Dan Siroker, Founder, Optimizely
Culture of Experimentation
As more companies embrace data-driven analytics in pursuit of higher performance, Dan Siroker has emerged as a global advocate for this type of experimentation. In fact, he wrote the book on it.
That book, A/B Testing: The Most Powerful Way to Turn Clicks Into Customers, consolidates the wisdom Siroker has gained from years in the trenches of experimentation in both politics and business.
After working as a project manager at Google, Siroker joined Barack Obama’s presidential campaign in 2008, and quickly worked his way into a role as director of analytics for the administration. His data-driven approach informed every step of the campaign and ultimately helped clinch Obama’s first term in the White House.
Having witnessed the power of experimentation on the national political stage, Siroker then created Optimizely to enable businesses to take advantage of testing, data collection, and personalization on websites, apps, and connected devices. He’s now the co-founder and executive chairman of the Australia-based company, which is currently the most adopted experimentation platform in the world.
But Siroker isn’t gunning for world domination. Instead, he’s on a mission to democratize experimentation, so early-stage startups and global corporations alike can benefit from the practice of using data to guide their paths. Here’s a look at how Siroker came to be the unlikely leader of a movement—plus some of the lessons he’s learned along the way.
From ‘HiPPO Syndrome’ to Embracing a Culture of Experimentation
Plenty of articles have been devoted to teasing out what makes Google such a unique and successful company. Siroker sums it up pretty quickly. “What made Google, Google…is this culture of experimentation,” he says.
Because Siroker worked for Google not long after graduating with a computer science degree from Stanford, he left his post at the tech giant assuming most companies had a similar culture. But his stint on the Obama campaign quickly proved how inaccurate that assumption had been.
“ was a great opportunity for me to see how to take something that sort of, to me, was common sense and I assumed was widespread…and really actually wasn’t,” says Siroker. “ was this really data-driven meritocracy of ideas, where the organization is really humble and willing to utilize data to drive their path.”
He contrasts this approach with the way most organizations work, which he describes as HiPPO Syndrome—in which the Highest Paid Person’s Opinion reigns supreme. Instead of experimenting with ideas and using data to inform decisions, too many companies simply adhere to the whims of the person at the top.
Siroker is now on a mission to change that.
Not only does his company develop tools that make it easier for product developers and marketers to test their ideas, but he’s also emerged as a thought leader who’s making a strong case for a shift in corporate culture—from one that favors a HiPPO approach to one that is all about experimentation. Here, Siroker weighs in on some of the many ways his ideology can be used to inform a business’s development.
On creating a culture of experimentation…
“I would say experimentation as a practice and as a process within a company should be one of the highest order cultural values the organization embodies,” Siroker says. “And that means not just conversion rate optimization in the marketing stage; it actually means that product developers should be experimenting every single thing they develop. Every single thing they put in front of a customer…should be an experiment. The practice of experimentation should be widespread and should be from the top of the organization down to the bottom.
“Technology is just one part of the picture. We think people, process, systems—that’s just as important.”
In Siroker’s view, baking experimentation into a company’s culture has to start at the top. “When the CEO of a company asks, ‘What were the test results?’—not ‘Let’s do X’ or ‘Let’s do Y,’ but ‘What were the test results?’—that changes the mindset of the company.”
On hiring the right CRO (Chief Risk Officer)…
“The best folks I’ve worked with in those functions…are very data-driven to the core,” Siroker says. “ not just focused on the tools and technology but the culture of experimentation—I think that’s very important. I’d ask any candidate who’d consider this role how they view their job as influencing the culture…of the organization. The best I know changing the mindset of the company from one where decisions typically get made at the top to one where decisions typically get made at the edges of an organization.”
On staying focused…
“It’s very, very easy to say yes; it’s very hard to say no,” Siroker says. “That’s true of how you spend your time, who you sell to, what you build. … You can really delude yourself into thinking you’re making progress, but really you end up doing too much—and too little of all those things you’re doing too much of.”
In order to stay focused, Siroker and his team craft a three-year plan each year. As part of this process, the team spends time defining not only what their business is, but also what it is not.
“That’s the most important thing for startups—to figure out what they’re not gonna do,” Siroker says. “We have only so many resources, and we have probably 10 times the amount of opportunity around us. So being ruthlessly focused on what we’re gonna do and what we’re not gonna do is important.”
On remaining competitive…
“I think it’s very critical as a company to embrace going fast,” Siroker says. “Frankly, going fast or dying slow are the choices that companies today have when they have to compete with the likes of Amazon. … And so you have to say, ‘Okay, if we’re gonna compete with Amazon, then our culture needs to be at least as good as theirs in terms of our willingness to be humble and to think of the work we do as an experiment.’”
That can be difficult to pull of, because it requires having a strong tolerance for risk. But it doesn’t have to be.
“One of the beauties of experimentation is you know whether something’s working or not. And if it’s not, it’s not the end of the world. You have the data to say, ‘Look, this idea or product is not working. Let’s kill it; let’s pull it and move on to the next one.’ I think organizations that are too afraid of risk and intolerant of failure end up undermining their ability to be innovative. … With experimentation as…a foundation of how a culture works, you’re able to actually get many more ideas to life. And if they work, they take off. If they don’t, they’ll die.”
On crafting a legacy…
“I truly believe that we have the opportunity to build a 100-year company,” Siroker says. “If I look at the growth we’ve had over the last seven years, it’s not just growth in terms of customers and revenue. It’s really growth in the mindset of experimentation. And so to me, that spans well beyond just one product. … That tells me if we continue to do what we’re doing, we can build a 100-year company.
“That said, I don’t think our success is preordained. … The world owes us nothing. We have to earn every single dollar we make, and we have to earn the right to endure. And I think that starts by making our customers wildly successful. If we make our customers successful, they’ll not only renew with us but will grow and spend more with us over time, and that…is the best source of funding for the company. So I’m focused on making our customers successful…and I think it starts with that.”
- Best practices for hiring a rockstar conversion specialist
- The power of making customers successful and why it is so important to Optimizely
- How to shift your startup to an experiment-driven culture
- How to stop spending time on the wrong tasks and instead focus on real progress
- How experimentation fueled the growth of Fortune 1000 companies over 700% in the past five years
Full Transcript of Podcast Episode with Dan Siroker
Nathan: The first question that I always ask everyone that I speak to is, how’d you get your job?
Dan: Well, I got my job through a pretty securitist path. So I worked at Google as a product manager, started there and learned really, what it…what made Google, Google, which is this culture of experimentation. That’s ultimately what I brought to the Obama campaign in 2008. I left, I joined that campaign, started off as a volunteer and eventually, it turned into a job as the director of analytics. And it was a great opportunity for me to see how to take something that to me, was sort of common sense and I assumed was widespread–what I saw at Google–and really actually wasn’t, which is this really data-driven, meritocracy of ideas, where the organization’s very humble and willing to use data to guide their path, not how most organizations actually work, which is using the HIPPO Syndrome, the highest paid person’s opinion.
So that’s what I brought to the campaign, it had a big impact there and saw first-hand the power of experimentation. And that’s why I started Optimizely, really to make it easy for anybody to do experimentation. And we’ve done that today. We’re the number one most adopted experimentation platform in the world. We got to work with huge global companies and actually many companies out here in Australia, including Atlassian and even much older organizations like Fairfax Media. So it’s been a fun journey. Today, I’m really focused on the product engineering design side of the house. And that’s my job.
Nathan: Yeah, gotcha. So what brings you guys to Australia?
Dan: It really was more of a pull than a push. We’ve had customers in Australia from almost the very beginning of the company and it’s been great to see their growth as we grow alongside with them. That ultimately culminated in the decision to really double down on where we’ve been successful here. And because we have so many customers here in the market that have really evangelized and really innovative, we think that can really spread to the rest of the market. And when we came, we thought it would be great to have a presence not only here in Sydney but in Melbourne, as well. Our first hire was out there, after our country manager, managing director Dan Ross came to the country.
So it’s exciting to see the how the growth–we think–here is really this huge potential, lots and lots of companies going through digital transformation that can benefit from experimentation and lots of startups that are digital first companies that are also really adopting our software.
Nathan: Yeah, because that’s something I find interesting. A lot of companies that might be online SAS like you guys. And they…online company, global brand. But they tend…a lot do come to Australia–Sydney, Melbourne–and set up kind of a bit of a base camp. So does that mean you guys will predominantly be doing business development that’s kind of…? And is that kind of the play?
Dan: I wouldn’t describe it as business development. It’s more so making our customers successful. So that includes CSMs, or customer success managers, it includes support. One of the great things that our customers benefit from globally is, with the presence here in Australia, we now can give them 24/7 global support, which is also a huge benefit. So that’s a big part of it. Our top focus at Optimizely is making our customers wildly successful and being close to your customers makes that much, much easier.
Nathan: Oh, awesome. Yeah, well, look, I’m so very excited to speak to you. And it’s cool that you guys are coming, because one thing that…to be 100% transparent…is, we’re actually looking to hire a CRO guy at our company. And that talent is kind of scarce here in Melbourne and Sydney, I’ve found. So I’m really curious. What advice would you give to me, looking to find a really, really strong kind of experimentation person, analytics person that has that growth mindset and kind of iterative mindset?
Dan: Yeah, that’s a great question. It reminds me of a funny story. When we…I think around 2012, the first time I had seen a job description that required Optimizely as a skill, it was very flattering to see. But what was interesting about that job description was that it required 10 years of Optimizely experience and we’d only been around for two years at that point. So I don’t know how they hired or who they hired, but that was a very flattering thing to see.
But first and foremost, I think–to answer your question–it is a new field. Just like industries like search engine marketing, before Google AdWords, search engine marketing wasn’t a discipline, it wasn’t really a full-time job, wasn’t even somebody’s…in their title. But because of the impact that it has to organizations, they feel like it’s important to specialize in that role. We’re seeing the same thing with experimentation and conversion-rate optimization. So in that sense, you’re right that it is early and there is a lot of…and you’re not going to get thousands and thousands of applicants for that role.
That said, I do think the best folks that I’ve worked with now in those functions at other companies are ones that are very data-driven at the core, are very focused on not just the tools and technology, but the culture of experimentation. I think that’s very important. I’d ask any candidate who considers this role how they view their job at influencing and changing the culture of an organization. That’s a high-order job and definitely tough to do in large companies that have been around for a long time. But the best people I know who run what we call the “center of excellence for experimentation,” these are folks who really see their job as much, much more than just optimizing button colors and driving conversion lift.
They see really around changing the mindset of the company from one where typically, decisions get made at the top to one where typically, decisions get made by the edges of the organization. So I think that’s number one. Number two, I do think the reality today is, there are thousands and thousands of technology solutions that companies can buy. And I think part of the reason why that happens is because the cost to start a company and build technology has become lower and so, you end up having thousands of solutions.
And these aren’t…we happen to play in one space of experimentation, but we don’t claim to do everything under the sun at Optimizely. And we’re really deeply focused on experimentation, but we think it’s importantly to deeply integrate with other best-of-breed solutions as well. And so, I think that’s important for this person in an organization to be the champion of: which is finding best-of-breed solutions that integrate seamlessly with one another, not a Franken-suite of products that have been acquired into one large conglomerate over time. But anyway, that…hopefully that’s helpful. Am I helping you out here, on this role…in this role?
Nathan: Yeah, 100%. What kind of…? I guess when it comes to personality traits, what kind of things would you interview? Because you guys would have best-of-breed, like CRO experimentation, analytic, star-driven people. I’m sure you’ve seen them. What kinds of characteristics, traits, things would you be looking for, for…? And would you hire someone with…? Is it possible to hire someone that’s really good with a couple of experience, or do you need someone that’s been doing optimization for 10 years, or…?
Dan: No, I absolutely think a couple years of experience is fine, because there frankly aren’t that many people who have been doing this for 10 years. The folks who’ve been doing this for 10 years probably come from companies like Google or Netflix, where they’ve really built this culture from the beginning. But I wouldn’t limit yourself to that pool of candidates. I think…in terms of characteristics, I think somebody who is…who sees themselves as a servant to the organization, who is really about enablement, their job…they feel like their job, first and foremost, is to enable other people in the company to look good, not to be the person who wants to take credit for all of the wins and losses and data. I think that’s really important as well. So I think those are two traits.
I also think somebody who’s able to think strategically. I think one of the biggest misses I see organizations make when they start with testing and experimentation is, they’re too incremental. They’re just trying small, little changes in the margin, maybe adding an exclamation mark at the end of a sentence. But that really isn’t going to move the needle for experimentation and oftentimes, that might actually lead to a bit of fatigue, like, “Hey, I’m putting all this effort in. Why am I not getting the results I expect?” So I think somebody who can be strategic and really force the organization to use its limited resources to test the things that matter is going to be an important skill.
Nathan: Yeah, no, I think that’s really a good point, because that’s really micro stuff that really doesn’t really impact the bottom line as much as…because we would be looking for someone–I guess–that can play around with offers and understand sales, as well. Because I think that’s a good skill. They have to be decent at selling too, right, because that’s a level of experimentation. Because we want that person to optimize the bottom line, right?
Dan: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, they should be directly tied to revenue. If that…the person in this role doesn’t think their job presence, almost, is to drive business and revenue, then you’ve got the wrong person. I don’t know if that needs to be necessarily focused on sales as a discipline or a function, but it definitely…somebody who can’t connect the dots between the work they do and directly impacting revenue is probably not the right fit.
Nathan: Interesting. And I’m curious. You can only run so many tests, right, in a certain…
Dan: That’s exactly right, yeah.
Nathan: …yeah, in a certain timeframe. So how do you know which battles to pick and how do you…? Because for us, for example, we can have many different products, many different magazine issues, many different things going on. How would a good CRO person know what battles to pick and…? Because you can only run so many tests over a certain period.
Dan: Yeah, we definitely…we try to make that easy. I think being able to prioritize and evaluate the return on investment for the different experiments you run is very important. We actually acquired a company called the Experiment Engine earlier this year and we’re going to be launching their stuff later this year. And one of the key things I love about their product is that it allows anybody in the organization to collaborate on ideation. So not just implementing the experiment, but ideating, coming up with new ideas. And it allows anyone in the organization to rank each one of these experiments by level of effort, by potential impacts, by a perceived complexity.
And one of my favorite characteristics is by how much we love the test, because everyone thinks they’re impartial. But unless you give somebody the form by which to actually say, “I just really love this test. I don’t know if it’s going to have an effect, I just really love it,” you’ll end up sort of hiding that input and putting it in the wrong place. And the cool thing about that is then, you can collaborate very much like and some of these collaboration software. You can collaborate on the ideas the organization has. And then, you could only put forth of those hundred ideas, the five that you think will really move the needle. And those are hypothesis. You don’t know for sure, but at least you kind of culled down that long list. So you’re not just incrementally changing things a bit at the margins, you’re actually driving for business outcomes.
Nathan: Yeah. Wow, that’s super cool. I’m looking forward to seeing that product and getting access to that. Another thing that I’m curious about as well is, when it comes to testing, one thing that we haven’t harnessed is…within our business…is, there’s so many different testers. As I said, you can only pick so many that you can go with. But how big of an importance should companies be placing this kind of experimentation within the business? Because there’s so many other things you can do. There’s only so many tests you can do. We’ve got marketing, we’ve got sales, we’ve got product, we’ve got customer success, we’ve got bus-dev, we’ve got acquisition. How important is a tool like Optimizely and why should companies be using it? Because there’s so much going…as a founder, there’s so many things you can be doing.
Dan: Absolutely. And I think that’s a great question. I don’t want to focus on the importance of the tool, but more so, on the concept of experimentation. I would say experimentation, as a practice and as a process within a company, should be one of the highest-order cultural values the organization embodies. And that means not just conversion-rate optimization on the marketing page, it actually means that product developers, they should be experimenting every feature they develop. Every single thing that they put in front of a customer, that should be an experiment. And so, we believe…and the product we launched last year that’s now our fastest-growing product that’s called Full Stack, that’s a product really designed for product development teams.
It’s the SDKs you put into your back end of your website or your native mobile apps or even Apple TVs. We really believe that that will enable product development teams to do the same kind of experimentation that made Google Google, or Facebook Facebook, or Netflix Netflix. And at the same time, we get this product through the marketing team or the business-minded folks web solution. So in that sense, we believe we aren’t just a product beyond Optimizely. We believe practice and experimentation should be widespread and should be from the top of the organization down to the bottom.
We hope that the…and we see this, actually, every day. The best CEOs…if you look at the Fortune 1000 companies five years ago, the CEOs of companies that embody a culture of experimentation, these CEOs focus on the number of experiments they run every single year, every single month, every single day. And these are the companies that have grown, actually over the last five years, over 700%. So I think these are the CEOs where they see experimentation as core to the way their organization runs and their culture.
That’s said, we see our product as playing a role there, but we’re not the end-all, be-all. We think of technology as just one part of the picture. We think people, processes, services, that’s just as important. And so, we definitely think that we can help them play a role, we want to be a champion for that. But I don’t want to overpromise and oversell to say, “Hey, Optimizely is the most important piece of software you can have at a company and I think we’re a critical part of making organizations innovative. And to the extent that that’s going to help you in the marketplace, we think we can help.”
Nathan: Now, you talk about that culture of experimentation. How can someone fuel that and make sure that your company has that? What are some best practices to fuel that?
Dan: Yeah, I think that’s a great question. I actually wrote a whole book on it, but let me summarize it. So I think one of the key things that I’ve seen is buy-in from the top. When the CEO of the company asks, “What were the test results,” not, “Let’s do X,” or, “Let’s do Y,” but, “What were the test results,” that changes the mindset of the company to say…first of all, presuming that, of course, you ran the test.
Now a lot of times, people will come to the CEO with an idea or a proposal and that will get approved or not approved. But if the mindset of the organization is that they’re going to be asked and held accountable to results from the test, they’re going to think about their initiatives and ideas around hypotheses, not as proposals for approval. So that’s first and foremost from the culture. Culture is set by the top and I think that’s really important.
Nathan: Yeah, I love that.
Dan: The second is…yeah. The second is, I think it’s very critical to…as a company, to embrace going fast. Frankly, going fast or dying slow are the choices that companies today have when they have to compete with the likes of Amazon. And Amazon today, is…whether they’re a competitor of yours or not, today, they probably will be at one point. And the way Amazon thinks about their companies, really as a bunch of experiments. And so, you have to say, “Okay, if our culture is…if our company is going to compete with Amazon, then our culture needs to be at least as good as theirs, in terms of our willingness to be humble and think of the work we do as an experiment.”
The third thing I’ll say–and I don’t want to blabber on it–is, I do think there needs to be a tolerance for risk. One of the beauties of experimentation is, you know whether something’s working or not. And if it’s not, it’s not the end of the world. You have to be able to say, “Look, this idea, this design, this product, it’s not working. Let’s kill it. Let’s move it out of the market and move on to the next one.” But I think organizations that are too afraid of risk and intolerant of failure end up actually undermining their ability to be innovative, because the next good idea that might seem like a bad idea the first time you hear about it in a meeting, probably most companies will kill it before it even has the chance to see the light of day.
With experimentation as a sort of foundation of how culture works, you’re able to actually get many more ideas to light. And if they work, they take off. If they don’t, they’ll die.
Nathan: Yeah, no, I love that. Awesome. So you guys have raised from…$146 million from investors, benchmark capital and recent Horowitz index ventures. Do you…? Are you guys profitable now? That’s something I’m really curious around. Do you plan to continue to raise, or what are your feelings, thoughts?
Dan: So one of the great things about having built a big businesses is, we get to fund our business from the growth of our customers. So today, we’re proud to say we have…we earn over $90 million in revenue annually, in recurring revenue. And so, right now, that’s our primary source of funding for the company. We definitely want to make sure we invest in growth and spend wisely across the board. But right now, we have no imminent plans to raise more money. And good news is, when you grow a business the size we have, you get to actually fund your growth from the revenue of your customers, which is the best form of fundraising.
Nathan: Yeah, love it. And when you build a business the size of what you guys have built, one thing one of my mentors told me is that you begin to care less around the revenue…obviously, you want to keep investors happy and you want to show growth. But the things that you really care the most about is actually the culture within your organization and the kind of company that you’re going to build and the legacy you’re going to build. So I’m really curious. What kind of legacy and culture do you want to build within Optimizely, besides having a culture of experimentation?
Dan: I truly believe that we have the opportunity to build a 100-year company. And very few organizations make it to 10 or 20 years and I’m…so I don’t want to seem naïve to think that I believe we can build a 100-year company. But the reason I believe that is, I think the market that we’re in and the market opportunity we have is absolutely massive. If I look at the growth we’ve had over the last seven years, it’s not just growth in terms of customers and revenue, it’s really growth in the mindset of experimentation. And so, to me, that spans well beyond just one product. We now have multiple hit products in the market. That’s another thing that most companies struggle with: is, they have a great first act, but can they follow up with an act two and an act three?
Our personalization product has done phenomenally well, our Full Stack product has done phenomenally well. So that tells me, if we continue to do what we’re doing, we have the opportunity to build a 100-year company. That said, I don’t think our success is pre-ordained and I’ve said, numerous times internally to the team, that we have to…the world owes us nothing. We have to earn every single dollar we make and we have to earn the right to endure. And I think that starts by making our customers wildly successful. If we make our customers successful, they’ll not only renew with us, but they’ll grow and they’ll spend more with us over time. And that–as I said before–is the best source of funding for the growth of the company.
So I’m maniacally focused on making our customers successful. I think culturally, if you asked anybody at Optimizely what’s the number one thing I’m going to do, I think uniformly, everyone’s going to tell you, “We’re going to make our customers wildly successful.” And I think it starts with that. We have a lot more, in terms of cultural values that we talk about, but at the core of my ambition is to build a company that outlives me.
Nathan: No, that’s super cool. And when it comes to planning, how far do you plan in advance? That’s something that I’d love to know. For me, with the company we’re building, Foundr, I’m planning no more than three to five years ahead. We want to one day build a SAS product. I don’t even know what that is, but one day. We’re a long way away from even building software, but… So I’m really curious, for…I’d have never thought that this is going to be a 100-year-old company, but I’m really curious.
Dan: Yeah. We think…well, that’s actually…that’s a really good question. So I think it’s really easy to talk about 100 years. And so, that’s one aspect. It’s also pretty easy to plan six months or a year out. The hardest for me has been planning three years out. We go through an exercise to do that. We call it our ambition document, where we’ll write very clearly what is our three-year ambition? In three years, what does success look like, what do we hope to achieve? Not only that, but in three years, how will we win and where will we play? I think both are really critical questions to answer for the whole company.
How we will win means, what is it that we do? What are we in the business of? What are we not in the business of? I think that’s the most important thing for startups to get, right, is to figure out what they’re not going to do. We have only so much resources and we have probably 10 times the amount of opportunity around us. So being ruthlessly focused on what we’re going to do or not going to do is important. And then, where we’ll play. What are the markets we’re going to care about? What are the markets we’re not going to care about? This market here in Australia and New Zealand, we care about this market. That’s why we’re investing here. There are other markets today that we’re saying, “We’ll do that later.”
And I think that that focus, as you think about things three years out, I think, “Is there any important…?” I honestly don’t think five years out. That’s actually too hard for me. The world changes so quickly, it’s really difficult to know what’s going to matter and what’s not going to matter. I know that as I believe in the long-term ambition of the company, I think we’ll get there. But right now, I want to make sure we don’t die of indigestion, because most companies die of indigestion, not starvation.
Nathan: So with your three-year ambition, you said…what you call “paint a picture.” I’ve heard of this process before.
Dan: We don’t use that term. That might describe it. The framework we use is something that Bane, the consultant firm probably uses similar things. It’s really simple methodology. It’s basically looking at our ambition, where we’ll play, how we’ll win. And then, we align that to what we call our OKRs–our objectives and key results–and that’s something that we do annually.
Nathan: Got you. So every year, you guys are kind of checking in and then, renewing that three-year ambition?
Dan: That’s right, yeah.
Nathan: Gotcha. Awesome. Well, look…sorry.
Woman: One more question.
Nathan: Yes, yes. I was just about to say, look, we’re just about to work towards wrapping up. Final question, Dan. Just from your experience of building…closing in on a $100-million annual recurring revenue business, what’s kind of been the greatest lessons that you would like to impart with our audience? And then, the last question is the best place people could find out about Optimizely.
Dan: Yeah, I have so many lessons I could share. I’d say the biggest thing I would say is, I think, focus. I think that’s the biggest lesson I could impart to your audience. It’s very, very easy to say, “Yes,” it’s very hard to say, “No.” That’s true of how you spend your time, who you sell to, what you build. And now, I’ve seen this time and time again that oftentimes, you can really delude yourself into thinking really making process. But you’re ending up doing too much and too little too much. And even, that’s true of large, large companies like Alphabet/Google.
And these are companies where they have almost unlimited resources. But if you’d ask Larry Paige, he would probably tell you, “We’re doing too much and we need to focus. We need to put more wood behind fewer arrows.” So that’s probably the biggest lesson learned. And then, what was your last question?
Nathan: Oh, where’s the best place people can find out about Optimizely and your work?
Dan: We have a website, optimizely.com. I would recommend you check that out. We also certainly are here in the market and we’ll happily meet with customers and give a demo the product and go from there.
Nathan: Awesome, fantastic. We’ll wrap there. Thank you so much for your time, mate.
Dan: Thank you. It was a pleasure to connect. And good luck to you and I wish you the best on your entrepreneurial journey. And hopefully one day, we’ll be able to be customers of yours.
Nathan: Yeah, thank you so much. I look forward to that one day, perhaps. Awesome. All right, thank you so much, guys. I’ll speak to you soon.
Dan: Take care. Bye.
Key Resources From Our Interview With Dan Siroker
- Learn more about Optimizely
- Like Optimizely on Facebook
- Follow Optimizely on Twitter
- Follow Dan Siroker on Twitter
- Check out Dan Siroker’s blog