He's saying that at times the point is to demonstrate to an opponent that your side of an emotional narrative makes sense to broad numbers of others. Just about everyone is rational according to their own systems of reasoning, and it's the reconciliation of those oftentimes implicit systems that the subreddit is about.
I think you're going to hit difficulties getting most local coffeeshops onboard. Unless there is a brand of local coffeeshop I am not familiar with, and it's probable that this in-between brand exists in cities without much space and more of a focus on pumping out volume, most local coffeeshops identify with the opposite of this ethos. They are focused on the experience of being in the coffeeshop and standing as a clear contrast to everything that chains like Starbucks and Dunkin offer. Namely an emphasis on quality and "realness".
I know many a coffeeshop owner whose immediate response to being pitched this would be "Starbucks already exists".
Completely agree with a lot of your points, we run into coffee shops every day that are hesitant to offer something like this. That said, resigning themselves to the fact that a chain exists is a surefire way to go out of business. Most of the shops we speak with are actively looking for ways to maintain the quality you've noted, while simultaneously attracting more customers.
In terms of scale, we're asked about fragmentation a lot. Chains like Starbucks and Dunkin' will never use Cloosiv, but there's no reason to believe that as our network grows, that we can't support large regional chains (Joe Muggs, Dollop) and even national chains (Caribou, La Colombe, etc.).
For now, we're hyper-focused on building out that network, by adding any interested shop as quickly as possible. That may appear fragmented across the country, but as we increase our speed we'll be able hit a critical mass quickly.
I think your points of targetting large regional chains and not-Starbucks national chains are great. I think you may achieve more impactful market acquisition there.
> resigning themselves to the fact that a chain exists is a surefire way to go out of business
Saying this to a local coffeeshop is a surefire way to get them to not only not listen to you, but to tell all their friends about how much you suck. This is absolutely wrong. This may work in selling to someone struggling, but the very fact that any other solidly-in-business coffeeshop exists proves your argument quite obviously incorrect.
Sorry about that, I didn't do a great job of clarifying. What I meant to say is that we haven't encountered that type of pushback nearly as much as we anticipated. Owners tend to understand the concept and most are interested in improving their competitive advantage. The primary concerns we face are around fulfillment and customer expectation, but we'll likely continue to run into more shops that are simply uninterested in this sales channel.
IMO there does not exist a perfect balance to be maintained. What defines balance is context, and you are eternally gaining new context. Hindsight often is a perceptive trap insofar that when looking back, you perceive it to have been possible to have known then what you know now and thus resolve that the path to perfection is in having a perfect plan. This is false. There was not a way for you to have known what was then the future before it came to pass.
So, what I personally do is just get started with whatever approach with the full knowledge that I will forever be refining and adding to that approach. Routinely check in with your context, what you are doing, and how those are informing each other and interacting to produce the results you are getting. For example, if you find that you are losing too much time journaling, do less of it. Figure out why, though. Maybe it is because work is busier than usual. Retain this information because it will allow you to make plans that are closer to perfect.
Basically what I'm saying is just get started. Moving in a direction is what is important, not necessarily getting to any place in particular. Understand what you are doing, and make sure you keep updating that understanding and remain fundamentally humble to the fact that you'll never strike a perfect balance.
Hey there, I think I may have already spoken with you. Got connected with the Seattle office through Triplebyte, then bounced over to an ATX hiring manager due to my being located in Austin. Took that call while running around NYC, in case it was you who I spoke with and you recall that.
Lead web generalist with heavy UI expertise. Specialize in facilitating group interaction such that individuals are happier, work happens smoother, and everyone and everything continually improves. Am young and able to smoothly code switch between casual millennial-friendly chitchat and board meeting appropriate language. Plethora of other cross-disciplinary skills common to early stage startup environments. UX design, product, etc.
- Location: Austin, TX
- Remote: sure
- Willing to relocate: yes
- Technologies: web UI and javascript for the most part, Data Science B.S.
Yes. Cultures are systemic, and they are much more than just how your company has a pingpong table and happy hour every day. Culture is the template for behavior. It is what dictates what the standard response to difficulty is. Just as children learn from their parents, followers learn from their leaders. It is imperative to install leaders who understand this.
> Remember: this is not about you, nor it is about your career. There are real people lives and well-being at play. You’re not playing god here and you’re not free from mistakes, erroneous judgment, or faulty reasoning. You're human as much as everyone in your team/organization, with all the bias and limitations. Be humble.
This misses the point. Yes, you are correct, womenswear features a wider ensemble of pieces than menswear. However, the societal norms for appropriate female dress are more rigid than those for men. Barack Obama could do an interview in sweatpants and retain respect. The Queen could not do the same.
> often quite a lot higher than the knee
I also fail to see what this has to do with anything other than signaling your contempt.
The Queen? You are confusing apples and oranges. You are seeing the problem where there's none. I can definitely see Michelle Obama getting interviewed while wearing sweatpants
> fail to see what this has to do with anything other than signaling your contempt
No contempt meant. But I think it’s relevant that women can expose their legs generously in a work environment whereas I have never seen a man do the same.
Yes. Humans experience life as a narrative, and the wider the set of narrative experience a person can understand the wider the set of humans that person can get along with or connect together.
Does reading fiction guarantee that a person will not do bad things? Do we require reading fiction to be good people? Of course not.
> executing on the roadmap and pivot if the feature fails
You answered your own question. Are they smart enough to make a solid plan and execute it? Are they smart enough to not miss a beat when their solid plan inevitably goes off the rails? Is the leadership humble enough to behave like this? Are they confident enough to be transparent about it? These are my personal metrics. There is no predicting the future, so I assess how the leadership handles making mistakes. The rest is just market statistics.
