Been working on a small team exploring what the intersection of coaching, employee engagement, and AI looks like. (https://engage.myemmaai.com/)
Most employee engagement software is just placation for HR. When it's common that the lowest scoring question on feedback cycles is "I believe that action will be taken based on the results of this feedback," there's something fundamentally broken with how companies handle feedback, and how the tools their given enable them to react to it.
Our end goal is to help leaders and managers identify problems with trust and communication within a team. The reality is, 90% of the time, the problem lies with the leadership itself. We're trying to provide both the tools to diagnose what the problems are, and frameworks for managers to fix them.
Looks neat! Keen to see where you go with this. I cofounded a small training company and we had something similar in mind for a while: a digital tool giving managers and orgs insight into team engagement, with diagnosis and tools based on our leadership framework. In the end we focused on consulting and in-person engagements but I think there's a lot of potential in what you're building.
Coaching is still a big part of what we're building, and I think it will be an ongoing option for orgs to have the option to bring in coaches to dive into their leadership and communication issues.
5+ YOE professionally, but I have toyed with contract work and startups since 2013. Most recently departed a travel tech startup where I was the head of engineering. Looking for a role either as an engineering manager or as an IC. Most of my experience is working for early/mid-stage startups. Thrive in an environment building things from the ground up.
I've worked at companies in a few different industries. From venture capital firms to logistics. Willing to relocate for the right role, or where relocation assistance is provided.
Offsite (https://www.joinoffsite.com) is helping create more engaged, connected, and empathetic workplaces of the future by allowing CEOs and their People Leaders at high-growth tech companies to easily plan, manage, and follow-up after team retreats and other types of Offsites.
We're currently looking to bring on our second engineer, and will be hiring two more soon after.
- Looking for a full stack engineer with at least a couple years of experience
- Preferably with some TypeScript experience, but we can be flexible for the right candidate.
- Distributed team
- Quarterly Offsites. You'll join us at our next one in March!
I think the concept is awesome, and I'm excited to see it, but it raises so many questions about how this is going to work. First question that comes to mind is how are you going to handle weather- and not just crazy storms, but heat and pressure too. Blimps/semi-rigid airships face a less than ideal operating window, and while ballonets and ballast can help manage the buoyancy of the ship, inevitably you'll have to vent helium.
How are you going to approach the infrastructure the drones are going to need to stay topped up on helium and ballast, and how are you going to approach emergency situations where you end up outside of the operating window of the aircraft?
We anticipate these will have operating bases with lifting gas storage tanks, hangars, tiedowns, etc. The hybrid design we're using doesn't need ballast because the total vehicle mass is heavier than air. In emergencies, we would land them in a field or on water for recovery when conditions improve, or fly to an area with better weather.
Used Atlas to incorporate and they helped correct mistakes that were made on both ends, was really nice having an actual person to talk to. Also had a deal for reduced fees which made it even sweeter. There were a few UX things that I wish were more clear initially, but they went above and beyond to fix them. Previously used LegalZoom for a 501c4 which was an experience I don't really recommend. It'd be nice to see some more options for different kinds of businesses. Kinda crazy to see how many companies they've incorporated yet still were able to offer really good support.
I like the new logo and colors, but man the weird thickness, spacing, and kerning of the font is off putting. The rhythm is all wrong so some of the letters look like they're the wrong sized or positioned wrong.
I fall on the idea person end of the spectrum more than the work-horse end, and when someone comes talking about big ideas without some baseline plan, hypothesis, or validation I zone out too. I get so frustrated with people who spend 40 hours working on shitty slide-decks trying to convince me something is a good idea instead of finding a way to show proof.
I feel like this article kinda confuses "idea people" and "people with an idea." Idea people should know how to prove an idea. I've had a lot of similar hairbrained ideas come my way looking to build an MVP for something, and typically the end of our conversation is "use an excel spreadsheet and prototype this idea and come back in 6 months, then I'll charge you $75-$200k to build the tech"
I've prototyped enough of my own ideas to know that most ideas are shit.
I think a lot of ideas are good, but they need to be "walked through," and refined. They are generally great at the hand-wavy level, but the devil is always in the details.
I believe that a lot of these colossal startup failures are great ideas; poorly executed.
The people I'm working with now, had a great idea, but didn't have it "thought through."
I said "I'll realize it, but expect big changes. I'll be developing a running prototype, and we'll be tossing out things that looked good on paper, but fall flat, in execution."
That's exactly what has happened. It takes a lot of patience; on both the "idea person" level, and the "execution person" level. I need to take their ideas seriously, and they need to shut up and pay attention when I catalog the costs of their ideas in the real world.
It'll work out, and won't look at all like they thought, but I'm designing an excellent baseline for creativity. It will work very well, will be localizable, accessible, and will allow creatives to put a lot of chrome on things.
I think you’re both right, but it’s the definition of “an idea” that has some assumptions.
Take Noah Kagan’s term “wantrepreneur” as the groundwork for what I mean:
Person A’s ideas are: Get business cards, build a website, get pamphlets, buy equipment, buy a business car, and so-on.
Person B’s idea is: find 3 clients first, do the rest after.
Person A’s ideas are all objectively good, but many of us who have seen businesses come and go won’t count those as ideas, and therefore will say “you have a good idea that needs refining” when talking about the core idea for the business.
I think for startups in general you gotta blend a bit of those two strategies to be successful too. You gotta build a nice landing page to convince people you're serious to get some of those early meetings to convince other people you're serious.
Most employee engagement software is just placation for HR. When it's common that the lowest scoring question on feedback cycles is "I believe that action will be taken based on the results of this feedback," there's something fundamentally broken with how companies handle feedback, and how the tools their given enable them to react to it.
Our end goal is to help leaders and managers identify problems with trust and communication within a team. The reality is, 90% of the time, the problem lies with the leadership itself. We're trying to provide both the tools to diagnose what the problems are, and frameworks for managers to fix them.