Watch all video interviews from eTail East 2010.
Sponsored by
Chris Friedland has started a few companies and is currently the founder and CEO of Build.com, an online retailer which was recently acquired by a large British firm. I caught up with Chris at eTail East, an e-commerce conference, to talk start-ups and entrepreneurship.
The Start-up CEO
Chris talks about how historically he’s been a “start-up” CEO, who has the idea, launches a company, takes a risk, and grows the company to the point where venture capitalists and other professional investors bring in a new CEO to take the company to the next level of growth.
Build.com is the first company he’s started where he has remained CEO during the next phase of growth, from $10 million in revenue to $50 million in revenue. This phase of growth often requires different skill-sets than the growth phase from zero to $10 million in sales.
Staying on for the next phase of growth has taught Chris some lessons on what it takes to move from entrepreneurial CEO to professional CEO.
DNA of an Entrepreneur
The main thing that distinguishes an entrepreneur from a typical business person is that when everyone else says something can’t be done, or won’t work, an entrepreneur continues to figure out how to innovate and make something work that “can’t be done.” Vision, or ignorance, allows an entrepreneur to see past all the common objections to a business idea.
Zeal and focus are important for an entrepreneur to be successful.
Lessons for Entrepreneurs
Chris stresses the importance of structure and giving employees clear direction and management. A CEO needs to set the vision, put employees on a path, regardless of whether it is ultimately the right or wrong path, and then allow employees to perform to the best of their capability.
Hiring New Employees
Chris would rather have a really diligent hard worker than an all-star thinker or analyst who doesn’t actually execute. He looks for scrappy “doers” who are willing to make mistakes and move on. During a job interview, Chris often listens to hear how someone would solve a real world problem the start-up is having.
Does that person take an analysts approach (which includes a lot of planning and process) to problem solving or propose ideas that show a willingness to experiment? In short, do they come up with scrappy executable ideas for how they would solve the problem and embrace the possibility of failure?
