Great post Kate. I think you’re right to dig deeper, beneath Sandberg’s quote to the practical implications of today’s job searcher. I also think you make a great point I never thought about around “what process did the company take to hire you”. That’s a smart yardstick that I think few use.
I think a follow-up blog post that could add additional depth to your analysis would be around company size and traction. You mention that it’s important to evaluate whether the company is solving a real problem for customers, and whether customers are willing to pay. I completely agree.
The challenge, however, is that the greater the evidence the company is solving a real problem and the greater the evidence customers are willing to pay, the less equity you will get upon joining the venture, and the more upper management ranks will already be filled by experienced executives. I think Sandberg is a unique case — with world-class smarts, pedigree, and connections — such that she could join Google and Facebook very high up the ranks while still receiving significant equity.
So, for the rest of us, I think the useful caveat to your framework is that potential employees must assess what company risk profile is right for them. Use your framework above to understand the key considerations, then recognize that the most life-changing opportunity may be those where all of your boxes are not checked — thus allowing an employee far greater equity or position within the organization.
Thanks Enke. RAW IS EVERYTHING seems interesting, and I’m glad you found something you’re excited about.
The central question I have after reading your post is, how do you plan to educate the consumer cheaply so that they recognize the value of your products?
I haven’t been following the $11B US skincare market closely, but I know multinationals invest tremendous sums to gain mindshare and trust, even when that trust is unwarranted/not backed by science.
So, from an investors’ perspective, it seems like a very expensive proposition to combat goliath and change the nature of the dialogue. Maybe you think of RAW IS EVERYTHING differently, more like Clover in that it’s capitalizing on a well-defined movement in the US away from unhealthy foods and red meat. But my suspicion is that the harmful ingredients in skincare products movement isn’t as well developed, so this may be a very expensive proposition for your team?
Great post Julisa!
I agree with your premise of purpose above product, of re-imagining your service based on that purpose mentality, and that structure must align with purpose.
Your comment around hiring talent who finds fulfillment in your purpose is interesting. I agree. It’s clearly advantageous for MiniLuxe to hire executives who care about reforming self-care, but I don’t think it’s essential. An interested addition I’d like to add that hit home for me when studying a supermarket chain is that truly any company can implement a purpose-driven culture, beginning with customer service. The employees at the supermarket chain, and I’d argue many of those in management, weren’t passionate about supermarket operations, but were clearly untied around delivering exceptional customer service.
I remember stepping back while reading and realizing, purpose can be imbued in any type of organization, starting with customer service. Starbucks is so impressive now, it’s almost unapproachable for entrepreneurs. But I think it’s useful to remember, no matter what type of business you’re in, reframing your mission from product to purpose is possible.