Global Marketeers Club (2025)

16/09/2025

The Dos and Don’ts of Succession
PlanningHere’s what BanyanGlobal’s Ben
Francois has to say about ensuring that your
legacy—and your nest egg—continues past your
retirement.

Anyone who’s watched all four seasons of HBO’s
Succession knows that it can be incredibly
complicated—both logistically and emotionally
—to pass along control of a company once the
owner ages out.

Even still, it’s an important process that
many founders must one day confront. The
decision of who to hand the reins over to
could shape their legacy, and their family’s
financial situation, for generations to come,
so it’s not the sort of thing to be deciding
at the last minute.

Ben Francois, managing partner at the family
business advisory firm BanyanGlobal, recently
co-authored a piece in the Harvard Business
Review exploring the different options
available to founders who are departing their
company, from entrusting it to family members,
employees or investors to restructuring it as
a co-op, charity or public company.

Francois recently spoke with Inc. about what
small business owners should be doing to set
the stage for their own succession—even if
they’re not planning to retire for many, many
years.

Why is succession such a hard decision for
founders, practically as well as emotionally,
and how have you seen them wrangling with such
a pivotal decision?

The reason it’s hard is that no one’s ever
been in that position before, so even in a
family business, you’re only the senior
generation once; you’re only the junior
generation once. And when you’re that senior
generation, you may or may not have a model of
what succession looks like, but you’re really
figuring it out on the fly. And as a founder
in particular, it’s a very lonely spot, so you
don’t really have anyone to talk to about it,
and you’re really trying to figure something
out that has implications that are pretty far
down the road. What you’re focused on is your
business. There’s a big part of founders that
really identify as a founder, and so thinking
about a life where that is no longer true is a
real challenge.

How do you see founders wrangling with that?

There’s two main pathways. There’s the group
that is really clear on where they want to
go–whether that’s a family business or a
transition into a nonprofit similar to the
Patagonia model—and when you have that
clarity, you’ve worked through the emotions.
You’ve worked through what you want your
legacy to be. The other group, frankly,
ignores it, and it just doesn’t come up. I
think there’s a belief that they’re keeping
their options open, but I think what really is
happening is, when you’re not thinking about
it, it becomes really challenging to plot a
course to what you want.

What are some of the mistakes you see founders
make when they’re going through this process?

If you don’t plan well, what happens is you’ve
limited your choices. The choice will be made,
whether you make it or you don’t. So this is
like a Charlie Munger inversion problem: ‘If I
don’t want to have a successful outcome, what
would I do?’ You would say, ‘I’m going to not
make any decisions, and at the end, whatever
the path of least resistance is for my heirs—
or whoever’s going to get this business—is
what’s going to happen.’ So the big mistake is
that lack of intentionality.

The inverse of that question is, what can
founders do years ahead of time—when they’re
not actively thinking about succession—to set
themselves up for a successful transition down
the line?

What I see work out in the wild is really
thinking through those legacy questions of
what you want, and revisiting them on a fairly
frequent basis. The reality is, what you want
when you’re 40 might look really different
when you’re 60 and you have grandkids. Your
perspective will change, and so revisiting
that. But one thing to think about is, how do
you keep more options open? If you’re not
totally sure where you want to go, how do you
start taking the steps that will allow you to
have some optionality, so that when you do
decide, it’s not too late to go down a path
you want?

How has private equity opened up new
considerations for succession planning?

It used to be that a private equity firm was
going to buy 80 percent to 100 percent of your
business. They were going to lever it up; you
no longer were the control person. If you
retained 20 percent, it was really so you
could get a second bite of the apple when they
resold the business. But private equity has
shifted a bit to have longer fund life, and
even in some cases, in perpetuity. And related
would be these huge, multibillion-dollar
family offices operating as private equity
funds and providing capital to help with
generational transitions sometimes. You might
have capital that comes in as a minority
shareholder, which was not really a thing;
there were very few firms that were doing
that. That’s a bit more common now. There are
firms out there that will buy 40 percent of
the business and not put any more debt on it,
and that capital may stay in for 15 or 20
years—or forever.

Another dynamic is the silver tsunami of
Boomer founders reaching retirement age. What
does that look like, and how does that inform
the dynamics here?

Back to private equity, we’re seeing this on
the small business front. You’ve seen private
equity go into all these HVAC businesses: it
used to be, if you had a small business like
that, you probably just wound it down when you
were ready to retire. Now you can capture this
multiple that you’d never thought was going to
be possible. Given what’s happened in private
equity, given what’s happened in the world of
search funds, there’s more and more exit
opportunities for small businesses—and there
should be, given the fact that there’s going
to be many more small businesses where you
have founders who are reaching retirement age,
and they may feel like they have a choice now
where before they didn’t. Now they can sell to
somebody, or they can say, ‘Wait, there’s a
lot of value here. I’m going to do something
else and pass this business down to my
employees or my partners or something else.’
This is something that is happening at a rate
much higher than has happened in the past.

Is there any additional advice you would share
with small-business owners about how they
should be approaching succession?

This is going to sound so trite, but I would
say, be open minded. One of the things that
gets celebrated in the world is, ‘I built this
company and sold it for a pot of money’—but
instead of just defaulting to that, think
about, ‘Hey, what am I really trying to do
here? What would my life look like if I
actually had this pot of money?’ That idea of
open-mindedness and not rigidly defaulting to
one pathway up front, during that exploration
phase, is the most important thing.

09/09/2025

There’s No Such Thing as Too Many LinkedIn
Posts, Says a New Analysis of 2 Million of
ThemYes, LinkedIn has an AI slop problem, but
if you’re looking to build a following on the
platform, more is still more.

LinkedIn is “forum for unsolicited armchair
business philosophy.” It’s “inundated with
photogenic micro-influencers posting vague
life advice.” All the posts there sound
“similar in tone and echo the same opinions.”

Everyone seems to agree. What once was a site
for self-promotion and job searching has
become a hive of AI-powered would-be
influencers. So does that mean entrepreneurs
looking to raise their profiles should buck
the trend on LinkedIn and focus on quality
over quantity?

A huge analysis of more than two million
LinkedIn posts now offers a definitive, data
backed answer to how frequently to post on the
platform. And AI slop haters aren’t going to
like it.

The rise of the LinkedInfluencer
How did we get to a place where well
intentioned entrepreneurs would have to weigh
the value of joining in the deluge of mediocre
content? Blame the rise of the professional
LinkedIn influencer, or, “Linkedinfluencer”.

Their content might be bland and ubiquitous,
but influencers are still making real money
churning out posts on LinkedIn. Fortune
recently profiled one of them. Valerie Chapman
is a 25-year-old who earns $10,000 a month and
managed to quit her corporate job by switching
her focus from TikTok to LinkedIn.

Jame Jackson, the company’s Community Segments
Lead, claims Chapman is not an isolated
example. “I have seen people be able to
generate six figures plus off of three and
5000 followers,” she told Essence.

This ability to pull in real money through
brand partnerships and courses, combined with
an explosion of AI posting tools, has
predictably led to a deluge of mediocre AI
slop. A study done by AI-checker Originality
AI last November found that more than half of
all long form posts on the platform are
created with AI.

Clearly, many of those would-be Valerie
Chapmans are leaning heavily on AI to power
their frequent posting.

Spam be damned
As noted above, this rise of same-y, same-y
posts has generated plenty of blowback. So if
you’re an entrepreneur trying to raise the
profile of your business or yourself on
LinkedIn, is there such a thing as posting too
frequently? With so many craving a human
touch, is it a better strategy to write fewer
but higher quality posts?

Social media management company Buffer
recently looked to the data to answer this
question. Haters of overabundant but
uninspiring content will not like what they
found.

Buffer applied a handful of statistical
techniques (for details check on the company’s
blog post on their methods) to examine the
performance of some 2 million posts from more
than 94,000 accounts. Their bottom line
takeaway was simple. When it comes to
succeeding as a “LinkedInfluencer,” more is
more.

“If you can sustain it, posting more is almost
always better, not only in terms of total
engagement, but engagement per post as well,”
concluded the company’s data scientist Julian
Winternheimer.

While there was a particularly big jump in
engagement between posting once a week and
posting two to five times a week, the benefits
of more frequent posting didn’t level off.
They just kept climbing.

“Posting 6 to 10 times weekly pushes the gains
further with +5,001 more impressions per post
and a 0.76 percentage point increase in
engagement rate,” Buffer concluded. “At 11+
posts per week, the lift is dramatic with
nearly 17,000 more impressions per post, 3x
more engagements, and a 1.4 percentage point
jump in engagement rate compared to posting
just once.”

So how frequently should I post on LinkedIn?
If you feel exhausted just thinking about
posting that frequently, Buffer concludes with
a few words of comfort. Acknowledging that
even for the most dedicated (and AI-savvy)
would-be hard pressed to maintain that
frequency, their final recommendation is to
aim for two to five posts a week.

“Whether you’re posting three times or 13,
sustainability should be the first priority.
The fastest way to stall growth is to burn
through your best ideas in a short burst and
then disappear,” they caution.

So bear that in mind if you’re looking to cut
through the noise and earn either attention or
money on LinkedIn. But don’t get complacent
either. Clearly, there is a flash and
frequency arms race going on on the platform.
Like it or not, entrepreneurs can’t win
attention by sticking to old habits of staid,
infrequent posting.

If you’re instead an everyday user of the
platform or even someone tasked with tweaking
its algorithm, these findings are concerning.
Buffer’s numbers show that LinkedIn continues
to reward a posting cadence that basically
demands AI.

Unless that changes, we’re all likely to have
to wade through more of it on LinkedIn.

02/09/2025

Companies That Allow Remote Work Grow 1.7X Faster, New Data ShowsSmall firms are much more likely to allow remote work arrangements, the report also finds, and the gap is only set to grow.

When KPMG spoke to 1,325 CEOs around the world late last year, 80 percent said that remote work would be dead within three years. A continued march of back-to-office orders from companies like Google, Amazon, and Starbucks in 2025 since then might seem to have proven them right.

But the real status of remote work, according to new data from the latest edition of The Flex Index from think tank Work Forward and Boston Consulting Group, is more complicated.

While many big companies now demand that their workers return to the office full time, a substantial number of employees are ignoring these orders. Meanwhile, smaller firms remain committed to remote work — 67 percent are fully flexible, meaning employees can work remotely as much as they choose, and 83 percent offer some flexibility.

And small companies benefiting from bucking the back-to-office trend. Flexible companies grow 1.7X faster than those who demand butts in chairs, the report also found.

“Even after adjusting for industry and size, flexible companies grow 1.3X faster than their peers annually,” Work Forward CEO Brian Elliott told Inc.com.

The real state of remote work
It’s not news that employees are pushing back against return-to-office orders. Cell phone and traffic usage and other data sources analyzed by Stanford economist and remote work expert Nick Bloom, have shown that while RTO mandates are up, actual attendance isn’t.

However much CEOs may shout about the need for “everyone to be together,” most companies operate a hybrid model in practice. And that isn’t changing.

This latest report just confirms this trend. Full-time in-office requirements may be up nearly two percent over the last two quarters, but half that increase comes from government jobs amid the Trump administration’s crackdown on remote work. But actual attendance numbers remain “flat as a pancake,” according to Bloom.

And most smaller companies aren’t even trying to get employees back in the office full time. “While Fortune 100 firms have tightened policies… smaller firms – employing half the US workforce – aren’t following suit,” the new report finds.

Why smaller companies are sticking with remote work
That’s simply smart business for smaller companies, according to Elliot.

“Regardless of size, flexibility is a competitive advantage. In every industry, at every size, there are companies using flexibility to attract and retain talent,” he says. Take the example of AT&T. When the telecom giant pushed a full time office mandate, its competitor Verizon poached some of its top talent.

Even if your employees stick around after you demand they return to the office full time, they’re unlikely to be happy about it. The higher growth at more flexible firms is “at least in part due to higher engagement: mandates drive it down, resulting in ‘quiet quitting,’” Elliott explains.

“If you treat adults like children and force them to march into offices five days a week, they’ll punch the clock.”

Back-to-office mandates irritate workers, but they also tend to result in bad management practices. The battle over remote work tends to breed mistrust, nudging managers to rely on proximity as a proxy for performance. Several recent reports have documented how this leads to workers wasting time performing busyness for their managers.

How more flexibility leads to better management
Happily, for small business owners taking a more flexible approach, the opposite is also true. Flexible work often (though not always) leads to a more efficient and effective approach to management.

“Smaller firms, with fewer resources, are developing more sophisticated management practices around trust and outcomes, while larger firms with extensive HR departments retreat to presence-based oversight,” Elliott reports.

The best firms realize that hybrid or fully remote setups demand “clear goals, regular check-ins, and accountability systems,” he continues. “The advantage comes from building these practices from the ground up rather than retrofitting them onto command-and-control structures.”

And the gap between how smaller and larger firms are handling remote work is only set to widen, Elliott believes.

Among big companies, “the vibe is definitely in favor of “get tough” these days. Changing management practices at scale is harder than issuing attendance policies,” he observes. “Meanwhile, smaller firms are getting better at flexible work practices and capturing the talent exodus and growing faster.”

Don’t fall for the RTO hype
The message to small business owners and managers is simple: don’t believe the RTO hype. Yes, more big companies are demanding talent return to the office. But that doesn’t mean employees are actually complying.

However successful they might be in getting everyone on site, these firms seem to be paying for their insistence in reduced employee engagement and ultimately growth. By sticking to their remote work guns, small companies can give themselves a competitive advantage.

26/08/2025

This Gen-Z Entrepreneur Doesn’t Believe in Work-Life Balance. Here’s Why He’s WrongAs a rule, Gen-Z thinks differently about the world of work. But they’re not all the same

Many reports tell us that Gen-Z — the age cohort born between roughly 1997 and 2012 and now entering the workforce in large numbers — thinks really differently about the workplace. They stare, they have different ideas about authority, they’re quick to quit, they don’t like the 9-to-5 grind, we’ve been told. But a Gen-Z entrepreneur behind the successful Ohio-based social media marketing company Step Up Social, Emil Barr, is in the spotlight for his very different take on the generation of workers he represents. Barr thinks that the typical Gen-Z goal of maintaining a better work-life balance than previous generations is a kind of “trap.” In fact, he believes that thinking like this will keep Gen-Z “comfortably mediocre,” Fortune reports.

Barr wrote an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal, but his topic wasn’t traditional office work — it was entrepreneurship, which may help color his words slightly differently.

The 22-year-old said in his urgent pursuit of creating new businesses (he says he’s built several, with a combined value of over $20 million), he’s actively “eliminated work-life balance,” in favor of pretty much only work, all the time. Building Step Up Social while attending college, he said he managed barely three and a half hours of sleep a night, then worked 12 and a half hours on his business — presumably fitting in studies around this schedule. The stress drove him to gain 80 pounds, he suffered anxiety, and, as the NYPost reports, some of his peers laughed at his sacrifices — though other entrepreneurs did praise his stance.

Barr is clearly applying traditional all-in entrepreneurial thinking about his own business creations, but he did also call out Gen-Z as a whole for some of the way this age group thinks about work. “I don’t think that we can be, as a generation …the same generation that argues for the four-day work week and then turns around and criticizes the cost of living crisis,” he argued. Turning the situation around is within reach for Gen-Z itself, he thinks, pointing out that his peers “live in the richest country in the world with the highest ever historical income per capita, so there’s never been more opportunity to actually become financially free by your early 20s,” he suggested, adding that “you just have to be prepared to make sacrifices to get there.”

Barr is parroting other leaders who’ve recently poured cold water on the notion of achieving work-life balance. Scott Wu, for example, told new workers for his AI company, Windsurf, that they could leave if they didn’t want to work under “extreme” conditions. Other reports say that dialing back work-life perks is on the agenda for lots of American business leaders, who are craving a return to the days before the pandemic when they could wield absolute power over their cubicle-dwelling minions. Meanwhile, the arrival of AI is said to have abolished the fun perks that used to be a Silicon Valley big tech staple — with people now striving to work as many hours as possible, lest they lose their job.

Barr may have some valid points, and he’s more or less rephrasing the old “pull yourself up by your own bootstraps” saying, but he’s forgetting that the cost of living crisis is multifaceted, with myriad causes — including some of the fiscal and political choices made by the Baby Boomer generation. Boomers also typically hold a “live to work” mentality that echoes Barr’s words, but which countless experts point out is very bad for individuals’ mental health.

If Gen-Z’s reaction to the cost of living crisis and the prevalence of burnout is that they prefer a four-day work week, then so be it: there’s plenty of research that contrasts with Barr’s thinking, showing that it actually boosts productivity and profitability rather than harms it. Barr, on the other hand, said that Gen-Z should think about “ruthlessly” optimizing their “peak physical and cognitive years” so they “could achieve financial freedom by 30.”

Why should you care about this?

Barr’s words are a reminder that the “burning the candle at both ends” entrepreneurial mindset is alive and well — with all its many pros and cons.

And what Barr said should also serve to remind you that not all of Gen-Z thinks in one particular way. This age cohort really does think differently, and there’s actually a lot that company leaders can learn from them: it’s possible that by listening to Gen-Z, you may achieve a better workplace culture in your company.

19/08/2025

1 in 3 Job Applicants Lie on Their Resumes. But Hiring Companies Lie MoreA third of people looking for work say they’ve fudged their resumes or cover letters. But businesses are also guilty of blurring reality when they’re recruiting.

Your job candidates are lying on their resumes and in their job interviews.

According to a new survey from Flexjobs, 33 percent of job candidates admit to lying on a resume or cover letter. Furthermore, 19 percent said “they’ve faked enthusiasm or pretended to be passionate about a company’s mission.”

Personally, I’m shocked that so many people would lie to survey takers.

The recruiting and job hunting process, in essence, creates a situation where a company and a candidate lie to each other in an attempt to persuade the other to take action.

While I’m willing to concede that perhaps only 33 percent of job candidates lie on their resumes, I’m going to say 95 percent fake enthusiasm about a company’s mission.

Your business just isn’t that special.

Yes, some people are passionate about some things and work in those fields. They absolutely exist, but for most people? They are doing a job. They may like it, but the passion that they express in an interview is nowhere near reality.

Which is fine, because the passion the hiring manager expresses is also nowhere near their true level of passion. And frankly, sometimes passion is a bad thing. For instance, people often discuss how railroads tend to avoid hiring individuals who are passionate about trains. Why? Safety.

As Reddit commenter SlowFlashingApproach said, “The railroad wants people that can treat the job like the job it is. Safety is a huge element, and hiring people that may be easily distracted from their work by a rare engine in the distance that they want to go look at or by the US’s last semaphore signal they want to get pictures of could compromise that safety.”

After putting a dose of reality into each party’s genuine feelings about the job, it’s worth considering the lies that companies make in their job postings. In a 2024 survey, 40 percent of businesses admitted to posting ghost jobs. Just completely made up jobs. The problem is so pervasive that Canada is taking steps to outlaw ghost job postings.

And what about job postings that say “remote” and end up being hybrid or, worse, 99 percent in office?

Or job descriptions that leave out the icky parts of the job, hoping that once they hire a candidate, the new employee will feel stuck?

A 2023 survey found that nearly 40 percent of hiring managers said they lied in job interviews.

Job hunting is much harder for everyone — hiring companies and candidates alike — because of all the lying.

Here’s how to reduce this deep-rooted problem:

1. Stop lying. I know it’s tempting and I know your competitors are doing it, but it makes people angry. And you don’t want to hire someone who took the job based on false pretenses. They’ll be unhappy and start to look for a new job.

2. Do in-person interviews, even for remote jobs. Consulting firm Gartner says by 2028, one-quarter of job applicants will be fake. What’s more expensive? Accidentally hiring someone who faked their way through the internet using AI (or worse, a North Korean spy) or spending a couple thousand dollars to fly in a candidate before making an offer?

3. Focus the questions on actual skills that your employees will need. Use validated tests for hard skills. Don’t check to see if a candidate has scuffed shoes, ask if they make their bed, or make them participate in a raw egg drop. Ask them questions about the actual job. You can have them do a short project or presentation, as long as it doesn’t require more than 2 to 3 hours of work. Any more, and you should pay them a fair consulting fee.

4. Stop lying. I know this was number one, but really, stop it. Make honest job postings. Inform the candidates about the actual travel or expected overtime. Let them know if you are the type of boss who will expect an answer at 10:00 pm. If doing so makes you uncomfortable, then stop doing those behaviors.

Yes, candidates should stop lying, but until companies stop it, you don’t have the moral high ground to demand total honesty from job seekers.

13/08/2025

Why LinkedIn Founder Reid Hoffman Says This Is
the Best Game for Business LeadersOn a recent
‘Masters of Scale’ podcast, Hoffman discussed
why being too ruthless in the game of Catan—
and in business—can backfire.

Successful entrepreneurs are often quick to
recommend helpful books, podcasts, or habits
to adopt, but they usually don’t suggest that
founders to take time off to play a board
game. Reid Hoffman, though, not only suggests
it, but encourages it as well.

The LinkedIn founder is a big fan of Catan
(also called the Settlers of Catan or just
Settlers). On a recent episode of his Masters
of Scale podcast, Hoffman spoke about what he
thinks makes the game a favorite for business
leaders in a conversation with brothers
Benjamin and Guido Teuber, who run the
business of Catan.

“This game, where players pretend to develop
an island by gathering resources, building
roads, and forming trading alliances, is the
best board game for entrepreneurs,” Hoffman
said.

Hoffman says Catan mirrors scenarios that
founders will ultimately have to face. Players
have only a partial knowledge about the
overall world, even when they keep close tabs
on competitors/other players. There is a
collaborative element, which he says is
essential in building a business. And there’s
a random factor to each game, meaning you have
to constantly assess the board and adjust your
strategy, no matter how many times you’ve
played.

The Teuber brothers oversee the Catan empire
these days, but it was their father who
created the game. Originally released in
Germany, it hit the U.S. market in 1997. In
the game, players collect resources to build
settlements, cities, and roads, trading
resources and placing buildings to collect
enough victory points to win.

And yes, the Teubers know how boring that
might sound.

“In the United States, it was really a
challenge to explain to people, because you
have to play it,” said Benjamin. “You just
have to experience it, and you can’t really
explain it.”

Part of the experience that mirrors the
entrepreneurial journey are the psychological
and social aspects of Catan. The Teubers say
their father believes he created a cooperative
game, but many U.S. players would argue it was
a fiercely competitive one. And, in the end,
both are likely correct.

“I see myself [as] a bridge builder, someone
who’s a diplomat, and yet my mom has commented
often that, ‘Why are you so ruthless in this
game? I don’t even recognize who you are,'”
Benjamin said.

Being too ruthless in the game, though, just
as in the startup world, can work against you,
Hoffman pointed out.

“If Ben, you, and I are playing a lot with the
people I play with, they’d say, ‘Oh, Ben wins
all the time. Don’t trade with him. Trade with
me.’ There’s a whole psychological side that
goes to it, which is among the many things
that I love about … the game,” he said. “[It]
has more of an entrepreneurial texture, a
real-world texture, because it plays into all
of those dynamics.”

Recent expansions have widened the lessons
Catan can teach founders, while also helping
to educate people about other scenarios, such
as climate versus energy demands. A new
standalone game called Catan—New Energies
forces players to choose between clean energy
resources or fossil fuels on the path to
victory.

Policymakers at The Verge climate technology
conference have praised the game for showing
the nuances of wanting to protect the earth
versus wanting to become the dominant player.

“The beautiful thing is I feel that it’s
educational without the wagging finger,” said
Guido. “There’s almost an eagerness, a
motivation to discuss this topic.”

Entrepreneurs and aspiring entrepreneurs can
benefit from those same educational qualities,
Hoffman says.

“Catan truly is one of the best ways to get
you into the problem-solving mindset that
entrepreneurship requires.

05/08/2025

This Female-Led AI Company Helps Fix Manufacturing Problems in Real Time—or Before They HappenSixSense just raised an $8.5 million Series A to develop ‘factories that think.

SixSense is using AI to shore up semiconductor production—and the female-founded startup just raised $8.5 million to do it.

SixSense is developing “factories that think” to bring what it calls “intelligent automation” to the incredibly complex and important semiconductor industry, according to its website. What this means in practice is that the company’s AI platform leverages data to catch issues early, improve output, and increase control over production.

The Singapore-based SixSense was co-founded in 2018 by CEO Akanksha Jagwani and CTO Avni Agarwal. With a background in mechanical engineering, Jagwani leads business development and efforts to partner with semiconductor fabrication plants to deploy SixSense’s AI. Major semiconductor makers including GlobalFoundries and JCET already use SixSense’s technology, according to TechCrunch. Agarwal leverages her background in computer engineering to lead the company’s tech and product vision.

“We’re already working with fabs in Singapore, Malaysia, Taiwan, and Israel, and are now expanding into the U.S.,” Agarwal told TechCrunch.

Although SixSense is based in Singapore, in the U.S. at least there is still a significant disparity in VC funding for women-led companies. According to data from Pitchbook, women-only teams secured roughly 2 percent of VC deal value in 2024, whereas companies with both a female and male co-founder secured about 22 percent that year.

There is also indication that women are growing and advancing at VC firms themselves. Women now occupy close to 19 percent of leading investor roles in firms across the U.S., The Wall Street Journal reported. At “mega venture firms,” which manage $3 billion or more, only about a dozen managing partners are women.

SixSense’s latest round of funding brings its total to about $12 million, TechCrunch reported. Peak XV’s Surge seed platform led the round with participation from Alpha Intelligence Capital, FEBE, and more, according to TechCrunch.

Global Marketeers Club

16/09/2025

09/09/2025

02/09/2025

26/08/2025

19/08/2025

13/08/2025

05/08/2025

Address

Website

Alerts

Shortcuts

Share