Update: Marc Andreessen, who was cited in the NYT article, further elaborates his perspective in a blog post titled Serial Entrepreneurs and Today’s Silicon Valley.

Summary: Max Levchik, the founder of PayPal, will never stop creating new Internet companies. I believe it would be even more extraordinary to succeed at something completely different.

I just read this astonishing article in the New York Times that makes me realize the full extent to which Max Levchik, the founder of PayPal, earned his money.

During his PayPal days, Mr. Levchin was so committed to seeing the company succeed that he often sacked out at the office in a sleeping bag he kept under his desk. Considering that he described his apartment during some of this time as “scary,” that had a certain logic. Cardboard boxes served as his living room furniture; a discarded computer desk was his dining room table.

These days, despite the phenomenal success of PayPal, which gave him the bulk of a fortune worth around $100 million, Mr. Levchin continues to work an average of 15 to 18 hours a day.

He goes on to calculate that there are too many hours in a day to just smell the roses:

“I enjoy sitting on nice beaches and hanging out with my girlfriend and playing with my dog, but that’s three hours a day,” Mr. Levchin said. “What about the remaining 18 hours I’m awake?”

Wait a minute… 18 plus 3 is 21… there are 24 hours in a day… 24 minus 21 is 3… this guy only sleeps three hours a night? He must be like Lance Armstrong: yes, a gifted athlete, but also genetically blessed to be physically capable of pulling off stunts of which mere mortals couldn’t begin to conceive. (Lance’s heart, for example, is 30% bigger than average for someone his size.)

Back to Max. He discovered his irrepressible worker demon after he sold PayPal and found himself twiddling his thumbs:

He thought he would spend the time after the sale “exploring my inner self.” Instead, he spent the better part of 12 months “feeling worthless and stupid” and baffled by what he might do with the remainder of his life. He felt too young to retire or downshift a gear or two — and too restless to become a philanthropist.

The article makes Max out to be the victim of an extra helping of the Type A gene. I wonder, though, if perhaps he just wasn’t able to think of anything better to do than to start another company and spend 98% of his waking hours focused on it. Fortunately, I have a suggestion for him and all the other Maxes out there.

What should you do after the first $100 million? Change the metric.

Max is competing against himself in his bid for ever-greater success, as evidenced by his criteria for satisfaction with his latest venture:

Mr. Levchin acknowledges that he has already earned more money than he could ever spend. But he said he would not consider Slide.com, the photo and video sharing site he founded in 2005 that is still in its start-up phase, a success unless it is ultimately worth, in real dollars, “at least $1.54 billion”— the price eBay paid for PayPal.

“Otherwise,” he asked rhetorically, “what have I learned?”

It’s possible, though, that doing the same thing a little bit better doesn’t mean you’ve learned more; it means that you’re staying in your comfort zone. If you’ve already proven that you can succeed at one metric, try a different one. Michael Jordan knew that everyone else knew he was the greatest basketball player in the world, so he tried his hand at baseball. Granted, he wasn’t that spectacular at it, but, hey, after you’ve earned $100 million, you can afford to take a few risks.

So if you’ve just sold your technology startup and you’re wondering what to do next, I propose that you give something else a go. Try to be a massive success at something other than a Silicon Valley technology startup. Climb a mountain. Try to win an Olympic gold medal or a chess championship.

Look at Richard Branson. Music. Aviation. Cellular telephony. Nobody can accuse him of only succeeding because he’s an industry insider.

Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert, talks about the benefits of being in the top 25% at two or three things (via Marc Andreessen):

If you want an average successful life, it doesn’t take much planning. Just stay out of trouble, go to school, and apply for jobs you might like. But if you want something extraordinary, you have two paths:

1. Become the best at one specific thing.
2. Become very good (top 25%) at two or more things.

The first strategy is difficult to the point of near impossibility. Few people will ever play in the NBA or make a platinum album. I don’t recommend anyone even try.

The second strategy is fairly easy. Everyone has at least a few areas in which they could be in the top 25% with some effort. In my case, I can draw better than most people, but I’m hardly an artist. And I’m not any funnier than the average standup comedian who never makes it big, but I’m funnier than most people. The magic is that few people can draw well and write jokes. It’s the combination of the two that makes what I do so rare. And when you add in my business background, suddenly I had a topic that few cartoonists could hope to understand without living it.

I always advise young people to become good public speakers (top 25%). Anyone can do it with practice. If you add that talent to any other, suddenly you’re the boss of the people who have only one skill. Or get a degree in business on top of your engineering degree, law degree, medical degree, science degree, or whatever. Suddenly you’re in charge, or maybe you’re starting your own company using your combined knowledge.

Capitalism rewards things that are both rare and valuable. You make yourself rare by combining two or more “pretty goods” until no one else has your mix. I didn’t spend much time with the script supervisor, but it was obvious that her verbal/writing skills were in the top tier as well as her people skills. I’m guessing she also has a high attention to detail, and perhaps a few other skills in the mix. Probably none of those skills are best in the world, but together they make a strong package. Apparently she’s been in high demand for decades.

At least one of the skills in your mixture should involve communication, either written or verbal. And it could be as simple as learning how to sell more effectively than 75% of the world. That’s one. Now add to that whatever your passion is, and you have two, because that’s the thing you’ll easily put enough energy into to reach the top 25%. If you have an aptitude for a third skill, perhaps business or public speaking, develop that too.

It sounds like generic advice, but you’d be hard pressed to find any successful person who didn’t have about three skills in the top 25%.

That’s great advice, but now imagine the possibilities if you could be the best, not just in the top 25%, but The Best, at two or three things. What would that feel like? How extraordinary would that be?

Would you want to? Are you driven in that way? And what would your two or three things be?

This entry was posted on Monday, October 29th, 2007 at 11:29 am and is filed under People matter. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.