Ep 175: Olesja Bondarenko
What do you need to start a Deep Tech startup & raise money? How Theranos case affected female founders and how to apply scientific mindset to company building
Olesja Bondarenko is the Founder and CEO of Nanordica Medical, a cutting edge deep science medtech company developing wound dressings using nanotechnologies. The company recently raised 1.75mEUR from such investors as Superangel and Specialist VC and they have leapfrogged the long medtech time to revenue by launching a product for animals before shipping a product approved for human use.
On this episode we talk about:
Introduction to Nanotechnology and Medtech
Challenges of Building a Deep Tech Startup
Importance of Regulatory and Business Development in Medtech
Fundraising and Communicating with Investors
Scientific Mindset vs. Business Development
Iterative Processes in Product Development
Resources referenced in the episode:
Book Traction by Gino Wickman - https://books.google.lv/books/about/Traction.html?id=88b51eSsiXgC&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y
NATO Innovation Fund - https://www.nif.fund/
We are on YouTube and Linkedin as well
Watch select full-length episodes on our YouTube channel > https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCP6ueaLnjS-CQfrMCm2EoTA
Connect with us on Linkedin > https://www.linkedin.com/company/pursuit-of-scrappiness/
Read the full episode transcript below
Janis (00:03.413)
Hello friends, we're back with another episode of Pursuit of Scrappiness podcast. Whether you're building a business, running a team or just starting out in your career, we're here to bring you scrappy and actionable insights to help you become more productive. My name is Janis Zeps with me today and as always, Mr. Uldis Teraudkalns. Hey.
Uldis (00:21.516)
Hi sir, pleasure to be here.
Janis (00:24.875)
Pleasure to have you today and we'll talk about some important stuff for a change. We'll talk about some important stuff and most important one of course is to subscribe and follow this podcast on Spotify and Apple podcasts. Helps more than you know in exchange that you will find over 170 episodes. They are covering all sorts of topics you need to become a scrappier and better version of yourself in life and business as we say.
Uldis (00:27.894)
for a change.
Janis (00:49.205)
So plenty to explore even if it's your first episode. By following us, you will also be the first to see episodes coming out every Tuesday morning. Head to Spotify, Apple Podcasts app and click the follow button. Also for the video lovers, we are now on YouTube. Great news. We knew that you like YouTube, so we decided to go there. So go to YouTube, find us, Pursuit of Scrappiness podcast. That's where we are. About today's topic. Well,
You have been hearing a lot about AI recently. AI technologies are only one of the scientific breakthroughs that we're experiencing as we go through life in recent decades, even like the pace of change has been super breakthrough and super fast. But there are lot of other technologies emerging that are already changing our lives. And as with all innovations, I mean, you know, this is an entrepreneurship podcast. So a lot of you are probably thinking, okay, you know, how could I be
you know, one of the first ones to jump on something and discover something and commercialize something or to turn it into business. And that's actually here. One example is here we're going to talk about today. We're going to talk specifically about the medtech industry. Again, very fast growing industry. As you know, also a lot of trends that are just going to get, I would even say worse, but that also worse means larger market. I mean, we have global aging in population.
We have a beast increase, so medtech is just going to grow. So nanotechnologies is one of subjects today and medtech is the other subject. So how do you build a deep tech company in this field? Sounds very complex. Let's see, we're here to unpack these complex concepts, explore what goes behind in actually building a startup in this space, rising funding.
convincing investors, demonstrating KPIs, all of the practical things you would do with any other startup, but just in this quite advanced and interesting field as well. To do that, today we're very happy to have Olesja Bondarenko, CEO of Nanordica Medical. Hey.
Olesja (02:58.057)
Hello, very happy to be here.
Janis (03:01.643)
Awesome to have you. Nalortica has just very quick intro on the company, has raised very recently, actually few months back, 1 .75 million euros from the likes of Superangel and Specialist VC known in the region to enter the market. They have a first -in -class type of product in their field. They use nanotechnologies to develop wound dressings. Sounds super complex and we'll unpack it. But yeah, today we want to talk about more
how it is actually to build and take it off the ground, to start up a company that is so technologically and science intensive that sounds already complex, but I want to encourage everyone to listen and to maybe give it a try as well in the field. So deep tech is our topic for today. Maybe to start to warm up, Nanordic is one of the companies working with nanotechnologies.
If you would need to explain nanotechnologies to people like us who have very limited knowledge of medical field and science field, and then probably you have done it already, how do you explain it usually to people? What is nanotechnology?
Olesja (04:17.973)
Nanotechnology is based on nanoparticles, tiny particles in the size range of 1 to 100 nanometers. So actually you cannot see them by eye, but they have very special properties. And thanks to these properties they are widely used not only actually in medicine, not only in drug delivery, but also in many other fields. And you can do it either from kind of scratch.
from small molecules like proteins or lipids, or you can do it by making bigger particles into smaller pieces to get all these very cool properties that you can use to develop better medicines.
Janis (05:04.271)
Some of the science fiction almost stuff I've heard is something like, you you would be able to use nanotechnologies and they would enter your body and they would exactly knew your DNA and cure only the things that you need to cure and you know, not have any side effects and stuff like that. Is that's what where the industry is heading or maybe already at?
Olesja (05:27.957)
You almost cited a very famous physicist, it's Feynman, and I think around 70 years ago he told that in the great future we can manipulate the atoms in the way we really want. So this is what he told, and from that time nanotechnology developed a lot. By the way, for example, in some vaccines from coronavirus there was nanotechnology involved.
Janis (05:36.862)
Hmm.
Olesja (05:56.341)
We have several great startups actually in Estonia in this area. One of them is Skeleton. So they don't often say that their ultracapacitors are based on nanotechnology, but actually they are. So it's actually, it's already in everyday life and I think it will bring kind of more and more progress. Yes, I actually strongly believe.
Janis (06:22.347)
How small is nano? it like a... I don't know if... I don't know, some like... Any kind of examples you can give so we understand how small it is.
Olesja (06:33.417)
It.
Uldis (06:36.556)
you
Olesja (06:38.005)
So basically it's less than a micron, meaning less than your hair. So about a thousand times, a hundred thousand times less than your hair. So you cannot really see them by eyes, so you can see them in a microscope.
Janis (06:50.378)
Hmm.
Janis (06:59.997)
makes me wonder what we are made of again, once again, but that's discussion for more like Joe Rogan type of podcast. Okay. You're operating in the field often labeled as deep tech. Is this something that's very science and technology intensive? Many entrepreneurs might be even scared to think of it. They would think like, I don't know what it is and how to start it.
Olesja (07:06.483)
Yes.
Janis (07:27.561)
How do you start even? What are the requirements even to think of being successful in the field? You can talk about what team would you need or what funding you would need. To be serious about it in order to start, what is even required?
Olesja (07:43.773)
I think you should not be serious when you start. This is kind of a requirement because you should not lose your enthusiasm and resilience. If we sometimes talk that every startup is kind of marathon, not sprint, then I would say that METTEC is even triathlon or Ironman. Even so, it requires actually more resilience and enthusiasm.
Uldis (08:02.901)
you
Olesja (08:08.753)
And the most difficult is to start and sometimes when I think back, if we would know what is kind of ahead, how actually difficult it is, we probably wouldn't start. this kind of ignorance or not willingness to think about the challenges that are ahead, it's also positive. But talking kind of, you mentioned more serious. So of course,
You can start as a scientist as we started actually very technical co -founders. We had also one clinician in our team. So we started like three people and entirely from scientific background plus clinician. What we actually quite quickly understood that we are missing very important parts and this was of course regulatory and business development.
It's not a deal breaker in the beginning. Of course, you can start without those two. Anyway, you first want to figure out what you are doing, for who and so on. But of course, you should have this business development and regulatory competence after some time on board. And the most easy way in the beginning is to have it through different networks, incubators, accelerators and then...
And then you can take, for example, business co -founder or someone who is like more of a constantly in the team. I think it's super important because we have many good, very strong technical co -founders in different startups. But if this business development site is missing, then it's very hard actually to figure out.
direction, you can just fall in love with your science, with your product and for example launch too late or develop your product for yourself, not for the market. So this is why I think it's very important. And on the later stages, also if we talk about METTECH, then reimbursement is of course very important.
Olesja (10:30.387)
that someone wants to pay for your product. So basically government wants to cover it because very often it's also key for success that you know how do you get into reimbursement and often it actually also influences a lot your product development.
Janis (10:52.901)
Interesting, yeah, you mentioned like, think making this match between scientific mind and this business mind and I mean, if you make a good match, can go really far together. Maybe you can give us insight like from your perspective as the scientific type of founder, what traits and skills you would look for in this business side of partner founder late.
Olesja (10:53.245)
Okay.
Janis (11:17.267)
early employee because there could be a lot of people listening to thinking okay maybe I can use my my sales skills or my product market fit skills and join such a startup but like what would you be looking for yeah in those roles
Olesja (11:34.317)
That's a very good question. Actually, we did not find our business developer from the first attempt. So I'm probably not the best person to give this advice. Or maybe it even puts me in good position because we failed with that and then we were successful. So what actually I think is the most important is that this business person still is able to understand science.
because it's kind of a big mistake if you think that it's only purely sales, like most of the other businesses. in some way, one of the goals of this person is to figure out the value proposition, to communicate it very clearly to the clients and to actually kind of absorb this feedback.
from clients. So it's of course the work of CEO, but also of this business development person. And without having a kind of scientific understanding or understanding very deeply the product, it's actually very hard to do. So yes, I think for early business developer, it's very important to understand this technical part.
Uldis (12:56.576)
What about yourself? Founders often think to themselves that if only I had more technical skills and understanding, I would be able to be much more effective. And yes, I'm pretty good at sales and then I can, I can build an organization, but you know, very, very low on that technical side on your, on your side, your strong scientific background. What were the areas of company building that you felt?
you are the most lacking when you started and how has that evolved over time? Is it something that you know catches on quite easily or you're still struggling with some things or those things? Can you share from that perspective?
Janis (13:39.686)
because it sounds like it's easier for you to learn, I don't know, sales, than for sales guy to learn nanotechnologies.
Uldis (13:46.974)
Yeah, we're fishing for your struggles so it doesn't seem too easy, you know.
Olesja (13:48.213)
Yes, actually, in a way you're right. Yes, business guy learns a little bit of technology and I learn a little bit of sales and this is how it works. of course, everyone has a sweet spot. So where to start? Actually, first for scientists, I think it's actually quite hard.
to do business and to start business and there are many things to figure out on the way and I'm kind of still on my journey. I can explain why because scientists are actually very critical. So they have already different mindset. you for many years if you are actually dealing with writing of papers you review and in a way kind of finding mistakes and
It's very hard to promote a product if you think it's kind of not perfect and it's never perfect, let's say. So I actually could see it from, could compare, for example, what kind of evidence could, for example, if there is the CEO is, for example, a sales person, sales guy, then maybe they don't have that nice evidence. They don't have more like solid data.
but still they are able to do such nice promotions. They are very confident and we are kind of rather careful. So this is one thing, why it's actually hard for scientists to promote the product. But with getting evidence, you are becoming more and more confident and of course it's improved. But that's why it's hard to start.
fellow scientists that maybe are listening and thinking. So you don't need to be perfect. your kind of idea and product don't need to be perfect and aligned with all, I don't know, statistical things. So you just need to start and then on the way you will actually do it better. We'll have the necessary feedback and we'll learn everything on the way. So I think this is one of them.
Olesja (16:11.925)
takeaways and what was difficult. The second thing is maybe all this fundraising communication with investors because it's actually very different from the science system and how you're kind of judged and how you're given money in the science system. So basically your mental KPIs are different.
And then in front of you, have investors that are thinking actually in a different way. they look at different things. And then it's very hard. takes kind of a year, maybe year to switch actually to their KPIs to start to understand what actually you should demonstrate to be kind of fundable. I think this is second.
that was to learn. I would also say business is often about people. Sales are person to person. Building of organization is about people, about motivating them, understanding them, communication with them in their own language. I think this is what science kind of
It's a little bit still old -fashioned, kind of hierarchical. With my students previously, it was like, okay, I explain you what to do, you do, and then I'm a reviewer. It's an absolutely different relation. So you should learn it. So you should step from there and talk with people.
kind of differently. So it's different approach. But there are some things that scientists actually, what makes scientists well positioned to establish a startup and be successful in that, so one is resilience. basically, scientists often, already were working on the PhD degrees, working.
Olesja (18:33.909)
working hard on topics and actually experiments fail and so not getting grants. So it's kind of already part of the system. So it's as we know, for example, about fundraising, it's a numbers game. So you go to 100 and then from two you get the term sheet. So it's kind of a little bit easier. So, okay, you get rejection. That's okay. So next.
So we move on, we learn, we move on. So this is one thing. And the second thing, what is actually useful in scientist mindset? It's the ability to learn from failures, from every interaction. So basically, we learn in our scientist life, we learn from experiments. Okay, if we do this, then what happens? If we do this, what happens? And it's kind of systematic way. And finally, we very often...
get to this kind of success or some experiment that shows, okay, then it's working like this or like this. And it's absolutely the same in business. So it's kind of this algorithm is the same. You go to investor and this investor is your friend. He told you, you know, you should highlight this and this is not really important. And you kind of absorb different signals. And finally, you know, and the same from your customers, actually.
They are actually telling you what they like, maybe in different language, in different words, and various sweet spots and so on. So as scientist, you are actually kind of integrator and it's very useful, I think, for the CEO and co -founder.
Uldis (20:21.802)
Yeah, it's kind of evident that there's a lot of similarities between the scientific process and methods and building companies with many trials and errors and many iterations and ability to learn from those iterations. as one previous guest said that you can iterate, but if you're just every time hitting your head in the wall, then those iterations are not going to come out to a very big progress.
Janis (20:22.291)
Meh.
Uldis (20:52.448)
So in that sense, I also felt when you were talking that I hear quite a lot of similarities with these two things.
Janis (21:01.845)
There might be even, I'm also thinking might be more than people realize usually because I know one of the first things might come to mind that in classical startups, it's almost encouraged, it's not almost, it's definitely encouraged to launch like not ready and broken products because it just, it's faster and you just get something out of, some learnings out of it, you can improve it. In science, it feels like, if the medicine is actually not working, but.
making someone worse, like that's not gonna work. But what you mentioned about this iterations and learning actual things, it's a good point in that sense that I think in lot of businesses, you can get very passionate about your product and you can start almost like lying to yourself and interpreting the data. It's like, but you know, we have traction, we have people like it, there's certain people like it. But in science it's like you're very like.
yes, no, black, why, if this experiment works or not, and you're gonna get reviewed by your peers anyway, like you can't wish your experiment to work, which kinda, I think, is a good skill.
Uldis (22:00.704)
I'm hearing constant references to Elizabeth Holmes in this conversation, unspoken truth. Definitely not a scientist there, With that approach. Fake it till you make it.
Olesja (22:07.275)
hahahaha
Right. not exactly.
Janis (22:18.339)
okay.
Janis (22:22.111)
How did that case affect the industry? Has it any impact? People are remembering it or it's already forgotten?
Olesja (22:28.513)
of course. Of course, people are remembering it. And you know, it's very hard to be female CEO in Webtex startup after Elizabeth Holmes. yes, yes, yes. actually, I personally, I don't have many role models, but
Janis (22:41.898)
Don't wear this black turtleneck, yeah.
Uldis (22:42.934)
Just don't wear the turtle neck.
Olesja (22:55.943)
Sometimes I was comparing myself to her and thinking, wow, this is what she achieved. So great communication of vision. And after all it came out, then it was kind of for me also mind blowing. So my only role model actually is now in jail.
Janis (23:14.538)
It's a bit unfair because every day there are a ton of men committing fraud as well.
Olesja (23:23.293)
Yes, absolutely. this is how it's getting in the light spot. Of course, if you look at this top five fraud, there are less females than men. But somehow people are talking about it. People are making books and movies about it. it sounds interesting.
Uldis (23:50.592)
Well, when women break the law, they go to prison and when men break the law, they become presidents.
Janis (23:50.728)
Yeah.
Janis (23:59.077)
in places.
Olesja (23:59.383)
Not exactly, but yes, bias still exists.
Uldis (24:03.124)
Very wild generalization.
Janis (24:06.78)
And you mentioned KPIs and investors a bit in previous comment. I was also wanting to ask one question about it. Of course, investors with typical startups, so show me how the revenue is coming in and whatnot. Your development cycles may be a longer. What do they look at apart from just revenue earned and sales?
Olesja (24:33.341)
That's quite interesting question because actually different investors are looking at a little bit different KPIs, what we learned. It depends very much whether it's specific MedTech investor or it's more general. So first, they all want to see this also, like you mentioned, either revenue or interest from potential partners or potential distributors.
Letter of intent is better than nothing, but signs of some partnership discussions ongoing are also good. But this is one side, and mostly generalist investors are looking at that. For more specialized investors, one of the comments I heard, if you can define your own KPIs, you're already half -baser, because these KPIs have
very different for each company and I would even say for stage. For example, if we are talking about the Nordic medical, where we are now. So we are on the market with one product for animals, healing wounds of animals. And now our main product will be soon on the market for humans.
for chronic wounds, challenging wounds. And now we are very busy with regulatory process. So actually now our main KPIs that we are reporting to Investros is how this regulatory process is going on. So how much of non -confirmities we have in our quality management system. So when we'll be there, how much of technical chapters are filed. Very boring, but actually it means...
that after that we are able to sell and it's actually huge the risk. So it's value infliction kind of point. So we are able to sell and for many investors it's so they're better. They can jump, feel comfortable enough to jump on board because otherwise they don't know whether we can come to the market at all with the main product or not. And the fact actually is that we came.
Olesja (26:53.417)
to the market with this veterinary product. It also, think it was part of the part of this kind of story why investors wanted to invest because they were seeing, okay, we can do also this business side too. We can do science, but also we can sell. And previously in the previous questions we discussed about this iteration and that you cannot be.
on the market in MedTech with an unready product. I encourage you actually, or not you, but people who may be from MedTech are thinking to launch actually rather early. And there can be many creative ways how to do it. For example, we did it just going into veterinary. So because there are no regulations, so we used the same technology.
product is different and for veterinary there are no regulations. We know also in military sometimes you can kind of skip them. So there are different actually quite creative ways how to actually prove that you got the business case and test your technology and get this very useful feedback. What we are getting from veterinary is actually quite similar to what we know about human action on human.
from our clinical trials. I think it's very important to start as early as possible but also clearly communicate to your client or customer, look we are still developing, please test, please give us feedback but please know that it's not the final product so we can do better.
Uldis (28:43.53)
How did you land on this veterinary idea? Because the first time I learned about you, that was actually the thing that I found the most amazing that you have kind of jumped over these many years of no revenue, no sellable product developing a high tech cutting edge technology. But you managed to actually come up with this. it come like based on some kind of
pressure or inspiration from investors or your own idea or it's very natural to test these things on animals when you develop them for humans. How did that happen?
Olesja (29:15.807)
Mm.
Olesja (29:18.975)
Mm
Olesja (29:22.485)
Actually, all that you mentioned, so it was kind of a natural process. yes, they think that tested sometimes on animals, but usually you pay for that huge money that they are tested on animals. So basically, it's a little bit kind of opposite. we are paid. Yes.
Uldis (29:45.585)
Not a scrappy tactic.
Olesja (29:49.725)
Yes, and how it came, was actually we have many ideas on the table, but I actually value sort of communications with other founders. I particularly remember that we met people from start -up wise guys, accelerator. And he was talking to person from there, why don't you do veterinary? And then it was forgotten for some time.
And then it's again, investors' tolls show traction. And then from our team also came pressure, should somehow invent a way how to test it on real models. not so because testing on humans, it's I mean, it's very expensive and it's very regular in regulatory ways, also time consuming. So we could.
We wanted to have a solid model, how to test it on a wound model similar to humans, but not humans, let's say. And this somehow it ended again on the table. And I think the first actually distributor, my co -founder actually found in her networks. we were, or somehow this person approached.
And then we decided, okay, so now we have this distribution agreement for Baltics. We are very happy with this distributor and now we are signing in Finland. So we actually can already work on this business side too. And we established different supply chains. So it was actually also very important for development of business. all this, so basically.
structuring agreements, doing the logistics. So we fought many gaps in our processes that come with scaling. So this veterinary side was really very useful. And I think this also helped us to raise funding, as I mentioned.
Janis (32:01.106)
We touched a bit on medtech and overall its potential. Maybe you can also give us an insight into industry from what you have seen, like how growing it is for different applications. Like I said, I mean just looking at people getting older, they will need more healthcare. People are getting more obese. As crazy it sounds, it's...
killing more people than guess hunger at the moment already. So that comes with a lot of health implications. Hopefully that trend can change, but we know that it won't change immediately, What is overall looking at? I was just thinking of like this Danish company, Novo Nordisk became now it's the most valuable company in Europe because on the back of the drug that, I mean, they have been successful before, but like they basically, they brought Ozempic to the market and...
Olesja (32:25.439)
Yeah.
Janis (32:49.672)
and just shot in the valuation. So how does that impact also your industry? Do VCs are looking for next No More No Disc or stuff like that?
Olesja (33:00.521)
know, these medtech quizzes, they are very kind of focused and these success stories do not affect them much. if they are already in this medtech field, they know that these examples are happening in our own field. Actually, one year ago there was a huge exit. The company, Vondker company was sold to a bigger player, also in Denmark, by the way, for one
I think. But it didn't attract many kind of general investors. But MetTech investors, know, they already know that this opportunity is existing. So I'm talking about Nova Nordisk, actually, it's one of the, they have their own VC fund, all kind of VC. So it's Nova Holdings. And this is one of the most
valued, one of the most valued investors actually. they were there even before they came out with their new innovation. yes, of course, people want to, we already believe so well that people want to get thinner, people want to age slowly. So of course, these are innovations that will produce a lot of money. But
but there are also fundamental needs like curing neuro -generative diseases and we didn't develop much on this track or even this area where I am, curing of chronic wounds, that's actually quite amazing. It's huge problem, but in 20 years the improvement in this area was barely 10%.
One researcher did the statistics. So people are still dying from chronic wounds. it's kind of... Sometimes there is great disparity between unmet clinical need and availability of solutions or willingness of investors to invest. For example, not many are investing in neurogenerative despite huge need, just because it's very complicated. So it's...
Olesja (35:27.612)
sick.
Yes, very much depends.
Janis (35:31.764)
Did you look at it actually in the last few years and also in our region there a of funds that came up as dual use technologies for military and civilian life, where it's basically something that works for both and now with the war and everything. Did you look into that at all? Is it a feasible option for MedTechs at all or is it too complicated? What's your thoughts?
Olesja (35:41.715)
Yes.
Olesja (35:55.445)
No, it's not complicated. In this way, it's as long on our table as option as veterinary has been. So we were always thinking that it could be very valuable for the soldiers to have, for example, a kind of fast curing for these traumatic wounds or burns, fast curing solution.
But it's little bit different development and it needs other resources. Despite of that, we are now in competition for this NATO, maybe you know, NATO Innovation Fund. They run the program Diana. So we were thinking and we heard many good things about this program. So actually we propose to repurpose our solution a little bit. Overall, I think it's actually great idea.
why to develop from scratch in general.
Janis (36:54.378)
and a lot of money in those funds, So it's something to overlook, I guess.
Olesja (36:59.794)
Absolutely, Yes, I did.
Uldis (37:07.286)
Do you see it as any, I guess you don't, but can it be a risk to kind cannibalize your main product and development? And I was thinking about this in the larger context of when we spoke about, you know, increasing our lifetime, like let's say longevity and improving the quality of life for already wealthy people.
Olesja (37:29.717)
Mm
Uldis (37:31.816)
is a very, very tempting target to go after because there's money and then you basically all the brain power goes there and basically you mentioned neurodegenerative diseases and other fields where we don't make any progress then maybe get left behind. How do you see this as a risk and if that can be somehow mitigated?
Olesja (37:36.906)
Yes.
Olesja (37:55.049)
Very philosophical question.
Uldis (38:03.666)
You can take it from your company's perspective. you're evaluating this NATO direction and with the current situation in the world, I think there's quite high risk that it becomes your first priority. How do you think about it when going in this direction?
Olesja (38:09.108)
Okay.
Mm -hmm. Mm -hmm.
Mm
Olesja (38:24.682)
Yes, if we are talking about our companies, then it's kind of easier. So now our first product is for chronic wounds and for people with diabetes and there is a different actually payment model. now hospitals are, yeah, and for example, the NHS trusts are spending a lot of money on taking care of all these people.
they want to reimburse actually products that are fulfilling their functions. basically curing these wounds, the patient is not coming to the hospital. it's everywhere is a shortage of doctors. So it's still, mean, I think this product will anyway be there and we will not harm.
this direction by taking on some military. So if again, if we take military, we just hire a few more people. So if we will see potential there, so it will be just a different branch. So in parallel.
Janis (39:41.675)
One thing I think a lot of businesses could learn from industry of yours is how to deal with an endless amount of regulations, paperwork, I mean scientists must be good at reading academic papers and writing them and everything, making things compliant. Any tip advice for someone in other field, like what they could learn in terms of dealing with this because it's fintechs, it's pretty much in every industry coming in more and more.
Olesja (40:06.261)
No, scientists are not good at reading this and following this. I can assure you. best you can do is to involve regulatory specialists who understand this language. They can be in your company for long enough learn.
Janis (40:12.411)
Hahaha.
Olesja (40:31.155)
what you're doing and how to translate it basically in this regulatory language. This is of course a very important part. If you misunderstand, then you can lose years with regulations. Yes, it's quite tough.
Janis (40:51.183)
No, actually, mixed what I thought of maybe like scientists are kind of good at being able to process a large amount of information because every time you open a scientific paper, you're like, as a non -scientific person. like, yeah, I think regulation is burden on everyone. And it's more like probably question to specific law types who seem to enjoy it and nobody else in the world does, but they get paid for that.
Olesja (41:17.187)
Exactly.
Exactly, you should find these very rare persons. And it was even harder than finding business developers.
Janis (41:28.284)
Interesting. From your perspective...
Uldis (41:31.114)
Yeah, I was about to ask that how much value do you assign to this function and how you say that it's even harder because I was thinking like it cannot be so hard to get a person with legal understanding that can navigate this but you're saying that it is very hard.
Olesja (41:49.543)
It is hard because there are many, specifically if you have this physical product. So it's not only again the low and actually again, you can be a little bit kind of creative. So you can show in a different way. you can fulfill this in different way. and very good person with a very good person, you just will have less trouble. So we will help to navigate you.
all this. And it's very hard to find this person because there are quite narrow specializations finally. So basically very often they should, even if you find a very good person with the right mindset, even with some previous competency, there are differences in kind of eyesores, in documentation, so it's finally they should learn.
quite a lot kind of on site.
Janis (42:52.746)
From your perspective, a lot of people in business entrepreneurs are now getting more obsessed about some kind of health routines and how to maximize productivity. They swim in cold lakes and whatnot. What do you have found for yourself? Maybe it's not even scientific, but any kind of tips, routines that can help others to be more productive or any kind of things that you have found out via your experience that...
that at least work for you.
Olesja (43:25.981)
I think I have very general tips. So I try to take my vacations and try not to work actually during this time. It's possible. We have kind of a replacement matrix. So I have a person who is responsible for these tasks and everyone has. I think people should be rested. Then they are kind of because you should kind of ideally not always deal with all these fires.
Janis (43:28.99)
Mm -hmm.
Janis (43:33.716)
Mm
Olesja (43:56.197)
kind of and urgent things, but rather prevent and work on building and prevention. And sometimes it's said you should work not in business, but on business. you should kind of this resting and, for example, not working on weekends. It helps actually you to do the most important things and to get them done.
So kind of because this is what we are aiming for. There is no productivity if you are doing wrong things, let's say, if you have no time to discuss it with your team and with your mentors and with your investors. yeah, maybe one thing one of the investors advised me to read a book called Traction.
called Traction. I read it first time, and I didn't take it from there a lot, but then I read it second time, and now I think we organize many things according to this book, because there are certain quarterly goals, so we are living in cycles of quarterly goals, and then everyone is responsible for some goal.
and then people stay really focused. So we know that on weekly meetings we will review these goals and weekly meetings are exactly at the same time, so on the same day. they know that we will discuss it. So it's kind of this organizational sort of routine. Even in startups, think this organization routine should work. also, from my personal perspective, I like sports.
very scientifically proven way to get more energy. If I'm very tired and feel bad and feel hungry, then I go running. And after 12 minutes, I figured it out. It's also scientifically proven, these 12 minutes more or less, then you start feeling differently.
Janis (46:14.334)
Yeah, it's crazy.
Uldis (46:14.536)
I think it's a brilliant quote this working on the business rather than in the business. is I think... Did you come up with that? No. It's a very nice one. It's a very good one.
Olesja (46:25.789)
No, unfortunately. I think I read it somewhere, but I liked it. Of course, you cannot always do it. So you're somehow pulled into the business, but you should allow yourself a little bit of time to start working on the business again.
Uldis (46:34.079)
Of course.
Janis (46:46.731)
Of course and that's the thing I mean like we shouldn't create perceptions that everybody is sticking to perfect routine every day every Week every every year. I think it's just in real life when we talk to people we find out, you know Everybody has these tenants these routines that they kind of try to stick to but I don't think any of our guests has said like Every day since you know 1999 I've woken up at this exact time. I mean, that's that's a bit bit more
on the impossible side of things, I guess. yeah, awesome, tips. And I think good insights in the industry that I think many people don't get exposed to that often. Makes us hopeful about the future. Good technology is coming out. Thank you for the conversation, Alessio. Super interesting. And yeah, to the listeners, well, we expect you to see you again next week.
Uldis (47:40.446)
Expect Demand Request.
Olesja (47:40.767)
Thank you very much. Thank you for inviting me.
Janis (47:41.756)
expect request. Thanks. Bye.
Uldis (47:47.72)
Alright, thanks guys, bye.
Olesja (47:49.043)
Bye bye.
Please note that the transcript text is AI-generated. We apologize for any potential errors or inaccuracies. Thank you for your understanding.
