The 5:30 a.m. Workout That Will Change How You Live

The sweltering days of summer make everyone lethargic, relaxed and – after a day of working in a refrigerated office building – too lazy to work out at 5 p.m., or any time after that. Forget it. A crushed-ice mojito sounds so much better than plodding away on the treadmill after focusing mentally all day at the job. But consider the alternative: dragging yourself out of bed before dawn to sweat it out at the gym? That's a categorical nightmare … or is it?

Four years ago, I decided on a whim to train for my first triathlon. Please. An athlete I'm not, and on top of that, a mother of two with a full-time job that includes lots of travel I *am.* How the hell was I going to train for the New York City Olympic-distance triathlon? (For those of you unfamiliar with the torture known as a triathlon, the Olympic distance races entail a 1-mile swim followed by a 26-mile bike ride capped off by a 10K run. I know. Why?)

But I was bitten by the bug of the idea and committed to racing with the Fox Business team. In strategizing how I'd tackle the challenge, I asked CEOs who looked like they were in good shape when they found time to workout. A good 75 percent of them told me they subscribed to the early morning workout concept. Well, forget that, I thought. But then I took a good, hard look at my Outlook calendar. Every minute during the day and often at night, I had swaths of time inked out with work, interviews, speeches, and school events for my two children. The only blank space every single day was from 5 a.m. to 7 a.m.

Oy. Really? Yes, really. I figured I'd try it. I dubbed it "My 5:30 a.m. Workout" because I wasn't in a creative mood. I'm never in a creative mood at 5:30 a.m. and I'm suspicious of anyone who leaps out of bed at that hour saying "hello, world!" with a big smile.

I was already in decent shape from years of doing the Jane Fonda Workout (yes, I wore a thong leotard back in the day; I'm from L.A., sue me) and had attended a million aerobics classes at various gyms in Columbus, Cleveland and Boston during my climb up the local TV news ladder.

But never – NEVER – had I worked out at 5:30 a.m.

The first week was painful. I set my alarm for 5:15 a.m. First of all, it happened to be January, so it was freezing and dark outside. On top of that, I live in New Jersey, so I had that going against me. New Jersey at 5:30 a.m. Lovely. I'd throw on my workout clothes with snow pants over them, along with a parka, and drive to the CanDo Gym in Edgewater. By 5:30 a.m., I was on the machines. One day I tried a spin class and paired it with another 20 minutes on the elliptical, followed by weights. Another day, I did the stationary bike for an hour. Those early days were agonizing, but a funny thing happened the third week in. I started to automatically open my eyes 30 seconds before the alarm went off. I also found that the more I worked out early in the morning, the later I could go at night. I had more energy for the daily journey. I became more alert on the job. I really only spent a total of about an hour and 10 minutes working out, so I was done by 6:50 a.m., hit the local Dunkin' Donuts for a large coffee at 7 a.m. and was back at home by 7:15 a.m. just as the kids were waking up.

I started thinking smugly that, because I was done with my workout by 7 a.m., I was already “ahead of the game” in both the rat race and the battle for good health. Before I knew it, the weather turned and soon I didn't look like the Michelin Man all wrapped up every time I walked out to the car to head to the gym. Seven months later, I completed the triathlon with a totally respectable time and I wasn't sore after.

In the beginning when I was so tired, I thought, "I can't wait ‘til the triathlon is done so I can stop this meshugennah effort." But you know where I'm going with this: I never stopped. To this day, four years and two more triathlons under my belt, I'm still waking up 30 seconds before that clock radio goes off. I've altered the workout a bit. I recommend shaking it up and finding out what works best for you. I take a 6 a.m. spin class at Flywheel two to three times a week, and on the other three days, I’ll do 50 minutes on the elliptical machine and then a series of weights for another 10 minutes. Done by 7 a.m. -- don't forget the Dunkin’ – and then I’m so good to go all day long with a metabolism that’s kicked up to a higher level. It’s an extremely efficient way to get your workout in. I know that some of you might say, "This isn't ground-breaking. A lot of people workout in the morning.” But I've found that in the working world, when I tell people I get up at 5:30 a.m., a lot of them say, "I could NEVER do that." I guess all I'm trying to say here is yes, you can. If I can, you can.

I can see why you might be hesitant. But if you can pull this off, you can ramp up your mental acuity and your muscles to win your own personal race. Good luck, and have a healthy summer!

The Top Five Ways to Turn Money into Happiness

In their new book, Happy Money : The Science Of Smarter Spending (Simon & Schuster), Elizabeth Dunn and Michael Norton (professors at the University of British Columbia and Harvard Business School, respectively), offer five key principles to help us get more happiness out of the money we spend — principles which also help companies create happier employees and customers.

Most people know they can benefit from expert help to make more money. But oddly enough, they're quite sure they already know how to spend their money to reap the most happiness. As a result, they follow their intuitions, using their money to buy things they think will make them happy, from televisions to cars to houses.

What's the problem with this approach? A decade of research demonstrates that people's intuitions about how to turn money into happiness are misguided at best and dead-wrong at worst. Those televisions, cars, and houses? They have almost no impact on our happiness.

The good news is that we now know what kind of spending does enhance our happiness--insight that's valuable to consumers and companies alike. Here are the top five ways to turn money into happiness according to Dunn and Norton:

1. Buy Experiences

Material things provide less happiness than experiential purchases (like trips and special meals). Whether you're spending $2 or $200,000, buying experiences rather than material goods can inoculate you against buyer's remorse. Even painful experiences can produce pleasure; by harnessing the power of experiences, a company called Tough Mudder convinces people to pay for the privilege of crawling through mud.

2. Make It a Treat

When wonderful things are constantly available, we become less able to appreciate them. Limiting access to the things we like best helps renew our capacity for pleasure. Turning our favorite things back into treats (like making that afternoon latte a special indulgence) increases happiness for purchases major and mundane. Companies have transformed products ranging from rental cars (Zipcar) to toilet paper (Charmin) into treats — enhancing their customers' experiences.

3. Buy Time

Money should permit us to outsource our most dreaded tasks (Think: toilet cleaning). Ironically, though, research shows that wealthier people do not spend their time in happier ways. Ask a quick question before buying: How will this purchase change the way I use my time? Companies like Intel and Patagonia compensate employees not only with money but with time, giving even their busiest employees a new sense of time affluence.

4. Pay Now, Consume Later

Digital technology and credit cards have encouraged us to adopt a "consume now and pay later" shopping mind-set. By reversing this trend--paying now and consuming later--you can buy more happiness, even as you spend less money. Delaying consumption allows us to reap the pleasures of anticipation (why vacations provide the most happiness before they occur); waiting even for a mere Hershey's Kiss makes things sweeter when we get them. And people are less prone to overspend when they pay up front; decreasing debt is a sure path to increased happiness.

5. Invest in Others

Research shows that spending money on others provides more happiness than spending money on yourself. The principle holds in countries rich and poor, from Canada to Uganda, India to South Africa. Investing in others can make individuals healthier and wealthier and can even help people win at dodge ball. Companies like PepsiCo and Google and nonprofits like DonorsChoose.org are harnessing these benefits by encouraging donors, customers, and employees to invest in others.

*****

When the Headhunter Calls

I sat on a panel at a job-search-advice event alongside a career placement person, a professor and a search guy, also known as a third-party recruiter. I have tons of headhunter friends and I may have even dated a recruiter or two somewhere along the way, but my fellow panelist that night was not someone the international brotherhood of headhunters would have chosen to speak on its behalf.

"When I call you or when another recruiter calls you on the phone, you pick up the phone," said my fellow panelist menacingly to the crowd. "We represent your best chance of getting a job." I sat quietly in my seat with a pasted-on smile on my face as the search guy berated the audience of job-seekers.

"We represent jobs, so don't hang up on us, and when we ask you for a referral to a friend of yours, give us the referral. You're going to need a headhunter someday, believe me," the punk headhunter went on. I started reciting the U.S. presidents in my mind to keep from stabbing the guy with my dinner fork. Washington. Adams. Jefferson. Madison. Monroe?

The search guy told the crowd how people like him go unappreciated by undeserving job-seeking slobs such as themselves. Well, I thought to myself as the panel concluded, that was painful, but at least I got a story out of it.

I have beloved headhunter friends, as I said. Third-party search is a critical part of the talent value chain, in my book, and when I was a corporate HR chief I relied on my search partners to a huge degree. My bros Bob and Steve in Chicago easily brought in 25% of the brilliant tech guys (a unisex term) who made U.S. Robotics grow from $17 million to $2.5 billion in sales while I was working there.

You have to have an outside person involved in a search in many cases, especially for some of the most-critical positions you hire for. There is something about the employer-candidate tango that screams for the participation of a mediating third party. I never felt that the recruiters I worked with earned a penny less than what they got paid. When you have that kind of partnership going, you see the value of a trusted search partner relationship close up. It works the same way on the other side of the equation, for job-seekers. I know brilliant people who have made all their job moves through one trusted search partner for twenty years or longer.

That being said, the guy who sat next to me on that panel from hell told a lie. Job-seekers don't need headhunters any more than headhunters need them.

The dude on the panel was speaking out of fear -- trying to spook job-seekers into thinking he holds a magic key to their success. My friends in the search biz would groan if they heard that. This is a big part of the negative association some people have with recruiters, in fact - the mistaken belief that headhunters have magical powers to get people hired, powers they can use if they like a job-seeker and withhold if they don't.

Headhunters don't have any special ability to get people hired. When you work with a recruiter, you're saying "Go ahead and represent me. I know you don't owe me a job and you don't guarantee me one." That is the deal. Search people work for employers, not for you, so don't expect them to provide free career coaching, any more than what's required to get your resume ready for the talent market.

Search people only have one way to make money, and that is by getting their candidates hired. If a search person calls you, your first question will be "How many people have you placed with this employer - the one you're calling me about today - in the past 12 months?" Unscrupulous search people are famous for throwing resumes at employers they have no relationships with, just to try and get a toehold.

That's bad for you, if you are one of the candidates who resume is being tossed about, because once a headhunter puts your resume into the employer's system that company is obligated to pay him a search fee if they hire you. By arriving through the search channel versus approaching the employer on your own, you become 25% more expensive to the employer (a typical search fee being 25% of the first year's comp plan). That makes you less appealing for many opportunities, not more!

Once you get the answer you want to your first question ("I've actually placed seven people in this client in the past year - I talk with them at least once a week") your next question will be "How many people have you placed in the past 12 months for this hiring manager?" Just because a headhunter puts lots of hires into an organization doesn't mean he or she has any traction with a particular manager. You are not bait to be squished onto a fishhook so that your guts come spilling out. You don't want to be represented by a search person who has no juice with the one guy we care about -- your hiring manager, a/k/a With Luck Your Next Boss.

If you decide to proceed with a search partner, specify in writing that you must give written approval every time the headhunter wants to send your resume out. Tell the search guy that you expect to hear from him or her at least once a week when your resume is in play for an opportunity - whether there is any news or not.

You could think of a headhunter like a real estate agent who's listed your house for sale. "I'll call you when something worth reporting happens" doesn't cut it. Every headhunter has competitors, and if the search person you're working with goes radio silent on you just when you're dying for news, that's a sign you can do better in the search-partner department.

One last bit of advice: don't go in search of headhunters to help you find a job unless you know your experience is what the market is looking for. Most new college grads, for instance, are not search-friendly candidates, because employers can find tons of new grads to hire when they need them. They don't need to pay a 25% premium to find new graduates, except in a few techie or specialized majors.

Unless a kid has a degree in nuclear engineering or another hard-to-find diploma, the kid is better off conducting the job search the old-fashioned, self-service way.

Remember, the next time a headhunter calls you: any song and dance routine you get that smacks of "You need me, bucko" is pure bluster, a sign that the person on the other end of the phone is trying to browbeat you into giving up your resume. Don't be fooled by that.

You hold the cards in this equation, no matter how stridently anyone tries to tell you differently. If you're wavering, ask yourself this question: Why would a headhunter call me out of the blue if he didn't need my resume to get a sale? Stay in your power, remember what you bring, and keep talking to search partners until the right one comes along.

30 Seconds To Mars - Beautiful Lie

If You Do This, Your Coworkers Will Hate You

Annoying coworkers top the list when it comes to workplace woes. You know who I’m talking about...there’s the guy one cubicle over who prefers to listen to his music as if he were actually at a concert, and two offices away sits your coworker who refuses to follow basic email etiquette.

What’s even more frightening--consider if the things you do are bothering your coworkers. No one wants to be “that person,” but growing tired of your coworkers is nearly inevitable when you’re stuck in close quarters with them for 40+ hours a week.

If you do these following things, your workers may end up hating you:

You regularly pass off your work. Making a habit delegating your work to other team members or employees is certain to get you noticed. If there does come a time when you have to pass off your work, be sure to return the favor as soon as possible. Offer to lend a hand whenever possible to ensure you’re pulling your weight.

You chase perfection. If you’re the person who constantly refuses to see eye-to-eye with your team on whether or not a product is finished, expect disgruntled coworkers. It’s time to set a new standard for yourself: 80 percent is new 100 percent. Forget perfection and begin focusing on getting projects and tasks to the point where they’re good enough.

You command. There’s a big difference between delegating tasks and ordering others around. Even a management title shouldn’t give way to shouting orders at your employees and coworkers. Establish more pleasant and effective interactions by asking your coworkersfor their input on given situations or projects. This allows them to come up with their own solution, rather than having yours forced on them.

You’re avoidant. When was the last time you attended an event hosted by your company? Avoiding company cocktail hours is certain to set you apart from the crowd--and not in a good way. A survey by Jobsite found that 70 percent of respondents said friends at work is the most crucial element to a happy working life. Being friends with your coworkers isn’t necessary, but putting effort into strengthening working relationships will make for a better work environment in the long run.

You’re just plain unprofessional. While every workplace has its own idea of what’s too casual, there are a few behaviors that should be deemed unacceptable across the board: gossiping, sharing too much personal information, and not using your manners to name a few. Not only will these unprofessional habits turn your coworkers against you, they could also cost you your job. Stay in tune with the casual nature of your work environment, but never drop your level of professionalism completely.

You’re the rain cloud. Positivity and optimism aren’t realistic every day, but consistently exuding negativity will bring your coworkers down. Put a cap on your judgemental and critical nature. Instead, focus on sandwiching your criticism by giving a compliment prior to and after a criticism.

You waste time at meetings. Meetings are the No. 1 productivity killer. If you’re the person who is constantly straying from the presentation, asking unnecessary questions, and circling back on points, you’re wasting both yours and your coworker’s time. Stick to the regularly scheduled programming and keep your information and questions brief and direct.

A more productive work environment starts with a cohesive team of employees. While annoyances happen, it’s best to stay in tune with your own habits to prevent agitating others.

What do you think is the worst habit a coworker can have?

Finding the Hidden Value in Your Network

Last time you really needed help, who did you ask? My bet is that you went to one of your strong ties—someone you know well and truly trust. Whether you’re looking for a new job or some good advice, it makes sense to go to your closest friends, family members, and colleagues. After all, those are the people you can trust to understand what you need and have your best interests at heart.

But in favoring strong ties, you might be overlooking the strength of weak ties. In a classic study, sociologist Mark Granovetter showed that people were 58% more likely to get a new job through weak ties than strong ties. How could acquaintances be more helpful than good friends?

The intuitive answer is that we have more weak than strong ties, so the odds are just higher. If you reach out to a few hundred people looking for job leads, and chances are that most of them will be weak ties. Although this might be true, the evidence supports a more powerful explanation: despite their good intentions, strong ties tend to give us redundant knowledge. Our closest contacts tend to know the same people and information as we do. Weak ties travel in different circles and learn different things, so they can offer us more efficient access to novel information. Most of us miss out on this novel information, filling our networks with people whose perspectives are too similar to our own.

When I share this evidence, people get it, but they’re afraid to act on it. Convincing people to ask weak ties for help is like persuading a man to ask for directions. It’s uncomfortable to admit to near-strangers (and yourself) that you don’t have all the answers. Even if you overcome this barrier, you hardly know them, so why would they be willing to help you?

The good news is that there’s a way to have your cake and eat it too. There’s a third kind of contact that combines the new information that weak ties provide with the trust, comfort, and familiarity of a strong tie. It’s called a dormant tie.

Dormant ties are the people we used to know. Think about the people with whom you’ve lost touch for a few years: a childhood neighbor, a college roommate, or a colleague from your first job. In groundbreaking research, Daniel Levin, Jorge Walter, and Keith Murnighan asked hundreds of executives to seek advice on a major work project from two dormant ties. When they compared the value of these conversations to the advice from current contacts, the dormant ties were actually more useful. The executives actually received more valuable solutions, referrals, and problem-solving assistance from people they used to know than their current friends, colleagues, and acquaintances. Why?

Just like weak ties, dormant ties offer novel information: in the years since you last communicated, they’ve connected with new people and gathered new knowledge. But unlike weak ties, dormant ties also bring the benefits of strong ties. The history and shared experience makes it faster and more comfortable to reconnect, and you can count on them to care more about you than your acquaintances do.

But don’t take my word for it; ask the Kevin Bacon of Silicon Valley. His name is Adam Rifkin, and he was named Fortune’s best networker in 2011. When I interviewed Rifkin for Give and Take, he told me that instead of reaching out to strong ties or weak ties, he spends most of his time “going back to people who I haven’t talked to in a while.” Years ago, Rifkin moved to Silicon Valley in the hopes of starting his first tech company. He was seriously lacking current contacts there, and he knew he needed guidance. Rifkin remembered that five years earlier, he had exchanged a few emails with a guy in the Bay Area named Graham Spencer. Rifkin reached out to reconnect, and when they met up for coffee, Spencer offered to connect him with some venture capitalists. One of those venture capitalists funded Rifkin’s startup for $50 million.

When they first corresponded, Spencer was just a college student studying computer science. By the time they reconnected five years later, Spencer was the cofounder of a company called Excite, which he had just sold for $6.7 billion. During the time that they lost touch, he had met some extraordinary people, but several years needed to pass first.

The research shows that dormant ties surprise us in several ways. When Levin and colleagues asked executives to rank ten dormant ties in order from most to least valuable, they failed miserably. The dormant tie they expected to be the least helpful was every bit as useful as the top-ranked tie. When you haven’t seen people in three or five years, you can’t predict what novel ideas and networks they’ll be able to share. And it turns out that the older you get, the more valuable dormant ties become. Along with having more of them, they’ve had more time to meet amazing people and accomplish amazing things.

Of course, it’s easiest to reconnect with dormant ties if you’ve been generous in the past. If you have a history of self-serving behavior, your old contacts are likely to lock the door to their networks and throw away the key—if they don’t use the reconnection as a prime opportunity to punish you. If you’ve given to them without strings attached, on the other hand, they’ll greet you with open arms.

If you decide to tap into this reservoir of goodwill, not all dormant ties will be useful. Levin and colleagues interviewed one executive who groaned about the prospect of reconnecting, noting that some ties “are dormant for a reason.” But most ties don’t become dormant because of bridges burned. The vast majority of the time, we fall out of touch by accident—we’ve moved, changed jobs, or just become busy. This leaves us with hundreds of dormant ties who can provide us with the right blend of trust and novel information. As that executive who originally groaned about reactivating dormant ties put it, the “experience has been eye-opening for me. For one, it has shown me how much potential I have in my Rolodex.”

After learning about these ideas, I added a repeating reminder to my calendar: reconnect with at least one dormant tie each month. This is one of the virtues of LinkedIn: it’s easier than ever to track them down and reconnect. Instead of asking them for help, I’ve been searching for ways to help them—sometimes by sharing knowledge, in other cases by making introductions. In my experience, rekindling old connections has become a source of meaning and happiness. Like renovating an old house, it brings us the best of the old and the new. Our dormant ties can help us revitalize our favorite features of our past selves, while opening doors to new future selves.

Approach Life Like an Entrepreneur

 Growing up, I never understood why anyone would want to become an entrepreneur. Between the long hours, constant uncertainty, and grueling pace of life, it just didn’t strike me as something that I would ever want to put myself through. My father, Vivek Wadhwa, founded several technology companies, and even though I deeply admired and looked up to him, I never quite understood why he had chosen that path.

Instead, my dream was to become a lawyer. It wasn’t that I was particularly attracted to that lifestyle either — I just believed that law was the most direct way to impact the world around me. I thought entrepreneurs only worked on improving small issues, while lawyers focused on solving the big problems. It didn’t take too long for me to realize that I had it backwards.

While he was always supportive of my decisions, my father liked to tease me that I was wasting my time with law. He would often tell me I was meant to be an entrepreneur and one day I would realize it, and I would reply, “There’s no way!” Now, as an adult with a startup in the privacy and cyber-security space, I am incredibly grateful that I was learning from him the entire time. The lessons themselves had little to do with business. It was the outlook on life that he instilled in me that has really taught me the skills I’ve needed to know. He showed me that entrepreneurship is not a profession, it is a mindset — and it shapes the way you interact with the world around you.

For example, one of the most unique traits of entrepreneurs is the way they approach a problem. My favorite thing about the many that I’ve had the pleasure of getting to know is a shared disregard for authority. As a group, they are relentless. They rarely accept no for an answer, and are always looking for a way to work around obstacles. Where most people would give up and move on, they try to think outside the box and develop creative solutions. Even if they ultimately are unsuccessful, it is often when they fail that they learn the most.

My father would always push me to ask for things – even, and especially, when I was completely embarrassed and afraid to. As a kid, I cringed whenever he did this – I hated it. But as an adult, I’m thankful he showed me value of getting out of my comfort zone. It is difficult to do this sometimes, because it should be; you grow much less from doing things that are easy or that come naturally. The fear of being rejected will stop many people from asking for what they want, but being told “no” rarely ever lives up to the anguish of the worst-case-scenarios we think up in our minds.

While convincing others to help you achieve your ends is great, it is far more important that you are treating people in an empathetic and respectful way. My father has always gone out of his way to mentor other entrepreneurs, even to a fault. He always cherished these experiences though – he’s told me many times that in life we’ll have people who lend a hand to us without expecting anything in return, it’s important that we do the same for others. As a child, I have vivid memories of the times near the holiday season when my mom would take me to a local toy store and let me pick out all kinds of different gifts. But the toys weren’t for me — we were buying presents for all of the company employees’ children. The simple act of having me decide what other children would want forced me to step out of my own world, and into theirs, even if it was for just a few moments.

However, not every lesson he taught me was positive. When I was in eighth grade my father suffered a massive heart attack, partially due to the fact that he was working constantly. I saw firsthand that one of the most important things you must do as an entrepreneur is to remember to invest in yourself. You can’t sacrifice your health for the sake of business. It’s not worth it.

Approaching life like an entrepreneur isn’t about ruthlessly exploiting opportunities or constantly seeking out new ventures: it’s about being bold, creative, and mindful in your everyday actions. Like running a business, living a life with an entrepreneurial outlook is all about balance and priorities. This Sunday, I will spend some time reflecting on what my father has taught me through his words, actions and decisions – and I will give thanks that my role model in life has shown me some of the keys to living a more fulfilling, challenging, and empowered life.

Free Speech and Facebook's Rape Pages; Is Apple Working on a Wearable Wrist Device?

It took two years, but a campaign to make Facebook aware of its failure to ban misogynistic pages -- when it has pulled pages where women have posted breastfeeding or mastectomy photos -- finally hit critical mass this past week. Those 5k+ emails, 225k signatures on a change.org petition and 60k Twitter posts with the hashtag #FBrape convinced Nissan and a dozen other advertisers to pull their Facebook ads.

On today's "This Week in Startups" news roundtable with author and investor James Altucher (@jaltucher) and LittleBird CEO Marshall Kirkpatrick (@marshallk), I said I believe Facebook's inconsistent enforcement of its "no hate speech" policy lies squarely with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg -- specifically his lack of any understanding of human decency.

Marshall disagreed, pointing out that Facebook has people throughout the company "working in good faith" and that they are dealing with a lot of complexity and subjectivity. To him it sounds like a mistake, and he hopes they will deal with it well.

James noted a legal precedent dating back to the 1990s (anti-Semitic posts on Prodigy): if you pull down one thing, you pull down everything. Facebook is trying to straddle the middle, but they have 1B users -- a clear scalability issue. "You can't straddle the middle line here, there is no easy answer here," he said.

We also talked about Apple working on what I call an "iBangle" (hint: see Wonder Woman) and how checking your wrist would be so much less offensive than wearing Google Glass. And yes, I ranted.

Sharing Some Learning – Observations from D11

This past week the 11th All Things DConference, D11, was held. It is such a great opportunity to attend and to learn from a great combination of interviews, speakers, demonstrations, questions, and attendees. Attending this conference has been a very valuable learning experience for me over the years and I’ve always made it a point to reflect and share some observations or learnings that stuck with me. This year is no different.

As with all events these days, so much of what happens at the event is tweeted, live blogged, re-blogged, etc. That makes it challenging to offer more by way of learning. If you’re interested in the details of the sessions, by all means watch the videos or see the official coverage on the All Things D, D11 Conference site. All the interviews are done by one or both of Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher. There you’ll also find some behind the scenes “KatieCam” videos shot by WSJ writer Katherine Boehret in a more relaxed setting as speakers left the stage and other behind the scenes videos and articles by the ATD writing team. Definitely check out the amazing photos from Asa Mathat (and team) that really capture the unique qualities of the conference.

“The Dialog”

For me what separates D from other events, if you had to pick one thing, is the dialog that takes place. While the format is an interview, I see it as more of a dialog. There are no slides, no setup, and after the interview the dialog continues with audience questions and then even more in the hallways during breaks (not to mention the electronic dialog). I feel sometimes in an effort to report the event as news, the back and forth or the dialog itself can get a bit de-prioritized. The dialog is important because the timing of the conference is the same every year. That means not every speaker has something to announce or launch. In fact some speakers have announcements already scheduled for the future and even with a lot of pushing they still aren’t going to preempt their organization’s efforts. This means that speakers sign up to attend knowing there are definitely questions they will get that must go unanswered. I think that speaks volumes to the appreciation for the dialog and participation that speakers share. Still, that can be a tiny bit frustrating for folks reading about the accounts—you are hoping for news but don’t get any.

There is a slightly different tone “in the room” which I am hoping to convey through these notes. The tone is very much about the nuance and subtlety of the topics being raised. So even if there is not news, the conversation is interesting. It is an important part of innovation and convergence of industries (the original and ongoing theme of the conference was how media, entertainment, and digital technologies are coming together). There are gems in most every session if you watch the video—not necessarily news gems, but articulation of challenges and tradeoffs that everyone is facing as they do their work. Making products is never a stark either/or set of choices and capturing these tradeoffs on stage, in the "hot seat" as it is called, is something I appreciate very much.

Big picture

There were 25 speakers along with demo sessions. The breadth of topics discussed delivers on the promise of the conference. Through the lens of product development there were a number of “themes” that surfaced for me:

• Mobile “era” – No one doubts the era we are in as an industry and across industries. The tech folks were “mobile first” from apps to advertising, not as a place to port to or also support. The entertainment folks see mobile as a place to enjoy entertainment or as the screen that accompanies entertainment, not as a competitor to television. Even attendees were mostly seen on their mobile devices most of the time. While this might not seem newsworthy, observing the changing perspectives over the years of the conference provides a neat context for this change.
• Disruption – Most tech conferences are about disruption in some form or another. This conference came about during a time when disruption was really happening (and to be fair, the WSJ and ATD are/were both part of disruptive dialogs over the years—and the topic of conversation at the show). The interviews always do a good job of confronting speakers who are viewed as participants in a potential disruption.
• Sensors – The role of sensors as part of the baseline experience for computing is front and center. There was a lot of discussion around form factors, wearables, and scenarios but all of this is rooted in devices that know about surroundings, which means products can be designed knowing the computers will have these capabilities.
• Consumerization – Walt Mossberg has always taken the non-techie, consumer approach to looking at technology which, as he said during the show, was somewhat heretical when he first started his column. These days the notion of consumers driving the experience and setting the bar does not seem so far-fetched. You know that is the case when the CEO of Cisco says “bring your own device trumps security”.
• Embrace of digital – In past years the “content” attendees appeared more on the defense than the offense. While the business challenges remain in some parts of the content space, I think there is far more of a sense of embrace and partnering going on between the tech and content parties. In general it felt to me like much more of a healthy dialog rooted in respect than in past years, which is a positive evolution.

Sessions

As mentioned, the sessions are all available on the D11 site along with live blogs done by WSJ/ATD reporters. Check those out for sure. I just wanted to offer some additional observations from a small set of sessions that hit close to home from a product development perspective. Inclusion / omission or number of points below are not indications of quality or importance!

Apple / Tim Cook

• Measuring what counts – There was a strong focus on measuring usage as a way of looking at success. This contrasted with the recent debate about market share (units or revenue). The depth usage of iOS devices is significantly more than competing devices. It is super interesting to think about how to inform product development when balancing existing depth usage, new users, and growth – very interesting.
• Relative to Android – The dialog turned to defining “winning” along the lines of usage, customer satisfaction, and even the amount of commerce done on iOS devices.
• Magic – There was a good discussion about how working across the team needs to focus on the intersection of hardware/software/services as being where the “magic happens”. Everyone in the product space knows that wherever seams exist there is an opportunity to innovate or for there to be challenges--seams can be found all over the place, especially as a product gets larger or an ecosystem around the product develops.
• Tradeoffs – As an example of the nuance/subtlety that is hard to capture, Cook tried to walk through some of the tradeoffs that go into making different sized devices for different “segments” (Walt’s description). He talked about color correctness, white balance, battery life, brightness, and more. A favorite expression from Cook was “customers expect Apple to weigh all these factors and decide things” along with the humble notion that deciding means shipping and learning. I personally love when the dialog turns to these types of issues at this “level” in an organization and also externally—real engineering stuff that is worth talking about in an open way.
• Openness and control – In talking about the difference between iOS and Android (using keyboards as an example), Cook was asked about opening up more. He talked about the challenges and tradeoffs involved in “putting the customer at risk” with some times of APIs and openness but committed to more openness at the upcoming WWDC. Again there was a very interesting and subtle discussion about the tradeoffs involved.

Facebook / Sheryl Sandberg

• Mobile is good for Facebook – There were a lot of numbers and support for how much engagement there is from both users and advertisers on mobile.
• Increasing engagement – Sandberg shared some numbers that were counter-intuitive for many (as evidenced by the reaction in the section I was sitting) when she talked about the increase in engagement. Five years ago 50% of people visited every day. Now 58% visit every day and the number of users is much higher.
• Priorities – I loved when she talked about how they have 5000 people to build and operate a service for a billion people. That puts the product development challenge in perspective.
• Mobile first – There is a strong “pivot” in the development team around mobile first. Whereas the browser used to be the primary target and the mobile teams would be playing catch-up, now nothing gets done without it being mobile first.
• Facebook Home – The challenges of doing an offering that is polarizing for sure. She cited that customer reviews are either 1 star or 5 stars. Home is a V1 and expect to deliver on the commitment to frequent changes/updates.

Disney Parks and Resorts / Tom Staggs

• My Magic Plus – This session was about a new way to enjoy a WDW (Walt Disney World) theme park visit—essentially you wear a “magic band” around your wrist (like a Jawbone Up or Fitbit). As someone who grew up in Orlando watching WDW go from the Magic Kingdom surrounded by orange groves to what it is today, I think the revolution that is going on with this innovation is amazing and far-reaching.
• Features – Wearing the band provides an experience with reduced anxiety, less waiting, more fun, and far more personal. And it is just starting. An amazing example I loved was how you could order the food you want and when you get to the restaurant you sit down and what you ordered just shows up. Neat. But what is really neat is that the employees can focus on being “hosts” and not the transactional elements of ordering and getting things right. Super cool. It certainly makes that summer job at Disney a lot more fun!
• Senses and sensors – Of course this is all about location aware, cloud experienced. But the way Staggs described it was “360-5” as a 360 degree experience for all 5 senses—you’re immersed in the experience beyond the rides. In general, this was a demonstration that unfolded super well—as I thought of questions they got answered moments later. So much opportunity on this platform.

Twitter / Dick Costolo

• “Social soundtrack” – Twitter was described as the second screen for television. It is viewed as a complement to broadcast. This was a statement that gets broadened to mean that Twitter is not itself thinking about making content or distributing it.
• Global town square – The way they think of Twitter is to think about both planned/unplanned events and to provide an unfiltered/inside out platform for the people “the event is happening to”. This town square is public, real-time,conversational, and distributed. From a product point of view, the clarity of this framework is incredibly valuable.
• Advertising – Costolo discussed how advertisers are coming to understand that being part of the conversation is important and how the idea of having a conversation as the canvas versus the ad itself as the canvas is important.
• Design – Another subtle part of the dialog was around where the openness of the Twitter platform will be. The idea is that Twitter does want to own the timeline experience for customers but still be open to thousands (100s of thousands) of developers with fairly lightweight rules. Simplicity is a major focus on the design of the timeline experience.

Glow / Max Levchin

• Demonstration – this was a demonstration of a new product that brings data and mobility to the challenges of procreation and fertility.
• App – The app is focused on being a beautiful source of telemetry and information for both the man and woman planning together to conceive a child.
• Data – Turns out that there is tons of data which is hard for people to get hold of and include in their planning and efforts. Glow is a way to bring this data to the solution space for people.
• Funding – The data shows that with the right use of data “infertility” can drop way down and thus the overall cost to the healthcare system is much lower. To support this the way the product will work is essentially to create a pool for people who are still unable to conceive after using the tool, which is a much smaller number than would be using less data-informed tools.
• Innovation – This is truly innovative when it comes to the problem space--hearing Levchin describe a typical way physicians handle this sounds almost like "country medicine" compared to using the data, telemetry, and an app. Combining data, mobility, and more into this app shows how empowering all the technology can be. We’re all able to start experience this notion of being in so much more control of our lives with these technology tools.

Box / Aaron Levie and Cisco / John Chambers

• What fun – This was such a fun pairing as the contrast between the people and companies was so interesting. Yet at the same time, both organizations are developing products for a new world where individuals are far more empowered. While no one is going to go out and buy their own router, the IT pros that do want to have the capability for you to use the router when you bring in your own device. A fun part of D in general is when you can see widely different perspectives in a dialog about a problem space each is approaching.
• IT control – Chambers asserted that the ability for IT to “say no” really changed 4 or 5 years ago and now enterprises need to catch up to consumer technologies and support them. Chambers even said “BYOD trumps security”.
• Disruption – Levie offered a wonderful example of how companies are handling disruption. He said that the three biggest Box customers are companies formed in the 1800’s. This speaks to how much change is going on among IT pros.

Disney Media / Anne Sweeney and Producer / I. Marlene King

• Twitter integration – It was fascinating to hear the content developer view of creating content knowing that Twitter is part of the viewing equation. There’s a clear perspective that Twitter is contributing to the experience and enjoyment of the show.
• OMG moments – I loved hearing about the way they essentially create the show to support “OMG” or “jump off the couch” moments, and how that plays into Twitter.
• Time zones – Turns out that the audience is pretty self-governing when it comes to spoilers and time zones, which was interesting to think about.

Pinterest / Ben Silbermann

• First appearance – Ben doesn’t often appear or do presentations. It is great to see him.
• Framing – Another great example of framing the goals of the product: Pinterest aims to help people “discover things they really love and inspire them to experience them in real life."
• Early users – From a product development perspective, he spoke about how early users ended up setting the tone of the product when it comes to passion.
• Last web app? – Kara asked if Silbermann thought that Pinterest might be the “last web first app” or not. The answer focused on starting off where people were but now today of course the goal is to be able to use the service wherever you are and of course a ton of that is mobile which overtook the PC along the lines of industry trends.

Tesla, SpaceX, Hyper Tube / Elon Musk

• Along with everyone at D11 and online, this was an incredible treat.
• “Mars is a fixer upper” – as far as planets go, Musk said Mars is our best bet for life on another planet since it can be fixed up relatively easily.
• Every tech takes 3 or 4 generations to get it to mass market. He walked through the original Tesla plan (high price/low volume, mid-price/mid volume, low price/high volume). He framed this as competing with a hundred years and trillion dollar investment in gas combustion. This is a great example of how disruption gets talked about in early stages – all the focus on whether electric cars can displace gas cars using the criteria gas cars developed over all this time. From a product point of view, this perspective is super interesting.