Press play to listen, or check it out on your favorite platform:

YouTube | Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts | iHeartRadio | Amazon Podcasts | Spreaker 

About Maria Blekher

Dr. Maria Blekher is a behavioral scientist, venture strategist, and Co-Founder & Managing Partner at Serendipity Impact VC, an early-stage fund investing in technologies transforming mental and neuro health.

With over 15 years of experience in consumer behavior, go-to-market strategy, and startup growth, she previously founded the YU Innovation Lab, a borderless ecosystem that helped introduce 70+ Israeli startups into the North American market.

A thought leader at the intersection of technology and mental health, Dr. Blekher serves on the boards of mental health initiatives including MindGuard and the MyWhat/If Foundation, and is an advisor to 97212 Ventures.

She holds a Ph.D. and MBA from Ben-Gurion University and was a visiting scholar at NYU’s Stern School of Business.

Episode Highlights 

Links and resources

• Serendipity Impact VC- It is a U.S.-based fund investing early in Israeli-sourced deep tech startups transforming one of the highest-growth markets of the next decade: mental and neuro health.

Interview Transcript

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: Hello Maria, welcome to Invisible Ink. We’re so excited to have you here today.

Maria Blekher: Thank you for having me, Shubha.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: So we have a bunch of really exciting stuff that I don’t think we’ve ever talked about at this podcast. So before we get into all of that, can you just tell us a little bit about your background? I know you’re now in vc but you weren’t always in vc. Can you just give us a little bit about your past?

Maria Blekher: Yeah, absolutely. So I had a bit of an unconventional path for venture capitalists. I’m coming from the behavioral science, academically. So I have a PhD in consumer behaviors. Spent a couple of years trying to really understand how people are making decisions and then very quickly pivoted into the entrepreneurial world because research is amazing. But I think we as humans are much more nuanced and the business world is very complex and plays out very interestingly when it comes to actually implementing research outcomes. So I spent the vast majority of my career in the field, working with early-stage startups on the journey to the American market.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: Great. And then how did you get into VC?

Maria Blekher: So after spending more than five years, probably in the US, working with early-stage founders, really seeing them developing incredible products and then struggling to make it to sales and to find go-to-market, I realized that there is something missing. And that something missing was of course, the strategy.

And then, as any founder knows, it was the funding part. I will not use the word ideal but the optimal way to go is probably to have outline strategy and funding. And so I decided that that’s going to be the next thing I’m going to do — add the funding component to the strategy and the go-to-market and the other things I was working on while working with founders.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: So it feels the funding was like the missing link. So you had the strategy, you had the go-to-market, and the pieces that the companies were missing was the funding.

Maria Blekher: I would say that you can do a lot without money and without funding but bottom line, sometimes to get things going, you do need funding. And I’ve seen many startups, especially in mental health and in brain health, that were struggling to fundraise.

We know the vast majority of startups fail and many of them should have not raised funding. But those who should have were struggling to raise from traditional generalist VCs, because space was less familiar and more nuanced. And again, because that’s my expertise and that’s my mission, I decided that someone has to do that, and that might as well be me.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: So, which brings us to Serendipity, which is the firm that you co-founded. Mental health’s a really broad area, what is your flavor? What is your twist to it? What is the focus and where exactly do you want to play within that space?

Maria Blekher: Yeah, so mental health is very wide and we’re working within the mental health and the brain health. So it’s even wider. We are working with founders that also are solving some of the biggest challenges. So when I’m looking at the company, I’m looking at what is the problem it’s solving and how painful is this problem?

I’m being more specific. I’m looking at loneliness, autism, PTSD, drug-resistant epilepsy, very complex medical decision-making, ADHD. So very, very big pains that currently don’t have solutions that are good enough.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: And is there anything unique about the type of solutions or about a specific approach that appeals to you, that you think is an opportunity?

Serendipity Impact VC Investment Thesis

Maria Blekher: Yeah, absolutely. So I’m looking at technological solutions. There is a lot of drug discovery going on and a large variety of solutions to all the problems that I just mentioned. I’m focused on technology that is enabling solutions or that is solving this problem. So that’s my take.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: And not to belabor the point, but when you talk about technology, so digital health is a very big thing, and I could argue that that’s technology too. Is that covered in your thesis or is that something more directly applied than just, “Hey, here’s a technology platform that we’re going to help”?

Maria Blekher: So, I think that’s a great question. And today, almost everything is technology. And I would say that digital health falls under the category. And obviously, we’re all speaking about AI and everything is AI-powered.

I can always say I’m focused on deep tech AI solutions. It can still be digital health. It can be a device but the idea is that you really have some revolutionary tech that is grounded in science — less kind of nice-to-have applications which are great, it’s just not the focus of what we’re doing. So, deep tech, deep science, real solutions. Major, major pains. That’s what I would say is where we’re focused.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: I like that focus on the very deep tech and also makes it much clearer. So I want to talk about what is happening in that field and why that’s attractive to you. What are some of the trends that you are seeing happening, particularly with that deep science, deep tech focus that you just talked about that’s new now and that’s disruptive?

Trends in The Mental Health Landscape

Maria Blekher: Let’s start with the market. The market is getting ready. We see more and more conversations about mental health and brain health in the headlines. We see more and more research about mental health and brain health, wherever people are consuming their information. And so that’s change number one. Things that prior to these times were, again, in the back rooms are now at the front.

The other thing is that we see that the FDA is actually starting to clear digital solutions, which is news. And it enables companies and it encourages companies to develop these solutions because well, there is a pathway — even regulatory pathway — that can be available today.

And these are things that five years ago were just not in place. And the third one is what we’re all experiencing with the development and acceleration of technology and AI. So AI today and again, this is a buzzword and everything is AI but it enables companies to achieve performances and unlock treatments that were not available five years ago or that would take much longer.

And today again, you can see clinical results much faster. And so the tech is ready, the market is ready, we see the regulation coming together. And so I think all these components are kind of colliding in this time and space we’re at.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: That’s great. So one quick question on that. So, you talked about the regulatory pathways opening up. What are you seeing in terms of the payers and their willingness to be able to reimburse these kinds of treatments or solutions?

Maria Blekher: It always comes back to who is going to pay for it and why. It’s, especially when we’re speaking about healthcare. So, first of all, we have the CPT codes, and you see more and more CPT codes that can be applied to various digital therapies solutions which again, opens an income pathway. That’s number one.

Second of all, we see the hospitals and the clinics seeking new solutions. So, there is much more openness to innovation, I think. Then it’s linked to what we previously said. So, the market is ready, the information is out there, people are listening to podcasts and they hear founders speaking about these new technologies and devices and processes that they develop to treat something.

And they’re seeking these solutions. And so, we start seeing more and more clinics offering things that maybe previously were kind of off limits, because you have the demand coming from the market. I would say, with the caveat, we’re at the beginning — there’s a long way to go yet.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: So, coming to the startup side, you are talking about a very specific niche where there is this marriage of deep tech and the market side, which is mental health. What are you seeing in terms of startups that are winning and what do you think are the winning factors, especially with this deep tech piece coming into the picture versus just what I’ll call a general digital mental health type of solution?

Deep Tech and Science in Startups

Maria Blekher: So, I would say and I would tie deep tech with deep science. If we’re looking to solve complex problems very often, they will need complex solutions that are tied back into science. And so, if you have technology that is developed based on solid science and it actually solves a major problem, that’s the first component. That’s the deep tech.

The second part and what we’re seeing is happening, is the problem itself. You have challenges today and I can speak to drug-resistant epilepsy that really don’t have alternative solutions or that the solutions that exist are just not good enough. So, you have millions of people suffering with no real solutions. So, really focusing on solving the problems in markets where there are no good alternatives and that’s true in this space and others as well.

So you really want to identify, at least as a first go-to-market, the problem — the most painful one — where the current solutions are not delivering. So, I would say that’s really the key. And then the third one is the founders. And it always goes back to the founder and we’ll talk about it later but founders who are open-minded and coachable and are flexible but also grounded in science. That would be the foundation for anything.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: That’s super interesting and I just want to touch on that for a little bit because if you think about science, a lot of it — the research follows the funding. I don’t know. I’m not deep enough in the academic world to know what the funding follows but certainly, there’s policy, there’s government funding, all that stuff.

My question is are you seeing an increase in either the number of researchers, the number of patents, or what I’ll call new discoveries and inventions? Are you seeing an increase in that that’s driving some of this or is it just the other parts of it that are becoming more active and making this a more attractive space?

Maria Blekher: So, I think we’re going to make a distinction between academic research and then technology because academic research is almost the source of knowledge, and the great thing about it is that it’s done almost always without any commercial thought in mind.

And that’s what’s great. You’re doing research for the sake of research, for the sake of discovery. And then we have this tech transfer that is happening. Oh, we have this discovery, let’s see what actual problem in the real world it can solve. Regarding the funding, we’re living in turbulent times.

So, I don’t know how funding is going to be allocated for various research projects and groups and topics but this kind of research — especially when we’re speaking about the brain — it requires funding. Who’s going to fund it, that’s a question.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: Just to go back to my question, it sounds like, at least from your perspective, the real change is happening in that transfer point where the research is there but now the gateway to the market and gateway to commercialization is opening up and that’s what’s a big part of the driving force behind all of this.

Maria Blekher: Yeah, I would say that we see more and more scientists almost organically transitioning. So again, these are not the masses but you would see scientists and physicians who were doing research and developed technology and now they’re starting companies or they’re joining companies but again, bring this like very deep scientific rigor.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: And do you have any thoughts on what’s driving that? Is it just the general excitement around startups? Is there something else at play? What’s happening here?

Maria Blekher: So, I would quote a neuroscientist I spoke to literally last week and he is now a founder of a company in the neurotech space. And I’m not an MD, so it’s not my personal opinion but he said something and I’ve heard it before.

So the reason for physicians to transfer into the tech side and start companies is that they feel that they can make a larger impact. If a physician or a scientist discovers something, they see that well, if you are not a physician, if you’re a scientist and you’ve done the research, you published the papers, you had several people read it, cited and quoted, you gave a talk at a conference — that’s great.

But if you think that you found something that can be used to cure or to help or to save people, that’s a different kind of impact. So, the impact side or the outreach is number one. And that goes both for scientists and physicians.

Physicians treat patients and they have an idea and they’re onto something, and they understand that this idea is scalable. And so, they will be able to help many more patients than keeping their practice. So, I would say that’s what I’m hearing from scientists and physicians who are making this transition into the startup world.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: Just one last question on that, because it’s so fascinating. At least from your observation of all the physician-turned-entrepreneurs and the scientist-turned-entrepreneurs in this space, have you been able to see any common factor or some trigger that made them wake up one day and say, “Hey, there’s got to be a different way”?

Maria Blekher: I would say those are the most curious people. But physicians and scientists would be curious to begin with but the ones who are looking for change.

It’s again, if you are a scientist or a physician, it’s hard work. And the combination of making an impact and now you’re 50 or 60 and you’ve done all these things and you suddenly see something different. The stack that we mentioned and is developing suddenly allows you to see things differently and do things differently.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: So, are you seeing this pattern in terms of what I’ll call more seasoned scientists and more seasoned physicians turning into entrepreneurs?

Maria Blekher: So, I see both. I see the younger physicians who had several years of practice and now there is this tech and we can develop a scalable solution. Or you see physicians who’ve been in the field for a while and they observed a phenomenon or identified a problem and they also have a very good sense of how to solve it.

They have enough experience. And very often you’ll see teams of scientists and physicians. You’ll see someone younger and you’ll see someone who is bringing 20-30 years of experience in the field.

Behavioral Science in Startups

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: Awesome. Fascinating. I want to talk about one whole other set of subjects, which is fascinating personally to me. You mentioned earlier that you’ve got a PhD in consumer behavior and this whole topic of behavioral science has a lot more applicability than people give credit for.

You and I have talked about the fact that it has applicability to founders even let’s say in a B2B FinTech startup, for example. Why should they care about behavioral science? And I know the easy answer is to say, well, because human behavior affects everything and people make decisions. I want to hear your view as a scientist, specifically, why should they care?

Maria Blekher: So, I would start with saying that we’re all human and we should all care. Because eventually, when you are building a startup, it’s beyond coding, beyond science, beyond AI. You are trying to change someone’s behavior.

You developed a new product, and you want to sell it. You are in a process of behavioral change whether it’s for a company or an individual, behavior is the outcome. But if you want to go deeper, behavior is driven by something. And so very often, we observe behavior in the business world and we attribute it to various factors. All of us as humans forget that most of the time, people don’t really respond to you or to the outer environment but they respond to themselves.

There is this saying that: We don’t see the world as it is, we see the world as we are. It’s kind of philosophical but I think we all need to keep it in mind as investors, founders, experts, and humans because it adds another layer, another perspective, to all the other practical things we’re going to talk about.

Let’s go beyond fundraising, for example. You are a startup founder. You raise money, you develop the product, and you are approaching a sales process. So, you’re approaching your go-to-market, you got a meeting. And at this meeting, what most of the founders are doing and most of the team is doing is pitching.

So, we’re telling about their product and the solution and the tech and AI and all the buzzwords. And we’re very focused on our perspective — very natural.  If you want to use that quote or take that approach to a very practical level, we need to see the world from the other side a.k.a. from our buyer’s perspective.

So, they don’t buy our product because they like us. Well, sometimes they do but that’s not the case. They’re buying it because it serves the purpose for them, not for us not because we need to make the sale, because our investors are waiting for their quarterly update and we’re stressed out. If they are going to buy, they’re going to buy because they have a pressing problem and whatever we are selling is the perfect solution.

And so, we really need to focus on the perspective of the other side and be very careful when we listen. I think if there is another skill and it may sound generic and easy, but it’s not. I suggest everyone to practice listening. Because very often, people will tell you what they need, what they think and that’s okay.

The most interesting things are happening in between the lines when people are not saying what is happening in that meeting, that is not being said. And so, I would suggest and this is an experiment, it sounds very theoretical  but your next meeting, my next meeting. I’m actually going to do it because it’s a great practice. Listen to what the other person is saying and listen to what they’re not saying. You’ll unlock a treasure.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: So, is there an example? Help me understand. I’m talking to an investor. I’m talking to a potential customer, and they’re saying X, Y, Z. Now, there’s always a resistance because especially if I’m selling, they know I’m selling so the wall comes down. So, they’re saying all the things that hopefully will get me off their backs. How are you going to listen for things that are not being said?

Maria Blekher: I love that example. So, if you are trying to sell something and they are telling you, for example, like, “It sounds great, but we’re already using company X, Y, Z, and they’re doing something similar.”

First of all, you should come prepared and you should know what they’re using. And you should know not only what they’re using, but also what are the downsides or what are the weak spots. You’ve done your competitive analysis. Let’s say you are selling a new software for office management. And again, that’s a very random example. You know there is a standard and the default, and everybody is buying the same software for many years.

And you develop this new AI-powered, streamlined software.  You’re saving time, saving money. On the surface, everybody should be subscribing. But they’re not because you have the default bias, and people don’t want, don’t like changes, and it’s a hassle.

And you got that meeting in the office and you’re telling them about your AI capabilities and how much time it’s going to save them and people will have time to really focus on what they should be doing.

And they’re like, “Yeah, it sounds great. But now we have a subscription to ChatGPT, and our staff is starting to use this additional thing, and they’re offering an integration.” You’ve done your homework, and you know that the current software has a weak spot.

And the weak spot can be that their customer service is off and every time there is something off in the system, it takes two days to fix and the customers are getting upset. You can find this information. Again, it takes some research. So, most of the founders or people who are doing the sale especially when they’re not trained enough.

They would say, “Yeah, but, you know, they have this thing going on, and they’re not picking up the phone when you need.” What does that automatically evoke? An objection. It’s like, you are telling me that I’m working with a bad company. It means that I made a bad decision.

Who are you? But what you can do. And again, we’re almost doing it automatically and we need to be aware of. You don’t need to put that in front of people, because they probably know that’s a problem that exists.

But you can always come and say, “Yeah, we know that these guys are great. But we’ve heard from other clients that sometimes, when the system is off, they lost two major customers during the last shutdown.And I’m sure you guys worked that thing out. So, you are a completely different level.”

So, you’re not pushing, you’re not selling. You’re opening a door.  And then people might say, “Oh yeah, last time that happened, it took them three days, and our boss was so frustrated.” And again, you are not selling anything. You’re opening a conversation.

You don’t need to say, “Oh, it’s not going to happen with us because like, this is an AI system and our assistants are 24/7.” It’s already there. Again, it’s an experiment. You need to fine-tune it. It should be super customized. It requires research.

So, you need to come prepared with kind of not have a sense of what might be the pitfalls but you don’t want to kind of push it into people’s face. You want to just be gentle, like, “Oh, I’ve heard that this is something going on, and like, our customers shared that, but I’m sure you are better than that.”

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: Awesome. I love that example. So, it’s almost like what you’re listening for that they didn’t say is “Don’t make me look like a fool.” They didn’t say, “Don’t make me feel bad about a decision I made.”

Maria Blekher: You just I think nailed it and put it in words that I didn’t, in a much better way. Shubha. It’s about you. We never want to make the other person feel bad a.k.a. when we’re starting to convince someone that they need our solution, essentially, people are hearing, “You’re a fool. You made a bad decision.”

The automatic reaction is resistance. What we want to say is the other people out there might be not as smart as you are but I’m sure you have that figured out and then you open a conversation. You allow them to be vulnerable.

You can share your own experience “Oh yeah, when I was working with that provider, and they had their shutoffs every other month, it really messed up our production, and we had to switch.” But you want to be empathetic, and you want to make the other person feel good in a genuine way.

So, it’s not fake. It’s very easy to see when it’s a fake conversation or when it’s a sales conversation. So, it’s not a fake conversation, but you really want to be curious and helpful. If you’re coming from, “I’m here to help, and I’m here to serve,” and that you can do something better. That’s the source, that’s the intention, if you wish.

Heuristics and Biases for Founders

 Shubha K. Chakravarthy: I love it. So that’s a great example. So that’s a little, you know, another cute little tutorial on sales, which I’m sure every founder needs because we’re, most of us are technical and don’t want to deal with sales. So with that said,  we talked about the psychology and kind of how to open doors and work around the sensitive spots of our customer psyche.

I want to move now to the other piece which you mentioned, which is the heuristics and biases, which is a huge area. I was looking at Wikipedia recently, there were like 45 biases and I am sure it’s growing every day. So from a founder’s perspective, I know that I am, I’m going to be subject to these.

It’s almost involuntary. Are there four or five that you would pick, that you would think, regardless of which industry I’m a founder in that have big impacts,  on my success and my ability to take my startup forward?

Maria Blekher:  First of all the list is very long and it’s getting updated and you have all this new phenomena and you still have the core. So you had Kahneman & Tversky received Nobel Prizes, a prize for the research. I would say that there are, in my opinion, there are a few that we want to keep in mind and ignoring the noise of the other 45.

And that’s just what I’ve seen in the industry, both as a founder, as an investor, as an advisor, and as a human. Because we keep using our titles like I’m a founder, I’m a salesperson, I’m an advisor, I’m an investor.  We’re human, and we bring ourselves everywhere.

And so the first one I would suggest all of us to keep in mind is the status quo bias or the default bias a.k.a, how many of us are changing the default selection on an app on any website you open, like the, “Do you accept all the cookies?” or you actually press the other button?

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: Ouch.

Maria Blekher: Ouch to all of us. And it’s true for us as humans who are founders as well. So when we develop something and let’s say we are approaching a new customer and we’re in a sales process, we need to keep in mind that the likelihood of people to change the status quo requires effort.

If it requires effort from us to click a button then for a company to move to a new software or to purchase a new product, it’s a major change. It requires tens of meetings and people to be involved in budget and that’s a lot of hassle.

So first of all, we want to make it—and that’s easier said than done—but we need to be aware and try at least to work towards that, is to reduce friction. Very often with founders, relatively small organizations, if it’s a startup, if you’re like 1, 2, 3, 4 people, you speak to your co-founders or coworkers over WhatsApp and the communication is very streamlined.

We forget that when we sell to a larger company or a corporation or a bank or insurance company, the processes are much more complex, many more people involved, and we don’t always plan for that. So I would say, as a founder, as you are preparing to start selling, figure out the decision-making process in the organization you’re approaching.

And as you are approaching it, to start reducing the friction before you are even at the door again. It requires some work on the backend and some of the information will not be on Google or on your favorite AI and you’ll need to speak to people from the industry.

But once you understand that, well there is a budget meeting that is happening every first week of the month. And so if you’re bringing something on the second week, it’ll have to wait and it’ll pile up and it’ll be at the end of the list. And it’ll add so much friction.

You may want to pace yourself and align your timeline with the timeline of the organization again. Because it’s so much easier to stay with what you currently have. So, reduce friction because the default is always easier for humans and organizations. That’s kind of number one.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: So I’m going to dig in a little bit into that because I think founders, we understand it, but we don’t understand it at the action level. So first thing I heard was reduce friction. First of all, that goes against what the founder’s tendency is, which is to say, “Hey, we’re so great. We’re so great.”

It’s pushing the positive as opposed to trying to remove the negative. What I’m hearing you say is: don’t worry so much about the positive – that will take care of itself, but what’s really going to kill your sale is all of the icebergs, all the hidden frictions. Question is: what are the specific actionable insights or pieces of advice that you have? And where are those points of friction that tend to blindside founders the most in their journey?

Maria Blekher: I think I have a very practical suggestion here. You may want to consider to start with a pilot. Don’t go and suggest. Again, if we’re taking an example of some sort of organizational software where you have an organization of 10,000 employees—that’s huge.

Start with a pilot. You want to make it easy for the other party to say yes. Because the status quo, because we want to reduce friction. Let’s run a small pilot. Let’s install it in like this one department and see and run it for a month or two or three, whatever.

It happens. And you don’t need to make any decision now. You don’t need to make any commitment now. If you feel it doesn’t work, again no friction, you’re going back. You don’t need to change your contract with the other company. Let’s see if that works. You want to make it really easy. And what’s really easy and it comes from the academic world where it’s much more complicated there but it’s an experiment.

If we’re speaking about B2B, you need to find the person who is going to be your champion. And again, easier said than done but that’s how you get in. The person who is looking for a better solution, who is more open-minded, curious. Maybe they just landed the job and their job is to bring the spirit of innovation.

So they are on the outlook for new solutions. But don’t start with the revolution. Always start: let’s have an experiment. It’s much easier to say, “Yeah, let’s try this,” instead of, “We’re replacing now all our organization’s software to this new startup that we don’t even know if it’s going to work.”

Once you get your foot at the door, it’s much easier. You’re already there. You are learning. And if it’s not working, then it’s not working, but you are saying, “Thank you, it was an experience,” and you still have hopefully positive relationships. Because eventually, everything is about relationships.

You asked for something practical: offer an experiment. Every customer you meet, if there is this person who you see that are more open for a conversation, don’t sell, offer an experiment.

And another thing and this is also to keep in mind, every time a large company, large medium companies working with a startup, they are taking huge risk. It doesn’t feel risk to the founder because as a founder, you spent 24/7 on your company, your product, you know everything inside out. An organization, especially a more traditional one, a startup is like this ball of red flags.

So it’s risk, risk, risk, risk. And so again, you have the default kick in and your job is to de-riskify. And to de-riskify, you want to reduce friction and you want to offer an experiment. Because the risk of an experiment is significantly lower than a risk of an organizational change.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: One other thought that occurred to me when you were talking about frictions is—as a founder, I’m wondering if you can take that journey that your customer needs to take from the moment they see you in your first meeting, what are all the things?

The budget meetings and then they’ll get regulatory, their compliance department to say yes, and they’ve got to do this. Does it help or have you seen examples where a founder can map out literally that journey and then figure out what are those big burning friction points? And then just kind of try to figure out where they can reduce the friction. And obviously, what you told us in terms of the scheduling, the meetings around the budgets, and the experiments are two great examples.

Maria Blekher: I think what you just said is essential to any founder who is trying to make their way into the market. You need to understand the sales cycle and who is involved in the process because you’d be surprised or not anyone who ever worked in a larger organization, it’s the same organization.

But very often, different departments have their own views, their own goals, their own motivations. Again, same organizations but different interests. And so it’s almost a must to map out all the internal stakeholders and try again. It requires some work on the backend but it pays off because then you are informed and you are not pitching or selling and you are surprised that like suddenly the legal department or the IT are not that excited about this new software that the accounting team wants to purchase.

Because that creates a completely new hassle for them and they weren’t prepared. So you really want to map out the stakeholders and you want to map out their objections if you can. And again, it takes some research but today almost everything is doable and you can reach the information from other organizations that are similar.

And you can use their KPIs or what are they valued for. Like the IT department needs to keep the organization safe or the cybersecurity. When you are coming to a meeting and there are five different people there, speak to every one of them from their angle. And it goes back to like, you need to understand their need, not the fact that you need to close the deal but the fact that IT is concerned with cyber breaches.

And so you need to have a sentence there saying, “We’re using this and this security and compliant with X, Y, Z.” And so they will be like, okay, like it’s not a problem. And you need to say the same sentence for HR or accounting or whoever is in the room. Again, it’s the things that are not said in the meeting.

Maybe no one will say anything, but the sale will not happen because the IT after the meeting will be like, “We don’t know if they’re compliant with whatever regulations.” It’s critical, it’s fundamental or foundational for a successful sell.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: Got it. And what I found most insightful in this whole discussion is that it’s a new view of the purchase process—not as a purchase process—but as a series of friction points, so that you as a founder can look at it in terms of, “What do I need to do to reduce the friction at every point so that I’m giving myself and my product a better chance at overcoming this default bias,” which you just talked about.

Maria Blekher: Absolutely. How do I make it easy for each one of these stakeholders to say yes? Sometimes you cannot know but very often, like the vast majority of them are generous enough at least to get to the next meeting. And when you are addressing them, it goes beyond sale.

You are showing that you understand the company, that you understand the business and you are just increasing the chance of an experiment, a pilot, or a sale. But there are all these other five guys in the room and the ladies and the group of stakeholders who are like, “Yeah, it sounds like a good idea.”

But the IT guy has his kind of he sees down the line where it’s going to cause more work and the accounting, and the HR, and they’re all like, “Yeah, it sounds good, but no. They don’t get our business. They don’t understand the complexity and work.”

You’re coming in just like you said. Like, you’ve done your research, you understand the friction point, and you say it upfront. “I know that very often, again, our customers are concerned with the cyber side of the software and to solve that, we already partner with company X, Y, Z, and we have this certification.”

So kind of dealing with all these frictions ahead of time means you see them, you hear them, you are already a partner.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: So we talked about default bias. What’s next on the list that you think founders should be aware of? What are the other big ones?

Maria Blekher: I would say that one of the big ones—and it comes great with messaging—is loss aversion. When we speak about founders and we speak about startups, very often we hear the message of, “We are going to help you to grow your audience. We are going to help you to grow your revenue.We are going to help you to achieve something.”

What happens with loss aversion and that’s one of the key, the foundational kind of effects out there is that we as humans, apparently, despite the fact that it’s illogical, we hate loss much more than we love winning. And it also plays out in the startup world. We can take an example from messaging and again, it goes back to pitches and sales.

So when you are saying, “Oh, my company is going to help you to acquire new customers.” It’s like, “Okay, I might do that.” But when you are saying, “My company is saving you a loss of five customers each day,” it’s different. Because when you own something, you hate losing. When you have customer service, or any basically customer-facing business or startup, you have churn.

You have losing customers and you have retention. You can increase retention or you can reduce churn. Which one are you going to use? It’s the same thing. The meaning is the same like the outcome is the same. You’re increasing retention or you are reducing churn. The question is: what’s going to be more effective?

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: But do you think that’s really true in companies? Because I’m going to push back on that a little bit. Because when you think about people in these positions, I don’t know to what extent they’re going to be incentivized by preventing losses of existing customers and how much they’re going to get bonus on getting new customers, right? Do you think there’s an interplay there where it might mess with how that effect is working out?

Maria Blekher: So I would say, it’s very strong. It comes back to messaging. And messaging works. You are asking if it’s going to work every time—definitely not. But it happens almost automatically. When we frame something in terms of losing like, “Every day you are not using this software, you are losing five potential customers” instead of, “Every day you’re going to gain five potential customers.”

Just even how it lands, like I was saying it. “I’m losing five customers every day if I’m not buying this,” or “I’m gaining.” Again, that’s how the brain’s wired. You’re asking me if that’s going to be the only reason someone is going to buy a software or a device—no. But if it adds up to a good product, a good solution, all the other ducks are in a row, it can be a cherry on top just in the way people think about it.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: So, are there other examples in terms maybe the less obvious examples of where loss aversion plays in a founder’s day or journey that you think would be better put to use?

Maria Blekher: The examples that I suggested were kind of for the outer communication. But it applies also to founders inside. I think the other way to look at it is: where do I as a founder see things or address things or buy into things when they are framed around loss and not around gain? Because we are also human.

And as founders, you are also constantly being sold to. And so because this is so powerful again, this is just something to be very mindful of when you want to buy something or go into a deal or do something for your company. Is it because you’re afraid of losing? Like, when you are doing that mapping in your brain, again, it’s an experiment—try that. It can change your decision the same way it can change other people’s decision.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: Is there an example that comes to mind?

Maria Blekher: Well, we could use the same example. If I’m a founder and I want to hire a marketing director and I interview people and they’re all like showing me their portfolios and telling me what they’re going to help me achieve. And there are people who are speaking with me about customer acquisition.

So like, “You’re going to hire me, we’re going to build this strategy and this campaign and your customer acquisition base will be whatever, 5,000 customers…” Or you will have someone who will say the same thing but they will be like, “Every day I’m not on board with you, you are losing 5,000 customer”.

Well, maybe we gave someone an idea. But try again. It is very strong. And when it’s used in a correct way again, when it doesn’t sound like pitching, like, “Yeah, sure, you don’t have to hire me. I’m like, listen you are leaving every week 5,000 new customers out there going to your competitors.” As long, you know, it’s okay.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: Yeah. I have to be honest, if somebody pitched themselves like that, I would find it very hard to turn them down, just by way of how you’re like, do I want to walk away from that kind of money? So your point is extremely well taken. So note to all the folks out there that are trying to get hired: great tip. “Here’s how much you’re losing by not hiring me.” Thanks. So that’s a really cool one.

Maria Blekher: Well, I think we keep forgetting that we’re all human and we’re all subjected to the same biases. So it’s, where it goes both ways and we should be aware, and we can use it when needed.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: Absolutely. So we talked about default bias, and then we can kind of see how loss aversion builds on that. Are there other biases that founders can make good use of and be aware of?

Confirmation Bias and Its Impact on Founders

Maria Blekher: Yeah, I would say confirmation bias. We are looking almost automatically as humans for information or people who will confirm our original thought, belief or whatever we’re seeking. So our brain will almost automatically choose the people who are writing positive recommendations and are cheering for us and are very enthusiastic and it’ll all support our narrative.

It’s very difficult again for us as humans to go the other way and focus on the people who are not choosing us and the things that are not working. And so on the one hand, we need the positive mindset and we want to be supported, and we want to focus on those who chose us. On the other side, it goes back to the things that are not saved.

So, I had a customer who bought my product. I have a customer who didn’t. If I only focus on those who did, it’s good. I’m going to get somewhere. If I will be able to have a conversation with the guy or the company, the lady who didn’t, I’d suggest that you’ll get much further quicker.

And the reason being, when you understand why not, it helps you to understand why yes. And to double down, I just wanted to link it to our previous conversation to be able to go back to an organization that didn’t buy your product. If you did everything we said before and they’re like, sounds good, but not, you still develop a sort of relationship and trials.

They’re like these guys get us. It’s not the right timing. We don’t have the budget but you might feel more comfortable. But even if not, they might be much more open to respond to your question. Again, if you’re not come attacking and be like guys I love what you’re doing. I know it might not be a good time. I just love five more minutes, 10 minutes, a coffee, a call.

Just to learn better. What do you really love about the current product? Or why didn’t I want to learn. Come curious, come to learn. If you are coming not from, “Oh, they didn’t buy my product. Like, my ego is hurt,” and people have the tendency to go into this loop. But you’re coming from a curiosity standpoint and you’re not looking for things that will confirm that what you’re doing is right but you are curious. Well, maybe I missed something here. It’ll completely change the way you sell, grow and move forward.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: So, at a mental or an intellectual level, I understand what you’re saying. But I can tell you, at least from personal experience, it’s really hard to go back and hear those tough messages. And as a founder already, you’re hearing all day, every day about all the 99,000 reasons why your startup isn’t going to work.

That’s number one. And then secondly, there’s a lot of people who will tell you things that aren’t true or are not data-backed, for lack of a better word that are not credible, that are not substantive. So, as a founder, what should you do to make sure that you’re using those opportunities to seek the right disconfirming evidence in a way that doesn’t destroy your self-confidence but still gives you actionable information?

Maria Blekher: First of all, I think you’re absolutely right. As founders, we’ll hear most of the day no, and I’m not seeking more constructive feedback. Absolutely, yeah. I get it. I was a founder. That’s really, emotionally very nuanced and complex. I would say it sucks. Like, you are doing all this work and hard work, and you really believe in what you’re doing, and something is not working out there.

I’m not a therapist but I would say it’s really a quick change of mindset because you’re not seeking bad feedback. You are curious. Because we’re all going just the same way we’re going into defense when someone is attacking us, that’s a rejection feels like an attack.

So we are, like, blocking all valuable information. And so if we come to the table and and we’re asking for a conversation, we’re not asking, what is wrong with our product but we’re curious to find out what is going on, what are the processes like? It’s a mindset of curiosity.  I know it sounds vague but again, this is something that when you start practicing, it opens an entirely different conversation.

Very often, a company that doesn’t close the deal, they’re like, oh, these guys are back, like, they want to sell more. So there is the resentment from all from both ends. But when the outreach is like, guys, really enjoyed the meeting, totally get it, that, you know, it might not be a good fit, not products. Would you be open for, like, five, ten minutes conversation?

Just have a couple of questions. We’re trying to figure something out. You are asking for advice. You’re asking for help. People like to help. And so, when you’re giving them an opportunity to help, they know you’re not expecting anything, you are much more likely to actually hear feedback that will be valuable and genuine and not something that was just thrown at you.

Because hard rejections very often like, we don’t learn anything. We don’t know what didn’t work. We can guess. Our guesses are as good as our guesses. So that’s one part. The other—and it’s not directly related but I would still say it is—that many people like giving advice.

People are full of ideas, full of advice, and hear words, speaking, sharing all these thoughts and ideas and you should do this and that. First of all, talking is always easier than doing. So that’s number one. And we all should keep that in mind. So, when you listen to a podcast, not in the business space but a health podcast and everybody: you should be awake by 6:00 AM, take a walk, then, like, drink your water.

Yeah. I don’t see how that works out with my lifestyle. It’s great advice but just doesn’t seem to work for me. So take all advice including this one with a grain of salt a.k.a. Most people are speaking from their experience. So I wouldn’t completely generalize feedback. That’s number one.

So if someone is like, your product is completely terrible, it doesn’t do what we need, and that’s, completely off and you feel that the feedback is not genuine because people want to really share something, but they’re just frustrated with whatever is going on— don’t take it.

You don’t need to take every piece of feedback. Not good one and not bad one, by the way. When you see a company that was you thought that it would be a really good fit and something didn’t work but you came in prepared and, like, you had a good conversation and the deal didn’t come through.

Again, it’s a cliche but the learning opportunity and a relationship building step.  Because you never know who’s going to leave the company, start a new one, which department is going to change.

So it’s really curious in the relationship building because things are moving so quickly and people are moving and if you were there present, curious, interesting, respectful, with a good solution—the guy who didn’t purchase, or the lady, or whatever, the company that didn’t hire you now may do it in two or three months when they are in their next phase. But that’s more in a relationship building.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: So what I’m hearing you say is because it’s so emotionally costly to hear disconfirming evidence, if I had to rephrase it, what I think I heard you say is: Make sure that the sources that you seek disconfirming evidence are very credible sources and high-value sources, number one.

And then number two, frame your question for disconfirming evidence in a way that makes it easier for you to hear, as in, “What is it about you that makes it difficult to take our product,” or whatever the case might be.

And number three, position some kind of mental trick to make it feel like an experiment and somehow detach yourself from it personally so that it’s more objective and being talked about something else that’s not you personally. Those are the three main takeaways I got in terms of how to use this, or how to mitigate this confirmation bias. Is that a fair statement?

Maria Blekher: More than fair. I would say that the last point of dis-attach yourself is probably number one. Because as founders, we tend to take it’s personal. It’s our company. It’s like a personal rejection, and we all keep forgetting it but it’s not personal 99% of the time. It’s the product or whatever it is.

Most of the time, it’s not about you as a person. And it’s on us, on the founder, to keep reminding. Because only then you will be actually open to hear feedback that you can implement and use, and it can be valuable. But yeah, that’s the most important part.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: Awesome. I know that we’ve got a lot to cover, so any last words on biases before we move on to our next subject, which I also want to talk to you about?

Maria Blekher: Well, you can read the list on Wikipedia, like the 44, 4 or 5. Use your favorite AI to summarize them. But I think the overarching kind of idea is: be aware that it exists and be aware that it works both ways that there  you can use them as a tool and work around them or make them work for you.

And also be aware when you are making decisions that are biased. And so it’s not the decision you wanted to make but you’re making it because of a specific framing, because of a specific angle, and how it changes your decision. So it’s really be aware. Know that it’s there. Sometimes just having that in the back of your mind is already a major shift because most of us are walking around thinking we are very objective and logical and we’re not affected by these things and we are, for the most part.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: And I have one last question on that question of bias. So I’ve read a couple of books on bias and one of the things that kind of stood out to me is, even when people have received bias training or are aware of their bias, it’s very hard to overcome it.

So let’s say that you are coming from a place where typically you have the negative position or you’re in an unfavorable position because of a specific bias, for whatever the case—homophily bias, whatever the case might be—knowing that I’m talking to you. You have this bias against me, I still need to sell this product, or get this money from you as an investor. Are there things I can do to minimize bias where I have very little control over how you think?

Maria Blekher: I think that’s a big and important question. I would say, on the one hand, I didn’t do the academic research and didn’t collect the data. At some point, I think we all need to accept that not everybody is going to like us or love our product or buy or invest. There is this, again saying I’m not a $100 bill. Not everybody has to like me. And that’s okay.

Looking for some common ground and people are not explicitly biased against a category of people, you almost always can find something that connects you on a human level. And that shared human experience whether it’s a cliche, but I don’t know, like cheering for the same team, having kids at the same age, loving the same type of food.

Anything that shows that the two of you, despite the fact that completely different groups, completely different categories, share something in common tends to kind of quiet the category bias. Because if you look biases against communities are very generalized. This community is something, so when we’re taking the label of community or these people or female founders or like international and whatever it is from, it’s not female founder.

It’s Shubha or it’s Maria. It’s like, oh no she actually started a company and like she killed it. So taking it from the general to the personal, think it’s good advice in any human relationship and especially when it comes to kind of working with people who might be slightly biased.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: I’ll just conclude with one. I don’t know if you read this. I recently read a news item about a research study where they found that by assigning people to any kind of random group like, pick two groups of people and call the one group the Blues and the other group the Reds and even that completely random grouping, because I belong to the Blues then I automatically prefer all the Blues because they’re “my” group even though it is so random and it’s based on some color that has nothing to do with anything.

Maria Blekher: Exactly. And I think this is so powerful and it shows to what extent we’re all affected by things that on the paper should have zero impact because these groups don’t have any meaning but it does because we assign meaning. Again, it happens almost automatically. It’s not that someone is thinking, “Oh, I was assigned to a blue group.” Things are happening. We need to be aware. And that’s why the way to overcome it like, “Oh, I’m also at the, you know, the blue group”

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: “One of the Blue group people.” Right. You’re a Blue group. I’m a Blue group. Love it. Love it. Thank you.

Building Relationships with Investors

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: So the last set of topics I wanted to talk to you about is around founders. They need to raise money from VCs. Just want to talk about, from your perspective — you’ve been a founder, now you’re a VC — what are the things that founders should think about in terms of the overall VC relationship that you think get forgotten, especially post, sort of, first funding? Are there long-term principles that you think founders should keep in mind even before they go get that first check?

Maria Blekher: Yeah, I think that’s a great question and I would start with: Founders, keep in mind that investors are people. Investors, keep in mind that founders are people. And so that’s again cliché everybody knows that. When a founder is coming to pitch A, B, C, they are in a pitching mode. VC is in a, almost like best-case scenario, listening mode — worst-case scenario, like panel-judging mode.

Both sides are aware of that. That’s step number one. You’re building relationships. Every founder that meets an investor, it’s a potential investor. It’s a potential champion. It’s a potential resource. It’s a potential friend. So when you are meeting  and I’m saying it goes both ways, to founders and to VC. The mindset of, “I’m going to meet this person. Yes, they have a company and they’re fundraising. But even if I’m not investing , I love the idea I can help them. I know someone I can introduce them to. I might be able to give them advice.”

For that to happen, the founder needs to remember that it is a pitch but it’s a conversation. So I would say if we want to distill it: less pitching, more conversation. Make it a dialogue rather than again sales speech like, “I built that, that’s the best next thing, like, you should write me a check.”

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: I’m very curious because I just this morning listened to five or six pitches of startup founders and every single case, they sounded so rehearsed. It just struck me the wrong way saying, “I don’t want to hear your speech. I don’t get a sense of who you are as a person”. Do you see that a lot? And does that impact you as an investor?

Maria Blekher: The vast majority of investors are finding or curating their pipeline. It’s a conversation. An investor is a person.

So you might be curious about them. They might be curious about you. When it’s a conversation, the chances that you will start building a relationship that might will end up with an investment but most likely it’s not going to happen.

First of all, only 2% of startups, I think get VC money — that’s the stats. But when you approach it like, not completely selling. I want to meet this person, I want to tell them about what I’m doing. I want to hear their feedback, because they might see more companies in this space and they might have some thoughts that I didn’t have. And they might have advice. And by the way, if they really like what I’m doing and they believe it, they can also write a check.

So I would really address meetings especially the first one. You are there to set the foundation for a relationship. Your goal is to get to the next meeting. Know what you’re doing — like, be really sharp about your startup and why, and the company and what are you doing, why it’s important, what is the market, know your numbers, know your competitors but also, like, use this meeting as a resource. What can you learn from the person who’s probably seeing 10 similar companies every week? What do they know that you don’t?

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: So what I’m hearing you say is, even if you’re pitching at a competition or if you’re having a one-on-one conversation, look at everything as the start of a long-term relationship regardless of what the outcome is. And if you have a relationship, that’s the positive outcome. And if you get funding, then that’s the bonus but it’s not the expected outcome. It’s kind of what I’m hearing you say. Is that a fair assessment of what you just said?

Maria Blekher: Absolutely. Every meeting is a potential for building a relationship. And you never know who the person you’re meeting or you’re pitching to knows. So it might be that this fund not relevant to their portfolio.

They don’t have money to invest now but that’s their ecosystem. So if I met a founder and I loved what they’re doing and I believe in the problem, I know the space. I know the problem. I might give them a few thoughts. I saw how they responded. That all worked well. I might not invest but I will introduce them to either other founders or investors. So you never know what this initial conversation, where it’s going to lead. You are a founder, you will end up raising. You will be hiring people. So putting this foundation early on, again, it’s an ecosystem.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: Got it. And then, you are speaking of what the investors think about, is there like one invisible filter that VCs or investors use that you think founders are not aware of? What is that filter and how should founders think about the impact of that filter?

Maria Blekher: So I would say there are two. There are probably many more. I would say the ones that I found founders be less aware of very often, especially early-stage ideas change. Business models change. Go-to-market strategies change. You evaluate the person. The founder-company fit. The founder-market fit. And to some extent, we cannot really evaluate the character but at least to what extent the founder is accepting advice or other opinions or coachable or pushing back.

And if you’re an angel investor, you are investing in a company. You are investing in a person. That’s why I said, when you meet someone, show who you are beyond the pitch. Be a person. If you are curious, ask questions. If you are empathetic, be empathetic. But be the human that you are. Because it’s going to be a bumpy ride and you want to be flexible, have a flexible mind. Founder’s journey, you know that as a founder it requires so much mental flexibility. And it’s relatively easy to test even during or to sense if you’ve spoken with enough people during a conversation.

And I think that’s one of probably the most important kind of character traits for founders because if you’re not mentally flexible, things are changing by the hour. So that’s one.

The second — if you’re pitching to a fund, you think they have whatever number of millions — you have no idea how much of the fund they already deployed or committed or raised. This is not information that funds have to disclose. And so you might be a perfect fit, but they already committed all their capital. Or you might be a great fit but now one of their portfolio companies needs extra support. So it’s not about you.

And so this information is more nuanced to obtain and it’s not always publicly,   I don’t think it’s ever publicly available unless it’s like a completely public fund. But be aware that especially if you’re getting into the first meeting and second and third, and you feel like you’re getting there — ask.

And this is something that you can ask. So it might not be a first-meeting question, but as a founder, you can ask, “Are you guys currently deploying capital?” Yeah, they don’t have to respond. But that’s also for you, as a founder — you should be knowing who you’re taking money from because it goes both ways.

Good investors can help you to go through the turbulent ride and be supportive and be of an asset. Bad investors can ruin the company. And there are plenty of examples out there. So it’s a legit question to ask. Again, maybe not first meeting but definitely second. See the response.

Key Takeaways for Founders

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: If you had to wrap up and say, “Hey, here are some three really actionable, non-obvious things that you don’t see out here normally rules or actionable tips for a founder to work effectively with an investor of any kind,” what would those be?

Maria Blekher: First one. Address every meeting. Treat every meeting as an opportunity to build relationships. You have no idea how lives are going to turn out, who’s going to leave what company. I’ve seen so many people finding jobs, getting investors, partners, friends just from all these meetings because they showed up.

So that’s first. It’s a meeting. It’s a business meeting. You need to be super professional. Like, you need to be on top of your game. But you also need to be human. That’s where magic happens.

Number two. You want to demonstrate flexibility. When you speak, when you describe what you’re doing, you can talk about pivots that you had with your product. And, in fact, I think it’s very important to show that you are open-minded and flexible. Because I think this is one trait that is must-have for founders. And I’m looking for it. So, if it’s not there and it’s not demonstrated and I cannot read it between the lines or somewhere in the journey it would be, something that I would love to dig in. Because it’s a must-have. It’s almost non-optional.

And the third one is: don’t be afraid to ask. The question is whether you are deploying capital. Ask this question. Don’t be afraid because it’s a two-way street. These are relationships. You should be able to ask questions just like the investor. It’s a conversation. Relationship goes both ways.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: Awesome. So this has been a pretty amazing conversation. I’ve heard a lot of things that I haven’t heard before especially from your expertise in behavioral science. So I want to thank you very much for taking the time to be on here and I’m sure I learned a lot and I’m sure our listeners will as well. So thank you so much, Maria.

Maria Blehker: Thank you so much for having me. It was fascinating for me as well. I think the way you kind of distilled the insight is,  I think I’m going to take notes after listening to the episode from your summaries because I think these are the highlights. So thank you for doing that.

Shubha K. Chakravarthy: Glad that worked out. Thanks and  we’ll talk to you soon. Take care.

Maria Blehker: Bye. Take care.