As a father of two girls, I have actually been thinking about this quite a bit. In general, I want my kids to be prepared for a world that is going to be very, very different from the world I grew up in, largely due to the travel, communications, and the Internet. I would recommend students to be focused on the following areas:

—Language and Culture: we are living in a global economy where America is going to only be one of the dominant economic forces. It will be really important for students to be able to communicate sensitively across the globe and be sensitive to other cultural norms. The American way of doing things is not necessarily the only or the right way to do things.

—The Scientific Method: I was lucky to be a scientist in college and learn the scientific method. You know: set up your controls, test, review, repeat. Actually most software development and Internet advertising is just large version of applying the scientific method to technology. The scientific method is really a core philosophy that is very applicable to almost anything a technologist or manager does these days.

—Creative Problem Solving: The Internet, mobile devices and access to information have almost eliminated the need for memorization. At the same time, there is an information explosion. So it is more important for students to understand how to find the right information and solve problems than it is to memorize information (like when we were growing up).

Comments | Reprints | Share:          

Every entrepreneur or executive would like to “do well by doing good.” That is the dream of being socially responsible and financially successful at the same time.

After working in venture capital and selling Internet advertising for eight years, I decided to focus on cleantech for my next career adventure. Though I live in Seattle, I was approached by a venture capital firm called XSeed Capital from San Francisco to be CEO of a next-generation biofuels and renewable chemicals called Bio Architecture Lab, founded by a professor from the University of Washington named David Baker, a post-doc from his lab and an MBA from UC-Berkeley.

Though our market timing in 2008 was challenging, given the financial and energy market crashes, we had a great run. We raised $35 million in financing, received the largest ARPA-E grant in the country for advanced energy research from the Department of Energy, and established partnerships with DuPont, Statoil in Norway, and the Chilean oil company ENAP. As of 2011, Bio Architecture Lab is a 40-person company located in Berkeley, CA and Chile, making great progress commercializing seaweed (or macroalgae) as a next generation sugar source for biofuel and chemical production. In 2010, we hired a fantastic, “been there, done that” energy CEO from Shell named Dan Trunfio to take the company to the next level. Dan has the much-needed experience in complex energy infrastructure, operations, and supply chain that I do not. As everyone knows, start-ups are all about people. Dan is the right guy at the right time for the next phase of growth for the company.

After a year of commuting to the Bay Area, I returned to Seattle to seek the next adventure. With young kids and a love for Seattle, I was focused on doing something local. I was equally open to another cleantech or Internet adventure.

We are almost five years into the “cleantech” revolution and, unfortunately, a cleantech cluster has yet to evolve in Seattle. There has been a lot of discussion of the importance of clusters in the evolution of industry and technology in general. For those interested, here are two good articles on technology clusters from Hosein Fallah at the Stevens Institute of Technology and another on industry clusters by Mercedes Delgado of Temple University and Michael Porter of Harvard Business School. San Francisco and Boston have established technology and biotech clusters. San Francisco is probably the dominant cleantech cluster, which is why our board decided to move Bio Architecture Lab to San Francisco in late 2009, even though it was founded in Seattle.

Why has Seattle not achieved critical mass in cleantech? Though Seattle has a lot going for it, I point to a number of factors:

• Finance: Raising money for cleantech in Seattle is hard. The venture capital community in Seattle is small, in general, AND cleantech is a very different industry from biotech and tech, requiring knowledge of energy and basic materials. Most Seattle venture capital firms and angel investors are focused on software and Internet investments, based on our Microsoft and Amazon roots. The only local funding source in Seattle that has been consistent to cleantech is the Northwest Energy Angels. Pivotal from Portland has also been making some small investments throughout the Northwest. OVP has made a number of cleantech investments but only EnerG2 in Seattle. Off the top of my head, most other VCs in Seattle have taken a similar approach of opportunistically looking at cleantech, but not making it a priority in Seattle. Arch, Vulcan, Polaris, Cascade, Second Avenue, and Voyager all have at least one cleantech investment, but most are not located in the greater Seattle area.

• People: Seattle is a GREAT software and Internet town, but it does not have … Next Page »

Comments (5) | Reprints | Share:          

Training: My sense is that Michigan probably has a high potential workforce, but needs to be retrained in new skills in growing markets—be it information technology, clean technology, biotechnology or something else.

Academic Treasure Hunting: There is probably a wealth of opportunity at University of Michigan and Michigan State University in terms of unique intellectual property that can be the foundation of the next great company.

Corporations: There are still large companies in Michigan that can be ready buyers for new technology (especially in chemicals and the transportation industry). Just like many clean tech companies are looking to the government as the initial customer for clean technology, it would be interesting if the Fortune 500 companies in Michigan had incentive to help small startups be successful.

Capital: Capital needs to be attracted to the state. So either angels, VCs, or private equity funds need to be started in the state or entrepreneurs should look for proactive ways to bring East Coast and West Coast investors to Michigan to educate them on the opportunities.

Policy: Entrepreneurs should probably look to develop policy, tax incentives, and state funding programs to support startups in the state.

[Editor's note: To help launch Xconomy Detroit, we've queried our network of Xconomists and other innovation leaders around the country for their list of the most important things that entrepreneurs and innovators in Michigan can do to reinvigorate their regional economy.]

Comments | Reprints | Share: