>> Narrator: From Sand Hill Road, in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's the CUBE. Presenting, The People First Network, insights from entrepreneurs and tech leaders. >> Hello everyone welcome to this special CUBE conversation, I'm John Furrier, host of theCUBE. We're here at Mayfield Fund, on Sand Hill Road and Menlo Park. As part of Mayfield's People First Network, co-creation with SiliconANGLE and theCUBE and Mayfield. Next guest, Beth Devin, Managing Director of Innovation Network and Emerging Technologies at Citi Ventures. Thanks for coming on. >> Thanks for having me. >> Hey, thanks for coming in. We're here for the Mayfield fiftieth anniversary, where they're featuring luminaries like yourself, and we're talking about conversations around how the world's changing and the opportunities and the challenges can be met, and how you can share some of your best practices. Talk about what your role is at Citi Ventures and what your focus is. >> Sure, sure, and boy howdy, has it been changing. It's hard to keep up with. I've been at Citi Ventures about two years and one of the reasons I joined was to stand up an Emerging Technology practice. Citi Ventures does a lot of work in corporate venture investing. We tend to be strategic investors, for start up companies that are aligned with the strategy of Citi, as well as our client. We serve probably, eighty percent of the Fortune Five Hundred companies in the world. But we also are a really important part of the innovation ecosystem at Citi. Which is looking at how to drive culture change, broaden mindset, and really, enlist our employees to be part of the innovation process. So, we have an internal incubator, we have a Shark Tank-like process we call Discover Ten X. And what I really bring to the table with my team is monitoring, and learning about, and digesting technology that's not quite ready for commercialization but we think it might be disruptive in a good or challenging way for the bank or our clients. We try to educate and provide content that's helpful to our executives, and just the employee body at large. >> I want to get into a LinkedIn post you wrote, called the Tech Whisperer, which I love. >> Thank you. >> You're there to identify new things to help people understand what that is. But that's not what you've done. You've actually implemented technology. So, on the other side of the coin, in your career. Tell us about some of the things you've done in your career, because you've been a practitioner. >> Beth: Yeah. >> and now you're identifying trends and technologies, before you were on the other side of the table. >> That's right, and sometimes I'll tell you, I have that itch. I miss the operator role, sometimes. Yeah, you know, I feel so fortunate I sort of stumbled on computer science early when I was going to school. And, the first, I'd say twenty years of my career, were working in enterprise I.T, which at that time I couldn't even have made that distinction, like why do you have to say enterprise I.T. I was a software developer, and I was then a DBA, and I even did assembler language programing. So way back when, I think I was so fortunate to fall in to software engineering. It's like problem solving, or puzzle making, and you with your own brain and sort of typing can figure out these problems. Then over the years I became more of a manager and a leader, and sort of about a reputation for being somebody you could put on any hard problem and I'd figure a way out. You know tell me where we're trying to go it looks knotty, like not a fun project, and I would tackle that. And then I'd say, I had some experience working in lots of different industries. Which really gave me an appreciation, for you know, at the end of the day, we can all debate the role that technology plays in companies. But industries, whether it's health care or media, or financial services. There's a lot of the same challenges that we have. So I worked at Turner Broadcasting before it was acquired, you know by Time Warner and AOL. And I learned about media. And then I had a fantastic time working at Charles Schwab. That was my first big Financial Services role when it came back to the bay area. I worked at Art.Com, it was a need converse company, the first company I worked at where I was in charge of all the technology. We had no brick and mortar, and if the technology wasn't working, we weren't earning revenue, in fact, not only that, we were really making customers angry. I also had a role at a start up, where I was the third person to join the company, and we had a great CEO who had a vision, but it was on paper. And we hadn't really figured out how to build this. I was very proud to assemble a team, get an office, and have a product launch in a year. >> So you're a builder, you're a doer, an assembler, key coding, hexadecimal cord dumps back in the day. >> Way back when. We didn't even have monitors. I'll tell ya, it was a long time ago. >> Glory days, huh? Back when we didn't have shoes on. You know, technology. But what a change. >> Huge change. >> The variety of backgrounds you have, The LinkedIn, the Charles Schwab, I think was during the growth years. >> And the downturn, so we got both sides. >> Both sides of that coin, but again, the technologies were evolving. >> Yes. >> To serve that kind of high frequency customer base. >> Beth: That's right. >> With databases changing, internet getting faster. >> It has. >> Jeff: More people getting online. >> We were early adopters, I'll tell you. I still will tell people, Charles Schwab is one of the best experiences I have, even though at the end I was part of the layoff process. I was there almost seven years, and I watched, we had crazy times in the internet boom. Going in 98, 99, 2000, I can't even tell you some of the experiences we had. And we weren't a digital native. But we were one of the first companies to put trading online, and to build APIs so our customers could self service, and they could do that all online. We did mobile trading. I remember we had to test our software on like twenty different phone sets. Today, it's actually, so much easier. >> It's only three. Or two. Or one. Depending on how you look at it. >> That's right. We couldn't even test on all the phone sets that were out then. But that was such a great experience, and I still, that Schwab network, is still people I'm in touch with today. And we all sort of sprinkled out to different places. I think, I dunno, there's just something special about that company in terms of what we learned, and what we were able to accomplish. >> You have a fantastic background. Again the waves of innovation you have lived through, been apart of, tackling hard problems, taking it head on. Great ethos, great management discipline. Now more than ever, it seems to be needed, because we're living in an age of massive change. Cause you have the databases are changing, the networks changing, the coding paradigms changing. Dev ops, you've got the role of data. Obviously, mobile clearly is proliferated. And now the business models are evolving. Now you got business model action, technical changes, cultural people changes. All of those theaters are exploding with opportunity, but also challenges. What's your take on that as you look at that world? >> You know, I'm a change junkie, I think. I love when things are changing, when organizations are changing, when companies are coming apart and coming together. So for me, I feel like, I've been again, so fortunate I'm in the perfect place. But, one of the things that I really prided myself on early in my career, is being what I call the bridge, or the, the translator between the different lines of business folks that I work with. Whether it was head of marketing, or somebody in a sales or customer relationship, or service organization, and the technology teams I built and led. And I think I've had a natural curiosity about what makes a business tick, and not so much over indexing on the technology itself. So technology is going to come and go, there's going to be different flavors. But actually, how to really take advantage of that technology, to better engage your customers, which as you said, their needs and their demands are changing, their expectations are so high. They really set the pace now. Who would have though that ten years ago we'd live in an environment where industries and businesses are changing because consumers have sort of set the bar on the way we all want to interact, engage, communicate, buy, pay. So there's this huge impact on organizations, and you know, I have a lot of empathy for large established enterprises that are challenged to make it through this transformation, this change, that somehow, they have to make. And I always try to pay attention on which companies have done it. And I call out Microsoft as an example. I can still remember several years ago, being at a conference. I think it was Jeffrey Moore who was speaking, and he had on one slide... Here's all the companies in technology that have had really large success. Leading up to the internet boom days, there would be a recipe for the four companies that would come together. I think it was Sun, Oracle, and Microsoft. And then he said, and now here's the companies of today. And most young people coming out of college, or getting computer science degrees won't use any of these old technology companies. But Microsoft proved us all wrong, but they did it, focused on people, culture, being willing to say where they screwed up, and where they're not going to focus anymore, and part ways with those parts of their business. And really focus on who are their customers, what are their customer needs. I think there's something to be learned from those changes they made. And I think back to the Tech Whisperer, there's no excuse for an executive today, not to at least understand the fundamentals of technology. So many decisions have to be made around investment, capital, hiring, investment in your people. That without that understanding, you're sort of operating blind. >> And this is the thing that I think I love, and was impressed by that Tech Whisperer article. You know, a play on the Horse Whisperer, the movie. You're kind of whispering in the ears of leaders who won't admit that they're scared. But they're all scared! They're all scared. And so they need to get, maybe it's cognitive dissonance around decision making, or they might not trust their lead. Or they don't know what they're talking about So this certainly is there, I would agree with that. But there's dynamics at play, and I want to get your thoughts on this. I think this plays into the Tech Whisperer. The trend we're seeing is the old days was the engineers are out coding away, hey they're out there coding away, look at them coding away. Now with Cloud they're in the front lines. They're getting closer to the customer, the apps are in charge. They're dictating to the infrastructure what can be done. With data almost every solution can be customized. There's no more general purpose. These are the things we talk about, but this changes the personnel equation. Now you got engineering and product people talking to sales and marketing people, business people. >> And customers. >> They tend not to, they traditionally weren't going well. Now they have to work well, engineers want to work with the customers. This is kind of a new business practice, and now I'm a scared executive. Beth, what do I do? What's your thoughts on that dynamic? >> You know, I'm not sure I would have had insight in that if I hadn't had the oppurtunity to work at this little start up, which we were a digital native. And it was the first time I worked in an environment where we did true extreme programming, pair programming, we had really strong product leads, and engineers. So we didn't have project managers, business analysts, a lot of things that I think enterprise I.T tends to have. Because the folks, historically, at an enterprise, the folks that are specifying the need, the business need, are folks in the lines of business. And they're not product managers, and even product managers, I say in banking for example, they aren't software product managers. And so that change, if you really do want to embrace these new methods and dev ops, and a lot of the automation that's available to engineering and software development organizations today, you really do have to make that change. Otherwise it's just going to be a clumsy version of what you use to do, with a new name on it. The other thing though that I would say, is I don't want to discount for large enterprises is partnerships with start up companies or other tech partners. You don't need to build everything. There's so much great technology out there. You brought up the Cloud. Look at how rich these Cloud stacks are getting. You know, it's not just now, can you provision me some compute, and some storage, and help me connect to the internet. There's some pretty sophisticated capabilities in there around A.I and machine learning, and data management, and analysis. So, I think overtime, we'll see richer and richer Cloud stacks, that enables you know, every company to benefit from the technology and innovation that's going on right now. >> Andy Jassy, the CEO of Amazon Web Search, has always said whenever I've interviewed him, he always talks publicly now about it is, two pizza teams, and automate the undifferentiated heavy lifting. In tech we all know what that is, the boring, mundane, patching, provisioning, ugh. And deploying more creative research. Okay so, I believe that. I'm a big believer of that philosophy. But it opens up the role, the question of the roles of the people. That lonely DBA, that you once were, I did some DBA work myself. System admins, storage administrator, these were roles, network administrator, the sacred God of the network, they ran everything. They're evolving to be much more coding oriented, software driven changes. >> It's a huge change. And you know, one thing that I think is sad, is I run into folks often that are, I'll just say, technology professionals, just say, you know, we're at large. Who are out of work. You know, who sort of hang their head, they're not valued, or maybe there's some ageism involved, or they get marked as, oh that's old school, they're not going to change. So, I really do believe we're at a point, where there's not enough resources out there. And so how we invest in talent that's available today, and help people through this change, not everybody is going to make it. It starts with you, knowing yourself, and how open-minded you are. Are you willing to learn, are you willing to put some effort forth, and sort of figuring out some of these new operating models. Because that's just essential if you want to be part of the future. And I'll tell you, it's hard, and it's exhausting. So I don't say this lightly, I just think. You know about my career, how many changes and twists and turns their have been. Sometimes you're just like, okay I'm ready, I'm ready to just go hiking. (Beth laughs) >> It can be, there's a lot of institutional baggage, associated with the role you had, I've heard that before. Old guard, old school, we don't do that, you're way too old for that, we need more women so lets get women in. So there's like a big dynamic around that. And I want to get your thoughts on it because you mentioned ageism, and also women in tech has also grown. There's a need for that. So there's more opportunities now than ever. I mean you go to the cyber security job boards, there are more jobs for cyber security experts than any. >> Oh, I'll tell you, yesterday, we held an event at our office, in partnership with some different start ups. Because that's one of the things you do when you're in a corporate venture group, and it was all on the future of authentication. So it was really targeted at an audience of information security professionals and chief information security officers. And it was twenty men and one woman. And I thought, wow, you know I'm use to that from having been a CIO that a lot of the infrastructure roles in particular, like as you were saying, the rack and stack, the storage management, the network folks, just tend to be more male dominant, than I think the product managers, designers, even software engineers to some extent. But here you know, how many times can you go online and see how many openings there are for that type of role. So I personally, am not pursuing that type of role, so I don't know what all the steps would need to be, to get educated, to get certified, but boy is there a need. And that needs not going to go away. As more, if everything is digitized and everything is online. Then security is going to be a constant concern and sort of dynamic space. >> Well, we interview a lot of women in tech, great to have you on, you're a great leader. We also interview a lot of people that are older. I totally believe that there's an ageism issue out there. I've seen it first hand, maybe because I'm over fifty. And also women in tech, there's more coming but not enough. The numbers speak for themselves. There's also an opportunity, if you look at the leveling up. I talked to a person who was a network engineer, kind of the same thing as him, hanging his head down. And I said, do you realize that networking paradigm is very similar to how cyber works. So a lot of the old is coming back. So if you look at what was in the computer science programs in the eighties. It was a systems thinking. The systems thinking is coming back. So I see that as a great opportunity. But also the aperture of the field of computer science is changing. So it's not, there are some areas that frankly, women are better than men at in my opinion. In my opinion, might get some crap for that. But the point, I do believe that. And there are different roles. So I think it's not just, there's so much more here. >> Oh, that's what I try to tell people. It's not just coding, right. There's so many different types of roles. And unfortunately I think we don't market ourselves well. So I encourage everyone out there that knows somebody. (Beth laughs) Who's looking-- >> If someone was provisioned Sun micro-systems, or mini computers, or workstations, probably has a systems background that could be a Cloud administrator or a Cloud architect. Same concepts. So I want to get your thoughts on women in tech since you're here. What's your thoughts on the industry, how's it going, things you advise, other folks, men and women, that they could do differently. Any good signs? What's your thoughts in general? >> Yeah so, first of all, I'm just a big advocate for women in general. Young girls, and, young women, just getting into the work force, and always have been. Have to say again, very fortunate early in my career working for companies like a phone company, and Schwab, we had so many amazing female leaders. And I don't even think we had a program, it was just sort of part of the DNA of the company. And it's really only in the last couple of years I really seen we have a big problem. Whether it's reading about some of the cultures of some of the big tech companies, or even spending more time in the valley. I think there's no one answer, it's multifaceted. It's education, it's families, it's you know, each one of us could make a difference in how we hire, sort of checking in what our unintended biases are, I know at Citi right now, there's a huge program around diversity and inclusion. Gender, and otherwise. And one of the ways I think it's going to be impactful. They've set targets that I know are controversial, but it holds people accountable, to make decisions and invest in developing people, and making sure there's a pipeline of talent that can step up into even bigger roles with a more diverse leadership team. It will take time though, it will take time. >> But mind shares are critical. >> It absolutely is. Self-awareness, community awareness, very much so. >> What can men do differently, it's always about women in tech, but what can we, what can men do? >> I think it's a great question. I would say, women can do this too. I hate when I see a group together, and it's all women working on the women issue. Shame on us, for not inviting men into the organization. And then I think it's similar to the Tech Whisperer. Don't be nervous, don't be worried, just step in. Because, you know, men are fathers, men are leaders, men are colleagues. They're brothers, they're uncles. We have to work on this together. >> I had a great guest, and friend, I was interviewing. And she was amazing, and she said, John, it's not diversity and inclusion, it's inclusion and diversity. It's I-N-D not D-I. First of all, I've never heard of it, what's D-N-I? My point exactly. Inclusion is not just the diversity piece, inclusion first is inclusive in general, diversity is different. So people tend to blend them. >> Yes they do. >> Or even forget the inclusion part. >> Final question, since you're a change junkie, which I love that phrase, I'm kind of one myself. Change junkies are always chasing that next wave, and you love waves. Pat Gelsinger at VMWare, wave junkie, always love talking with him. And he's a great wave spotter, he sees them early. There's a big set of waves coming in now, pretty clear. Cloud has done it's thing. It's only going to change and get bigger, hybrid, private, multi Cloud. Data, AI, twenty year cycle coming. What waves are you most excited about? What's out there? What waves are obvious, what waves aren't, that you see? >> Yeah, oh, that's a tough one. Cause we try to track what those waves are. I think one of the things that I'm seeing is that as we all get, and I don't just mean people, I mean things. Everything is connected, and everything has some kind of smarts, some kind of small CPU senser. There's no way that our existing, sort of network, infrastructure and the way we connect and talk can support all of that. So I think we're going to see some kind of discontinuous change, where new models are going to, are going to absolutely be required cause we'll sort of hit the limit of how much traffic can go over the internet, and how many devices can we manage. How much automation can the people and an enterprise sort of oversee and monitor, and secure and protect. That's the thing that I feel like it's a tsunami about to hit us. And it's going to be one of these perfect storms. And luckily, I think there is innovation going on around 5G and edge computing, and different ways to think about securing the enterprise. That will help. But it couldn't come soon enough. >> And model also meaning not just technical business. >> Absolutely. Machine the machine. Like who's identity is on there that's taken an action on your behalf, or the companies behalf. You know, we see that already with RPA, these software robots. Who's making sure that they're doing what they're suppose to do. And they're so easy to create, now you have thousands of them. In my mind, it's just more software to manage. >> And a great contrary to Carl Eschenbach, former VMware CEO now at Sequoia, he's on the board of UIPath, they're on the front page of Forbes today, talking about bots. >> Yes, yes, yes, I've heard them speak. >> This is an issue, like is there a verification. Is there a fake bots coming. If there's fake news, fake bots are probably going to come too. >> Absolutely they will. >> This is a reality. >> And we're putting them in the hands of non-engineers to build these bots. Which there's good and bad, right. >> Regulation and policy are two different things, and they could work together. This is going to be a seminal issue for our industry. Is understanding the societal impact, tech for good. Shaping the technologies. This is what a Tech Whisperer has to do. You have a tough job ahead of you. >> But I love it. >> Jeff: Beth thank you for coming on. >> Thank you for having me. >> I'm Jeff Furrier for the People First Network here at Sand Hill Road at Mayfield as part of theCUBE and SiliconANGLE's co-creation with Mayfield Fund, thans for watching.

>> Narrator: From Sand Hill Road, in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's theCUBE, presenting the People First Network, insights from entrepreneurs and tech leaders. >> Hello and welcome to a special Cube conversation, I'm John Furrier with theCUBE. We're here at Mayfield Fund on Sand Hill Road, Venture Cap for investing here for the People First co-created production by theCube and Mayfield. Next to us, Phil Finucane who's the former CTO of Express Scripts as well as a variety of other roles. Went to Stanford, Stanford alum. >> Mm hmm. >> Good to see you, thanks for joining me for this interview. >> Thank you, thank you for having me. >> So, before we get into some of the specifics, talk about your career, you're a former CTO of Express Scripts >> Yep. >> What are some of the other journeys that you've had? Talk about your roles. >> Yeah, I've had sort of a varied career. I started off as just a computer coder for a contract coder in the mid-90s. I sort of stumbled into it, not because I had a computer science background, but because when you start coding, sort of for fun in Silicon Valley in the mid-90s, there are just lots of jobs and I was lucky to have great mentors along the way. In 2003, I joined Yahoo and came in as the lead engineer, sort of the ops guy and the build and release guy for the log in and registration team at Yahoo, so I learned how to, went from being just a coder to being somebody who know how to run and build big systems and manage them all around the world. That was in the day when everything was bare metal and I could go to a data center and actually look at my machine and say, "Wow, that one's mine," right? And you know, sort of progressed from there to being the architect by the time that I left for some of the big social initiatives at Yahoo. On my way out, the YOS, the initiative to try to build Facebook in I think 2007, 2008 to try to take them on. That didn't work out too well, but it was definitely a formative experience in my career. From there I went to Zynga, where I was the CTO for Farmville. Was really, really good at getting middle-aged women in the Midwest to come play our game, and you know, was there for >> And it was highly, >> About three years >> high growth, Farmville >> Huge growth >> Took off like a rocket ship. >> Yeah, you know, over the 10 quarters I worked on the game we had over a billion dollars in revenue and that was, you know, the Zynga IPO'd on the back of that, right? And we weren't the only game, but we were certainly >> That was one of the big games >> The big whale, us and poker were the two that really drove the value in Zynga at that point. After that, I went to American Express, where I worked in a division that sort of sat off on the side of American Express focusing on stored value products. I was the chief architect for that division. Stored value products and international currency exchange. So, you know, at one point, I was in charge of both a pre-paid platform and American Express's traveler's checks platform, believe it or not, a thing that still exists. Although it's not heavily used any more. And you know, finally, I went to Express Scripts, where I spent the last three years as the CTO for that org. >> It's interesting, you've got a very unique background, because you know, you've seen the web scale, talk about bare metal Yahoo days, I mean, I remember those days vividly, you know, dealing with database schemas, I mean certainly the scale of Yahoo front page, never mind the different services that they had, which by the way, silo-like, they had databases >> Very, oh totally >> So building a registration and identity system must've been like, really stitching together a core part of Yahoo, I mean, what a Herculean task that must've been. >> Yeah, it was a lot of fun. I learned a lot, you know, we, it was my first experience in figuring out how to deal with security around the web. You know, we had, at the beginning, some vulnerabilities here and there, as time went on, our standards around interacting around the web got better and better. Obviously, Yahoo has run into trouble around that in subsequent years, but it was definitely a big learning experience, being involved in you know, the development of the OAuth 2.0 spec and all of that, I was sort of sitting there advising the folks who were, you know, in the middle of that, doing all the work. >> And that became such a standard as we know, tokens, dealing with tokens and SAS. Really drove a lot of the SAS mobile generation that did cloud, which becomes kind of that next generation so you had, you know Web 1.0, Web 2.0, then you had the cloud era, cloud 2.0, now they're goin' DevOps and apps. I want to get your thought, and you throw crypto in there just for fun, of dealing with blockchain and then token economics and new kinds of paradigms are coming online >> It's amazing how far we've come in those years, right? I mean I look at the database that was built inside of Yahoo and this predated me, you know, this was back to circa 1996, I think, but you know, big massively scalable databases that were needed just because the traditional relational database just wouldn't work at that scale, and Yahoo was one of the first to sort of discover that. And now you look at the database technologies that are out there today that take some of those core concepts and just extend them so much further and they're so much easier to access, to use, to run, operate, all of those things than back in the days of Yahoozle, UDB, and it's amazing just to see how far we've come. >> Phil, I want to get your thoughts, because you know, talking about Yahoo and just your experiences and even today, at that time it was like changing the airplane's engine at 35,000 feet, it's really difficult. A lot of corporate enterprises right nhow are having that same kind of feeling with digital, and digital transformation, I'd say it's a cliche, but it is true this impact, the role of data that's playing and the just for value creation but also cybersecurity could put a company out of business, so there's all kinds of looming things that are opportunities and challenges, that are sizable, huge tasks that was once regulated to the full stack developers and the full web scalers, now the lonely CIO with the anemic enterprise staff has to turn around on a dime. Staff up, build a stack, build commodity, scale out, this is pretty massive, and not a lot of people are talking about this. What's your view on this? Because this is super important. >> Yeah it is, and you know, so I had kind of a shock, moving from working my whole career here on Silicon Valley and then going to American Express, which you know, is very similar in a lot of ways to Express Scripts, and the sort of corporate mindset around, "What is technology?" There is this notion that everything is IT and here in the valley, IT is you know, internal networks and laptops and those sorts of things, the stuff that's required to make your enterprise run internally. Their IT is all of your infrastructure, right? And IT is a service organization, it's not the competitive advantage in your industry, right? And so both of the places that I've gone have had really forward-thinking leaders that have wanted to change the way that their enterprise operates around technology, and move away from IT but, to technology, to thinking about engineering as a core competency. And that's a huge change, not only for the CIO >> You're saying they did have that vision >> They had the vision, but they didn't know how to get there, so my charter coming in and you know, others who were on the teams around me, our charter was to come in and help build a real engineering organization as opposed to an IT org that's very vendor-oriented, you know, that's dependent on third parties to tell you the right thing or the wrong thing, you know that hires consultants to come in and help set up architecture standards, because we couldn't do that on our own, we're not the experts on this side. You know, that's sort of the mindset in many old school companies, right? That needs, that I think needs to change. This notion that software is eating the world is still not something that people have gotten their heads around in many companies, right? >> And data's washing out old business models, so if software's eating the world, data's the tsunami that's coming in and going to take out the beach and the people there. >> Right. And so it's like, all of these things, it's one thing for, you know, a forward-thinking CEO like Tim Wentworth at Express Scripts, who was responsible for bringing me and the group in, you know, those kinds of folks, it's one thing to know that you have to make that transition it's another thing to have a sense of what that means for an engineering team, and all the more for the rest of the organization to be able to get behind it. I mean, people you know, I don't know any number of business partners who've been used to, just sort of taking a spec, throwing it over the wall, and saying, "Come back to me in two years when you're done." That's not how effective organizations work around technology. >> Let's drill into that, because one of the things that's cultural, I mean I do some of the interviews of theCUBE, I talk to leaders all the time like yourself, the theme keeps coming back, it's culture, it's process, technology, all those things you talk about, but culture is the number one issue people point to, saying, "That's the reason why "something did or didn't happen." >> Correct. >> So, you talk about throwing it over the fence, that's waterfall, so you think about the old waterfall methodology, agile, well documented, but the mindset of product thinking is a really novel concept to corporate America Not to Silicon Valley, and entrepreneurs, they got to launch a product, not roll out SAP over two years, right, or something they used to be doing. So that's a cultural mindset shift. >> It's difficult for folks, even if they want to get on board to come along some of the time. One of the real big successes we had early on at Express Scripts was, you know, transitioning our teams to Agile wasn't difficult, what was difficult was getting business partners to sort of come along and be actively engaged in that product development mindset and lifecycle and all those sorts of things. And you know, we had one partner in particular, we were migrating from a really old, really clunky customer care application that you know had taken years and years to build, took on average, a new agent took six weeks to get trained on it because it was so complex and it's Oracle Forms and you know, every field in the database was a field on this thing, and there were green screens to do the stuff that you couldn't do in Oracle Forms, so and we wanted to rebuild the application. We tried to get them to come along and say, "Okay, we're going to do it in really small chunks," but business partners were like, "No, we can't afford "to have our agents swiveling between two applications." And so finally after we got our first sort of full-feature complete, we begged to go into a call center, you know with our business partners, and sit down with a few agents and just have them use it and see if it looked like it worked, if it did the right thing, and it was amazing seeing the business partner go, over the course of an hour, from "I can't be engaged in this, "I don't want an agent swiveling, "I don't want to be, you know, delivering partial applications "I want the whole thing." to, "Oh my god, it works way better, "the design is much nicer, the agents seem to like it," you know, "Here are the next things we should work on, "These are the things we got wrong." They immediately pivoted, and it wasn't, it was because they're the experts, they know how to run their business, they know what's important in their call centers, they know what their agents need, and they had just never seen the movie before, they just had no concept you could work that way. >> So this is actually interesting, 'cause what you're saying is, a new thing, foreign to the business partners, the tech team's on board, being Agile, building product, they have to, they can't just hear the feature benefits, they got to feel it. >> Yeah, they have to see it >> This seems to be the experience of success before they can move. Is that a success you think culturally, something that people have to be mindful of? >> It's absolutely something you have to be mindful of. And that was just the first step down the path. I mean, that team made a number of mistakes that folks here I think in the valley wouldn't normally make, you know. Over-committing and getting themselves into deep water by trying to get too much done and actually getting less accomplished in the process because of it and you know, the engagement around using data to actually figure out what's the next feature that we build. When you've got this enormous application to migrate, you should probably have some insight as to you know, feature by feature, what are you going to work on next? And that was a real challenge, 'cause there's a culture of expertise-driven, you know being subject-matter driven, expertise driven as opposed to being data driven about how do you >> Let's talk about data-driven. We had an interview earlier this morning with another luminary here at the Mayfield 50th conference celebration that they're having, and he said, "Data is the new feedback mechanism." and his point was, is that if you treat the Agile as an R&D exercise from a data standpoint. Not from a product but get it out there, get the data circulating in, it's critical in formulation of the next >> It is, yeah, it's absolutely critical. That was the eye opener for me going to Zynga. Zynga had an incredible, probably still does have, an incredible product culture that every single thing gets rolled out behind an experiment. And so you know, that's great from an operational perspective, because it allows you to, you know, move quickly and roll things out in small increments and when it doesn't work, you can just shut it off but it's not some huge catastrophe. But it's also critical because it allows you to see what's working and what's not and the flip side of that is, some humility of the people developing the products that their ideas are not going to work sometimes just because you know this domain well doesn't mean that you're necessarily going to be the expert on exactly how everything is going to play out. And so you have to have this ability to go out, try stuff, let it fail, use that, hopefully you fail quickly, you learn what's not working and use that to inform what's the next step down the path that you take, right? And Agile plays into it, but that's for me, that's the big transition that corporations really have to struggle with, and it's hard. >> You know you're, been there done that, seen multiple waves of innovation, want to bring up something to kind of get you going here. You see this classically in the old school 90s, 80s day. Product management, product people and sales people. They're always buttin' heads, you know? Product marketing, marketing people want this sales and marketing want this, product people buttin' heads, but now with Agile, the engineering focus has been the front lines. People are building engineering teams in house. They're building custom stacks for whatever reasons, the apps are getting smarter. The engineers are getting closer to the edge, the customer if you will. How do you help companies, or how do you advise companies to think about the relationship between a product-centric culture and a sales-centric culture? Because sometimes you have companies that are all about the customer-centric, customer-centric customer-centric, product-centric and sometimes if you try to put 'em together there's always going to be an alpha-beta kind of thing there and that's the balance in this. What's your take on this? Seems to be a cutting edge topic >> Yeah, well, so you know, one of the last big initiatives that I worked on at Express Scripts. Express Scripts has the, to my knowledge, the largest automated home delivery pharmacy in the world. It's amazing if you walk into one of our pharmacies where automation is packaging and filling prescriptions and packaging and shipping and doing all of that stuff. And we've built so much efficiency into the process that we've started getting slack in the system. Every year, you're trying to figure out how to make something work better and you know, have better automation around it. And so, you know, what do you do with all of that slack? The sales team can't sign up enough new customers for Express Scripts to actually fill that capacity. And so they create a division of commoditizing this, basically white labeling your pharmacy. We called it Pharmacy as a Platform, exposing APIs to third parties who might want to come along and hey, Phil's pharmacy can now fill branded prescriptions to get sent to you in your home, right? And so that's a fantastic vision, but there's a real struggle between engineering who had all these legacy stacks that we needed to figure out how to move to be able to really live up to this, you know the core of Express Scripts was our members and not somebody else's members. And so there's a lot of rewiring at the core that needs to be done. An operations team, a product team that's, you know, running these home delivery pharmacies, and a sales team that wants to go off and sell all over the place, right? And so, you know, early on, we started off and the sales team tried to sell, like six different deals that all required different parts of the vision, but you know, they weren't really, there was no real roadmap to figure out how do you get from where we're at to the end, and we could've done any of those things, but trying to do them all at once was going to be a trainwreck. And so, you know, we stubbed our toes a couple of times along the way, but I think it just came down to having a conversation and trying to be as transparent as possible on all sides, in all sides. To you know, try to get to a place where we could be effective in delivering on the vision. The vision was right. Everybody was doing all of the right things. But if you haven't actually, with so much of this stuff, if you haven't seen the movie, if you haven't worked this way before, there's nothing I can tell you that's going to make it work magically for you tomorrow. You have to just get this together and work in small increments to figure out how to get there. >> You got to go through spring training, you got to do the reps. >> Yep, absolutely. >> All right, so on your career, as you look at what you've done in your career, and what people outside are looking at right now, you got startups trying to compete and get a market position. You have other existing suppliers who could be the old guard, retooling and replatforming, refactoring, whatever the buzz word you want to use. And then the ultimate customer who wants to consume and have the ability of having custom personalization, data analytics, unlimited elastic capability with resources for their solution. How, what advice would you give to the startup, to the supplier, and to the customer to survive this next transition of cloud 2.0, you know and data tsunami, and all the opportunities that are coming? Because if they don't, they'll be challenged a startup goes out of business, a supplier gets displaced. >> Right, I mean, well, so the startup, I don't know if I have good advice for the startup. Startups in general have to find a market that actually works for them. And so, you know, I don't know that I've got some secret key that allows startups to be effective other than don't run out of money, try to figure out how to build effectively to get you to the point where you're, you know, where you're going to win. One of my earliest, one of the earliest jobs I had in my career, I came into a startup, and I tried, one of the founders had written the initial version of the code base. I, as a headstrong engineer, was convinced that he had done horrible work, and so I sort of holed up for like, six to eight weeks doing a hundred hours a week trying to rewrite the entire code base while getting nothing done for the startup. You know, in the end, that was the one job I've ever been fired from, and I should've been fired, because, you know, honestly as a startup, you shouldn't worry about perfection from an engineering perspective. You should figure out how to try to find your marketplace. Everybody has tech debt, you can fix that as time goes on, the startup needs to figure out how to be viable more than anything else. As far as suppliers go, you know, I don't know it's interesting the, you know, I sort of look at corporate America and there are many many companies that really rely heavily on their vendors to tell them how to do things. They don't trust in their own internal engineering ability. And then there are the ones, like the teams I have built at AmEx and Express Scripts that really do want to learn it all and be independent. I would say, identify when you walk into somebody's shop which they are and sell to them appropriately. You know, I've been a Splunk customer for a long time, I love Splunk. But the Splunk sales team early on at Express Scripts tried to come in and sell me on a whole bunch of stuff that Splunk was just not good at, right? >> And you knew that. >> And I knew that, because I've been a hands-on customer every since Zynga, right? I know what it's good at, and I love it as a tool, but you know, it's not the Swiss Army knife. It can't do everything. >> Well now you got Signal FX, so now you can get the observability you need. >> Exactly, right? So yeah, I, you know, I would say, you know, for those kinds of companies, it's important to go in and understand what your customer is, you know, what your customer is asking for and respond to them appropriately. And in some cases, they're going to need your expertise, either because they're building towards it or they haven't gotten there yet, and some cases, one of the things that I have done with teams of mine in the past, was it with AppDynamics at Express Scripts, excuse me at AmEx, five or six years ago, they were sold on, you know, bringing in AppDynamics as a monitoring tool, I actually made them not bring it in, because they didn't know what they didn't know. I made them go build some basic monitoring, you know, using some open source tools, just to get some background, and then, you know, once they did, we ended up bringing AppDynamics in, but doing it in a way that they were accretive to what we were trying to accomplish and not just this thing that was going to solve all of our problems. >> And so that brings up the whole off-the-shelf general purpose software model that you were referring to. The old model was lean on your vendors. They're supplying you, and because you don't have the staff to do it yourself. That's changing, do you think that's changing? >> It is, it's changing, but again, I think there's a lot of places where people nominally want to go there, but don't know how to get there, and so, you know, people are stubbing their toes left and right. If you're doing it with this mindset of, we're constantly getting better and we're learning and it's okay to make mistakes as long as we move forward, >> It's okay to stub your toe as long as you don't cut an artery open. >> Yeah, that's true, yeah exactly >> You don't want to bleed out, that's a cybersecurity hack >> That's true, that's true. But for me a lot of the time that just comes down to how long are you waiting before you stub your toe? If you're, you know, if you wait two years before you actually try to launch something, the odds of you cutting your leg off are much higher than >> Well I want to get into the failure thing, so I think stubbing your toe brings up this notion of risk management, learning what to try, what not to do, take experiments to try to your, which is a great example. Before you get there, you mentioned suppliers. One of the things we hear and I want to get your thoughts on, is that, a lot of CIOs and C-sos, and CBOs, or whatever title is the acronym, they're trying to reduce the number of suppliers. They don't want more tools, right? They don't necessarily want another tool for the tool's sake or they might want to replatform, what does that even mean? So, we're hearing in our interviews and our discussions with partitioners, "Hey, I want to get my suppliers down, "and by the way, I want to be API driven, "so I want to start getting to a mode "where I'm dictating the relationship to suppliers." How do you respond to that? Do you see that as aspirational, real dynamic, or fiction? >> It's a good goal to give motivation, I believe it. For me, I approach the problem a little differently. I'm a big believer, well, so, because I've seen this pattern of this next tool is going to be the one that consolidates three things and it's going to be the right answer and instead of eliminating three and getting down to one, you have four, because you're, you need to unwire this new thing, there's a lot of time and effort required to get rid of, you know, your old technology stack, and move to the new one, right? I've seen that especially coming from the C-Sec for Express Scripts is an amazing guy, and you know, was definitely trying to head down that path but we stubbed our toes, we ran into problems in trying to figure out, you know, how do you move from one set of networking gear to the next set? How do you deal with, you know, all of the virus protection and all the other, there's a huge variety of tools. >> So it's not just technical debt, it's disruption >> It's disruption to the existing stack, and you've got to move from old to new, so my philosophy has always been, with technical debt, when you're in debt, and I think technical debt really does operate in a lot of ways like real debt, right? Probably good to have some of it. If you're completely debt-free, that's I've never been in that place before. >> You're comfortable. You might not be moving, >> Exactly, right? But with that technical debt, you know, there's two ways to pay down your debt. You can scrimp and save and put more money into debt principal payments as opposed to spending on other new things, or, well and/or, build productive capacity. So a huge focus for me for the engineering teams that we've built, and this is not anything new to the folks in this area, but, you know, always think about an arms race, where you're getting 1% better every day. The aggregation of marginal gains and investing in internal improvements so that your team is doubling productivity every year, which is something that's really possible for, you know, some of these engineering organizations, is the way that you deal with that, right? If you get to the point where your team is really, really productive, they can go through and eliminate all the old legacy technology. >> That's actually great advice, and it's interesting, because a lot of people just get hung up on one thing. Operating something, and then growing something, and you can have different management styles and different techniques for both, the growth team, the operating team. You're kind of bringing in and saying, we can do both. Operate with growth in mind, to 1% better approach. >> Right, you know, and for me, it's been an interesting journey, you know. I started off as the engineer and then the architect, who was always focused on just the technology, the design of the system in production. Sort of learned from there that you had to be good at the you know, all the systems that get code from a developer's desktop into production, that's a whole interrelated system that's not isolated from your production system. And then from there, it has to be the engineering team that you build has to be effective as well. And so, I've moved from being very technology-centric to somebody who says, "Okay, I have to start "with getting the team right "and getting the culture right if we're ever going to "be able to get the technology to a good place." Mind you, I still love the technology. I'm still an architect at my core, but I've come to this realization that good technology and bad teams will get crushed by bad technologies and good teams. Because now I've seen that a couple of places, where you have old but evolving technology stacks that have gone from low availability and poor performance and low ability to get new features into production to a place where you're fixing all of that at a high rate. It starts with the team. >> You're bringing us some core Silicon Valley ethos to the IT conversation, because what you're talking about is "I'll fund an A team with a B plan any day "over a B team with an A plan." >> Right. >> And where this makes sense, I think is true, is that to your point about debt, A teams know how to manage it. >> Yeah. >> So this is kind of what you're getting at here. >> Right. >> You can take that same ethos, so it's the Agile enterprise. >> Yeah, it is >> That's what we're talking about. Okay, so hypothetical final point I want to chat with you about. Let's just say you and I were startin' a company. We're chief architects, you're the chief architect, I'm a coder, what are we doing? Do I code from horizontally scalable cloud, certainly cloud native, how would you think about building, we have an app in mind, all of our requirements defined, it's going to be data-centric, it's going to be game change and have community, it might have some crypto in there, who knows, but it's going to be fun. How do we scale this out to be really fast? How would you architect this? >> Yeah, well, you know, I do start in the cloud. I go to AWS or Azure or any of the offerings that are out there, and you know, leverage everything that they have that's already wired up already for you. I mean the thing that we've seen in the evolution of software and production systems over the last, well, forever, is you get more and more leverage every day, every year, right? And so, if you and I are startin' a new company, let's go use the tools that are there to do the things that we shouldn't be wasting our time on. Let's focus on the value for our company as much as we can. Don't over-architect. I think premature optimization is a thing that you know, I learned early on is a real problem. You should, you know >> Give an example, what that would look like. >> I've seen >> Database scale decisions done with no scale >> Correct, yeah, you know? You go off >> Let's pick this! It's the most scalable database, well we have no users yet. >> Right, you know you build the super complicated caching architecture or you know, you go design the most critical part of the system out of the gate, you know, using Assembly. You use C++ or, you use a low level language when a high level language with your three users would be just fine, right? You can get the work done in a fraction of the time. >> And get the business logic down, the IP, >> Solve the problem when it becomes a problem. Like, it's, you know, I've, any number of times, I've run into systems, I've built systems where you have some issue that you run into, and you have to go back and redesign some chunk of the system. In my experience, I'm really bad at predicting, and I think engineers are really bad at predicting what are going to be the problem areas until you run into them, so just go as simple as you can out of the gate, you know. Use as many tools as you can to solve problems that, you know, maybe as an engineer, I want to go rebuild every thing from scratch every time. I get the inclination. But it's >> It's a knee-jerk reaction to do that but you stay your course. Don't over-provision, overthink it, thus start taking steps toward the destination, the vision you want to go to, and get better, operate >> Solve the problem you have when it shows up. >> So growth mindset, execute, solve the problems when they're there. >> Right, and initially the problem that you have is finding a market, you know, not building the greatest platform in the world, right? >> Find a market, exactly. >> Right? >> Phil, thanks for taking the time >> Thank you very much, appreciate it. >> Appreciate the insights. Hey, we're here for the People First, Mayfield's 50th celebration, 50 years in business. It's a CUBE co-production, I'm John Furrier, thanks for watching >> Thanks John. (outro music)

>> Announcer: From Sand Hill Road in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's theCUBE, presenting the People First Network, insights from entrepreneurs and tech leaders. (bright electronic music) >> Everyone, welcome to this special CUBE conversation. We're here at Sand Hill Road at Mayfield Fund. This is theCUBE, co-creation of the People First Network content series. I'm John Furrier, host of theCUBE. Our next guest, Yuvi Kochar, who's the Data-centric Digital Transformation Strategist at GameStop. Variety of stints in the industry, going in cutting-edge problems around data, Washington Post, comScore, among others. You've got your own practice. From Washington, DC, thanks for joining us. >> Thank you, thanks for hosting me. >> This is a awesome conversation. We were just talking before we came on camera about data and the roles you've had over your career have been very interesting, and this seems to be the theme for some of the innovators that I've been interviewing and were on the People First is they see an advantage with technology, and they help companies, they grow companies, and they assist. You did a lot of different things, most notably that I recognized was the Washington Post, which is on the mainstream conversations now as a rebooted media company with a storied, historic experience from the Graham family. Jeff Bezos purchased them for a song, with my opinion, and now growing still, with the monetization, with subscriber base growing. I think they're number one in subscribers, I don't believe, I believe so. Interesting time for media and data. You've been there for what, how many years were you at the Washington Post? >> I spent about 13 years in the corporate office. So the Washington Post company was a conglomerate. They'd owned a lot of businesses. Not very well known to have owned Kaplan, education company. We owned Slate, we owned Newsweek, we owned TV stations and now they're into buying all kinds of stuff. So I was involved with a lot of varied businesses, but obviously, we were in the same building with the Washington Post, and I had front row seat to see the digital transformation of the media industry. >> John: Yeah, we-- >> And how we responded. >> Yeah, I want to dig into that because I think that illustrates kind of a lot what's happening now, we're seeing with cloud computing. Obviously, Cloud 1.0 and the rise of Amazon public cloud. Clearly, check, done that, a lot of companies, startups go there. Why would you provision a data center? You're a startup, you're crazy, but at some point, you can have a data center. Now, hybrid cloud's important. Devops, the application development market, building your own stack, is shifting now. It seems like the old days, but upside down. It's flipped around, where applications are in charge, data's critical for the application, infrastructure's now elastic. Unlike the old days of here's your infrastructure. You're limited to what you can run on it based on the infrastructure. >> Right. >> What's your thoughts on that? >> My thoughts are that, I'm a very, as my title suggests, data-centric person. So I think about everything data first. We were in a time when cloud-first is becoming old, and we are now moving into data-first because what's happening in the marketplace is the ability, the capability, of data analytics has reached a point where prediction, in any aspect of a business, has become really inexpensive. So empowering employees with prediction machines, whether you call them bots, or you call them analytics, or you call them machine learning, or AI, has become really inexpensive, and so I'm thinking more of applications, which are built data-out instead of data-in, which is you build process and you capture data, and then you decide, oh, maybe I should build some reporting. That's what we used to do. Now, you need to start with what's the data I have got? What's the data I need? What's the data I can get? We were just talking about, everybody needs a data monetization strategy. People don't realize how much asset is sitting in their data and where to monetize it and how to use it. >> It's interesting. I mean, I got my computer science degree in the 80s and one of the tracks I got a degree in was database, and let's just say that my main one was operating system. Database was kind of the throwaway at that time. It wasn't considered a big field. Database wasn't sexy at all. It was like, database, like. Now, if you're a database, you're a data guru, you're a rock star. The world has changed, but also databases are changing. It used to be one centralized database rules the world. Oracle made a lot of money with that, bought all their competitors. Now you have open source came into the realm, so the world of data is also limited by where the data's stored, how the data is retrieved, how the data moves around the network. This is a new dynamic. How do you look at that because, again, lagging in business has a lot to do with the data, whether it's in an application, that's one thing, but also having data available, not necessarily in real time, but if I'm going to work on something, I want the data set handy, which means I can download it or maybe get real-time. What's your thoughts on data as an element in all that moving around? >> So I think what you're talking about is still data analytics. How do I get insights about my business? How do I make decisions using data in a better way? What flexibility do I need? So you talk about open source, you think about MongoDB and those kind of databases. They give you a lot of flexibility. You can develop interesting insights very quickly, but I think that is still very much thinking about data in an old-school kind of way. I think what's happening now is we're teaching algorithms with data. So data is actually the software, right? So you get an open source algorithm. I mean Google and everybody else is happy to open source their algorithms. They're all available for free. But what, the asset is now the data, which means how you train your algorithm with your data, and then now, moving towards deploying it on the edge, which is you take an algorithm, you train it, then you deploy it on the edge in an IoT kind of environment, and now you're doing decision-making, whether it's self-driving cars, I mean those are great examples, but I think it's going down into very interesting spaces in enterprise, which is, so we have to all think about software differently because, actually, data is a software. >> That's an interesting take on it, and I love that. I mean I wrote a blog post in 2007 when we first started playing with the, in looking at the network effects on social media and those platforms was, I wrote a post, it was called Data is the New Development Kit. Development kit was what people did back then. They had a development kit and they would download stuff and then code, but the idea was is that data has to be part of the runtime and the compilation of, as software acts, data needs to be resident, not just here's a database, access it, pull it out, use it, present it, where data is much more of a key ingredient into the development. Is that kind of what you're getting at? >> Yes. >> Notion of-- >> And I think we're moving from the age of arithmetic-based machines, which is we put arithmetic onto chips, and we then made general-purpose chips, which were used to solve a huge amount of problems in the world. We're talking about, now, prediction machines on a chip, so you think about algorithms that are trained using data, which are going to be available on chips. And now you can do very interesting algorithmic work right on the edge devices, and so I think a lot of businesses, and I've seen that recently at GameStop, I think business leaders have a hard time understanding the change because we have moved from process-centric, process automation, how can I do it better? How can I be more productive? How can I make better decisions? We have trained our business partners on that kind of thinking, and now we are starting to say, no, no, no, we've got something that's going to help you make those decisions. >> It's interesting, you mentioned GameStop. Obviously, well-known, my sons are all gamers. I used to be a gamer back before I had kids, but then, can't keep up anymore. Got to be on that for so long, but GameStop was a retail giant in gaming. Okay, when they had physical displays, but now, with online, they're under pressure, and I had interviewed, again, at an Amazon event, this Best Buy CIO, and he says, "We don't compete with price anymore. "If they want to buy from Amazon, no problem, "but our store traffic is off the charts. "We personalize 50,000 emails a day." So personalization became their strategy, it was a data strategy. This is a user experience, not a purchase decision. Is this how you guys are thinking about it at GameStop? >> I think retail, if you look at the segment per se, personalization, Amazon obviously led the way, but it's obvious that personalization is key to attract the customer. If I don't know what games you play, or if I don't know what video you watched a little while ago, about which game, then I'm not offering you the product that you are most prone or are looking for or what you want to buy, and I think that's why personalization is key. I think that's-- >> John: And data drives that, and data drives that. >> Data drives that, and for personalization, if you look at retail, there's customer information. You need to know the customer. You need to know, understand the customer preferences, but then there's the product, and you need to marry the two. And that's where personalization comes into play. >> So I'll get your thoughts. You have, obviously, a great perspective on how tech has been built and now working on some real cutting-edge, clear view on what the future looks like. Totally agree with you, by the way, on the data. There's kind of an old guard/new guard, kind of two sides of the street, the winners and the losers, but hey, look, I think the old guard, if they don't innovate and become fresh and new and adopt the modern things that need to attract the new expectations and new experiences from their customers, are going to die. That being said, what is the success formula, because some people might say, hey, I'm data-driven. I'm doing it, look at me, I'm data. Well, not really. Well, how do you tell if someone's really data-driven or data-centric? What's the difference? Is there a tell sign? >> I think when you say the old guard, you're talking about companies that have large assets, that have been very successful in a business model that maybe they even innovated, like GameStop came up with pre-owned games, and for the longest of times, we've made huge amount of revenue and profit from that segment of our business. So yes, that's becoming old now, but I think the most important thing for large enterprises at least, to battle the incumbent, the new upstarts, is to develop strategies which are leveraging the new technologies, but are building on their existing capability, and that's what I drive at GameStop. >> And also the startups too, that they were here in a venture capital firm, we're at Mayfield Fund, doing this program, startups want to come and take a big market down, or come in on a narrow entry and get a position and then eat away at an incumbent. They could do it fast if they're data-centric. >> And I think it's speed is what you're talking about. I think the biggest challenge large companies have is an ability to to play the field at the speed of the new upstarts and the firms that Mayfield and others are investing in. That's the big challenge because you see this, you see an opportunity, but you're, and I saw that at the Washington Post. Everybody went to meetings and said, yes, we need to be digital, but they went-- >> They were talking. >> They went back to their desk and they had to print a paper, and so yes, so we'll be digital tomorrow, and that's very hard because, finally, the paper had to come out. >> Let's take us through the journey. You were the CTO, VP of Technology, Graham Holdings, Washington Post, they sold it to Jeff Bezos, well-documented, historic moment, but what a storied company, Washington Post, local paper, was the movie about it, all the historic things they've done from a reporting and journalism standpoint. We admire that. Then they hit, the media business starts changing, gets bloated, not making any money, online classifieds are dying, search engine marketing is growing, they have to adjust. You were there. What was the big, take us through that journey. >> I think the transformation was occurring really fast. The new opportunities were coming up fast. We were one of the first companies to set up a website, but we were not allowed to use the brand on the website because there was a lot of concern in the newsroom that we are going to use or put the brand on this misunderstood, nearly misunderstood opportunity. So I think it started there, and then-- >> John: This is classic old guard mentality. >> Yes, and it continued down because people had seen downturns. It's not like media companies hadn't been through downturns. They had, because the market crashes and we have a recession and there's a downturn, but it always came back because-- >> But this was a wave. I mean the thing is, downturns are economic and there's business that happens there, advertisers, consumption changes. This was a shift in their user base based upon a technology wave, and they didn't see it coming. >> And they hadn't ever experienced it. So they were experiencing it as it was happening, and I think it's very hard to respond to a transformation of that kind in a very old-- >> As a leader, how did you handle that? Give us an example of what you did, how you make your mark, how do you get them to move? What were some of the things that were notable moments? >> I think the main thing that happened there was that we spun out washingtonpost.com. So it became an independent business. It was actually running across the river. It moved out of the corporate offices. It went to a separate place. >> The renegades. >> And they were given-- >> John: Like Steve Jobs and the Macintosh team, they go into separate building. >> And we were given, I was the CTO of the dotcom for some time while we were turning over our CTO there, and we were given a lot of flexibility. We were not held accountable to the same level. We used the, obviously, we used-- >> John: You were running fast and loose. >> And we were, yes, we had a lot of flexibility and we were doing things differently. We were giving away the content in some way. On the online side, there was no pay wall. We started with a pay wall, but advertising kind of was so much more lucrative in the beginning, that the pay wall was shut down, and so I think we experimented a lot, and I think where we missed, and a lot of large companies miss, is that you need to leave your existing business behind and scale your new business, and I think that's very hard to do, which is, okay, we're going to, it's happening at GameStop. We're no longer completely have a control of the market where we are the primary source of where, you talk about your kids, where they go to get their games. They can get the games online and I think-- >> It's interesting, people are afraid to let go because they're so used to operating their business, and now it has to pivot to a new operating model and grow. Two different dynamics, growth, operation, operating and growing. Not all managers have that growth mindset. >> And I think there's also an experience thing. So most people who are in these businesses, who've been running these businesses very successfully, have not been watching what's happening in technology. And so the technology team comes out and says, look, let me show you what we can do. I think there has to be this open and very, very candid discussion around how we are going to transform-- >> How would you talk about your peer, developed peers out there, your peers and other CIOs, and even CISOs on the security side, have been dealing with the same suppliers over, and in fact, on the security side, the supplier base is getting larger. There's more tools coming out. I mean who wants another tool? So platform, tool, these are big decisions being made around companies, that if you want to be data-centric, you want to be a data-centric model, you got to understand platforms, not just buying tools. If you buy a hammer, they will look like a nail, and you have so many hammers, what version, so platform discussions come in. What's your thoughts on this? Because this is a cutting-edge topic we've been talking about with a lot of senior engineering leaders around Platform 2.0 coming, not like a classic platform to... >> Right, I think that each organization has to leverage or build their, our stack on top of commodity platforms. You talked about AWS or Azure or whatever cloud you use, and you take all their platform capability and services that they offer, but then on top of that, you structure your own platform with your vertical capabilities, which become your differentiators, which is what you take to market. You enable those for all your product lines, so that now you are building capability, which is a layer on top of, and the commodity platforms will continue to bite into your platform because they will start offering capabilities that earlier, I remember, I started at this company called BrassRing, recruitment automation. One of the first software-as-a-service companies, and I, we bought a little company, and the CTO there had built a web server. It was called, it was his name, it was called Barrett's Engine. (chuckles) And so-- >> Probably Apache with something built around it. >> So, in those days, we used to build our own web servers. But now today, you can't even find an engineer who will build a web server. >> I mean the web stack and these notions of just simple Web 1.0 building blocks of change. We've been calling it Cloud 2.0, and I want to get your thoughts on this because one of the things I've been riffing on lately is this, I remember Marc Andreessen wrote the famous article in Wall Street Journal, Software is Eating the World, which I agree with in general, no debate there, but also the 10x Engineer, you go into any forum online, talking about 10x Engineers, you get five different opinions, meaning, a 10x Engineer's an engineer who can do 10 times more work than an old school, old classical engineer. I bring this up because the notion of full stack developer used to be a real premium, but what you're talking about here with cloud is a horizontally scalable commodity layer with differentiation at the application level. That's not full stack, that's half stack. So you think the world's kind of changing. If you're going to be data-centric, the control plane is data. The software that's domain-specific is on top. That's what you're essentially letting out. >> That's what I'm talking about, but I think that also, what I'm beginning to find, and we've been working on a couple of projects, is you put the data scientists in the same room with engineers who write code, write software, and it's fascinating to see them communicate and collaborate. They do not talk the same language at all. >> John: What's it like? Give us a mental picture. >> So a data scientist-- >> Are they throwing rocks at each other? >> Well, nearly, because the data scientists come from the math side of the house. They're very math-oriented, they're very algorithm-oriented. Mathematical algorithms, whereas software engineers are much more logic-oriented, and they're thinking about scalability and a whole lot of other things, and if you think about, a data scientist develops an algorithm, it rarely scales. You have to actually then hand it to an engineer to rewrite it in a scalable form. >> I want to ask you a question on that. This is why I got you and you're an awesome guest. Thanks for your insights here, and we'll take a detour into machine learning. Machine learning really is what AI is about. AI is really nothing more than just, I love AI, it gets people excited about computer science, which is great. I mean my kids talk about AI, they don't talk about IoT, which is good that AI does that, but it's really machine learning. So there's two schools of thought on machine. I call it the Berkeley school on one end, not Berkeley per se but Berkeley talks about math, machine learning, math, math, math, and then you have other schools of thought that are on cognition, that machine learning should be more cognitive, less math-driven, spectrum of full math, full cognition, and everything in between. What's your thoughts on the relationship between math and cognition? >> Yeah, so it's interesting. You get gray hair and you kind of move up the stack, and I'm much more business-focused. These are tools. You can get passionate about either school of thought, but I think that what that does is you lose sight of what the business needs, and I think it's most important to start with what are we here trying to do, and what is the best tool? What is the approach that we should utilize to meet that need? Like the other day, we were looking at product data from GameStop, and we know that the quality of data should be better, but we found a simple algorithm that we could utilize to create product affinity. Now whether it's cognition or math, it doesn't matter. >> John: The outcome's the outcome. >> The outcome is the outcome, and so-- >> They're not mutually exclusive, and that's a good conversation debate but it really gets to your point of does it really matter as long as it's accurate and the data drives that, and this is where I think data is interesting. If you look at folks who are thinking about data, back to the cloud as an example, it's only good as what you can get access to, and cybersecurity, the transparency issue around sharing data becomes a big thing. Having access to the data's super important. How do you view that for, as CIOs, and start to think about they're re-architecting their organizations for these digital transformations. Is there a school of thought there? >> Yes, so I think data is now getting consolidated. For the longest time, we were building data warehouses, departmental data warehouses. You can go do your own analytics and just take your data and add whatever else you want to do, and so the part of data that's interesting to you becomes much more clean, much more reliable, but the rest, you don't care much about. I think given the new technologies that are available and the opportunity of the data, data is coming back together, and it's being put into a single place. >> (mumbles) Well, that's certainly a honeypot for a hacker, but we'll get that in a second. If you and I were doing a startup, we say, hey, let's, we've got a great idea, we're going to build something. How would we want to think about the data in terms of having data be a competitive advantage, being native into the architecture of the system. I'll say we use cloud unless we need some scale on premise for privacy reasons or whatever, but we would, how would we go to market, and we have an app, as apps defined, great use case, but I want to have extensibility around the data, I don't want to foreclose any future options, How should I think about my, how should we think about our data strategy? >> Yes, so there was a very interesting conversation I had just a month ago with a friend of mine who's working at a startup in New York, and they're going to build a solution, take it to market, and he said, "I want to try it only in a small market "and learn from it," and he's going very old school, focus groups, analytics, analysis, and I sat down, we sat at Grand Central Station, and we talked about how, today, he should be thinking about capturing the data and letting the data tell him what's working and what's not working, instead of trying to find focus groups and find very small data points to make big decisions. He should actually utilize the target, the POC market, to capture data and get ready for scale because if you want to go national after having run a test in... >> Des Moines, Iowa. >> Part of New York or wherever, then you need to already have built the data capability to scale that business in today's-- >> John: Is it a SaaS business? >> No, it's a service and-- >> So he can instrument it, just watch the data. >> And yes, but he's not thinking like that because most business people are still thinking the old way, and if you look at Uber and others, they have gone global at such a rapid pace because they're very data-centric, and they scale with data, and they don't scale with just let's go to that market and then let's try-- >> Yeah, ship often, get the data, then think of it as part of the life cycle of development. Don't think it as the old school, craft, launch it, and then see how it goes and watch it fail or succeed, and know six months later what happened, know immediately. >> And if you go data-centric, then you can turn the R&D crank really fast. Learn, test and learn, test and learn, test and learn at a very rapid pace. That changes the game, and I think people are beginning to realize that data needs to be thought about as the application and the service is being developed, because the data will help scale the service really fast. >> Data comes into applications. I love your line of data is the new software. That's better than the new oil, which has been said before, but data comes into the app. You also mentioned that app throws off data. >> Yuvi: Yes. >> We know that humans have personal, data exhaust all the time. Facebook made billions of dollars on our exhaust and our data. The role of data in and out of the application, the I/O of the application, is a new concept, you brought that up. I like that and I see that happening. How should we capture that data? This used to be log files. Now you got observability, all kinds of new words kind of coming into this cloud equation. How should people think about this? >> I think that has to be part of the design of your applications, because data is application, and you need to design the application with data in mind, and that needs to be thought of upfront, and not later. >> Yuvi, what's next for you? We're here in Sand Hill Road, VC firm, they're doing a lot of investments, you've got a great project with GameStop, you're advising startups, what's going on in your world? >> Yes, so I'm totally focused, as you probably are beginning to sense, on the opportunity that data is enabling, especially in the enterprise. I'm very interested in helping business understand how to leverage data, because this is another major shift that's occurring in the marketplace. Opportunities have opened up, prediction is becoming cheap and at scale, and I think any business runs on their capability to predict, what is the shirt I should buy? How many I should buy? What color should I buy? I think data is going to drive that prediction at scale. >> This is a legit way that everyone should pay attention to. All businesses, not just one-- >> All businesses, everything, because prediction is becoming cheap and automated and granular. That means you need to be able to not just, you need to empower your people with low-level prediction that comes out of the machines. >> Data is the new software. Yuvi, thanks so much for great insight. This is theCUBE conversation. I'm John Furrier here at Sand Hill Road at the Mayfield Fund, for the People First Network series. Thanks for watching. >> Yuvi: Thank you. (bright electronic music)

>> Announcer: From Sand Hill Road in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's "theCUBE," presenting the People First Network, insights from entrepreneurs and tech leaders. (upbeat electronic music) >> Hi, everyone, welcome to this special "CUBE" conversation. I'm John Furrier, co-host of "theCUBE" and co-founder of SiliconANGLE Media. We are on Sand Hill Road at Mayfield Fund, the venture capitalist funding startups. We're here with Tara Vaishnav, who is the vice president of technology, innovation, and advanced analytics at The Clorox Company, as part of the People First Network co-creation of content with SiliconANGLE and Mayfield. Tara, welcome. >> Well, thank you very much for having me! And congratulations to Mayfield on 50 amazing years, wow! >> 50 years they have been in Sand Hill Road, they've been investing in some great startups. They really have a great philosophy about people first. >> Yep. >> And you've had a very distinguished career in technology, IT, in big companies. Long tenures, too, like, you know, decades. >> Yes, oh, yes. >> And now at Clorox, a consumer company. So talk about your journey, where your experience is, where you started, tell us about your background. >> Yeah, well, I grew up in India, if it's not obvious already. I came to the United States after I finished my undergrad in India, I had an undergrad in electrical engineering. Came over here, got my electrical engineering master's at the University of Southern California, go Trojans. And after that, I worked for several companies, but mostly in health care and life sciences. So the past four years, I have been the vice president of IT at The Clorox Company, which is a CPG company, so quite a bit of a learning curve there. >> Health care, serving patients, now you're serving consumers. >> That's right, that's right. >> Clorox is well-known for their analytics, well-known for technology, innovation. >> Tara: Yes, yeah. >> I've interviewed a bunch of folks at Clorox, they've always been at the head of the curve. >> Tara: Yeah. >> Like Procter & Gamble, you guys, consumer companies have to be. >> Tara: Definitely. >> Now, more than ever, digital disruption is an opportunity for companies to have a better relationship with their customers. >> Tara: Absolutely. >> And changes the makeup of their brand as well, since it touches the customer. How do you see that evolving? What's the current state of the art of some of the things you're working on? >> Yeah, it's pretty fascinating, actually. And I hate to use cliches, but things like consumer experience is really at the heart of it. We're a brand company, at the end of the day, and how people feel about us is really, really important. It's not so much, it is about the products, and we make amazing products, but how do they feel about us as a company, and how do they engage with us differently than they did before? We do not buy the same way as we did even five years ago. And so, learning that, learning the new, evolving consumer, and getting really close to what's important to them, that's really on the forefront of how we think about our digital transformation. >> One of the cool things that's great about the People First Network that we've been doing-- >> Tara: Yeah. >> This content, is that we have a lot of luminaries who have had a storied career, like yourself, have looked at the changes and the waves of innovation that have come before, and now, more than ever, omnichannel, how you advertise and reach customers, how they interact, how they buy and consume. When you look at health care and some of the things you've been involved in, in the '90s, remember, client-server was big, they had computers. >> Tara: (laughs) Oh, yes. Oh, yeah. >> IT has changed a lot. >> It has. >> What is the most striking thing that you see from those changes in this new wave that we're living now? >> You know, so, (sharply exhales) I was fortunate in that I decided that data was where it was at, right from the beginning of my career. That's how I kind of made my way up my career ladder, is really that focus on data. I had a software engineering background, but really felt the power of data to change things. What has happened, if I think about some of the big changes, or the key milestones, if you will, in my career, one of the first real big changes came about when data, which was up until that point really sort of coming along for the ride, you had applications, applications had data, when data actually became the mainstay and the applications kind of came and went. I remember one of my mentors in the past, a past CIO, actually, telling me that applications come and go, but data is forever. And when that really started to become a thing was when big data and big data technologies became, came of enterprise age, if you will, along with cloud technologies. That marriage really, that was, I think, the tipping point where the things that you could do with data and the way that you could get insights from data really took on a life of its own, if you will. >> You know, one of the things, that's a great point. I'd love to get your insights as a leader and as you grew with data, because it wasn't really obvious at that time. Certainly, people had databases and that, the big data, the applications had data. >> Tara: Sure, sure, yeah. >> But it was always kind of old-school data. "Hey, get some data, let's look at the demographics, "let's look at the Consumer Price Index," blah, blah, blah, all kinds of data. But access to data became driven by the database. >> Tara: Correct. >> So there might've been data available-- >> Tara: Yeah. >> But getting it in the hands of the practitioners even now is hard, but even back then, you might not have had the data. So as a leader who's sought data-- >> Tara: Yeah. >> As a strategic advantage. By the way, that's rare early, isn't it? So, (laughs) awesome for you. >> You know, I got lucky. >> How did you get through that? How did you lead the organization to make data at the center of things? >> It is a very good question. There were a few things that started to take shape once big data and the marriage of the cloud started to happen. It started to open up doors, break down organizational silos. When you brought that data together, the business value, or the potential business value that could be unlocked, became obvious. The way that we approached it, though, under my leadership, I always believe in small steps. I believe in leapfrog, but I believe that you have to feed innovation or innovative thinking out in small doses. People are not always ready to consume it in one big (laughs) fell swoop, if you will. So doing things incrementally, but with an idea towards transformation, was, I think, the secret sauce that I used to approach these things. So as a couple of examples, in Kaiser Permanente, when I worked there for almost seven years, I was instrumental in bringing their big data platform to life. But it was not just a matter of, "Here's the technology "for technology's sake." It was a matter of, "Here are some real problems "that we are having a lot of difficulty in solving today. "Let's show you how we can solve those differently "in an amazing way." And we proved that. It was an experiment, that we proved that, and that really started to get us those adopters, if you will. >> John: So take baby steps. >> Yep. >> Don't try to do wholesale changes hardcore. >> Correct, correct. >> Let people get used to it. >> Yeah. >> This must've had an impact on culture. >> Yes, yes. >> And this comes up a lot in the DevOps culture we've seen in the past decade, even now. >> Yeah. >> Getting people to change has become very difficult. >> Yes! >> John: We all know that person-- >> Yes. >> Has their project that's their baby, adding features, "No, don't take my "baby away from me." >> Tara: Yes, yes, yes. >> "I don't want to change." >> (laughs) Oh, yeah. >> How do you make that happen? How do you lead people through that very difficult transformation at an emotional level, on a business level? What's the strategy there? What's your technique? >> Yeah, so, again, back to, you have to show results. And you have to show results incrementally in a way that people can appreciate them and consume them. You have to look at technology from a business value perspective. Business value comes first, technology is just along for the ride. That's how people see it, and that's how they should see it. >> John: Mm-hm. >> It's what you can do with the technology that makes a difference. So, some of the techniques that I have used in the past have been, number one, you do have to find like-minded people in the organization. You can't go at it alone. You have to start to build your clan, if you will, of innovators, so you've got a target audience that you're chippin' away at, slowly, but you've got to build credibility. Because results build credibility. Credibility builds trust. Trust removes barriers. So that's kind of the way that I approach things. I bring like-minded people together, I find people in the organization, of the people that are resistant, that I can bring onto "my side," if you will, and I use their knowledge, their insights, their knowledge of how this person who is obviously a stakeholder, and an important stakeholder, how they think and what's important to them, and I use that language and that person to be able to approach individuals in different ways. It's about culture. >> And it's always good to make them, you know, success has many fathers, if you will-- >> Yep. >> Is always an expression. Making them feel part of the solution. >> Absolutely. >> So I got to ask you a question. Is having a software background, coming into the tech world and the business world, this, now, you're starting to see applications really dictate to the infrastructure. Elastic clouds are out there. >> Tara: Yes. >> You have data as a resource now. If you were entering the market as a young software engineer today, and you were asked to come in and make an impact, knowing what you know, how do you see the world today? Because, you know, a lot of software engineers creating value from men, and, now, a lot more women are coming on board. >> Yeah, yeah. >> It's still lower numbers, but still, software's not just that software engineer. >> Yeah. >> It's software architecture, it's software engineering, software development, UX, UI-- >> Tara: Yeah. >> Analytics, a lot of range-- >> Tara: Yeah, yeah. >> Of software opportunities. How would you attack the marketplace today if you were coming in and entering the workforce or in the middle of your career? >> Yes, you know, when I look at my career, which is a little longer than I'd like to admit, I see myself as a young undergraduate student in India. I was one of six girls in a class of about 50. I was striving to get a degree in what was called, actually, electronics and telecommunication. I was in a minority. I came over here to the United States, and I continued to be in the minority. I look at my career, which is more than 25 years old. I have also continued to stay in the minority throughout that career. The biggest difference between where I am now in my career versus where I was then is I don't care as much anymore that I'm in the minority. (both laugh) Right? What is fascinating to me, though, John, is when I look at some of the very young students, actually, we had a high school intern program for the first time this year at Clorox, which is actually interesting. We typically have college interns, but this year, Clorox, a 105-year-old company in the middle of the Silicon Valley, having the ability to see that the very, very young generation can think very differently, and bringing in the high school intern, or a set of high school interns, to help with that journey, I think, was forward-thinking for the company. And those kids, the confidence that they have? They are not shackled by knowing too much, you know? >> John: Yes. >> But they know what's relevant, they know how to make things happen, and boy, do they know how to use technology to make problems that we consider problems that would take months, happen so quickly. They were with us for four weeks. In four weeks, they developed an app, a website. They developed our logo. They developed a PR video for us. They had an innovation showcase. In four weeks, four little students. >> It's interesting, for the first time (Tara laughs) in my career, I can admit that, from a self-awareness standpoint, "Well, I really don't know what I'm talking about." These young kids have a different view, because now their experiences are different. >> Tara: Yes. >> And so, the insight coming out of this new generation really is pretty compelling. >> Tara: It is. >> They are adding a lot more because there's been a shift in expectations, there's been a shift in experiences-- >> Tara: Yes. >> For this new generation, and they're at the forefront, so it's a big wave coming. What's your thoughts on that? Because analytics is a big part of your career now, and it always-- >> Tara: Yes, yes. >> Has been, but now, more than ever-- >> Yeah. >> The younger generation, they want instant gratification, they want value. >> They do. >> They don't want to wait and be told-- >> They do. >> They want to see the immediacy. >> They do. >> Talk about this new shift, this new younger generation. >> Yeah, yeah. You know, there used to be the good old days, where we could, say, put a product out there and, you know, eventually it kind of works its way into the consumer ecosystem, and then we'd get to hear back, over the course of time. Customers would call in with a recommendation or a complaint. It's very different now. Things are out there instantaneously. We put something out there, you're getting comments and reviews, some of them good, some of them not so good. It's out there, and it's out there instantly. And that also, the modern consumer is not shy. They kind of hide behind the keyboard, and they're putting their comments out there, right? (both laugh) They're the keyboard warriors! >> John: (laughs) Yeah. >> So being able to respond to that and having not just the data, but the ability to extract insights from data and to extract insights in real time, that is crucial. And so, gone are the days where you had months to do your analytics. You have to be able to do your analytics in the flow, you have to be able to take in new information, incorporate it into your models, be able to do predictive analytics on it. So technology and the way that it is evolving is super critical for survival these days. >> So, survival, and also competitive advantage, we've heard-- >> Oh, for sure. >> From other CIOs, and also CSOs, from a security standpoint-- >> Yes, yes. >> There's business risks involved. How real-time do you see the advantage being? Obviously, near real time is pretty much what people talk about. >> Yeah. >> Real time is to the second, and self-driving cars will certainly need that. >> Yeah, yeah, yeah. >> But as a leader chasing the real-time holy grail-- >> Yeah. >> Seems to be a theme we hear. How do you react to that, and how do you view real-time data? >> There is definitely something that builds up to the richness of data that you can take advantage of in "real time." And I am saying "real time" in quotes because there is a contextuality associated with it. The wonder of modern advanced analytics and machine learning is that you have an existing model that you're tweaking and evolving with new information, and that model is serving as your guide as you receive new information. So, does it have to be reactive, or can it be proactive? You're building the insights, and then you're adding on new information as you see it. And you're using technology to help you make more holistic decisions. And at the end of the day, there is something to be said about the human aspect of it. The machine can give you guidance-- >> John: Yes. >> But the human being needs to make the decision. >> I'd love to ask you a quick question on that, because I think this is something that we talk about all the time. >> Yeah. >> Humans are critical in the equation, machines augment the humans. >> Yes. >> In the data world, if you're "data-driven," which has been (laughs) a cliche, "We're data-driven!" >> Tara: Yes, yes. >> It takes on multiple forms. >> Tara: Yes. >> I've seen multiple actors saying, "We're data-driven," but they're really just correlating data. >> Tara: Yeah. >> The causation side of it is, what's causing things, that's more of a management thing. >> Tara: Yeah. >> So causation and correlation are two different variables-- >> Tara: Yes. >> In the analytics field right now-- >> Tara: Yeah. >> That are being amplified as, you got to know the distinction between correlation, because you can correlate anything, causation is something that might be more designed towards figuring out something, and you really can't rest on one more than the other. >> Yeah. (laughs) >> Your thoughts on the balance between the two. >> You're talking to someone who worked in health care for-- (laughs) >> John: (laughs) I probably won't get you to continue. >> For almost seven years. Causation and correlation are-- >> John: More important than ever. >> Are more important than ever. And I think more and more, the boundary between what machines can do and how they can augment human beings, versus actually having the machines help you make decisions, it's getting fuzzier, and machines are able to do more and more. I mean, all of the knowledge that you could read about 24 hours a day cannot sit in your head. You have to be able to leverage machines to help you make those decisions. So as far as causation and correlation, I think the correlation is something that the machine can be the master of. It can see patterns where you may not even think to look for patterns. So I think that, let's give it up to the machines. Correlation is where-- >> John: They got that. >> The machines have got that, and you got to set them up so that they can do that for you. Causation is where the tricky area starts to happen. Because there is a lot to say, especially when you talk about doctors, about experience and working with individuals. Each individual is different. You can't say that the causation for this person is the same as that because the correlations are similar. No, you have to look, there are so many factors that go into what is causing-- >> John: Yeah. >> A disease or a condition in a person. So I think that is where the human element and experience really, really still make a difference. >> In the media business, we call it behavioral and contextual. >> Yes. >> Context is really important for really aligning-- >> It is. >> With whatever the problem statement may be. >> Yes, yes. >> Correlation, behavior, machines can do that. >> Correct. >> That's awesome, great, great, great insight there. A final question for you is, for other folks out there, CIOs or IT executives, as they look at the digital transformation journey, which, again, very cliche, but very real, there's a lot of opportunities, but also potential pitfalls if not executed properly. >> Tara: Yeah. >> Your thoughts on general roadmaps or best practices around how to tackle transformation, if they're doing it, coming in for the first time or at the beginning, or if they're in the middle of a digital transformation, and they're stuck in the mud-- >> Yeah, yeah. >> Or "Oh my God, "my head person quit. "I got to get more people." >> Yeah. >> "I need developers," or people on the back end of the transformation, different parts of the journey. What's your advice? >> Yeah, I've got a couple of, again, from the scars of my past, a couple of things that I think are important. Number one, when I joined Clorox, I had the stretch goal of actually building out their cybersecurity program. I had not done that in the previous part of my career. I was an enterprise architect, that's where I would spend most of my many years. But cybersecurity, and I hired the CSO and built out that program for Clorox, it puts a whole different lens on how you look at your transformation, and it is an important lens. And I think I would not have been rounded, as either an enterprise architect who's developing technology strategy or a digital technology innovator, if I did not have that lens of, there is risk that you need to consider. Now, the point to remember is that you can't over-rotate one way or the other. You have to consider risk and opportunity, and there's a fine line. And I think the smartest CIOs and senior executives know where that fine line exists, and are able to tell when you need to go this way or that way. So that's one thing that I would say, is don't lose that lens. Technology can do wonderful things for you, but so can the hackers from a different-- >> You got to be aware-- >> You've got to be aware. >> And then, you've got to shape it, too, as it evolves. Is that something that you see as important? >> You have to have that lens of, you're doing this wonderful, amazing thing, however, what if the unintended audience is able to access whatever you're doing? And what can they do with it? So that's one thing that I would say, is keep that balance in mind. Again, don't over-rotate one way or the other, but keep that balance in mind. The other thing that I would say is, innovation is a state of mind that needs to be nurtured and developed, and it needs to be sought from every part of the organization. The only way to scale innovation is to have everybody be an innovator in the organization. So that would be my advice, is innovation can come from the youngest high school intern, or, we actually just had someone at Clorox celebrate their 50th year at Clorox. So, you know-- >> John: Yeah. >> Innovation can come from anywhere in the organization. You have to always be ready, open-minded, and prepared to grab that opportunity when it happens. >> My final takeaway for this is in context to where we are now, we're on Sand Hill Road-- >> Yes. >> At Mayfield Fund, they're a venture capitalist. >> Yes. >> They fund early-stage and growth. >> Yep. >> The younger generation, we just talked about the insights that they can have, new shifts that are happening in experiences, expectations. The startups, more than ever, have an opportunity to have customers like Clorox. >> Tara: Yes, yes. >> What used to be, "Well, a startup, "risk, don't go through the, go through TSA, "and when you get approved, "then we'll talk to you," kind of thing. (Tara guffaws) It's a big, painful process. >> Used to be? >> Now, more than ever, startups want to land the big Clorox deals. >> Yes, yes. >> They want to show the value proposition, time to value, shortening, with cloud and other things. What's your advice to startups who want to sell to you or hope to, aspire to, be successful in the marketplace? >> You know, I love startups, and I spent a lot of time with them. What I have seen as differentiating in the startups that I have seen is, some of them, they're out there, they want your business. So they are looking at you from that, "Can I get your business?" And then there are other startups that, I'm sure they've got that lens, but they don't make it obvious to you. To them, the value is in working with you. You're a company that is well-reputed. You've got a ton of amazing data that can be used to develop your models. You've got a ton of insights and understanding of the business that you can get by just working with this "reputed" company, like Clorox. Those in itself, you can't put a tangible, material value on that, but that is what helps startups build relevant and amazing products. And that, in itself, is "payment." The money will come, but look to the experiences, look to the ability to leverage data, and, above all, look to how you can position your product in a way that it is solving a business problem. Don't do technology for technology's sake. >> So, your advice would be, don't focus on on the PO. If they're venture-backed, they probably have some runway. >> Yes. >> Focus on the value proposition. >> Absolutely, and learning how companies operate and what's important to them, take the time to do that. >> How about scale? Do you hear that a lot with startups, they want to try to use the value proposition? One, they have to get in the door and show value, so that's one. >> Tara: Of course. >> Kind of table stakes, get through the door. >> Okay, yep. >> Then it's more about how they can be operationalized. That becomes something I've seen with startups. What's your thoughts on that? Because one of the benefits of getting in the door is getting (laughs) in the door, but staying in-- >> Yeah. >> Is about operationalizing that new value proposition. How do you look at that as a leader? >> (sharply exhales) Yeah, the word operationalization is an interesting one. So, companies like Clorox, I mean, while I love to work with startups, I will tell you that I do experiments, four, six, eight weeks, we've got a metric. If we go beyond that, it's probably a project that needs to go through a different route. But we do these experiments, and we do them quickly. The thing that we do worry about is, "Okay, great startup, great product. "Is it enterprise-ready?" You know? And I think that is where a lot of startups struggle a little bit, is, can they prove to you that their product is Fort Knox, that it won't be a way through which your systems get hacked? Can they prove to you that they've got a good handle on where they are going, what their roadmap is, what capabilities they are developing in their roadmap? Can they showcase that to you in a way that makes sense to you? We're looking for companies that are not just here today and gone tomorrow, companies that are here for the long run. And then, even if they can't do all of that, show that you integrate really well with our other products. Because, guess what, if you don't work out so well for us, little startup, we want to be able to replace you. We want to have that option. And if you don't integrate seamlessly and can be plucked out and put back in again, then we're stuck with something that we can't extract from our environment. So they've got to think how we think, is what I would advise them. (laughs) >> Tara, thanks so much for this great insight. For startups out there, for folks entering their career, for other women who are looking to break into tech, we have a great inspirational leader here. >> Thank you. >> John: Thank you for spending the time, we really appreciate it. >> Thank you very much, really appreciate it. >> Thank you very much. I'm John Furrier. You're watching the People First program with SiliconANGLE and Mayfield. Thanks for watching. (upbeat electronic music)

>> Over and welcome to this special cube conversation here in the Palo Alto Studios of Cube. Part of our People. First project with Mayfield Fund and Co creation with Cuban John Very your host. Very special guest. Judy Estrin. She's the CEO of J Labs and author of the book Closing the Innovation Gap. She's also well known for being an Internet entrepreneur. Pioneer worked on the initial TCP IP protocol with Vin Cerf from When the A Stanford Great History Computer Science. You have computer systems in your blood, and now you're mentoring a lot of companies. Author you a lot of work, and you're lending your voice to some cutting edge issues here in Silicon Valley and around the world. Thanks for joining me today for the conversation. >> Thank you. It's fun to be here, >> So I love the fact that you're here. You're a celebrity in the commute computer industry circles. You were there at the beginning, when the computer systems or the Internet were being connected as they built out of stone of the whole system's revolution in the eighties, and the rest is history. Now we have cloud computing, and now we're seeing a whole nother level step function of scale. And so you've kind of seen it all. You've seen all all the waves. Actually, something like make is they have seen some of the ways, but you've seen all of them. The most compelling thing I think that's happening now is the convergence of social science and computer science. Kind of our motto. Silicon Angle. You recently wrote to Post on Medium that that has been kind of trending and going viral. I want to get your perspective on that. And they're They're interesting because they they bring a little bit of computer science called the authoritative Authority Terrian Technology Reclaiming Control far too attention, part one. We go into great detail to lay out some big picture computer industry discussions. What's it all about? What's what's the What's the idea behind these stories? >> So let me back up a little bit in that, a Sze Yu said. And we can go into this if you want. I was very involved in a lot of thie, ah, innovation that happened in the Village Valley in terms of microprocessors, the Internet, networking, everything that laid the foundation for a lot of the things we see today incredible opportunities for my career for problems we solved over the last ten years. Ten, twelve years. Um, I began to see a shift and a shift in the culture and a shift in the way technology was impacting us. And it's not all good or bad. It's that it felt like we were out of balance and that we were becoming shorter and shorter, term focused and actually my book in two thousand eight closing the innovation gap. The main message there is let's not forget about the seeds you plant that all of this comes from because we're reaping the benefit of those seeds. We're not planning new seats and that we were becoming in the Valley in the nation the way we thought about things more and more short term focused and technology was causing some of that and benefitting and not been and at a disadvantage because of that. So that started with my book in two thousand eight and then in twenty fourteen, I think it was I did a Ted talk a Ted X talk called Balancing our Digital Diets, and I was even Mohr concerned that we were out of whack in terms of the consequences of innovation, and I drew an analogy to our food's systems, where so much innovation and creating cheap calories and energy and things like high fructose corn syrup that it took years to realize that, Oh, there's some negative consequences of that innovation. And so that was kind of a warning that, um, we weren't thinking enough about the consequences of at that point. Social media. That was before fake news, and I talked about tweets and how truth that lies went faster than truth, not knowing how bad that situation was going to be and then leading up to the election and after the election. We all know and have all learned now about the impacts of these technologies on our democracy, and I believe on our society and humanity. And I don't think it's just about our election system. I think it's about our psyches and how the technology's air impacting the way we think our fear and anxiety level of our kids and us is adults. So I been talking to people about it and advising, and I finally decided as, uh, I was collaborating with people that I felt that a lot of the awareness was in pockets that we talked about data privacy or we talked about addiction. But these air things were all interrelated, and so I wanted to one ad. My voices is technologists because I think a lot of the people who are writing the building, the awareness and talking about it if you are in government or a journalist's or even a social scientist people, it's really easy to say, Yeah, you say that, but you don't understand. It's more complicated than that. You don't understand the technology. So one, I do understand that technology. So I felt adding my voice as a technologist. But I'm also, uh, just increasingly concerned about what we do about it and that we take a more holistic view. So that's what, what what the pieces are about. And the reason I broke it into two pieces is because they're too long for most people, even the way they are. But the first is to build awareness of the problems which we can dig into it a high level if you want. And then the second is to throw out ideas as we move towards discussing solutions. So let me take a breath because you were goingto jump in, and then I can. >> No, it's just because you're connecting the foundational of technology foundation technology, identifying impact, looking at pockets of awareness and then looking at how it's all kind of coming together when you talk like that The first time I saw O subsystem interrupt us connection so someone could get like a operating system. And I think the society that you're pointing out in the article, the first one intention was there only to relate. And I think that's the key part. I think that's interesting because we run into people all the time when we do our cue broadcasts that have awareness here and don't know what's going on this. So this context that's highly cohesive. But there's no connection, right? So the decoupled right but highly cohesive, That's kind of systems. Architecture concept. So how do we create a robust technology's society system where technology and I think that's a threat that we're seeing this? What I cleaned out of the articles was your kind of raising the flag a little bit to the notion of big picture right system, kind of a foundational, but let's look at consequences and inter relationships, and how can we kind of orchestrate and figure out solutions? So what was the reaction to expand on that concept? Because this is where I was. It was provocative to me, >> right? So I think there are two thought trains that I just went down. One is that one of the problems we have that has been created by technology and technology is suffering from again. It's causing both cause and effect is not enough seats, system thinking and so one issue, which is not just this is not just about social media and not just about a I, but over the last twenty years we've increasingly trained, I think, are, Ah, engineers and computer scientists in Mohr transactional thinking. And as we move quicker and quicker to solve problems, we are not training our leaders or training our technologist to think in terms of systems. And so what I mean by systems is two things that you can break, that any problems have pieces. But those pieces air inter connected. We are interconnected, and that you, if you don't keep those things in mind, then you will not design things in a way, I believe that have the longevity and make the right type decisions. The second is the law of consequences when you have a system, if you do something here, it's going to impact something here. And so that whole notion of taking was thinking through consequences. I'm afraid that we're training people as we are focusing on being more and more agile, moving more and more quickly that it's in technology and in society that we're losing some of that system, thinking >> that they kind of think that's the trade off is always around. Whenever he had systems conversations in the past, but my old systems had on trade offs, we have overhead, so we have more memory. How do we handle things? So this is kind of That's just what happens. You tell about consequence, but >> we don't have all those we I'm older than you. But we started at a time when that we were limited. We were limited by memory. We were limited by processing. We were limited by band with and a different times. As thie industry emerged, the constraints were in different areas. Today, you don't have any of those constraints. And so, if you don't have any of those constraints. You don't get trained in thinking about trade offs and thinking about consequences. So when when we come into just what drove me to write, this one set of things are foundational issues and what I mean by foundational it's it's our relationship to technology. And the fact of the matter is, as a society, um, we put technology on a pedestal, and we have, uh, this is not to be taken out of Cut is not to be taken the extreme of talking about people, but overall, our relationship with technology is a bullying, controlling relationship. That's why I called it authoritarianism. >> Upgrade your iPhone to the new version. >> Well, whether it's as a user that you're giving up your your your authority to all these notifications and to your addiction, whether it is the fact that it is the control with the data, whether it is predictive ai ai algorithms that are reading your unconscious behaviors and telling you what you think, because if it's suggesting what you by putting things in front of you. So there are all of these behaviors that our relationship with technology is not a balanced relationship and you could one. You have a culture where the companies that are that have that power are driving towards. It's a culture of moving fast growth only don't think about the consequences. It's not just the unintended consequences, but it's the consequences of intended use. So the business models and at which we don't need to go into, because I think a lot of other people talk about that all end up with a situation which is unhealthy for us as people and humanity and for us as a society. So you take that part and it is. There's a parallel here, and we should learn from what happened with industrial Ah, the industrial revolution. We want progress. But if we don't pay attention to the harm, the harmful byproducts and trade offs of progress, it's why we have issues with climate. It's why we have plastic in our oceans. It's because you, you judge everything by progresses just growth and industrialization without thinking about well being or the consequences. Well, I believe we now face a similar challenge of digitization, so it's not industrialization. But it's digitalization that has byproducts in a whole number of areas. And so what the the article does is get into those specifics, whether it's data or anxiety, how we think our cognitive abilities, our ability to solve problems, All of those things are byproducts of progress. And so we should debate um, where we what we're willing to give up one last thing. And then I'll have to come in, which is one of the problems with both of these is is humans value convenience. We get addicted to convenience, and if somebody gives us something that is going to make things more convenient, it sure is held to go backward. And that's one of the reasons the combination of measuring our goodness as a country or a CZ. Globalization by economic growth and measuring our personal wellness by convenience, if something is more convenient, were happier. Take those two together, and it makes a dangerous cop combination because then our need for community convenience gets manipulated for continued economic growth. And it doesn't necessarily end up in, Ah, progress from, ah, well being perspective. >> It's interesting point about the digitization, because the digital industrial revolution, when the digital revolution is happening, has consequences. We're seeing them and you point them out in your post Facebook and fake news. There's also the global landscape is the political overlay. There's societal impact. There's not enough scholars that I've been trained in the art of understanding into relationships of technology, and Peg used to be a nerd thing. And now my kids are growing up. Digital natives. Technology is mainstreams, and there it is. Politics. You know, the first hack collection, Some of the control, The first president actually trolled his way. That president, I said that I'm the kid. That was my position. He actually was a successful troll and got everyone he trolled the media and you got the attention. These air new dynamics, This is reality. So is you look forward and bring these ideas, and I want to get your thoughts on ideas on how to bring people together. You've been on a CTO Cisco Systems. I know you've been sleeping on a board. This is a cross pollination opportunity. Bring people together to think about this. How do you do You look at that? How do you view how to take the next steps as a as an industry, as a society and as a global nations? It eventually, because cyber security privacy is becoming polarized. Also on a geography bases in China they have. GPR is hard core there. In Europe, he got Asia. With Chinese. You got America being American. It's kind of complicated as a system architecture thinking. How do you look at this? What is the playing field where the guard rails? What's your thoughts on this? Because it's a hard one, >> right? So it is a hard one and it isn't. It isn't easy to pave out a path that says it's solvable. Um, nor does Climate right now. But you have to believe we're going to figure it out because we have to figure it out. So I think there are a lot of pieces that we need to start with, and then we need to adjust along the way. And, um, one piece is and let me back up. I am not. I don't believe we can leave this up to the industry to solve the incentives and the value systems and the understanding of the issues. The industry is coming from an industry perspective, and you can't also. You also can't leave it just two technologists because technologists have a technology person perspective. I don't believe that you just can have government solve it for a variety of reasons. One is, if it takes a spectrum of things to legislation, tends to be retroactive, not forward looking. And you need to be really careful not to come up with regulation that actually reinforces the status quo as opposed to making something better. But I think we need to. We do need to figure out how to govern in a way that includes all of these things. So once >> it's running, it's clear that watching the Facebook hearing and watching soon dark sky in front of the house. Our current elected officials actually don't even know how the Internet works, so that's one challenge. So you have a shift in its every beat >> and it and it's actually, if you think about the way legislation often gets made one of the problems with our democracy right now, I'm not going to put it in quotes. But I want to put it >> out. >> Is that the influence of money on our democracy means that so often the input toe legislation comes from industry. So whether it's again big tech, big pharma, big Oil, big. That's the way this cycle works in places where we have had successful legislation that industry input, what you need industry input. You just don't want industry to be the on ly input that is balanced with other input. And so we need infrastructure in the world. In the country that has policy ideas, technology. This needs to come from civil society, from the academy from non profits. So you need the same way we have environmental sciences. We need to fund from government, not just industry funded that science. That's number one. And then we need ways to have conversations about influencing companies to do the right thing. Some of it is going to be through legislation some of it is going to be for through pressure. This, in some ways is like tobacco in some ways, like it's like food. In some ways, it's like climate on DH. It's so and an underlying any of this to happen. We need people to understand and to speak up because awareness amongst whether it's individuals, parents, teachers, we need to give people the information to protect themselves and to push back on companies and to rally pushback on government. Because if if there's not an awareness of people are walking around saying, Don't take away my service, don't make this less convenient don't tax my soda. Don't tell me my text messages. That's right, so and I'm not saying taxes of the way. But if there isn't what what I'm focused on is, how do we build awareness? How do we get information out? How do we get companies like yours and others that this becomes part of >> our >> messaging of understanding so we can be talking about I >> think it's, you know back, Teo, The glory days of the TCP epi Internet revolution. He sent a package from here to there. It's a step. Take a first step. I personally listening to you talk feel and I said, It's on The Cuban people know that. You know, my my rap know that I've been pounding this. There's a counter culture in there somewhere. Counter culture's is where action happens, and I think you know, tax regulation and, you know, the current generations inherited. It is what it is we have. You're laying out essentially the current situation. John Markoff wrote a great book, What the door Mail said, talking about how the sixties counterculture influence the computer industry from breaking in for getting computer time for time sharing, too hippy revolution question I have for you put you on the spot. Is Is there a counterculture in your mind? Coming a digital hippie quotes is because I feel it. I feel that that let the air out of the balloon before it pops. Something has to happen and I think has to be a counterculture. I yet yet can't put my finger on it. Maybe it's a digital kind of a revolution, something compelling that says Whoa time out. >> All right? I think we need a couple of counter culture's in that in layers of it, because, um, I think there is going to be or is starting to be a counterculture amongst technologist and the technology industry and entrepreneurs who are some it's still small who are saying, You know what? This chasing unicorns and fastest growth and scale, you know, move faxed and break things. But, um, we want to move fast, but we want to think about whether we're breaking what we're breaking is really dangerous, you know, move fast and break things is fine, but if it's oops, we broke democracy. That isn't something that, uh that is I'm sorry you have to think about and adapt more quickly. So I think there is Are people who are talking about let's talk openly about the harm. Let's not just be tech optimists. Let's understand that it's small, but it's beginning and you're seeing it in a I for instance, the people who are saying Look, were technologists, we want to be responsible. This is a powerful weapon or tool. And let's make sure we think about how we use it. Let me just say one thing, which is, I think we needed another kind of counterculture, which I'm hoping is happing in a number of areas, which is societally saying, You know, we have a slow food movement. Maybe we just need a slow down, a little bit movement. So if you look at mindfulness, if you look at kids who are starting to say, You know what? I want to talk to someone in person, I don't. So we we need some of that counter movement where I'm hoping the pedestal starts to come back. In terms of people looking for real connectivity and not just numbers of connections, >> it's interesting, You know, everything has a symmetrical, responsible thing about it. For every fake news payload and network effect is potentially an opposite reaction of quality network effect. It's interesting, and I don't know where it is, but I think that's got it could be filled, certainly on the economic side, by new entrepreneurial thinking, like one observation I'm making is you know this. Remember, they'll bad boys of tech and he's smiling. Now It's bad gals, too, which is growing still lower numbers. So I think there's gonna be a shift to the good, the good folks right moment. But she's a she's a good entrepreneur. She's not just out there to make a quick buck or hey, mission driven za signal we're seeing. So you start to see a little bit more of a swing to Whoa, hey, let's recognize that it's not about, you know, could Buck or >> so, yes, but between you and I, it's teeny compared to the other forces. So that's what those of us who believe that needs to happen need to continue to >> one of those forces money making. >> I think it's a combination of, Ah, money and how much money, Dr. Celebrity culture, um, the forces, the power that's in place is so strong that it's hard to break through, um, short term thinking, not even being trained. So like so many things in our culture, where you have entrenched power and then you see uprising and you get hope and that's where you need the hope. But, um, we've seen it so often in so many movements, from race to gender, where you think, Oh, that's solved, it's not solved and then you come back in and come back at it. So I just I would argue that there is little bits of it, but it needs fuel. It needs continuity. It it. And the reason I think we need some government regulation is it needs help because it's not gonna >> happen. You should question, you know, some successes that I point out Amazon Web services, Google even having a long game kind of narrative they're always kind of were misunderstood at first. Remember, Google was loud by search is not doing too well. Then the rest is history. Amazon was laughed. Amazon Web services was laughed at. So people who have the long game seemed to be winning in these transitions. And that's kind of what you're getting at. You think long term, the long game. If you think in terms of the long term vision, you then going look at consequences differently. How many people do you run in? The valleys actually think like that. Okay, >> so we're talking about two different things. One is long term thinking, and I do think that apple, Google, Amazon have taken long term thinking's. So there are a good example. But if you look at them, if we look at the big companies in terms of the way they approached the market and competition and their potential negative impacts on overall society, they're part of the power. They're not doing anything to change the systems, to not >> have good and continue to benefit. The rich get richer. >> So there this This is why it's complicated. There are not good guys and bad guys there are. These people are doing this and that. So do I think overall dough? I see more long term thinking. Um, not really. I think that the incentives in the investment community, the incentives in the stock market. The incentives culturally are still very much around shorter term thinking. Not that there aren't any, but >> yeah, I would agree. I mean, it tends to be, you know, Hey, we're crushing it. We're winning, you know? Look at us. Growth hack. I mean, just the languages. Semantics. You look at that. I think it's changed. I think Facebook is, I think, the poster child of short term thinking growth hacks move fast, break stuff and look where they are, you know, they can't actually sustaining and brand outside of Facebook, they have to buy Instagram and these other companies to actually get the kind of growth. But certainly Facebook is dominate on the financial performance, but they're kind of sitting in their situation. I think you know the bro Grammer movement, I think is kind of moving through the white common ear culture of Okay, let's get some entrepreneurship going. Great. Rod. I think that's stabilising. I think we're seeing with cloud really science and thinking for good. That's a positive sign. >> Well, I'm I'm glad to hear that from you, you know, and all >> you're probably going with. >> No, no, no, I'll take that and take that into feeding my hope because I hope, >> well, the movement is classic. Look, we're not gonna tolerate this anymore. I think transparency in my final question to you before you get to some of the more entrepreneur Question says, If you look at the role of community on data, science and connectedness, one of the things about being connected is you got potential potential for collective intelligence. So if you look at data, as I said, networks, what if there was a way to kind of hone that network to get to the truth fast? Esther, something we've been working on here, and I think that's something that, you know changes media. It changes the game. But collective intelligent, the role of the community now becomes a stakeholder and potentially laying out. So his problems and you're part of the Mayfield community was co created this video with roll community, super important people. The rule of the of the person your thoughts on >> so I community is a word that is has takes on a lot of meetings, and the problem is when you mean it one way and use it the other way, the same as data driven. So I think there's at one level which is community and conductivity that has to do with collecting input from lots of sources. And when you talk about investigative journalism or they're in environmental situations or all sorts of areas where the ability to collect information from lots of sources that air interested and analyze that information that is one level of community and connectivity and networking because of people you know which is great, there's another type. When people talk about community, they mean a sense of community in terms of what humans need and what that connectivity is. And most online networks don't give you that level. The online needs to be augmented by, Ah, inter personal understanding. And one of the problems. I think with today's technology is we're fitting humans into bits that technology Khun Support, as opposed to recognizing what are our human needs that we want to hold on to and saying There are some things that are not going to fit into somebody's data set. So in that first type of community than absolutely, I think there's lots of benefits of the cloud and wisdom of the crowd. But if you're talking about humans connecting in people. You don't have the same type of, uh, that that really community online tools can help. But we should never confuse what happens in our online world >> with your final question for, you know, we got We're pushing the time here. Thank you for spending time. First of all, it's great conversation. You've seen the movie with venture capital from the beginning. You know, all the original players seeing what is now just where's that come from? Where are we? What's the state of VC? Then? He hope to the future, they all adding value. How do you see that evolving and where are we with? >> You know, I would. I think venture capital has gone through a lot of different phases. And like so many things, especially those of us who want computers, we liketo lump them all together. They're not altogether. There are some small, Yes, like they field. And the I do think, though, that something shifted in the lead up to the dot com. Ah, and later the burst. And what shifted is venture capitalists. Before that time were company builders. They were the financiers, but they saw themselves with the entrepreneur building companies because of the expansion leading up to two thousand, and the funds grew and the people coming into the field were, they became more bankers and they took more financial supposed to balancing financing and entrepreneurship. It felt like it moved. Maurin toe. This is a private equity play, Um, and I think the dynamic with entrepreneurs and the methodology overall shifted, and I don't know that that's changed Now again, not across the board. I think there are some, uh, those firms that have identified our partners within firms who still very much want Teo filled companies and partner with entrepreneurs. But I think the dynamic shifted, and if you view them as that's what they are, is private equity investors. And don't expect something else. If people need money, that's a good pick. Ones that are the best partner >> is your partner. If you want a banker, go here. If you want Builder, go their key distinction. Judy. Thanks for sharing that insight. We're Judy Estrin. Sea of Jail as author of Closing Innovation. Gabbas Wellman's well known entrepreneur advisor board member formally CTO of Cisco. And again, Great gas. Thanks for coming on I'm John for Herewith. Cube conversation. Part ofmy Mayfield. People first with the Cube. Thanks for watching.

>> Everyone, welcome to this special CUBE conversation. We are here in the Palo Alto studios of theCUBE. I'm John Furrier, your host here with Rehan Jalil, former president and CEO of Elastica, here to talk about the People First network and his approach and experiences and his entrepreneurial journey. Rehan thanks for joining us. >> Thank you so much. Thanks for inviting. >> So we were talking before we came on. You have a great entrepreneurial journey. It's a great podcast up on the Mayfield.com website. Really a good story about what you've done. But you had a lot of different kind of experiences through your progression journey in entrepreneurship. You had some failures and some successes. And certainly now with cloud security hot, I'm sure you're probably go into another one. But what it's like right now for you? You just left Semantic. You're kind of out on your own. Are you clipping coupons? Going to go to the beach and hang out? Are you working on a new startup? What's happening? >> I think there's a lot to do. Frankly for me it's very important to actually understand some new problems that needs to be solved. Especially there's so much changing with AI and all the intrusions are you're seeing and breaches that are going on. There are new problems to solve and that's where my head is. I'm not going to take too much of a break. I'm going to get going. >> Yeah you seem to get it going. And that's, most entrepreneurs do that. Let's talk about some of the experience you have. And one of the things we were talking about, before I got my cameras out, back in the old days when before internet, broadband wireless was hot, you get a startup around Wimax, which was early days of broadband wireless. And then you had some failures that successes but didn't work out. Then you had another wireless startup that was successful that became part of that 4G movement. This is an example of being correct in the thesis but you picked the wrong door to go through. Talk about that journey because I think that time in history, this was around 2001, 2002, 2003 timeframe. This was the internet was growing. Wireless, we didn't have the phones we have now. Obviously it's smartphone in 2007 years later. This was pre-mobile boom. This was the beginning of the shift to broadband, true broadband. Now we see it everywhere: LTE, 5G's around the corner. This was a pivotal moment, but for you, you were as an entrepreneur, you had the right decision, broadband wireless, but it was shifting. Feels like cloud today but I want to get in touch here. What did you learn? >> I think they were two very different companies. The mission of the first company which I joined as an employee, the first company, which was to take the high speed internet to the masses. In US and some developed world, they were DSL and cable kind of first coming up, but that infrastructure did not exist in the rest of the world, and the mission was that if we could take same level of high speed connectivity and enable it for the rest of the world, it'd be really cool. And this is back in the day. So thesis was right and hence I joined that company. And it was a lot of fun. I learned a lot. But I think one thing you have to realize, even in those times, to do such a massive project and to go against some massive incumbents which exist in those ecosystems, the differentiation has to be extremely high. And to create differentiation on the radio side of things is just very difficult. And I think so, and of course at that time, the economy took a bad turn and that company didn't have some significant big outcome. From that learning I evolved a thesis that this technology needs to go mobile and this is again pre-iPhone times. It was Blackberry times. So if you were to go talk to investor and say look the world is going to look like when we will have internet in our pocket, the people would smile at you. It's like what are you talking about? So even raising money for that was not easy and that was my first company that I started myself called WiChorus. And these there was what if you could have DSL-type connectivity and literally all internet's power in your pocket. But the learnings from that first company were that if you go try to do that in straight in the wireless side of things in a telco environment, the competition is going to be significantly high. >> The scale, the presence, the market power they have. >> And the purchasing side. Most important is the purchasing cycles. People take time. Even if you come up with something really compelling, by the time it's going to be getting deployed, somebody will catch up to you. >> I mean just think about the time. This is a time for the folks watching, if you're younger or even older like my age, think about it. To actually have a phone in the car and surfing the internet didn't exist. I mean you could barely get email just through a lower latency and a lower bandwidth internet tower. They didn't have the broadband. And so today we surf, watch movies in the car. This was pre-broadband. So I remember a time when we were testing one router, it's like look it we're getting a ping back while we're driving down 101. That was like a miracle. Now it's standard. This is when big shifts happen and a lot of people are comparing that kind of environment to what we're seeing with cloud computing now. You're seeing Amazon Web Services, 26, 27 billion dollar run rate from just 47% a year. Google with great technology and now entering in. Microsoft pivoting to cloud. Those are big players and startups are now trying to figure out what you learned and how to not get in the way but also draft off the momentum. What's your view of this and what advice do you have for entrepreneurs that are out there because this is the number one question that I hear and I talk about entrepreneurs, either behind closed doors or on theCUBE. >> I think it's a blessing to have actually some infrastructure like that, but if you don't do it right it could be a curse. What I mean by that is that you have to leverage something that is available to you and not trying to kind of reinvent, do something slightly better. So I think on the infrastructure side, you have to be very thoughtful on where you could potentially play. And we're frankly some of the big players like AWS or Microsoft and perhaps Google is going to be basically wanting to actually play themselves in that area. However having said that, but the ecosystem and the layer of services that is made available, it's actually a big, big blessing for startups because all the value creation is kind of moving up the chain. And if you leverage that, then the cost of building startups and cost of doing new things is kind of gone down. So we did something very similar with Elastica, which was all about security for the cloud from the cloud. And if we didn't have that infrastructure and the layer available the amount of money that would have required would have been significantly higher. >> So the cloud gets you scaled up, leveled up quicker. Faster to go to market, more agile and dynamic, and then you could wrap IP around those old tasks of provisioning servers. >> There's plenty of intellectual property that first you can put on top of it but in a verticalized fashion. At least for Elastica it was very much kind of a vertical solution of security for the cloud in SaaS applications itself instead of trying to redo your own servers and server stack and our mission. I mean things that are available, just make use of it. >> So you guys were successful with the cloud and you sold that company to Symantec. What year was that? >> Actually it was 2015. We sold it to Bluecoat. And the Bluecoat got acquired by Symantec but then Bluecoat management took over Symantec and that was hurried. So we had like two acquisitions back to back. >> That's nice. It's a good experience. So I want to, before we move on to some of the things that are more personal, I want to get your take on an entrepreneurial dynamic that a lot of successful entrepreneurs take and I want to get your reaction to. Most entrepreneurs are very optimistic. They see the opportunity recognition. They go for it. They're persistent. But they're also in discovery mode to validate their thesis and always kind of self-aware, but there's always the fatal flaw out there that potentially could be there. We talked about broadband wireless, directionally correct, good concept, its fatal flaw was the incumbents. How do you in essence debug a startup venture, venture architecture or venture plan because if there's a fatal flaw in there it's like a bug in software. How as an entrepreneur do you debug that? I mean in your journey as you've had successes and you learned from some of the things that were teachable moments for you, is there a debugging formula? How would you react to that? How would you explain to entrepreneurs? Because that's what they always are naturally doing. Where's the fatal flaw? Where's the fatal flaw? >> And it's I think extremely important. Firstly, the intellectual honesty in setting your own direction is very important. You certainly have to have the aspiration to go do something and have that initiative to go do it, but at the same time setting direction is the most important thing or keep tuning the direction over time is actually extremely important. And then there is no one answer. The key thing is that if you're going to be building something, you have to see if there's going to be a big market for it. That's the first thing. And then when you're going to get there, how the adoption is going to be there. Would you have advantage in adoption as compared to incumbents if they get there? So I think you have to have a thesis because you just can't always project the right way, especially in the enterprise side of things. And if you can actually crack that code, and then if when you do offer this to the market, is it going to be easy to adopt? Easy to accept by the customers? And would it have some kind of an effect of quick movement? I think you have to have all those right. And some trend, if it kind of gives you support. Like when we built Elastica, there was thesis the cloud is going to take over. The SaaS is going to happen. >> That was a tailwind for you. >> So it was a tailwind. So it happened interestingly at the times when we had the product. Same actually happened for WiChorus interestingly, with a thesis that the need of very high speed internet to a mobile device, this is pre-iPhone times, would happen and luckily iPhone came on in around 2007 timeframe and we had the product which telco's would have needed and the iPhone came along. And we ended up building one of the first 4G networks along with ClearY in southern California. So I think all these things kind of have to line up. The market timing, your strategic advantage, your acceptance, all these stuff. >> The self awareness is a great point. Also having versatility and having the skills to flex because to get all those things right you're kind of juggling. And that persistence. Okay I got to ask you about People First. What does People First mean to you? >> At the end I think frankly that is the core, core of startups. And we've been kind of lucky within Elastica. Our main reason for success has been that the team that we ended up having and building over time, they not only had actually very good, diverse skill set because Elastica required very diverse skill set from networking to cloud to AI to all those. But the chemistry between the team was also quite amazing. So I think if you understand that not only the people and the company and the dynamics within them is going to be, which is going to be required, then you start paying attention to the culture that goes along with it. So the culture of executing as well as doing it with kindness and humility along the way. >> Sharing your experience, the journey together, co-creating, kind of creating that superglue in the culture. That's super important. What have you learned over your journey around the where it's worked, where it hasn't cause a lot of people are trying to figure out that people equation, and it's people they really if they sincerely believe they want to do it then but sometimes people don't know the playbook. Is there a playbook or people just go by their gut? What's your advice on in terms of hey I really want to get my people equation right. I want to get that right. We have a mission, you share that mission. What are some of the things that entrepreneurs and companies can do like immediately that's easy to get going? >> I think being is communication. And upfront I continue to start communicating not just in words, but in the things that you do yourself. Because it's not words don't count. How you actually deal with people and how you should treat them and how you actually collaborate additionally really matters. And that actually is the driving force of actually starting a culture I would say in place. And then if you observe anything that aren't working out, communication is going to be the key. You openly communicate and do it in a way that it is not a hostile environment. >> I love your history. I love your background. My personal family as a family of immigrants has come to the United States. You have a very immigrant story. Andy Grove was an immigrant, founder of Intel. I mean Silicon Valley is born, entrepreneurship is indiscriminate. Entrepreneurs are who they are but you have an interesting story where you came from, how you came to Silicon Valley. Tell that story. >> So I was born in Pakistan. My parents were born in India so they migrated to Pakistan which just happens to be that I came here for studies. Interestingly I didn't know much about Silicon Valley to be honest and I happened to have a job in Sun Microsystems that happened to be in Silicon Valley, but when I came here it was kind of a blessing. This is exactly where I needed to be because even when I was going to grad school I had the aspiration to actually go do something on my own but I didn't know how. And when you come here to Silicon Valley, the people around you and the friendships that you create here and the relations that you build here and what you learn from the other people is actually quite amazing. So I feel very blessed. >> And it really is a special place and you have to kind of understand that vibe and culture. I want to ask you a personal question. A lot of entrepreneurs think they can go to business school and get an entrepreneurship degree, and some do, but I always have that debate. You're kind of born with this kind of my philosophy. Some people might debate that. It's always a classic debate: are you born with it or can you learn it or both. Some people know their entrepreneurship early on. Some figure out like me when I'm in my 30's. That's when I kind of figured it out that I have that entrepreneurial talent looking back at some of the things I did. When did you find out that you knew that you were entrepreneurial and wanted to build stuff on your own and this is who I am as a person. What was that moment like? >> I think very early. I didn't have any doubt. This was undergrad times back in my undergrad school in Pakistan. I think I just knew that I'll be doing something on my own and that's exactly what I wanted to do so how I would do it, what time it was going to be, I didn't know any of that. But I had some belief in my mind that I'm going to basically build some things and build business around it. So it was quite early. >> You were lucky, got some time. And when you came to Silicon Valley, what were some of the things you did? Was it like a oh my God this is an amazing place or did you have to do some networking? What were some of the things that you did when you first came in to really kind of get in to that groove swing, entrepreneurial groove swing? >> This is one of those times when Sun was, is an amazing place. I ended up at Sun Microsystems and the people there were unbelievably talented. They have all kind of talented people there. >> Very entrepreneurial. Two coming out of Stanford, Scott McNeely, all the early DNA was very entrepreneurial. >> Exactly. So I think that was again a place where you could learn a lot not just in technology but actually how to solve problems, how to understand customer problems that you could solve and build new technology on top of it. And I didn't stay there that long. Within a couple of years, I decided that I need to go basically join a small company where I could do more things beyond just designing one aspect. I was building microprocessor designs. Instead of just doing that I could do other roles also. So I joined the broadband wireless company after that opportunity. >> As an entrepreneur, one of the big decisions is who are you going to marry in terms of the VC or partner, financial partner. It truly is taking on a new partnership and that's a big struggle and I think we've seen the programmer culture certainly amplified. It's just recently passed decade where everyone wants to go for the big valuations and like wow look it, I only sold 15% of my company and raised ten million or a big number, look how great it is. But then you realize that when they come to board meetings you got them a good valuation but they may not be receptive on the other side. So there's a dynamic in fundraising early on, not just market selection as a venture but partner selection. Talk about how important that is, how you handled it, and advice for people thinking about selection of a financial partner. >> In technology companies where you have to invest a bunch in R&D early on, you do need money. It's just the way it works. But money is not everything because right now at least, today, money is kind of commodity. You can actually raise from many, many different sources, many different VC's. But one thing I've learned within the startups is that any and all startups will have good times and bad times, will have doubt in a strategy and will have conviction. And when those times are not so good, you need people who you can just go talk frankly without having to worry about it and without getting judged along the way. >> Trust. >> Trust is the key. So I think you pick people essentially based on how much you actually trust them, especially very, very early stage startups. And then as you go along, perhaps things change over time because over time if the company's scaling you may need a lot more money. But I think again people first. You want to partner people you can actually trust. >> In that hard conversation sometimes, you want to be self aware and that's always step one but two, vulnerability and then partnering with a financial partner that's going to sit on the same side of the table at the right times and maybe on the other side to be a counterbalance at the right times. And also when you need more money they got to help you sell the next round too. There's a lot of things that they have do to, and the dynamic is critical. And you've had success with that. >> So far it's been a success. >> Well what's the big thing happening right now in your mind, just to kind of take it forward now as we look forward. You see a lot of cloud computing. You got a great experience with cloud. You've been successful. Cloud security is really hot. What do you see as opportunities in the cloud space now that you got your entrepreneurial 20 mile stare out, they're looking for opportunities. I'm sure you probably mean more security space but in general as an entrepreneur, what do you see as things that people can go after markets? >> In general I sit on the enterprise side of things. Anything that simplifies work and automates it, whether it's using AI and whether they're using other technologies, software technologies, I think that space is going to grow more because the horizontal layers where you have big data platforms and you have infrastructure providers, I think they are doing a great job in integrating the system, but now you're going to see a lot more verticalized solutions based on machine learning and AI and automation. I think we're going to see a lot more of that. There's plenty of opportunities. >> It's super early. Do you agree with that? Great, well thanks for coming in the CUBE conversation. I appreciate this part of the Mayfield People First conversations. I'm John from theCUBE. We are here with Rehan Jalil, former president and CEO of Elastica. Successful serial entrepreneur about to embark on his next adventure. Good luck and I'm looking forward to catching up. >> You know, thank you so much for inviting me. >> Thanks for watching. This is the CUBE conversation People First network. I'm John Furrier.

>> From Sand Hill Road in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's theCUBE. Presenting, the People First Network; insights from entrepreneurs and tech leaders. >> Hello everyone, we are here for CUBE conversation in San Francisco. I'm John Furrier with siliconANGLE media theCUBE. We are in San Francisco with John Zimmer, who is the co-founder of president of Lyft, the famous ride sharing company that's dominating the world and changing the game in transportation. We all use Lyft, we love it. John, great to see you here for this People First Network special conversation. Thanks for spending the time. >> Thanks for having me. >> I know you're super busy, you guys are growing, billions of dollars in raised capital. You guys are growing like a weed on a rocket ship. A lot of things happening. But, you know, it's interesting, you guys are not that old of a company and the growth has just been fantastic. So, as you continue to ride the wave here, there's a lot of lessons that you've learned. So, tell the story about how you guys got started. You and your co-founder have a great relationship, and this has been a part of the culture at Lyft. How did it all get started? >> Yeah, so I'll start with Logan, my co-founder. He grew up in L.A. surrounded by traffic and he hated that. And he wanted to find a better way to get around. So when he went to college, he went to UC Santa Barbara, he did not take his car. He rode the bus, he car pooled, he had friends with cars. And then he went to start a car sharing program before Zipcar was around on college campuses. He got the attention of the local transit board, he got elected as the youngest member ever on the transit board. And he fell in love with the promise of public transportation. Affortable, accessible transportation for everyone. But frustrated by the reality that it was dependent on tax money. So, he wanted to create a better solution and he started coding his own website, named Zimride, named after a trip he took to Zimbabwe, for long distance car pooling. My own journey was I was on the east coast. I did not know Logan, was in love with hospitality, making people happy through great service. So I went to Cornell Hotel School, I took a city planning course, and I saw that the most important hospitality experience we have in society today is the city itself, and yet unfortunately we've designed cities for cars, and not people. What I mean by that is most of our cities are paved over. There's roads, there's parking lots, and if you design a city instead for people, pedestrians, safe places to bike, and don't need people to own cars in order to get around, then you could have a much more durable place to live. So we came together in 2007 to work on Zimride. And then a few years later, in 2012, we launched Lyft. >> So this is a transportation problem, ultimately, to solve. But the itch you guys were scratching was just the need for transportation. You saw it as more of a convenience thing as well. The hospitality thing kind of comes together, boom, Lyft is born. Then you guys enter the market, and the transportation problems are still there, and then you have the growth of mobile, so sort of a perfect storm coming together. What is the biggest challenge and exciting things that you guys see in this transportation scheme? Is it it's antiquated and inadequate? Is it a technical thing? What are some of the challenges that you guys are exited about? >> Well I think the biggest thing is this fact that the American dream has almost become, or been, historically, synonymous with a car in every garage. And that everyone should own a car. And that was your sense of freedom. But the reality is not quite that. American families spend more on their car than they do on food. It's the second highest household expense. A new car costs, on average, an American family $9,000 per year to own and operate. And so, there's a lot of ingrained behaviors, and designs of cities so that it does cater to needing to own a car. So we're trying to break that down piece by piece and making progress. But we're about 1% of the way there. >> Yeah, it's a cultural change too. But I also want to get to that in a second about culture, both with Lyft and and into your audience, which is the cities and the environments you guys deploy in, but also the users. But the founding and the story of you guys growing is interesting, because startups are all about execution and culture. You've had an interesting relationship with your co-founder. And this is the secret sauce of startups. It's documented somewhat, but it's a people first mindset, where you get a good team early on, you kind of feel your way through those first couple of years. Talk about that relationship with the founders, because this is something that's important. It's not just a number on a cap table, it's a little more than that. Talk about the relationship. >> I mean Logan has become my best friend. We actually carpool to work, still. Almost every day. And we weren't friends prior. So, a lot of times you have friends that start a company together. We were two people that were incredibly passionate about our mission, which is to improve people's lives with the best transportation. So we shared this passion, we share this vision, and we're two completely different people. So our approaches were different. His approach is often product-oriented and my approach is often hospitality-oriented. And the fact is, for transportation, you need to combine those two pieces. So it worked out really well for us. So I think having a co-founder is a massive advantage, because you can have two different people and then you want to find the thing in common, which is the thing you're fighting for, within our case the mission. >> How did you guys work together to play off each other, to get that innovation spark. Because when you get into the ride sharing, certainly it's a brand new category, huge demand, and there's a lot of build up, a lot of things you've got to stand up for the business. At the same time, you also want to differentiate and be innovative. You're kind of a first mover, with Uber, these guys are out there too. You guys are building a business, and growing really fast. So, how do you guys nurture that innovation? How do you put a twist on it? How do you keep it alive, versus the blocking and tackling and standing up the basic business activities? >> Well I think because we, you know at the beginning, we created a new category. We're the first to do peer-to-peer ride sharing. Uber existed, but they were doing cabs and limos. And we said, that may work for 1% of the population, but we wanted to use this under-utilized asset, which is the car that's sitting in everyone's parking spot or garage. And so that DNA of innovation, that DNA of being the underdog, the challenger, has always been true to us, but also the people that we we've brought on and hired. People and the hiring is something that, over the last ten years, is probably the one activity we've spent the most time on. Because that's the best way to keep those values, keep that focus on vision. >> And certainly these days, people want to work for a company that has a purpose. And that has a mission. When you hear the word people first, what pops into your head? >> Obvious. It just feels, in everything I've tried to do as a person, whether that was studying- like hospitality is the business of people first. How do you give people a great service and a great experience. And so I think often times, when people think about technology, they think about the what, which is I made this phone, I made this device, or I made this app, when way more important to that, is the why. Why did you do that? Who are you doing that for? And so we try to start everything we do with the person we're trying to- you know our mission is to improve people's lives with the world's best transportation. It's not to build the worlds best transportation. >> So that's your why. I was talking about how you guys scaled to a world-class organization. You guys have build a world-class team, certainly got great investors, Floodgate, Mayfield and then the rest is all on the web. You guys raised a lot of money, but you can't just throw money at the problem, you have to have that foundation and culture. How do you scale up a world-class organization? What's the learnings, can you share your perspective? >> Yeah, so first having clarity on the mission, which we've talked about, but also having clarity on core values. So we have three core values that have been true for a very long time. So, one is to be yourself. It also sounds very simple, like people first, but a lot of corporate environments have made spaces where people aren't comfortable being themselves, where there's group think, where people don't feel comfortable bringing their full self, and therefore their most productive self, to work. So be yourself, respecting the diversity of our team, has been critical from the beginning. The second is uplift others. So we use that both internally and externally. Life's short, we spend a lot of our time working. We might as well enjoy what we're doing. Again, all these values are both the right thing to do, make for a better place to work, and lead to better productivity and business success. And the last is make it happen. That's pretty self explanatory. Be an owner, go out and take action and get stuff done. And so with those three simple core values, looking for amazing, talented people, who also care about our mision. People are mission oriented, people want to care about what they're working on. And if you're fortunate to have a choice where you work, what we've seen is that people will follow a mission. >> Yeah, it's totally true. I can see that in culture here. And I've also seen you guys got kind of a cool factor too in the way I've seen some of your activations out in the marketplace. You kind of got a cool factor going on as well. But I think what's interesting, and I want to get your reaction to this, I think this points to some of the cultural discussions, just recently during the elections I saw you guys really wanted to make an effort to help people to get to the polls. Here in California, the disasters of wildfires are really tragic. You guys are doing some work there. This speaks to the culture. You say, hey, Lyft's available, and you're helping people out. Talk about what that means to you and the team here, and the culture at Lyft. >> Yeah, at the end of the day, when we look back on the work we've done, we want to make sure it has improved people's lives. And when we see opportunities to take our ability to provide transportation that will benefit people in a meaningful way, whether it was, you know, in the last- not this most recent election, but in the last election, in the last presidential election, I believe it was about 15 million people listed transportation as a reason why they couldn't vote. >> They've got a way, hey! >> Yeah, let's solve that. We can. When you think about unfortunate natural disasters, if we can help people get to safety, or help a horrible situation, then we should do that. I think that's just a moral and civic responsibility. It allows us to be aware and proud of the solution we've created, and I think it keeps our team extremely motivated. >> And I think it's one of those intangibles in terms of the mission, changing the transportation industry sounds academic and corporate. But here, you're changing lives by one, the voting, and two, saving lives potentially, with the disasters. So, great job. Okay, so what I thought, let's talk about the growth okay. I had a great conversation with the CEO of Amazon Web Services, Andy Jassy, a few years ago, talking about the early days of AWS. You have to be misunderstood for a while, and get through that early on, if you're going to be successful, because most big things are misunderstood. He also made a point about the key learnings during the early days. When you're trying to do stuff, things going so fast, that there's learnings that come out of it. And if you can persevere through it, that sets the culture. Share a story around something that you guys have been through at Lyft, where you persevered through it. It might have been some scar tissue. It might have been you got a little bloody, a little dirty. But you got through it and you learned from it. You applied it, and changed the culture. >> Well I think there's two main ones that come to mind. So, you know, people may think Lyft, in the last five years, has really come out of nowhere, but Logan and I have been working together for eleven years. And the first idea was Zimride, was long distance car pooling. And we built a team of 20, 25 people, we got this to break even. That's actually the company that Mayfield invested in, or the product. But it didn't have product-market fit in a massive way. It wasn't a massive success. And then so we tried to reinvent ourselves five years later, and that was Lyft. And at this point, that was a crazy idea. To have people riding in what everyone thought of as a stranger's other vehicle. And so that was a reinvention, an acknowledgement that the first solution we created did not fully work in the way that we wanted it to. The second was about four to five years ago, we wake up and Uber raises three billion dollars. And we have a hundred million dollars in the bank and about five months left. And everyone said Lyft is done. There is no way that they can survive this, it's a winner take all market, Uber is way more aggressive. And we proved that wrong. By focusing and staying true to our values and to our mission. By having an incredible team. An amazing community of drivers providing great service to our customers, we've gone from the early days of single digit market share to nearly 40% market share, amidst that pressure and belief that we couldn't survive. >> Game's on. Either rally or fold, right? It's a cultural test really. What's your mindset around the capital market. I know, I've done a lot of startups myself, I know a lot of fellow entrepreneurs, and when you raise that money, and you guys had that product-market fit, post the first venture, where you got through that. Then you get lightning in a bottle, whoa, let's double down on this. I want to go back to the early stages when you were thinking about investment. Was there any cautions around VC, cause a lot of startups have that conversation. What was the narrative for you guys at that time? Hey, let's go to Mayfield, should we raise money, should we bootstrap and make it cashflow positive. What was your mindset as founders, at that time when you were doing the venture round? >> Well, I think we knew that we needed a certain amount of capital to get to a scale that was interesting to us. So, not every business needs as much capital. But for they type of transportation infrastructure that we wanted to change, the type of scale we wanted to get to, we knew that it was important to raise VC money. So, money that was substantial and also understood the level of risk we were taking. So, at that point, we were fortunate to have a firm like Mayfield believe in us. And what we were looking for was people that care about who we were, cared about our mission, and understood what it was like to be an entrepreneur and an operator, not just an investor. >> What's the rallying call now for the team as you guys look out a6nd continue to have this growth? Obviously you guys cleared the runway in a big way. And there's still a lot more work to do, the market's still early. You know, you think about transportation and the regulatory environment and how technology and policy are coming together. A lot of forces out there, you got some tailwinds and some headwinds. How do you guys look at the future? What's the next mountain you're going to climb? >> Yeah, so, we've now done a billion rides. Since inception. And we're focused on providing a full alternative to car ownership. So I don't think people grasp that. The idea is not to provide an alternative to a taxi, or a late ride home. It's to completely replace car ownership. And so, we are 1% of the way there. Those that are joining our team and our mission get to be there for the 99% rest of that. And at the same time, as we go towards the next billion rides, we want to stay focused and rally around the individual stories behind each ride. So, every single week, we have over ten million rides happening, where two people are coming together. They could be two people that helped each other have a better day. They could be a Democrat and a Republican sitting next to each other and finding common ground. And so to us, yes we have big milestones and big opportunities ahead, but also care about each ride that's happening on the platform. >> And the other thing I love about your background in hospitality is you're bringing an experience as well. Not just math, in terms of the bottom line numbers. There's a lot of people doing the math and saying hmm, should I have a car? But I got to ask you a question. So what you learned at school, Cornell great school, great Lacrosse team, great Ivy League school, they teach you the textbook, the old hospitality. This is a new era we're living in. What is happening in your world that they don't teach you in the textbook from a hospitality standpoint? As you look at the experience of ride sharing and transportation for users, what is different, what's the twist in hospitality that has not yet been written in the textbooks, that you're exploring or thinking about? >> I actually think the old basics are more important than ever. There's all this flashy technology and opportunity to do it at larger scale, and to use data, that's new. To use data in ways that help inform providing great service. But, the basics of human interaction, communication, and treating people with respect, can get you pretty far. >> And happy customers, right? Final question, I know you got to go, I appreciate your time. Share a story or something about Lyft that people might not know about. First of all, everyone knows about your brass, you guys are doing a great job out there with the market share. But tell a story about Lyft, or something a datapoint, anecdotal piece of information, that they might not know about, that they should know about. Share an inside story or factoid about Lyft, that people should know about that they might not know about. >> I think it's really deep, deep in the mission. That people may not understand what gets us out of bed in the morning. You know, every time I have a new hire orientation, I try to talk to every new hire that comes to the company and really emphasize the importance of every driver, every passenger. And I read a story about a driver and passenger that really helped each other. And don't really want to provide the details because they're private to those individuals, but it's incredibly powerful to hear about. And so, I would just, we may look like a big company or brand at this point, but we care deeply about each individual that's on the platform. >> The fabric of society is being changed by you guys, really appreciate the work you've done, and congratulations, and a lot more work to do. Thanks for the conversation. >> Yeah, thanks. >> I'm John Furrier, here in San Francisco at Lyft's headquarters, talking with John Zimmer, who's the co-founder and President of Lyft, sharing his stories and successes, and a lot more work to do here at the People First conversations. With theCUBE, and Mayfield, I'm John Furrier, thanks for watching. (outro music)

Silicon Valley, it's theCUBE covering People First Network. Brought to you by Mayfield. >> Hello, I'm John Furrier here in Palo Alto for an exclusive conversation, CUBE conversation, part of the People First Network with theCUBE and Mayfield fund. I'm here with John Chambers at his house in Palo Alto. John Chambers is the former CEO/Chairman of Cisco Systems, now running J2C, JC2 Ventures. Great to see you, thanks for spending time! >> It's a pleasure to be together again. >> I'm here for two reasons. One, I wanted a conversation about People First and technology waves, but also, I want to talk about your new book, which is exciting, called Connecting the Dots. And it's not your standard business book, where, you know, hey, rah-rah, you know, like a media post these days on the internet; it's some personal stories weaved in with the lessons you've learned through the interactions you've had with many people over the years, so exciting book and I'm looking forward to talking about that. >> Thank you! >> Again, John Chambers, legend, Cisco, 1991 when you joined the company from Wang before that. 400 employees, one product, 70 million in revenue. And when you retired in 2015, not so much retired, 'cos you've got some--. >> I'm working on my next chapter! >> You've got your next chapter (laughs)! 180 acquisitions, 447 billion in revenue, you made 10,000 people millionaires, you created a lot of value, probably one of the biggest inflection points in computer history, the evolution of inter-networking and tying systems together, it was probably one of the biggest waves somewhat before the wave we're on now. So an amazing journey, now you're running JC2 Ventures and investing in game-changing start-ups. So you're not retired? >> No. It was only my next chapter. I made my decision almost 10 years before I left Cisco first, to make for a very smooth transition because it's my family, and out of the 75,000 people, I hired all but 23 of them! And in terms of what I wanted to do next, I really wanted to both give back, create more jobs, get our start-up engine going again in this country, and it's currently broken, and I want to do that on a global basis, in places like France and India as well. So I'm on to my next chapter, but the fun part in this chapter is that I do the things that I love. >> And you've got a great team behind you, but also, you have a great personal network. And I want to get into that, of your personal stories as well as your social network in business and in the community; but one of the things I want to get up front, because I think this is important for this conversation is, you've been very strong. I've seen you present many times over the years, going way back into the 90's. You're eloquent, you're people-oriented, but you have a knack for finding the waves, seeing transitions, you've been through many waves. >> Yes I have, good and bad. >> Good and bad. But one of the big ones, how do you spot those transitions? And what wave are we in now? I mean, talk about the wave that's happening now, it's unprecedented on many levels, but, different, but it's still a wave. >> It is, and outgoing market transitions and often combined with either economic changes or business model changes with technology. And part of the reason that I've been fortunate to be able to identify many of them is I listen to customers very carefully, but also, you're often a product of your prior experiences. Having experienced West Virginia, one of the top states in the US in terms of the chemical industry, uh, during the 40's and 50's and 60's when I was growing up there, and literally more millionaires in West Virginia than there were in the entire Great Britain. We were on top of the world in the chemical industry, and the coal industry, and yet, because we missed transitions, and we should've seen them coming, the state fell a long way, so now we're trying to correct that with some of the start-up activity we'll talk about later. As you see this, and then I went to Boston, 128, we were talking earlier, Wang Laboratories, the mini-computer era, but I was in IBM first out of the central part of the nation, so I watched IBM and Mainframes, and then I watched them miss on going to the mini-computer, and then miss in terms of the internet. So I was able to see the transitions that occurred in Boston, Route 128, where we were the Silicon Valley of the world, and we knew it, and this unusual area out in California called Silicon Valley, we paid almost no attention to, and we didn't realize we failed to make a transition from the mini-computer era to the pc and the internet era. Then I joined Cisco, and saw the internet era. So part of it is, you're a product of your experiences, and know the tremendous pain that occurs, because Boston 128 is nowhere near what it used to be, so there's no entitlement in this new world out of the thousand high-tech companies that I was associated with, including four or five giants in mini-computers, none of them are really in existence today, so it shows you, if you don't identify the transitions, number one, you're going to have an opportunity to benefit by them, but number two, you sure have an opportunity to get hurt by them. >> And you know, these waves also create a lot of wealth and value; not just personal wealth, but community wealth, and Cisco in particular had a good thing going for them, you know, TCP-IP was a defact-- not even a standard, it was a defacto standard at that time, IBM and these kinds of digital equipment corporations dominated the network protocol. Even today, people are still trying to take out Cisco competitively, and they can't because they connected the world. Now the world's connected with digital, it's connected with mobile, so we're kind of seeing this connected wave globally. How do you think about that, now that you've seen the movie at the plumbing levels at Cisco, you now have been traveling the world, we're all connected. >> We are. And it's important to understand that I'm completely arms-length with Cisco, it's their company to run now, and I'm excited about their future. But I'm focused on the next chapter in my life, and while I think about the people at Cisco everyday, I'm into the start-up world now, so how do I think about it now? I think most of the innovation over the next decade will come from start-ups. The majority of the top engineering students, for example, at a Stanford or an MIT or a Polytechnique in France, which is the top engineering school, I think, in Europe, or at the ITs in India, they are all thinking about going to start-ups, which means this is where innovations going to come from. And if you think about a digital world going from the time you and I, we almost recruited you to Cisco, and then we finally did; there's only a thousand devices connected then when Cisco was founded. Today there are about 20 billion devices connected to the internet; in the future, it's going to be 500 billion in a decade, and so this concept of digitalization combined with artificial intelligence, all of a sudden we'll get the right information at the right time to the right person or machine to make the right decision, sounds complex, and it is. And it's ability to do that, I think start-ups are well-positioned to play a key role in, especially in innovation. So while the first stage of the internet, and before that were all dominated by the very large companies, I think you're going to see, in this next phase of digitalization, you're going to see a number of start-ups really emerge, in terms of the innovation leaders, and that's what I'm trying to do with my 16 investments I've made, but also coaching probably another 50 uh, start-ups around the world on a regular basis. >> And the impact of outside Silicon Valley, globally, how do you see that ecosystem developing with the entrepreneurship models that are now globally connected in with these connection points like Silicon Valley? >> It will partially in parallel, partially, it's a new phenomenon. I sold the movie of Boston 128, as I said earlier, and on top of the world, and there is no entitlement. The same thing's true with Cisco, um, sorry, of Silicon Valley today; there's no entitlement for the future, and just because we've led up until this point in time, doesn't mean we will in 10 years, so you can't take anything for granted. What you are seeing, since almost all job creation will be from start-ups, and small companies getting bigger, the large companies in total will probably not add any head count over this next decade because of artificial intelligence and digitization, and so you're now going to see job growth coming from those smaller companies, if these small companies don't get a forum to all 50 states, if they don't get a chance to grow their head count there, and the economic benefits of that, then we're going to leave whole states behind. So I think it's very important that we look at the next wave of innovation, I think there's a very good probability that it will be more inclusive, both by geography, by gender, and all diversity measures, and I'm optimistic about the future, but there are no guarantees, and we'll see how it plays out. >> Let's talk about your next chapter. I was going to wait, but I want to jump while we're on the topic. JC2 is a global start-up, game-changing start-up focus that you have. What is the thesis? What are you looking for, and talk about your mission? >> Well, our mission is very simple. I had a chance to change the world one time with Cisco, and many people, when I said Cisco's going to change the way the world works, lives, learns, and plays by enabling the internet, everybody said nice marketing, but you're a router company. And yet, I think most people would agree, probably more than any other company, we had the leadership role in changing the internet and the direction going on, and now, a chance to do it again, because I think the next wave of innovation will come from the start-ups, and it doesn't come easy. They need coaches, they need strategic partners, they need mentors as much as they need the venture capitalists, so I would think of as this focusing on disruptive start-ups that get very excited in these new areas of technology, ranging from physical and virtual worlds coming together, to artificial intelligence and automation everywhere, to the major capabilities on cyber security across that to the internet of things, so we're trying to say, how do we help these companies grow in skill? But if I was just after financial returns, I'd stay right here in the Valley. I can channel anybody, VC's here that I trust and they trust me, and it would be a better financial return. But I'm after, how do you do this across a number of states, already in seven states, and how do you do it in France and India as role models? >> It's got a lot of purpose. It's not just a financial purpose. I mean, entrepreneurs want to make money, too, but you've made some good money over the years, but this is a mission for you, this is a purpose. >> It is, but you referred to it in your opening comments. When we were at Cisco, I've always believed that the most successful owe an obligation to give back, and we did. We won almost every corporate social responsibility award there was. We won it from the Democrats and the Republicans, from Condie Rice and George Bush and from Hillary Clinton and President Obama. We also, as you said, made 10,000 Cisco employees millionaires just in the first decade. And we tried to give back to society with training programs like Network Academies and trained seven million students. And I think it's very important for the next generation of leaders here in the Valley to be good at giving back. And it's something that I think they owe an obligation to do, and I think we're in danger now of not doing it as well as we should, and for my start-ups, I try to pick young CEOs that understand, they want to make a financial return, and they want to get a great product out of this, but they also want to be fair and giving back to society and make it a win-win, if you will. >> And I think that's key. Mission-driven companies are attracting the best talent, too, these days, because people are more cognizant of that. I want to get into some of your personal stories. You mentioned giving back. And reading your book, your parents have had a big role in your life--. >> Yes, they have. >> And being in West Virginia has had a big role in your life. You mentioned it having a prosperity environment, and then missing that transition. Talk about the story of West Virginia and the role your parents played, because, they were doctors, so they were in the medical field. The combination of those two things, the culture where you were brought up, and your family impacted your career. >> I'm very proud of being from West Virginia, and very proud of the people in West Virginia, and you see it as you travel around the world. All of us who, whether we're in West Virginia, or came out of it, care about the state a great deal. The people are just plain good people, and I think they care about treating people with respect. If I were ever run off a road at night in the middle of the night, I'd want to be in West Virginia, (both laugh) when I go up to knock on that door. And I think it carries through. And also, the image of our state is one that people tend to identify in terms of a area that you like the people. Now what I'm trying to do in West Virginia, and what we just announced since last week, was to take the same model we did on doing acquisitions, 180 of them, and say here's the playbook, the innovation playbook for doing acquisitions better than anyone else, and take the model that we did on country digitization, which we did in Israel and France and India with the very top leaders, with Netanyahu and Shimon Peres in Israel, with Macron in France and with Modi in India, and drove it through, and then do the same thing in terms of how we take the tremendous prosperity and growth that you see in Silicon Valley, and make it more uniform across the country, especially as traditional business won't be adding head count. And while I'd like to tell you the chemical industry will come back to West Virginia and mining industry will come back in terms of job creation, they probably won't, a lot of that will be automated in the future. And so it is the ability to get a generation of start-ups, and do it in a unique way! And the hub of this has to be the university. They have to set the pace. Gordon Gee, the President there, gets this. He's created a start-up mentality across the university. The Dean of the business school, Javier Reyes is going across all of the university, in terms of how you do start-ups together with business school, with engineering, with computer science, with med school, et cetera. And then how do you attract students who will want to really be a part of this, how do you bring in venture capital, how do you get the Governor and the President and the Senate and the Speaker of the House on board? How do you get our two national senators, Shelly Moore Capito and also Joe Manchin, a Democrat and a Republican working together on common goals? And then how do you say here's what's possible, write the press release, be the model for how a country, or a state, comes from behind and that at one time, then a slow faller, how do we leap frog? And before you say it can't be done, that was exactly what people said first about India, when I said India would be the strongest growing economy in the world, and it is today, probably going to grow another seven to 10%. That means you double the per capita of everyone in India, done right, every seven to 10 years. And France being the innovation engine in Europe to place your new business, you and I would have said John, no way, just five years ago, yet it has become the start-up engine for Europe. >> It's interesting, you mentioned playbook, and I always see people try to replicate Silicon Valley. I moved out here from the East Coast in 1999, and it's almost magical here, it's hard to replicate, but you can reproduce some things. One of the common threads, though, is education. The role of education in the ecosystem of these new environments seems to be a key ingredient. Your thoughts about how education's going to play a role in these ecosystems, because education and grit, and entrepreneurial zeal, are kind of the magic formula. >> Well they are in many ways. It's about leadership, it's about the education foundation, it's about getting the best and brightest into your companies, and then having the ability to dream, and role models you can learn from. We were talking about Hewlett-Packard earlier, a great role model of a company that did the original start-up and Lou Platt, who was the President of HP when I came out here, I called him up and said, you don't know me, Lou, I'm with a company you've probably never heard of, and we have 400 people, but I don't know the Valley, can you teach me? And he did, and he met with me every quarter for three years, and then when I said what can I do to repay you back, because at that time, Cisco was on a roll, he said John, do it for the next generation. And so, that's what I'm trying to do, in terms of, you've got to have role models that you can learn from and can help you through this. The education's a huge part. At the core of almost all great start-up engines is a really world-class university. Not just with really smart students, but also with an entrepreneur skill and the ability to really create start-ups. John Hennessey, Stanford did an amazing thing over the last 17 years on how to create that here at Stanford, the best in the world, probably 40% of the companies, when I was with Cisco, we bought were direct or indirect outgrowth of Stanford. Draw a parallel. Mercury just across the way, and this isn't a Stanford/CAL issue, (both laugh) equally great students, very good focus on interdisciplinary activities, but I didn't buy a single company out of there. You did not see the start-ups grow with anywhere near the speed, and that was four times the number of students. This goes back to the educational institution, it has to have a focus on start-ups, it has to say how they drive it through, this is what MIT did in Boston, and then lost it when 128 lost it's opportunity, and this is what we're trying to do at West Virginia. Make a start-up engine where you've got a President, Gordon Gee, who really wants to drive this through, bring the political leaders in the state, and bring the Mountaineers, the global Mountaineers to bare, and then bring financial resources, and then do it differently. So to your point, people try to mimic Silicon Valley, but they do it in silos. What made Silicon Valley go was an ecosystem, an education system, a environment for risk-taking, role models that you could steal people from--. >> And unwritten rules, too. They had these unwritten rules like pay it forward, your experience with Lou Platt, Steve Jobs talks about his relationship with David Packard, and this goes on and on and on. This is an important part. Because I want to just--. >> Debt for good is a big, big issue. Last comment on education, it's important for this country to know, our K through 12 system is broken. We're non-competitive. People talk about STEM, and that's important, but if I were only educating people in three things, entrepreneurship, how to use technology, and artificial intelligence; I would build that into the curriculum where we lose a lot of our diversity, especially among females in the third, fourth, fifth grade, so you haveta really, I think, get people excited about this at a much earlier age. If we can become an innovation engine again, in this country, we are not today. We're not number one in innovation, we're number 11! Imagine that for America? >> I totally agree with ya! And I don't want to rant and waste a lot of time, but my rants are all on Facebook and Twitter. (both laugh) Education's a problem. It's like linear, it's like a slow linear train wreck, in my opinion, but now you have that skills gaps, you mentioned AI. So AI and community are two hot trends right now. I'm going to stay with community for a minute. You mentioned paying it forward. Open source software, these new forms of operational scale, cloud computing, open source software, that all have this ethos of pay it forward; community. And now, community is more important than ever. Not just from the tech world, but you're talking about in West Virginia, now on a global scale. How does the tech industry, how can the tech industry, in your opinion, nurture community at local, regional, global scale? >> This is a tough one John, and I'd probably answer it more carefully if I was still involved directly with Cisco. But the fun thing is, now I represent myself. >> In your own opinion, not Cisco. There's a cultural thing. This is, Silicon Valley has magic here, and community is part of it. >> Yes, well it's more basic than that. I think, basically, we were known for two decades, not just Cisco, but all of the Valley as tech for good, and we gave back to the communities, and we paid it forward all the time, and I use the example of Cisco winning the awards, but so do many of our peers. We're going to Palestine and helping to rebuild Palestine in terms of creating jobs, et cetera. We went in with the Intels of the world, and the Oracles and the other players and HP together, even though at times we might compete. I think today, it's not a given. I think there is a tug of war going on here, in terms of what is the underlying purpose of the Valley. Is it primarily to have major economic benefits, and a little bit of arm's length from the average citizen from government, or is it do well financially, but also do very well in giving back and making it inclusive. That tug of war is not a given. When you travel throughout the US, today, or around the world, there are almost as many people that view tech for bad as they do tech for good, so I think it's going to be interesting to watch how this plays out. And I do think there are almost competing forces here in the Valley about which way should that go and why. The good news is, I think we'll eventually get it right. The bad news is, it's 50/50 right now. >> Let's talk about the skill gap. A lot of leaders in companies right now are looking at a work force that needs to be leveled up, and as new jobs are coming online that haven't been trained for, these openings they don't have skills for because they haven't been taught. AI is one example, IOT you mentioned a few of those. How do great leaders, proactively and reactively, too, get the skills gaps closed? What strategies can you do, what's the playbook there? >> Well two separate issues. How do they get it closed, in terms of their employees, and second issue, how do we train dramatically better than we've done before? Let's go to the first one. In terms of the companies, I think that your ability to track the millennials, the young people, is based upon your vision of doing more than quote just making a profit, and you want to be an exciting place to work with a great culture, and part of that culture should be giving back. Having said that, however, the majority of the young people today, and I'm talking about the tops out of the key engineering schools, et cetera, they want to go to start-ups. So what you're going to see is, how well established companies work with start-ups, in a unique partnership, is going to be one of the textbook opportunities for the future, because most companies, just like they didn't know how to acquire tech companies and most of all tech acquisitions failed, even through today. We wrote the textbook on how to do it differently. I think how these companies work with start-ups and how they create a strategic relationship with a company they know has at least a 50/50 probability of going out of business. And how do you create that working relationship so that you can tap into these young innovative ideas and partnerships, and so, what you see with the Spark Cognition, 200 people out of Texas, brilliant, brilliant CEO there in terms of what he is focused on, partnering with Boeing in that 50/50 joint venture, 50/50 joint venture to do the next FAA architecture for unmanned aircraft in this country. So you're going to see these companies relate to these start-ups in ways they haven't done before. >> Partnership and collaboration and acquisitions are still rampant on the horizon, certainly as a success for you. Recently in the tech industry we're seeing big acquisitions, Dell, EMC, IBM bought Red Hat, and there's some software ones out there. One was just going public and got bought, just recently, by SAP, how do you do the acqui-- you've done 180 of them? How do you do them successfully without losing the innovation and losing the people before they invest and leave; and this is a key dynamic, how do companies maintain innovation in an era of collaboration, partnerships, and enmity? >> I had that discussion this morning at Techonomy with David Kirkpatrick, and David said how do you do this. And then as I walked out of the room, I had a chance to talk with other people and one of them from one of the very largest technology companies said, John, we've watched you do this again and again; we assumed that when we acquired a company, we'd get them to adjust to our culture and it almost never worked, and we lost the people at a tremendously fast pace, especially after their lock-in of 18 to 24 months came up. We did the reverse. What we did was develop a replicatible innovation playbook, and I talk about it in that book, but we did this for almost everything we did at Cisco, and I would've originally called that, bureaucracy, John. (both laugh) I would've said that's what slow companies do. And actually, if done right, allows you to move with tremendous speed and agility, and so we'd outline what we'd look for in terms of strategy and vision; if our cultures weren't the same, we didn't acquire them. And if we couldn't keep the people, to generate the next generation of product, that was a bad financial decision for us, as well. So our attrition rate averaged probably about 5% or over while I was at Cisco for 20 years. Our voluntary attrition rate of our acquired companies, which normally runs 20% in these companies, we had about four. So we kept the people, we got the next generation product out, and we went in with that attitude in terms of you're acquiring to be able to keep the people and make them a part of your family and culture. And I realize that that might sound corny today, but I disagree. I think to attract people, to get them to stay at your company, it is like a family, it is like how you succeed and occasionally lose together, and how you build that family attitude under every employee, spouse, or their children that was life-threatening, and we were there for them in the ways that others were not. So you're there when your employees have a crisis, or your customer does, and that's how you form trust in relationships. >> And here's the question, what does People First mean to you? >> Well people first is our customer first. It means your action and everything you do puts your customers and your people first, that's what we did at Cisco. Any customer you would talk to, almost every customer I've ever met in my life would do business with us again, or with me again, because your currency in today's world is trust, track record, and relationships, and we built that very deep. Same thing with the employees. I still get many, many notes from people we helped 10 or 15 years ago; here's the picture of my child that you all helped make a difference in, Cisco and John, and you were there for us when we needed you most. And then in customers. It surprises you, when you help them through a crisis, they remember that more than when you helped them be successful, and they're there for you. >> Talk about failure and successes. You talk about this in the book. This is part of entrepreneurship, you can't succeed without failures. Handling failures is just as important as handling successes, your thoughts on people should think about that from a mindset standpoint? >> Well, you know, what's fun is those of you who are parents, or who will be parents in the future, when your child scores a goal in soccer or makes a good grade on a test, you're proud for them, but that isn't what worries you. What worries you is when they have their inevitable setbacks, everybody has that in life. How do you learn to deal with them? How do you understand how much were self-inflicted and how much of it was done by other causes, and how they navigate through that determines who they are. Point back to the West Virginia roots, I'm dyslexic, which means that I read backwards. Some people in early grade school thought I might not even graduate from high school much less go to college. My parents were doctors, they got it, but how I handled that was key. And while I write in the book about our successes, I spend as much time on when disaster strikes, how you handle that determines who you are in the future. Jack Welch told me in the 90's, he said John, you have a very good company, and I said Jack, you're good at teaching me something there, we're about to become the most valuable company in the world, we've won all of the leadership awards and everything else, what does it take to have a great company? He said a near-death experience. At the time I didn't understand it. At the end of 2001 after the dot com bubble, he called me up, he said, you now have a great company, I said Jack, it doesn't feel like it. Our stock price is down dramatically, people are questioning can I even run the company now, many of the people who were so positive turned very tough and--. >> How did you handle that? How did you personally handle that, 'cos--. >> It's a part of leadership. It's easy to be a leader when everything goes well, it's how you handle when things are tough, and leadership is lonely, you're by yourself. No matter how many friends you have around you, it's about leadership, and so you'd lead it through it. So 2001, took a real hard look, we made the mistake of focusing, me, on the numbers, and my numbers in the first week of December were growing at 70% year over year. We'd never had anything negative to speak of, much less below even 30% growth, and by the middle of January, we were -30%. And so you have to be realistic, how much was self-inflicted, how much the market, I felt the majority of it was market-inflicted, I said at the time it's a hundred year flood. I said to the employees, here's how we're going to go forward, we need to bring our head count back in line to a new reality, and we did it in 51 days. And then you paint the picture from the very beginning of what you look like as you recover and in the future and why your employees want to stay here, your customers stay with you and your shareholders. It wiped out most of our competitors. Jack Welch said, John, this is probably your best leadership year ever, and I said Jack, you're the only one that's going to say that. He said probably, and he has been. >> And you've got the scar tissue to prove it. And I love this story. >> But you're a product of your scars. And do you learn how to deal with them? >> Yeah, and how you-- and be proud of them, it's what, who you are. >> I don't know if proud's the right word. >> Well, badge of honor. (both laugh) >> Red badge of honor, they're painful! >> Just don't do it again twice, right? >> We still make the same mistake twice, but at the same time when I teach all these start-ups, I expect you to make mistakes. If you don't make mistakes, you're not taking enough risk. And while people might've, might say John, one of your criticisms is that you spread yourself a little bit too thin in the company at times, and you were too aggressive. After thinking about it, I respectfully disagree. If I had to do it over, I'd be even bolder, and more aggressive, and take more risks, and I would dream bigger dreams. With these start-ups, that's what I'm teaching them, that's what I'm doing myself. >> And you know, this is such a big point, because the risk is key. Managing risk is actually, you want to be as risky as possible, just don't cut an artery, you know, do the right things. But in your book, you mention this about how you identify transitions, but also you made the reference to your parents again. This is, I think, important to bring up, because we have an expression in our company: let's put the patient on the table and let's look at the problem. Solving the problems and not going out of business at that time, but your competitors did, you had to look at this holistically, and in the book, you mentioned that experience your parents taught you, being from West Virginia, that it changed how you do problem solving. Can you share what that, with that in conscience? >> Well, both parents were doctors, and the good news is, you got a lot of help, the bad news is, you didn't get a lot of self 'cos they'd fix you. But they always taught me to focus on the real, underlying issue, to your point. What is the real issue, not what the symptom is, the temperature, or something else. And then you want to determine how much of that was self-inflicted, and how much of it was market, and if your strategy's working before, continue, if your strategy was starting to get long in the tooth, how do you change it, and then you got to have the courage to reinvent yourself again and again. And so they taught me how to deal with that. I start off the book by talking about how I almost drowned at six years of age, and as I got pulled down through the rapids, I could still see my dad in my mind today running down the side of the river yelling hold on to the fishing pole. It was an ugly fishing pole. Might've cost $5. But he was concerned about the fishing pole, so therefore I obviously couldn't be drowning so I focused both hands on the fishing pole and as I poked my head above water, I could still see him running down. He got way down river, swam out, pulled me in, set me on the side, and taught me about how you deal when you find yourself with major setbacks. How do you not panic, how do you not try to swim against the tide or the current, how you be realistic of the situation that you're in, work your way to the side, and then you know what he did? He put me right back in the rapids and let me do it myself. And taught me how to deal with it. Dad taught me the business picture and how you deal with challenges, Mom, uh, who was internal medicine, psychiatry, taught me the emotional IQ side of the house, in terms of how you connect with people, and I believe, this whole chapter, I build relationships for life. And I really mean it. I think your currency is trust, relationships, and track record. >> And having that holistic picture to pull back and understand what to focus on, and this is a challenge for entrepreneurs. You're now dealing with a lot of entrepreneurs and coaching them; a lot of times they get caught in the forest and miss the trees, right? Or have board meetings or have, worry about the wrong metrics, or hey, I got to get financing. How should an entrepreneur, or even a business leader, let's talk about entrepreneur first and then business leader, handle their advisors, their investors, how do they manage that, how do they tap into that? A lot of people say, ah, they don't add much value, I just need money. This is important, because this could save them, this could be the pole for them. >> It could, or it could also be the pole that causes the tent to collapse (both laugh). So I think the first thing when you advise young entrepreneurs, is realize you're an advisor, not a part of management. And I only take young entrepreneurs who want to be coached. And as I advise them, I say all I'm asking is that you listen to my thoughts and then you make the decision, and I'll support you either way you go, once you've listened to the trade-offs. And I think you want to very quickly realize where they are in vision and strategy, and where they are on building the right team and evolving the team and changing the team, where they are in culture, and where they are on their communication skills because communication skills were important to me, they might not have been to Jack Welch, the generation in front of me, but they were extremely important to ours. And today, your communication mismatch on social media could cost your company a billion dollars. If you're not good at listening, if you're not good at communicating with people and painting the picture, you've got a problem. So how do you teach that to the young players? Then most importantly, regardless of whether you're in a big company or a small company, public or private sector, you know what you know and know what you don't. Many people who, especially if they're really good in one area, assume that carries over to others, and assume they'll be equally as good in the others, that's huge mistake; it's like an engineer hiring a good sales lead, very rarely does it happen. They recruit business development people who appeals to an engineer, not the customer. (both laugh) So, know what you know, know what you don't. For those things you don't know, surround yourself with those people in your leadership team and with your advisors to help you navigate through that. And I had, during my career, through three companies, I always had a number of advisors, formal and informal, that I went to and still go to today. Some of them were very notable players, like our President Clinton or President Bush, Shimon Peres, Henry Kissinger, or names that were just really technical leads within companies, or people that really understood PR like Thomas Freedman out of the New York Times, or things of that. >> You always love being in the trenches. I noticed that in Cisco as an observer. But now that you're in start-ups, it's even more trenches deeper (laughs) and you've got to be seeing the playing field, so I got to ask ya a personal question. How do you look back at the tech trends that's happening right now, globally, both political, regulatory technology, what advice would you give your 23-year-old self if you were breaking into the business, you were at Wang and you were going to make your move; in this world today, what's going on, what would you be doing? >> Well the first thing on the tech trend is, don't get too short-term focused. Picture the ones that are longer term, what we refer to as digitization, artificial intelligence, et cetera. If I were 23 years old, or better yet, 19 years old, and were two years through college and thinking what did I want to do in college and then on to MBA school and perhaps beyond that, legal degree if I'd followed the prior path. I would focus on entrepreneurship and really understand it in a lot more detail. I learned it over 40 years in the business. And I learned it from my dad and my mom, but also from the companies I went into before. I would focus on entrepreneurship, I'd focus on technology that enables entrepreneurship, I would probably focus on what artificial intelligence can do for that and that's what we're doing at West Virginia, to your point earlier. And then I would think about security across that. If you want really uh, job security and creativity for the future, if you're a really good entrepreneur, with artificial intelligence capability, and security capability, you're going to be a very desired resource. >> So, we saw you, obviously networking is a big part of it. You got to be networking with other people and in the industry, would you be hosting meet ups? Young John Chambers right now, tech meet ups, would you be at conferences, would you be writing code, would you be doing a start-up? >> Well, if we were talking about me advising them? >> No, you're 23-years-old right now. >> No, I'd just be fooling around. No, I'd be in MBA school and I'd be forming my own company. (both laugh) And I would be listening to customers. I think it's important to meet with your peers, but while I developed strong relationships in the high-tech industry, I spent the majority of time with my customers and with our employees. And so, I think at that age, my advice to people is there was only one Steve Jobs. He just somehow knew what to build and how to build it. And when you think about where they were, it still took him seven years (laughs). I would say, really get close to your customers, don't get too far away; if there's one golden rule that a start-up ought to think about, it's learning and staying close to your customers. There too, understand your differentiation and your strategy. Well John, thanks so much. And the book, Connecting the Dots, great read, it's again, not a business book in the sense of boring, a lot of personal stories, a lot of great lessons and thanks so much for giving the time for our conversation. >> John, it was my pleasure. Great to see you again. >> I'm John Furrier here with the People First interview on theCUBE, co-created content with Mayfield. Thanks for watching! (upbeat electronic music)

>> From Sand Hill Road in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's theCUBE, presenting the People First Network, insights from entrepreneurs and tech leaders. (techno music) >> Hello everyone, I'm John Furrier, the co-host of theCUBE, founder of SiliconANGLE Media. We are here at Sand Hill Road at Mayfield for the 50th anniversary celebration and content series called the People First Network. This is a co-developed program where we're going to bring thought leaders, inspirational entrepreneurs, and tech executives to talk about their experiences and their journey around a people first society. This is the focus of entrepreneurship these days. I'm here with Navin Chaddha who's the managing director of Mayfield. Navin, we're kicking off the program. Tell us why the program, why People First Network, is this a cultural thing, is this part of a program, what's the rationale, what's the message? >> First of all I want to thank John, you and your team and theCUBE for co-hosting the People First Network with us. It's been a real delight working with you. Shifting to People First, Mayfield had had a long-standing philosophy that people build companies and it's not the other way around. We believe in betting on great people because even if their initial idea doesn't pan out, they'll quickly pivot to find the right market opportunity. Similarly, we believe when the times get tough, it's our responsibility to stand behind people. And the purpose of this People First Network is people like me were extremely lucky to have mentors along the way when I was an entrepreneur and now as a venture capitalist, who are helping me achieve my dreams, and Mayfield and me want to give back to other entrepreneurs by bringing in people who are luminaries in their own fields to share their learnings with other entrepreneurs. >> This is a really great opportunity and I want to thank you guys for helping us put this together with you guys. It's great co-creation. The observation I was seeing in Silicon Valley and certainly in talking with some of the guests we've already interviewed, and that'll be coming up on the program, is the spirit of community and the culture of innovation is around the ecosystem of Silicon Valley. This has been the bedrock of Silicon Valley, Mayfield, one of the earliest, if not the first, handful of venture firms hanging around Stanford, doing entrepreneurship, this is a people culture in Silicon Valley and this is now going global. So, great opportunity. What can we expect to see from some of the interviews, what are you looking for, and what's the hope? >> Yeah, so I think what you're going to see from the interviews is, we are trying to bring around 20 plus people and they'll be many Johns on the interview besides you. So there'll be John Chambers, ex-chairman and CEO of Cisco, there'll be John Zimmer, president and co-founder of Lyft, and there also will be John Hennessy, who'll be our first interview with him, from Stanford University. And jokes apart, there'll be like 20 plus other people who'll be part of this network. So I think what you're going to see is goings always don't go great. There's a lot of learnings that happen when things don't work out. And our hope is when these luminaries from their professions share their learnings, the entrepreneurs will benefit from it. As we all know, being an entrepreneur is hard, but sometimes, and many times actually, it's also a lonely road. And our belief is, and I strongly personally also believe in it, that great entrepreneurs believe in continuous learning and are continuously adapting themselves to succeed. So our hope is this People First Network serves as a learning opportunity from entrepreneurs to learn from great leaders. >> You said a few things I really admire about Mayfield and I want to get your reactions. I think this is fundamental for society. Building durable companies is about the long game and people fail and people succeed, but they always move on. They move on to another opportunity, they move on to another pursuit, and this pay-it-forward culture has been a key thing for Silicon Valley. >> It absolutely has been. >> What's the inspiration behind it from your perspective? You mentioned your experiences. Tell us a story of an experience you've had. >> Yeah, so I would say first of all right since we strongly believe people make products and products don't make people, we believe venture capital and entrepreneurship is about like running a marathon. It's not a sprint. So if you take a long-term view, have a strong vision and mission, which is supported with great beliefs and values, you can do wonders. And our whole aim, not only as Mayfield, but other venture capitalists, is to build iconic companies which are built to last, which beyond creating jobs and economic wealth, can give back to the society and make the world a better place to work, live, and play. >> You know, one of the things that we are passionate about at theCUBE and on SiliconANGLE Media is standing by our community, because people do move around. And I think one of the things that is key in venture capital now than ever before is not looking for the quick hit. It's standing by your companies in good times and in bad. Because this is about people, and you don't know how things might turn out, how a company might end up in a different place. We've heard so many entrepreneurs talk about that that the outcome was not how they envisioned it when they started. This is a key mindset for-- >> It absolutely is, right? Like, let's look at a few examples. One of out most successful companies is Lyft. When we backed it at Series A, it was called Zimride. They weren't doing what they were doing, but the company had a strong vision and mission of changing the way people transport and given that they were A+ people, as I mentioned earlier, the initial idea wasn't going to be a massive opportunity, they quickly pivoted to go after the right market opportunity. And hence again and again, right to me, it's all about the people. >> Navigating those boards is sometimes challenging and we hope that this content will help people, inspire people, help them discover their passion, discover people that they might want to work with. Really appreciate your support. And thank you for contributing your network and your brand and your team in supporting our mission. >> It's been an absolute pleasure, and we hope the viewers and especially entrepreneurs can learn from the journeys of many iconic people who have built great things in their careers. >> Navin, thank you so much, great vision. >> Pleasure. >> Yeah, it's a pleasure working with you, John. >> Okay, I'm John Furrier, stay tuned for more People First Network content as part of our ongoing open collaboration with Mayfield. Trying to get the brightest minds to share their stories, their experiences, with you. I'm John Furrier, thanks for watching. (techno music)

>> From Sand Hill Road, in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's theCUBE, presenting the People First Network: Insights from Entrepreneurs and Tech Leaders. >> Hello everyone, I'm John Furrier with theCUBE. We are here for a special conversations part of Mayfield's 50th anniversary People First Network. This is a series of interviews from fault leaders around entrepreneurship, and insights. Manish Chandra, who's the CEO, Co-Founder and CEO of Poshmark, a very successful company. A serial entrepreneur that I've known for many, many years, going back to his early startups. Great to see you, thanks for spending the time today. >> Thanks for having me, John. And it's great, we were just talking about our early days when you were doing your podcast, and me, I was doing a social shopping company back then, was it, 2006? 2005 timeframe, a long time back. >> Pioneers have arrows on their back, as they always say in entrepreneurship, but if you look at the time when we were doing startups, over 14 years ago, social sharing, democratization; these were the buzzwords. This was the wave that we were all trying to ride. When 2008 hit, it kind of took the water down a little bit. But still the game didn't change, a rise comes Facebook, Twitter, social, multiple channels. The consumer's expectations changed a lot in that timeframe, and I want to get your thoughts because you've had two successful companies, Kaboodle and now PoshMark, with almost 40 million users, billion dollar valuation, hundreds and hundreds of employees, got like a hundred openings in your company. You're ramping up and you're scaling. But the expectations of users has changed. What are some of those dynamics in your business that you're seeing? >> I think the biggest sort of, uh, culmination or ignition point for social platforms came with the advent of mobile. And uh, early days of mobile were crude days, but you know, if you look back at the advent of Poshmark, sort of the idea of Poshmark reignited in my mind in 2010, and iPhone 4 had just come out. It was a couple of months after Instagram had started. And SnapChat had not even started yet. And what, I think, mobile platform did, especially with the high quality platform like iPhone 4 was, it made the process of content creation, consumption, and sharing so fast, and you finally had the device that could produce it, that uh, it just kept accelerating. And now, in the days of, you know, iPhone Excess Max and what have you, it's just so easy. At the same time, the speed expectation, the transparency expectation, and the velocity of expectation has gone up, and so what we've seen in Poshmark is, day one, our users were spending somewhere between 20-25 minutes in the app. And here today, we have billions of users, and they're still doing that same thing, so that level of deep immersion that you see is sort of unique to the mobile paradigm. >> I want to dig into the user expectation and the experiences that you're delivering. But before we start, take a minute to explain Poshmark; what you guys are doing as a core business, how it's evolved. >> So Poshmark, very simply, is a simple way to buy and sell fashion and other sort of style-based paradigm, we call it a social commerce platform because it really brings together users in a unique way. But it really allows anybody to build a business starting with their closet all the way to opening up a full-brand, wholesale engine on the platform. We provide all of the infrastructure, you know, shipping, payments, technology, and you have to bring in your inventory, so we don't touch inventory, but everything else we handle for you. >> So you're really helping people, enabling them to be successful with the ease of use; heavy lifting. >> Heavy lifting. >> It's kind of like Amazon. You don't need to provision anything, just kind of get started. E-Commerce in the era now of Google, Amazon, and Cloud technology, you see the rise of all the scale. How are you riding that trend, because that's a tailwind for you? And what is that doing for the user's expectations, I mean, I have four kids, I see them all online, they never use their laptops, except for homework, but they're on the mobile device, they're doing new things, this is the new expectation; what are some of those expectations? >> In our business, which is the business of fashion and style, what it means for people is, number one is, if they see something. Whether they see something on Instagram, or something on SnapChat, it needs to be instantly shoppable, right? And that obviously benefits a platform like us, which makes easy access to all of the different brands and things that are developing. At the same time, what social media's also doing is making the obsoleting of your products very fast, because once you've used it, you've, you know, posted a picture, you want to be able to not consume it again. >> You've been seen wearing the same outfit, I can't wear it twice! >> Exactly! And so we make that easy as well. And then the third thing is, uh, everyone is a content creator, everyone is a seller, everyone is sort of participating in this economy; people are hosting AirBnB guests in their home, people are selling on Poshmark, and the reason is because phone, and sort of this new mindset of collaboration and social makes it very easy for people to participate, so they want to be able to sell, but they don't want any hassle in that process. And so the new consumer expectation is instantaneous, deeply immersive, and constantly changing, and if you can't satisfy all of those things, then it becomes harder for you to scale. So you have to use technology, the physical world, and sort of the emotion all in the right mixture. >> One of the things I know that you're passionate about, and we've had this conversation, we feel the same way, certainly, at theCUBE is, role of community. And I see a lot of companies these days, whether they're saying we're doing an ICO using tokens to, um, getting a big bag of money from venture capitalists, oh yeah, our key strategy is to build a community. You can't buy a community. You've got to really win the hearts and minds and provide value, and you really can't, and build trust. Talk about the role of community for you guys, especially in the stylist world, where you have all this, where style's involved, a very robust community. How did you do it? How did you foster a community, and how did you nurture it? And how has that played out for you guys? >> So community is a foundation of Poshmark. And community's our value, not just our customer, but also what we are, and uh, community is what I'm more passionate about, even more passionate than fashion; and that was sort of, in my previous company, the thing that was really highlighted for me. And so we did it very slowly, actually. During the first year of our company, we only had a hundred users, but these hundred users were immersed. And then we went from a hundred to a thousand. Then thousand to five thousand. But very deliberately and slowly. So the end of the first 18 months of our company's life, we had maybe ten thousand users, right? And then we went from ten thousand to 300,000 in the next seven months, then we went from 300,000 to 12 million in the next two years. And today we went from 12 million to 40 million in the next few years, because, once you have sort of figured out how the community is created, it can scale very fast, but the early days if you compromise in how the community is being created, it's very powerful. For example, in the first, probably, eight or nine months in the company, I answered every single customer service email. And today, I probably interact with 80-100 customers directly everyday. Really keeping the pulse in sort of servicing. And service and love are sort of two of our core values, and it is very important that's built into the system. The second thing is, the community has to be authentic. You cannot fake a community. Which means, there is conversations that will happen in the community, there is, which may be antithetical to what you think is your brand, but if you don't let that authenticity happen, then what ends up happening is the community sort of withers away, because people are not going to tolerate anything inauthentic. The third thing, as you mentioned, is trust. And so from day one, we created not just trust in the way platform was built, but also in the economics. So day one we said, hey, if you're going to be part of this platform, there's two things that you're going to pay for; one, is, as a buyer, you're going to pay for shipping, and as a seller, you're going to revenue share with us, and we're not going to charge you any other money. Nothing. And so we shared, started from day one, a 20-80 partnership with our sellers, and today, here we are six or seven years later, and we have the exact same partnership. On the buyers, we started by charging them $7 for shipping, today our shipping is $6.49, at that time our shipping was 3 pounds to 5 pounds. Everything was priority, today everything is priority. So in six to seven years, if you think of any other marketplace in the world, not just in the country, how many times have they raised their fees? How many times have they changed their paradigm, changed their shipping paradigm? For us, it was very important. In the early days, it felt, people were saying, why are you charging so heavily? I said, I don't want to charge anything different tomorrow that I'm charging today, and by the way, there's no additional fees we've ever imposed on the platform, so, we don't have any marketing fees, any promotion fees, any credit card fees, and so that trust that's created ultimately leads to a lot of loyalty. And so today, you see our consumers growing, our users growing, and every single cohort we have continues to grow in revenue more like SAAS businesses, as opposed to e-commerce businesses. And that, to me, is the power of community if you do it right. >> And that's an interesting point. There's a lot of things you said in there, I think, that are worth doubling down on. One, I just want to highlight it, if you're creating value, and you're certainly scaling, passing that down in cost savings, and reducing cost and adding value, that's a secret formula. You see, we know one company that does that really well: Amazon! And that's worked. And they recognize the value of keeping people in there engaged, and so I think that's almost a take away for anyone watching is that if you're not adding value and reducing the costs while you're scaling, you're probably doing your math right. >> Absolutely. >> The second thing I want to talk about, and get your reaction to is you know about community and slowing it down at first. That's almost counter-intuitive. The, almost the answer is put the pedal to the metal, let's get some numbers; you took a different approach. You decided to take your time. Was that to get a feeling for the community, build the trust, understand the dynamics? Talk about why you went slow at first. >> The key is that the first two, three years, you're perfecting a lot of things, right? You have to make sure things are getting right. And in the first year, it was all about getting the product right, right? Then we scaled. Then we quickly realized that that scaling was breaking everything, was breaking our shipping system, was breaking our technology's office; I actually, Mayfield, which was an early investor in Poshmark, was on the board, and I went to my board, and I said you know, I'm actually going to slow down growth by 60%. And if you can imagine a venture board hearing that from their CEO, in the early days, it's challenging. >> It's a tough conversation. >> Yes. But I think one of the things that I value about Mayfield and my early investors is their focus on partnership, at a people level, a human level, with me. And uh, trust, and so we actually cut down our marketing budget by 80%, filled out the systems, got the partnership with USPS where we created the country's first fashion shipping label called Poshpost, and built up our technology and infrastructure, built out our payment partnership with BrainTree and Paypal, and by sort of, early-to-mid 2014, we started scaling and have never stopped. And in fact, I had told my investors early on, that first two or three years of building this business will be challenging, so hopefully you are prepared to go on this journey with me; but once we build it, it will accelerate. And what you see with us is, the business continues to accelerate every quarter, and we are seeing hyper growth, six, seven years into the business, which is even faster than the growth we saw in the first few years. And part of it is that, network business, which are built around true sort of networks, continue accelerating and connects later on in the process, but if you haven't created the right foundation in the early days? They fall apart. >> I think that's a lesson that entrepreneurs can learn, because you got to go slow to go fast. In Cloud based businesses where you have network effects, if there's a crack in the foundation, it can come crumbling down. >> It can come completely crumbling down, and it did, I mean, there were times in 2013 when people were literally doing things and just, the data would get lost in other things. We had to fix many of those, the broken pieces. We had USPS come to our offices and say hey, either you pay us a multi-million dollar fine or we have the right to arrest you. We had to renegotiate our contract with them. There's a bunch of things that happen in that scaling, and you hear things like blitz scaling and stuff these days, and their great terms, but at the same time, if you don't fix what's broken, you can't build that super scalable business. >> You got to be ready to blitz scale. As you know, Reid Hoffmann's famous channel, Masters of Scale, points out, which, by the way, is a great program, but, if you're not ready, you can crash and burn big time. That's a good point. You know, I have conversations a lot with a lot of senior people, one of them Theresa Carlson, who runs Amazon Web Services Public Sector Cloud business, she talks about doing the hard work upfront. And, you know, she's using public sector, so you have to get those kind of certifications, it sounds like this is a lot of things that you had to do. How did that test your entrepreneurial spirit? I know you, and you're hard-charging, but you're pragmatic and we can see that. But taking the time to do the work can sometimes test the patience of the team and the entrepreneur themselves. What's your reaction to that? >> Um, I would say that, you know, when we started Poshmark, the mission was that can we serve a hundred million people. In the country, you know, not even around the world. In our way we have 40 million people. From day one what we saw was deep engagement in the platform, because of the level of usage we had, because of the level of, sort of, activation we had, we knew we were on to something. I'll share a small episode with you, which convinced us that we've touched a deep nerve within the community is, in May of 2012, we were barely, you know, six, seven months into our app being launched in the public space, and we had maybe five or ten thousand users. At that time, we were adjusting our shipping for the first time, and uh, literally we announced the, we had launched the product with a small discount on the shipping, we were going to take it back, and we just said, you know, we're going to take it back. We got 200 plus emails which ranged from, you know, you're going to take away my entire set of clothing, and my entire business and we barely thought we were even launched, and so we knew we were servicing something very deep. That commitment to servicing the community where you are, really helping people at a deep level, allowed us to ride through these crazy ups and downs. And there was a point of time we went along the valley, even though we had the initial funding, in the mid stages of it we got over 200 rejections in the paradigm; sometimes multiple by the same investors. And so, it was definitely not a smooth ride in the middle of building this company. But that sort of passion for community and what they were experiencing kept us going. >> Let's talk about People First and venture capital. And one of the things I'm impressed on with this program we're doing with Mayfield is, and theCUBE has newer effect as well in the community, it's a people-centric culture. We lived through the social media early days when social and democratization was happening. More than ever now, you're seeing the role of people, because we're all connected. So there's rapid communications, there's frictionless, for people to yell and/or raise their hand and give accolades as well. So you have now a social dynamic with the fabric around the world. People can transact and communicate, complain, you know, applaud. This is changing everything. How is that change your outlook on life, because you have to recruit people, they want to work for a company that's people-centric, they want to work for a mission-driven company. These are the new dynamics we're starting to see in this generation; how has People First impacted your core mission? >> So for me, life is all about people. This company's all about people. We serve people, people is one of our core values. And my connection with Mayfield, which is through Navid, started back, actually, in my previous company. At the very beginning of that journey, '04/'05, uh, and we tried to partner up but the timing was never right, so when we were starting Poshmark, Navin was the first one with a term sheet, even before he'd sort of seen the business idea. And to me, that was a huge belief in me and the team I could put together. And I have the same sort of feelings about the people we bring on into the company, where uh, many of my team members here, including two of my co-founders, were involved with me in Kaboodle. One of them was a co-founder in Kaboodle. The first 20, 30, 40 people, I think, in the company, are still here seven or eight years later. They were people who are now playing very senior roles in the company, where they've gone through their ups and downs and we are always behind, two or three people left and we recruited them back into the company. So I think at the end, life, anywhere, but particularly in today's world, is so much about people and relationships. And it's the same thing we did to our community. I mean, uh, we just finished our sixth annual user conference, which was six times bigger than our first one. What was amazing was, they were so many people who were there in the first conference who had been coming to all the six conferences, and they are now like mini-celebrities in the community. And so, it's just amazing to see how a focus on people can be both rewarding at a business level, but also very gratifying at a personal level. >> It's nice to see you hit that tipping point. Congratulations on your success, it's great to see. You're a great entrepreneur. I want to ask you the question around funding, because I know, we've both been through venture capital fundings, we've been through this point building this great company you run now, and you've actually hit massive growth to a whole other level, your challenge today and going forward. This is, given it's Mayfield's 50th anniversary, you've seen a lot of changes in venture capital. A rounds used to be A rounds, now there's B and pre-C, there's all kinds of nuance, and now you have alternative funding now and global landscape you're seeing block chain and cryptocurrency, although ICO's have taken a bath because of the regulatory issue. Issues around regulation, some scams out there, actually. But venture capital's been tried and true. What's changed in venture capital the past 25 years in your view? >> I think, two things, which have happened, particularly in the last seven or eight years is there's a lot of it. And secondly, it favors the mighty more than the weak. And so, those are sort of the two big changes that have happened in the venture capital business. I think you were just mentioning is the people I used to work with, a whole range of investors, are now investing in post-growth stage funds. I mean, the same company. So everyone is sort of leveled up and leveled up and then leveled up, you know? You see venture capitalists raising two, three, four billion dollar funds; I mean, that's not venture capital, there's no way you can deploy that at the venture stage. A company is staying private much longer at different scales, which I think is probably more sort of a sign of the times. And finally, I think, it is the metrics and the scale that your business can achieve, that these are obviously very aware of, is an order of magnitude bigger than it has ever been. In fact, sort of, in some ways, unicorn, being the unicorn is uh, as sometimes as people joke, sometimes an insult. You need to be a deca-unicorn these days. So the feeling of not being enough is constant. >> And that's challenging, too, for the venture industry, because, you know, there's still the classic building blocks of entrepreneurship and venture architecture, which is, you start with an idea and you get a prototype, and certainly it's easy to get on the Cloud computing certainly, a great win for the entrepreneur; so I can see maybe some acceleration. But at the end of the day, it's still the classic blocking and tackling with building your company. >> Yes. >> Building a durable company. >> Absolutely. And you and I have both seen the '98, '99, 2000 timeframe, you know, everyone believes nothing repeats, and, you know, we certainly see, maybe not exactly the same thing, maybe it's an order of magnitude less, but there's definitely some level of exuberance we see today. But if you're building a fundamentally good business, that has robust economics, that can scale, and is based on foundational principles, with a large sort of market, I don't think that we are wrong in terms of deploying massive amounts of capital up against it. But at the same time, um, I think it also creates certain socioeconomic, as well as responsibility challenges, that I don't think we are fully facing up to, as an economy, and as a Valley. >> You've raised over a hundred million plus, so you have done some funding. A lot of funding, you have a lot of cash you've raised. When you had to go through those exercises of looking at the fundraising, 'cos, you don't want it to die on the mind, you're building a durable business, you have to go through multiple rounds of fundings. What were the key decision points for you as you started to look at this fundraising process to build your business? >> See, in the early days it was literally just about survival, I mean, there were times where I ran the business on negative balance sheets, right? So it isn't that it's been easy. I was only, I would say, the last funding round was the one that was easy, where we got multiple term sheets proactively, and the first couple of them. In between--. >> When things are scaling things are great, you know? >> In the middle of it, every single round was effectively zero to one term sheets. Every single time. We were lucky to have Mayfield as a partner, and some of our early investors like Inventus and Menlo who sort of supported us through each of these pieces of the journey. Mayfield as an anchor point. But it was really, really hard. And part of it is that, what we were doing was challenging, so many things still are, that even to process our cohort data is hard. Do you think of it as used, do you think of it as buying, do you think of it as selling, what is it? It looks like a bird, but it moves like a plane, you know? What is it? It's Superman or Superwoman, right? So that being a challenge, uh, only in the last round did we have the freedom, we could raise no money, some money, all of the money, and um, most of the focus for us, for that capital, was really to have the deep pockets that would be required for global expansion. We had actually scaled the business, at that point in time, that we didn't need too much money for domestic expansion. And in fact, not only have we not touched any money from that round, we have not touched any money from the previous round, so far; most of the money from the previous round. And so, again, part of it is you need muscle to compete in a bigger world, but at the same time, if you build a fundamentally sound business, then over time you can scale with or without money. >> And you got SAAS, sellers and service, and network effects booming and great community. That's a great tailwind for you guys, for sure. >> It is a phenomenal tailwind, and in fact, um, I was just in my management team meeting this morning, and I said, you know, we are growing, but we can grow even faster at this point, because the level of network effect we are seeing in the community is an extraordinary effect, where there's sort of second order; our community is opening up Instagram accounts to promote Poshmark to sort of go out to YouTube, so there's sort of this wild, organic movement that's happening across the country, which is just bringing out a whole different level of growth that we've ever seen. >> Yeah, there's a whole new dynamic it seems. It's interesting, I'm seeing, and not a lot of people writing stories about it are documenting it, but Masters of Scale has a whole different perspective, but no one's really talking about something that you guys are touching upon, and we're seeing it in our business. Creating an environment that has network effects, and community, and good content in this case, product for your end. Um, creates a flywheel. And what's interesting is, in this new era of people who can create value, with the ability to capture it, is really a unique formula, and I think this is the new kind of management discussion. Certainly lower prices, increased value, that's an Amazon effect. That's a, lacking the words, good example, well-documented, you do that, you're good, you're doing it, but now you have the ability for people to create value. Who can then capture it. This is almost a whole 'nother big wave. Your reaction? >> I think the power of people today is at a very unique level, right? And it can go in the negative direction, but when you harness it from a positive perspective, it's phenomenal. And to me, you know, we've started added a fifth core value recently, is that at the end, the true happiness comes from service of others, right? And if you service everyone, in our job, you're servicing our community, who's then servicing other people, and that creates an amazing sort of paradigm. And if you remove the conversation of money, because it's taken care of, it's built into the platform, then it just keeps sort of circulating. And I think that's something that people underestimate. And one of the things that you, you know, you see is that, for example, open source software, right? You start by focusing on community and then it becomes all about money, and then you forget about the community and you see many of the larger open source companies slow down, because they forget the fact that what brought them there was the community. And to me, I think--. >> If they get greedy, the project's fail. >> Exactly, exactly. And so, the hardest thing at scale to balance is how do you make sure that you're still focused on the community? >> Great stuff! Final question for you. You know, these days, with venture capital, the question always is, where's the value at? Talk about your experiences with Mayfield, and what differentiates a value add versus a value subtract investor? When should an entrepreneur feel it? What's the tell signs of someone's got a value add, and partner is not? >> I think, I think Mayfield is so aligned in so many ways with our core values, which is focus on people and focus on service, that it's just been an amazing partnership with them. You know, even in our lowest moments, I knew that we would get funded; I didn't know how it is, because I knew that Navid and Mayfield would figure out a way, so I never sort of worried about the capital after I brought in Navid and saw him in action for a year and a half. And if you're a venture capitalist, you need to provide capital! And forget about any of the services, many VCs fail that one task, which is to provide capital when you most need it, right? But beyond that, it's been a great resource. I mean, I met my co-founder through Mayfield. Tracy and I were first introduced via Mayfield. Many of our recruiting of the top executives have come from Mayfield, but they're always available as a sounding board across the pieces, so I do think that they take their service paradigm to a whole new level. >> And they support you, too, right? The support's there? >> Support and they have an HR partner who's helped, I think, with some of the recruiting issues, hiring the recruiting partnerships, et cetera. PR, other areas as we needed it. Somebody that you could call on, too, even if it was just talking about searching for a general counsel, and Mayfield has been great, even in that. Help, at this late stage of a company, so it's fantastic. >> It's a great network; people, value, paying it forward. Manish, thanks for coming on, sharing your insights, here as part of theCUBE's 50th People Network with Mayfield. Thanks for sharing your experience. >> Thanks for having me! It's been a pleasure and joy to see you after so many years as well! >> This is theCUBE here on Sand Hill Road at Mayfield for their 50th Anniversary as a Venture Capital Firm, sharing insights and ideas from entrepreneurs, and tech executives. I'm John Furrier, thanks for watching! (electronic music)

>> From Sand Hill Road in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's theCUBE. Presenting, the People First Network, insights from entrepreneurs and tech leaders. >> Hello everyone I'm John Furrier with theCUBE, we are here in Sand Hill Road up at Mayfield Venture Capital Firm for their 50th anniversary, their People First Network series, produced with theCUBE and Mayfield, I'm John Furrier, with Bill Schlough, the Chief Information Officer of the San Francisco Giants, CUBE alumni, great to see you thanks for joining me today for this People First Series we're doing with Mayfield's 50th anniversary, thanks for coming in. >> Good to be here, John. >> So, been a while since we chatted, it's been a year, A lot's happening in tech, you can't go a year, that's like seven dog years in tech, lot happening, you're managing, as the CIO for the Giants, a lot of things going on in baseball, what's the priorities for you these days, obviously, you guys, great social, great fan experience, what's new for you, what's the priority? >> Man, there's always something new. It's what I love about it, this'll be my 20th season with the Giants comin' up. And, it never gets old, there's always new challenges. On the field, in the seats, off the field, you name it. As we look toward next year, really excited about bringin' in a new video board, which we haven't publicly announced, maybe I just did publicly announce, we're breaking news on theCUBE today. So we're puttin' in a new video board, it'll be over three times the size of the one we have today. That's big news, we're doing a lot of exciting things in the ticketing world. The ticketing world is really transforming right before our eyes in terms of the way fans buy tickets. It's changed a lot. Once up on a time you could call a game a sellout, and we sold out 530 straight games at AT&T Park, but really there's no such thing as a sellout anymore I mean, at any point you can get a great ticket, so we have to adapt to that and change the product that we're delivering to fans, so making some changes on the ticketing front, the fan experience, the ballpark with the video board, and another thing that's changing a lot is the way fans consume our game when they're not at the ballpark. It's rare that you're going to see somebody sit on a couch for three plus hours and watch a game continuously anymore. Fans are consuming through mobile devices, streaming, catching clips here and there, all different methods, and it's fun to be a part of that, because, fans still love the game, but they're just consuming it in different ways. >> Yeah, I love having chats with you on theCUBE because one of the things that have always been the same from nine years doing theCUBE is, the buzzword of consumerization of IT has been out there, overused, but you're living it, you have a consumer product, the ultimate consumer product, in Major League Baseball, and the Giants, great franchise, in a great city, in a great stadium, with a rabid fanbase, and they know tech, so you have all the elements of tech, but the expectation of consumers, and the experiences are changing all the time, you got to deliver on the expectations and introduce new experiences that become expectations, and this is the flywheel of innovation, and it's really hard, but I really respect what you guys are doing over there, and that's why I'm always curious, but, always, the question comes back to, is, can I get faster wifi in the stadium? (laughs) It's always the number one question >> It's funny that you ask that because it is AT&T Park, you know, so, honestly, we got to check that box, and we've had to for years, all the way back to when we first rolled it out, way back in 2004 when we first rolled out wifi in the park, people weren't asking for it then, people were coming to the ballpark with a laptop and plugging a card into it, and there were about a hundred of them that were accessing it, but today, what's interesting is, who knows what next, but we're not talkin' about wifi as much, wifi is just kind of, expected, you got to have it, like water. You're talkin' about 5G networks, and new ways to connect. Honestly, this past season, our wifi usage in terms of the number of fans that use wifi, what we call the take rate, the percentage of fans, was actually down 30% from the previous year. Not because we had less fans in the stadium, because this is the take rate, a percentage of fans in the stadium, went down, because AT&T made some massive investments in their cellular infrastructure at the ballpark, and if you're just connecting, and you got great bandwidth, you don't feel the need to switch over to wifi, so who knows what the future will hold? That's a great point, and you see the LTE networks have so much more power, it used to be you needed wifi to upload your photos, so you'd go in, log in, and if they auto login that's cool, but people don't need to. >> Not with photos, what they need it now for is when we see it really maxing out is events, like our Eagles concert, or Journey concert, or a really big game, like opening day, or honestly, Warriors playoffs game, 49ers football games, that's when folks are streamin' to video. For streamin' to video, they're still goin' to that wifi. Yeah, that's the proven method, plus they don't want to jack up their charges on the AT&T site, but I won't go there, Let's talk about innovat-- Most say unlimited, I will go there, most say unlimited these days. >> Really, I got to find that plan, my daughter's killin' me with her watchin' Netflix on LTE, I tell her. Innovation is changing, I want to get your thoughts on this, 'cause I know you're on the front end of a lot of innovations, you do a lot of advising here at Mayfield. The VC's always trying to read the tea leaves, you're living it, what's the innovation formula look like now for you 'cause as you're sittin' in your staff meetings, as you look at the team of people around you, you guys want to foster, you do foster, innovation culture. What's the formula, what do you guys do when you have those meetings, when everyone's sitting around the table sayin', what do we do next? "How do we create a better experience? "How can we get better fans, and better product "in their hands as fast as possible?" What's your strategy? >> You know, it's funny, people talk about the secret sauce for innovation, what's the formula? I would say, for us, it's really a symbiotic relationship with a lot of things, first of all, where we are, geographically, we've got folks like Mayfield, down the street, and many others, that we can talk to, that are, when innovation is happening, when the startups are incubating, they're being funded by these guys, a lot of times they are here, and our phones are ringing off the hook with a lot of folks so my formula for innovation is answer the phone and take the meetings, but, to be honest, that creates its own problems, because there's so many great ideas out there, if you try to do all of them, you're going to fail at all of them. You got to pick a very small few to try to experiment with, give it a shot, we just don't have the bandwidth, we only have 250 full-time staff on the business side. For us, geographically, you have to really be laser-focused and say okay, there are so many great ideas out here, which are the three or four that we're going to focus on this year, and really give it a try, that's really going to drive, propel our business forward, enhance our product on the field, whatever it might be, but I'll tell you where it really truly starts. It's from the top with our CEO. And, I've had a few different bosses over the years, but with the Giants, our CEO is singularly focused on all of us doing things folks have never done before regardless of what business unit you're in. Whether you're in ticketing, finance, marketing, sales, what drives him, and drives all of us, is innovation. And his eyes glaze over when I talk to him about cost-cutting, and his eyes can glaze over really fast. But when I talk to him about doing something no one's ever done before, that's when he sits forward in his chair, he gets engaged, and I just have a great boss, Larry Baer, he's been with us for 25 years wit the Giants, and he is the driver for it, he creates the culture from the top, where all of us, we want to impress him, and to impress him, you got to do sometin' nobody's ever done before, and what's even more interesting is there are some challenges and some changes talking place across our industry, as I said before, ticketing and other areas, and I've sat in meetings with him where somebody might raise their hand and say, "But this is happening across the industry, "so it's just a macro trend," and he'll get upset, be like, "I don't care about macro trends. "We are here in the Bay Area, "we're the San Francisco Giants, "we're going to do it our way." >> And so when you do it your way, he promotes risk-taking, so that's a great culture. What are some of the things you have tried that were risky, and/or risque, or maybe an experiment, that went well, and maybe ones that didn't go well, can you share some color commentary around that? >> Sure, over 20 years we've had some of all of those. I would say, I've had some real scary moments, our culture is collaborative, but I wouldn't call it combative, but we all have strong opinions, a lot of us have been there a long time, and we have strong opinions and so we'll battle, internally, a lot, but then once the battle is over, we'll all align behind the victory. Thinking back, one of the most stressful times for me at the ballpark was related to wifi, when we decided to take our antennas and put 'em under people's seats. No one had ever done that before, and there were two major concerns with that. One is, honestly are people going to get cancer from these antennas under their seats, it's never been done before, what's going to happen, and whether it's going to happen or not, what's the perception of our fans going to be, because, these are, the bread and butter is, the golden goose here, all the fans, so, yeah it's great that they're going to be, have faster connection here at AT&T Park, but if they think they're going to get cancer, they're going to cancel their season ticket plans, we got to problem. Number two is, we're taking away a little storage space also, under the seats, so it was very controversial internally, we did all of our research, we proved that having a wifi antennae under your seat is the equivalent to having a cell phone in your pocket, most people do that, so we're pretty safe there, and from the storage space perspective, honestly, it actually elevates your stuff, if somebody spills a Coke behind ya, it'll fall all around your purse, which is sitting on top of that wifi antenna so we came up with a good solution, but that was an example of something that was really controversial >> So beer goes on the antennae not your bag. (laughs) >> Exactly, your bag stays dry, we found a way to spin that but, there have been so many, I can go way back in time, back to the days when it was the PalmPilot that ruled the day instead of the apple >> Well you guys also did a good job on social media, I got to give you guys props, because, you're one of the first early adopters on making the fan experience very interactive. That was, at that time, not viewed as standard. Yeah, built the @Cafe at our ballpark, which is still there really to try to bring social media to the fans. >> I think you're the first ballpark to have a kale garden, too, I think. >> That's a little off topic, but yes, driven by one of our players, who's a big kale fan, yeah, the garden out in center field. >> So sustainibility's certainly important, okay, I got to ask the question around your role in the industry, because one of the things that's happening more and more in Major League Baseball and certainly as it crosses over to tech her at Mayfield Venture Capital, there's a lot of collaboration going on, and it's a very people-centric culture where, it used to be people would meet at conferences, or you'd do conference calls, now people are in touch in real time, so these networks are forming. It takes a village to create innovative products, whether you're inside the Giants, or outside in the ecosystem, how have you personally navigated that, and can you share some experiences to the folks watching, how you became successful working in an environment where it's collaborative inside the walls of the San Francisco Giants, but also outside? >> %100, the topic is near and dear to my heart, and from when I started with the Giants, that's what I love about our industry We compete on the field, and only on the field. When you look at who the Giants competitors are, from a business perspective, honestly the Dodgers are not a competitor from a business perspective. The A's are barely a competitor from a business perspective. We got a lot of competitors and very few of them are in our actual industry, so we collaborate all day, and it's been amazing, I can count on one hand, across all of sports, folks who have not been collaborative. There's a very small group of teams, your favorite team, the Boston Red Sox, are not on that list, they are very collaborative, but their arch rival, well there's a few others out there that may be less collaborative, but most of them are highly collaborative, from top down, and so, what I did from when I first started the first trip I made, was to Cleveland. And this was many years ago, Cleveland Indians had a reputation of being very progressive so I called up my counterpart there, I said, "I'm new to the industry, can I come out, "can I learn from you?" And that's where it started, and ever since, every year, we travel to two cities, I take at least four of my staff, to two cities each year and we meet with all the sports teams in those cities. This year, we went to Milwaukee and we met with the Brewers, and we did the Packers as well. Every year, over the 20 years we've visited pretty much every professional sports city, and we just go through it again, and always, red carpet, open door, and you build those face-to-face relationships, that you can pick up the phone and make the call, in a few weeks we're all going to get together in Denver at our MLB IT Summit, my job at the IT Summit every year is I host the golf classic, so I bring all the golfers, the hackers, the duffers out, and we have a great time on the golf course and build those relationships and again, the only thing that we don't really talk about that much is the technology we use to enhance the product on the field. Everything else is fair game. >> So share the business side, but the competitive advantage, where the battle's really having Dodger and Giants obviously on the field, highly competitive-- >> But what's cool about that is then I can meet with the other sports teams to talk about that, so I'll leave the teams nameless, but we've had some awesome collaborative discussions with NBA teams especially to talk about what they're doing to assess talent, and there's no competition there. >> So there's kind of rules of the road, kind of like baseball, unwritten rules. >> Right. >> So talk about the coolest thing that you guys have done this year, share something that you personally feel proud of, or fans love, what were some of the cool things this year that pops out for you? >> Sure, the technology that we invested in this year that I thought was a game-changer, we saw, we experimented with last season, but this year, we've been experimenting with VR and AR a little bit. But, a technology that we thought was really cool is called 4DReplay, it's a company out of Korea. And we saw them, we did an experiment with them, and then we implemented them for the full season this year and we've seen them at some other venues as well, the Warriors tried them at the Playoffs, but we had 'em full year and what we did was they put in about 120 cameras, spaced approximately five feet apart, between the bases. 120 of 'em, and they focus on the pitcher and the batter, so when you have a play, you can 3D, or 4D, 4D rotate around that play and watch the ball as it's moving off the bat, and get it from that full perspective, it's awesome for the fan experience, it gives them a perspective they never have, I love watching the picture, because you can see that hand, in full 4D glory pronating as it comes through on every pitch, if you can watch that hand carefully you can predict what kind of pitch it is, it's something that a fan has never had access to before, we did that for the first time this year. >> I had a new experience, obviously you see Statcast on TV now, a lot of this overlayed stuff happening, kind of creates like an esports vibe to the table. Esports is just coming. >> And it's just the beginning >> Your thoughts on esports, competitor, natural evolution, baseball's going to be involved in it, obviously, thing in the emerging technology's looking interesting, and the younger generation wants the hot, young... Sure, we feel like our game has been around a long time, and it still is, the rules haven't changed that much, but fans still enjoy it, but they just consume it differently and our game can be incredibly exciting in moments, but, there's also some gaps in there when you can build relationships. Some of the younger generation may fill those gaps with watching somethin' else, or two other things on their devices, but that's okay, we embrace that at the ballpark, but in terms of the emergence of esports, and the changing demographic of our fanbase, what we're trying to do is just package our game differently. One thing I'm really excited about, and startin' to see, we're in the early days, I consider with virtual reality, we experiment with it, maybe two or three years ago we've been doing some stuff with it, but I'd say it feels like we're in the second or third inning with virtual reality, where we're really going, and I've seen Intel doin' some of this stuff, I was out working with Intel in Pyeongchang, at the Olympics this past year, working with their PR team, and where it's going I can already visualize what this is going to be like, this concept of volumetric video. Where, it's not about having that courtside seat, in basketball, or that seat right behind home plate, it's about being wherever you want to be, anywhere in the action. And to me it's not about doin' it live, because in baseball, you don't know where the ball's going to go, it's about doin' it, replay, right after, okay, that ball was shot to Brandon Crawford, he made the most amazing diving play, picked it up, gunned it to first, where do you want to watch that from? Everybody's different, some people might want to watch it from right behind first base, some people might want to watch it right Brandon Crawford, behind the batter, with volumetric video and the future of VR, you'll be able to do that, and this esports generation, this fan's instant gratification want, unique experiences, that's what's going to deliver it. >> This is such an immersive environment, we're looking at this kind of volumetric things from Intel, and you got VR and AR, immersion, is a new definition, and it's not, I won't say putting pressure, it's evolving the business model, who would've thought that DraftKings and these companies would be around and be successful, that's gambling, okay, you now you got that, your VR so the business model's changing, I've been hearing even token and cryptocurrency, maybe baseball cards will be tokenized. So these are kind of new, crazy ideas that might be new fan experience and a business model for you guys. Your thoughts on those kind of wacky trends. >> That's why I love working with companies like Mayfield 'cause they're seeing the future before we see it, and I love being where we are, so we can talk to them, and learn about these companies. Another example, along those lines is, how are fans going to get to the ballpark five years from now, and how do we adapt to that because we're doing a major development right adjacent to the ballpark, we've got 4,000 parking spaces. Are we going to need those five years from now? Well we're going to build out that whole parking lot, we're going to put a structure in there. But five, ten years from now, we're building that structure so it can be adaptable, because, is anyone going to need to park? Is parking going to be like typing, you know on a typewriter, 10, 15 years now because everybody is in either self-driving cars, or ride shares, and the cars just, poof, go away, and they come back when you need 'em. >> Like I said, everything that's been invented's been on Star Trek except for the transporter room, but maybe they could transport to the game. >> We could use that in San Francisco. >> Bill, got to ask you about your role with Mayfield, because one of the things I've always been impressed with you is that you always have a taste for innovation, you're not afraid to put the toe in the water or jump in the deep end where the technology is, these guys are lookin' for some trends, too. How do you advise some of these guys, how do you work with Mayfield, what's the relationship, how are they to work with, what's the intersection between Mayfield and you? >> Well the one thing that Mayfield does is they put together a conference, each Summer, that I love comin' down to, and I get to meet a lot of my counterparts and we talked about meeting with my counterparts in sports, but I love meetin' with my counterparts across all industries, and Mayfield makes that possible, they bring us all together with some really interesting speakers on a variety of topics not all directly tech related, so it's a great opportunity for me to just get outside of the daily routine, get outside the box, open my mind, and I just have to drop down the road to do it. So that's an example, another thing is, Mayfield, and other firms will come to me, and just say, "Hey, here's a technology we're evaluating, "they think it would be a great fit in sports, "what do you think?" And so, I can give them some valuable feedback, on company's they're evaluating, companies will come to us, and I might throw them their way, so it's really a two way street >> Great relationship, so you're a sounding board for some ideas, you get to peek into the future, I mean, we've interviewed entrepreneurs, successful entrepreneurs here, it's a seven, eight year build out, so it's almost like an eight year peek into the future. >> Yeah, and it's super valuable, especially given where we are geographically and our inclination toward being on the leading edge. >> I want to just end the segment by sayin', thanks for comin' in, and I want you to show the ring there, 'cause I always, can't stop starin' at the hardware, you got the ring there, the world champion. >> It's a few years old at the moment, we're going to have to get a new one sometime soon. >> We got to work on that, so is there any cutting edge technology to help you evaluate the best player, who you lookin' at next year, what's goin' on? What's the trades goin' on, share us-- >> Are we off the record now, 'cause I have a feeling you're asking this for personal reasons, for your squad, so. >> I'm a Red Sox fan of the AL, obviously, moved here 20 years ago, big fan of the Giants, I love comin' to the games, you guys do a great job, fan experience is great, you guys do great job and I'm looking forward to seeing a great season. >> Thanks, yeah, hope springs eternal this time of year, we always block off October and expect to be busy, but when we have it back, it just gives us an opportunity to get a head start on everybody. >> Well Bill, thanks for coming in, Bill Schlough, CIO for the San Francisco Giants, here on Sand Hill Road talkin' about the 50th anniversary of Mayfield, and this is the People First Network, getting ideas from entrepreneurs, industry executives, and leaders. I'm John Furrier with theCUBE, thanks for watching. (electronic music)

>> From Sand Hill Road in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's theCUBE presenting the People First Network, insights from entrepreneurs and tech leaders. >> Everyone, I'm John Furrier with theCUBE. We are here for a special conversation on Sand Hill Road at Mayfield's 50th anniversary, part of their People First Network. I'm here with Jonah Goodhart, co-founder and CEO of Moat, now with Oracle, sold their company in 2017, entrepreneur, serial entrepreneur. Thanks for joining me today. >> Thanks for having me, John, excited to be here. >> So we're talking before you came on camera. You've been an entrepreneur since you were a small kid doing all kinds of hustles and side things. What's happening with you now? Obviously, you sold your company in 2017, part of Oracle. Oracle not known for the entrepreneurial activity, but you brought that company in, still goin' on. Give us an update. >> So I started Moat back in 2010. Like you said in 2017, Oracle decided to make us an offer, and we decided to sell our company. And it's been frankly exciting for me to be part of a company that has a 40-year history in Oracle. To have a company that has played a pretty pivotal role in Silicon Valley. We're sitting here right in the heart of Silicon Valley, and to be a part of a company that I think is... So important to the future development of software and databases and hardware. I think is interesting and exciting. And certainly not the path that I thought I would be on, but I'm excited to be here today. >> It's always nice to have an entrepreneurial success the level you guys had. Great exit, the numbers that was reported almost close to a billion dollars in value to Oracle, sorry, the company you started. But you got a unique journey. You started with your brother. Was in New York. Take us through that journey. What were some of the things that you did? And how did it get started? What was the main drive? >> Sure, so I got to take us back a little bit. So I've been in business with my brother, Noah, for 20 years. So we started a company in the late 1990's when I was an undergrad at Cornell. And the Internet was going crazy. E-commerce companies were going public. And the first of everything was starting, the first Internet credit card, the first of x, y, and z, fill in the blank. And so we decided, sort of haphazardly at the time, that we would start a business. And we started by helping companies acquire customers using the Internet. And so we really built, I think in sort of looking back on it now, it was somewhat of a marketing agency but at the time we were building-- >> What year was that? >> This is '98, '98, '99. >> So sort right in Internet boom. Things are going crazy. >> Things are going crazy. We're in college. We were building email lists. We were essentially trying to figure out how do you tell stories and advertise online, but we didn't know we were doing that. We were just trying to simply make some money. I was working for $5 an hour at the Computer Center in Ithaca, New York at Cornell, and I didn't own a computer. So I'm sitting there. Part of the reason I worked for the Computer Center was 'cause I got 24-hour access to the Internet and to a computer. And so we started our first business there. And things went really well almost out of the gate. So '98, '99, and then 2000 happened. And 2001 happened, and the world changed. Business certainly changed. The so-called sort of bust of a lot of, I think, the ideas that people had. I think people realized that there was going to have to be real business that were built. And eventually those businesses were built in many cases. But I think it didn't happen the way that people expected. And we were certainly surprised by it. We were 21-year-old, I was 21 at the time. My brother was two years older than me. And so we had this business that was going really well, and then we sort of ran off of a cliff. And so were profitable, growing, on top of the world, and then hit a challenge. And it was one of the first business lessons that I really learned back in 2000, 2001, which is that you have to have something that is sticky. That's going to be able to stick around through the tough times. It can't only work when things are going up. It can't only work when people are spending money. And so we learned a lot of lessons about how do you build a long-term sustainable business. In 2002, someone that we had done business with for a couple years called me. And he said, "I'm going to start a new business. "And I think there's an opportunity to build a business "to trade digital advertising and to do it more effectively "and efficiently than has been done to date." This guy said, "I think there's something to be done. "I think now is the time to do it." My brother and I decided to partner with him. We decided to write a check to become his first client and to help him start a company that he started in 2002 called Right Media. Right Media ended up becoming a big success. It was the first big ad exchange. The first platform to trade digital advertising inventory. Yahoo! ended up acquiring the company in 2007. And so we were sort of on our way as entrepreneurs slash now investors, but enter the world of 2008. Once again, the economy changes. The world changes. And we start to think, "Alright, maybe when the market "goes down, when everything crashes, maybe that's the time "to start thinking about starting a new business. "Maybe when competition dries out a little bit "it's the right time to get back into building companies." And so Noah and I, my brother and I, decided, "Alright, let's go start a new business." And we got started with Moat in 2010. And it's been a pretty fun ride. >> And how long did you work on Moat for? How many years? >> So we started in 2010. We spent a year or two trying to figure out what we would do. Really got started in earnest in 2010. Raised, invested the initial amount of money ourselves through myself, and Noah, and our third partner, Mike Walrath, the guy from Right Media. And in 2011, raised the friends and family round. 2012, we're fortunate to get Mayfield to invest. And at that point was when our business really took off. So we ran the company from 2010 to 2012 with zero dollars in revenue. Mayfield invested in us when we had zero dollars in revenue. And things started to go off from there. So from 2012 to 2017 when we sold the company, we built a pretty sizable SaaS business. >> So interesting experiences as to Mayfield, no revenue, that's the way they like it. Like to build businesses. Take a piece of the action. You also did that early on. But I think what's interesting about your story, and I want to get your thoughts on this is that entrepreneurs sometimes they hit a wall and sometimes they can't get back up. You hit multiple kind of market timings. I'll say the bubble crash, 2001-2002 time frame. You mentioned 2008. Seeing transitions is a big part of having that entrepreneurial antenna, if you will, having a feeling for the market, knowing what the wave is, when to start, when to invest, invest in down markets. As you grew from that first venture and you're on top of the world, college, that first crash, how did you figure out the market transition kind of dynamic? What was, did it jump out at you? Was it just scar tissue? What was some of the feelings there? >> Yeah, I mean my view is that so the market changed, and we had all these expectations about our revenue was going to continue to grow forever, and our profits were going to continue to grow forever. And when the market changed and outside dynamics changed our business. This is Colonize. I'm talking about our first company. All of a sudden we went, "Uh oh, what do you now?" And I think it was more having lived through that experience that we said, "Alright, we need to figure out "when we build businesses, how do we build them "to be sort of fool-proof? "Or as much fool-poof as we can be. "How do we have something that's sticky, sustainable, "that can't simply be turned off with the ebb and flow "of the market?" And I think it, for me, taught me something which was you need to build something that's long-lasting. Something that is not driven by market conditions. If your business is driven by external market conditions, that should be a big signal that there's potentially a problem, 'cause if those conditions change you're going to be in a tough spot. And so we decided then and there, "Alright, we need "to really build businesses that are here for the long run." We sat on the board of Right Media, helped start the company, but we didn't operate it. Mike ran this company, and we watched. We watched very closely and carefully, and he did something else that was interesting. It's that he learned how to story tell. He learned how to think about where we were going as a business in Right Media not where we were. And so I combined, with my brother, these two themes. Sustainable, sticky business with storytelling. Think about where you're going not just where you are. And I think as we created Moat, we thought, "Alright, how do you actually turn that "into a long-term business?" And part of the way you do it is by trying to project forward, trying to think, "Alright, not what are we doing today? "But where are we going into the future?" And that really became a critical part of product development, a part of our vision, of where we wanted to be as a business. And I think it was a critical part of our success. >> What can other entrepreneurs learn from that? Because I think I see a lot of entrepreneurs here in Silicon Valley and around the world, now that entrepreneurship's kind of gone global, is they get stuck in with dogma and like, "We got to make this work." And sometimes they might not be self-aware that they might have to just take their head up and look around and get a feel for what's goin' on around them. What's your advice for those guys? >> I think you have to be honest with yourself. You know, as an entrepreneur, in your heart of hearts is what's happening to you real? You know, you should know I think, whether or not what's happening to you is because of some conditions, because of one customer that's doing something that's good or bad, or because of a broader trend or a broader movement. I try to ask questions about not just what does it look like a year from now or two years from now or three years from now? I think about the world ten years from now. What do I know to be the case ten years from now? I think this is something that Jeff Bezos talks about. Which is what do you for sure know is going to be the case with your business ten years from now? If you can plan towards that, you can build something that's sustainable. And so we knew ten years from now marketers are still going to want to reach people. They're still going to want to story tell. They're still going to want to measure how effective it was to actually reach those people. And so we knew that wouldn't change. What might change are the mechanisms. How they reach people, how they story tell, what platforms they do it on, whether it's Facebook or Snapchat or Pinterest or whatever the next new platform is, that may change. But the fact that marketers will need to reach people won't. And so we felt really confident that ten years from now that's going to still be the case. And I felt if you know that then you can build towards this vision and so-- >> Medium and the channels are all going to change all the time, but the stories need to be told. >> That's right, and interestingly, I think that when you start a business you come up with a theme. You come up with a vision. And so for us it was how do marketers tell their stories increasingly in a world that's digital? That's not something that's going to change overnight. And I felt like over the long haul that's not going to change very quickly. Increasingly we're going to be digital consumers, and marketers are going to have to tell their stories. Now the business that we started at Moat in 2010 ended up changing dramatically. We started a crowd-sourced creative marketplace. We ended as a measurement and analytics company. Pretty different place from creative. The vision was still the same. The vision was still about helping companies, marketers, tell their stories in a world that's increasingly digital. And if you look at successful businesses, they tend to have the same vision from when they started. Now the underlying business may change. Hopefully, the underlying business iterates and finds the right path, but the overall, the high level of where you're going ideally doesn't change. And I think that's part of the key to success. >> That's a great point. I think, I always get in a debate here among entrepreneurs and investors. The word pivot versus adjusting. When you have a North Star or a mission, you just got to kind of tack with the wind and make it a tailwind not a headwind versus a full pivot which might be, "Hey, there's no business here. "We have to do something different." Can you talk about the nuances between what a pivot is? And how you find that tailwind, the wind in the sails if you will, for the entrepreneur to hit that vision? >> Yeah, so first of all, any successful business that I've ever seen never starts off how it ends. In other words, there are always iterations that go through. Pick any company that you can think of right now. They've iterated. They've started off with one theme, and they've gone this slight different path. So I would argue that every good business is going to iterate. Now whether you want to call it a pivot or not, I think is more nomenclature or semantics. My view is you're going to iterate. They key is having that North Star. So in ten years, what do we believe to be the case? Forget about what do we believe, what do we know to be the case? What do we know this is going to be the case ten years from now? And if you're right about that then it can qualify as your North Star. By the way, if you don't know ten years from now this is going to be the case then maybe that shouldn't be your North Star. Maybe that shouldn't be the guiding light for your business. Once you get that part right then it almost frees you to be flexible. It frees you to say, "Okay, so if the world's moving "this way or that way, I'm going to adjust." One of the things that I learned from Moat was actually somebody gave me advice early on. They said, "Go have a thousand meetings. "Go have a thousand meetings in your industry, "in your category. "Go meet with every single person in the business." And I did that. It took me probably 18 months, but I went out and met with everyone who would take my meeting. What I learned from that is that in the B2B world we have an advantage. You can talk to your customers. Your customers will literally tell you, "Here are the issues we're having. "Here are the things we're trying to solve for. "If you can help us solve for this, we will pay you money "to provide a service to us to actually solve this problem." And so I learned, "Wow, that's pretty amazing!" If you actually meet with enough people, you get a sense of the market. You get a sense of what people are buying. You get a sense of the trends. As my oldest brother says, "The world kind of slows down "a little bit." Markets move in slow motion when you really get into it. And so if you go out and have a thousand meetings in your industry, you actually learn what's happening in that business. And you can tweak your business accordingly. I walked away with Moat feeling like if you're not in a meeting talking your story, telling your pitch, telling your vision, and they're not nodding their head going, "Yep, yep, yep, 100% on the same page." Then you're not in the right place. >> I love that comment about slowing the game down. Reminds me of baseball batters up there slowing that game down, watch that ball come in, really slow. And I think that's good advice because you want to slow it down. You want to make sure you're kind of capturing the right things that's happening at the right time, not try to go too fast. >> That's right. Things don't happen overnight. I think oftentimes when you're not in the industry, and you just read the headlines, you think, "Oh my God, that's crazy that this thing happened "and that thing happened!" When it's your space, it doesn't move quite that fast. There's work that has to be done. Contracts that have to be put in place. You see it evolving. And so I always tell people when you want to get to know an industry, read every single piece of content there is about the industry, read every article that comes out about it, and take as many meetings as you can possibly take in the space. And it'll slow down. It'll move at a pace that you can kind of go, "Got it! "It feels like if we do this and this then we can actually "start to build a business here." And again, I think there's a bright line test in B2B if you walk into a meeting and you start telling your story, and you're not getting the nods, and you're not getting the, "Yep, yep, yeah, "that's an issue for us." If that's not happening, then you're not in the right space. Doesn't mean your North Star is wrong, but it means you got to iterate a bit. >> You got to find your groove. I want to change gears a little bit and talk about this People First Network concept that I love because you hear, "Mobile first, cloud first." And the notion of people first, we live in a very social world now, you're seeing a lot of stuff happening where we're connected now almost with digital 100%. Everyone's kind of got mobile even in emerging countries you got connections. Yet there's a lot of new dynamics emerging on the social scene and checking around you're well-known for networking. You're known for connecting with people certainly in your area and beyond. And so there's two things I want to get your thoughts on. One is networks. Who to work with. How do I make decisions on? How do you want to spend your time with other entrepreneurs or other peers? And social entrepreneurship, there's a lot of emphasis around mission-driven things. These are people dynamics where you're starting to see the role of the relationships between people start to take a really important role in entrepreneurship not just, "Let's hire and fire fast." Certainly some basic business knowledge that's common sense. But as you're starting to see this next generation of entrepreneurs emerge, there's an eye on social, mission-driven, but spending time with the right people. What's your thoughts on that? >> So first of all, businesses are about people. In the end of the day, you want to do business with people that you like, with people that you trust, with people that you want to hang out with. That was one of the lessons I learned somewhat early on, and I think it's critical. Businesses are not automated. Businesses are about, "Alright, a group of people "come together with a shared idea of what they can do. "And they can hopefully go support a group of other people "who are trying to get their vision done." And so once you realize that, you realize it's about people. You want to build relationships. You want to build connections. You want to figure out, "Alright, how can I help people? "And hopefully with good karma something will happen "in my favor at some point." And so I always operate under the idea that you just try to do good, you try to help people, and hopefully as a result, good things will happen. In terms of social entrepreneurship what I would tell you is that having a mission that you feel deep down inside of you that is not just, "We're going to make money. "And we're going to deliver on behalf of shareholders." Yes, of course that's important. But when you wake up, and you go to work or you get online, you want to feel something for it. You want to feel like, "Alright, this is something "that I feel good about doing." When you do that, when you know that you've done it right, it doesn't feel like work. It doesn't feel like a job. It feels like you want to wake up, and you can't get enough of it. And I think that's when you know you've done something right. So I think the more that we can lead mission-driven businesses, mission-driven lives, the better that will be. In the end of the day, I think that life and business converge. I think in the end of the day when you do it right, it doesn't feel like work, and it doesn't feel like you're working or not working. It just feels like you're trying to do good, you're trying to help other people, and hopefully good things happen. >> Great stuff. The thing I love about digital is you start to see that blending of analog and digital where lives are now part of each other. If you could go back and be 18 and 20 again with all the tools that we have out there now, open-source at a whole new level, you have everyone's connected, what were some of the things that you would do? If you had to go back and talk to your 18-year-old self going into Cornell with your brother, a lot more on the table to play with. Certainly, it's easier to do ventures, easier to come up with ideas, maybe more lean. What are some of the things that you would do if you were in your 20's? >> Yeah, I guess if I went back I would tell myself to make big bets and make them on where you know the future is going to be ten years from now. I think oftentimes, particularly when I was a young entrepreneur, you were living day to day or week to week where you were going, "Alright, we need to get this thing done by this day "so that we can do this tomorrow." And so we need to fly and stay up all night and end up eating and sort of doing things that are not the best sort of health-wise in order just to try to get things done or what you thought would just get things done. I think I would play a longer game, and I would encourage myself to think about, "Alright, what do I know to be the case "ten years from now and how can I focus on that?" If we go back 20 some years, two or three of the biggest companies in the world were really created in Amazon, in Apple, in Google. And I think the opportunity existed back then. So if I could go back to my-- >> You'd buy some Apple stock for sure. (laughs) >> I don't know if I would bought Apple stock, but certainly I would've made longer term bets. What those companies do that I think is phenomenal is they think about where the world's going not where the world is today. >> I think that's great advice. And it's interesting, too. You go back, and you always, everyone has those experiences in life where they would say, "I could've been there "or there." Looking forward is the key. And I think one of the interesting things about your journey is you had the time in college, make some money, put some dough in your pocket. Then you go out and you have some cash. You make an investment. You ride the wave with Right Media, and then you go the venture-backed startup. Talk about the dynamics. Specifically the venture-backed startup, because now the dynamics are changed. I mean, hell, I might go do an ICL and suddenly get subpoenaed if I did that. But you got all kinds of new opportunities to get funded, either to venture capital, either with Mayfield. Different venture architecture there you mentioned, no revenue, but funding to go build it out. What was different about doing a venture-backed startup versus the other ones? >> Yeah, I guess what I would say is first of all we have to step back and realize that when we're in these industries, we have a hard time understanding what they're doing. What venture capitalists do is just what any money manager does. They're doing allocation of capital so that they can get returns for their investors. And so in the end of the day, they're trying to make bets. Now the bets that a venture capital makes are different from someone who's buying public equities for sure, but the same sort of ideals are there which is they want to make bets on the right companies, on the right people so that they can drive profits and returns and hopefully make a difference. In the case of Moat, we were really impressed by Mayfield. We were impressed by the way that they approached the conversation with us, the way that they leaned forward. I tell entrepreneurs when you have venture capitalist meetings if three out of ten of them go well, you're in the Hall of Fame. It's like baseball. Most of the time you're not going to get that perfect chemistry. You're not going to get that feeling where, "Ah, there's something interesting here." The other thing I tell entrepreneurs is if they're not leaning forward, if they're not going, "You know what we could do? "We could do this, this, and this. "I could connect you with so and so. "We could build a business doing this. "You should think about this." If they're not doing that, they're probably not the right fit. I think about it. I'm happily married for many years with four kids. When you meet your spouse you tend to know that that's the right person. If you have to go home and say, "Alright, why don't you "send me some reasons to try to justify "why you might be the right fit for me," maybe that's not the right spouse. I think it's the same thing with venture capitalism. You ultimately want to have chemistry. Again, it comes back to people. And so Mayfield I think does a really good job of thinking about people and putting people first in that conversation. >> And it's also a team environment almost because you want to have a spouse and a venture partner who's going to be there for the good, bad, and the ugly. >> That's right. >> And be there. And that's, I think a lot of people don't get that. They want the valuation, "Oh, I got a better deal." There's no better deal when you look at the long run impact of potentially making the wrong decision. >> One of the first things that Navin Chaddha from Mayfield said to me when I first met with him is he said, "This is going to take you seven to ten years "to build this business." And I thought, "Wow, that sounds like a long time!" >> I'm going to do it in three. >> Yeah, that seems crazy. (John laughing) But he was right, and one of the things that he said to me after they invested and we had gone through a couple quarters of working. I came in and I actually had pretty high expectations of what we could do as a business. I said, "Well, if we really push the accelerator "I think we could do this number instead of this number." And he said, "Relax. "We have plenty of time. "Don't try to knock it out of the park, "and you'll make mistakes if you do that. "Just try to deliver on the numbers that you think "you can deliver realistically. "And focus on building the business." And he was right. Having that approach is smart. It's not about, "Can I make this work next quarter?" It's about, "Can I make this work over the long run?" And I learned a lot in that process. >> Well, Jonah, I really appreciate the conversation. You're an inspiration to a lot of entrepreneurs out there. And congratulations on all your great success. I guess the question is what's next for you? You got that ten year vision. What's going to happen in the next ten years? Which wave will you be riding? >> Well, I think, increasingly, we're going to live in a connected society where data is information, and data is knowledge. And I think for me I'm excited about a future world where will we use more or less data to make decisions. I think more. Will we make smarter decisions over time? Hopefully smarter decisions over time. Will we be able to catch diseases earlier? I think so. Will we be able to leave longer lives? I think so. And so some of those things end up being themes-- (no audio) >> Great, Jonah Goodhart, at Oracle now, first a founder, entrepreneur, serial entrepreneur, here as part of theCUBE's People First Network series. I'm John Furrier. Thanks for watching. (upbeat electronic music)

(futuristic electronic music) >> From Sand Hill Road in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's theCUBE presenting the People First Network, insights from entrepreneurs and tech leaders. >> Alright, I'm John Furrier with theCUBE. We are here in Sand Hill Road at Mayfield for their 50th anniversary content program called the People First Network, co-created with theCUBE, and with Mayfield and their network. I am John for theCUBE, our next guest is Pradeep Sindhu who is the former co-founder of Juniper Now, the co-founder and CEO of Fungible, a start-up with a super oriented technology we're going to get into, but first, Pradeep, great to see you. >> It's great to see you again, John. >> For a 50th anniversary, there's a lot of history. And just before we get started, we were talking almost 10 years ago, you and I, we did a podcast on the future of the iPhone, only about a year in, maybe half a year. You had the vision, you saw the flywheel of apps, you saw the flywheel of data, you saw mobile. That's actually exchanges to IoT that we're seeing today, that world that's playing out. So, obviously, you're a visionary and an amazing entrepreneur. That's actually happening, so. You saw it and how did you adjust to that? What was some of the things that you did after seeing that vision? >> Well, some of the things that I did, if you recall our conversation, a big piece of that was data centers and the fact that the ideal computer is centralized. There are other things I want to make distributed, but it was obvious back then that people would build very large data centers. And the same problem that happened with the internet, which is how do you connect billions of people and machines to each other, was going to come to data centers themselves. So that is the problem that I prepared myself for, and that's the problem that we're trying to solve at Fungible as well. >> And one of the things we've been having great conversation was as part of this 50th anniversary, People First, is the role of entrepreneurship. What motivated you to do another start-up? You had that itch you were scratching? You were also at Juniper Network, huge success, everyone knows the history there and your role there. But this is a wave that we've never seen before. What got you motivated, was it an itch you were scratching? Was it the vision around the data? What was the motivator? >> It wasn't necessarily an itch I was scratching. I'm a restless person. And if I'm not creating new things, I'm not happy. That's just the way I'm built. And I also saw simultaneously the ability, or this potential, to do something special a second time for the industry. So I saw a big problem to which I could contribute. >> And what was that problem? >> So that problem really was, back then, I would say 2012, 2013, it was obvious that Moore's law was going to flatten out. That this technology called CMOS, on which we've been writing now for 35, 40 years, was not giving us the gain that it once was. And that, as a result of that, transistors that one people thought were plentiful are going to become precious again. And one result of that would be that general purpose CPUs which were doubling in performance, or had been doubling in performance every couple of years, would stop doing that. And the question I ask myself is, that when that happens, what next? And so it's in the pursuit of what next is what led me to start my second company, Fungible. >> So what's interesting, we've been seeing a lot of posts out there, some cases criticizing Intel, some saying Intel has a good strategy. You see Nvidia out there doing some great things. The earnings are doing fantastic. The graphics, my kids want the new GPU for their games. Even their being bought for the people who are doing cryptocurrency mining, so the power of the processor has been a big part of that. Is that a symptom or a bridge to a solution, or is that just kind of the bloated nature of how hardware's going? >> It's not so much the bloated nature of hardware as it is the fact that, see, general purpose microprocessors or general purpose computing was invented by John Mo-noy-man in the late 1940s. This was just a concept that you could conceive and build something which is Turing-equivalent, which is completely general. In other word, any program that any computer you could conceive could be run by this one general purpose thing. This notion was new. The notion for programmable computer. This notion is incredibly powerful and it's going to take on all of the world. And Intel today is the best proponent of that idea. And they're taking it to the limit. I admire Intel hugely. But so many people have worked on the problem of building general purpose processors, faster and faster, better and better. I think there's not a lot in left that tank. That is the architecture is now played out. We've gone to multi-core. Further, the base technology on which microprocessors are built, which is CMOS, is now reaching, is beginning to reach it's limits. We think, actually general concessions in the industry, and I particularly also think, that five nanometers is probably the last CMOS technology because technology's getting more and more expensive with every generation, but the gains that you are getting previously are not there anymore. So, to give you an example, from 16 nanometers to seven, you get about a 40% improvement in power but only about a 5% improvement in performance and clock speed, and, in fact, probably even less than that. And even the increase in the number of transistors, generation to generation, is not what is used to be. It used to be doubling every couple of years, now it's maybe 40%-50% improvement every two to three years. So with that trend and the difficulty of improving the performance of general purpose CPUs, the world has to come up with some other way to provide improved performance, power performance, and so on. And so those are the fundamental kinds of problems that I am interested in. Prior to Juniper, my interest in computing goes back a long ways. I've been interested in computing and networking for a very long time. So one of the things that I concluded back in 2012, 2013, is that because of the scarcity of Silicon performance, one of the things that's going to happen is people are going to start to specialize computing engines to solve particular problem. So, what the world always wants is, they want agility, which is the ability to solve problems quickly, but they also want the ability to go fast. In other words, do lots of work per unit time, right? Well, those things are typically in conflict. So, to give you an example, if I built a specialized hardware engine to solve one and only one problem, like solving cryptocurrency problems, I can build it to be very fast. But then tomorrow if I want to turn around and use that same engine and do something different, I cannot do it. So it's not agile, but it's very fast. >> It's like a tailor-made suit. >> It's like a tailor-made suit. >> You're only wearing one-- >> It does one thing. >> You put on a little weight, you got to (chuckles), you get a new one. >> Exactly. So this trade off between agility and performance is fundamental. And so, general purpose processors can do any computation you can imagine, but if I give you a particular problem, I can design something much better. So now as long as Silicon was improving the performance every couple of years, there's no incentive to come up with new architectures. General purpose CPUs are perfect. Well, what you are seeing recently is the specialization of the engines of computing. First was GPUs. GPUs were invented for graphics. Graphics, the main computation of graphics is lots and lots of floating point numbers where the same arithmetic applies to an array of numbers. Well, people then figured that I can also do problems in AI, particularly learning and inferencing, using that same machinery. This is why Nvidia is in a very good place today. Because they have not only an engine, called a GPU, which does these computations very well, but also language that makes it easy to program, called CUDA. Now, it turns out that in addition to these two major types of computing engines, one which is general purpose compute, which is invented a long time ago, and the other one which is called a signal instruction multiple data type of SIMD engine. This was invented maybe 30 years ago in mainframes. Those are the two major types of engines and it turns out that there's a third type of engine that will become extraordinarily useful in the coming world. And this engine we call the DPU, for data processing unit. And this is the engine that specializes in workloads that we call data-heavy. Data intensive. And, in fact, in a world which is going from being compute-centric to data-centric, this kind of engine is fundamental. >> I mean, the use cases are pretty broad, but specific. AI uses a lot of data, IoT need data at the edge. Like what the GPU did for graphics, you're thinking for data? >> That is correct. So the DPU, let's talk about what the DPU can and cannot do. And maybe I can define what makes a workload data-centric. There's actually four characteristics that make a workload data-centric. One is that the work always comes in the form of packets. Everybody's familiar with packets. Internet is built using packets. So that one is no surprise. Second one has a given server. Typically serves many, many hundreds, maybe thousands, of computations concurrently. So there's a lot of multiplexing of work going on. So that the second characteristic. The third characteristic is that the computations are stateful. In other words, you don't just read memory, you read and write memory, and the computations are dependent. So you can't handle these packets independently of one another. >> I think that's interesting because stateful application are the ones that need the most horsepower and have the most inadequacy right now. APIs, we love the APIs, restless APIs, no problem. Stateless. >> Stateless. Stateful, by the way, is hard. It's hard to make stateful computations reliable. So the world has made a lot of progress. Well, the fourth characteristic, which is maybe even a defining one, but the other ones are very important also, is that if you look at ratio of input/output to arithmetic, it's high for data-centric calculations. Now, to give you-- >> Which high, I is higher, O is higher, both? >> I/O, input/output. >> I/O, input and output? But not just output? >> Not just input, not just output. Input/output is high compared to the number of instructions you execute for doing arithmetic. Now, traditionally it was very little I/O, lots of computation. Now we live in world which is very, very richly connected, thanks to the internet. And if you look inside data centers, you see the same, it's a sort of Russian dolls kind of thing. And the same structure inside which is you have hundreds of thousands to maybe millions of servers that are connected to each other, that are talking to each other. The data centers are talking to each other. So the value of networks as we know is maximized at large scale. The same thing is happening inside data centers also. So the fact that things are connected east-west and is any-to-any way, it is what leads to the the computations becoming more data-centric. >> Pradeep, I love this conversation because I've been banging my head on all my CUBE interviews for the past eight years saying that cloud is horizontally scalable. The data world has been not horizontally scalable. We've had data warehouses. Put it into a database, park it over there. Yeah, we got Hadoop, I got a data lake, and then what happens? Now you got GDPR and all these other things out there. You got a regulatory framework that people don't even know where their data is. But when you think about data in the way you're talking about it, you're talking about making data addressable. Making it horizontally scalable. And then applying DPU to solve the problem, rather then try to solve it here in the path of, or the bus if you will, I don't know what to call it, but-- >> The thing to call it is, it's the backplane off a data center. So the same way that a server, a mainframe, has a backplane where all the communications go through. Well, inside a data center, you have this notion of a network which is called a fabric of the data center. It's the backplane off the data center. >> So this is a game changer, no doubt. I can see it, I'd love to get, I can't wait to see the product announcements. But what is the impact to the industry, because now you're talking about smaller, faster, cheaper, Which has been kind of the Moore's law. Okay, the performance hasn't been there but we've had general purpose agility. Now you have specialism around the processor. You now have more flexibility in the architecture. How does that blend in with cloud architectures? How does that blend into the intelligent edge? How that fit into the overall general architecture? >> Great question. Well, the way it blends into cloud architecture is that there's one and one thing that distinguishes cloud architectures from previous architectures, and that's the notion of scale-out. So let me just maybe define scale-out for the audience. Scale-out essentially means having a small number of component types like storage servers and compute servers, identical. Put in lots of them because I can't make individual one faster, so the next best thing is to put lots of them together. Connect them by very fast network that we call a fabric, and then have the collection of these things provide you more computing and faster computing. That's scale-out. Now scale-out is magical for lots of reasons. One is that you deliver much more reliable services because individual things failing don't have an effect anymore, right? The other thing is that the cost is as good as it can get because you're doing, instead of building very, very specialized things, a few of them, you're building many, many, many things, which they are more or less identical. So those two things, the economics is good, the agility is great, and also the reliability is great. So those three things is what drive cloud architecture. Now the thing that we talked about, which is specialization of the engines inside cloud. So we had, up until now, the cloud architecture was, is homogenous scale-out servers, all x86 based. What we're entering is a phase that I would call heterogeneous specialized scale-out engines. So you are seeing this already, x86, GPUs, TPUs, which are tensor flow processors, FPGAs. And then you're going to have DPUs coming, and in this ecosystem, DPUs are going to play two roles. One which is to offload from x86 and GPUs those computations that they don't do very well, the data-centric computations. But the second one is to implement a fabric that allows these things to be connected very well. Now you had asked about the edge. Specialization of computing engines is not going to be sufficient. We have to do scale-out more broadly in a grander sense. So in addition to these massively scalable data centers, we're going to have tens of thousands of smaller data centers closer to where the data is born. We talked about IoT. There's no reason to drag data thousands of miles away if you don't have to. >> Latency kills. >> Latency kills for some applications, it's in fact deadly. So putting those data centers where both computing and storage is near the source of data is actually very good. It's also good from the standpoint of security. At least it makes people feel good that, hey, the data is located maybe 10, 20 kilometers away from me, not 10,000 kilometers away where maybe it's a different government, maybe I won't have access to my data or whatever. So we're going to see this notion of scale-out play in a very general way. Not just inside data centers, but also in the sense that the number of data centers is going to increase dramatically. And so now you're left with a networking problem that connects all these data centers together. (John chuckles) So some people think-- >> And you know networking? >> I know a little bit about networking. So some people say that, hey, networking is all played out, and so on. My take is that there is pressure on networking and network equipment vendors to delivery better and better cost per bit per second. However, networking is not going out of style. Let's be very clear about that. It is the life blood of the industry today. If I take away the internet, or DCIP for example, everything falls apart, everything that you know. >> Well, this often finds-- >> So, the audience should know that. >> Yeah, well, we didn't really bang on the drum. We seen a real resurgence in networking, in fact, I covered some of Cisco's events and also Juniper's as well, and you just go back a few years, all these network engineers, they used to be the kings of the castle. They ran the show. Now they're kind of like, cloud-natives taking it over, and you mentioned serverless. I mean, heterogeneous environment, it's essentially serverless, Lambda and other cool things are happening, but what we're seeing now is, and again, this ties back to your apps conversation 10 years ago, and your mention about the DPU and edge, is that the paradigm at the state level is a network construct. You have a concept of provisioning services, you have concepts of connectionless, you have concepts of state, stateless, and that right now is a big problem with things like Kubernetes, although Kubernetes is amazing, enabling a lot of workloads to be containerized, but now don't talk to each other. Sounds like a network problem. >> Well, it is-- >> These are network problems. Your thoughts. >> When you look, so networking is really fundamental, at one level, so as I've said, there are three horsemen of infrastructure. There is compute which is essentially transforming information in some way. By doing some form of arithmetic. I don't mean one plus one gets two. I mean generalized manipulation of data. You have some input, you do some computation, you get some output. That's one entity. Another entity is storage, which is general purpose storage. I put something in there, I want to come back later and retrieve it. And it needs to be resilient, ie. resistant to failures. The third piece of the puzzle is networking, and the kind of networking that is the most useful is any-to-any networking, which is what TCIP gives you. So, essentially these three things are three sides of the same coin, and they work together. It's not as if one is more important than the other. The industry may have placed different values, but if you look down at the fundamentals, these three things go hand in hand. >> What's interesting to me and my observations, we have an internal slide that we used in our company, it's a content, our content pillars, if you will, and they're concentric circles. Data center, cloud, AI, data, and BotChain crypto. Data being like big data now, AI. Right in the middle is IoT, security and data. You're inventing a new category of data. Not classic data. Data warehousing-- >> This is agile data. At the end of the day, what we want to build is engines and platform for data processing, taken to it's limit. So, to give you an example, with the engines that we have, we should be able to store data with arbitrary levels of reliability. I really mean that. >> Stateful data. >> Stateful data, that is, I put data in one place, I can keep it securely, in other words, it's cryptographically, it's encrypted. It is resilient, and it's distributed over distance so that I could come back a hundred years later and find it still there, and nobody can hack it. So these are the things that are absolutely necessary in this new world, and the DPUs going to be a key enabler of providing-- >> So just to tie it all together is the DPU, the data processing unit, that you're inventing. Is the glue layer in the heterogeneous world of cloud architecture? Because if you're offloading and you have a fabric-- >> That's one role. That's one role. The glue layer that enabling a fabric to rebuild is one of the roles of the DPU. The second role, which is really, really important, is to perform data-centric calculations that CPUs and GPUs do not do very well. So, on data-centric calculations, the four things that I told you about, we're about 30 times better price performance and power performance compared to either GPU or TPU, on those calculations. And to the extent of those calculations are really important, and I think they are, the DPU will be a necessary component. >> Pradeep, I've been getting a lot of heat on Twitter, well, I'm on social media, I know you're not, but I've been saying GDPR has been a train wreck. I love the idea, we want to protect our privacy, but anyone who knows anything about storage and networking knows that storage guys don't know where their databases are. But the use cases that they're trying to solve are multi-database. So, for instance, if you do a retail transaction, you're in a database. If you're doing an IoT transaction in your self-driving car that need data from what you just bought, the idea of getting that data is almost impossible. They would have to know that you want the data. Now that's just two databases, imagine bringing-- >> Hundreds. >> Hundreds of databases. Everything, signaling in. It's a signaling process problem. Part of the problem. >> Part of the problem is that data is kept in many, many, many different formats. I don't think one can try to come up with a universal format for data, it won't work. So generally what you need to do is be able to ingest data in multiple formats. And do it in real time, store it reliably, and then process it very quickly. So this is really the analytics problem. >> Well, congratulations, the future of Silicon Valley is coming back as a chip, a chip that you're making? >> We are making a chip. What's very important for me to say is that this chip is, or it's a series of chips, these are programmable. They're fully programmable. But they're extraordinarily powerful. >> Software-defiant chip sets coming online. Pradeep, thanks for spending the time. >> You're welcome. >> I'm John Furrier, here at Sand Hill Road for the People First Network, theCUBE Presents. I'm John Furrier, thanks for watching. (futuristic electronic music)

>> From Sand Hill Road, in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's theCUBE! Presenting the People First Network, insights from entrepreneurs and tech leaders. >> Hello everyone, I'm John Furrier with theCUBE. We are here on Sand Hill Road at Mayfield's Venture Capital Headquarters for the People First Network. I'm here with Pradeep Sindhu, who's the co-founder of Juniper Networks and now the co-founder and CEO of Fungible. Thanks for joining me on this special conversation for the People First Program. >> Thank you, John. >> So I want to talk to you about entrepreneurship. You're doing a new startup, you've been so successful as an entrepreneur over the years, uh you keep building a great company at Juniper Networks, everyone kind of knows the success there, great success. We've interviewed you before on that, but now you got a new startup! >> I do. >> You're building a company I thought startups were for young people. (Pradeep laughs) Come on! We're nine years into our startup, we're still a startup. >> Well, I'm not quite over the hill yet. (John Laughs) One of the reasons I jumped back in to the startup world was I saw an opportunity to solve a very important industry problem and to do it rapidly and so, I took the step. >> Well, we're super excited that you shared your vision with us and folks can check that video out on theCUBE and deep dive on the future of that startup. So, it's exciting, check it out. Entrepreneurship has changed and one of the things that we're talking about here is how things have changed just since the last time you've done a round. I mean, you're now a couple years in, you've been stealth for a while building out this amazing chip, the the Data Processing Unit, the DPU. What's different about building companies now? I mean, are you a unicorn? You have a billion-dollar evaluation yet? I mean, that's the new bar, it's different. What are some of the differences now in building a company? >> You know, one thing, John, that I saw is a clear difference between when I started Juniper and started Fungible, is that the amount of bureaucracy and paperwork that one has to go through is tremendously larger. And this was disappointing because one of the things that the US does very well is to keep it light and keep it fast so that it's easy for people to create new companies. That was one difference. The other difference that I saw was actually reluctance on the part of Venture to take big bets. Because people had gotten used to the idea of a quick turn around with maybe a social media company or something. Now, you know, my tendency to work on problems is I tend to work on fundamental problems that take time to do, but the outcome is potentially large. So, I'm attracted to that kind of problem. And so, the number of VCs that were willing to look at those kinds of problems were far fewer this time around than last time. >> So you got some no's then? >> Of course, I got no's. Even from people that-- >> You're the Founder of Juniper Networks, you've done amazing things, like you created billions of dollars of value, you should be gold-plated. >> What you did 20 years ago only goes so far. I think what what people were reluctant, and remember, I started Fungible in 2015. At that time, silicon was still a dirty word. I think now there are several people who said, no, we're regretting because they see that it's kind of the second coming of silicon and it's for reasons that we have talked about in the other discussion that, you know, Moore's Law is coming to a close. And that the largest that it was distributing over the last 30, 40 years is going away so what we have to do is we have to innovate on silicon. You know, as we discussed, the world has only seen a few architectures for computing engines on silicon. One of the things that makes me very happy is that now people are going to apply their creativity to painting on this canvas. >> So, silicon's got some new life blood. What's your angle with your silicon strategy? >> So, our silicon strategy is really to focus on one aspect of computations in the data center and this aspect we call Data Centric Computing. Data Centric Computing is really computing where there's a lot more movement of data and lot less arithmetic on data. And today, giving scaled out architectures, data has to move and be stored and retrieved and so on as much as it has to be computed on. So, existing engines are not very good at doing these Data Centric Computations, so we are building a programmable DPU to actually do those computations much, much better than any engine can today. >> And that's great. And just a reminder, we got a deep dive on that topic, so check out the video on that. So, I got to ask you the question, why are people resistant at the silicon trend? Was it trendy? Was it the lack of information? You almost see people almost less informed on computer architecture these days as people Blitzscale for SASPA businesses. Cloud certainly is great for that , but there's now this renaissance. Why was it, what was the problem? >> I think the problem is very easy to identify. Building silicon is expensive. It takes very specialized set of skills. It takes a lot of money, and it takes time. Well, anything that takes a long time is risky. And Venture, while it likes risk, it tries to minimize it. So, it's completely understandable to me that, you know, people don't want to take, they don't want to put money in ventures that might take two, three years. Actually, you know, going back to the Juniper era, there are Venture folks, I won't name them, but who said, well, if you could do this thing in six months, we're in, but otherwise no. >> How long did it take? >> 2 1/2 years. >> And then the rest is history. >> Yeah. >> So, there's a lot of naysayers, it's just categorical kind of like, you know, courses for horses for courses, as they say, that expression. All right, so now with with your experience, okay, you got some no's, how did that, how did that make you feel? You're like, damn, I got to get out and do the rounds? >> Actually-- >> You just kind of moved on or? >> I just moved on because, you know, the fact that I did Juniper should not give me any special treatment. It should be the quality of the idea that I've come up with. And so, what I tried to do, my response was to make the idea more compelling, sharpen it further, and and try to convince people that, hey there was value here. I think that I've not been often wrong about predicting things maybe two, three years out, so on the basis of that people were willing to give me that credibility, and so, there were enough people who were interested in investing. >> What did you learn in the process? What was the one thing that you sharpened pretty quickly? Was it the story, was it the architecture message? What was the main thing that you just had to sharpen really fast? >> The thing I had to sharpen really fast was while the technology we were developing is disruptive, customers really, really care, they don't want to be disrupted. They actually want the insertion to be smooth. And so, this is the piece that we had to sharpen. Anytime you have a new technology, you have to think about, well, how can I make it easy for people to use? This is very, very important. >> So the impact to the architecture itself, if it was deployed in the use case, and then look at the impact of ripple effect. >> For example, you cannot require people to change their applications. That's a no-no. Nobody's going to rewrite their software. You also probably don't want to ask people to change their network architecture. You don't want to ask people to change their deployment model. So, there are certain things that need to be held constant. So, that was a very quick learning. >> So, one of the other things that we've been talking about with other entrepreneurs is okay, the durability of the company. You're going down, playing the long game, but also innovation and and attracting people and so you've done, built companies before, as with Juniper, and you've worked with a great team of people in your network. How did you attract people for this? Obviously, they probably were attracted on the merit of the idea, but how do you pick people? What's the algorithm? What's the method that you use to choose team members or partners? Because that's also super important. If you got a gestation period where you're building out. You got to have high quality DNA. How do you make that choice? What's the thought process? >> So John, the the only algorithm that I know works is to look for people that are either known to you directly or known to somebody that you trust because in an interview, it's a hit or miss. At least, I'm not so good at interviewing that I can have a 70, 80% success rate. Because people can fake it in an interview, but you cannot fake it once you've worked with somebody, so that's one very important test. The other one was, it was very important for me to have people who were collaborative. It is possible to find lots of people who are very smart but they are not collaborative. And in an endeavor like the one we're doing, collaboration is very important, and of course the base skill set is very important so, you know, almost half of our team is software because we are-- >> It's a programmable chip. >> It's a programmable chip. We're writing our own operating system, very lightweight. So, you need that combination of hardware and software skills which is getting more and more scarce regrettably. >> I had a chat with Andy Bechtolsheim at VMworld and he and I had a great conversation similar to this, he said, you know, hardware is hard, software is easier, (laughs) and that was his point, and he also was saying that with merchant silicon, it's the software that's key. >> It is absolutely the key. Software, you know, software is always important. But software doesn't run on air. We should also remember that. And there are certain problems, for example, switching packets inside a data center where the problem is reasonably well-solved by merchant silicon. But there are other problems for which there is no merchant silicon solution, like the DPU that we're talking about. Eventually, there might be. But today there isn't. So, I think Apple is a great example for me of a company that understands the value of software hardware integration. Everybody thinks of Apple as a software only company. They have thousands of silicon engineers, thousands. If you look at your Apple Watch, there are probably some 20 chips inside it. You look at the iPhone. It won't do the magic that it does without the silicon team that they have. They don't talk about it a lot on purpose because-- >> 'Cause they don't want a China chip in there. >> Well, they don't want a China chip, but not only that, they don't know to advertise. It's part of their core value. >> Yeah. >> And so, as long as people keep believing that everything can be done in software, that's good for Apple. >> So, this is the trend, and this is why, Larry also brought this up years ago when he was talking about Oracle. He tried to make the play that Oracle would be the iPhone of the data center. >> Mm-hmm. >> Which people poo-pooed and they're still struggling with that idea, but he was pointing out the benefit of the iPhone, how they are integrating into the hardware and managing what Steve Jobs always wanted which was security number one >> Absolutely. >> for the customer. >> And seamlessness of use. And the reason the iPhone actually works as well as it does is because the hardware and the software are co-designed. And the reason it delivers the value that it does to the company is because of those things. >> So you see, this as a big trend, now you see that hardware and software will work together. You see cloud native heterogeneous almost server-less environments abstracted away with software and other components, fabric and specialized processors? >> Yes. >> And just application developers just programming at will? >> Correct, and edge data centers, so computing, I would say that maybe in a decade we will see roughly half of the computing and storage being done closer to the edge and the remaining half being done in these massively skilled data centers. >> I want to get geeky with you for a second, I want to ask you a question, I want to get your take on something. I've been thinking about and haven't really talked publicly about, kind of said on theCUBE a few times in a couple interviews, but I want to get your thoughts. There's been a big discussion about hybrid cloud, private cloud, multi-cloud, all that stuff going on, and I was talking with Andy Jassy, the CEO of Amazon, and Diane Greene at Google and I'm like okay, I can buy all these definitions, I don't believe any of 'em, but, you know, what the hell does that mean, what I know. I said to Diane Greene, I said, well, if everyone's going cloud operations, if cloud operations and edge is the new paradigm, isn't the data center just a big fat edge? And she looked at me and said, hmm, interesting. So, is the data center ultimately just a device on this network? If the operating model is horizontally scalable, isn't it just a a big fat edge? >> So you can, so here's the thing, right, if we talk about, you know, what is cloud? It's essentially a particular architecture, which is scaled out architecture uh to build a data center and then having this data center be connected by a very fast network. To consumers anytime, anywhere. So, let's take that as the definition of cloud. Well, if that's the definition of cloud, now you're talking about what kind of data centers will be present over time, and I think what we observed was it's really important for many applications to come, and with the advent of 5G, with the advent of things like augmented reality, now, with the advent of self-driving cars, a lot of computing needs to be done close to the edge because it cannot be done, because of laws of physics reasons, it cannot be done far away. So, once you have this idea that you also have small scale out data centers close to the edge, all these arguments about whether it's a hybrid cloud or this cloud or that cloud, they kind of vanish because-- >> So, you agree then, it's kind of like an edge? >> It is. >> Because it's an operational philosophy if you're running it that way, then it's just what it is, it's a scale out entity. >> Correct. >> It could be a small sensor network or it could be a data center. >> Correct. So, the key is actually the operational model and the idea of using scaled out design principles, which is don't try to build 50,000 different types of widgets which are then hard to manage. Try to build a small set of things, tinker toys that you can connect together in different ways. Make it easy to manage, manage it using software, which is then centralized by itself. >> That's a great point. You you jumped the gun on me on this one. I was going to ask you that next question. As an entrepreneur who's looking at this new architecture you just mentioned, what advice would you give them? How should they attack this market? 'Cause the old way was you get a PowerPoint, you show a presentations of the VCs, they give you some money, you provision some hardware, you go on next generation, get a prototype, it's up and running, you got some users. Built it then you get some cash, you scale it (laughs). Now with this new architecture, what's the strategy of the eager entrepreneur who wants to create a valuable opportunity with this new architecture. What would you advise them? >> So I, you know, I think it really depends on what is the underlying technology that you have for your startup. There's going to be lots and lots of opportunities. >> Oh don't fight the trend, which is, the headwind would be, don't compete against the scale out. Ride that wave, right? >> Yeah, people who are competing against scale out by building large scale monolithic machines, I think they're going to have difficulty, there's fundamental difficulties there. So, don't fight the trend. There's plenty of opportunities for software. Plenty of opportunities for software. But it's not the vertical software stack that you have to go through five or six different levels before you get to doing the real work. It's more a horizontal stack, it's a more agile stack. So, if it's a software company, you can actually build prototypes very quickly today. Maybe on AWS, maybe on Google Cloud, maybe on Microsoft. >> So, maybe the marketing campaign for your company, or maybe the trend might that's emerging is data first companies. We heard cloud mobile first, cloud first, data first. >> Correct. We think that the world really, the world of infrastructure is going from compute centric to data centric. This is absolutely the case. So, data first companies, yes. >> All right, so final question for you, as someone who's had a lot of experience in building public company, multi-billions of dollars of value, embarking on a big idea that that we like, I love the idea. A lot of people struggle with the entrepreneurial equation of how to leverage their board, how to leverage their investors and advisors and service providers. What would you share to the folks watching that are out there that have struggled? Some think, oh the VCs, they don't add value. Some do, some don't. There's always missed reactions. There's different, different types out there. Some do, some don't. But in general, it's about leveraging the resources and the people involved. How should entrepreneurs leverage their advisors, their board, their investors? >> I think it's very important for an entrepreneur to look for complementarity. It's very easy to want to find people that think like you do. If you just find people that think like you do, you're not, they're not going to find weaknesses in your arguments. It's more difficult, but if you look to entrepreneurs to provide complementarity, you look to advisors to provide the complementarity, look to customers to give you feedback, that's how you build value. >> Pradeep, thanks so much for sharing the insight, a lot of opportunities. Thanks for sharing here on-- >> Thank you, John. >> The People Network. I'm John Furrier at Mayfield on Sand Hill Road for theCUBE's coverage of the People First Network series, part of Mayfield's 50th Anniversary. Thanks for watching. (upbeat music)