Modern life has an insatiable appetite for power. We’re racing toward AGI, reshoring critical manufacturing, electrifying transport, and building the compute infrastructure that will power the AI century. The strategic significance of firm power, the always-available, dispatchable electricity that keeps the lights on when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow, cannot be overstated.

So what exactly is firm power?

Think of electricity like water in a city. Solar and wind are great. They’re like rainfall that fills the reservoirs for free. But you can’t run a hospital, a factory, or a hyperscale AI cluster on rainfall alone. You need reservoirs with pumps that deliver water 24/7, on demand, at the exact required pressure. Firm power is that reliable, controllable supply; the kind that comes from natural gas, nuclear, hydro, or other sources that can ramp up or down instantly and run continuously. Without it, the entire system becomes fragile.

Why is firm power so significant right now?

Because every major trend in the economy now demands it in unprecedented quantities and at unprecedented speed:

• AI training and inference clusters need rock-solid, high-density power that never drops.

• Reshored factories and advanced manufacturing require 24/7 reliability.

• The grid itself needs firm capacity to balance the massive influx of intermittent renewables.

Data centers alone are a perfect example. New hyperscale facilities don’t just need “some power.” They need firm power at the scale of small cities, delivered exactly when the GPUs demand it.

But here’s the uncomfortable reality: the United States is facing a firm power emergency.

The supply chain for new firm generation has effectively collapsed just as demand has gone vertical. Grid interconnection queues in major markets such as PJM and ERCOT now extend 4–5 years. Need a large power transformer for a substation upgrade? Expect 3-year lead times. New gas turbines from traditional OEMs? Sold out until 2030.

We are watching a historic mismatch unfold in real time.

So what’s driving this crisis?

A perfect storm of converging forces:

• Explosive AI-driven demand from hyperscalers.

• The continued build-out of renewables that still require firm backup.

• Decades of underinvestment.

• Offshoring that atrophied America’s industrial base.

• Geopolitical reality: while we debate permits, China added 315GW of solar in 2025 alone — more new capacity in a single year than most countries have in total.

This isn’t a temporary blip. It’s structural.

Why is this problem not going away?

Because the physics and timelines simply don’t line up.

By 2027, next-generation AI racks (NVIDIA’s Kyber architecture and beyond) will push toward 600 kW–1 MW per rack. That level of density changes everything. Solar plus batteries to firm that power would require significant land quantities per cluster.

Consider the following graph, which illustrates projected U.S. data center power demand.

The numbers are staggering: data center grid power demand is expected to nearly triple by 2030, creating a need for roughly 60+GW of new firm capacity in a window of just a few years. Capital is already deployed. Land is already purchased. Chips are already ordered.

This is no longer a forecast. It is booked demand colliding with a grid that cannot metabolize it.

The AGI arms race makes this existential.

We are in a race where the winner will dominate the technologies of the 21st century — from scientific discovery to economic productivity to national security. Training and inference must occur on sovereign soil under sovereign authority. The stakes could not be higher.

It’s why we’re already seeing extraordinary moves. Elon Musk’s xAI has resorted to purchasing and shipping power plants from abroad and reassembling them on U.S. soil simply because the domestic grid and supply chain could not deliver fast enough.

Satya Nadella captured it perfectly in November 2025:

“The biggest issue we are now having is not a compute glut, but it’s power... If you can’t [get the builds done fast enough], you may actually have a bunch of chips sitting in inventory that I can’t plug in. In fact, that is my problem today.”

This is the new normal.

America is simultaneously building the most advanced AI infrastructure on Earth, accelerating electrification, and reindustrializing, each of which demands unprecedented quantities of reliable, firm power.

Right now, the systems that deliver that power are too slow, too bureaucratic, and too constrained.

This is both a profound challenge and a historic opportunity.

The challenge is to close the gap between explosive demand and sclerotic supply before it constrains American ambition. The opportunity is to reindustrialize the energy sector at the pace this moment demands, creating jobs, strengthening national security, and ensuring that the United States never again finds its future constrained by electrons.

Firm power is not optional.

It is the foundation of everything we’re trying to build.

And the time to act is now.

A perfect storm is brewing in the world of power electronics, and transformers are at the heart of it. This article explores the critical role of transformers in the evolving landscape of energy systems.

Modern life has an insatiable appetite for power. We're simultaneously racing towards AGI, reshoring manufacturing, and building incredible networks of EV charging stations. Yet, very few people I speak with are aware of the strategic significance of critical energy infrastructure like transformers.

Transformers are a bedrock component of our energy infrastructure. But what exactly are they, and why do they matter so much?

What is a transformer?

A transformer is an electrical device that takes a given input voltage and outputs a different voltage. In this sense, it can either increase (step up) or decrease (step down) the voltage.

Electrical energy can be challenging to visualise. Think of it like water flowing through pipes, and the electricity is the water. Current is the rate of water flow, and voltage is the water pressure. Modern life requires us to move large quantities quickly, so we build pipelines capable of handling tremendous volumes of fast-moving water. That's all well and good, but what happens when it reaches the end consumer? Turn on the tap, and your apartment would quickly face an epic deluge from the high-pressure water. Remember, we said that voltage is like pressure? Well, in this analogy, transformers serve the function of changing the pressure (voltage) to safe levels for consumption.

Why are transformers so significant?

Transformers are strategically significant because they're a critical part of the power system. Wherever a change in voltage is required, you'll find a transformer. We can think of three main categories:

• High-voltage (HV) transformers -> Used for transmission

• Medium-voltage (MV) transformers -> Used for distribution

• Low-voltage (LV) transformers -> Used for end-use applications

As the US increases its power demands, it needs a corresponding increase in the number of installed transformers. Data centres in particular require large quantities of transformers. New solar and BESS facilities require transformers. The electrification of everything requires transformers.

But the truth is that domestic production lags demand considerably, with 80% of demand for large power transformers satisfied by imports. Power systems are built with redundancy in mind, but when large power transformers fail or are intentionally damaged, the economic costs can run into the billions of dollars. It's no wonder, then, that the National Infrastructure Advisory Council (NIAC) has recommended creating a strategic reserve of transformers.

So what's going on with the supply chain?

Since the pandemic, lead times and costs for transformers have steadily risen. According to the Department of Energy, "the lead times for transformer orders, particularly distribution transformers, increased from three to six months in 2019 to 12 to 30 months in 2023." Much of this is driven by the uncertainty around raw materials, the electrification of everything, the boom of AI data centres, and the recalibration of international trade in an increasingly uncertain world. More specifically, though, the US faces several constraints when it comes to producing transformers. For example, Cleveland-Cliffs is the only domestic producer of grain-oriented electrical steel (GOES) – the steel that is vital for building transformer cores. Then there's the labour shortage across the power engineering sector, the labour shortages across the manufacturing sector, the retiring worker problem, and tariffs to add a sprinkle of uncertainty.

Why is this problem not going away?

There's a perfect storm of converging factors. AI data centres, the electrification of everything, climate and natural disaster-related destruction of energy infrastructure, the replacement of old equipment, and the fresh demands of a 21st-century grid. All of this is happening against a backdrop of geopolitical uncertainty, an international AGI arms race, and the full effects of decades of offshoring production to lower labour cost nations.

This storm will affect most critical energy infrastructure within the US. If we want to build a grid that can keep up with the demands of modern life, we're going to need to do better. We need to address systematically the bottlenecks that plague the industry. The US Government needs to create additional economic incentives beyond those in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) to encourage domestic production of critical energy infrastructure. These incentives need to happen at warp speed. Let's look at why...

AI data centres

Consider the following graph, which illustrates projected data centre power consumption.

Total U.S. data center electricity use from 2014 through 2028.
Source 2024 United States Data Center Energy Usage Report

There are profound national security and geopolitical risks associated with AI, and in particular, AGI. In essence, we're in an AI arms race, and the prize is unfathomable human prosperity and riches through technology-led innovation, which also possesses a darker side in the form of superior cyber attack capabilities, even more precise autonomous weapons, and godlike predictive intelligence. Economic dominance is the obvious prize for the nation that controls AGI first. With the stakes so high, it's only natural that America wants training and inference done domestically. And so we are now building increasingly larger AI data centres. The US already has the most AI data centres in the world, but we're not resting on our laurels. For example, the Stargate Project now has 5GW of AI data centres planned, which will use over 2 million chips.

Elon Musk's xAI is taking this race so seriously that they've resorted to purchasing a power plant from abroad, shipping it to the US, and reassembling it, because they couldn't get a US-made one in time.

These are the new norms, and this is why energy infrastructure is so significant. The U.S. is building the most advanced AI data centres, accelerating EV adoption, and reshoring critical industries — all of which demand unprecedented amounts of reliable electricity. Transformers aren’t just a piece of that puzzle; they’re the backbone. Without them, nothing else moves.

Right now, the supply chain for these assets is fragile, slow, and dependent on foreign manufacturing. If we want a grid capable of supporting 21st-century ambitions — from AGI to nationwide electrification — we can’t treat transformers as an afterthought.

This is both a challenge and an opportunity. The challenge is fixing bottlenecks in materials, manufacturing, and skilled labour before the gap between supply and demand becomes unmanageable. The opportunity is for the U.S. to invest in resilient, domestic transformer production and grid infrastructure — creating jobs, strengthening national security, and ensuring we can power the technologies that will define the next century.

In short: transformers are not optional. They are the foundation of everything we’re trying to build. And the time to act is now.

All sources were last accessed on 4th August 2025.

I visited several factories across Michigan and Pennsylvania and interviewed their owners to learn more about business opportunities for technology entrepreneurs in manufacturing.

I recently returned from the United States, where I visited more manufacturers. During this visit, I wanted to see the factories through the eyes of the owners and ask them questions about their businesses. There's no substitute for boots-on-the-ground research.

This trip took me to Michigan and Pennsylvania. Pittsburgh greeted me with winter temperatures that I'm only used to on the ski slopes! I visited and spoke with an eclectic mix of companies ranging from furnace producers, candy makers, and racecar parts producers to more generic machine shops and 3D printing factories. Most of these companies have <30 employees.

Which key themes arose during your visits?

The companies I spoke with have <30 employees. There are ~240,000 manufacturers in the US, 75% of which have <20 employees and ~93% have <100 employees. I mention this because specific key insights arose repeatedly. So, I think it is fair to say hundreds of thousands of businesses are facing the following issues in varying degrees of severity:

1. Knowledge Loss

2. Labour Shortages

3. Supply Chain Uncertainties

4. Unclear Approach to Retirement

5. Training

6. Lost Relationships

7. Efficiency Gains

8. Spare Parts

9. Data Gathering and Unification

10. Maintenance

11. Quoting

Setting up meetings

How did you arrange meetings?

I set up meetings in two ways: first, by asking my network for referrals, and second, by reaching out to owners. Naturally, referrals tend to work best because someone can vouch that you're not a crazy person.

I didn't record my conversations because I wanted the meetings to be relaxed and for the owners to give honest answers rather than the answers that looked good on camera.

How long were the meetings?

Most of my in-person meetings were two hours long – enough time to build rapport, get an overview of how the business works, and then tour the factory floor or shop while asking questions. I've also done some online interviews with factory owners and employees, but I think you can obtain information with greater context by visiting them in person. Often, when you ask a question, the owner will immediately take you to the spot in the factory where they can show you the answer.

What did you explain in advance to the owners?

I said that I'm an entrepreneur with a software background and that I'm exploring the following trends:

• Labour shortages

• Reshoring of manufacturing

• Opportunities for innovation in their production methods

• Retirement planning

Key Themes

Knowledge Loss

Knowledge loss is going to be a huge problem. As senior staff retire, they take undocumented knowledge with them. This creates a massive inefficiency – now your company must figure out how to redo something it previously knew how to do. Often, this involves duplicating past work or hiring a recently retired employee back as a consultant.

I dug further into this and uncovered the following:

• Conveying nuance is hard. Imagine your job – You possess different types of knowledge, varying in complexity. You could produce documents, audio, and videos to explain the general gist, but deciding when to go into greater depth is subjective. If you won't be around to answer questions after you retire, you have to try to pre-empt the questions that could be asked when documenting your knowledge.

• Most of the lost knowledge is tacit knowledge gained from personal experiences at work, which is complicated to explain.

• Engineers know that good documentation takes time and must be maintained.

• Technical literacy could present a barrier to a retiring staff member documenting their knowledge.

💡 Opportunities

1. Build systems that reward the documentation of knowledge.

2. Automate knowledge collection and build methods to categorise and group different data inputs (camera systems, voice recordings, logs, incident reports, files)

3. Wearable devices. VR headsets can enable subject matter experts to record and document training information. Other factory workers can then use headsets to see and understand critical knowledge while operating machines.

Labour Shortages

Manufacturers are facing constrained production due to labour shortages. If you don't have workers and can't fully automate what you do, you have a problem. The factories I visited experienced problems sourcing machinists, maintenance, and production managers. With more staff, they could increase production levels.

There are several factors contributing towards the labour shortage:

• Record numbers of retirees: In 2024, ~11,000 American baby boomers retire daily.

• Globalisation: Outsourcing production reduced the need for specific skill sets at home. Peace and prosperity enabled complex global supply chains to develop, which we now rely on.

• Conditions and pay: Many career opportunities exist which pay comparable salaries and have better working conditions than manufacturing jobs.

• A lack of encouragement to enter manufacturing: Factories informed me that we need more apprenticeship schemes. Similarly, they suggested that being a tradesperson has been stigmatised in favour of getting a college degree.

• Complacency: Society has amnesia about the importance of manufacturing. If we don't prioritise producing things, we must rely on others to do it for us, which has national security implications.

💡 Opportunities

1. Training programs focused on upskilling and reskilling.

2. Consulting services to help busy factory owners understand how best to improve automation and where it makes the most sense to do it.

3. Redesign machines to be operable by less-skilled workers.

Supply Chain Uncertainties

Owners reported that they have been extending their delivery times to customers because of supplier delays. Labour shortages, electronic component shortages, war, and shipping delays were common reasons provided by suppliers.

Interestingly, some factories reported having no data or insights into what was causing delays – they simply relied on their supplier's narrative and retold that story to their customers. I talked about supply chain insights and risk management software with factory owners, but they highlighted the recurring issue of not having in-house skills to use and keep on top of such updates.

💡 Opportunities

1. Alerts and insights into supply chain risk management for busy, small factories.

Unclear Approach to Retirement

In the next decade, many small business owners will retire. A lot of small manufacturing firms are family-owned and operated. Imagine now that you've operated this business for most of your career, and you were secretly hoping that your children would take over the company. I spoke with owners in this situation, and they highlighted that their children don't care for the family business and don't have the necessary skills to operate it. In this situation, you could:

• Close the business down

• Get acquired

• Hire an heir

• Not retire

If there's one thing all the owners I spoke with have in common, they're busy! If your factory is understaffed, you may not have the time to sit down and carefully plan out your retirement. Many owners I spoke with are integral to the operation of the business. Therefore, they try a combination of speaking with succession planning companies, local competitors, suppliers, customers, or industry people at tradeshows. A managed, competitive bidding process could yield a much better outcome for the seller.

Some factories also reported having workers of a similar age to the soon-to-retire owner. In that situation, even if there was a suitable in-house heir, the owner might be reluctant to promote them. Talking honestly with workers about your impending retirement can be challenging – some workers I met had been with their employer for 30 years. The owners don't want to create uncertainty; they want the best for their staff.

💡 Opportunities

1. Succession planning as a software service. Marketplaces for buying and selling factories.

Training

Most factories I visited reported wanting to improve staff training. Factories can have vast differences in the output of workers doing the same job. I asked different owners what prevented them from providing enhanced training. They reported:

• Time: A recurring theme! They wanted to provide better training but were busy with other tasks. Several factories reported that training involved giving the staff members increasingly more complex tasks and having a more experienced staff member help whenever required. There's also a short-term hit to overall output if you ask your most productive workers to train others. Of course, with better training, output would increase in the long run, but long-term planning is often a luxury when short-staffed.

• Computer literacy: In some cases, workers had never received formal training.

• Computer accessibility during a work shift: I must admit that I hadn't considered this one, but it was instantly apparent when I visited factories. If your job involves wearing protective equipment like gloves, helmets, or ear protection, you will interact with computers differently. I asked one factory about placing training videos on tablets near machines. They highlighted that by the time the worker interacted with the machine, they'd be wearing protective equipment.

💡 Opportunities

1. Invent durable and rugged wearable devices which can be used alongside protective equipment to assist with training.

2. Build apprenticeships and schools to train the next generation of manufacturing workers.

Lost Relationships

I visited one factory faced with a problem on the opposite side of the world. For decades, they've worked with a sales rep in Asia. The sales rep has secured them a lot of work, maintains valuable relationships, and is integral to their business in that country. Now, the sales rep wants to retire. He has no heir and plans to close his business down.

Consequently, the factory owner has to take a considerable risk and forge a relationship with a new sales rep before retiring. I say risk because the owner wants to sell his business, and losing the Asian relationships would significantly impact the enterprise value.

I asked the owner how this situation unfolded – he's had a great working relationship with this sales rep for many years. He's asked him to delay his retirement, and the sales rep has obliged. But this time, it's different.

So many small business owners will face this problem. Key partners they depend on will want to retire at the same time they are retiring. Without good succession planning, the relationships those partners have will vanish.

💡 Opportunities

1. Turn succession planning into a software service.

Efficiency Gains

I toured different types of factories; in every case, the owners could show me multiple ways to improve efficiency. The key reasons why they weren't doing that were:

• I'm about to retire, and it's a project for someone younger.

• A lack of in-house skills like software engineering.

• Time and money.

• Staff resistance to change.

One factory showed me decades of order data they kept in an Excel spreadsheet. "Has a data analyst ever looked at this?" I asked. The answer was no. I could only imagine the patterns sitting there, unsurfaced from that data.

💡 Opportunities

1. Acquire an existing business from somebody close to retirement. Look for companies where the level of technology utilisation is low.

2. Provide consulting services focused on helping smaller manufacturers to embrace the latest software technology and tools.

3. Assist factories in getting data from old machines and turning it into valuable insights.

4. Enable predictive maintenance of machines within factories.

Spare Parts

If your business involves producing a machine or building a product with subcomponents, you almost guarantee a longtail business for spare parts.

One factory showed me their order data. They frequently sell spare parts at 2-6x multiples. Numerous owners explained how the same situation arises with their customers: When they sell a product, they also provide a recommended spare parts list that the customer should keep in stock. Invariably, someone uses a part and doesn't replace it (a common theme), or a customer makes a short-term cost-saving decision not to stock all of those recommended parts. Then the machine breaks.

In many cases, the customer doesn't have the internal resources to shop around for a quote. They took a risk by not stocking the recommended parts, and now their business is losing revenue every day that the machine is offline. Price sensitivity is very different in such a situation. In some cases, I heard that a factory can make so much on a spare part that they'll remove one from a machine currently on the production line. That impacted machine still gets delivered on time because they have a reliable spare part supplier and can order another one.

💡 Opportunities

1. Match a business with a supplier that has a spare part available for immediate dispatch.

2. Predict when customers will request spare parts.

3. Improve spare part inventory visibility.

This situation strikes me as a significant opportunity. How many companies get themselves into this situation? At any one moment, someone in the US probably has that spare part, and if there were more suppliers, then the price would naturally be driven down. The customer simply uses the original supplier because that company knows them, and they can quickly outsource their problem to them and get the machine back online.

Data Gathering and Unification

Even in small factories, there are many sources of data. I spoke with various owners who fully understood the importance of data, but several barriers existed between where they were today and where they wanted their business to be:

• What data does this machine gather?

• How does the data across my machines differ?

• Is that data accessible?

• If it is, is it worth accessing this data?

• How can we set up a data pipeline?

• How can we clean the data and then manipulate it?

• What are we optimising for?

• How can we interpret the data?

• How can we automatically surface the most relevant data insights?

Some factories I visited required an overarching strategy for both data and software. They couldn't deliver this in-house. The owners installed software at those factories in a piecemeal fashion. Without a CTO to guide the strategy, several factories reported installing software that did not meet expectations.

I visited one machine shop that was doing things differently. They were building software, a factory operating system. This was an exciting business with a visionary owner exploring deeper integration between those on the factory floor and software engineers.

💡 Opportunities

1. Factory operating systems targeted at specific types of manufacturing

2. Factory insights and automation software

3. Hardware solutions that automatically gather data from older machines

4. Data and software strategy implementation. Visit factories, analyse the existing machines, and determine how to collect all the data. Implement this system and provide meaningful insights based on the business objectives.

5. Show factories what other factories are doing and the anticipated ROI of doing the same.

Maintenance

Every factory that I visited had a different way of handling maintenance. They were at various stages of maintenance evolution – some were still doing reactive maintenance, whereby assets were allowed to run to failure. Others performed preventative maintenance by scheduling weekend downtime when someone would service the machine. Some had third-party maintenance contracts, and if anything went wrong, a technician would arrive the next day to repair the machine.

All of the factories I visited had yet to achieve predictive maintenance levels. I think that a sound data strategy is necessary before a factory can achieve a predictive maintenance strategy – you need to be confident that if you install industrial IoT devices, you have the skills and resources to interpret the alerts and data coming off those devices.

💡 Opportunities

1. Fractional CTO services for small factories

2. Step-by-step software and data services that bring the entire factory's software and business intelligence stack up to a standard where they can then embrace predictive maintenance and other ML-driven services.

3. Help small factory owners boost their business valuation by implementing a software and data strategy before they sell the business. Focus on improved efficiency and automation.

Quoting

The leading problem factories reported to me was taking skilled labour away from production and involving them in the quoting process. As a software guy, I naturally thought, why can't we have people outside of the factory contributing to these quotes, or better yet, could AI do this? Based on what the factories told me, I found it difficult to answer this question. I discovered a much-loved quoting software solution called Paperless Parts during my research process. I visited two different factories that gave me two opposing opinions. One said it couldn't capture the complexity of what they do, and another said it was perfect and had revolutionised their quoting. Both could be true because the factories produced different products of varying complexity – I'm simply highlighting that one solution doesn't work for all.

💡 Opportunities

1. Enable factories to produce accurate quotes quickly without taking skilled labour away from production.

There are significant opportunities for entrepreneurs...

I believe that there are significant opportunities for technology entrepreneurs in the following spaces:

Technology.

• Wearables designed for harsher manufacturing environments. Subject matter experts use these devices to document core knowledge. Others use them to see that knowledge when operating machines.

• Automated data collection systems that gather data, group it, and surface insights from it with a particular focus on knowledge learned on the job.

Education and Training.

• Upskilling and reskilling workers into manufacturing.

• Creating apprenticeships and schools for trades.

Artificial Intelligence and Automation.

• Redesign how machines function to lower the technical competency required to operate them.

• Make AI accessible to small and medium-sized factory owners with limited subject knowledge.

• Some companies are developing humanoid robots. Often, in manufacturing, it's possible to automate something, but it's not cost-effective to do so. Similarly, there will be tasks that make economic sense to pass off to a humanoid robot. Most small factories I visited would struggle with a) determining if humanoid robots are worth implementing, b) implementation, c) monitoring, d) maintenance and e) data insights to drive ROI.

Marketplaces.

• Create industry-specific marketplaces that match retirees with individuals or cohorts interested in buying their business.

• Create a marketplace for spare parts which requires minimal time and technical interaction to match buyers and sellers.

Software Services.

• The trend here is to tailor software services to be very simple to use and to have low time investment.

• Fractional CTO services to small factories to give them the skills required to have robust software and data strategies.

Factory owner retirement planning as a software service.

• Real-time factory order tracking updates software for the customer.

• Supply chain risk management software that provides tailored alerts for that factory. It could automatically check in with suppliers about specific risks and suggest alternative suppliers to the factory if the probability of disruption is high.

When I think about reshoring manufacturing, I often think about population differences between China and the US. Recent US policy has focused on derisking supply chains by bringing critical technology manufacturing back home or to closely allied nations. The differences between China and the US are profound – China has benefited from decades of rural-to-urban migration, which has enabled a constant stream of new workers who can be trained to produce goods. In comparison, the US deprioritised manufacturing, and workers consequently shifted to other sectors. Reshoring manufacturing on the scale that the US wants to achieve will involve serious upskilling and reskilling of labour and, in my opinion, a lot more automation than we are seeing today.

I believe that the US has a wonderful opportunity right now with manufacturing and automation. The economic, political, and demographic climate is different today. In recent decades, outsourcing for lower labour costs and reliance on other nations has been viewed positively. Today, at least in some critical technology categories, that is no longer true. Consequently, opportunities exist for entrepreneurs to figure out how to manufacture more efficiently in the US. We can not expect to manufacture products in the same way as nations with populations 4x as large and wildly different living standards. This is further complicated by the record number of daily retirees.

We must get creative, redesign how we produce things, and optimise for a future of increased supply chain resilience. The renaissance of manufacturing is underway.

Some of the questions which guided me in this direction:

• What might happen if global supply chains broke down?

• What did the COVID-19 pandemic reveal about our supply chain resilience?

• What are the likely consequences of declining birth rates?

• What are the potential implications of frosty relationships between economic superpowers?

• What conditions must be true for most of the world's products to be automatically produced?

• How might manufacturing change in the coming decades?

Through research and personal experiences, I have concluded that more STEM talent should be tackling hard problems at the intersection between manufacturing, automation, and ML.

How I got here

To date, I've built software and internet companies. They include Foro (software/AI automation), Purepoint (bespoke software engineering), Bowhurst (e-commerce), and Mighty Matcha (e-commerce).

When building my first company, I never once considered that it was only possible to create because others before me built great technologies and systems. Consider something as ubiquitous today as a computer. It's made up of many parts, designed, manufactured, and assembled in different countries, shipped across the globe, transported and placed into a warehouse, delivered to a store, and finally sold to me so I can code and build. That supply chain didn't just happen overnight; it took decades. It required people to collaborate and solve many hard problems along the way.

We needed to make physical things for the Internet era to be a possibility. I don't want to be Captain Obvious, but this point is worth stressing. If manufacturing is constantly disrupted, you won't be grilling meats with Zuck in the metaverse anytime soon. Likewise, Elon doesn't get his crater-view retirement pod on Mars unless STEM talent finds manufacturing a sexy career.

I think that globalisation gave North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand – I'll henceforth refer to them as 'the West' – a collective amnesia about the importance of making physical things. Brexit, the Covid-19 pandemic, the Ukraine war, inflation, and geopolitical tensions seem to be awakening the West to the importance of supply chain resilience.

Nations are waking up. The US is undergoing a huge reindustrialisation project partly due to the Inflation Reduction Act 2022 and the CHIPS Act 2022. The UK announced a new semiconductor strategy in May 2023. The European Parliament recently approved the European Chips Act.

Relying on other nations to produce components critical for your national security is flawed. We got into that situation because we got comfortable, and its cheaper. Imagine the goods we're going to need to produce at home as a prerequisite to us reshoring other, more complex products.

Constant disruption is the new normal – that's my belief. I don't know for long that will be true, but I think we're talking decades, not years. Reshoring will require us to rethink the way we manufacture goods so that they can be reliably produced at the right price. This will present plenty of problems for entrepreneurs to tackle.

What might be possible when we reshore manufacturing?

This is an exciting question to entertain because it reveals so many hard problems available for entrepreneurs to tackle. Traditionally, companies outsource because of cost, availability of labour, and access to specialised knowledge. Entrepreneurs looking at reshoring will need to systematically address each of those points. Here are some starting points for further exploration:

1. Could advances in production techniques, automation, and ML lead to factory configurations that are more versatile, thereby reducing total machinery costs?

2. How might AI help us to design different methods of production?

3. Which forms of automation would offset the higher onshore costs of labour?

4. Given current technological constraints, where is the optimal balance between manual and automated production? How many existing companies know their own optimal balance?

5. Which breakthroughs are required in automation and ML to build fully automated factories for an ever-increasing number of goods?

6. Could you apply software and internet business models to manufacturing? e.g. Subscribe to access guaranteed machine time or real-time variable pricing based on raw material and energy costs.

7. Could you fully automate the reverse engineering process and produce a part without infringing IP?

8. Could you build a network of microfactories closer to the end consumer of the goods they produce, and have them specialise in the most in-demand intermediary goods in that region?

9. How could you optimise the energy usage within a factory?

10. What about controlling the emissions produced?

11. Could an AI consume the latest research on materials science, manufacturing techniques, and production methods, and make decisions about how a factory should function?

Constraints are sometimes a blessing – they focus the mind on developing creative solutions to problems. There are incentives in all directions for entrepreneurs in this space.

Why am I curious about labour shortages?

In the first paragraph, I mentioned labour shortages. The pandemic provided a moment of pause and reflection for many people. Some took early retirement. Others decided to change careers.

Demography can reveal a lot about the anticipated future of a nation. Here are some recent stats I've learned:

Retirement

• About 10,000 people retire daily in the US. ³

• The final people belonging to the Baby Boomer generation (born 1946-1964) will reach retirement age in 2031.

• The peak of the baby boom era was 1960, therefore, daily retirements will peak in 2025. ³

• As their generational name implies, they were the largest generation.

Fertility Rates

• A fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman ensures a stable population. ⁴

• This assumes no net migration and mortality rates remain the same.

• China is facing demographic collapse. Its population will halve by 2100. ⁵

• The world population is expected to peak at just over 10 billion around 2100. ⁶

• Some European nations are projected to lose 10-15% of their people by 2050. ⁶

• Fertility rates have been below repopulation levels for several decades in many of the following countries:

Fertility rate data sourced from the OECD ⁴

When I consider the above data, here are the kinds of thoughts I have about manufacturing and automation:

• What industry knowledge will be lost when the Baby Boomers retire? How many owner operated manufacturing SMBs haven't digitalised all of their knowhow?

• If nations reshore, how will they handle labour shortages in the manufacturing sector? Will subcontracting of parts give way to full production by one company?

• Will we have enough people to do the research, science, and engineering required to make major breakthroughs in automation? Aren't we in a race against time type situation?

• How will finance evolve in an era of record retirement, ageing populations, the largest ever intergenerational wealth transfer when Baby Boomers die, and worker shortages?

• How likely is it that certain nations will offset their declining populations with mass immigration? Will people within those nations understand the necessity and be open to mass immigration?

• Fewer people in an economy typically means less consumption. Could a reshored factory designed for fewer end users operate differently? For example, what about agile factories capable of theoretically producing millions of different products in smaller quantities in contrast to a traditional production line method of making millions of a single product.

• With a smaller workforce, isn't the widespread adoption of robots a necessity?

• The five nations with the highest robot density – measured as the number of industrial robots per 10,000 workers – are South Korea (0.8), Singapore (1.1), Japan (1.3), Germany (1.6), and China (1.2). ⁷ Fertility rates, shown in brackets, are all below repopulation levels.

Why I care

I believe that we have a moral obligation to contribute positively towards the future for humanity. The intersection of manufacturing, labour shortages, and ML presents so many fascinating problems for entrepreneurs to tackle. I think this intersection represents a good quest!

Let's not forget how to build things. The industrial base is essential for progress. In an era where software companies dominate headlines and the bulk of venture capital flows in that direction, it's refreshing and inspiring to see creators who can bring together brilliant teams to tackle hard industrial problems. I've seen examples recently in the US, such as Varda Space Industries (Space Factories and Space Drugs!), Figure (Humanoid Robots), Machina Labs (Agile Manufacturing), Hadrian (Efficient Factories), Radiant (Portable Nuclear Microreactors), and in the UK, companies like Space Forge (Space Manufacturing). These companies are building physical things, daring to reinvent how things are done, and in some cases, inventing entirely new markets.

How you can help

I'd like to meet others who want to work or fund companies in this space. In particular, I'm looking for the following:

1. Discussions with people working at the intersection of manufacturing, robotics, and ML.

2. Discussions with VCs who are passionate about this topic.

3. Opportunities to shadow senior executives of companies building physical things in this space.

4. Introductions to startups and early-stage companies.

5. Introductions to others interested in starting a company.

Recently, I've been learning about venture capital financing. I wanted to understand how founders can be better prepared when fundraising. The Venture Deals course was designed to level the information playing field between founders and venture capitalists, making it an optimal starting point for my studies.

Brad Feld, the cofounder of Foundry, Techstars, and Venture Deals, and Jeff Harbach, CEO of Kauffman Fellows, created this course, and the following venture capitalists contributed their insights and opinions:

• Elliott Robinson, Partner, Growth Equity at Bessemer Venture Partners

• Miriam Rivera, CEO and co-founder at Ulu Ventures

• Nicole Glaros, Venture Capitalist, Entrepreneur, and Board Director

• Jaclyn Hester, Partner at Foundry

Brad originally wrote a book called Venture Deals with Jason Mendelson.

Course Structure

The course consists of 5 parts:

• Lesson 1: The Capital Ecosystem, Investor Engagement, and Best Practices

• Lesson 2: Preparing to Fundraise, How a VC Works, Valuation, and Cap Tables

• Lesson 3: Term Sheets and Negotiations

• Lesson 4: Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in Venture Capital

• Lesson 5: Mental Wellness

The Capital Ecosystem, Investor Engagement, and Best Practices – 8 takeaway points

The key players in the capital ecosystem

• Institutional Investors. They are known as Limited Partners (LPs) and act as the source of funds.

• Venture Capitalists. They are known as General Partners (GPs), and they raise funds to invest in companies.

• Corporate Venture Capitalists. Typically, large companies earmark capital for venture deals.

• Accelerators/Incubators/Studios. As their names suggest, they nurse startups and get them up and running. They provide introductions to investors and are often the source of early financing.

• Angel Investors. Angels are typically high-net-worth individuals and sometimes were even founders themselves. They most often invest at the earliest stages.

• Entrepreneurs/Family/Friends. Many companies get off the ground with the help of family and friends.

VCs make money when...

A portfolio company has a liquidity event. A liquidity event could be a sale, merger, or initial public offering (IPO). The fund will return that capital to investors, and the VC will keep their share. This description is intentionally simplified. To explore this further, see The Basics of Venture Capital Fund Distributions.

VC is a high-risk form of financing, and not all portfolio companies return capital to the VC. This fact means that VCs must seek out companies with tremendous growth and disruptive potential because those investments generate massive returns for the VC fund. It pays to be bold in your vision when pitching VCs.

Building human relationships with VCs is important (surprise!)

Most founders would say this is obvious, but I've seen startups violate this repeatedly. This usually occurs because of the startup being in a rush for cash, or the founders lacking prior relationships with VCs, or inexperienced founders not knowing how to raise funds.

Investors "invest in lines, not dots." To summarise this principle, speak to your potential investors early. Imagine the investor wants to plot you on a graph. If you reach out only when you're ready for investment, they can only assess you based on that one data point. Conversely, if you forge a relationship earlier, the investor can plot your progress on a graph. This approach will give the investor several data points to assess your growth and delivery ability.

When your company draws up a prospective investor list, target individual VCs at firms and consider creative ways your founding team can form bonds with them, like common schools attended, similar hobbies, or both belonging to an underrepresented group. Find a piece of content they've published that you can reference when you do connect with them. Work your own network to find people who know the VC. Don't know someone who knows them? Form a relationship with someone who knows them. Aim to find at least two people per VC, one who can make an introduction and another who can follow up for you later.

Engaging with investors is like dating, emphasising a human relationship, authenticity, honesty, and delivering on commitments. Handling rejection well can still lead to future opportunities.

When fundraising, your objective is to achieve a yes or a no quickly from an investor

Watch out for the 'maybe' investors. Many investors will say maybe because they don't gain anything from rejecting you early on. They might want to see if there is interest from other investors before they decide (FOMO runs strong in the world of VC!), which can slow down your process. Once you have established a relationship with the VC, get to a yes or no quickly.

Choose a lawyer who has experience with venture capital deals.

This approach will save you time, cost, and headaches, and your investors will also thank you! When an inexperienced lawyer raises objections or clarifications about perfectly standard clauses in financing documents, it can frustrate all parties. The VC-experienced lawyer will also know how to protect your interests during the deal.

65% of startups fail due to team issues

Research by Dr Noam Wasserman, formerly of Harvard Business School, indicates that 65% of startups fail due to team issues. VCs will naturally want to explore your team and its dynamics. How do you work together? Where are your strengths? What about weaknesses? How aware are you of these issues?

Spend some time researching common reasons why teams fail. In particular, why cofounders fall out. You will spend a lot of time with your co-founder and endure periods of high stress and tension, and it's a relationship which needs to be nurtured and maintained.

Preparing to fundraise requires good planning

The company's story is essential. What's your pitch? VCs are thinking about the growth potential of your company. Would you be a good steward of their capital? What are the risks within your business? Who are your competitors? Is your market growing or shrinking? What does your team look like?

Keep the above questions in mind when assembling your pitch deck. If you think about risks and opportunities within your business, your pitch deck will address the most pertinent investor questions.

Use a spreadsheet, CRM, or pipeline software to track your fundraising process. I've created a template prospective investor spreadsheet based on the one shown in the course.

Divide the investors into three groups: A, B, and C.

• Group A contains your dream investors, offering capital and deep expertise. These investors can massively influence your chance of success.

• Group B includes investors who can only offer you a little beyond their money.

• Group C is the 'we are desperate and will take anything' group.

Pitch to your group B investors first. Start at the very bottom of your group B list. The benefit of pitching to group B investors first is that you'll learn as you go. You'll understand common questions and how best to respond to them. You can use this information to refine your pitch and your conversational style.

Once your group B is exhausted, go to your group A list.

If groups A and B get you nowhere, go to group C, but if you reach this stage, there may be an issue with your company that needs to be addressed. Check the feedback you've received to date and look for themes. You'll probably need to address recurring issues before completing a successful fundraise.

If you follow a structured process when identifying and contacting VCs, you'll end up with the right investors and waste less time.

Do what you say you're going to do

Nicole Glaros placed a massive emphasis on this point. She explained that often, founders say they will do something by a specific date and then don't deliver on that date. It could be as simple as replying with some data. Even if you don't have the information you thought you would have by that date, send an update and offer a revised timeline.

Take no well

There's a range of reasons why your particular company might not suit a venture capitalist right now. Many of those reasons are not in your control. Maintain good relationships and take a ‘no’ well; that venture capitalist might invest in you at a future point.

2. Preparing to Fundraise

Preparing to Fundraise, How a VC Works, Valuation, and Cap Tables - 7 takeaway points

Think seriously before raising venture capital.

7/10 venture-backed companies fail. The odds are not in your favour! Discuss with your cofounders to decide if venture capital is the correct financing for your company. Raising venture capital can distract you from building a profitable company and introduce new external pressures on your team.

If you decide to fundraise, understand what venture capitalists will consider about your company. VC funds typically want to return 3-5x on the money they borrow from their investors. If 7/10 of their investments never return capital, then the math is such that a minority of companies within the fund need to produce exceedingly large multiples. Ask yourself:

• Could we generate a 10x+ return for investors?

• What's our exit strategy?

• How long will we be in this company?

VCs must see tremendous growth potential, an exit strategy, and a realistic liquidity timeline.

Think like an investor

When an investor reviews your company, they are looking at several things:

• What are the risks and opportunities associated with your company?

• Investors "invest in lines, not dots."

• Does this investment opportunity suit me/my fund right now? Experienced fundraisers will speak with venture capitalists about their fund's lifecycle. It's okay to be direct about this. For example, a typical VC fund lifecycle is ten years. There will be a specific investment period, usually five years, followed by a support period in which they help the portfolio companies to flourish. I've left out some of the nuances here for brevity. The key takeaway point is to ask the fund about its lifecycle.

• Will this team be good stewards of the capital we provide?

Understand how a VC firm makes money

Typically, a VC firm makes money in two main ways:

1. Management fee - The annual fee charged by the VC. Usually, it's around 2% of the capital committed within the fund.

2. Carried interest (carry) - The percentage of profits the VC keeps, usually 20%.

Carry is the main thing a VC is interested in.

10-20% of investments will generate 80-90% of the fund's returns.

Understand the typical VC fund lifecycle

Some key definitions:

• Fund life - The duration of the fund. Typically, ten years with a two-year extension (at the discretion of the VC).

• Investment period - when the funds get deployed. Typically 2-5 years.

• Therefore, if a fund is in its fifth year or later, it might not have funds to invest in new companies.

• Vintage year - The year the fund first deployed capital.

• Dry powder - The remaining money in a fund.

Experienced entrepreneurs will ask a VC about the vintage year and how much dry powder remains. This information helps the entrepreneur to understand if this fund could commit additional capital when the company needs to raise capital next.

On the topic of valuation...

Many early-stage companies delay the valuation conversation by issuing convertible notes, often with a cap. You can learn more about this over at YCombinator's Documents page.

Before going out to market, look at similar companies to gauge their valuations. Your valuation will likely be a product of how much you want to raise, how much dilution you will tolerate, and how much your investor needs to own.

Brad Feld says that a Series A investor typically looks for 15-20% of the company. He recommends having valuation conversations early on with your handful of suitable investors. Explain to them that you want to raise X for Y% of the business and ask if that fits with them. Brad also recommends asking whether the valuation you're receiving is pre- or post-money. Not asking the investor and misunderstanding this concept can trip up founders.

Don't lie to VCs about offers you've received because it's an interconnected industry, and information flows between different venture capital firms when they want to test your claims.

If you are lucky to obtain multiple term sheets, sit down with your other founders and consider the pros and cons of each investor. Measure their values and decide what fits best with your company.

Know thy cap table

A cap table lists which entities own what of the company. You could make it in Excel or use software tools provided by companies like SeedLegals.

Investors want to see your cap table to ascertain how much of the company you own and whether you have an employee options pool to incentivise and attract staff.

Founders commonly make mistakes about whether a valuation is pre- or post-money. Consider the following example:

• $10m valuation

• $5m investment

• If this is a post-money valuation, the $5m bought the investor 50% of the company.

• If this is a pre-money valuation, the $10 + $5m = $15m and the $5m bought the investor 33% of the company.

• Always ask if a valuation is pre- or post-money!

Modelling your future cap table can also help to avoid simple misunderstandings.

Keep your cap table clean.

When you're fundraising, investors will want to see your cap table because it gives them an idea of your company's ownership structure. The investors will look for many key things; having a clean cap table is ideal.

A clean cap table refers to the following:

• The number of investors. Sometimes, a startup could have many angel or crowdfunding investors. Lots of investors can create a headache and a time overhead.

• No bad debts.

• No toxic convertible notes, defined as one in which an early-stage investor ends up with a disproportionately large amount of your company.

• No investors holding shares with much better rights than others (e.g. liquidation preferences)

• Preferably no ex-founders who left and still own a sizeable amount of the company

3. Term Sheets and Negotiations

Term Sheets and Negotiations

Term sheets include three main types of terms, which relate to:

1. Economics

2. Control

3. Other

Economic Terms

Founders tend to focus on the headline price/valuation, but several other terms adjust the valuation. Let's consider each:

Employee option pools

Many investors will insist that you have an unissued employee option pool in the deal. Consider two scenarios:

£10m pre-money valuation - 20% option pool = £8m pre-money

Compare this to asking for the 20% option pool post-money; your valuation would now be £12m.

£10m pre-money valuation + 20% option pool = £12m post-money.

Always determine if a valuation is pre- or post-money. Similarly, if you have already issued some options, ask the VC if the 20% option pool will include the already issued options.

Warrants

If your company has issued an investor a warrant, ensure this is accurately recorded on your cap table. Warrant issues often arise when lawyers go through the fundraising details. If you didn't disclose the warrant to the investor, you, not the investor, will likely suffer the additional dilution.

Liquidation Preferences

When you issue a liquidation preference, you give an investor preferred stock with particular characteristics. This will alter the eventual payouts received during an exit. It's vital to understand the implications of liquidation preferences. To learn more about the different types of liquidation preferences, see: What is a Liquidation Preference? and Beware of the Trappings of Liquidation Preference.

Vesting

Getting founder-to-founder vesting right from the start is critical. Don't avoid difficult cofounder conversations at the beginning of your company because those conversations will only become more complex with time. A vesting agreement gives each founder some level of protection if another founder does something unexpected. A standard vesting schedule is 4 years, either annually, quarterly, or monthly.

Brad Feld gives an example of 3 founders he invested in who said they were committed to working together forever. He tried to argue why they should sign a vesting agreement, and they were suspicious that he wanted it to ease one of them out. Brad liked them and said, “don't worry about the vesting.” Within one year, one founder fired another; within two years, another founder was no longer active in the business. All three founders had the same stock, and one of the founders working on the company was frustrated by the value increases that the other founders were receiving.

Key lesson: Founders should protect each other from themselves by having vesting.

Redemption Rights

An investor with redemption rights can insist that the company pay them a certain amount for their shares after a particular time. This is to protect the investor when a company isn't moving towards an exit.

Anti-dilution protection

Whenever a company issues new shares, the existing shareholders are diluted. This is fine when the company's valuation is increasing, but if the company has to raise funding at a lower valuation, then existing investors will want protection. This is where anti-dilution comes into effect.

This impacts your valuation because you'll need to give existing shareholders with anti-dilution protection more shares, which changes the economics of the valuation you received from the new investors.

Ask your lawyer about anti-dilution protection clauses in your term sheet and look out for and avoid at all costs full-ratchet anti-dilution, which is hugely dilutive because it, in effect, reprices your new round at your old round's price.

Remember that you never know when the market conditions will change. Even if your company is growing well, a future fundraise could be at a lower valuation for reasons beyond your control. Protect your interests!

Control Terms

Founders often mistakenly believe that they control the company if they own 50% or more. In reality, the control terms can dramatically change who has the power within the company.

Here are some key ways that control within a company can be altered:

Board of Directors

The board is ultimately responsible for the company's management. Aim to have other non-financial directors on your board, even at an early stage.

Broadly speaking, there are three main types of directors:

1. Common stock directors (including founders and the CEO)

2. Investor seats (one or many)

3. Independent directors

Investors will tend to add a financially-minded director per investment round. Brad Feld coauthored another book entitled Startup Boards: A Field Guide to Building and Leading an Effective Board of Directors, which addresses board composition. One noteworthy point is to add an independent director for every investor director who joins your board in a new round.

Configuring your board of directors to be diverse and have the right people on it will be good for business, especially if your board represents the same diversity as your customer base.

Protective Provisions

If these provisions exist, you have to get consent from your investors to do certain things. This changes the control dynamic within the business, so pay careful attention to protective provisions. You want to avoid overly burdensome ones. For example, some standard protective provisions include:

1. Preventing the company from changing the stock without the investors' consent

2. Preventing the company from selling without the investors' consent

3. Prevent the company from taking on debt that would have seniority over equity investments

Some bad protective provisions which could slow down your company and lead to strange power dynamics might be:

1. An investor needs to approve all commercial transactions.

2. An investor can veto the decisions of the majority.

Drag Along Rights

A term to describe a situation where you would vote your stock in alignment with the majority. It allows a class of investors to 'drag along' other investors.

Like founder-to-founder vesting, drag-along rights seem undesirable to founders initially, but make a lot of sense. For example, imagine a founder leaving a business on bad terms and having considerable company equity, and they could hold up decisions due to the size of their shareholding. Drag-along rights would prevent such a situation.

Conversion Rights

This allows investors to convert preferred stock into common stock. You can have optional and mandatory conversion rights. A mandatory conversion right would be a situation like an IPO, when all preferred stock converts into common stock. An optional conversion right might arise when it's more advantageous for an investor to own common stock than preferred stock, for example, when there is a low liquidation preference multiple, and the company sells for a high valuation.

Other Terms

Focus mainly on the economic and control terms. There are some other terms on a term sheet which are noteworthy:

Dividends - Aim for non-cumulative rather than cumulative. Cumulative is more common in PE deals, whereas non-cumulative is in VC deals.

Information Rights - Often, there's a threshold to determine access to company information. If you have a lot of smaller investors, you might want to grant them a different level of information access than your leading investors.

Rights of First Refusal - Grants existing investors the right to invest in the next round. A simple pro-rata right is perfectly reasonable.

Voting Rights - Check with your lawyer that these are boilerplate to avoid situations where an investor can have an unfairly disproportionate voting voice.

No-shop Agreement - This exists to prevent the founders from taking that term sheet elsewhere to try and get a better deal. It gives the investor confidence that you're acting in good faith and willing to do all you can to make this deal happen with them.

Remember, working with VC-experienced legal counsel will save you time and hassle. They will help you to identify and push back against abnormal terms. It will also show your investors that you take negotiations seriously.

Negotiations

There's an asymmetry for founders going into a venture capital financing negotiation. The VC has likely done this many more times than the founder!

Three key things to remember:

1. Make sure the VC feels heard and understood. Use basic mirroring or rephrasing to achieve this.

2. Listen more than you talk.

3. Always have a next step.

Be Prepared with your Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA)

Establish with your cofounders what your BATNA is, and be clear about the terms that matter to you. Your BATNA represents the most advantageous alternative you can take if negotiations fail. If you negotiate without knowing your BATNA, you'll likely get pushed in a direction that makes you unhappy later.

Understand who you are negotiating with

This conversation is ultimately about people. People have different motivations and self-interests. What motivates and excites the people you're negotiating with? What personality type do they have, and how does this impact their negotiation style? Try and figure this out during the fundraising journey with them.

4. Diversity, Equity and Inclusion

During this lesson, six different VCs offered their perspectives on DE&I and how it influences their investing decisions:

Brad Feld

Brad's key point is that during the process of learning more about diversity, equity and inclusion, he often made mistakes about how he referred to certain things. He used to feel guilty about this, but realised that these moments are necessary if you really care about building a diverse, equitable and inclusive company. Reframing those moments as valuable learning steps on a work-in-progress pathway can be helpful.

Elliott Robinson

Elliot's key point is to remove this outdated idea of cultural fit and replace it with values fit. When hiring new team members, think about their cultural add. You want to expand your company's access to novel ideas and opinions. If you start with diversity from the beginning, those roots and foundations will expand. DE&I isn't just marketing; it's superior business practice.

Miriam Rivera

Diverse teams perform better because they draw on different life experiences. When you systematically overlook communities, you miss out on markets and opportunities. The same is true for a company. A diverse team will understand the needs of a broader range of customers.

Nicole Glaros

When we can lean into our differences as competitive advantages rather than weaknesses, we bring a diversity of thinking to the table. We can build better businesses that way and a more equitable society for everyone. Use your diversity strengths to strengthen the room.

Jaclyn Hester

Diverse perspectives lead to more informed decision-making.

Jeff Harbach

The entrepreneurs who will solve the world's greatest problems in the 21st century will likely be the same people who have experienced those problems.

5. Mental Wellness

Mental Wellness - Guidance from the Teachers

• Do your part to reduce the stigma around mental health.

• Being a founder is challenging; don't suffer in silence.

• Stress and anxiety with no end in sight are not good things. Some stress can be good, for example, if you are working to push your limits slightly and then following that up with some time to rest and recover.

• Being a CEO can be lonely because you have to choose what you share with different people at the company. Your positivity and mental well-being also set a tone for others. Miriam tries to be vulnerable at work to make it safer for others to do the same.

• Success is hard. Build tools and systems of support for your mental well-being during difficult journeys.

• Sometimes it can be helpful to join communities where you can connect with others and share stories.

• If you are working remotely, getting together occasionally with your team can help build empathy.

And finally...

Think of your uniqueness as your competitive advantage. Shed yourself of the individuals who don't allow you to do that.