Anyone who knows me IRL also knows I’m a strange outlier because I don’t just like to public speak. I love it.
So when the Arc.dev’s “Mastering Remote” folks asked me to join their podcast I was ALL IN. A podcast that focuses on remote work culture, Christine and I decided to talk about the employer branding work I’ve been doing. It was a great (and very fun) opportunity to synthesize so much of the work over the past two years. Full podcast and summary of that is here.
And then earlier this month, my awesome manager Mardi invited me and my coworker Brianna to share how we collectively have worked to improve the employee experience at Mozilla. Like all people-related things, it’s well, never just “one” thing. And importantly, we again had fun. And we hope the 500 or so attendees did too. Check it out here.
Addendum: rather than create an entirely new brag post, i am just adding this super fun interview I did with Julia Levy for The Switchboard!
My deep curiosity has led to what I like to call an “unlinear” career path. But at last I’ve been able to identify a common thread: helping technical people build cool stuff. And if I’ve learned anything, it’s that innovation isn’t restricted to startups. And, that being a startup hardly guarantees you’ll do something innovative.
Also (per my previous post) I’m the weird outlier that gets a high degree of energy when I get to public speak (see? I even say “get to”). Recently I had the privilege to share about ways I’ve helped technical people thrive.
First was the Lean Startup Conference in SF this October. I had shared Mozilla’s cultural transformation story as part of our submission to Fast Company’s Best Workplaces for Innovators (spoiler: we got it!), and was keen to share this story elsewhere, too. I pulled in my colleague Matt who has led our Culture of Experiments program to tell our story of how we evolved from a culture that avoided data at all costs out of respect for user privacy, to one that embraced data in ways to deliver that privacy more effectively (deck).
Then earlier this month I had the enormous pleasure to spend time with with our team in Taipei to do a bunch of things. Admittedly helping the first-ever Firefox Run for Internet Health was a top-contender for memorable stuff I did (really, it was); but relevant to this post is the fun time I spent with the team at TechStars’ Taipei Startup Week. It was a great excuse to reflect on my own career to convey all the different ways that startups need “other” companies, and vice versa (deck). In short, I didn’t want the audience (entrepreneurs) to sell their value short simply because they are trying to survive (easier said than done).
It was also great to learn from the folks there more about the local markets; in my case, I hung out with the breakout group to get up-to-date on Korea’s startup markets — certainly a revisiting of my roots from my first gig at Asia Pacific Ventures so long ago. Turns out their landscape is now not dissimilar from the U.S. in that a few central entities swallow up most of the smaller companies (in this case, the chaebol). But the funnel to acquisition is financed not by VCs and pension funds as in the States but rather primarily through governmental entities. From what I could glean, this could democratize things a bit more at the earlier phases. But, I’d love to dig in more.
I’m the rare human that loves public speaking. Yes I get nervous, of course, but I also get a huge charge out of it. So this Slack from my coworker Susy had a special amount of serotonin accompanying it:
I soon huddled with another colleague Rosana (like Susy, Rosana’s also far more familiar with crowdsourcing than me). I got into my best Michael Krasny consultant curiosity groove to beat back the imposter syndrome and hopefully helped in crafting the panel topic: Crowdsourcing: Data By and For the People, to be hosted fittingly at Mozilla’s Community Space in SF.
Since the link to our panel doesn’t include what we wrote up to describe it, I’m pasting it here so you can get a sense of what it was really about:
Per CSW’s website, by “engaging a ‘crowd’ or group for a common goal — often innovation, problem solving, or efficiency,” crowdsourcing can “provide organizations with access to new ideas and solutions, deeper consumer engagement, opportunities for co-creation, optimization of tasks, and reduced costs.”
But is this a fair value exchange for everyone involved? The above solves a number of problems for companies, but do they help contributors? And what role does crowdsourcing play in social equity?
As products and services increasingly incorporate Artificial Intelligence (AI), crowdsourcing has a critical role to play in ensuring new technologies and algorithms serve society equally. To quote The Verge: “Data is critical to building great AI — so much so, that researchers in the field compare it to coal during the Industrial Revolution. Those that have it will steam ahead. Those that don’t will be left in the dust. In the current AI boom, it’s obvious who has it: tech giants like Google, Facebook, and Baidu.” If we build the next generation of AI apps using data from a few select players, we risk creating a world that serves the needs of a few corporate entities vs. the needs of all.
If we crowdsource data to train the next generation of AIs, we stand in a much better position to deliver products and services that incorporate the needs of many vs. a few.
This panel will explore how different organizations are approaching crowdsourcing, and dive into the specific implications around rewarding contributors, and the social responsibility of organizations who use crowdsourcing.
We organized a prep call which went great – we got into some of the thorny topics, surfaced some healthy panel-bait discomfort. But by far the most memorable part was at the end, when, one of the panelists (we’ll let the reader guess) announced s/he had to “go to another part of campus” and “just wanted” to say that the published topic – the one that we just prepped for, Crowdsourcing: Data By and For the People – really shouldn’t be about ethics at all, because nothing really “goes anywhere” from ethics discussions. Instead, we should delve into the “intricacies of crowdsourcing itself.”
Just before s/he then dashed off to grab a campus bicycle, I reminded the call that the organizer loved it, and I was super grateful that another panelist chimed in to say the topic was precisely why s/he agreed to be on the panel.
I quickly developed a strong energy for day-of-show.
And it went fine; granted, we were one of just a few panels that weren’t in the main building so: away from all traffic, and, at the tail end of the conference at 3:00pm on a Friday. So we were heartened by the ten or so folks who did show up and listened attentively.
We tackled the time this way:
How do you tie into crowdsourcing?
How do you see contributors benefiting?
How about the economics?
How about ownership and meaningful influence?
And the takeaway? Our closing point was: if you get others’ data, use it only for the intended use case. And as Megan reminds us, “be sure the intended use case is clear; “consent” doesn’t mean anything if people don’t understand what they’re opting into. And if it changes, that’s okay! Just let people know and require them to consent again.”
Personally I’m quite gratified we didn’t decide to unilaterally change the terms of service on our panel topic, either.