Barry Ward, the president of Bardel Entertainment, tech companies across the city are desperate for skilled employees, but there just aren’t enough of them to meet demand.

“Everybody’s feeling the pinch for talent,” Ward says. “You’re looking around town for someone with 5-10 years experience and they’re just not there.”

Bardel, the animation company Ward co-founded, has offices in both Kelowna and Vancouver. The company opened its Kelowna office three years ago, looking to expand out of a crowded Vancouver market.

Photo credit: Bardel Entertainment

Vancouver is the undisputed centre of technology in British Columbia but, according to Ward, the overcrowded market there has left an opening for another B.C. city to establish itself as a tech-industry hub.

He believes Kelowna is the perfect city to do that, but says that won’t happen “without an available talent pool” in Kelowna.

Dr. Raymon Lawrence knows that all too well.

Lawrence is an associate professor of computer science at the University of British Columbia in the Okanagan, where computer science programs are essentially at maximum capacity.

Lawrence says the university’s computer science department is on track to graduate 30-40 students next year, but that many of the graduates will be scooped up by tech giants like Google and Microsoft.

Photo credit: KelownNow

“Pretty much if any grad wants a job they can get a job within three months,” Lawrence says.With so much lucrative work outside the province, and relatively few skilled workers graduating every year, Lawrence says “there’s a real problem in Kelowna.”

Both Ward and Lawrence say the solution is simple: more people trained right here in Kelowna.

Ward was one of 18 tech industry “leaders” who wrote an open letter to Premier Christy Clark earlier this month asking for more funding and support for technology-related post-secondary programs.

They asked the premier to invest $100 million to grow post-secondary programs in the province, specifically in places like Kelowna.

Early this year, Clark did announce plans to introduce computer coding to B.C. school curriculum, and in 2015 the provincial government created a $100 million venture fund to finance tech startups.

Lawrence says provincial funding aimed directly at post-secondary programs would likely be the only thing capable of spurring growth in UBCO’s computer science programs.

“Unless there’s some money provided to us, we won’t grow,” he said.

Why The Biggest Tech Companies Are Not In Canada

Mayo0615 Reblog from July 22, 2013

It dawned on me that my blog post from July 2013, still has particular relevance to the current situation in Canada. I discuss the longer term structural issues confronting Canadian entrepreneurs and Canadian venture capital. When I first arrived in Canada, I learned quickly that the Vancouver startup ecosystem was nothing like what I knew from Silicon Valley. My personal case study was Mobile Data International, a pioneering company in wireless data, well before WiFi and Bluetooth, that could have led the market and the technology. Instead, the company was taken public much too early.  MDI was bought by Motorola Canada for $39 Million,  in a hostile takeover, and was essentially moved out of Canada and shut down.  Later, in 2012, I had another opportunity to be up close and personal with Canadian innovation, as a participant in the Canada Foundation for Innovation deliberations in Ottawa. These two experiences have played a major role in the development of my views on this topic.

The following reblog raises the tough questions that are holding Canada back.

From July 2013:

In 2013, ContentDJ founder Jerry Tian published a blog post addressing the issue of “Why Canada Has No Big Tech Companies” – Nortel is dead and RIM is quite obviously dying, he points out. Tian, who was himself responding to an interview with Boris Wertz, founder of Vancouver’s Version One Ventures, offers a thought provoking theory and one that applies to a large degree to all up-and-coming startup ecosystems.

The founder questions the commitment and willingness of Canadian investors and entrepreneurs to devote the ten years or more that it may take to build an independent multi-billion dollar company with staying power, rather than flipping that company for an eight, nine, or even ten figure exit – typically to Silicon Valley acquirers – and exporting that future innovation and wealth building. It’s a charge that could be applied equally well to New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Austin, Boulder, and dozens of would be international startup hubs.

“’Silicon Valley is not a place but a state of mind,” Tian writes, quoting KPCB General Partner John Doerr. “Some of these insights are collaboration, competition, openness to innovation, failures and experimentation. Probably the most important one is the long term commitment behind technology companies.”

Of course, Tian and Doerr are spot on. What emerging startup hubs often miss when trying to “become the next Silicon Valley” – a flawed mission in and of itself – is that the grandaddy startup ecosystem is more than its physical infrastructure of entrepreneurs, engineers, designers, investors, service providers, universities, and the like. Equally important are the systematic irrationality and a feedback loop around the willingness to turn down the quick buck and go for the massive once-in-a-generation success story.

This isn’t the case with every company, founder, or investor, but it exists in enough density in the San Francisco Bay Area, and based on results to a lesser extent in Seattle, that these are the only two areas areas in the country that have led to multiple ten billion dollar plus technology and internet companies – the true giants that transcend their local ecosystems and seep into the lives of average consumers.

It is these companies, with their ability to attract talent, make acquisitions, invest in long-term R&D, and create systemic wealth that make ecosystems. And with very rare exception, getting to this scale requires a decade or longer commitment and a willingness on the part of founders and investors to turn down near and mid-term paydays. Similarly, it requires a vision and an ambition  to build something that will be around forever.

Tian writes:

So, why is nobody talking about these acquisitions? I think it’s simply because investors are getting filthy rich off these deals.

And that’s exactly what not to do if you want to create the next Silicon Valley. You cannot sell the hen that lays the golden eggs for a few quick buck [sic]. Technology companies take 10 years to really manifest the value. To really build a billion dollar company, it takes tremendous multi-decade commitment. And that’s the biggest missing piece in Canada.

Like or hate Zynga founder and former CEO Mark Pincus, one has to respect him for saying that he wants to build a “digital skyscraper,” a company that would be around for 100 years. Pincus went further to say that he views serial entrepreneurship as failure and that he wants to run Zynga for the rest of his career. Ironically, he recently replaced himself as CEO, personally recruiting Don Mattrick for the role. But Pincus made the ego-busting move in an effort to return Zynga to its former glory and to get it back on that century-long track.

In his somewhat controversial on-the-ground reporting on the Chicago ecosystem last summer, Trevor Gilbert delved into “the Midwest Mentality” and the impact it has on the types of companies that are built there. Gilbert called Chicagoans “pragmatic.” Lightbank partner Paul Lee offered an example of this pragmatism, saying that Chicago startups typically focus on generating revenue from day one, rather than building a massive, but unprofitable user base, a la Facebook and Twitter pre-monetization. Profit is all well and good, and should be the ultimate goal of any business that wants to be around for the long term, but focus on it too intently early on and it can be impossible to invest in growth. It takes a special kind of vision and fortitude to look past the short term and make the big bets required to create massive companies.

This is not to pick on Chicago. A similar phenomenon seems to exist in LA where companies race out to a low nine-figure valuation and then either stall out in that vicinity or sell for sub-one billion dollars to a larger out of town acquirer. Call it the curse of the big-little deal – maybe everyone here just wants to see their name in lights. In a market that is desperate for success stories and validation, these medium-sized exits are hailed as “wins” – and they are, given the difficulty of building a hundred-million dollar company – but they often rob the ecosystem of potential multi-generational tentpole companies. This is a mentality that appears to have changed in recent years, but that change has not yet bore fruit in the form of LA’s answer to Google, Amazon, or Facebook.

New York has seen its own version of this phenomenon, with the ecosystem’s biggest success stories, DoubleClick and Tumblr, being exits to Google and Yahoo respectively. Local darling MakerBot followed suit, selling for $600 million in June. New York does have Fab, Gilt, and Foursquare all shooting for the moon but these companies and the ecosystem as a whole still must prove that they can sustain this ambition and parlay it into a giant company.

As Tian points out, part of the blame for these exits falls on investors. It’s not that investors aren’t interested in massive outcomes – they most certainly are. But not all non-Silicon Valley investors are equipped for the financial and time commitment it takes to create them. These investors, many of which operate out of first- or second-generation funds, often have smaller pools of capital to invest out of.

Write a $2 million check at a $10 million valuation out of a $100 million fund, and a 50x return looks pretty good, returning 98 percent of your fund. Make that same investment out of a $1 billion fund and the impact on fund economics is decidedly less interesting. This is one of the few arguments in favor of mega-VC funds. But it also benefits firms that are on their fourth, fifth or sixth fund and have less to gain reputation-wise with solid base hits.

Returning to Tian’s piece, he closes by writing, “If you are wondering why Canada doesn’t have the [sic] billion dollar company, it cannot be more obvious than this. Too many people are in it trying to get rich quickly off entrepreneurs. Not enough people have the gut [sic] and commitment to create or help create something truly meaningful.”

Tian paints with a broad brush, yes, which ignores many of the subtle nuances and external factors that contribute toward building massive technology companies. But there’s little arguing that people in Silicon Valley think differently. Armed by decades of case studies and social proof, the ecosystem has developed a healthy disregard for rationality.

Mark Zuckerberg famously did just that when Yahoo came calling. He was just 20 years old and Facebook, at less than two years old, was unprofitable with just $30 million in revenue. Yet Zuckerberg and Facebook’s board, which included Peter Thiel and Jim Breyer, turned down Yahoo’s $1 billion offer. When the elder advisors tried to convince the young founder that his 25 percent of that offer would be a big number he said, “I don’t know what I could do with the money. I’d just start another social networking site. I kind of like the one I already have.”

Israeli social mapping company Waze just made the opposite decision, selling to Google for slightly more than that mythical $1 billion. Sarah Lacy cautioned Israel-bulls to “reconsider too much high-fiving over Waze.” While legendary local angel investor Yossi Vardi likes to compare Israeli startups to tomato seeds which need more experienced farmers to grow properly, Lacy believes that the country has the potential to build and sustain globally dominant Web companies without selling, offering MyHeritage as an example.

None of this is to say Silicon Valley is immune from this syndrome. There are thousands of entrepreneurs in the Bay Area who would rather flip their company than do the long, hard work of building something sustainable. But the sheer density of the ecosystem means that a dozen or so each year choose the road less traveled. Also, given the scale of the Valley ecosystem, building a big company is the only way to move the needle and attract talent and capital. Everyone in line at Philz coffee is working on the next “billion dollar business.”

Finally, Silicon Valley is a magnet for those entrepreneurs around the globe who want to build great technology companies, and the ecosystem surely benefits from this imported talent. This was actually Wertz’s central point in the original interview and is one that Tian touches on briefly. It’s a difficult problem to solve, given the power of knowing someone (or several someones) who has summited the mountain before and who can show you that it can be done. In each of these other markets, someone will have to be the first.

In many cases, it is highly irrational to turn down a nine- or ten-figure acquisition offer. There are real benefits to gaining access to the financial and personnel resources of a larger acquirer, ones that can often make or break the success of a still fledgling company. But, if there’s anything in Silicon Valley that Canada, LA, New York, and other startup ecosystems should aspire to it’s this willingness to roll the dice. Sometimes the shooter rolls a “7.”