COOLIRIS TEACHING NOTE

The Cooliris case follows the struggle of a new venture trying to recruit a highly qualified team.
The case is designed so students are brought to the edge of a crisis regarding what to do about a
broken recruiting process. This teaching note discusses how Cooliris resolved the crisis and
suggests one way to teach the case. In general, the case is designed so that students spend class
discussing how to resolve the crisis by answering two key questions proposed by the protagonist
at the end of the case (1. Who is an A+ player? and 2. How do you attract A+ players?). The case
and this teaching note are designed to lead the discussion to illustrate the following two learning
objectives.
The first objective is to demonstrate that all new ventures, even well-endowed new ventures, face
challenges building a strong team unless they have the proper recruiting process. In the case,
Cooliris has several problems with their recruiting process. First, like many new ventures,
Cooliris has struggled to agree on a definition of what makes an A+ candidate. As a result, their
recruiting targets are somewhat inconsistent. Second, Cooliris views the recruiting process as a
selection, or buying process, rather than a selling process. As a result, candidates are not
adequately engaged by the company to join the company. Third, Cooliris has overlooked the fact
that recruiting talent is much like a sales funnel. As a result, the team is wasting immense energy
on a shotgun approach to recruiting. Cooliris ultimately succeeds by properly defining their ideal
candidates, reframing the hiring process as a sales activity, and focusing the recruiting funnel on
their top candidates.
The second objective is to illustrate that many problems in entrepreneurial settings are highly
ambiguous and difficult to solve. When problems are ambiguous, there may be a temptation
either to avoid them or to propose a barrage of solutions. The case illustrates that often the best
way to solve such ambiguous problems is to use a framework to guide the discussion. Although
the framework may not be perfect, imposing some order on a nebulous problem significantly
enriches the ability to discover a solution.

This teaching note was prepared by Nathan Furr while a Ph.D. student at Stanford Universitys School of
Engineering, with assistance from Josh Schwarzapel, Soujanya Bhumkar, and Professor Thomas Byers, as the basis
for class discussion rather than to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of an administrative situation.
Some facts have been disguised.
Copyright 2010 by Stanford University. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, used in a spreadsheet, or transmitted in any form or by any meanselectronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or otherwisewithout the permission of The Stanford Technology Ventures Program.
Revised January 2010

Page1of10

For this particular case, the Cooliris team stated that they solved the problem by mapping the
process from beginning to end. Furthermore, the team stated that if they had been more
haphazard, and failed to apply the process mapping framework described below, they would
have missed the real solution. This case acts as an excellent teaching point of this particular
framework but more importantly serves to illustrate how entrepreneurs can solve ambiguous
problems: by using a framework and imposing order.
The rest of this teaching note discusses a tactical plan for teaching the case.
Case Discussion Introduction
1. Consider setting the stage for the discussion by telling the class that they are the Cooliris
team holding a meeting to figure out what to do.
2. The purpose of the meeting is to address the problems Cooliris has had in recruiting a
technical team. To do this, use the two big questions the protagonist feels must be
answered:
a. WHO is an A+ player
b. HOW do you attract A+ players
First Question: Who Is an A+ Player?
1. Students often overlook the nuance in the definition of an A+ player. In this module,
explore what makes a candidate an A+ player. There are three key points to
communicate:
a. An A+ player who cannot work as part of a team is not an A+ player.
i. Furthermore, some of the attributes that entrepreneurs desire in a
candidate may have potential downsides in a team setting. Therefore,
understanding what the company is really searching for is important.
b. The attributes desired in candidates may change.
i. As entrepreneurs go through the hiring process, they often discover the
qualities they really want in candidates as opposed to those they defined at
the beginning of the process.
c. Balance the team.
i. Dont hire individuals with exactly the same characteristics and expertise.
For example, when hiring a technical team, entrepreneurs should hire both
specialists and generalists, not just one or the other.
2. To help students understand the nuance of selecting candidate attributes, use the
following attribute selection activity.

Page2of10

a. Attribute Selection Activity

i. Divide the class into teams to decide which qualities make an A+ player
for the Cooliris team.
ii. Pass out the list of 20+ attributes (see appendix A). Have each team
choose eight qualities and split them into two groups: must-haves and
nice-to-haves.
iii. Have student groups present the qualities they chose and defend their
choice.
1. Use questions to probe why groups selected certain qualities and
not others.
iv. Share the Cooliris list and discuss why the Cooliris team may have
selected these qualities and not others (see Appendix B).
3. Follow-up the activity with a brief discussion of:
a. The potential upsides and downsides of selected attributes.
b. The pitfalls of hiring A+ players who cannot work as a team.
c. The potential of change in the desired list of attributes as the team goes through
the hiring process.
d. The need to balance the team.
Second Question: How Do You Attract A+ Players?
1. The purpose of this module is to help students understand how to develop a successful
recruiting process.
a. The key tactical points to communicate are:
i. Hiring for entrepreneurial firms is a selling, not a buying, process.
ii. The recruiting process resembles a sales funnel: understand the recruiting
funnel and focus efforts on getting dream players rather than boiling the
ocean to get good players.
iii. Tailor the message to the audience.
iv. Communicate openly.
v. Never stop recruiting.
b. The key higher-level objective to communicate is:
i. When tackling ambiguous or challenging problems, using a framework
can significantly improve the ability to analyze and solve that problem. By
going through the work of mapping out the Cooliris recruiting process,
students will get experience imposing order on ambiguity and thereby
coming up with a more complete solution.
2. Consider beginning this discussion by simply asking students what Cooliris should do to
fix their problem. Write these solutions down on the board (brainstorming style). Often in
such discussions, students come up with part of the solution but not the entire solution.
Once students have shared their solutions, the following process mapping activity will
Page3of10

reveal how using a framework leads to a much more complete solution in an ambiguous
setting.
3. To understand why Cooliris had trouble attracting a technical team, begin by analyzing
the recruiting process described in the case from beginning to end, discussing what is
wrong with each step.
a. Begin by creating a diagram on the board of the current Cooliris recruiting
process (see figure 1)
i. Use student comments to fill in the numbers for the process
ii. Optional activity: have students estimate the amount of time required for
each step and total time invested for a yield of zero candidates. This will
help emphasize the scale of the investment
Figure 1

4. To solve the problem, the Cooliris team systematically re-examined their process. With
the process mapped out, have students suggest ways to improve the process (or use the
suggestions proposed in earlier discussion). Lead students through the discussion to the
following major changes in the process made by the Cooliris team:

Page4of10

a. Hard shift from buying mode to selling mode

i. Previously the Cooliris team approached recruiting as a buying process,
first carefully evaluating candidates for technical capability while keeping
the most exciting but sensitive parts of the company secret until the end of
the recruiting cycle.
ii. The Cooliris team realized that for an entrepreneurial firm that is
somewhat unproven, recruiting is a selling rather than a buying process.
The Cooliris team made the following significant changes to the recruiting
process
1. Brought potential recruits in through the main Kleiner Perkins
office doors, showing them where famous venture capitalists sit,
offering them some of the free food, and introducing them to
people in order to impress upon them the feeling of being part of
something bigger and exciting.
2. In the new process, the first interview focused primarily on selling
rather than on screening the candidate for technical ability. The
entire team met with the candidate to make them feel important.
The opening presentation was changed to make the candidate feel
like part of a big and successful team. To do this, the presentation
featured the venture capitalists as part of the regular Cooliris team
and then the candidates picture was added to the teams pictures
during the presentation.
3. The first presentation took the risk of revealing Cooliriss
somewhat sensitive vision and future products rather than focusing
on the publically known past. (Cooliris was in stealth mode at the
time.) This got the candidate truly excited about the big vision for
Cooliris, which was much more compelling than the products of
which they were already aware.
4. While the Cooliris team was selling the company they found they
could actually easily evaluate candidates. The final round
interview had some more technical evaluation components, but
generally it became very clear early on whether a candidate was a
good fit.
5. Although the process was focused on selling, the Cooliris team
was careful not to oversell. Otherwise, both the candidate and the
team might simply deceive one another about the fit for both
parties. Additionally, in the final round interview, the CEO had a
very open discussion with the candidate about the potential upside
as well as expectations.
b. Optimized the flow of the recruiting process
Page5of10

i. Previously the Cooliris team had focused on processing a large number of

candidates who might fit the target attributes. This required an immense
investment of time.
ii. After analyzing the process, the Cooliris team decided it would be better
to invest a disproportionate amount of time recruiting one dream candidate
than spreading their efforts thinly over a number of potentially good
candidates. (See Figure 2 below.) To change the process, the Cooliris
team:
1. Selected approximately 50 dream candidates for the position. To
find these candidates the team used their social networks alongside
more of the traditional methods they had used previously
(LinkedIn, Google searches, etc.).
a. Interestingly, the team found that their social networks
were not entirely adequate. The CEO and venture
capitalists had social networks that connected with senior
level people whereas the other three team members had
social networks that connected to students. What was
missing was a social network that reached mid-range
technical candidates with a few years of experience.
2. Screened the 50 dream candidates with a phone call. Based on the
feel of the individual and their interest on the phone call, the
team invited 20 candidates for a first-round interview focused on
getting them excited. Out of those interviews, 15 people were
invited for a final round that was also a technical screen. In the
end, the Cooliris team extended 5 offers of which 5 were accepted.
The new recruiting process represented a dramatic improvement
not only in terms of return on time invested but also in the quality
of candidates that ultimately accepted the employment offer.
3. When it came time to make an offer, Cooliris focused on closing
the deal by creating a sense of urgency from multiple sides (and
not by giving exploding offers). Specifically, they created a sense
of urgency by having a discussion about the very real need to act
now given the current market opportunity and the special role the
candidate would have in making that happen. As an example, when
the candidate would ask about starting dates, the CEO would
suggest, in all seriousness, how about right now? Although
candidates would inevitably ask for a few days to think about it,
this discussion reframed the closing period from weeks to days.
Finally, when an offer was extended it came from the Kleiner
Perkins offices (not the Cooliris offices) and was closed quickly.
Page6of10

Figure 2:

c. In addition, the Cooliris team re-evaluated what appealed to their target audience.
i. In the early recruiting period, the Cooliris team was convinced that they
understood what would appeal to the technical team. Given that their
company had been recently funded by a famous venture capital firm, had
great initial team members, and developed exciting technology, the
Cooliris team felt they had the perfect appeal to attract technical talent.
Only after the process failed did the team realize the nuance in what their
candidates really wanted. By doing some research, the Cooliris team
discovered what really motivated the technical talent they were looking
for:
1. Although Cooliris saw it as a plus that they were located in the
Kleiner Perkins incubator (which gave them close access to top
venture capital talent and advice), technical candidates saw it as a
sign that the company really wasnt very proven and therefore not
very reliable. To make up for this weakness, the Cooliris team
invested a significant amount of time to create a hard-coded demo

Page7of10

of their next big product, which made the company seem more real
and successful.
2. Through talking to candidates, Cooliris discovered that what really
appealed to technical candidates was:
a. An interesting technical challenge
b. Being made to feel that they were uniquely suited to have a
big impact
c. Interesting technical people to work with
d. A compelling product / monetization vision
e. Financial compensation
3. To address what candidates really wanted, Cooliris tailored their
message to each individual. Furthermore, they had Austin, their
resident technical genius, spend much more time with candidates.
Finally, they shared their monetization vision so candidates could
see that Cooliris could be a large, long-term success.
ii. In addition, as the Cooliris team grew, they recognized that other types of
candidates (such as sales candidates) would have different desires that
would need to be addressed differently.
d. Lastly, the Cooliris team reframed the recruiting challenge.
i. Cooliris came to recognize that recruiting was a full-time effort.
ii. Cooliris came to realize that they should never stop recruiting and
maintained lists of interesting candidates who might be a good fit in the
future, thereby saving time and effort in future recruiting efforts.
What Happened
Josh and the Cooliris team successfully made radical changes to their recruiting process, which
both increased the success rates of recruiting efforts and, more importantly, led to hiring more
capable team members. As Cooliris soon found by experience, A+ players did indeed hire and
incentivize other A+ players to join. Within six months of revising the process, the team had
grown dramatically (to approximately 12 full time individuals and 36 interns) and was making
significant strides forward in reaching the product vision.

Page8of10

Appendix A: List of Potential Candidate Attributes

What Should You Look for in a Technical Candidate?
Directions: Identify the eight most important eight that you would look for in hiring a core
technical team member, and rank them in order from 1-8. Draw a line at the point where the
must-haves end and the nice to haves begin, if there is such a place in your list. Be prepared
to defend your list.
__ Honest
__ Youthful / Energetic
__ Articulate
__ Highly analytical
__ Communicative
__ Enjoyable to be around
__ Solid academic credentials from a top school
__ Big name company experience
__ Passion for the product vision
__ Hunger for success
__ Personable
__ Tendency toward entrepreneurship
__ Expertise in a technical domain the company is missing
__ Skill at managing people and process
__ High level of intelligence for and knowledge about the field
__ Humble
__ Outgoing
__ Bias toward implementation over strategy
__ Startup experience
__ Solid organizational skills
__ Experience in a team environment
__ Experience in a creative environment
__ Good short game on the golf course
Page9of10

Appendix B: Cooliris List of Desired Attributes

1. Passion for the Product Vision

2. Hunger for Success
3. Tendency towards entrepreneurial leadership
4. Expertise/Experience in a technical domain that were lacking in
5. High level of intelligence for and knowledge about the field
6. Bias towards execution over vision/strategy
7. Communicative
8. Humble

Page10of10