I made many mistakes as we grew Atomic Object. Since we turned ten years old a few months ago, obviously none of them were fatal. For example, not getting help in my job sooner was one of the bigger mistakes I made. Seeing many small mistakes as evidence of a smart strategy is something I’ve just recently come to appreciate.
Mistake is just another word for a failed experiment. The purpose of experiments is to confirm or deny a hypothesis, or in other words, to learn something. Saying that we made a lot of mistakes is also saying that we ran many experiments. For example:
- We built a web CMS product back in 2002.
- We invested time and effort to try an open compensation system.
- We invested in various strategic partnerships.
- We hired someone into a leadership position from outside the company.
- We created an isolated design team.
- We bought an ad in a trade magazine.
- We took over the maintenance team for a large customer.
These are a few of our failed experiments. None of them worked the way we anticipated, but we learned an awful lot from these “mistakes”.
I, like every successful entrepreneur, am strategically brilliant in hindsight. That’s how I like to phrase the reminder that while I’ve done some things right and met with some success, I can’t claim I knew what the path to success was going to be when I started down the road — it only looks that way since we managed to arrive. So while I didn’t have it all figured out at the start, it wasn’t just luck, either. In fact, I think my training in science and engineering gave me a successful strategy for growing the company.
The core of this strategy is the scientific method:
- Form a hypothesis.
- Design a test to prove or disprove the hypothesis.
- Run the test, gather data.
While the scientific method is at the core, there are some other elements we’ve added around it to make a successful strategy for building Atomic:
- Try many ideas.
- Learn from your experiments.
- Keep it small — the failure of a single experiment shouldn’t threaten your survival.
- Adapt quickly when you learn what works and what doesn’t.
- Keep the pressure on yourself to experiment, even once you’ve found some success.
- Pay close attention to clients and the world at large to inspire experiments.
Because I take it for granted, I hadn’t really thought about the scientific method as an intentional strategy for growing a business. It just seemed like the obvious way to proceed given I had no formal education or background in business, and I had business problems to solve.
Listening to Tim Harford describe the common attributes of success helped me appreciate our strategy for what it is. In his book Adapt, he identifies three characteristics that underpin success: diversity, survivability, and measurability. I see those traits in our business strategy. We get diversity from the many different things we try. We insure our survival by mitigating the risk of our experiments and limiting their size and potential negative consequences. Lastly, we take care to regularly assess the results of our experiments.
Strategic brilliance and bet-the-company risk taking make for great stories. But I suspect our approach, with it’s many little experiments and plenty of non-fatal failures, is actually the more common strategy used in successful businesses.
- Attention: Spending Your Most Valuable Currency - February 10, 2022
- Slicing the Revenue Pie in a Multi-Stakeholder Company - July 30, 2021
- Commercial versus Existential Purpose - July 19, 2021
- How I Misunderstood Mentorship and Benefited Anyway - June 16, 2021
- Sabbath Sundays and Slow Mondays - June 4, 2021
Anonymous
November 14, 2011Good post Carl. Ever since my founding partners left TroopTrack, I’ve felt that just hanging in there was my main strategy. To be able to hang in there, I have to accept slow growth (it’s only me, working in my spare time, for the most part), avoid large financial commitments, and execute survivable experiments. In other words, I’m optimizing around sustainable pace, because I believe that if I can just arrange my life so that I can keep working at my product indefinitely, eventually it will be the best product on the market.
We’ll see how that works out. Ten years from now if I only have 500 subscribers I may be moaning about this strategy…
Carl Erickson
November 15, 2011I hope the compounding value you get from continuous improvement eventually pays off, Dave. Perhaps this will happen when you’ve sufficiently proven the market and product. At that point money might be the critical ingredient you need to really grow your subscriber base.
Anonymous
November 15, 2011I just did an experiment that so far hasn’t worked. I placed my first ad, in a niche newspaper with huge crossover to my target market. So far, the marketing campaign hasn’t brought me a single new customer. I struggle to know when to give up on the experiment. The newspaper comes out weekly, and I’m not sure how long I should give it. I think that’s the tough question for engineers-running-businesses – how do you know when you have answered the question.
Carl Erickson
November 16, 2011One day you know nothing; one year you are certain. I think you get progressively more confident with time. Seems like this dynamic calls for running multiple experiments in parallel.
Reflections on four years of integrating design and development | Atomic Spin
November 16, 2011[…] Development get in bed together. What results? Beautiful little product babies!)Consistent with our mistake-driven approach to business, we’ve tried a lot of different things in those four years. We bailed on […]
Practical Advice for Bringing a New Product to Market | Atomic Spin
June 15, 2012[…] feels. We were once a startup, and like others we made a few mistakes along the way. This is why we now publish what we know (both successes and failures) and continue to learn from […]
Experiments as options on future growth | Great Not Big
September 11, 2012[…] strategy I used to create Atomic Object, and which we continue to employ, is to try many things, stick with […]