AS4 Class suggestions
I was excited about taking this course because it combined education with business in a public forum. I enjoyed the assignments and the opportunity to synthesize education and business. Some ideas occurred to me: PROF INPUT 1. I was interested to read some of the prof’s own venture efforts and hoped to learn more from […]
Continue reading AS4 Class suggestions Posted in: Uncategorized
mcquaid 12:26 pm on November 30, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Just to play the EVAA role, here (Educational Venture Analyst Antagonist)… with today’s technology, it would actually be possible to project a presentation on the inside of an elevator. If I was in an elevator with someone, and they could show me their ideas in that way, I would be seriously impressed.
I agree with your purist ideas of the pitch… (length, personal touch, etc.), but I think that the pitches can advance a bit with the times as well. Heck… many years ago, what may they have been called… hydraulic lift pitches? Funicular Pitches? Archimedes’ lifting device pitch? “So… Hiero… I have this idea about figuring out if your crown is pure gold or not, but I’ll need to use the crown. Here, hop on my lift with me. I’ll tell you about it…”
David William Price 12:42 pm on November 30, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Again, it’s not about the technology, it’s about the personal credibility. It’s about demonstrating your confidence, passion, and grasp of the issues by speaking directly face-to-face with someone. It’s about selling yourself, not the idea. Ideas really are dime a dozen. The investor’s interest is whether they should invest in you, initially with time, later with resources and contact.
schiong 6:08 pm on November 30, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply
hi,
A person without product … I guess a conman would probably win the race.
cheers,
Steve
David William Price 6:21 pm on November 30, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply
A conman gets your attention. Then you do your due diligence before making an investment.
David William Price 12:48 pm on November 30, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Perhaps to help put things in perspective… Winklevoss vs Zuckerberg?
bcourey 2:40 pm on November 30, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply
My concern with most of the face-to-face videos I see on YouTube that are pitching their products are so amateurish that they defeat the purpose in my opinion..hollow acoustics, bad shadowing, bad lighting, bad angles….unless a person is willing to spend the bucks and get one done professionally with proper lighting, sound system and a great backdrop, I believe I am making a better impression with a powerpoint.
Deb Kim 4:16 pm on November 30, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I agree with you, Brenda. Rather than presenting myself under bad shadowing and bad lighting, I’d make it more professional with a powerpoint. For my elevator pitch, although I only used my voice (not myself infront of the camera), I still spent a tremendous amount of time and effort. Many of the elevator pitch that I watched didn’t have the F2F videos, I still liked them a lot. For example, Doug’s elevator pitch only had his voice, but it still looked very professional.
Deb
David William Price 6:26 pm on November 30, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I think you’re really misunderstanding this post. I am not suggesting that as a business entrepreneur you video yourself doing a pitch then send people links to that video.
A real elevator pitch is something you do in person when you bump into someone. While you may want to produce an attractive ad to sell your idea, that’s not even an option in that circumstance. I am encouraging people to focus on the experience of creating that pitch and delivering it. This assignment was both an opportunity to share your pitch through video, and to comment about the role of pitches for entrepreneurs.
An investor relies on you to actually make the business work. The good impression you want to create comes from you speaking in person with warmth and passion.
Stephen makes the point about con men. Well, what do con men do? They develop your trust based on talking to you. That’s step one. The next step is then to provide necessary information for due diligence, so you can establish what they claim is true.
Deb Giesbrecht 5:37 pm on November 30, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply
yikes – I take back all my positive comments. Technology is about how you use it and if it can benefit your case by all means.
David William Price 6:29 pm on November 30, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply
“I take back all my positive comments”
Grad seminars are about sharing diverse perspectives and challenging your own comfort zone. I’d encourage you to consider the post in the spirit it was intended… encouraging people to go out and sell themselves in person, face-to-face, and establish their personal credibility.
Deb Giesbrecht 7:41 pm on November 30, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Missed the spirit of encouragement. I am all for constructive criticism – constructive being the key word. Constructive criticism will be incorporated into each of our marks with comments on how to improve when David sends out our final evaluations. I think educators have a propensity to be critical – as that is the nature of their role – some how in the guise of trying to improve character or behavior. Nurses on the other hand tend to nurture – believing we can attract more bees with honey versus vinegar.
This course was well beyond my comfort zone as it was – I am not from a business background and likely would not have ventured into this material had I known how much it strayed from traditional course work in this program – so I applaud everyone who actually finished the assignment – powerpoint or not. I am truly amazed at the creativity and diversity (and tech savvy ) ideas that came across and applaud the diversity of presentations. Truly a reflection of a resilient and creative group.
I do not use elevator pitches in my personal, professional or academic life – and am still able to eek out a truly successful career and personal life and have based a long successful working history on personal credibility built on honesty and fairness. I did not have to sell anything – I have no plans on changing my habits.
schiong 6:14 pm on November 30, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Hi David,
I think you make a very good point about selling oneself.
I will remember that if I need to pitch in the future.
cheers,
Steve
Allie 10:44 am on December 1, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Hi David,
I wanted to say thanks for the time and effort you put into critiquing my E- and VP; you were really rigorous, and I’ll be taking your comments into account in further revisions should I pursue my idea. I have to say, when you wrote that your evaluations may be ‘cold,’ I immediately thought: uh-huh. And I came away from your critiques relatively unscathed.
I know that you’re intending your contributions to be ultimately encouraging and constructive, but I’m not sure they’re playing out that way. In truth, to my eyes/ears, they sound a little less ‘hey, let’s develop this nugget of awesomeness,’ and more ‘you(r work) SUCKS.’ I completely get that you’re playing the role of a prospective investor, and that that world isn’t sunshine, lollipops and rainbows. However, even in that *virtual* scenario, your – and all of our – *actual* roles as educators and colleagues never go away. I think this is especially the case when we’re doing all of this in public. People’s professional identities are on the line. True confession: I’m glad that the name that I use professionally isn’t attached to a publicly accessible, itemized list of my (work’s) deficiencies. Especially since I’m on the job market.
I guess, what I want to say is that while I appreciate that you bring a very rigorous approach to your critiques, I think – no, make that I know – that one can be both tough and rigorous, and kind. I know this because I learned from the best – in my previous life, I was pursuing a research career before deciding to pursue education; my doctoral adviser is tough, bloody demanding, and *hella supportive* at the same time**. She pushed me further than I thought I could go, and I always knew she had my back. I’ve been an adjunct prof for three years at UBC, and I continually draw on her example in working with my own students. Not that I’m always successful, but, you know, work in progress.
I also think that as educators/education students – with feedback and evaluation forming a huge part of what we do professionally – the onus is on us to develop and role model effective feedback/eval techniques and mechanisms that genuinely facilitate growth. It’s our social role, and perhaps our competitive advantage too.
Like… everyone else?… writing an E- and VP is completely new to me. This was my very first go, and I think I did pretty well especially given that I’m more conversant in Marxist critique than in venture capitalism (another true confession: kinda glad that isn’t publicly associated with my professional identity given job market ;). The only similar experience I have is writing grant and fellowship proposals – equally tough market and crowd, and equally dependent on making a solid, well researched case. Just like this class, in graduate school, we wrote and workshopped proposals that we submitted to national and international competitions. I have a pretty good record, but I’m glad that first attempt of mine from my first year of my Master’s isn’t floating out there on the internet.
yours,
Allie
**I have to say, her critiques – which could be blistering – were always contained within closed, confidential environments. She simply wouldn’t put us on her panels at conferences or write us reference letters unless she thought we were ready (after all, her name is on the line too), but when she had us out there publicly, she went to bat for us. I say this to underscore the private/public nature of all this.
bcourey 6:21 pm on December 1, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Well said Allie…this has ended on a very sour note for me..blistered and bruised
Brenda
Allie 6:35 pm on December 1, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply
🙁