Keep in touch via Facebook, this is critical to your future success. And we’re public now, so can you click on an ad or two when you’re there?

– Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg, speaking at Harvard Business School’s “Class Day” event Wednesday

The four-year-old social games company revealed this morning that it is seeking to raise $850 million to $1.15 billion in its initial public offering.

In a presentation posted online, Pincus explains why Zynga’s approach to developing games such as FarmVille, CityVille, Poker, Empires & Allies and Words With Friends is a massive opportunity moving forward.

In the video, the executive, who can normally be found in jeans and a T-shirt, is wearing a suit jacket with a button-down shirt; he doesn’t bother with a tie.

From the 30-minute presentation, here are Pincus’s Top 5 reasons why investors should be excited about Zynga:

1. The idea of play is a core Internet activity and fastest-growing on mobile. Zynga is to play what Google is to search, Amazon is to shop and Facebook is to share.
2. Zynga is the leader in play.
3. The company’s platform can scale as it grows.
4. It’s a profitable business model.
5. Zynga has made an unmatched investment in the space.

Even though Pincus looks a little stiff, this is the topic he’s most comfortable discussing. Not to mention that this process should be somewhat familiar to the Wharton and Harvard Business School grad, who took his service- and support-automation software company Support.com public 11 years ago.

Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, best known for investing in Google, Amazon, Twitter and Zynga, has made a bet on Turkey as the next big market with its first major investment there.

The receiving company — Trendyol.com, an e-commerce site based in Istanbul — is announcing today that it has raised $26 million from Kleiner Perkins and Tiger Global.

Trendyol is similar to other flash sales sites in the U.S., such as Gilt Groupe, Rue La La, and Ideeli. The site sends out daily emails offering a heavily discounted selection of clothes. Consumers have a limited amount of time to purchase the items before the sale expires or quantities run out.

The company was founded by Demet Mutlu, a 29-year-old dropout from Harvard Business School — she is now running the company with about 350 employees.

Kleiner partner Aileen Lee said a combination of a hardworking executive team, the company’s phenomenal growth, and Turkey’s increasingly attractive market opportunity led to the investment. Plus, it doesn’t hurt to introduce e-commerce to a market that doesn’t have a strong brick-and-mortar environment.

Check out some of these facts:

• Turkey has 35 million Internet users, representing the third largest Web market in Europe.
• Turkey is a socially engaged country, ranking fifth-highest for Facebook usage globally; eighth for Twitter and first for FriendFeed.
• Turkey has a high credit card penetration rate of about 60 percent with 46 million credit cards.
• In the past 16 months, Trendyol has signed up four million members, translating into one out of every nine Turkish Internet users.

Think of it as the Netflix for fashion.

The 18-month-old company lets you rent high-end dresses and accessories for special occasions. It even gives you the prepaid envelope to send it all back when you are done–no dry cleaning necessary.

If you didn’t know better, you would have thought Rent the Runway starred in the hit movie “Bridesmaids.” That’s because there are dresses for most occasions, even a wedding that you aren’t willing to break the bank over.

Rent the Runway was founded by two Harvard Business grads, Jennifer Hyman and Jennifer Fleiss, and is announcing today that it has raised $15 million in venture capital from Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. The funding follows a first round by Bain Capital Ventures and Highland Capital totaling $16 million. Aileen Lee, a partner at Kleiner Perkins, will join Runway’s board.

On the site, women browse from 25,000 dresses from 95 designers, such as Dolce and Gabbana and Vera Wang. Next, they enter a date for the event and their dress size. After that, you make a reservation, and can even get a back-up size free, so you don’t have to worry about it fitting on the big night.

Rental prices vary depending on the price of the dress. For example, a knee-length dress from Sachin + Babi rents for $125 and retails for $660. But a $2,250 peach-colored dress from Nina Ricci rents more than twice that at $300. In general, the colors and styles seem endless.

The investment will allow Rent the Runway to offer a wider selection of brands and price points. It also will go toward some of the less glamorous work, such as beefing up its back-end systems to handle future growth and pay for new warehouses outside of New York City (coming in January 2012).

If the model doesn’t already sound like the mail-order DVD rental business, the company is willing to draw the comparison itself. In a release, it said it will also be personalizing the shopping experience “using proprietary algorithms rivaling that of Netflix.”

So far, the company claims to already have more than one million members.

Part of its business proposition is also exposing women to new brands.

In that way, Fleiss, the company’s president, says the company can be used as a marketing and customer acquisition channel for its partnering brands. In a release, she said, “Ninety-eight percent of our customers are trying brands they’ve never before worn. We are introducing experiential brand marketing into the fashion industry–not just a onetime transaction–which is the power behind Rent the Runway.”

Margo Georgiadis (pictured here), VP of Global Sales Operations at Google, will be COO of Groupon, Google confirmed.

She is currently located in Chicago, where the social buying site is headquartered.

A Google spokesman confirmed the move by Georgiadis, while Groupon–which specifically denied a query about her appointment that BoomTown made Tuesday–dithered.

In a statement, her boss, SVP and Chief Business Officer Nikesh Arora said:

“I’m grateful for all that Margo has done for our team over the past two years. We will miss her, but we’re also very excited that she’s joining a terrific company and a great partner for Google.”

Besides COO, I will officially bestow the title of “Chief Cat Wrangler” on Georgiadis, for the massive organizational job ahead for her at the notoriously chaotic start-up. (As evidenced by Google being the company confirming a major Groupon hire.)

Still, Groupon’s growth had been stunning. It now has thousands of employees and has already washed out one COO, former Yahoo exec Rob Solomon, whose departure was reported here.

It has also turned down a $6 billion acquisition offer from Google, raised a badillion dollars in venture funding from tech’s top investors and also is prepping an IPO valuing the company at upwards of $15 billion.

Phew!

Georgiadis must bring calm to this perfect storm.

Because of her solid resume (see below) and quiet demeanor, I had included her in a list of candidates several weeks ago and had queried the social buying company about her specifically this week.

In fact, when I asked for a comment if Georgiadis was hired on Tuesday, a Groupon spokeswoman said: “This would be news to me. Nothing to announce yet.”

At the time, Google had the class to simply say “no comment.”

(Lesson learned!)

Crain’s Chicago Business’ John Pletz first posted on Georgiadis’ hiring earlier today.

In any case, Georgiadis is just the kind of candidate that Groupon has been looking for–a competent and experienced sales and operations exec who would not overshadow its quirky CEO and co-founder Andrew Mason.

As I wrote two weeks ago:

Lastly, and perhaps most important, the Groupon COO candidate is going to have to accept that the role will not be a CEO-in-waiting, either before or after its inevitable IPO in the next year.

While I have received several tips that co-founder and CEO Andrew Mason might not stay its principal exec, extensive checking with sources inside and outside the company indicate that such a move is highly unlikely.

“Andrew is beloved to the board, by investors and, most of all, by employees,” said one source. “He’s not going anywhere.”

Indeed, Mason has a close working relationship with co-founder Brad Keywell, as well as Groupon co-founder and Chairman Eric Lefkofsky.

In fact, despite other business interests, Lefkofsky has been very involved in all key decisions with Mason.

That job, presumably, would fall to the new COO, which Groupon should be hiring sooner rather than later.

“Groupon needs a world-class COO, who can manage hyper-growth, but also who knows that a No. 2 stays in the background while doing it,” said another source. “That’s a tall order.”

Groupon has looked at a number of top execs, most specificially at former DoubleClick and Google exec David Rosenblatt. Sources said the high-profile exec did not want to play second fiddle to Mason or move to Chicago.

That’s moot now. Here is Georgiadis’ bio at the Silicon Valley search giant, which shows why Groupon picked her:

Georgiadis is responsible for driving Google’s sales operations and strategies across regions, channels and products as well as leading the sales technology teams which enable the successful commercialization of Google’s products (e.g., AdWords, AdSense, display and mobile ads) with advertisers and publishers.

She also leads the company’s local and commerce businesses, working to extend services like Checkout, Google Places and commerce search to small and large businesses alike.

Before joining Google, Margo was a principal in Synetro Capital LLC, a private investment firm based in Chicago. She also spent five years as the executive vice president of card products and chief marketing officer of Discover Financial Services where she led a radical turnaround of business performance and revitalized its rewards leadership with award-winning new products, customer experience and marketing. Prior to Discover, Margo was a partner at McKinsey and Company for 15 years in London and Chicago. She was a leader in the firm’s marketing and retail practices, and also co-founded and led the customer acquisition and management and retail marketing practices.

She has a bachelor’s degree in economics from Harvard College and an MBA from Harvard Business School.

Many years ago, before Google went public, I had an unusual late-night conversation in the lobby of the TED conference with its co-founder Larry Page about the prospect, about which–despite its inevitability–he had more than a little nervousness.

That would be: Taking the search company public.

After much ruminating, Page concluded that one of the more important reasons he felt compelled to have an IPO was to finally reward Google’s employees for all the work they had done to build the company.

While I have never had a similar chat with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg about the powerful social networking company and an initial public offering, I suspect that he would not express any such sentiment.

And it’s not because Zuckerberg does not value his staffers any less than Page did–instead, it’s because he seems to value his privacy most of all.

I know–ironic!–given how many perceive the company to be cavalier about important issues related to disclosures of personal information uploaded to Facebook by the mountain-load daily by its hundreds of millions of users.

That aside, Zuckerberg’s clear intent to keep the lid on Facebook tight–with no information about the details of financial performance and other pertinent information a public offering would require be disclosed–is clearly about to become a nettlesome issue for the company.

While that effort at preserving secrecy by staying private has resulted in little more than cute Silicon Valley media guessing games about a possible IPO, its most recent machinations are too clever by a half.

That would be the new and giant investment from Goldman Sachs, as well as a deal to get $1.5 billion of pre-IPO shares in the hands of the investment bank’s rich customers.

Aside from the appalling image that only the very wealthy can get an early shot at Facebook shares, which instantly became a press meme yesterday after the Goldman deal was announced, pretending this single investment entity–called a “special purpose vehicle”–simply feels like a Wall Street trick.

Plus, a special purpose vehicle sounds like a car that bankers use to take people for a ride.

Thus, a gaggle of rich doctors in New Jersey are treated like one blob, instead of what is plainly true to all. As the old Latin legal phrase goes: Res ipsa loquitur (the thing speaks for itself).

Of course, this strategic move is designed to keep the number of primary stockholders under 500, which is the IPO tipping point for the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Therefore, by all means, let’s do it!

Or not, because I had an intense déjà vu about all this, and an unease that it felt vaguely familiar as a negative characteristic of Zuckerberg’s leadership that seems to cling to him.

That would be the dicey origins of Facebook, which remain a controversy to this day, including garnering an entire Hollywood movie on the subject.

Anyone with a passing knowledge of Facebook’s history knows the basic question: Did Mark Zuckerberg “steal” the idea for Facebook from the Winklevoss twins, as well as sandbag their efforts, while they were all students at Harvard University?

And, more to the point, was it illegal?

The Winklevii certainly think so, continuing in their Don Quixote quest to take Zuckerberg down in a series of ever-more-comical lawsuits.

For me, the answer is a lot more complex–I think Zuckerberg most definitely screwed with the Olympic rowing twins and it was very creepy that he did.

But, in terms of breaking the law, not so much.

Of course, if you are endeavoring to always act with ethics in your career, this should not be the bar set. But in practical terms, it was most definitely an aggressive knee-capping that is not uncommon in business.

Zuckerberg has shown similar tendencies many times since then, especially around the thorny issues of privacy, where fast-and-loose behaviors are quickly followed by the I’m-sorry-I-didn’t-mean-it excuses.

Okay, fine, I get it. Business is war.

But, as it moves into a more mature place, the question now is whether Facebook should keep stressing this kind of wink-wink-nudge-nudge propensity, because it feels–how can I say this in the nicest way–icky.

Plus it will surely attract unneeded attention from the SEC, which is already looking into the opaque market for trading shares of closely held companies and where Facebook is the star attraction.

And this is to say nothing of other issues–for example, could there be insider trading problems around the buying and selling of these private shares, as one person close to the situation has noted to me?

Facebook, of course, will defend what it is doing as above board, say it’s not unfair to give special access to its bounty to the very rich in what is essentially a private IPO and wag a finger at critics like me and tell us we don’t understand sophisticated financial issues.

But here’s what I grok without a Harvard Business School degree: It feels sneaky, it feels elite, it feels opaque, and this kind of fancy financing footwork could end in tears.

Because these legitimate questions on how Facebook handles its stock will continue to dog the company until–when he is good and ready (and finances at Facebook look prettier)–Zuckerberg eventually pulls the trigger on an IPO.

It would be nice, even if Wall Street applauds his cleverness, if he didn’t keep shooting himself in the foot along the way.

While the news has been be out there for a month, Miramax officially confirmed this morning that former News Corp. exec Mike Lang was named CEO of the Hollywood movie company.

What will be interesting about that for digital content players will be to see exactly what the man who was deeply involved in deals to buy the Myspace social networking site and also create the Hulu premium video service will do with Miramax’s rich trove of more than 700 award-winning films, including “Shakespeare in Love” and “Pulp Fiction,” in its movie library.

Lang left his post as EVP of business development and strategy at Fox Entertainment, including its film studio, broadcast network, sports and cable channel, earlier this year.

BoomTown spoke to him last night about his new job, which came after he advised the group that finally won Miramax–Filmyard Holdings.

“We are trying to take this company to the next level by exploring not only our traditional options, but our digital ones,” he said.

Miramax will not be aggressive in making new movies, but in taking advantage of the sequel rights it has to a number of hits, as well as the existing movies, which include four of the last 15 Best Picture Oscar winners.

“Our strategy is still emerging, but we want to exploit our assets in a variety of ways,” said Lang, who noted that could include everything from subscription deals with online video services, such as Netflix and Amazon, to digital content lockers in the cloud.

“We want people to be able to access our content across multiple medias,” he said. “We’ll take any payment, of course, but we also have to be smart about how we do these things.”

Lang, who has always had a foot in both worlds, said he thinks that digital media could develop similarly to the way traditional media has.

“There is no reason to think that digital will not emulate older media, with different windows in which subscribers watch content,” he said.

But, said Lang, he also thinks there is still life in physical media, such as Blu-ray players.

Since the deal just closed with former Miramax owner Disney, there are no employees yet for the Santa Monica, Calif.-based company.

But once he staffs up, Langs said he hopes to present a different picture of Hollywood to the digerati than the more typical wary hostility.

“Our goal really is we want to send a signal that we are a different company,” said Lang. “Not only about digital, but in being an innovative company.”

Here is the official press release about Lang:

MICHAEL LANG NAMED MIRAMAX CEO

SANTA MONICA, CA–December 8, 2010–Miramax today announced that Michael Lang has been appointed chief executive officer, effective immediately. Lang will be based at the new Miramax headquarters in Santa Monica and will oversee the renowned Miramax film library, which was acquired by Filmyard Holdings on December 3, 2010.

“I have known and worked closely with Mike for almost 20 years and have always respected his talents,” said Richard Nanula, chairman of Miramax and a principal at Colony Capital. “We are confident that he is the right person to lead Miramax in its next phase of growth.”

“I have always admired the Miramax library, which includes many respected titles and award-winning films,” said Lang. “Based on the quality of these assets, I believe bringing new life to this library–by working with traditional and new partners–will be an exciting and unprecedented story of growth and innovation. I am honored by this opportunity, and I look forward to working with my partners as we build a new kind of media company.”

Lang, 45, most recently served as a consultant to Filmyard in its acquisition of Miramax. Prior to that, he was EVP, Business Development and Strategy at Fox Entertainment, responsible for strategic initiatives across News Corp.’s entertainment assets, including Fox’s film studio, broadcast network, sports and cable channels. Lang played key roles in the acquisition of MySpace and the formation of the MySpace Music joint venture, and he led the creation of Hulu, with major broadcast partners. In addition, Lang was involved in Fox’s mobile, digital and video game initiatives. He joined Fox in 2004.

Prior to Fox, Lang served as a consultant on media-related investments. In the late ’90s, he was a founding executive of Z.com. Lang began his career at The Walt Disney Company in Strategic Planning. Lang earned his MBA with high distinction at Harvard Business School and he holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Claremont McKenna College.

(Full disclosure: News Corp. owns Dow Jones, which owns this site.)

“I mean damn, did you even see the test
You got D’s, motherf*$@%&, D’s! Rosie Perez”
– Kanye West

No position in a company is more important than the CEO, and as a result, no job gets more scrutiny. Sadly, little of this analysis benefits CEOs, as most of the discussions happen behind their backs. This post is a step in the opposite direction. By describing how Andreessen Horowitz evaluates CEOs, I am at the same time describing what I think the job of the CEO is. Here are the key questions we ask:

Does the CEO know what to do?

Can the CEO get the company to do what she knows?

Did the CEO achieve the desired results against an appropriate set of objectives?

1. Does the CEO know what to do?

One should interpret this question as broadly as possible. Does the CEO know what to do in all matters all of the time? This includes matters of personnel, matters of financing, matters of product strategy, matters of goal sizing, matters of marketing. At a macro level, does the CEO set the right strategy for the company and know its implications in every detail of the company?

I evaluate two distinct facets of knowing what to do:

Strategy–At Andreessen Horowitz, we like to say that in good companies, the story and the strategy are the same thing. As a result, the proper output of all the strategic work is the story.

Decision-making–At the detailed level, the output of knowing what to do is the speed and quality of the CEO’s decisions.

The Strategy and the Story

The CEO must set the context that every employee operates within. This context gives meaning to the specific work that people do, aligns interests, enables decision-making and provides motivation. Well-structured goals and objectives contribute to the context, but they do not provide the whole story. More to the point, goals and objectives are not the story. The story of the company goes beyond quarterly or annual goals and gets to the hardcore question of why? Why should I join this company? Why should I be excited to work here? Why should I buy your product? Why should I invest in the company? Why is the world better off as a result of this company’s existence?

When a company clearly articulates its story, the context for everyone–employees, partners, customers, investors, and the press–becomes clear: When a company fails to tell its story, you hear phrases like:

“These reporters don’t get it.”

“Who is responsible for the strategy in this company?”

“We have great technology, but need marketing help.”

The CEO doesn’t have to be the creator of the vision. Nor does she have to be the creator of the story. But she must be the keeper of the vision and the story. As such, the CEO ensures that the company story is clear and compelling.

The story is not the mission statement; the story does not have to be succinct. It is the story. Companies can take as long as they need to tell it, but they must tell it and it must be compelling. A company without a story is a usually a company without a strategy.

Want to see a great company story? Read Jeff Bezos’s three-page letter he wrote to shareholders in 1997. In telling Amazon’s story in this extended from–not as mission statement, not as a tagline–Jeff got all the people who mattered on the same page about what Amazon (AMZN) was about.

Decision-making

Some employees make products, some make sales; the CEO makes decisions. Therefore, a CEO can most accurately be measured by the speed and quality of those decisions. Great decisions come from CEOs who display an elite combination of intelligence, logic, and courage.

Courage is particularly important, because every decision a CEO makes is based on incomplete information. In fact, at the time of the decision, the CEO will generally have less than 10 percent of the information typically present in the ensuing Harvard Business School case study. As a result, the CEO must have the courage to bet the company on a direction even though she does not know if the direction is right. The most difficult decisions (and often the most important) are difficult precisely because they will be deeply unpopular with the CEO’s most important constituencies (employees, investors, and customers).

In my personal experience, the best decision that I made in my career–the decision to sell the Loudcloud business to EDS and become Opsware the software company–would have lost by landslide had I put it to a vote with my employees, my investors or my customers.

As CEO, there is never enough time to gather all information needed to make a decision. The CEO must make hundreds of decisions big and small in the course of a typical week. The CEO cannot simply stop all other activities to gather comprehensive data and do exhaustive analysis to make that single decision. Knowing this, CEOs must be continuously and systematically gathering knowledge in their day-to-day activities so that they will have as much information as possible when the decision point presents itself.

In order to prepare to make any decision, the CEO must systematically acquire the knowledge of everything that might impact any decision that she might make. Questions such as:

What are the competitors likely to do?

What’s possible technically and in what timeframe?

What are the true capabilities of the organization and how can you maximize them?

How much financial risk does this imply?

What will the issues be, given your current product architecture?

Will the employees be energized or despondent about this promotion?

Great CEOs build exceptional strategies for gathering the required information continuously. They embed their quest for intelligence into all of their daily actions from staff meetings to customer meetings to 1:1s. Winning strategies are built on comprehensive knowledge gathered in every interaction the CEO has with an employee, a customer, a partner, an investor, and so on.

2. Can the CEO get the company to do what she knows?

If the CEO paints a compelling vision and makes fast, high-quality decisions, can she then get the company to execute on her vision and decisions? The first ingredient in being able to do this is leadership, as I outlined in a previous post, Notes on Leadership.

In addition, executing well requires a broad set of operational skills. The larger the organization, the more elaborate the requisite skill set.

In order for a company to execute a broad set of decisions and initiatives, it must:

Have the capacity to do so–in other words, the company must contain the necessary talent in the right positions to execute the strategy.

Be a place where every employees can get things accomplished–the employees must be motivated, communication must be strong, the amount of common knowledge must be vast, and the context must be clear.

Is the CEO building a world-class team?

The CEO is responsible for the executive team plus the fundamental interview and hiring processes for all employees. She must make sure that the company sources the best candidates and that the screening processes yield the candidates with the right combination of talent and skills. Ensuring the quality of the team is a core part of running the company. Great CEOs constantly assess whether or not they are building the best team.

The output of this capability is the quality of the team. It’s important to note that team quality is tightly tied to the specific needs of the company in the challenges that it faces at the point in time that it faces them. As a result, it’s quite possible that the executive team changes several times, but the team a) is high-quality the entire way and b) there is no attrition problem.

Is it is easy for employees to contribute to the mission?

The second part of the evaluation determines whether or not the CEO can effectively run the company. To test this, I like to ask this question: “How easy is it for any given individual contributor to get his or her job done?”

In well-run organizations, people can focus on their work (as opposed to politics and bureaucratic procedures) and have confidence that if they get their work done, good things will happen for both the company and them personally. By contrast, in a poor organization, people spend much of their time fighting organizational boundaries and broken processes.

While quite easy to describe, building a well-run organization requires a high level of skill. The skills required range from organizational design to performance management. They involve the incentive structure and the communication architecture that drives and enables every individual employee. When a CEO “fails to scale,” it’s usually along this dimension. In practice, very few CEOs get an “A” on this particular test.

Netflix’s CEO Reed Hastings put great effort into designing a system that enables employees to be maximally effective. His presentation on this design is called Reference Guide on our Freedom and Responsibility Culture. It walks through what Netflix (NFLX) values in its employees, how they screen for those values during the interview process, how they reinforce those values, and how they scale this system as the number of employees grows.

3. Results against objectives

When measuring results against objectives, start by making sure the objectives are correct. CEOs who excel at board management can “succeed” by setting objectives artificially low. Great CEOs who fail to pay attention to board management can “fail” by setting objectives too high. Early in a company’s development, objectives can be particularly misleading as nobody really knows the true size of the opportunity. Therefore, the first task in accurately measuring results is setting objectives correctly.

We also try to keep in mind that the size and nature of the opportunity varies quite a bit across companies. Hoping that VMware (VMW) can be as capital-light as SolarWinds (SWI) or trying to get Yelp to grow as fast as Twitter doesn’t make sense and can be quite destructive. CEOs should be evaluated against their company’s opportunity–not somebody else’s company. Let me share a funny story, which illustrates a CEO really owning delivering against results. This story is from Robin Li, CEO of Baidu (BIDU). He shares that on the day of Baidu’s IPO–usually one of an entrepreneur’s most exhilarating days of his entire life–he sat at his desk terrified. Why? Listen to how Robin owned delivering results:

In 2004, we raised our last round of VC money led by Draper Fisher Jurvetson…and Google, one of our great colleagues. Then a year later, in 2005, the company went public. The ideal price was $27 [the stock's initial offer price] and it closed on the first day at $122. It was great with us for many of the Baidu employees and for all of the Baidu investors. It was a very miserable thing for me because when I decided to take the company public, I was only prepared to deliver financial results that match the price of $27 or maybe a little higher, $30, $40. But I was really shocked to see that the price went to $122 on the first day. So that meant I needed to deliver real results that matches an expectation much, much higher than what I had prepared to do. But in any case, I thought I had no choice. So I put my head down and focused on operation, focused on technology, focused on the user’s experience, and I delivered.

Once we’ve taken all of this into account, we see that black-box results are a lagging indicator. And as they say in the mutual fund prospectuses, “past performance is no guarantee of future performance.” The white box CEO evaluation criteria–“does the CEO know what to do?” and “can the CEO get the company to do it?”–will do a much better job of predicting the future.

Closing Thought

CEO evaluation need not be a byzantine, unstated art. All people, including CEOs, will perform better on a test if they know the questions ahead of time.

Ben Horowitz is co-founder and general partner of Andreessen Horowitz. He co-founded Loudcloud, later renamed Opsware Inc., in 1999 and served as CEO of the company before it was acquired in 2007 by Hewlett-Packard. He was most recently vice president and general manager of Hewlett-Packard’s Business Technology Organization Unit.

While a lot of people doubted Arianna Huffington when she co-founded her eponymous blog site many years ago, she can add another I-told-you-so to the pile, after today’s induction of the Huffington Post as an official Harvard Business School case study.

Huffington, as well we HuffPo CEO Eric Hippeau have been at the school today, answering questions from the 900 students to whom the case study has been presented.

While it will not be immediately published, as others have been, due to the company wanting to keep some information private, Huffington said the overall theme was how some enterprises create opportunity when other see problems.

“The whole concept is about disruption in the media business,” said Huffington, who knows the topic well, given content blogs like hers are often blamed for disintermediating the media business.

Huffington actually got hooked up with Harvard professor Tom Eisenmann via his wife, well-known tech and media investment banker Jill Greenthal, at the seventh D: All Things Digital conference last June, where Huffington appeared onstage in an interview with me.

Eisenmann, who co-heads a course at HBS called “The Entrepreneurial Manager,” said he had long wanted to profile the innovative start-up.

“They’re ambitious,” he noted, in terms of revenue and editorial goals. “And, for the students, it’s fun to have a case that is more familiar and current.”

Eisenmann’s team started collecting data–about one-third history, one-third on the current business and one-third about competitors–from the HuffPo execs and staff in November.

While there have been many case studies of digital companies, Eisenmann said the point of this study is to allow students to look at key decision-making moments that a fast-growing start-up has to face.

“There is always a series of key decisions,” he said. “Our goal is to ask the students to find out if they were the right ones or not.”

Indeed, and while Huffington and her team keep making them, here’s a the video of her at D7 in an interview with Washington Post (WPO) publisher Katharine Weymouth:

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100412/the-huffington-post-goes-to-harvard-business-school-as-a-case-study-that-is/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20100104/yahoo-can-relax-a-little-but-just-a-little-this-years-boomtown-obsession-might-have-to-be-att/ http://allthingsd.com/20100104/yahoo-can-relax-a-little-but-just-a-little-this-years-boomtown-obsession-might-have-to-be-att/#comments Mon, 04 Jan 2010 15:03:09 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=22528

Of all the major issues to think about in the digital sector over the next year, perhaps the most important to focus on will be the mobile space.

That’s why the swirl of controversy around the inability of AT&T (T) to maintain a reliable network for users of the Apple (AAPL) iPhone–especially in New York and San Francisco–is perhaps the flashpoint story of the coming year.

It’s not only an appalling predicament for consumers who have paid for promised service and been denied it, as well as a future Harvard Business School case study in corporate incompetence (or malfeasance, depending on your mood), it is a really bad development for tech in general.

In other words, failed calls and glitchy apps are more than just annoying–they’re holding back a key spark of future innovation for computing.

Unfortunately, this kind of thing happens way too much in the digital space.

In fact, this AT&T debacle actually reminds me a lot of AOL’s busy-signal crisis of 1997, when the then-high-flying online service signed up too many consumers for its all-you-can-eat access and did not have the equipment in place to deliver what it sold.

At the time, AOL CEO Steve Case used the same lame excuses as AT&T, pretty much asking users to buck up during the shortfall. But he quickly retreated, apologized and fixed the situation.

That particular self-inflicted mess is now but a distant memory and certainly did not stop the progress of either AOL or Internet use overall. But it was a stark reminder that the relentless march of innovation should not be throttled.

That’s truer than ever as computing moves into what I consider an entirely new era of development, all centered on portable “smart” devices, whose standard-bearer is the iPhone, iPod touch and–soon–iSlate.

That’s purely my opinion, of course (hey, Scoble, Web 3.0 is still mobile!)

But, as Walt Mossberg and I wrote before our seventh D: All Things Digital conference last summer:

“So what’s the seminal development that’s ushering in the era of Web 3.0? It’s the real arrival, after years of false predictions, of the thin client, running clean, simple software, against cloud-based data and services. The poster children for this new era have been the Apple iPhone and iPod touch, which have sold 37 million units in less than two years and attracted 35,000 apps and one billion app downloads in just nine months.”

This means there’s plenty of need for strong networks that can handle all the wireless data that are going to be pumped through them in ever-increasing amounts.

Perhaps this looks like a bandwidth hogfest by customers, but it’s the landscape now and AT&T must adapt or, well, you know.

So, following in the footsteps of a lot of really terrific work done pretty much by bloggers on the mess AT&T has created, it is probably a given that–as I have obsessively done with Yahoo (YHOO) and its management woes–other journalists and I should stop making jokes about it and spend a lot more time monitoring what the telecom giant and others are doing or, really, not doing.

As usual, all tips and delicious memos appreciated, as well as suggestions of stories to look into.

Until then, here’s a short and mostly silly video I did recently of some dropped calls I had on my iPhone, as well as an interview Walt did with AT&T President, CEO and Chairman Randall Stephenson at D7 last summer about these very issues:

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100104/yahoo-can-relax-a-little-but-just-a-little-this-years-boomtown-obsession-might-have-to-be-att/feed/ 9 http://allthingsd.com/20090716/cybercrime-tactics-fit-for-an-mba-program/ http://allthingsd.com/20090716/cybercrime-tactics-fit-for-an-mba-program/#comments Thu, 16 Jul 2009 15:15:06 +0000 Andrew LaVallee http://voices.allthingsd.com/?p=13550 Online scam artists are borrowing customer-acquisition and partnership strategies from legitimate marketers, a Cisco (CSCO) security executive says.

In conjunction with the company’s midyear security report, Patrick Peterson, Cisco’s chief security researcher, said in a Webcast that the increasing sophistication of the cyber criminal is one of the biggest threats security experts face.

“A lot of these things you would learn if you went to Harvard Business School,” he said. “The criminals that we study make money, and they’re successful in their markets. And they’re applying those same lessons, those same cyber-MBA lessons to what they’re doing. It makes them, again, a much more virulent enemy.”

Read the rest of this post on the original site

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20090716/cybercrime-tactics-fit-for-an-mba-program/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20081120/boomtown-pick-for-microsoft-digital-head-qi-lu-yes-the-former-yahoo-search-guru/ http://allthingsd.com/20081120/boomtown-pick-for-microsoft-digital-head-qi-lu-yes-the-former-yahoo-search-guru/#comments Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:01:32 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=6784

Yesterday, BoomTown opined that Microsoft was nearing a decision on who would become the head of its digital efforts.

And, according to several sources and some puzzling by me–if an agreement can be reached–I think that Microsoft (MSFT) CEO Steve Ballmer’s top choice is former Yahoo tech star Qi Lu.

While this is by no means a done deal, Lu is just the kind of top tech exec that Ballmer and Microsoft would warm to over a more media-centric choice like former Yahoo COO Dan Rosensweig or former AOL head Jon Miller.

Lu was EVP of engineering for the Search and Advertising Technology Group at Yahoo (YHOO), where he ran all development initiatives for its search and monetization platforms. He was at Yahoo for a decade.

If Ballmer manages to pull off the hire of Lu–on the heels of already grabbing another top Yahoo search exec, Sean Suchter, which I reported on yesterday–the aggressive exec could almost be bypassing a Yahoo search partnership he has long sought by sucking the talent right out of the place instead.

Ballmer is like Edward in “Twilight,” attracting top-notch search execs to Microsoft’s Redmond HQ, as if they were geek versions of Bella.

Lu would be a different choice for the post than many had expected, with a much more technical background than one in online media or advertising sales.

But since all of Microsoft’s future rests on winning in the search and search advertising space and trying to catch up with its archrival Google (GOOG) from way back in the race, Lu is also well suited for the position.

If Lu takes the job, he will be the boss of three strong digital execs at Microsoft: Satya Nadella, the SVP who heads engineering for Microsoft’s search, portal and advertising platform group; Yusuf Mehdi, whose online services portfolio includes marketing, online audience business development and product management for MSN and the search properties; and Brian McAndrews, the SVP for the advertiser and publisher solutions group.

Lu is known as as solid manager, but he is also called a very nice man and unusually humble for a tech star by many, which could be a good influence on Microsoft.

Before Yahoo, Lu was on the staff of the IBM Almaden Research Center, and worked at both Carnegie Mellon University and Fudan University in China (he also got degrees from both places).

And, in the kind of cred Microsoft likes, Lu holds 20 U.S. patents.

He left Yahoo after becoming dissatisfied with all the turmoil there, quitting in June, without another job lined up.

Since he left Yahoo, there have been rumors that he might be headed to Microsoft, but not in such a prominent job.

There has also been speculation that Lu would take a position at Facebook or even return to China for a tech job.

The well-respected Lu certainly has a multitude of choices, but the chance to lead money-laden Microsoft’s digital efforts–as it suits up for battle with Google–is compelling.

BoomTown has been poking around to try to figure out who Ballmer would choose for the digital head, ever since the man who used to be in charge, Kevin Johnson, quit in July, after the software giant’s takeover bid to buy Yahoo failed.

Several people close to the situation say Microsoft’s Ballmer has been keeping the deliberations close to the vest–perhaps because so many of those he has targeted have declined to consider the job.

But this week, many sources both inside and outside the company have told me that Ballmer is close to announcing his choice.

Annoyingly, one source has decided to play a digital version of “The Da Vinci Code” with me, dribbling out clues–more technical than media, very well liked in Silicon Valley, humble–about the candidate, which he wanted me to solve as if I were Robert Langdon and on the hunt for the progeny of Jesus.

Well, my solution is in: Microsoft’s most promising digital Holy Grail is Lu.

On a related note, bizarrely, the day after this column broke the story about Lu’s leaving Yahoo, I caught him by accident in the background of a video I was doing at a Harvard Business School event honoring Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg.

You can see him at 4:14 minutes in the video, laughing at me, as I bother Greylock Partners VC David Sze and make a bad pun related to former Yahoo exec Jeff Weiner’s departure from Yahoo.

Here’s that video:

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20081120/boomtown-pick-for-microsoft-digital-head-qi-lu-yes-the-former-yahoo-search-guru/feed/ 3 http://allthingsd.com/20080618/harvard-dropout-zuckerberg-feted-by-well-harvard/ http://allthingsd.com/20080618/harvard-dropout-zuckerberg-feted-by-well-harvard/#comments Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:12:52 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=2172

Oh the sweet irony of Facebook Founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg getting awarded a big round glass object, suitable for mantel-showing-off, from Harvard types.

Especially since he is now the school’s second most famous tech mogul dropout–after Microsoft’s Bill Gates.

But that was the case last night at the San Francisco Airport Hyatt Regency, where the 24-year-old Zuckerberg collected the 30th Entrepreneurial Company of the Year Award from the Harvard Business School Association of Northern California.

As is required at dinners like this, Zuckerberg had to sing for his supper in a post-meal interview about the hot social-networking site’s past and future.

At first, he did clarify that he was technically “on leave” from Harvard, as Gates also is, which the crowd loved.

(But, memo to Harvard Yard: Neither Gates nor Zuckerberg is coming back, so don’t leave the lights on.)

Zuckerberg (pictured here with me) also used the term “share information” in the interview, perhaps even more than he did onstage when I interviewed him at the D: All Things Digital conference last month.

And so much so that it could be the basis for a raucous drinking game where you take a shot every time he says “share information,” which would make you dangerously inebriated within 56 seconds.

Zuckerberg also strongly reiterated his statement that Facebook was not for sale, which is especially important now that it looks like a tastier treat to Microsoft (MSFT), in the wake of its failed takeover of Yahoo (YHOO).

But Zuckerberg specifically nixed a sale to Microsoft, which invested $240 million in Facebook and gave it its infamous $15 billion valuation.

He was joined onstage by Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg–who is an academically scary double whammy, holding a master’s degree in business administration with highest distinction from the Harvard Business School and a bachelor’s degree summa cum laude in economics from Harvard University.

Plus Sandberg has a really effective hairy eyeball that she used to stop me from stalking her or Zuckerberg with my Flip camera.

Still, BoomTown managed to get some video of those attending the event, which was heavy with tech types.

My various quarry dispensed business advice, all while I mocked Harvard (lovingly, so don’t gripe that I am envious–am not).

So, here’s my video of last night’s event, which includes: Piczo CEO Jeremy Verba (HBS); Facebook’s Ben Ling (not Harvard) and Elliot Schrage (Harvard undergrad, masters, law!); Greylock Partners’ James Slavet (HBS) and David Sze (horrors–Yale!); Accel Partners’ Jim Breyer (HBS); and the glass award itself (totally HBS!).

[ See post to watch video ]

And, once again, here’s Zuckerberg and Sandberg in action, somehow withstanding my withering questions at D6:

Part One

Part Two

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20080618/harvard-dropout-zuckerberg-feted-by-well-harvard/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20080604/facebook-gets-harvard-business-school-kudos/ http://allthingsd.com/20080604/facebook-gets-harvard-business-school-kudos/#comments Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:21:01 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/20080604/facebook-gets-the-harvard-business-school-treatment/

While it is not yet clear exactly what kind of business case study Facebook will turn out to be in the end–a raging success or a raging something else entirely–that has not stopped Harvard from feting the hot and hyped social-networking site.

That would be the Harvard Business School Association of Northern California, which will bestow upon Facebook its 30th Entrepreneurial Company of the Year Award on June 17 at the Hyatt Regency San Francisco Airport.

Apparently, the glamour never stops for CEO and Founder Mark Zuckerberg, who will be at the event, leading the crowd “through Facebook’s remarkable journey.”

Well, that’s all BoomTown needed to hear, immediately ponying up the $225 for a seat for non-members (although we briefly contemplated the $10,000 “Centennial” table for six, which includes a private reception and preferred seating).

While neither Zuckerberg nor I have the fancy degrees–he dropped out of Harvard as an undergrad and I did not have a prayer of getting in in the first place–Facebook’s leadership is chock full of Harvard graduates.

(Much to the chagrin, I might add, of some of Facebook’s less collegiately endowed types, who sometimes grumble to me about the tony school’s influence there, much in the same way some at Google complain about MIT and Stanford.)

In any case, COO Sheryl Sandberg must have scored 800s on her SATs (BoomTown: a decent 720 in English and a less-impressive 640 in math, as near as I can remember)!

According to Facebook’s Web site, she “holds a master’s degree in business administration with highest distinction from the Harvard Business School and a bachelor’s degree summa cum laude in economics from Harvard University.”

Meanwhile, new PR honcho Elliot Schrage “has been a contributor to the Harvard Business Review…holds a bachelors degree from Harvard College, a master’s degree in public policy from the Kennedy School of Government and a J.D. from Harvard Law School.”

And let’s not leave out CFO Gideon Yu, who “holds a master’s degree in business administration from Harvard Business School,” while VP of Product Management Matt Cohler’s “writings on the start-up economy have been published in Harvard Business Review.”

Here’s hoping some of this Harvard brain power rubs off on me over dinner!

And, using any excuse to post two video highlight reels from our recent sixth D: All Things Digital conference, here’s Zuckerberg and Sandberg in action, somehow withstanding my withering questions last week:

Part One

Part Two

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20080604/facebook-gets-harvard-business-school-kudos/feed/ 0