Yesterday it was made official. President-elect Joe Biden selected his one-time opponent for the Democratic presidential nomination and former Mayor of South Bend to serve as the Secretary of Transportation.

Both progressives on the left and conservatives on the right will have their qualms about Mayor Pete becoming Secretary Pete — check out Twitter if you don’t believe me. But soon-to-be “Secretary” Pete’s South Bend track record and proposed national transportation policy proposals present hope for people in the transportation and mobility space who have sought innovation-centric leadership at the Department of Transportation (DOT).

This need for strong leadership and new approaches comes at a pivotal time. The pandemic has laid bare the embarrassing and underfunded state of our public transit systems and infrastructure. And it’s no surprise that the American Society of Civil Engineers has continued to warn both elected officials and the public of our crumbling infrastructure and the looming disastrous impact on safety, national security and our economy. Moreover, Congress has been unable to come together and pass bipartisan legislation for the 21st century transportation policy that everyone in the United States needs and deserves.

And despite all these problems, we are living in the golden era of big ideas and innovation in transportation and mobility — from rapid advancements in autonomous and semi-autonomous vehicle technology to scaled adoption of micro mobility solutions, to a sea change in electric vehicle demand, to moonshots like Hyperloop to a public debate on parity of transit funding!

Secretary Pete is the right person to take on the herculean task of embracing and leveraging these exciting innovations to chip away at the immense transportation, mobility and infrastructure problems we face. Here’s a preview of the exciting ways that Secretary Pete may bring innovations to the Department of Transportation.

Prioritizing systems-based innovation

Secretary Pete was early to champion innovation and performance management within his administration at South Bend. He hired Santiago Garces initially as a Performance and Innovation Manager to reform the city’s key performance indicator tracking system, which ultimately led to Santiago being hired as the City’s first Chief Innovation Officer — a unique role for a small US city in 2015. This new position led to the systematic overhaul of IT services, the formation of Business Analytics group and a Civic Innovation Department and slew of adopted innovations that were both developed in-house and adopted from external vendors. It’s one thing to elevate the role of innovation and technology to the Mayor’s cabinet, it’s another thing to welcome and encourage the full-scale modernization and re-thinking of government systems ranging from public works to 311. If Secretary Pete implements even a fraction of his bold approach to systems change at the DOT, then he will reshape how the federal agency embraces and promotes innovation and technology as a standard practice.

Climate change and the environment

On the presidential nominee campaign trail, Secretary Pete announced a $1 Trillion plan to address America’s crumbling infrastructure. That ambitious plan included proposals specific to tackling climate change and environmental issues — ranging from billions in federal funding for modernization of flood protection systems for communities impacted by climate change to new regulations aimed at incentivizing smart electric grid technologies across the US. It also included $150 billion to improve public transportation with a majority of that funding to go to repairing and expanding existing rail and bus services. How would this bold policy plan be paid for? The bulk of the expense for the transportation and infrastructure plan was covered by a $1 trillion climate change plan that included $200 billion in investments in clean energy R&D, a $250 billion Clean Energy Bank for financing new clean-technologies and an additional $50 billion seed fund to help catalyze riskier experimental green tech. Of course, these policy proposals may never see the light of day, but it’s clear that Secretary Pete will mobilize the full force of the DOT to combat the massive challenges of climate change in America.

A focus on the little guy

Most folks know at this point that Secretary Pete was once Mayor Pete of South Bend, Indiana — population 100,000. As Mayor of a small midwestern city, Secretary Pete championed and served as a genuine amplifier for the hard work of small towns and cities beyond the usual big city circuit of New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, etc. His ability to resonate with leaders of small cities and towns across the US became obvious when local elected leaders from California to Pennsylvania endorsed him for the Democratic nominee for president. Secretary Pete is likely to not forget his small city roots or those who supported his candidacy when taking this new role. He is uniquely suited help the DOT better deploy much-needed federal resources, programs and attention to the small towns and cities that millions of Americans call home.

Lions, Tigers and Complete Streets Oh My

As Mayor of South Bend, Secretary Pete selected a team of city employees to participate in the Safe Street Academy. The result of which was community-centered research and the implementation of complete street and traffic calming strategies in South Bend. The project implemented short-term pilot projects to try and slow dangerous traffic and create alternative mobility options for community members. Secretary Pete has seen firsthand how such strategies to form complete streets can dramatically improve safety. It’s possible that Secretary Pete could help champion such approaches in the DOT and unlock new resources and funding for more local governments across the US to adopt similar strategies to those that helped make South Bend’s street safer for everyone.

Silicon Valley’s Secretary

Secretary Pete views the world through tech lenses. This belief became apparent when Silicon Valley coalesced around his presidential campaign. To the chagrin of many progressives, he built relationships and received contributions from tech leaders ranging from Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook to Reed Hastings of Netflix and many others in Silicon Valley’s Big Tech and startup scene. While one may negatively question his coziness to technology companies, I would argue that Secretary Pete is well positioned to leverage his relationships and mobilize the private sector tech community to be an integral part of the 21st century transportation, mobility and infrastructure solutions we need. In this way, Secretary Pete could jumpstart new private sector investment towards infrastructure and transit tech that the federal government would never be able to accomplish on its own.

Welcome mat for start-ups & infrastructure tech

While running for president, Secretary Pete may have been embraced by Silicon Valley tech leaders, but during his time as Mayor of South Bend it was he who embraced infrastructure tech and startups to help solve major infrastructure challenges. Two such examples include the infra-tech startup companies EmNet and RoadBotics,. While EmNet was adopted by South Bend before Pete was Mayor, he championed the tech’s value nationally and shared the impact it had on South Bend to prevent more than 1,500 gallons of combined sewage entering the local St. Joseph’s River. As Mayor, he did initiate the adoption of RoadBotics’ AI pavement assessment software to receive in-depth data about the potholes and surface condition of its 550 mile road network (full disclosure, I previously led the Growth team at RoadBotics). If Secretary Pete maintains his risk tolerance for testing and adopting new tech from startups like EmNet and RoadBotics, then it’s likely that we will see more programs and funding geared towards connecting startup solutions to the DOT as well as creating more opportunities for state and local agencies to adopt impactful infra-tech.

A final thought: Equity-based transportation

When publishing his $1 trillion infrastructure campaign proposal as candidate Pete, he defined it as a plan focused on opportunity, equity and empowerment. And in a tweet publicly announcing President-elect Joe Biden’s offer to be Secretary, he made a similar nod to enhance equity for all. What this rhetoric means in practice is still to be determined. But, it is certainly important to have the Secretary of Transportation who publicly acknowledges the systemic inequities built into the very fabric of your transportation, infrastructure and mobility systems. Admissions is a first step. But, real meaningful ‘innovation’ at DOT will be bringing forth policies and programs that tackle the challenge of inequities in American transit head-on.

I think Secretary Pete is up for the job.

What a “Secretary Pete” Buttigieg Means for DOT Innovation was originally published in The Startup on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

During this Presidential Election season, there was very little discussion by either Joe Biden or Donald Trump about how either of their administrations would prioritize government technology across federal agencies and form policies that bolster innovation and technology in the US.

Now that the votes have generally been tabulated and it’s clear that President-elect Joe Biden will enter the White House in January, we can begin to imagine how tech policy will take shape under the Biden + Harris administration.

Unlike previous Obama and Clinton campaigns where technology was an explicit policy agenda, the Biden Harris campaign policy proposals focused on the obvious and massive economic and health challenges faced by Americans due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

This lack of messaging does not mean that the Biden + Harris administration won’t prioritize government technology. On the contrary, as I’ve detailed in past writing, there’s evidence that they will be champions of government tech.

And with the announcement last week of who will serve on the Biden + Harris transition team, we can begin to consider just how the fascinating group of tech-savvy individuals selected for the team will influence the new administration’s priorities and approach towards tech for the next four years.

Who are these people and what might their specific backgrounds in tech tell us about the upcoming Biden + Harris administration?

Office of Science & Technology Policy

Let’s start our analysis by focusing on the people serving on transition teams for the obviously tech-centered hive of government — the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).

OSTP plays the critical role of advising the President and others in the Executive Office on scientific, engineering, and technological aspects across many areas ranging from the economy and the environment to national security and foreign relations.

From a review of the OSTP transition team’s expertise and past work below, key policy areas emerge including biosecurity, international technology cooperation, machine learning, climate science, privacy and tech regulation. Additionally, we see a trend in transition team members having backgrounds in promoting public understanding of science, forming connections between private sector tech companies and government and R&D budget investment.

• Cristin Dorgelo (Team Lead) — Cristin is the President Emeritus of the Association of Science & Technology Centers, which works to increase the public’s understanding and engagement with science and technology. In an era where folks are questioning science, her leadership ASTC will come in handy. Her past experiences serving as the Chief of Staff and Assistant Director for Grand Challenges in the Office of Science & Technology Policy as well as serving as the Vice President of Prize Operations for the XPRIZE show that prioritizes convening government and bold startups to solve big problems.
• Andrew Hebbeler — Andrew is the Senior Director and Lead Scientist for Global Biological Policy and Programs at the Nuclear Threat Initiative. He has a deep career in academia, research and government related to biological and chemical security threats, including serving as the Team Chief in the Biosecurity Engagement Program and Deputy Director of the Office of Science and Technology Cooperation in the Department of State. Given the global pandemic, it’s no surprise that such a biosecurity expert with prior key appointments in the State Department would be a critical voice in the transition.
• Kei Koizumi — Kei is an independent science policy consultant who previously served on the Technology, Innovation & Government Reform Policy Working Group of the Obama + Biden Presidential transition team. In his subsequent role in the Obama administration as the Assistant Director for Federal R&D and Senior Advisor to the Director of the National Science and Technology Council and various roles at the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), Kei has focused on R&D funding policy, which is likely the superpower he’s bringing to this transition team.
• Mahlet Mesfin — Mhalet is the Deputy Director of the Center for Science Diplomacy at American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and is Executive Editor of policy journal Science & Diplomacy. Like others on the transition team, she’s previously served in OSTP, specifically as the Assistant Director for International Science & Technology. These experiences combined with other previous international science policy roles, show that Mahlet is a leading voice in international science and technology policies.
• Dave Riedmiller — Dave is the Climate Center Director at the Gulf of Maine Research Institute. He is the team’s voice on climate change as evidenced by his past experience serving as the Chief Climate Scientist and Climate Science & Technology Team Lead in the State Department, Acting Director of Northeast and Southeast Climate Adaptation Science Centers in the Department of the Interior and the Director of National Climate Assessment at the US Global Change Research Program.
• Pavneet Singh — Pavneet is a policy wonk on national security and trans-Pacific relationships, having previously served as the Director of International Affairs managing the US-China and US-India relationships for the National Security Council as well as serving as Senior Advisor to the Deputy National Security Advisor. In addition to his government work, he’s held various research roles at the Brookings Institute and the World Bank where he’s studied machine learning and its impact on solving a variety of challenges ranging from financial services to health care. Pavneet’s participation in the transition makes a nod to the new administration’s focus on trans-Pacific tech transfer relationships, particularly with China as well as gives a voice to machine learning and its impact on government and global relations.
• Erin Szulman — Erin has a wide-ranging career that pulls together various fields of technology, ranging from serving as Special Assistant to the Under Secretary of the Department of Energy to Chief Strategy Officer at a stealth quantum computing company to her most recent work serving as the Director of Performance Improvement and Internal Operations at the nation’s largest public electric vehicle charging network EVgo. A look at her time serving as Policy Advisor to the Chief of Staff of OSTP points to additional work in clean energy as well as leadership in convening the private sector and federal government. With Erin’s inclusion on the team, it’s clear there are strong voices for clean energy investments and private sector tech involvement in the administration.
• Nicole Wong — Nicole is an independent consultant with a deep legal background in developing international privacy and regulatory policies for high growth tech companies. She previously served as US Deputy Chief Technology Officer where she focused on internet governance and privacy policy. Prior to her time in government, she served in key legal roles with some of the biggest tech companies including Twitter and Google. As you can imagine, it’s likely that Nicole is going to lay the groundwork for how the Biden + Harris administration will approach big questions about privacy and regulation with BIG Tech. She’s also serving on the National Security Council transition team.

This team is well suited for the task of shaping a Biden + Harris technology agenda that prioritizes cultivating broader public understanding of science, tackling climate change, doubling down on national preparedness for future pandemics and other biohazard events and facing the tough questions regarding privacy and regulation with Big Tech.

All that said, it would be great to have more leading voices from two key areas:

1. Artificial Intelligence: given the dramatic impact that artificial intelligence has had on our lives in the past decade, imagine the role it will play in the next four years. From advanced social media algorithms shaping how we view our world to the promising future of assisted and fully-automated vehicles powered by AI systems, we are living in an increasingly AI-enabled world. As such, we need a concerted policy agenda that lays the foundation for how we will govern, regulate and interact with such technologies.
2. Tech + Economic Development: I know that some will say that policy matters pertaining to the economy don’t belong in OSTP, but I would argue that tech experts have a real responsibility in determining how best we can harness the 21st century innovation economy to create a wave of good paying blue collar and white collar jobs. The unprecedented automation potential of AI has some believing in a doom scenario for modern work while the promising possibility of converting to global clean energy has some believing it will create an entirely new industry ripe with jobs. Regardless of the outcome, technology has a critical role to play on the economy and it would be ideal to have a member of the transition team whose expertise aligns with this need.

United States Digital Service

Next, let’s dive into a tech-centric office that was created in 2014 under the Obama Administration — the United States Digital Service (USDS). USDS is housed in the Executive Office of the President and is charged with working across all federal agencies to improve and simplify digital services. In other words, it’s the federal hub for the herculean task of digitizing the federal government. In terms of staffing size and bureaucracy of OSTP, USDS is comparatively smaller. The result is a leaner transition team.

The two individuals selected for the USDS transition team bring very different strengths to the table (as detailed below). Matt Bailey is the administrative policy leader and Andrew Nacin is the engineering leader. Given USDS’ mission, it’s not unsurprising that both of them were brought in to understand the current administrative and technical engineering status of USDS.

• Matt Bailey (Team Lead) — Matt has built a career threading together technology, civic engagement and human rights. In his current role as Digital Freedom Program Director, he focuses on issues of digital inclusion, disinformation surveillance that impacts the free speech of writers and journalists around the world. He is also a Member of the Board of Advisors for Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting and a former Senior Advisor for Democratic Technology and Innovation for the National Democratic Institute. He’s also served in government as the Acting Policy Unit Chief and Digital Services Expert for the White House Office of Management and Budget, User Experience Manager for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Director of Technology Innovation for the District of Columbia. Combined, these experiences show a clear agenda for government transparency and user-designed digital services.
• Andrew Nacin — Andrew is a software engineer who has managed government and private sector teams of developers responsible for building scaled, globally reaching software platforms. As the Lead Developer at WordPress, he’s helped create one of the world largest website content publishing platforms. In addition to this private sector experience, he’s previously served in the USDS as a Software Engineer and Senior Advisor where he coordinated teams of cross-agency engineers on a variety of projects. Andrew is also currently listed as Director of Engineering at the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. Andrew is clearly the software engineer who knows how to manage dev teams to tackle big software problems within complex government systems.

Together their backgrounds in blending civic engagement with technology and mobilizing the technical teams required to overhaul complex government systems form a bright, albeit broad view into what USDS will look like under the new administration. USDS and government digitization should be a critical component of the next administration and adding more experts in specific areas would help us better understand what USDS specific priorities will be.

In particular, it would be great to see the addition of transition team members with expertise in:

1. Financial Technology — Given the massive blunders in the Trump administration’s ability to deploy Congressionally approved money to people and businesses impacted by the pandemic, it would be prudent to include a transition team member with fintech experience whose presence signals a focus on updating how federal agencies make payments and transfer funds. Moreover, as the US moves towards digital banking services, USDS could look at how the federal government could play a role in leveraging its connections with millions of Americans to help develop key technologies that would contribute to banking the unbanked.
2. Machine Learning — In addition to adding more AI-power to the OSTP transition team, it would be great to see either a machine learning administrative expert or a machine learning engineer. Either additions would signal that the Biden + Harris administration will prioritize the development of machine learning technologies in its broader federal digitization strategy. It would also show that the new administration recognizes the contemporary criticisms of machine learning algorithms (e.g. encoded racial discrimination) and that USDS is equipped with the talent to build and manage more responsible systems.

What About the Other Transition Teams?

Technology is embedded into every facet of modern industry and life. This is true in the federal government too. Let’s take a look at members of other transition teams whose backgrounds in tech may give us insights into how other federal agencies will prioritize tech-centric agendas.

Department of Commerce

• Colleen Chien — Colleen is an intellectual property legal researcher and professor at Santa Clara University, a Fellow at the Stanford Computation Policy Lab and former Obama Administration Senior Advisor to the Chief Technology Officer on matters of innovation and intellectual property.
• Denice Ross — Denice is a Senior Fellow at the National Conference on Citizenship where she works census data quality issues. She’s also a former Data Strategy Lead at New America think tank and previous leading figure in the Obama Administration’s effort to found the White House Police Data Initiative.

Department of Defense

• Victor Garcia — Victor has a long engineering track record including serving as USDS Director of Engineering in the Obama administration and most recently holding the position of Engineering Rebel with Rebellion Defense — a startup that connects technologists with the government to work on national security problems.
• Andrew Hunter — Andrew is the Director of Defense-Industrial Initiatives Group at the Center for Strategic and International Studies where he’s working on issues affecting the industrial base including emerging technologies and the defense acquisition system.

Department of Education

• Keia Cole — Keia is a former Chief of Staff to the Deputy Secretary of Education who currently serves as the Head of Digital Experience at MassMutual where she is responsible for driving the insurance company’s digital transformation efforts.

Department of Energy

• Hannah Lee — Hannah is an experienced software and big data product manager with a background in environmental engineering who has held positions ranging from Battery Technology and Cell Quality Safety and Regulatory Product Manager with Tesla to Product Lead of the State of California’s COVID19.ca.gov response website.

Department of Health and Human Services

• Mina Hsiang — Mina is VP of Policy and Government Affairs for the healthcare tech company Devoted Health as well as the Co-founder and former Executive Director of the Digital Service at the Department of Health and Human Services and former Senior Advisor to the White House for Healthcare and Health Data in the Trump administration.
• Natalie Kates — Natalie was also a Cofounder and Head of Product of the Digital Service at the Department of Health and Human Services during the Trump administration.
• Geoff Roth — Geoff is Co-Founder of an Indian-led health technology company Inaji that builds solutions specific for Indian Country as well as a former Senior Advisor to the Indian Health Service in the Obama Administration.

Department of Homeland Security

• Robert Silvers — Paul is a former Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for Cyber Policy in Homeland Security in the Obama Administration and currently serves as a Partner at Paul Hastings where he specializes in cybersecurity law.

Department of Interior

• Chris Goranson — Chris is a GIS technician by training who has had a wide ranging career in building citizen-facing digital services that includes serving as Experience Design Lead at 18F, Presidential Innovation Fellow at the US Department of Interior in the Obama administration and Director of Parsons Institute for Information Mapping.

Department of State

• Frances Colón — Frances served as the Deputy Science and Technology Advisor to the Secretary of State in the Obama administration where she worked on emerging technology policies and connecting technology and innovation to foreign policy.
• Raphael Majma — Raphael has held a number of technology positions in government administration including serving as Senior Advisor to the Chief Technology Officer, Product Manager at 18F, Policy Lead and Immigation Portfolio Lead as USDS and Director of Digital Service at the State Department.

Department of Treasury

• Liyan Chang — Liyan is a software engineer who played a role in fixing botched roll-out of healthcare.gov site and a former Senior Advisor to the Administrator at USDS.
• Nicole Isaac — Nicole is the Senior Director for North America Policy at LinkedIn, founder of tech employment development organization Code the Streets and former White House Special Assistant to the President for issues pertaining to technology workforce development, intellectual property, patent and banking reform.

Department of Veterans Affairs

• Andrea Ippolito — Andrea is the former Director of the Department of Veterans Affairs Innovators Network that enables VA employees to develop innovations that improve the experience of Veterans and their families and prior to this role, she served as a Presidential Innovation Fellow in OSTP.

Environmental Protection Agency

• Ann Dunkin — Ann is the former Chief Information Officer of the US Environmental Protection Agency and currently serves as the Chief Technology Officer for State and Local Governments at Dell Technologies.

General Services Administration

• Michael Hornsby — Michael is a software developer and product manager who served as the acting Chief Information Officer in the Executive Office of the President before joining Salesforce as their Director of Customer Success.

Intelligence Community

• Natalie Evans Harris — Natalie is the former Senior Policy Advisor to the US Chief Technology Officer in the Obama Administration who established the federal data science community of practice, called the Data Cabinet.
• Sean Roche — Sean is the former Associate Deputy Director for Digital Innovation at the Central Intelligence Agency where he led cyber intelligence, open source collection, data curation and data science.

National Security Council

• Austin Lin — Austin has served as a Research Fellow at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications, Deputy Director of Information Technology at The White House, Technical Program Manager at Facebook and most recently he has joined the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative as a Technical Program Manager.

Office of Management & Budget

• Mark Schwartz — Mark is software and innovation lead with experiences serving previously as the Chief Information Officer for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and currently as an Enterprise Strategist for Amazon Web Services.

US Postal Service

• Aneesh Chopra — Aneesh is most well known for being the first U.S. Chief Technology Officer appointed to the position by the Obama administration in 2009 and is currently the President of the health tech company CareJourney

A Final Thought: Technology Matters

The depth of transition team members who possess technology backgrounds signals towards a new administration where the revival of technology as key to government and operations is almost certain. And for good reason, as we begin to step into the 2020’s, we need more government administrators (and elected officials!) who understand the impact and importance of technology.

The Fascinating Tech People on the Biden + Harris Transition Team was originally published in The Startup on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

With the cacophony of election-related opinions blasting your social media and inboxes for the next few days, I had initially decided not to publish an article this week. After all, what more could be added to an already crowded discussion about Election Day 2020 and potential days of uncertainty ahead?

Well, that was my feeling until I noticed that within my startup friend circles there was one recurring question that founders, CEOs, board members, investors, and even individual employees of startups persistently are bringing up: Should my company take a political stance?

My answer is a YES.

Which Side Are You On?

This question of ‘Should my company take a political stance?’ is not new. Startup tech companies, and tech companies more broadly, have been generally reticent to acknowledge politics exist at all. Instead tech leaders have regularly sought a middle group or apolitical position — one that does not attempt to poke a political bear that could draw attention and impede a growth-at -all-cost mindset. This is a rational stance for a startup CEO to take. After all, it’s in our most boom startups and innovation where a new generation of society-changing tech companies emerged during a period of economic growth and political stability in the US.

But the political calamity of the 2016 Presidential Election kicked off a series of culture shaking movements in the US, resulting in public upheaval and outcries from people of all backgrounds. Very few have kept their opinions on hot button political and cultural issues silent. Rather, there is a shared sense of responsibility to stand-up and make your opinions known. In 2020, particularly as we venture closer to Election Day, the action of remaining silent feels like a deafening form of status-quo complacency.

Folks in the tech community are not immune to the political and social happenings taking place around them. To the contrary, many tech employees have begun to publicly protest and voice their stance on political matters — pushing for the leaders of their companies and the company itself to ‘pick a side’. However, the CEO and founder responses to both employee and public pressures have varied.

And yet, those CEOs and founders (and the startups and established tech companies they lead) are in powerful positions of privilege to voice opinions on the most critical political and social issues facing our society. Startups individually and as a collective possess a tremendous amount of cultural reach and financial resources that many in the US could only dream of mustering for the specific purpose of influencing the world. That tremendous privilege beckons for action.

Startups Take a Stance

As political rhetoric and polarization have intensified in the past few weeks, political positioning in Silicon Valley and the broader tech community has begun to burst into public view. Recent reporting from Erin Griffith and Nathaniel Popper of the New York Times illuminate the complex terrain that CEOs, Founders and tech startup investors are navigating when deciding to take a political stance in the upcoming Presidential Election.

On one side of the spectrum, the cryptocurrency platform Coinbase took a public stance against employees engaging in any social issues or politics within the workplace. And on the other side, through a somewhat internal democratic process, the CEO of receipt management platform Expensify distributed a message to 10,000 customers promoting a clear political stance: a vote for Donald Trump instead of Joe Biden for President is a threat to democracy.

Ultimately, what both examples show is that the question we should be asking ourselves is not “Is our startup political?’ but rather ‘How should our startup be political?’

We have reached a point of inevitability where our leaders — in technology and across all industries — need to dip their toe into political matters. Let’s be real, Coinbase’s act to claim ‘no-politics’ is still a political act — it’s taking a stand. You might disagree with it, but it is still a political stance. The same can be said for Expensify. The world will not end because of their stances, but their employees and customers will respond accordingly.

How to Take a Political Stance

Now, if you’re a leader of a tech startup (big or small), the fact that this political inevitability has come to pass does not actually help you figure out how to traverse such a heated and complex situation. In other words, how does a startup CEO or founder take a political stand?

Here are nine points of consideration that you may find helpful:

1. Don’t Avoid the Difficult Conversation — You and your company would be an outlier if the discussion of politics and social movements has not already been a point of debate within your executive team, inner circle and/or board members. That’s a good thing. Avoidance of these topics altogether gives the impression that people’s work-lives are fully disconnected from the politics that impact their personal-lives. That said, it’s likely not the most productive situation to have politics leak into every executive team conversation. Consider setting aside a specific time for your leadership team to discuss politics and how they intersect with your company, your customers, your team and your service or product. What do they think about the current political environment and what is the company’s responsibility as part of it? At least creating the space for the conversation will inform you on what your top lieutenants are thinking and offer a space for key employees to have the opinions heard.
2. Capture Team Insights — Don’t just capture the opinions and thoughts of your closest colleagues. Capture the insights of your entire team. Consider using an online tool to solicit anonymous information about team members’ feelings on the current political situation. Even consider asking them to imagine what it would look like for a company like your own to take a political stance on a social issue or a candidate. Although you may not take the democratic approach that Expensify did in determining how to respond to the current political situation of the Presidential Election, your process of capturing information will better inform you of trends in your team’s sentiments. However, soliciting info from your team will put further pressure on you to do/say something. Do not ask people questions and then do nothing with their insights. At best, people will think you’ve ignored them, and at worst, you could create a breakdown in internal trust.
3. Create a Framework — As you analyze and think about your inner circle’s and broader team’s opinions, take a pause and consider how you will approach future decisions related to taking a public position on other, future political situations. Such trends in decision-making are the future, so beginning to map out a framework for determining specific outcomes or reactions will help you not only make future decisions but to also ensure consistency with those decisions. It is also a hell of a lot easier to deal with really challenging, uncomfortable problems if you have some kind of road map in place beforehand. For example, what specific triggers would need to take place for you to make a public statement? Are there specific issues that would trigger certain responses? What types of communication are most appropriate for your company and audience? How much will you factor in company team member sentiments? How will you react to responses from your customers, team, the public? Any framework you develop now will evolve over time, but it is certainly more helpful to evolve a framework now than to have to build from scratch in the future.
4. A Key Consideration — Regardless of how you collect insights from your team or create a decision making framework, be sure to consider the question: What is the kind of society where your customers, team and product or services thrive? A world in which your customers and team are oppressed or repressed will wipe out your company. You definitely care about your customers and team — so taking a stance on candidates or specific policy issues that impact their well being should be a key factor in how you take stances on political matters. In other words, you would most certainly stand up against a candidate or policy that would potentially threaten the success of or existence of your company’s service or product, so why not similarly defend the people that build, maintain and use your service or product? A great example of this notion is the tech community’s shared backlash to the Trump administration’s various restrictions and bans on immigration.
5. Make a Decision — As I have tried to articulate here, you should not be grappling with the question of If we are political?, but rather How will we control or express our position on political matters? As such, it is decision time. Even if you choose to do or say nothing about the current political environment, just realize that this is inherently a decision. Without question, at the very least your customers and employees will be watching and listening — for better or worse.
6. Rely on Facts — If and when you do craft a public statement about a particular political candidate or issue, use credible facts and resources to justify your position. We are living in an era of fake news, truthiness and distrust in scientific institutions. All the more reason for your company’s perspective on any specific political issue to be steeped in credible facts. Moreover, your political opinion will be far more substantive if it includes details and facts. Deploying only emotional rhetoric will open your company up to further scrutiny, which you will undoubtedly already receive. That said, don’t shy away from breathing emotion into your statement and using emotive language and imagery as a way to make tangible and real the facts of your argument.
7. Be Conscious of Using Customer Contact Info — Before sending out an email to all your customers with any particular political stance, consider the use of their data for these sorts of distribution purposes. Prior to doing so, consider reviewing and updating terms of service or other user-related language that informs the customer explicitly that communications from your company may include political-specific messages. Now, I’m not an attorney that can advise on the specifics of the language to include. The point is that you should be transparent with your customers and do everything that you can to ensure that when they provide you with their contact info that they are made fully aware of the types of communications that they should expect to receive from your company.
8. Face It, There Will Be a Reaction — There will be consequences to any stance that your company takes — political or otherwise. Prepare yourself for people’s praise and ire. You may lose customers, you may gain some. Challenges within team dynamics could emerge — the consequences of which could include some type of legal action or unrest. Your team could also rally around your decisive leadership. All this said, you will have done everything you could to have considered all of these possible outcomes and factored them into your framework and ultimate decision making based on your thoughtful and comprehensive process.
9. Would You Have a Super PAC Say It? — Let’s face it, political stances happen all the time on behalf of tech companies and any company for that matter. Such acts of political positioning just typically take place through the activities of corporate Super PAC advertising efforts and financial contributions. I’m not questioning the role of Super PACS or PACs being a tool for companies to influence political issues and political outcomes. All I’m suggesting is to consider why you would have a Super PAC voice a particular issue or concern separate and apart from your company. Of course, one approach is typically far less transparent and publicly connected to your brand, but is that separation an asset or liability to your company, your customers and your team?

A Final Thought: A New Generation of Political Leaders from Startups & Tech

This article will definitely be criticized for a variety of reasons. That’s great — reach out and let’s talk about it! Hopefully we can continue to move the world of tech into the messy world of politics. As it should be moved towards.

Tech companies big and small have revolutionized our very way of life — from how we communicate, to how we get around, to how we perceive the world. AI and machine learning combined with other emerging technologies will continue to have an outside role in shaping every facet of the 21st century. Politics (and the resulting policy) will influence how those technologies develop and shape our world. The current backlash in Congress with Big Tech is an example of how technology has outrun our politics, but more importantly it’s an example of how tech has outrun our politicians. But it does not need to be this way in the future.

We could view this moment where CEOs and founders of tech startups are re-negotiating the relationship between their companies and heated political issues as an opportunity to reshape the composition of our elected leadership.

In our not too distant future, technology can be a tool to either further divide us and grow our already gaping inequalities, OR technology could be the tool that helps bring us together towards the unrecognized vision of American opportunity and prosperity for all. I think that some of the best people to help ensure that the latter possibility comes to fruition are those civically-conscious folks who are working in today’s tech startups.

Perhaps the current political reckoning that we are seeing taking place publicly and inside US tech companies will spur some of these CEOs, founders and employees to consider running for elected office in 2021. Their technological know-how combined with their civic conviction are the kinds of leaders that I think our 21st democracy needs and deserves.

Yes, Your Startup Is Political. was originally published in The Startup on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Regardless of the outcome on November 3, the next administration should move to form the US Department of Technology and Innovation led by the first ever appointed Secretary of Technology.

The formation of this new Department would unify and amplify existing Federal Agency technology work, including that being done by the Office of Science and Technology Policy, US Digital Service, and other tech-focused offices of our Federal bureaucracy. Moreover, this move would create a much needed executive leadership position in the President’s cabinet – an elevated level of power and influence beyond the current highest tech positions in the land (US Chief Technology Officer and Director of the Officer of Science and Technology Policy).

Why do we need this transformation in Executive Branch tech leadership and organization?

We are living in a world where technology is inextricably tied to our identities, relationships and jobs — our very way of life. The ubiquity of cutting edge technologies has accelerated over the past decade and has become more integral to everything we do.

Too often it feels as though the US government dramatically lags in understanding and adopting cutting edge technologies as well as crafting policy measures that take into account our current future technological world. Or, to put it more bluntly, the ‘gap’ between technology and the Executive Branch has eroded to a chasm.

It’s not enough to have individual Federal departments prioritize technology and innovation within its own operations. Only centralized coordination and clearly defined executive leadership will elevate the importance of technology and pave the way for a 21st century US government.

A Secretary of Technology

The Secretary of Technology would be a member of the President’s Cabinet. In addition to the duties required of overseeing the newly formed Department of Technology and Innovation, the Secretary would have the challenging responsibility of advising and briefing the President directly on any technology-related matters.

The new Department would best be served if the inaugural Secretary is a private sector technology leader who possesses a broad understanding of established, cutting edge and bleeding edge technologies. In this way, the Secretary would be deft at applying a variety of technologies in the government and briefing the president on any technology-related matters.

A well-respected private sector technology leader as the Secretary would also be able to mobilize a vast network of other tech executives for the benefit of the Federal Government. The Secretary would build critical relationships between private tech companies (from startups to Big Tech) and the Federal Government.

In this way, we could see the Secretary of Technology serving as a powerful tech ambassador who can play a pivotal role in both mediating and navigating the contentious relationship between Big Tech and Government — ultimately helping to steer the Federal Government and private sector technology towards policies that make American’s lives better.

A Department of Technology and Innovation

The Department of Technology and Innovation mission and mandate should focus on the following ten key priority functions:

1. Advise National Policy — Advise the President and Senior White House officials on technological aspects of the Executive branch and broader national policy as well as inform the President’s budget request in areas pertaining to technology.
2. Monitor Emerging Technologies — Track emerging technologies (e.g. AI), analyze potential implications on US policy, determine how new developments could pose a threat to US security and economy and offer guidance on how to deal with these threats.
3. Lead Research & Development — Manage Federal R&D technology activities, including setting R&D priorities that align emerging technologies with national policy agenda, developing Federal R&D budget and coordinating related programs and policies.
4. Upgrade Federal Technology — Use technology to make the Federal Government more accessible, transparent and useful to citizens as well as develop interoperable systems that improve data sharing and coordination across Federal Agencies.
5. Support Local & State Governments — Offer consultative and grant support to State and Local government technology officials to accelerate tech adoption and to advance the coordination of Federal-State-Local technology policies and initiatives.
6. Build Global Partnerships — Work closely with the State Department to consult with foreign government counterparts and international organizations to advance global technology policy and shared technology advancement priorities.
7. Cultivate Tech Industry Partnerships — Build strong relationships between leading technology companies and the Federal Government, enabling greater connectivity and participation by private sector and academic experts in advancing US technology policy.
8. Hire Leading Technologists as Advisors — Create a ‘residency program’ that hires the leading experts in key fields of academia and commercialized technologies as advisors to the Department and Federal Agencies with on-ramps to long-term employment.
9. Establish Office of Start-ups — Launch an office that develops programs that contribute to (i) catalyzing new tech start-ups, (ii) supporting existing tech start-up growth and (iii) enabling underrepresented founders to have more equitable access to critical resources.
10. Establish Office of Climate Change Tech — Launch an office that develops programs to identify and enable the accelerated testing and scaling of emerging technology solutions (e.g Electrical Vehicle Batteries) for the existential threat of climate change.

Congress Could Play a Leading Role Too.

Founding the Department of Technology and Innovation would certainly be a major step forward in putting technology at the centerstage of American policy. That said, Congress could play its role as well.

Congress has been plagued with publicly embarrassing failures to understand the 21st century technologies that are ubiquitous to everyday Americans and major drivers of our economy. This lack of tech knowledge could and should be addressed by reviving the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA).

Between 1972 and 1995, the OTA offered members of Congress and their staffers objective analysis on the leading contemporary scientific and technology-based issues. The more than 750 studies the OTA conducted and published provided Congress with digestible information that informed bipartisan policy decisions.

In 1995, Congress defunded OTA’s $21.9M annual budget, which eliminated the OTA’s 143 staff positions and choked Congress of non-partisan, expert analysis on technology — just as the internet boom of the 90’s was beginning to take shape.

Just imagine how current cringeworthy debates between Congress and Big Tech (Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google) would look if Members were informed with facts and data about emerging and leading technology trends? It’s not too late. Congress can and should step up and bring back the OTA, which would be a welcome Legislative complement to the Department of Technology and Innovation.

Towards a Government Where Tech Matters

Across and down the ballot, technology policy is not a focal point of the 2020 Election Cycle. Unprecedented issues of public health and COVID-19 response, pandemic relief, racial justice, health care, job creation and economic growth, trade and national security are justifiably at the top of minds for millions of Americans — as they should be!

But technology and innovation policies do not need to be in the media or debated around the kitchen table for them to be instrumental to our individual lives and the future of our country. Technology is too often the unseen, underlying architecture to our lives — impacting not just our individual decisions but also informing our national policies, fueling our 21st century economy and shaping our relationships with one other and our societal cultures at large.

Humanity and technology are now locked in a forever dance. The US government is our representative body in this dance. Our next elected leaders have a pivotal opportunity in 2021 to take the lead — bringing technology to the public foreground of policy making and being the driving force that shapes how technology will impact all of our lives.

We Need a US Secretary of Technology was originally published in The Startup on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Senator Kamala Harris would be a champion for government technology — particularly for state local governments across the US.

What evidence is there to support this claim? Let’s circle back to when Sen. Harris introduced the Digital Service Act of 2019 and caused govtech leaders in both the public and private sectors to turn their heads.

The bill received little fanfare beyond the technology (TechCrunch) and government (GovTech) circles. And it gained only co-sponsor on the bill (Senator Patty Muray, D-WA).

Despite the lack of mainstream press, the bill itself represents the most promising potential to usher in the next critical phase of United States government technology adoption — from local governments to Federal agencies.

Government Technology Today

Our current phase of government technology emerged during the Obama administration with the creation of the United States Digital Services. This federal agency, which is housed within the Executive Office of the President, was formed to be the nexus for Federal agencies to simplify and improve their digital services.

Many of the Federal government’s digital services had not changed much since the Clinton Administration in the 90’s when wide scale consumer adoption of the internet led to the initial digitization of the government’s paper and pencil analog services. This archaic, hodgepodge system of digital services was often disconnected, resulting in fragmented connectivity and use across agencies.

All of the problems of the last era in US government technology became blatantly clear to the public during the botched launch of Healthcare.gov. Recognizing technology was no longer an additive component to government services, but rather inextricably tied to its current operations and future progress, President Obama in 2014 established the US Digital Service.

For the first time, technology was front and center and in direct proximity to the power of the presidency. Mikey Dickerson, a former Google engineer, was brought in to head the agency, with the first mission being the recovery and improvement of Healthcare.gov.

In addition to forming the US Digital Service, the Obama Administration further elevated the importance of spurring innovation in the Federal government by developing the Chief Technology Officer of the United States position within the Office of Science and Technology Policy. Inaugural CTO Aneesh Chopra was tasked with working across the Federal agencies and with leading technology companies to apply cutting edge technologies in government, resulting in more data-driven decisions and enhanced services ranging from healthcare to criminal justice.

Senator Harris’ Bill

The formation of the US Digital Service under President Obama and continued under President Trump has resulted in greater integration of technologists and technology within the Federal government.

Senator Harris recognized that the current era of government technology and the work of the US Digital Service fell short in championing the adoption of technology beyond the Federal government.

Despite little Federal support, State and Local governments did not wait to begin centralizing their technology offices and elevating the power and responsibility offered to Chief Information Officers and Chief Technology Officers. In the 2010s we have even started to see the formation of Chief Innovation Officer positions in government — a position typically responsible for both managing government IT management and looking to adopt new ways to bring enhanced service delivery (sometimes related to technology and sometimes not).

With the release and announcement of The Digital Service Act of 2019, Senator Harris made it clear that a key role of the Federal government should be to support these localized efforts and to enable even greater technology adoption at the State and Local levels of government. “We must do more to empower our state and local governments to tap into the power of technology to provide seamless, cost-effective services for the 21st century.”

Her bill set forth $50 million to fund the continued operations of the US Digital Service. But it also went further by allocating $15 million per year to go to state and local governments looking to create similar technology and innovation teams as the Federal government had done over a decade ago. The $15 million would be offered in the form of two-year grants for amounts ranging from $200,000 to $2.5 million per year.

Interestingly, Sen. Harris’ approach to the grant funding focuses on both localized investment and cultivating local human capital capacity: Governments receiving grants would be required to take on 20% of costs and would need to spend over half of the funding on talent — not just technology purchases.

It is very unlikely that Sen. Harris’ bill will ever see the light of day. And, many in government technology will say $15 million is not enough. Both points are true. However, her bill does provide the public with the boldest and clearest (and perhaps only) vision for how the Federal government should evolve its technology and innovation priorities to include more resources to States and Local governments.

Why should technology leaders in government and the private sector care?

For governors, mayors, managers, CIOs and CTOs, the benefit is obvious: More funding to build or grow their technology talent on their teams and more resources to procure much needed technology solutions. Unsurprisingly, tech companies — from fledgling startups to Silicon Valley darlings — capture a large share of technical and non-technical talent by offering high wages and other perks. With additional talent-centric funding, local governments can attract more talent by offering civic purpose and more market-rate salaries. Combining new talent with increased funding for actual procurement positions State and Local governments with the possibility to innovate, resulting in improved government service delivery, economic growth and improved conditions for millions of residents.

For private sector companies that build and sell solutions for governments, the injection of funding will undoubtedly contribute to an uptick in government purchasing new technologies. The recent Local Government’s Next Normal study published by The Atlas showed that COVID-19 has catalyzed a dramatic trend for local governments to adopt new technologies at a rate not seen before. With additional resources, this movement can continue to gain momentum, resulting in increased sales for government technology companies and likely the formation of dozens of other new ventures to solve tomorrow’s government challenges. What’s more, increased number of tech-savvy government employees will lead to more folks in government advocating for more technology — a win-win.

There is a third benefit to having Sen. Harris as a champion of US government technology, which goes beyond funding: Closing the technology gap between the public and the leaders who represent us. At times, this separation can feel like a gaping chasm. Look no further than previous hearings between Congress and tech CEO’s like Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg. Watching these cringeworthy debates can leave audiences feeling uneasy when it is clear that the leaders who represent us, do not use or have a strong grasp on the technologies that the majority of people in the US use everyday. And don’t even begin to have a conversation about cutting edge technologies in the fields of machine learning, bioinformatics, quantum computing — the combination of which will certainly shape our lives (and policies) of the not-too-distant future. And with the mounting debate on the potential regulation of ‘Big Tech monopolies’, wouldn’t we all sleep a little better at night if our representatives who were going to develop such groundbreaking policy had firsthand experience and knowledge inside the world of tech? I think so.

Senator Harris’ bill shows that the cultivation of government technology talent begins at more localized levels of government. And by investing in State and Local government technologies, we are much more likely to ignite a spark in current and future technologies to run for office — whether that is for a City Council seat or for the opportunity to become a Senator of the United States Congress.

Kamala Harris Will Be a Govtech Champion was originally published in The Startup on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

COVID-19 has placed a tremendous burden on the thousands of local governments who serve millions of residents every day. Although there is a shared sense that the impacts of COVID-19 are reshaping local government, there has not been a clear picture of exactly ‘how’ things are changing and how local governments intend to evolve.

Too often the picture of COVID’s impact on local government has been obfuscated by the media and reports that focus on large cities like New York and Los Angeles whose high population centers were disproportionately impacted by the virus. But little is captured about cities and small towns.

Thankfully, a group of local government online communities, government technology companies and local government media outlets including Atlas, ELGL, Route Fifty and SeeClickFix by CivicPlus have come together to publish the “Local Government’s Next Normal”, which finally delivers a comprehensive view into how local governments — particularly small and medium size governments — across the US are adapting to the pandemic and preparing for a post-pandemic world.

The survey includes 385 local government official respondents with 90% of respondents coming from municipalities with 500k or less population. The complete survey report is filled with terrific information. But here are the most striking figures:

1. 94% of respondents believe that their budget will be significantly impacted by revenue shortfalls caused by COVID-19.
2. 80% of respondents noted that their shift from paper to software will be permanent, in large part due to the promise of savings that software presents them.
3. 76% of respondents say their cities will adopt more software to streamline public services in the months and years ahead.

Without question this data shows that the pandemic has catalyzed broad, long-term interest by officials from governments big and small to adopt new technologies. It’s clearer than ever that the time for a digital local government or ‘smart city’ is not someone in the distant future — it’s right now. And this should be an exciting rallying cry for everyone:

• For Government Officials: The political will and timing is there to be bold in experimenting and implementing new technologies as well as cultivating a culture that embraces iteration and testing new ways of doing things.
• For Established Corporations: With COVID-19 accelerating government adoption of new software and hardware, corporations that have existing customer relationships with governments and established possess a unique opportunity to expand their government offerings.
• For GovTech Startups: Although corporations have the brand and relationships, startups uniquely have the entrepreneurial drive and iterative, lean approach to bring new solutions to age-old government challenges.
• For Citizens: Citizens have incredible power to show support for local officials to experiment with new technologies as well as to even create solutions — all of which will provide a better experience in your hometown community.

The Local Government’s Next Normal presents a data set that compels us to believe that the time is now to build bold technology solutions for our local governments. The report analysis points to five key growth areas where technology will play a vital role in solving the most critical current and future government challenges:

1. External and Internal Communication Software

Perhaps one of the biggest realizations by government officials during the pandemic has been how reliant they were to in-person interactions — whether for internal or external purposes. In the survey, respondents listed community engagement and communications as their number one use for new software during the pandemic. Moreover, 45% of respondents anticipated using new software for community engagement and 48% anticipated using software to work from home. All data points to a world where digital communications is key — whether that’s new secure chat services to bolster internal remote office communications or new platforms to enhance connectivity between government and constituents.

2. Workflow Management Powered by Online Forms

The report shows just how the shift towards digital service delivery during the pandemic resulted in the adoption of software to manage workflows, including 54% of respondents using permitting software and 44% of respondents using citizen request management software. Government officials need dashboards, notification systems and workflow automation to manage and track more data and services than ever before. Workflow management tools are exponentially more valuable when constituent-facing online forms and digital signature are also used as the community’s point of entry to government services. In fact, the report shows that 56% of respondents adopted online forms for this purpose during the pandemic. Local governments’ use of workflow management software is here to stay — in the months ahead, will see more and more companies developing tools that cater to the workflow challenges faced by governments big and small.

3. Payment Processing Platforms

The pandemic has made local governments look closely at how they collect revenues. Clearly, the shift is towards online processing of payments that prioritizes seamlessness and contactless experiences. The report shows that the second most mentioned use of technology during the pandemic was payment processing software. The online payment revolution by governments is already underway, but there is still an immense amount of growth and innovation in the government payments space. The fintech space is immense and with 46% of respondents noting that they anticipate using software for online revenue and payment capture, there is a growing number of government officials eager to go digital. As such, it is only a matter of time that we begin to see more companies developing government solutions ranging from secure online payment processing to mobile-first payment solutions for government services.

4. Digital Asset Management Tools

The report data shows that the top budget concern, particularly among local government officials in leadership positions, is capital projects. It’s surprising pandemic-induced revenue shortfalls would result in cuts to capital projects, which are oftentimes tied to critical infrastructure spending for things such as roads, sidewalks and facilities. Interestingly, the report mentions that asset management software is the sixth most mentioned software used during the pandemic. Together, these two data points show how increasingly critical asset management software tools will be to local governments. As spending becomes tighter and tighter on the construction of new assets, increased attention will be paid towards the maintenance of public assets. A variety of cheap sensors and software tools now make digital asset management accessible to governments of all sizes. And we will see more and more such systems enter the market as governments prioritize adopting software that helps extend the lifetime use of government’s critical infrastructure and ultimately reduce capital budget costs.

5. Cloud Storage Services

I have to admit that I was initially surprised that so little was mentioned in the survey data about cloud storage. But let’s face it, how often do we really think about the immense data storage infrastructure that actually powers all of our modern software tools. Amazon, Google and Microsoft are the giants already providing cloud storage services to governments. And for good reason: a) The traditional method of on premise data storage is something unattainable and too expensive for most governments. b) Cloud-based data storage enables greater accessibility and sharing of data. c) the security standards of cloud storage companies like Amazon are top notch. Or to put it bluntly, the cloud will be the infrastructure on which all other services will be built. As such, more and more players have the opportunity to jump into this space and offer cloud storage services that meet the unique needs and use cases of local government.

The pandemic has accelerated change in every sector, including local government. The Local Government’s Next Normal shows that we are standing at the beginning of a new age of local government — one that embraces technology to strengthen how it tackles critical local issues and delivers valuable services to millions of people across the US.

To access the complete survey report, download and read Local Government’s Next Normal here. And be sure to check out the important work of the organizations behind the publication: Atlas, ELGL, Route Fifty and SeeClickFix by CivicPlus.

Available data shows that between 15%-25% of US summer internships were cancelled. No question, fall internships are being cut as well — meaning thousands students will miss out on these formative (sometimes life-changing) internship experiences. This loss not only robs talented individuals of opportunities to grow, but it also will have massive long-term rippling economic effects. Both are BAD outcomes.

Over the past few weeks, this challenge has become more real for me. Concerned university students, faculty and friends and even parents have reached out to me asking for my suggestions on a difficult question:

What should an ambitious and curious student do when they cannot find an internship experience for the fall term?

The short answer is broaden your thinking on what an internship actually is, which has the key elements of: (i) structured — oftentimes applied — learning, (ii) network-building and (iii) views into particular professional settings.

So, yes you can achieve all of these elements by building your own structured learning experience for the fall term.

Yes, it will take a bit more thinking and time to craft an ‘alt-internship’ on your own but in doing so, you have the exciting opportunity to run fast at the things that most interest you. For most folks this process of self-creation seems daunting at first.

So, I’ve shared the five ways I advise university and college students on what to pursue and how to get started with each possibility. Each of these pathways has the potential to produce more valuable intellectual and skill growth than what even a traditional internship can offer. Let’s dig-in.

1. Develop an Independent Research Project

Students from any discipline can take ownership over their learning growth by pursuing an independent research project. Such projects enable you to delve into the questions and topics that most interest you. Many universities and colleges have specific programs that help students develop a research project, connect with a faculty mentor and then execute the actual research at-hand. If your college does not have a specific program (shame on them), then you can create an independent research topic on your own.

No program at your university? No problem, let’s talk about how you can pursue an independent research project on your own.

First, be sure to find a faculty mentor to help you structure your research as well as to help guide and provide check-ins as you are pursuing the project. If you are not receiving academic credit for your research, be sure to track all the work and hours that you are putting into your research project. In many cases, you can advocate for retroactive credit to be awarded for your studies. Having detailed records of your studies will give you powerful evidence when you go to pursue getting credits.

Note: It can be really challenging to navigate your university to create your own independent research projects. That said, these are amazing learning opportunities. If you get stuck, feel free to reach out to me directly for help.

2. Find Mentors & Grow Your Network Like It’s Your Job

You might spend between 10 and 20 hours a week working on things for a typical internship. Take that block of time, let’s say 10 hours, and dedicate to flexing your networking muscles. You may be one of those people that scoffs at networking, but first think about this: If you commit to setting up zoom calls with three new people per week, then over a ten week period, you will have expanded your network by 30 people. Those 30 people could be future mentors, advisors or employers and you would not have met if you had not put yourself out there.

Building your communication skills and getting good at just connecting with people you are interested in takes regimented practice — just like building up specific muscle groups at the gym. The best way to improve at it is through repetition and experience. So, in addition to expanding your ‘network’ this is also an excellent opportunity for self growth.

How to get started with your networking schedule? First, think about the topics you care most deeply about — they could be academic, journalist, tech-based, political, etc. Next, based on those topics, do some research and list out the most interesting or provocative people whose ideas you either really enjoy or disagree with. Don’t limit yourself by letting your internal voice say that author X is too important to have a conversation with me.

Write down this dream team list of people to meet and find their contact info (online searching, LinkedIn, or get introductions from mutual contacts). Here’s the important secret sauce to this alt-internship path: Make a goal to e-meet 3 people per week. Now, this will mean that you need to email 3–5 people per week to pre-schedule the actual video calls. For your initial email outreach, be sure that you (a) share a bit of background about you, (b) include a sentence about your interests in chatting and (c) list 2–3 specific questions you would like to ask. Being concise and specific with your intro emails will help the person see that you are not looking to waste their time!

3. Focus on Learning & Honing a Specific Skill

Not interested in honing your networking and communication skills? Instead, take the time you would allot to an internship and focus on cultivating a specific skill that you do really care about. Similar to the networking example, the key here is to block-off specific time in your schedule each week to dedicate to skill development. Focusing on one skill will enable you to go deeper than if you would spread such time out over several areas of interest.

As part of your development, create a kind of syllabus or schedule to help guide your learning. For this process, set forth specific progress goals that you want to achieve each week. For example, learning how to code in Python is a good general ‘what’ goal, but the ‘how’ portion of your goal needs more specificity in order for you to actually achieve it.

Ask yourself: What sorts of projects could you complete or work on to show learning of that skill each week? How will you learn these new skills? It’s likely that you’ll have to scope out a mentor or two to help you guide and structure things, similar to the method you would use to develop and execute an independent research project.

Be sure to document your skill development journey and share your progress (and struggles) with others. By being specific about your skill of choice, you can tap into a number of online communities of people out there in the world who are trying to hone the same skills you are. Diving into one of these communities will help gain new friends, insights and be more accountable to achieving your skill growth goals.

4. Build Something Entrepreneurial.

Have you ever had a software idea? Web service? Physical product? Company? Now is the ideal situation to take a radical focus approach and allocate time each week to build something. Again, the key to success is blocking off structured hours within each week to dedicate to your building efforts.

Such efforts will likely include learning about the specific problem you want to build a solution for. Prototyping a solution. Mobilizing friends to work with you on the effort. Sharing your resulting prototype with people to get feedback. And maybe, even trying to sell the solution and creating a company to help get your product out in the world.

Building a product and corresponding company can be all encompassing. Instead of pursuing an internship, you have a unique opportunity to show independent creativity and leadership skills that no internship could provide. And regardless of the outcome of building your idea, you will develop valuable skills that can translate into any future career.

As an entrepreneur, I have a firm belief that the next great ideas for the next great companies will be developed due to the rapid changes the world has seen due to COVID-19. Why should it not be you and your friends who are the ones that build these next generation of impactful ideas and companies?!

5. Get Engaged with a Political Campaign

Tis the season for political races, which are only heating up during the fall semester. As such, there is a great demand for people to get involved with political campaigns. From a hyper local city council seat to the presidential race, you can apply the time you had allocated for an internship and jump into a campaign. You will get a firsthand look at the electoral process, meet new people and play an active role in elevating the issues you care about most — all within a safe remote working environment. Win-win-win.

There are a number of ways you can join a campaign. The larger, flashier campaigns (like the presidential campaigns) have formal ‘get involved’ or ‘volunteer’ applications on their websites. Smaller campaigns may require some digging on social media (check out candidates’ Twitter accounts) to find a good contact. Once you have good contact info, reach out and share your interest in participating in campaigning activities. If you are taking this route, be sure to explain why you are compelled to get involved (aka what about the candidate’s platform is important to you) and give a brief overview of your particular skills (e.g. communications). The personalized and thoughtful this message, the more likely you are to get a genuine invitation to help out.

Whether it’s joining a national political campaign (e.g. presidential or senate race, for examples) or you want to help unseat an incumbent city council person, you should expect to do a ton of calling or texting to help persuade voters to not only vote, but to vote for your candidate. Based on your skills and the needs of the campaign, you could also take on more specialized responsibilities. The remote nature of political campaigns in the era of COVID-19 enables you to get engaged and take-on more responsibilities than what may have been possible with in-person campaigning.

Hopefully these five options show you a path forward for a valuable alt-internship experience. Don’t let COVID-19 stifle your intellectual and professional growth. Your ideas and talent are the key to our future beyond this pandemic!

Like so many other startups, the Growth Team at RoadBotics has had to evolve our selling processes to meet the evolving needs of our clients and prospective clients — especially since our clients are almost exclusively local, county and state governments who are feeling incredible public health, political and financial pressure resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic.

If you are a startup or SaaS company that sells to government agencies, then you are certainly following the litany of doomsday reports elaborating on short-term and long-term budget shortfalls. For example, A National League of Cities and United States Conference of Mayors released survey data that shows the grim budgetary impact COVID-19 is having on municipal governments’ abilities to secure revenues. According to the survey, 88% of local leaders anticipate the pandemic will lead to painful reductions in revenue this year, which will undoubtedly negatively impact their ability to maintain as well as purchase new software solutions that are critical to their operations.

Unfortunately and frustratingly, much of the pandemic’s impact on government budgets and purchasing is out of the control of companies like RoadBotics and other SaaS providers. And yet, COVID-19 has shown that it is more critical than ever to have governments — from local to state to federal — move towards more SaaS, cloud-based service offerings to ensure resiliency in operations and service delivery to constituents.

To help other govtech startups and government service SaaS companies meet the challenges presented by this ‘new normal’ of government purchasing, our Growth Team at RoadBotics has compiled our key learnings.

1. Consider Location.

Government restrictions on personnel and ongoing services vary dramatically from state-to-state, county-to-county and every municipality-by-municipality within the same county. The lack of centralized policy for COVID-19 has resulted in a patchwork of reactions and measures at all levels of government. If you are a SaaS company that sells to governments across the US, then this variability may seem like a massive challenge. Instead, we have seen great success in using the variability as an opportunity for enhanced A/B messaging testing and outbound outreach efforts. And because the on-the-ground experience of governments continues to rapidly evolve weekly, we have been forced to develop processes that accelerate our ability to plan, roll-out and gain feedback on the efficacy of our outbound efforts. If you have not previously done so, we strongly encourage tracking and taking into account location for outbound government sales efforts. It has made our sales organization more nimble and focused during COVID-19.

2. Listen to your Prospects & Track their Insights.

The best way to understand how your customer’s purchasing behavior is evolving, is to glean insights from your prospects. Whether your organization runs a prospecting system based on cold calls, email touch points, or other outbound sales efforts, all the prospect-facing team members’ activities should focus on capturing insights about your prospects’ current COVID-19 obstacles. Our prospecting team at RoadBotics views their impact on the company as not only developing qualified potential buyers, but also as frontline intelligence agents. In order to make sure that these captured insights can be used as critical decision making data for your evolving sales organization, be sure that you both qualitatively and quantitatively track them. Our team has found success in implementing an ongoing Google Doc of qualitative vignettes of details that prospects mention regarding COVID-19 in conjunction with quantitatively tracking categories for key COVID-19 obstacles that prospects mention are impacting their budgets and purchasing. We compile these qualitative and quantitative insights on a weekly basis so that we can review as a team and adapt our efforts accordingly.

3. Reassess & Reframe Your Value Proposition.

When COVID-19 first started to grip the country, every email or phone call started with the same “I hope you are staying safe during these crazy times” or some version of the same line. Our Growth Team was doing the same thing. After a while we asked ourselves if this was the best approach, especially since every communication people were receiving started with the same line — how do you stand out and grab attention? And more importantly, could we provide more genuine messaging that not only showed we cared about prospective clients but also showed them immediately how our software solution could address their specific concerns related to COVID-19. Using our frontline intel data, we were quickly able to see that our prospective customer (Public Works Directors and City Engineers) were very concerned about how their communities would be negatively impacted if they were unable to assess the condition of and do maintenance on their roads for an entire year (keep in mind RoadBotics provides the foundational pavement condition data and decision support software that enables hundred of governments across the US to make critical decisions about improving the roads we all drive on everyday). By understanding this key intel, we crafted new scripts and emails that immediately showed our prospective customer that we understood how COVID-19 was causing specific concerns about their pavement management as well as how our solution could alleviate that concern. In this way, we had to reassess how we typically framed our value proposition in a way that was empathetic to the new environment that our prospective customers were, and still are, operating in. So far, people have appreciated this direct and thoughtful approach.

4. Adopt Multi-Channel Outbound & Track Access to Decision Makers

Work from home policies have dramatically changed platforms for communication for government decision makers. Email communication may have once felt like a blackhole. However, as government employees rely more and more on email for remote communication, there is certainly an uptick in decision makers checking inboxes for relevant email messages. Additionally, we are seeing more government professionals logging on to LinkedIn and using the professional networking platform to connect with others during these social isolation times. Our data also shows an increased reach to decision makers through cold calling efforts because staffing rotations combined with work from home orders have caused many incoming calls to be immediately directed to the head of a given department. Whatever outbound method you are using, track your rate of decision maker access meticulously and use this data to experiment aggressively ramping up the most successful approaches week-by-week. And if you have the organizational capacity, consider new ways that your sales team can implement a multi-channel approach. With more and more government professionals communicating digitally and remote means, there is an unprecedented opportunity to meet prospective customers across various channels.

5. Test New Payment Models.

“We do not have the budget for new technology right now.” As our data began to show a consistent increase in this objection response from prospective customers, we decided to have a difficult, existential conversation about the very way we allow our customers to pay for our SaaS services. Were there ways that we could reshape our payment model so that our prospective customers would be better positioned in the short term to purchase our software, which we know will help save them money in the long term? Our team ultimately put ourselves in the position of our prospective customers and responded to this question with creative solutions that would decrease up front adoption costs, spread fees out over a long period of time and ultimately help them better mitigate the risks of taking on new technologies during times of increased budget sensitivity and uncertainty. Prospective government customers have shown great appreciation for having a menu of options that meet them where they are in their current challenging situation. It may be uncomfortable for your company to financially consider during these trying times, but we strongly encourage you to at least experiment with payment models in this new era of COVID-19 government sales.

We hope that our key learnings provide a framework for other SaaS sales teams across the US to better reach the government professionals who their technology seeks to have a lasting positive impact. There is no question that software solutions and data are the tools that enable outstanding elected and non-elected leaders to be revolutionizing forces for enhanced government operations in the 21st century. Let’s not allow COVID-19 to undermine tech companies’ ability to provide such critical value to our government leadership across the US and the world.

Join our team at RoadBotics.

Our core mission at RoadBotics is to use cutting edge AI to revolutionize the way governments manage and maintain the world’s 8 million miles of roads. Our technology gives governments unprecedented data on the condition of their roads, which drives more informed maintenance decisions. Or in other, words fewer pot holes and bad roads.

Why does our company focus on using tech to help improve the worlds roads? Put simply they are the world’s largest public asset. That means that a ton of public resources go into ensuring safe and adequate transport of the worlds 7.5 billion people! To date, our tech spans 15 countries across 4 continents and has helped more than 150 customers impact millions of people. Check out a free version of our tech here.

Our team is thrilled to be moving into a new phase of our growth. We are a venture-backed start-up that has raised over $10M to accelerate our growth and impact. Growth means that we are looking for more folks who believe in the power of technology to change government to join our team.

Our team members are committed to using tech to help governments solve massive problems. Although our team shares a collective mission, we come from a variety of backgrounds: from baristas and anthropologists to software engineers and digital marketers. If you’re like one of us and are crazy enough to think that you could have impact on one of the world’s intractable problems, check out the posting below.

Open Full-time Positions

• Evangelists | Our evangelists are ambassadors who find creative ways to tell the world about RoadBotics, our tech and our customers.| Apply now
• Partner Development/Growth Leads| Our partner growth leads are the front line of bringing new enterprise partners to our platform. | Apply now
• Solutions Engineers| Our solutions engineers tackle partner/customer challenges and ensure a world class product experience.| Apply now
• Partner Success Leads| Our success leads are dedicated to enabling our enterprise partners to reach their business goals. | Apply now
• Software Engineer — Data| This engineer improves internal tools to scale our systems for ingesting, transforming and delivering data.| Apply now
• Software Engineer — JavaScript | This engineer builds customer-facing products React leveraging modern JavaScript techniques.| Apply now
• Software Engineer — Mobile | This engineer ensures that we have a best in class mobile development environment.| Apply now

If you have questions or just want to figure out how you can support the cause, feel free to also email me directly at ryan@roadbotics.com.

Based on my experiences in startups, I’ve seen that new employees too often have a limited understanding of Stock Options, particularly those folks joining a startup for the first time. I’ve participated in many conversations where team members express confusion with Stock Option Plans, which can be intimidating legal documents.

If you are a first timer to the startup world, then this primer is here to demystify employee stock options and to equip you with a few basic tools to get the most of out stock option opportunities.

First, what is a stock option and how is different from shares of stock/equity?

It is very important to know that an option is NOT equity or stock in the company!

An option is simply the right for you to buy shares of stock in the company at a predetermined price in the future. Or put another way, options are the way in which you purchase shares of stock in the startup. If your company is able to grow and be successful, then your stock options can become very valuable for you.

What are some common terms I need to know?

• Stock Option: Stock option is the legal right to buy shares of stock in a company at a predetermined price in the future (the strike price).
• Shares: Your ownership in a fraction of a percent a company’s overall stock or equity after you buy your vested options.
• Issue date: The date the stock option is given to you.
• Strike price: The purchase price that you are offered to exercise each option. Essentially, this is the per option price that you will pay to convert the options into shares. The strike price offered in your options agreement is locked-in and should not change — even as the value of the company’s shares increases — this locked-in ‘strike’ is one of the major benefits to Stock Option Plans.
• Vesting: The pre-designated timeframe and rules for when you will have access to the full stock options offered to you. In short, this means that you won’t have the ability to exercise all or a portion of your stock options until a certain time period has elapsed.
• Exercise: The moment you buy your vested options at the pre-determined Strike Price. Upon purchasing your options, they are converted to shares in the company. You don’t get to purchase your options immediately! Instead you need to go through a vesting period.
• Vesting Cliff: The time period in which you are not allowed to exercise any of your stock options — typically one year. Your employer uses a vesting cliffs to ensure that you put in at least a year of work before having the ability to exercise your options and gain shares.

Can you give a step-by-step example of how options might work for me?

1. Venture Startup Inc. hires you — congrats! As part of your hiring package, Venture Startup Inc. has a Stock Option Plan that grants you options to acquire 10,000 shares of Venture Startup Inc.’s common stock at $1 per option (For reference, $1 is the fair market share value at the time you are provided options).
2. You see from the Stock Option Agreement that your options are subject to a four-year vesting period, with a one year vesting cliff. This means that you have to work at Venture Startup Inc. for one year before you have any right to exercise 2,500 options (25% of your total 10,000 options granted).
3. The remaining 7,500 options you were granted will then vest over the next 36 months. Each month 1/36 (or 208 options) of the remaining options will vest until all of the 7,500 remaining options are fully vested.
4. If you leave Venture Startup Inc. or are fired before the end of your first year, you don’t get any of the Options because of your one-year vesting cliff (with some variations usually laid out in the agreement, for example ‘for cause’ versus ‘not for cause’ terminations).
5. After your options are “vested” (whether it’s immediately after the vesting cliff is over or each month following the vesting cliff) you have the right to exercise the options at the guaranteed strike price of $1 per option — even if the share value of the company has gone up dramatically (which is what you hope for!). You don’t have to do this immediately though. You now have the right, but you don’t have to exercise until you want to (usually when the company is acquired or when you leave)
6. After all four years, all 10,000 of your option shares are vested if you have remained employed by Venture Startup Inc.
7. Venture Startup Inc. becomes so successful that it is acquired or goes public. Venture Startup Inc.’s stock becomes valued at $25 per share.
8. You exercise your stock options and buy 10,000 shares for $10,000 (10,000 x $1).
9. You turn around and sell all 10,000 shares for $250,000 (10,000 x $25 per share publicly traded price), making a nice profit of $240,000. Congrats!

Why would I would want stock options?

When working at a high potential startup, stock options can be an amazing pathway for you to purchase shares of stock at an affordable rate. Ideally, as the company becomes more successful, the company’s stock value will rise, while the strike price of your options remains the same. In other words, you can get a bargain deal on increasingly valuable shares of stock!

OK, how do I get stock options?

Not all employees are provided Stock Options. However, in the startup environment, it is common to offer stock options more widely to employees. Startups provide stock options via a Stock Option Plan, which is a legal document that details your stock option rights.

Each company will have its own version of a Stock Option Plan, but the plan follows the same terminology and processes outlined previously in this article. You will want to review this plan carefully and if possible, consulting legal advice or outside opinion on the matter can be very helpful.

If there are any issues you see with your company’s Stock Option Plan or if you just have questions, please be sure to bring them to your employer’s attention! Of course, you want to believe that your startup employer has written the terms of the Stock Option Plan in favor of its employees, but it is not always the case. By understanding standard stock option terms and practices, you can be better prepared to recognize the nuances in your company’s specific Stock Option Plan and negotiate any points that you’re unhappy with. Consult your own counsel if you have questions. (Remember the companies counsel does not represent YOU they represent the COMPANY)

Finally, when you sign the agreement for your Stock Option Plan (whether it’s on paper or digitally using a service such as Carta), there is very little that you can do to turn back or change. That agreement is a legal contract between you and the company, so be sure that you are fully comfortable and informed before finally signing!

What are common things I should consider discussing stock options with my company?

• Stock options as sweetener to lower wages: Working for a startup often means that you are going to have a wage that is below market rate. Your employer will likely provide you options to balance out the lower salary because they believe that if you can contribute to the success of the company, then you can purchase the options and benefit from the upside of actually owning shares. Be careful with this kind of thinking. Remember, if the company tanks, then the stock options and subsequent shares have no value!
• Understand percentage of ownership. As part of your hiring, your new company might say you get 10,000 stock options. However, the number 10,000 alone has no meaning. In other words, 10,000 may seem like a high number, but how many stocks have been created? For example, the opportunity for 10,000 stocks is dramatically different if it 10,000 of 100,000 stocks (10%) verses 10,000 of 10,000,000 stocks (0.1%). It is very important to find out what your specific percentage of ownership will be. Conversely, you need to know the current market value or the last round valuation of the stocks (this might be different than the strike price for a variety of complex reasons) but knowing that will help you understand what a financially savvy and informed investor has paid for the same slice of the company.
• Paying to exercise your stock options. Be sure to review your Stock Option Plan and agreement very closely to determine the ways in which you can pay to exercise your stock options. In contract terms, this is typically described as ‘consideration.’ Payment or consideration can take the form of cash or deferred payment. Whatever the case, be sure that you understand the method for exercising your stock options. Especially consider what happens if you leave the company prior to either fully vesting or an acquisition. Life happens and you might move on. Usually the vested shares will need to be exercised within some time period following your departure, which means you will need to pony up the cash to exercise your options and convert them into shares of stock (remember shares of stock don’t have a time limit!).
• Success events and triggers. A Success Event is typically a sale or Initial Public Offering of a company. Be sure to review your stock option agreement for clauses that discuss accelerated vesting at the time of a success event. For example, if you have stock options with a 4-year vesting period, but after 2 years of being with the company it is acquired, then your options could be accelerated so that you could purchase them before the 4-year vesting period is complete. If your agreement stipulates that your remaining stock options are accelerated automatically at the occurrence of a success event, then it is called a trigger. Note that some stock option agreements actually leave such acceleration up to the discretion of the board of directors. Acceleration can be in full (meaning all the remaining unvested options become vested) or partially (only a portion of unvested become vested). You certainly want to have your stock options accelerated and you want them to be accelerated in full — you contributed to the company’s accelerated success, so you should benefit from having the opportunity to purchase all that stock included in your option plan!
• Single vs double trigger: One final note on acceleration is that there are two kinds of triggers. The most typical trigger is the single trigger, which means that either the full or partial acceleration of your unvested stock options occurs at a single success event (e.g. sale of the company). The less common double trigger is often reserved for cofounders or executive employees. In a double trigger, two events are needed to accelerate vesting. The first event is typically the sale of the company and the second is the termination of the employee without cause. In this case each trigger accelerates a partial amount of unvested stock options. Double triggers are typically used to protect founders and executive staff that might be terminated during an acquisition or merger of the company. Definitely be sure you understand what triggers (if any) are associated with your specific stock option agreement!

Is there anything else I should keep in mind about Stock Options?

1. Be comfortable with the terms and values surrounding the stock option agreement. The company should be forthright in ensuring that you understanding the values and valuations, number of shares outstanding, etc.
2. The amount of stock options granted varies greatly based upon when you join the company as well as your specific role. Typically earlier employees are given larger stock option plans because in the early days a company is worth less and it is riskier to join. Also, management generally receive bigger stock option packages because of greater responsibility to impact the company’s value.
3. Stock options and shares of stock are not cold hard cash. Remember that options have no value until they are exercised and converted into shares of stock in the company. Even shares of stock are not liquid cash like a bonus or wage increase.
4. Stock options are lottery tickets, not something to rely on. Working towards vested stock options and exercising those options is a gamble. Regardless how many stock options you exercise and ultimately how many shares of stock you eventually own, if the company fizzles out, then the value of the shares of stock becomes zero as well. It’s important to realize that it is not a replacement for your salary.

Hopefully this guide offered some helpful tools to navigate the ‘stock option conversation’ with your startup team. Good luck!