This is one of the most frequently asked questions by startups and scaleups founders. Yet, answers on the topic are not straightforward and often the search for the perfect structure leads to greater waste and falling deeper into that inflection point you are trying to address with this question in the first place.
Yara will answer the question for you, sharing a thinking framework that is adaptable to different stages of maturity of your company.
Auto-generated transcript - may contain errors. Tap a timestamp to jump the video.
Hey, folks. We're back for our last session of the day. Before we get into that, just a quick word about some of our partners. If you if you haven't, go check out the featured partners section on the in the web app, or the phone app, and especially the the expo if you're looking for your your next opportunity, you can filter by hiring.
And then you can find all the companies that have posted jobs in there, right in the partner booth. So for example, Amazon Dev Center is currently hiring for software devs. Current health are growing super fast and hiring data scientists and customer success managers.
Our pals at administrate are on the hunt for more senior software engineers, and others as well as product jobs, design jobs, etc. So well worth checking out if you're if you're looking to make a move. Okay, next up, we're going to hear from Yara Paoli, who used to live in Edinburgh hereabouts.
And she was, she played a pretty important role in the Skyscanner journey, which we'll hear a little bit about when we chat to her. They were a pretty small organization when she started and pretty huge by the time she left. And so she's been there and got the T shirt and done it all on the growth journey.
But today, she's going to talk to us about structuring for growth and what the best structures for growth might look like. So let's jump in with Yara Paoli. Hello, everybody. I'm Jara Paoli, Chief Growth Scientist at GrowthOS and the former Global VP of Growth at Skyscanner.
I currently work as a growth mentor and advisor across several accelerators, amongst which China Accelerator, Mobile Oil Accelerator, and the female angel investor, Xie1K. Today, I will answer the frequently asked question about what is the best structure for growth. I will talk through the why, when, and how of the best growth structure.
What is the best structure for growth is actually the number one question that I get asked from the startups and scale ups that I work with. I will start saying that I think this is a very, very good question to ask. But the problem is that very often, you get asked with a superficial intent and a misleading understanding of growth.
In fact, leaders and founders that ask me this question have probably heard or read about growth themes somewhere out there. And they seem to expect from me a visually easy to grasp and an even easier to apply org chart that will magically unlock greater growth.
What I would expect from them instead is to be open and ready to dig into the why a structure exists and what growth problem or opportunity you want to address with a structural change. So let's start from the hard truth. There is not a universal best structure for growth.
The best structure answer is not about the shiny growth theme that you can show off or plug in and play with, but a deep molecular change to your organization. This change aims at enabling your people to become more functional in unlocking growth systematically.
This means doing that better, faster and more sustainably. An Organigram in this sense is just the tip of the iceberg and the last step in a reorg process. Today, I will share a concrete growth oriented framework that you can use to structure for growth.
But on the basis of what I've just said, I want to first get rid of some wrong assumptions that are out there. Growth is not a hack, nor it is just a methodology. It is an operating system that you create for the people in your company to enable sustainable growth.
So in order to do that, to deliver long term sustainable growth, growth itself needs to be baked in your entire company DNA. And how you structure your teams helps you doing exactly that. So the second question that we need to ask ourselves is when should a startup think about restructuring for growth?
Well, again, there isn't an exact time to reorg for growth nor to build a growth team, But there are three crucial moments in the journey of a startup around which lots of challenges might arise. And it makes sense to some extent to consider a growth team.
For instance, the first crucial moment is the achievement of some good level of product market fit. I wouldn't recommend to think about building a growth team before that. And the reason is that you need to focus your entire energy on unlocking core product value for your users.
Only after doing that, you can start considering a possible reorganization for growth. The second crucial moment in the journey of a startup is when you are considering to open a new market. Let's say that you have achieved a good level of market share in your original market, and you start considering to open up in a second, third or even multiple markets at once.
The third point is when you're launching new products or verticals. And keep in mind that the point in time number two and point three can be interchangeable in this sense. So, in an ideal scenario, your startup would fly through all these steps, growing exponentially and sustainably.
However, the reality is often quite different, and you will incur into several negative growth risks and potential strategic inflection points, right around one of the three strategic pivotal moments or during the scale up phase of your user base. And some of the causes that might lead to growth flattening or declining are around your startup potentially operating system with, for example, big gumballs going around.
This happens usually when your organisation is not very data driven. And these inevitably lead to an unsustainable acquisition that, for example, does not focus on retention. Or, for example, when you don't have in place the right payback and monetization strategy. Another scenario might be that your organization is not sharply focused on optimisation of the growth funnels.
Again, you might be in another scenario for which you are hiring a lot, because you don't lack funding resources, but the growth outcomes in your startup do not follow the hiring. Well, so when should you think about creating a growth team? Let's say that you are in a so called reactive scenario.
This is basically when you realize that you have already entered an inflection point or that your growth has already started declining. And therefore you might want to take a countermeasure as soon as possible. You might want to try to pull the production cord and understand why your growth is declining.
What you would do next is to build a team around this, so to experiment as much and as fast as possible to get your growth rate going up again across all your prior metrics. However, this is quite risky as the farther you go, the more difficult it is to change the DNA of your company.
And indeed, it might be too late to fix the root cause of your growth decline. At Skyscanner, for example, we moved from a traditional marketing organization to a growth oriented one quite late in time. At that point, in fact, we had already launched three verticals, flights, hotels and car hires.
And we had started to do several marketing activities across different regions in EMEA, in APAC and in Americas. The problem is that we didn't really achieve product market fit consistently across the verticals. And we didn't really achieve a good level of localization in all the markets in which we had opened already.
So we had that scenario of big waste in our system that called for an entire review of our organisation and then a move into a growth oriented team. We have another type of scenario, which is a proactive one. In this type, you enable your organisation to predict and spot the leading indicator of a possible inflection point.
And you start planning your reorganization based on the insights that you gather. This approach is fully data driven and is more farsighted than the previous one, of course. And the advantage is that it allows you for more time to plan the right reorg for growth.
I will share an example of this in practice. What I like to call out here is that lots of accelerators and angel investor groups have understood that the earlier you embed the growth mindset, the more likely it is the startup will have a core growth DNA that scales in the next phases of the startup.
This helps with having a more adaptable organization that will most likely not only keep surviving and evolving through different challenges, but also helps you help you growing faster and more sustainably. I have two examples to share with Preply, which is an online marketplace for online language learning, and with the colonial, which is the leading online grocery retailer in Norway, we have anticipated the risk of inflection point and we have foreseen challenges ahead.
So we started to structure for growth well before bumping into a significant growth risk. This of course played at the advantage of the company and it was followed by significant growth results. The gross team restructure scenario can lead indeed to a significant impact on your overall growth outcomes.
And I guess at this point, the right question to ask ourselves then is how would you structure to get those results? So, before giving you a concrete answer to this question, I want to add one more note that you cannot create a good structure for growth nor a growth theme unless your definition of growth is clear.
Now, I would like to ask you to stop for a moment and think. What is your definition of growth? And how does this differ from a colleague of yours that works in finance, in marketing, in product, in commercial? Well, I've done this test myself and I've asked this question to several of my colleagues that work across this function.
And as you can see from the written answers here, I got a great variety of answers that go from revenue growth to employees development, to gross marketing, to growth being a mindset. Ninety eight percent, by the way, of the answers I got fall within one of these.
It's quite messy, isn't it? Well, so in the context of thinking about the best structure for growth, I want to therefore agree on the fundamental definition of growth. And I picked three that I call three DNA level definition of growth. I guess by now it is no secret that the more tests you run-in your company, the more likely it is that you're going to grow.
This graph, in fact, is a well known testimonial from Twitter back in the days on the impact that their accelerated testing had on their growth. And this is why the rapid experimentation methodology is at the core of the popular term growth hacking. So the first DNA level definition of growth that I want to share with you today is about growth being a scientific methodology to discover and optimize ways to connect, ways to distribute your core product value to your target audience.
The second definition of growth is that growth, finally, is your desired outcome. Let's not forget that. And in particular, we're talking about sustainable growth, which according to the very lean startup is about getting new customers from the actions of past customers. In this sense, accountability of this type of growth should be shared across the entire organisation and it cannot be the sole responsibility of one single growth team.
The third DNA level definition of growth, and for me the most important one, is that growth is a people operating system that enables sustainable growth for the business at company DNA level. So thinking about your structure for growth, again, on one hand, it means thinking about how you enable your people organization to deliver sustainable growth.
One via the user value creation, and two, be a scientific methodology that continuously helps you increasing your core growth metrics and the funnels. What happens is that lots of organization build around acquisition and revenue alone, while sustainable growth starts from user value creation and useful funnel, which is represented by the right side of this slide.
So, while the role of product and marketing is often very clear and the parts they own as well, digging deeper into the accountability for the growth metric funnels reveal in the great majority of the cases an absent or unclear ownership around activation, retention and referrals.
Basically, what makes your growth sustainable in the long run. I must add that the terminology out there does not help either, nor to make clarity around responsibility, nor on accountability, as even growth experts, senior marketeers, product directors would actually struggle to give you a very clear definition of the terms that you see written here, let alone distinguish them from one another.
And yet these terms get used interchangeably in many discussions and even in hiring processes for growth. So, to cut through the chase, a good way to start visualizing a sustainable growth oriented structure is based on assigning the accountability of our pirate metrics optimization, basically the value distribution funnels to a growth team.
That you call it growth or not is another story. But at this point, I'm sure you've got these questions in mind. Where should I start? Should I start from building all these teams together? Or how do I prioritize them? And in the process, should I hire hackers?
Well, let me be straight on this one. You do not start from hiring growth hackers nor from moving people around. You start from identifying your biggest growth opportunities and the constraints that block you from achieving further growth. And then you build an adaptable structure around those.
So now I will share a practical example of how I normally approach this issue with the company that I work with. What we have clarified so far is that, one, we want to achieve sustainable growth for our startup, ideally avoiding inflection points. Two, we want to adopt a scientific approach to discover and optimize ways to distribute our core product value to our target audience.
And three, that we need to define growth clearly for our organization. And only after doing that, we can build our structure around it. While the final output, as we said at the very beginning, certainly requires to have a clear organigram in place, the initial step is about understanding what you need to build your growth structure around.
And a people organigram that is not backed by data insights, very often answer more to a personal power need than to the company need for long term sustainable growth. That is why we start from building a data driven org chart, namely a North Star Metric Organigram.
So talking about alignment on definition, let's be clear on what a North Star Metric is. It is the single metric that best captures the core value that your product delivers to customers. I have picked an example for an online marketplace for online language learning.
A good North Star metric that captures the core product value delivered to customer might be this one: weekly classes taken with high tutor rating. This is actually quite a good one because it encompasses a measurement of quality of product value for the customers, as well as a frequency in the weekly classes part.
What we do after defining our North Star metric and obviously making it clear across the organization is breaking it down into its core inputs and drivers, basically the key performance indicators that can impact positively our North Star metric. So you see here, I've called out the first layer of inputs into our north star metric, new customers, recurring customers, revenue per customers.
The following part of this exercise is basically mapping out all the inputs and growth levers that can impact our north star. So, you see called out all our AARRR metrics and then farther down more in detail. We need to map this meticulously to make sure that we understand our core growth levers.
And once we have done this part of the exercise, we want to run several funnel analysis across our parametrics and across our core drivers that we have identified here. So, for example, here, I picked the final analysis of activation. In this particular example, it is the journey of a student from the first landing to experience core product value for the first time until they form a habit with my product.
I then repeat this exercise across other growth panels to identify clearly and numerically my biggest constraints to further growth and therefore my key opportunities. You can see here that I highlighted two steps. One is the one highlighted in red, which is a conversion to a registered student.
And the second one is the one in orange, which is a student booking a class for the first time. After doing that, ideally, we might want to investigate and understand what is a good industry benchmark. So, for example, we find out that the industry benchmark of people registering on a site similar to ours is ten percent.
This helps us identifying that we have five percent point to actually fill with our exercise and with our refocus onto this particular part of the user journey. So doing this exercise, what I can do is to end up mapping in a quantitative and qualitative way my ten times growth opportunity.
So the result of this process basically is something like this, where you visualize your prioritized growth opportunity in an overarching system. In this case, I had identified, for example, time times type of opportunity for growth in the activation optimization, times three in referrals, and then times five type of growth in revenue, in particular, looking at conversion to the first booking and then on the pricing for our classes.
Once I have my North Star metric or chart mapped out and my greatest growth constraints called out, I can then start planning and building the best possible growth structure for my company at this point in time. One more note on this is that it's really, really important to build an adaptive organization that can continuously discover and work on new sources of pros consistently and systematically.
And this is important because it minimizes also the impact of change that I'm sure you know, it can be quite costly for organizations. So, the result in Structure for Growth, probably the best for your company right now, is the one that is prioritized by opportunity, that is sharply focused on the growth funnels, might that be organized by metrics or flows, and that is built for speed of experimentation and adaptability to new cross opportunities while maximizing the impact on your North Star metric.
I'd like to conclude and leave you with some key takeaways. So the most important one is that your growth operating system is bigger than your growth team. And actually structuring for growth is very different from embedding growth hackers in your organization. Also, does not equal one single team and is not one team responsibility.
However, the earlier you embed a growth team, the easier will be to replicate that growth DNA across the future organization. The reorganization for growth process require the right mindset and leadership too, and for sure, a data driven approach. In this sense, an alignment on the definition of growth is a prerequisite to all the process that I've talked you through today.
And the best way to do this, as we've seen, is to first define your North Star metric, then identify your biggest growth opportunities to increase that and structure flexibly around them. Last but not least, the right mindset and culture are the other essential components of your growth operating system that will fully support your people on the execution of growth at scale.
Thank you very much. I hope this was helpful for you. Okay, huge amount to to absorb and dig into there. And we've got Yara here with us to help us. So we're going revisit some of the some of the ideas in the talk.
But first of all, maybe hear a little bit about what Yara is up to right now. So if you're there, Yara, come come on in. Welcome to the stage. Thank you. How are you? Thank you. Must be for you to be back in Edinburgh like this, right?
Yes, it is fantastic. A virtual Edinburgh with a virtual rain and sitting comfortably my office in Barcelona. So perfect combination. Nice, nice. My old my old, where I used to live in Barcelona. But yeah, at least you've you know, you've already been you've lived in Edinburgh a long time, you know, the city, so you're not missing that part.
But you had a pretty important part of your career here in in your role at Skyscanner or your various roles at Skyscanner. Maybe maybe we start there. Can you talk us through well, when you joined Skyscanner, was pretty small organization. Right? And maybe talk us through your your original what you what you joined to do and what you ended up doing and that the evolution of that, of your journey there within the company?
Sure, with pleasure. So I joined Skyscanner as employee number thirty two. So as you say correctly, we were indeed a very small startup working out of a very small office. And you must know that I joined to actually manage and grow the Italian market when Skyscanner was just starting their internationalization strategy and opening up and starting to localize the mainly flies product for several European markets.
So my journey with the Skyscanner started as what we call back then a market development manager role to localize entirely the product for the Italian market, understanding the Italian travelers. And I would say a posteriori, that was a real growth role because it encompassed everything from identifying and prioritizing commercial deals with airlines and OTAs, to translating, localizing the product, meaning, you know, everything from copywriting to translations for product, to then obviously establishing a marketing strategy from scratch.
And that's included SEO, SEM, all the traditional channels, plus some creative experimentation around, you know, local platforms, their relationship with journalists, PR, etc, etc. So, I think I covered the role for a year and a half. And it was quite a full on journey, But I would say also quite successful, because when we started in Italy, we had around one hundred and fifty thousand users.
And when I moved on to the next challenge, we had already reached one million and we had a positive ROI for every marketing campaign that we were running. So, I thought back then that it was a good next step for me to actually take on the challenge of building up a social media strategy.
Consider that back then, you know, Facebook was at the beginning, they hadn't even released their paid advertising opportunities yet. And I was given the chance to actually build that strategy from scratch, exploring the beauties and the unknowns of, you know, using social media, Facebook, Twitter, and then obviously the local version of it, for example, became Russia and, you know, neighbor in South Korea to acquire users and also engage with them all over, you know, the course of the traveler experience.
And only later also use it as a very powerful acquisition channel. When Facebook started to release, I think now obviously it's a very used tool, but the app install ads, you know, that they were just released in beta when we first actually jumped on that opportunity.
So this was my second stage. And you know, we became a pretty good team and big team, you know, twenty four social media manager across the globe, tasked actually with the, you know, acquisition and engagement type of goals. And after that, you know, is when actually the famous transformation of Skyscanner from a traditional marketing organisation to a growth orientated one started to happen.
And I had the luck to be given the opportunity to be one of the leaders actually leading this transition. So my next role was, I would say, a full blown growth role where, you know, we started to reshape the org from just marketeers to operating in tribes and squads.
And the so called tribe that managed back then was called central growth tribe. So everything to do with marketing automation, algorithmic marketing, channels, enablement, optimization, and expansion at scale, and then building up strategy tactics and tools to serve actually the markets expansion needs.
And this role is the one that probably I've been on for the majority of my years. So the last five out of eight years that I've been with Skyscanner. And it took many forms and many shapes because it was an extremely experimental journey, experimental in the structures that we were trying out, in the way we were managing relationship with the customers, internal customers, meaning the regions and external customer, meaning the travellers.
And then, you know, in all the challenges and the ambitions that continuously was growing for Skyscanner until we got acquired, which is probably the most known bit and farther after that, you know, with the farther evolution into growth, working more closely with products, etc, etc.
So yeah, my journey was quite complex, quite varied, and certainly never boring. Lots of personal learning, professional learning, and I guess also team and company level, you know, great growth results. Yeah, it's it's a it's a fascinating journey. It's kind of it's really interesting hearing about the early days of social media.
It seems like a pretty distant memory. But, yeah, at that at the start, there were so many opportunities. I I mean, even with stuff like LinkedIn, they only brought in targeted ads, what, two years ago or something. So some of them are are still catching up.
Now you your role you you work with GrowthOS now. That's your cofounder there. And in your current role, you are a mentor and advisor to a bunch of startups. What kind of mistakes do you see growth teams making the most often? Well, the first one is what I was mentioning in the presentation, which is not having a clear definition of growth.
I saw someone asking in the chat how many of the startups I work with, right? Not having a clear definition of growth. And I would say all of them. Normally, I ask them, okay, why do you want the growth team? Why do you want to shape your organisation for growth?
They normally tell me because we want to increase our revenue. So, then I ask, you know, okay, is that your definition of growth? And the majority of the startups say yes. So, they identify growth with an increase in the revenue. And I think that's a massive mistake to make, because it shows a very short sighted vision for how the product might grow or more likely not grow in the long run.
So, it doesn't include necessarily an element of sustainability. So, which normally comes out obviously on a focus on retention on creating continuously value for your customers. So, once they have experienced, you know, the core value, they keep coming back at scale ideally. But also, you know, as I was quoting from the Lean Startup, it's about having the right methodology to think about getting word-of-mouth going and getting referrals going, because you focus so much and so well on creating value for your customers, that then, you know,
it should be a relatively easy step to get existing users to refer to new ones without having to continuously pay. So, would say to summarise an answer is the lack of a clear definition of growth is one mistake that I see happening quite a bit.
And it's followed by, you know, a whole set of scenarios that come as a consequence of that, which means lack of clear methodology about how to approach growth, and unclear definition of accountability and responsibility between product marketing, commercial teams and so on. And also, you know, a consequent waste that they create even in a small startup of ten, fifteen, twenty people about, you know, what do we focus on?
How do we prioritize and, you know, how do we align our efforts to that, you know, definition of growth, which technically might be represented by a guiding North Star metric. Something that you touched on quite a few times in the talk, and it seems pretty a pretty central element of your view on growth growth marketing is around that it needs to be data driven, and it needs a lot of experimentation.
A question in from Russell Murray, asking what's the relationship between growth and agility? Doctor. Oh, that's a very good question. The relationship between growth and agility. I guess it's the same relationship that comes from structuring, you know, a people team with clear processes and a clear direction.
So growth per se can be considered in one of its main definition as a methodology for rapid experimentation, right? Specifically around the pilot metrics. So, if you manage to embed that methodology across your teams, inevitably, you're creating an operating system that allows you people to go and move much faster than the previous state in which you were operating.
So, in a way can be seen as strictly correlated to agility. And of course, agility now in an organisational environment can take many shapes. But if we explore the direct relationship with growth, I would justify saying that, you know, growth as a rapid experimentation methodology leads to being faster in discovering new opportunities for growth and therefore developing a sort of agility in unlocking a more sustainable type of growth.
The Yeah, the slide, I think that was maybe the one that stood out the most to me from your presentation was around the growth, sustainable growth focus and that inverted pyramid where we look at the the pirate metrics and the idea that growth belong you know, is kind of responsibility of everyone, every team in the in the in the company.
In your experience, are there some teams that are more resistant to that than others or some teams that embrace that more easily? And how do you address any of those challenges? Brian, that's a very tricky question to answer without going into trouble. I think, you know, there are always some teams or some people that are more resistant to embracing new concepts and change than others.
That goes also with how well you have embraced the growth mindset for yourself and how open minded you are towards considering new opportunities for growth. There are some fairly well known types of friction between marketing and product and sometimes even between marketing and commercial, especially when you try analyzing how you can improve the constraints that you identify across the activation and retention metrics.
And these are more true for the relationship between marketing and product. And then the revenue optimisation part and the funnels that go with that when you are trying to make a positive impact on the way, for example, marketing and commercial teams operate together.
Every company is very different. And I would say that, you know, the personality and the DNA of the company many times is determined by the founders and their own mindset. So, you might see a great variety of reactions to this type of change, depending on how the founders, you know, think and what's the background.
So, know, founders that have a background in design, their founder that got a background in marketing would probably set up an initial organisation in very different ways. And therefore, depending on the big gap that you need to fill from the the original organisation and the new one driven towards growth ambitions is what really creates this kind of friction.
Yeah, that a follow-up question to that, I guess, is, around the makeup of growth teams. And have you found so I guess the last question I was sort of a little bit asking about engineering and how reluctant engineers might be to embrace, this kind of growth mindset.
That's probably a little bit loaded question, though. But what about multi disciplined growth teams? Is it is it helpful to recruit in from other areas to have product managers or designers or engineers within embedded within the growth team with, you know, now this is your role?
This is growth is what we're doing in this team? How does that work in your experience? And it is totally cross functional. And, you know, growth is cross functional by definition. So you cannot unlock growth unless you've got all the different functions collaborating on a challenge, which might be, you know, increasing the growth rates across biometrics or, you know, any way improving the user journey experience or working on discovering and validating new channels.
So, I think, you know, there is no growth team that doesn't have, for example, an experienced marketeer in that, or a UX designer, someone that does user research. And certainly, it cannot exist without engineering people. And I'd like probably to dig deeper into the so called fight between growth manager and product managers.
So technically, a growth manager is a product manager for a growth product. And the growth product normally is the growth funnels. So, the friction there exists because there are many times you create a growth team that is new to the product organization and that is independent for the product organization.
So unless you clarify the purpose of that, you explain to your people why you're making this transformation, how it is different or how it is partially overlapped, people inevitably fall into a sort of defensive position that creates some sort of tension. But I guess, you know, a growth product owner or a growth manager can be a product manager that operates according to product management best practise, and that knows very well the best growth discipline and the growth science, namely, you know, the growth methodology that applies rapid experimentation
that is very familiar with the channels rather than maybe other parts of the product. So, it should be quite flexible and interchangeable across, you know, product and the pros organization in this sense. Interesting. Lots. Yeah, I mean, cross functional element of it seems, like you say, self evident and some something that maybe some teams have been a little bit slower to embrace.
But I've I've spoken myself and Mark Logan, for example, have chatted about this in the past and about the the transformation that Skyscanner went through. It's pretty pretty fascinating and so much for for people to learn from that. Another fascinating cultural shift or or something that you've been exposed to recently is maybe the way different parts of the world think about these challenges, particularly Asia.
So you lived in Singapore when you were VP growth at Skyscanner, and then you're a mentor and adviser to a couple of organizations in China, and in Hong Kong. Well, China also, I guess. What how is how do people in that part of the world think differently about growth?
Or is it is everyone just operating on the same playbook now? So I'm a bit biased, because I favor the China startup ecosystem quite a bit. Reason being that I think they are ahead of us European big time in everything they do and how they do things.
I think they are five to ten years ahead. And this is true even when we think about growth. So, I think many startups in Europe tend to have what I call the reactive approach to embedding growth, to fix constraints and fix the growth decline.
In China, they tended to embed the best growth methodology and thinking not only, you know, adopting the AAR framework and thinking in loops rather than just panels and all of that, but they also do that, you know, let's say, very, very early stage.
So, accelerator groups that I work with, for example, they hire mentors like me to teach startups that are pre seed level, maximum seed level, and maybe they are from ten to twenty, fifty people to learn everything that there is to be learned about the best growth practice and methodology, to learn about the mistakes that others have done so that they can avoid them.
And they can actually structure very early towards the best possible format and shape to be able to unlock growth when they will be able to scale up. So, they are really characterised by definitely an agile thinking, but they operate at the speed of light in terms of how they think, how they want to make mistakes, learn from the mistakes, and then learn from others and embed the best of the word into their organisational design as well.
Fascinating. Yeah, there's so much there's so much I think that we learned from Chinese startups. We were due to have a talk last year, actually, at TuringFest from Eamonn Carey at Techstars about what he's because he works in China quite a lot, the difference that he's seen between the two.
And in the end, couldn't make it, so we're gonna have to get Eamonn back for that. But perhaps we'll get you back in as well to give us a bit more on your experience in in Asia. But for today, we've covered tons, and and there's so much in the talk.
It was it's it's really goes deep on a lot of areas. So there's a lot for people to rewatch. There's a lot for me to rewatch, frankly. So thanks very much for joining us. And hopefully, we'll have you, you know, on the real stage one one sometime in the near future.
I hope so. And thanks very much for having me and everybody for listening in. It's been a pleasure. Thanks, Yada. Take care. Bye bye. Okay, so that's it for today. Three pretty tremendous keynotes. There's so much to rewatch and that I've taken a million notes on those already.
So we're going to get a lot of value from that over over the next weeks and months, I think. We're done for today. But we're back on Thursday. And I'll be chatting with Andrei vanitsky from graphy about the journey that he's been on over the past two years.
Pretty fascinating for anyone who is in the early stages of building a company, whether you're a founder or just one of the early team, you know, sort of sub twenty people, I think it's particularly useful for, but a man with big ambitions as well.
So we'll hear from him on Thursday, four pm UK time. But for now, that's it. Thanks and see you next time.
We use cookies to measure traffic and improve the site. You can accept or reject analytics & advertising cookies. Privacy Policy