Tag: Jobs

Categories
McNair Center Women

The Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing

Photo courtesy of Shelby Bice.

McNair Center Intern Shelby Bice attended the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing Conference along with 18,000 other computer scientists on October 4-6, 2017 in Orlando, Florida. 

The Grace Hopper Celebration honors the legacy of Grace Hopper, a trailblazer in computer programming who led the team that developed the first programming language, a precursor to COBOL. The conference is organized by The Anita Borg Institute for Women and Technology, a nonprofit organization founded in 1987 by computer scientist Anita Borg. It is an event to recruit, retain, and advance women in careers in computing and technological innovation.

The Grace Hopper Conference brings together companies ranging from small startups to tech giants. All are looking to recruit talented computer scientists and engineers. The event also includes panels on topics such as new applications for artificial intelligence and formulating an elevator pitch. In many ways, Grace Hopper resembles any other tech conference. However, there is one crucial distinction: the majority of the panelists, presenters and representatives are women.

What makes the Grace Hopper Celebration so important?

First and foremost, the Grace Hopper Celebration reminds the tech industry that female engineers not only exist, but that they are also just as hardworking and capable as their male counterparts.

When companies like Uber face backlash for low female representation, they often blame a lack of women in the industry. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal reports Uber’s laughable finding that only 1,800 women engineers might be qualified to work for Uber. However, tickets for the celebration sold out within hours due to high interest from female computer scientists across the country. It seems safe to say that there are more than 1,800 women who meet Uber’s standards, regardless of their rigorousness.

The conference exposes women at different career levels to the vast array of careers in computer science. The stereotype of a lone male programmer sitting in a dark room coding video games is not an accurate depiction of computer science. Despite the many areas in which female engineers can apply their skills, many women are often unaware of available opportunities.

Grace Hopper showcases juggernauts like Google and Microsoft alongside smaller, lesser-known startups. The conference embodies the interdisciplinary and dynamic nature of computer science. For instance, Grace Hopper piqued my interest in Flatiron, a company that partners with oncologists to analyze data and recommend better cancer treatments.

McNair Center Intern Shelby Bice at the Grace Hopper Celebration (October 4-6, 2017). Photo courtesy of Shelby Bice.

Most importantly, Grace Hopper celebrates women in computer science. According to the WSJ, the percentage of female computer scientists in industry fell from roughly 37% in the mid-1980s to 18% in 2014. With only minimal gains since 2014, leaders must make a conscious effort to bring more women into the field. It’s also just as important to keep female computer scientists engaged and fulfilled throughout their careers. Many female computer scientists leave technical positions due to a lack of support from their company or, sometimes, gender discrimination. The Grace Hopper Celebration combats these negative forces by fostering an inclusive community.

Going forward

The Grace Hopper Celebration is just one step that the tech industry can take to empower women in computer science. After listening to the inspiring experiences of female computer scientists, entrepreneurs, researchers and leaders, I am confident that events like the Grace Hopper Celebration can help resolve the gender imbalance in computer science.

Grace Hopper will be coming to Houston in 2018. I look forward to attending!

Categories
McNair Center Weekly Roundup

Entrepreneurship Weekly Roundup: 2/24/17

Weekly Roundup is a McNair Center series compiling and summarizing the week’s most important Entrepreneurship and Innovation news.

Here is what you need to know about entrepreneurship this week:

Austin’s Venture Capital

Eliza Martin, Research Assistant, McNair Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation

In her latest post for the McNair Center, Martin follows up on her previous analysis of Austin’s booming entrepreneurial ecosystem. Martin highlights Austin’s decreases in VC investment and deal closures from 2016 as signs of a slowing in growth. According to a report released by PitchBook, 2016 brought substantially fewer deal closures than 2015 for Austin startups. Martin suggests that increased perceived risk among investors and a recent decline in startups are byproducts of an over-investment into Austin startups in previous years.

Still, Martin remains optimistic about the health of Austin’s entrepreneurial ecosystem going forward, predicting that the city “ will see investment increase again after VC investment balances out.”

Big Food Looks to Startups for Ideas, Innovation

Annie Gasparro, Reporter, Wall Street Journal

When the Kellogg’s and General Mill’s of the food industry realized that they couldn’t quell rising consumer obsession with healthy and unprocessed products, they started investing in food startups.

In recent years, many prominent names in the food processing and consumer goods industry began creating VC funds to invest food startups. According to CircleUp, a company that acts as an investment marketplace for food startups and PE firms, big players in the consumer good industry saw roughly $18 billion of their market share swept away by smaller competitors between 2011 and 2015. These partnerships are also mutually beneficial. Emerging food startups gain access to resources and credibility, and larger corporations receive valuable insight into the successful marketing strategies and recipes of their new competitors.

Why Some Startups Succeed (and Why Most Fail)

Patrick Henry, Founder and CEO of QuestFusion, Contributor, Entrepreneur

In his article for the Entrepreneur, successful entrepreneur and startup consultant, Patrick Henry, analyzes startup failures and successes. Henry reinforces the relevance of his post by citing an article by FastCompany, which states that 75% of venture-backed startups fail. Henry frames the question in two ways: what makes startups fail, and what makes startups succeed? Citing studies from StatisticBrain, CB Insights and Compass,

Henry attributes most business outcomes to company leadership. More often than not, successful startups have CEO’s or c-suite members with general and industry-specific business knowledge. Think Google’s Eric Schmidt, Ebay’s Meg Whitman or Apple’s Steve Jobs. Commons reasons for startup failures, such as raising too much capital too quickly, running out of cash or ineffective marketing, signal poor decision-making at the management level. Company founders should consider adding “seasoned” business veterans who the possess “domain expertise” to best support their strong technical team and existing product design.

According to Henry, startups should not undergo more than two pivots. Pivots are changes “in course of direction that result in a material change in the product-market strategy.” While young businesses should be equipped to adjust to market fluctuations, they should avoid being so flexible that they lose sight of their founding mission.

The Megatrends of Entrepreneurship are Key to Job Growth

Wendy Guillies, Contributor, Forbes

Wendy Guillies, President and CEO of the Kauffman Foundation, discusses the megatrends of entrepreneurship.

The first major trend involves demographics. Despite America’s growing diversity, the country’s entrepreneurial population has remained largely stagnant. Women and other minorities remain largely underrepresented in business ownership. According to Kauffman Foundation data, minorities and women are half as likely as their counterparts to own a business that employs people.

The second key trend focuses on geography. Entrepreneurial activity is becoming increasingly concentrated in urban centers. According to Guillies, this phenomenon is largely a function of population shifts, as more and more people relocate to cities. From the 1980s to 2017, the share of small businesses based in rural communities dropped from 20 to 12 percent. “Increasing urbanism” also has spurred the spread of entrepreneurial activity from the major coastal hubs, “ driving geographical equality.”

The third trend involves job creation and technology. According to Guillies, “in the past, as companies scaled their revenue, jobs scaled in an almost linear fashion.” Now, this is no longer the case. For example, in 1962, when Kodak reached $1 billion ($8 billion today) in sales, the corporation employed over 75,000 people. When Facebook surpassed similar sales targets in 2012, the company employed a mere 6,300 workers. Despite promoting capital efficiency, digitization has slowed job creation from the startup sector, However, there is a significant upside to these web-based technologies: such platforms lower many of the barriers to market entry for small businesses.

According to Guillies, “these three megatrend…are sources of both concern and optimism.” If entrepreneurs and policymakers can better understand and take advantages of these trends, they can “enhance job opportunities for the benefit of us all.” For instance, if minorities alone started as many businesses as non-minorities, the economy would add more than 9.5 million jobs.

QA with Jared Bakewell on the 2017 Annual State of Entrepreneurship Address

Silicon Prairie Team, Silicon Prairie News

The 8th Annual State of Entrepreneurship Address took place this past weekend in Washington D.C. Jared Bakewell, CEO and Co-founder of Proseeds, an Omaha-based startup, recently sat down with the Silicon Prairie Team to discuss the event’s key takeaways. The Kauffman Foundation’s Guillies delivered the address,and she focused on the three major trends of entrepreneurship.

In the interview, Bakewell stressed a general consensus among the event’s attendees, which included entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, and politicians: government policy should remove early barriers to success for startups and small businesses. For entrepreneurs in the midwest and rural areas, access to capital is a concern.Currently, most of the nation’s VC flows toward the coastal hubs. Additional concerns for startups looking to expand operations are instabilities in both healthcare and immigration policy. Bakewell optimistically concluded the interview, adding that many of the attending politicians appeared open to the suggested solutions to these challenges.

IBM Watson joins Indiegogo to back a crowdfund-to-production service for entrepreneurs

Khari Johnson, Reporter, VentureBeat

Last week, IBM Watson and Arrow Electronics announced a new partnership with crowdfunding website, Indiegogo. IBM spokesman Deon Newman shared with VentureBeat that the partnership will expand Indiegogo’s operations from purely fundraising to also incubating and accelerating startups.

Indiegogo cofounder Slava Rubin reiterated the strategic shift, telling VentureBeat that the company plans on evolving its platform into “a springboard for entrepreneurs.” All startups that participate in the partnership’s services will gain access to IBM Watson’s Bluemix. Bluemix, along with IBM Watson’s other AI services, will offer smaller companies the opportunity to apply machine learning processes to their existing infrastructure. Some successful participants will even participate in Bluexmix’s global entrepreneur program and receive $50,000 in capital from Arrow.

Categories
Government and Policy McNair Center

The International Entrepreneur Rule: The US Startup Visa

SAN FRANCISCO, CA - SEPTEMBER 7: Atmosphere during the TechCrunch Disrupt SF 2013 Hackathon inside The Concourse at San Francisco Design Center on September 7, 2013 in San Francisco, California. (Photo by Jeff Bottari/TechCrunch) *** Local Caption ***

The Obama administration proposed new provisions for immigrant entrepreneurs in August 2016. The administration designed the proposal to attract international entrepreneurial talent to the United States, especially in advanced technology fields. In mid-January, with only days left in President Obama’s term, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finalized the details of the “International Entrepreneur Rule.” It is scheduled to go into effect on July 17, 2017. Whether it goes into effect will depend on President Trump’s immigration plan, which may see changes in the current H1-B visa program.
statue

Overview

The International Entrepreneur Rule would allow USCIS to grant discretionary parole to international entrepreneurs for two and a half years . However, entrepreneurs may struggle to qualify for a parole grant unless they are already involved in a successful venture. The rule states that first-time applicants must own at least 10% of a U.S. startup that is less than five years old and play a significant role in its management.

Applicants must also demonstrate that their startup has high potential for growth and job creation. The two main avenues for satisfying this criterion are demonstrating that the company has received $250,000 or more in venture capital from “established U.S. investors” or at least $100,000 or more in funding from government entities. Applicants that do not meet these standards may still qualify if they can demonstrate “significant public benefit that would be provided by the applicant’s (or family’s) parole into the United States.”

After their initial parole is over, entrepreneurs may apply to extend their stay for an additional two and a half years. In order to receive an extension, entrepreneurs must show that their startups have “shown signs of significant growth.” A total of two parole grants is the maximum; there are no further extensions. If entrepreneurs wish to stay longer, they must find another method to secure a visa or a green card.

Analysis

When this rule was originally proposed by the Obama administration, it received early praise; Tim Ryan, the co-founder of Startup San Diego, applauded the proposal as a step in the right direction.

However, government agencies only expect this rule to impact a very limited number of entrepreneurs. The Department of Homeland Security estimates that a mere 2,940 international entrepreneurs will qualify annually. DHS also estimates they will bring approximately 3,234 dependents and spouses. In contrast, the USCIS approved 85,000 H1-B visas in the 2014 fiscal year.

The high level of investment required may serve as a hurdle for applicants. Y Combinator, widely considered the world’s best startup accelerator, only offers startups a maximum of $120,000 in investment funding. However, to qualify for the proposed International Entrepreneur Rule, USCIS expects companies to have at least $250,000. Not only that, but this money must come from investors with a record of repeated investment successes. Some policy advocates worry that there simply will not be enough reputable investors able to provide that level of funding. Moreover, even if some investors can fulfill the requirement, they may not all have the necessary experience to satisfy the rule.

The rule may help to keep entrepreneurial talent in the U.S., but will do little to attract new recruits. The applicant pool may be limited by the requirements that the company must be U.S.-founded and that the applicant have a significant role in the company. Because of these specifications, applicants must be individuals who are already in the U.S. Nonetheless, this rule may help international students at U.S. universities who are unable to acquire H-1B visas.

There is also an issue of time — entrepreneurs only have five years, maximum. The high levels of investment required for initial application and renewal may put strain on startups. TechCrunch puts the average time of an “IPO-track startup” at about seven years, although it can take up to ten years. Given this information, the parole periods may not be long enough to positively impact startups.

Ultimately, potential investors may view the startup visa as an undesirable risk. Investors will be aware of the possibility that a company, or at least its key members, could lose immigration status.

Lastly, it is unclear whether the Trump Administration will alter the details of the rule. A Department of Homeland Security spokesman informed CNN on January 23 that the DHS is still awaiting guidance on how President Trump’s executive order freezing new and pending regulations will impact the International Entrepreneur Rule’s implementation.

Learning from Other Countries

The U.S. is not the first to propose a visa for startup entrepreneurs. Many other countries have established their own processes for admitting international entrepreneurs, including the United Kingdom, Canada and France.

The U.K. allows individuals wishing to set up or take over a business within its borders to apply for a Tier 1 (Entrepreneurship) Visa which can be extended before they can apply for settlement or an indefinite leave to remain. The U.K.’s financial requirements for applicants are also more flexible than the U.S. requirements in sources and amounts of funding. The U.K. startup visa does not require that applicants start the business themselves. Instead, intention of starting a new business, taking over one or providing significant funding is enough.

Canada seeks to attract innovative talent by tying them to government-approved Canadian entities with a goal of facilitating long-term success. The Canadian Start-Up Visa Program focuses on the creation of new startups. Applicants must obtain at least one letter of support that details funding from a list of designated organizations. This includes venture capital funds, angel investor groups and business incubators.

France launched its French Tech Visa in 2016 to complement the “French Tech Ticket” program it began in 2015. The French Tech Ticket program selects 70 international entrepreneur teams and provides funding and support with a French incubator for a year. The French Tech Visa expands this program to attract foreign startup founders, exceptional talent, investors and angels by offering renewable visas.

The U.S. could look into incorporating aspects of these programs to compete for the top foreign entrepreneurs. For example, the entrepreneurs can only renew this visa once; perhaps lawmakers could extend its duration or allow additional renewals. The U.S. could also aid the integration of accepted businesses into the startup and tech communities. These changes, however, would be dependent on President Trump’s immigration policy.

Conclusion

Eligibility requirements of the International Entrepreneur Rule are rigorous, and the time period allotted by the visa is short. It is reasonable to assume that the proposed startup visa would have little, if any, economic impact. Moreover, if President Trump repeals the order, there may be little hope for a truly meaningful startup visa. While Trump vows to “establish new immigration controls to boost wages and to ensure that open jobs are offered to American workers first,” his exact plans for reforming H-1B visas, including the possibility of a startup visa, are unclear.

Categories
McNair Center Women

Women in Top Tech Companies

In 2014, many of the top tech companies released information on their employee diversity demographics for the first time, bringing attention to the low representation of women in top tech companies. This post looks beyond these numbers. How are tech companies responding to this gender imbalance?

The top five tech companies by market cap are, in order: Apple, Alphabet (Google), Microsoft, Amazon, and Facebook. The gender balance of each company’s workforce is in the table below:

women-workforce-table
Sources are linked for Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon, and  Facebook. Data on national averages can be found here and here.

All of these companies are seeking to improve their gender balance and support current women employees. Resource groups, family benefits and smart hiring practices are some of the most common solutions. Even when these efforts are made, the male-dominated work environments can be far from ideal for women at these companies.

Women Employee Experiences

Resource Groups

Resource groups can serve as valuable support networks for women employees. Each of the top tech five has at least one employee resource group for women (Apple: Women@Apple; Google: Women@Google, Google Women in Engineering; Microsoft: Women@Microsoft; Facebook: Women@Facebook, Amazon: Women@Amazon, Amazon Women in Engineering, Women in Finance Initiative). All of these groups share similar goals: empowering women in their workforce and providing networking opportunities.

Many of these resource groups also participate in community outreach, engaging young girls and women and creating programs to foster their interests in technology. (See Women in STEM: Closing the Gap for more information on how community outreach can help change the culture around women in STEM in the United States.)  After recognizing that underrepresentation of women in tech is related to the lack of educational STEM exposure and encouragement for women, Facebook created Computer Science and Engineering Lean-In Circles to support women in college who are interested in CS.

Conferences

Sponsoring women’s tech conferences, like the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing or the Women in Real Life (WiRL) Conference, is also common among these resource groups. Amazon even holds its own conference: Every year, the women’s resource groups at Amazon also team up to host AmazeCon, a diversity conference that focuses on the achievements due to diverse teams at Amazon. The conference draws thousands of experts and leaders to discuss the importance of diversity in creativity and accomplishments.

Microsoft has taken an extra step by creating an innovative program for women, Women Think Next. WTN is a “worldwide community for professional women,” bringing together women from varying fields and backgrounds to network and support one another.

The program is not limited to Microsoft employees. WTN encouraged any and all professional women around the world to join. Women Think Next holds an annual networking conference and provides resources for women throughout the year. The conference also serves as a recruitment event for Microsoft to hire women with strong skills.

Employee Complaints

Everything isn’t always as it seems on paper, though. The male-dominated work environments at these companies can be isolating for female workers. In 2015, Microsoft faced a lawsuit accusing the company of gender-discriminatory policies in employee reviews. In May 2016, a former Facebook contractor published a piece on the sexism she experienced while working on a project team. During September 2016, Apple received criticism in the media for a series of leaked emails that revealed the company’s unresponsiveness to concerns of women employees. Through these emails, women employees described the company’s atmosphere as “toxic,” including workplace harassment and gender discrimination.

It is important to note that these are all anecdotal experiences. Each company responded by emphasizing that they take complaints like these seriously. The sensitive nature of the companies’ investigations of these claims prevents more information from being public.

Work-Life Balance

In American society, women often face conflict between the gender norms surrounding women’s family responsibilities and a desire to pursue a career. Maternity and family leave benefits can be an important factor in a woman’s decision to stay with a company in the long run, especially after she has started a family.

Of all of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development member countries, the United States is the only one that does not mandate paid maternity leave. According to the most recent statistics, only 12% of Americans receive this benefit.

However, within the tech top five, they seem to go far and beyond this requirement. Below is a summary of the family leave benefits for the tech top five.

maternity-leave-chart
Sources are linked for Apple here and here, Alphabet, Microsoft here, here and here, Amazon, Facebook, and National Standard

It is not surprising that these companies give generous benefits. Named the best place to work in the U.S. in 2015 by both Forbes and Glassdoor, Google is known for its employee perks. One of Google’s greatest strengths lies in its emphasis on self-study to determine workforce problems and find solutions. In 2007, Google’s People Operations (AKA Human Resources) department noticed that new mothers left Google at twice the average departure rate. In response, the company decided to lengthen paid maternity leave from 12 to 18 weeks. After this change, Google’s departure rate for new mothers dropped by 50 percent.

Controversial Benefits

In 2014, both Apple and Facebook received media attention for their announcements that they would pay to freeze U.S.-based employees’ eggs. Apple announced it as a new dimension to their support for infertility treatments. The move was met with mixed reviews by the media. NBC News praised it as a “game-changing perk,” but The Guardian denounced it as “unreasonable and illogical.” Supporters of the policy argue that it gives female employees more flexibility in their decision to have children. Critics claim that the policy sends the wrong message, implying that if female employees want to succeed at work, they need to delay motherhood.

Parental Equality

It is important to look not only at a company’s maternity leave policies, but at their parental and family leave policies as well. Studies of maternity and motherhood-related policies in other countries, like a mandated child care law in Chile and a reduced hours law in Spain, have shown that offering parental benefits only to women can lead to a decrease in salary and promotion rates of all women at a company, even those who don’t take advantage of them. One approach to combating these negative effects could be making these policies gender-neutral. This would allow for men to take advantage of these policies and reduce gender-discriminatory practices.

Hiring, Promotions and Pay

Facebook has received attention for its hiring point system. Facebook’s recruiters receive points for new hires, but based on the new recruits’ diversity, it can earn recruiters more points. White or Asian males only count for one point, whereas black, Hispanic, or female new hires count for two points. Higher point totals can lead to good performance reviews and bonuses for recruiters. This system incentivizes the creation of a more diverse workforce.

At Google, employee studies showed that women were less likely than men to submit their names for promotions. After Google brought this information to the attention of women employees, this discrepancy disappeared. Google now prides itself in the fact that they promote women and men at the same rates.

In August 2016, Apple announced plans to increase hiring of women and minorities. During the same announcement, they celebrated their official elimination of all gender pay gaps within the company. To maintain this, they have pledged to analyze and correct any gaps as they may arise in the future.

Amazon has also addressed its pay gap. Amazon boasts that women earn 99.9 percent of men’s salaries, explaining that the percentage fluctuates annually, so that it may not always reach a perfect 100 percent. However, Amazon has received criticism on its diversity reports for not including statistics on the percentage of women who make up their tech workforce. This discrepancy has led media to question whether Amazon has something to hide. Until Amazon releases more information, there is no way to know the state of female representation in their tech workforce.

What Does This Mean?

When compared to national averages, women are not as well-represented in the top tech companies. However, these companies provide benefits and services to their women and employees that are above and beyond the norm. Nonetheless, as the anecdotal experiences of the women at Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft have shown, a company can offer great benefits while still tolerating a discriminatory workplace environment.

Regardless, these companies need to develop new strategies  to address low women’s representation. Only time will tell how future policy, research, and incentives will impact women’s employment in the tech workforce.

Categories
McNair Center Weekly Roundup

Entrepreneurship Weekly Roundup: 11/18/2016

Weekly Roundup is a McNair Center series compiling and summarizing the week’s most important Entrepreneurship and Innovation news.

Here is what you need to know about entrepreneurship this week:

Nationalism is not putting a damper on this trillion-dollar sector

Elaine Pofeldt, Contributor, CNBC.com

CNBC Contributor Elain Pofeldt observes that the United States and Europe are witnessing a rise in nationalist and anti-globalization sentiment. She cites Mr. Trump’s election and the Brexit referendum as evidence. The trend may reflect a global desire to redistribute market and government benefits domestically – and a disapproval of corporations that send wages abroad and profits to the already wealthy.

In this uncertain climate, one economic principle remains key: Entrepreneurship fosters economic growth.

The Kauffman Foundation’s recently released Global Entrepreneurship Index emphasizes the importance of entrepreneurship to economic growth. This annual index rates countries on the health and quality of their entrepreneurial ecosystems. There is a strong correlation between a country’s GDP and its technological advancements. Governments should support a strong entrepreneurial ecosystem if they are truly serious about encouraging the country’s economic growth.

Currently the U.S. ranks number one on the index. The index suggests that the strength of the U.S. entrepreneurial environment lies in a strong perception for opportunity. One area of opportunity that U.S. entrepreneurs are increasingly tapping into are the regulated sectors, such as health care, energy and education.

Social entrepreneurs is also on the rise. Jonathan Ortmans, a senior fellow at the Kauffman Foundation, notes how this relates to national policy: “We’re now seeing a much larger number of public-sector leaders — government at the national and local level — jumping in and asking, `How do we tackle this and build stronger entrepreneurial ecosystems?'”

The Role of Entrepreneurship in Job Creation and Economic Growth

Margarita Hakobyan, Contributor, Huffington Post

Huffington Post’s Hakobyan emphasizes the role of entrepreneurship in job creation and economic growth. According to a report released by the Small Business Administration in 2012, small businesses created 60 percent of new jobs in the previous decade.

New businesses challenge existing markets and encourage competition by offering new or improved products. Successful entrants often steer customers away from existing companies. Disruptions in the market consequently force existing companies to innovate or watch their market share diminish.

Although the manufacturing sector suffered job losses from advancements in automation and other technologies, its productivity and scale have both risen considerably.

Manufacturing is an exception – many market disruptions create jobs. For example, Netflix, dismantled the video rental industry but created jobs by feeding a demand for large-scale processing of DVDs and maintenance of the grocery store kiosks that sell these DVDs.

Small businesses can also contribute to economic growth through their flexibility and diversity. Flexibility allows startups to react quickly to market conditions. Startups can meet consumer demands faster than established corporations because large companies often must follow long administrative processes before implementing reforms.

Venture Capital Firm Navigates Uncharted Course to Success

Michael J. de la Merced, Reporter, New York Times

The Times’ Merced reports on venture capital firm, Spark Capital. The firm is known for early investment in promising startups like Twitter, Tumblr, Slack and Oculus.

Spark is also wading into uncertain industries. It recently invested in Cruise Automation, a San Francisco-based startup that develops software for self-driving cars. At a time when Google and Uber declared self-driving vehicles “among their top research priorities,” the success of less funded and less established startups competing to break into the same market seemed doubtful. Big industry players already dominated the research on self-automated cars, so most VC firms turned to alternative ventures within less-explored markets. Despite the industry’s conventional wisdom, Cruise Automation was sold to General Motors for $1 billion within months.

Spark adopts a nontraditional process for investment decisions that focuses on products rather than markets. Instead of specializing in certain industries or markets, partners at Spark can bring any prospective venture to the table. Investors then debate the merits of pursuing the opportunity until a consensus among the partners is reached. Spark accredits its most successful decisions to an “appreciation for good product design.”

In total, Spark manages $3 billion in investment funds. Its fifth venture fund will have a first-close target of $400 million.

Ever Wanted to Back a Start-Up? Indiegogo Opens the Door to Small Investors

Stacy Cowley, Reporter, The New York Times

Indiegogo is a popular crowdfunding site that enables small venture capitalists to invest personal money into promising and creative ventures. The major crowdfunding site is the first to take advantage of a new securities rule, which allows “ordinary investors to risk up to a few thousands dollars a year backing private companies.”

Before the rule was passed, only accredited investors, or those with an annual income greater than $200,000 or net worth of $1 million, could invest personal funds in these riskier ventures. With the passage of the new rule, crowdfunding backers can own equity stakes in the companies they invest in.

The new rule addresses an issue raised during Oculus’ acquisition by Facebook. Oculus raised millions of dollars on crowdfunding sites during its early investment stages. The startup used the investments raised by crowdfunding backers to prove to venture capitalists that there was a market demand for its products. Investors poured money into the company, and Facebook subsequently acquired Oculus. The firm’s original crowdfunding backers reaped no gains; angel and venture capital investors took home the profits.

The Reason Silicon Valley Beat Out Boston for VC Dominance

Anil Gupta and Haiyan Wang, Contributors, Harvard Business Review

The Boston-Cambridge and Bay Area have histories in technology entrepreneurship and venture capital (VC). However, since the 1990s, Silicon Valley has consistently snatched a larger share of all VC investments in the US than its Northeastern counterpart. New England’s share in VC investments plateaued at roughly 10 percent. Meanwhile, the Bay Area’s share of VC investments has grown from 22.6 percent to just over 50 percent.

HBR’s Gupta and Wang identify cultural factors and state-level policies as possible explanations for the divergence between the two coastal VC hubs. For example, Massachusetts, unlike California, allows businesses to include noncompete covenants in their employment contracts. Noncompete covenants offer company loyalty, but they can also remove the need for fast-paced innovation that many Silicon Valley entrepreneurs face.

Additionally, New England and Silicon Valley differ in the type of investors and companies that they attract. The Northeast dominates in the life sciences; in the first three quarters of 2016, 60 percent of New England investments involved ventures focused on biotechnology and medical devices. Silicon Valley, on the other hand, is home to many of the startups that develop platform technologies integral to the digital age.

According to Gupta and Wang, California’s stronghold on the digital and tech industry has resulted in a “growing agglomeration effect.” Increasingly, entrepreneurs are migrating to or launching their businesses in the Bay Area to gain access to these synergies that come from being immersed in the world’s greatest entrepreneurship ecosystem.

And in startup news…

Womply bags $30M to Help Small Businesses Harness Data

Tomio Geron, Reporter, The Wall Street Journal

San Francisco-based Womply raised $30 million in its most recent round of financing, bringing its funding total up to $50 million since 2011.

The startup’s platform offers a “web-based suite of software tools” that allows small businesses to analyze performance data on sales, marketing, consumer behavior, revenue and online reputation.

Womply serves a diverse set of clients, ranging from salons to legal firms, but focuses on supporting service-oriented small business. The startup allows small businesses to gain valuable insights into their performance and consumer base. President Cory Capoccia says Womply is helping small businesses increase their efficacy “by “building technology to help grow, protect and simplify running small businesses.”

Rice Entrepreneurs

Spotlight on Rice Entrepreneurs: East-West Tea

Carlin Cherry, Research Assistant, McNair Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation

East-West Tea is a student-run business that sells boba tea to Rice University students. Initially developed as a project for an undergraduate marketing class, East-West launched operations last month. The McNair Center’s Carlin Cherry interviews operations manager Andrew Maust.

Categories
McNair Center Small Business

Small Business and Overtime Regulation

Clocking in: Small Business and Overtime Regulation

What is the New Overtime Regulation?

frustrated workerOn December 1, 2016, the Labor Department will officially institute new regulations on overtime eligibility for workers. Announced on May 17, the new rules require business owners to pay salary workers earning up to $47,476 a year time-and-a-half overtime pay when they work more than 40 hours during the week. This new regulation will be updated every three years to adjust for average pay in the United States.

Federal employment law stipulates two different ways for employees to receive overtime pay. First, if the employee is not an executive or a professional with decision-making authority they are eligible. Second, if the salary of an employee is below a certain amount, that employee can receive overtime pay.

Who is Affected?

While the Labor Department calculated that the new law will affect 4.2 million workers, the Economic Policy Institute estimates that this new regulation will affect 12.5 million employees. That is 23% of salaried workers. The institute expects these new rules to affect over one million Texans.

The new overtime rule will apply to any business that is subject to the Fair Labor Standards Act. This includes any business with sales of at least $500,000, or employers involved in interstate commerce. The National Federation of Independent Businesses says that the requirements will affect around 44% of US business with fewer than 500 employees.

History of Overtime Pay Regulations

The 1938 law that began federal minimum wage also started the overtime rule. While the government has raised the overtime pay salary cut-off several times over the years, the current cut-off is at $23,660. Vice President Biden noted that that more than 60 percent of salaried workers qualified for overtime in 1975 based on their salaries, but only 7 percent do today.

Complying with Regulations

To comply with these new regulations, employers will have to track employees work hours, even those of salaried employees. This change can involve costly adjustments as employers may have to buy new systems and spend time on regulatory compliance. Additionally, employers may have to change the way they manage their labor budget. Failure to comply can result in lawsuits or penalties.

Employers will most likely respond in a couple of ways. Some employers will choose to limit their employees’ work hours to avoid paying overtime. Others may hire additional workers and divide up existing jobs. Additionally, employers could raise the pay of employees whose salaries are close to the cutoff to avoid paying overtime work. Or employers could cut salaries of workers with the hope that overtime will make up the difference in income.

Oxford Economics predicted that a “disproportionate number[s] of workers” [that] became eligible for overtime and worked more than 40 hours would see their hourly rates decreased by an equal amount, leaving their total annual earnings unchanged.” On the other hand, the Institute for the Study of Labor, said that base wages would fall somewhat over time, but that the higher overtime payments would more than offset any loss in regular salary levels.

Positive Aspects of the New Regulations

The new regulations could potentially have positive effects on the labor force. Goldman Sachs and the Economic Policy Institute estimate that the new regulations will create about 120,000 jobs.

The main argument, however, it is only right for employees to earn overtime for working over 40 hours. Vice President Biden and other supporters of the change present the idea of fairness as the main positive aspect of the new regulation. The Obama Administration hopes that the rule change will give middle-class families additional income.

Negative Aspects of the New Regulations

Despite the potential for positive effects, the new regulations could bring numerous negative consequences for employers.

The new regulations will immediately require employers to keep track of employee attendance and hours. This tracking will impose implementation and operation expenses, which may be prohibitively high for smaller and less profitable firms. Payroll reclassification for small businesses can also be time consuming and expensive. Business owners must also figure out whether their workers are exempt from the new requirements. Misclassification can result in lawsuits and penalties. And, of course, small businesses may face increased payroll expense.

All of these changes can be costly for small businesses to implement. A study by the National Retail Federation estimated employers could end up having to pay as much as $874 million to update payroll systems, convert salaried employees to hourly wages and track their hours. The potential costs have not gone unnoticed; the National Federation of Independent Businesses filed a petition to delay the implementation of these new rules. Otherwise, the new regulation may drive some small firms out of business.

Hurting Workers

This new measure could even hurt employees by giving workers less flexibility, hour cuts and decreased morale. Salaried employees often enjoy flexibility in working hours that can allow them a certain amount of freedom. This flexibility is about to become more expensive as employees are required to record every hour of their work. Being a salaried employee, rather than per-hour labor, also has positive psychological benefits. Employee morale may therefore drop. Finally, employees will soon run the risk that their employers will cut their hours to avoid paying overtime.

Jobs may be created by this regulation. However, most of those new jobs could come from cutting a full-time job in half to avoid paying overtime. Coordinating two people to do one person’s job will make America’s workforce less productive.

Room for Improvement

These new regulations disproportionately hurt small businesses. It may be important to respect the rights of workers to earn more money for overtime. However, the government must find a solution to help low-income workers without imposing a burden on small business owners.

A step in the right direction would be to institute this new regulation in phases. The overtime income cutoff change from $23,660 to $47,476 is a huge difference. But unless government offsets these costs, perhaps by lowering taxes on small businesses, this new policy will discriminate against the 28 million small businesses that provide more than 8 million American jobs.