A friend recently told me about HealthBox that more people should know about. With all the talk about Y Combinator, Tech Stars, The Founders Institute, and 500 Startups I think it will be a great program to help with startups in the HealthCare field. Here is a little about the program:

Healthbox will officially launch in January 2012 with an inaugural class of 10 startups. For three months, these teams will share collaborate in Chicago, where they'll have access to:

• The expertise of industry leaders, investors and established entrepreneurs who can provide feedback and advice across an array of healthcare disciplines
• A collaborative workspace where other entrepreneurs and mentors can come together in an environment that stimulates learning and knowledge sharing
• Forums where business experts will lead engaging discussions on topics relevant to early-stage companies
• Seed capital – each team will receive $50,000, in exchange for 7 percent equity.

I know the media likes to hear about Peter Thiel and his 20 under 20 and of course Y Combinator. But this program has something much more compelling. Bring startups in the medical field together and helping fund them with $50k, give them mentorships and access to people that can help nail and then scale their companies, and to collaborate and network with other start-ups. 

The technological startup bubble is causing a lot more entrants in the market and the quality, to society, of the startups is declining. Are they actually creating something valuable? I mean, how many Groupon clones do we need? How many new ways do we need to share photos on an iphone? How many new iphone, ipad, or Facebook games do we need? Is this the kind of innovation that we need to help push us forward? Is this the innovation and job creation that will help push output for the worldwide economy? No. Is funding the mark of value to society? No. Is the number of users a mark of value to society? No. 

The measure of a successful startup should be the value of the output into the economy. Maybe this is my background in Economics and Accounting talking. This is what we want to cultivate as a society. We should be targeting real innovation and real output increases. The ability for people to perform more, perform better, perform new things. I am not just referring to B2B. Facebook and Twitter, for example, are fantastic inasmuch as they allow us to share and collaborate. Look at how the Middle East is changing due to those services. 

Here is the Unofficial List of Y-Combinator Startups. Are there great companies on the list? Yes. Heroku. DropBox. Scribd. Just to name a few. Did some exit? Yes. CloudKick and more...
But is anyone surprised that this failed? JustSpotted Radar - the best and only place to see sightings of the hottest stars near you. This and many other startups, which were accepted in Y Combinator don't provide any value in terms of output t society. (I would hate to see the rejects...)

The models that Y Combinator and others are using is an example to other industries. So here comes HealthBox, employing the same successful format for innovative companies that will have the potential to impact 16% of US GDP, probably lead to more innovations that will help the output of medical care across the world. If HealthBox is able to execute well, its companies will provide more value to the economy and with that will come some of the other metrics of startups; more exits, less failures and of course less celebrity spottings. (Wait, how about an app that notifies you when a celebrity goes to the doctor....)

We've chosen to apply to HealthBox. As Managing Partner of Bern, I hope we get accepted. We are doing something compelling that helps discover billing errors for physicians. As a member of the society, I hope that we don't make the cut and that there are even more deserving companies. But that would be impossible :)


David Fuhriman
@dfuhriman

Today the article I wrote "If you wouldn't do your job for free, then quit" appeared on LifeHacker.com http://lifehacker.com/5834025/if-you-wouldnt-do-your-job-for-free-then-quit

It is always rewarding to see people interact with your ideas. I like seeing the positive and negative feedback when they are well thought out. Or funny. Some of the highlights after the release of the article are Tom the founder of Myspace tweeting the article and Daniel Pink the author of "Drive". I sent Daniel the link to review the article because I highly respect him and the analysis that he has done. I cannot recommend "Drive" highly enough. 

My favorite comment has to be from Seeräuber Jenny 
"I know this may sound petty, but I've never heard anyone who went to the school in New Haven call it "Yale Law." It's always "Yale Law School." The failure to pick up on small distinctions like this, like mispronouncing a name, or calling someone by a nickname s/he doesn't use, instantly makes me skeptical."

The beauty of the Interwebs is the ability to be able to learn from other people and share information. I definitely didn't attend Yale Law (School) so I don't know the correct way to reference the school. I did visit the campus once, though. I find the skepticism in the entire story due to my ignorance interesting. But I can assure you that everything in that story was true. Maybe except for me being the best soccer player on my teams. But, that is the way I like to remember it.

OK- crazy long title in for this blog post. In preparing a pitch for Bern Medical to help recruit partners, customers and advisors, I started thinking, What if journalism or the "News" didn't exist. How would a prospective journalist would answer a Q&A with a Venture Capitalist.

VC: Where did you get your idea?
J: Me and my friends like to talk about other things that we see happen in the world. I once had a friend that worked in the Pentagon. He said one day a plane flew into the side of the Pentagon. I thought that other people would really like to know about these things happening too.

VC: Why would people want to know what is happening if they didn't see it firsthand?
J: I think that people want to know what is happening in their city, or state, or country, or anywhere in the world

VC: What are your channels of distribution?
J: We can deliver them news via online, email, twitter, print newspapers, or TV/video.

VC:How many people do you think are interested in this service?
J: Well, I think ultimately everyone in the world would find the service interesting. If everyone used our service, then we could all talk about more than what we have just seen by ourselves.

VC: How are you going to monetize this?
J: Well, we would have companies share an ad along side the news. We think that we could really get a lot of users and we could monetize with advertising. 

VC: Do you have any proprietary technology?
J: No.

VC: What are your barriers to entry?
J: Well, I think that our ability to provide good news that people find interesting and provide them the information as it is happening woud be our barriers. We will employ good looking people to read the news on TV and witty writers to write online and in newspapers.

VC: What would you do if Google did it?
J: Well, Google's main product is search. As our service grows we think that we can partner with Google to help people search an find interesting things that they might care about. This could be anything from weather, CEO's that resign, or someone's favorite reality show star going back to rehab.

VC: This seems more like a feature than a company. You only really do one thing. Tell what is happening.
J: Well, Mark Suster, we think that it is a company because there will always be a lot of things happening. There are a lot of different areas that might interest people.

VC: How do you know that something will happen? Your entire business model rests on something happening in the world.
J; Yes, but we think in the world on any given day there will be something interesting to share with people. 

VC: What if there stops being news?
J: I don't think that will happen, there will always be something to report.

VC: How can you be sure?
J: Well, when things get slow, we can always find something to share and whatever we share will become important to people.

SUMMARY:
I put up a launch page on LaunchRock, without writing one line of code and within
30 days CloudGirlfriend.com was listed on TIME Magazine’s 100 Most Influential
things of 2011, covered by Mashable, Cnet, PC World, PC Magazine, MSNBC.com,
ABC News, and a tons of international coverage. CloudGirlfriend.com was mentioned
by Jay Leno and Conan O’Brien, CNN and by radio stations across the world. We
received 850,000 unique visits and 85,000 registrations. We launched within 30
days and TechCrunch and many other new outlets covered out launch. 

It is a story of an extreme lean start-up. It is born of quick pivots, long nights, an
incredible team and years of preparation. Did I expect the reaction we received?
No. Was the ride crazy? Definitely. Can you replicate the process for your idea? Of
course.

The Idea:
My friend Kusno and I had a crazy idea. Create fake girlfriends for social networks
that would be managed by real girls. We talked about it for a couple of months.
When we talked to people about the idea they were always intrigued. We decided
to see if we could get anyone else to care. Maybe if 1,000 people were interested we
could convert 10% and build something with 100 users at go-live. We decided to
test the idea before we built anything. I encourage you to learn from my experience
and apply it to your project.

Step 1) Have a Compelling Story
You need a story that incites conversation. Our story was about social media,
technology, love, dating, gaming, and fantasy vs. reality. It is about how our world
is changing because of Facebook, Twitter, and online dating. These are disruptive
technologies that are changing society. Are we more connected now than ever? Or,
are we less connected personally? Nobody knows the answers, but everyone has an
opinion.

Step 2) Understand Diffusion of Innovation
You need to know how technology is adopted. There are innovators, early adopters,
early majority, late majority and laggards. You need to target the innovators and
understand that awareness does not mean adoption. How many people use Twitter?
How many people are aware of what Twitter does? I first put a link on HackerNews
back to our launch page page. Why? Those are the innovators that are thinking
about my story. Find your innovators.

Step 3) Learn and use the rules of influence
Robert Cialdini wrote a great book, “Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion”.
This is a MUST read for everyone. The tools that I used in the beginning for
CloudGirlfriend.com were social proof and scarcity. The media attention reinforced
the social proof and introduced authority. Using these tools helped create
conversation, sharing and registrations.

Step 4) Use LaunchRock (or other launch page with viral functionality)
There is no way we could have received the traction and attention that we did
without LaunchRock. Sharing on Facebook and Twitter were crucial in being able to
gain awareness for us. The site is easy to use and should be the default landing page
for any start-up. What is great about LaunchRock is that you have to be so concise in
your message and this forces you to be clear and simple. We described our site in 4
easy steps.

Step 5) Understand Customer Development
This entire process is intended to test your hypothesis (idea). Two of them are
fundamental: the problem and the product concept. We received very valuable
feedback from the media and from users on both fronts. We confirmed the problem
that people feel disconnected in the online world and would like to find a way to
be able to connect to others in an unconventional way. We also received important
feedback from attorneys representing Facebook that impacted our product
hypothesis. (Cease and Desist) This forced us to change the product to solve the problem. Despite set-
backs, this means that the process worked! We discovered a lot about the problem
and the product. This is what you want.

This is Part 1 of a 3 part series. Up next- Recruit a Team and Build Something.
DAVID FUHRIMAN

Great article by Marc Andreessen in the WSJ. Can see the full article here

One part struck me as particularly interesting:
"Health care and education, in my view, are next up for fundamental software-based transformation. My venture capital firm is backing aggressive start-ups in both of these gigantic and critical industries. We believe both of these industries, which historically have been highly resistant to entrepreneurial change, are primed for tipping by great new software-centric entrepreneurs."

The problem is that is is hard to crack into healthcare. Not just from a market penetration point of view, but from an actual understanding of the market, the ability to create useful and meaningful software, and then the talent to execute. Bern Medical is one of those software-centric entrepreneurial companies.

Are disruptive innovators attracted to learning about the workflow and complexity of the healthcare system?  I am not sure.
Do a lot of the software talent want to learn HL7, DICOM, CPT, ICD etc... I doubt it. 
Could a recent high school graduate with $100,000 of Peter Thiel's money and no college diploma advise MD's on software that would impact their Revenue Cycle? Unlikely.

But, without understanding the issues facing healthcare and the intricacies of the process, how can we get the entrepreneurs involved? How do you attract innovators to the healthcare that possess the entrepreneurial drive? 

I think the best chances will be pulling talent from the existing system and marrying with an external perspective. This way, we can get the best of both worlds- an understanding of healthcare as it is and the new outlook. It is a hard task to create a team that can understand and build meaningful software for healthcare and be able to have the drive to launch a new company. I know there is talent out there and perhaps it will take some work and time for the pieces to fit together. The stars have been aligned in the launching of Bern Medical to do just that. Although we are small, we have a great team of people with just the right background and skill-set to build a great company. 

I am living right now the process of this innovation. This is why I appreciate Marc's advice near the end of his article. "Finally, the new companies need to prove their worth. They need to build strong cultures, delight their customers, establish their own competitive advantages... No one should expect building a new high-growth, software-powered company in an established industry to be easy. It's brutally difficult."

Mark Suster loves talking about skating to were the puck is going, not where it is. The puck is going to data and to healthcare. If you are outside the healthcare industry and want to get in- start now. Learn as much as you can and partner with people inside the industry who will compliment your skills. If you are already in healthcare and want to start a company, consider partnering with someone who will compliment your skills and add a new perspective. 

It will be brutally difficult. But isn't that better than sitting in your cubicle everyday looking out the window at a parking lot?


DAVID FUHRIMAN
@dfuhriman

On May 12, 2009 I read a list of advice my brother-in-law received during graduation from Yale Law:

• An hour of sleep before midnight is worth two, and an hour of work before noon is worth two.
  
• Always pick your kids up from school. That’s when they want to talk.
  
• Never let your skill exceed your virtue.
  
• Never take less than two weeks off when you have a child or for your honeymoon. Don’t let them talk you down.
  
• When you mess up, admit it frankly and quickly, and move on.
  
• Always do your very best in your job, but if you don’t like what you’re doing enough that you would do it for free, quit. (This seems extreme, but at the same time mentally liberating.)

This last one hit me like a bolt of lightning. Of course I had heard similar advice, like do what you love and you would never work a day in your life. But this one was different. Would I do it for free? That is a pretty high standard. I enjoyed the job I had. Everything has ups and downs, but generally is was ok. I was doing work that I enjoyed. I was working with technology and finance/accounting- it provided enough of a challenge and the company was growing well. But, I knew that I wouldn't do it for FREE. 

What did I love enough that I would do it for free? I figured that if I was actually willing to do it for free, then that would be a good start. So I explored taking the CFA or CAIA certifications- maybe I would like to do more security analysis. No. I started looking into commodities and opened up a margin account, funded it with some money. But that wasn't it. Did some real estate analysis, properties in the mid-west have attractive cap-rates. No. 

I ended up coming back to what I used to do: helping small companies grow. This time I wanted to grow something scalable- with national or international scope. I started attending tech events, reading everything online, buying books, and discovered something I love doing for free- and what I do really well. I am very good at working in the space between Technology and Business. I ended up quitting my job to work on these things full-time. I discovered there are two reasons to only work in a job that you would do for free.

Personal Satisfaction
This is the thing that most people kind of intuitively understand. Maybe it is because we have all had some days, or weeks, or years.... where we HATE waking up and going into the job. Where many of us trip up is trying to identify what gives us enough satisfaction that we would do it for free. Most people I talk to think that this means that they should work in video games, sports, or some other recreational activity that they enjoy. This perspective blocks one's ability to actually discover what they love. 

The process I recommend to discover what you would do for free is to discover what you loved doing when you were 12. Why? There is something a little innocent about that age where we are developing our own personality and growing up but not old enough to get distracted by things such as making more money, working in a prestigious career etc.... In the words of the Black Eye Peas:
I feel the weight of the world on my shoulder
As I'm gettin' older, y'all, people gets colder
Most of us only care about money makin'
Selfishness got us followin' our wrong direction

So what did I love doing when I was 12? Playing soccer. But as I explored what it was that I loved about soccer, I loved being the best player on the team. I loved leading the team. I loved playing creatively, doing the unexpected. I loved quickly finding solutions to problems on the field and planning tactics before the game to get an advantage. I loved practice and constantly improving. Now I do the same things that I loved when I was 12- but I do them with tech companies.

Mastery
We should only work in something that we would do for free because only then we will have the intrinsic motivation to attempt to achieve mastery- or getting better and better at something that matters. Mastery is something that I found in my process of discovery. Books such as "Drive" by Daniel Pink and "Delivering Happiness" helped me understand that when we are really focused on becoming a expert at something that matters, we cease trying to accomplish things because of the external motivations. For example, when I was in college I had to take a Geology class. I didn't care about geology and I took the class just for a grade. I don't remember much from that class. I enjoyed Economics though and I earned a minor in Economics because I enjoyed the theory and enjoyed learning. I never had to worry about getting an A in Economics, because I was mastering the material.

But mastery does not refer to perfect execution and knowledge. As Pink says in his book, “the mastery asymptote is a source of frustration.  Why reach for something you can never fully attain?  But it’s also a source of allure.  Why not reach for it?  The joy is in the pursuit more than the realization.  In the end, mastery attracts precisely because mastery eludes.” I believe that we can only pursue mastery of things that we do based on internal motivation. Not if you are there to collect a paycheck.


So how about you? What would you do for free? Well you must find out what it is and quit your job so you can do it. You will enjoy your work much more and will become an expert in your field.

DAVID FUHRIMAN

Here is some additional details of the Billion Dollar Gram.Click here to see on Information is Beautiful 

Great presentation on how data visualization can open new perspectives on the underlying data.

Think about what kind of hidden information is in your data sets. Are there relationships that can be revealed if you were able to visualize your data? I think often organizations and people are capturing compelling data- but are not able to understand the relationships as well as they could. In fact, some organizations are impressed if they are using 15 year old technology to analyze their data sets.

Since Geoffrey is able to provide an algorithm for cities and corporations, the next question should be: Can we now change the results? I am an optimist and would like to think that we could reduce the negatives for cities. For corporations, I don't think that we can substantially change the results.

Cities:
If wealth and other positive metrics such as education and access to health care increase in cities, is it wise to encourage members of developing economies in Africa to migrate to cities? I serve on the Board of a Non-Profit whose goal is to provide sustainable help to villages in Mozambique. Can some problems be solved if the people moved out of the villages and into the cities? On an micro basis, is it better, given the trade-offs of increased crime? Maybe if we can begin to change the network effects of some of these items. Like I said, I am an optimist and believe that we can reduce the negative effects and still retain the positives.

Corporations:
Are we doing ourselves a diservice by having "Too Big to Fail"- and having companies grow past the optimal size? Once it is too large, each employed person's output is smaller than what it could be in a smaller company. Which is why a lot of people leave large companies to launch start-ups and why a lot of start-ups that are acquired fail when in a larger and bureaucratic system. I don't think that we can change the bureaucracy and mentality in working for larger corporations. I think part of the problem is one's ability to be able to connect with enough people to continue and gain economies of scale. Information is unable to cross through various departments and redundancies.


What is great about the analysis Geoffrey West has made is that the answers were in the data. Hidden away for years, but now we are able to capture, share and analyze like never before in the history of mankind.