Aaron applies his study of people and metaphysics to marketing, product development, and entrepreneurship. His approach is product driven, data inspired, and cross-disciplinary (philosophy and behavioral economics).
→ His background as the head growth at StumbleUpon
→ His thoughts on channel instability
→ What are the things he calls the growth hacking subspecialty of product and marketing
→ His thoughts on SAAS products
→ His mindset as a growth hacker
→ The most challenging company he handled from a growth perspective and why
→ His biggest growth success from all the companies and projects he handled
→ His best advice to give anyone who wants to become a growth hacker
→ And a whole lot more
Bronson: Welcome to another episode of Growth Hacker TV. I’m Bronson Taylor and today I have Aaron Ginn with us. Aaron, thank you so much for being on the program.
Aaron: Thank you.
Bronson: Absolutely. So tell us a little bit about yourself. You’re a popular online blogger and you’ve led growth at a few different companies. So tell us about those things. Just briefly.
Aaron: Our challenge, popular. I just write things.
Bronson: That are popular. Sorry, that.
Aaron: I decide to write about things that I think about. So yeah, I’m currently the head of growth at StumbleUpon. Before that I worked at Mitt Romney and I worked as a product manager there. So it’s on growth. And then before that I was in the health care space, evolved into a couple of different companies. The most important one was simply where I was initially a marketing manager and then evolved into the head of marketing and then sort of into this growth hacker ish position. And and so I specialize in user acquisition activation and retention, and that’s what I currently focus on.
Bronson: That’s right. And a little bit later, I hope to get into the StumbleUpon a little bit more, because I want to know more about that. But we start with an article that you wrote for the next web where you talk about how growth hacking came to be. I think it was a great article, and you said that growth hacking arose in part because of channel instability and channel saturation. Explain those two things. US What is channel instability and what is channel saturation and what does it have to do with growth hacking kind of coming to be?
Aaron: Well, the channel instability relates to how with the rise of Internet and the ability of people to create products quickly, is that the the rate at which channels grow and dissipate is quite is quite fast. For example, if you you can point to multiple, multiple billion dollar businesses that have that occurred on Craigslist that were taken off of Craigslist as an example of how Craigslist lost that channel or is or is in the process of losing that channel. And yet another business is not created that did the exact same thing. And you can another area you can point to is the fact that Facebook radically changes its open graph over the course of an entire year. It’s a completely, almost completely different product every new year. And so products grow and they disappear very quickly. And it’s the same for channel saturation. It’s that these channels become once one is found to be very successful, the competitors tend to jump in very quickly because of the ability of the Internet to build product very quickly. Now it’s all it’s much easier to develop a product now. It wasn’t ten years ago. So when you have somebody like when you’re a competitor competing, get somebody in, you have the channel that successful. Less likely that arbitrage will start disappearing very quickly over the course of a year. So combining those two forces is that successful companies are continually looking for news channels to try and develop those channels and their competitors are following on and neither saturating those channels or or or creating new ones themselves. The another prime examples that have the rise of cost of AdWords, cost of AdSense, as more people dump into those channels, the prices rise and thus smaller competitors have to go innovate and find another channel.
Bronson: Yeah, now those are great examples and thanks for kind of diving in deeper there. You also said that growth hacking arose due to product centric reasons. First, you mentioned something you call the best product fallacy and then you also mentioned the product growth fit. We’re used to hearing product market fit, but you talked about product growth. But start with best product fallacy. What is that and what does that have to do with growth hacking?
Aaron: Basically, the idea that simply value will, if you deliver value to users that they that you’ll be a successful company. I like there is there’s a lot of emphasis in the technology circles of just like just create value or create a valuable product and not, I guess true in one sense that there’s like this other half of it, which is the distribution angle and that’s what the product growth that is, that’s the phrase that developed for it. And when you hear people discuss about how growth is simply delivering value to users, I think it’s sort of coming short of the fact of the effort that you go to the diligence and strategy to find the right channel ever is to expose the value to the users. I have a strong background in behavioral economics. And just because you as your company, if you do, let’s say, factually demonstrate or actually have a deliver user value, the user itself has has a lot of heuristics that prevent him from understanding that value or even accepting that value. And that’s sort of what I would say. The growth in product growth that’s takes into account is saying that my users may not understand my product initially and I have to educate them or I need to go find these users and tell them like, here is what my product does and here’s why. But essentially. The whole idea that the best product wins is like a very pervasive fallacy, that it’s pretty hard to find examples where that it’s very hard to find examples of where the best product wins in the sense of like, you know, we all agree that this is a far better product. Like right now, the battle between radio and Spotify, you could probably. Pretty well argue that already RDA is a much better product for music lovers and Spotify is not a superior product in the sense of what they’re more what they’re marketing as is like. This is the best place for music lovers. Actually, audio probably is, but Spotify is growing at a much rad place in audio. Another example would be TiVo and how TiVo is a far superior product even to the one DVR today. But but the cable box is kind of superior distribution channel. And as you know, the rest is history. Similar with HD DVD Blu ray, like examples go on and on and on about how a basically if your distribution strategy is is far superior, even if you have a slightly less like product value, like, you know, on the objective sense, probably the one with the stronger distribution distribution strategy will win because users will like does the marginal increase in product value between year to June, the superior and M and must superior product actually have a higher cost than the distribution strategy? And most likely probably doesn’t. And so that’s that’s when that’s why the importance of distribution strategy or the product growth it is, is so like you need to have the same level of diligence as product market fit. You need to have a team dedicated to the fact of how can I promote this product and what like what, what channels are delivering back to me, new users and how can I increase those efficiencies?
Bronson: Yeah. Now that’s great. You talked about, you know, radio and Spotify and those are two of the kind of the more modern examples you mentioned. I don’t know how well you know the case studies there, but what is Spotify doing? Like, if you had to sum it up and just like, what are they doing? The audio is just missing, that’s allowing a subpar product to kind of win.
Aaron: I would say that they they basically had more more juice behind their beat. I believe they’ve raised far more capital than audio, but also Spotify utilized Facebook to a much greater extent. And also they had several people within Spotify that were, I would say, insiders within Facebook and probably develop some sort of partnership there. But beyond that, I don’t know, other than just personally using each product. And the fact of like how if you just look on Facebook, Spotify basically took advantage of the offline graph to a very extreme degree and was sort of late later to either properly execute upon that or never fully leveraged the beyond the graph.
Bronson: Yeah, thanks for sharing about that. Another thing I’m interested in is how you define growth. Hacker It seems like you’ve probably done as much as anybody to define the term just by virtue of the platforms you’ve been on defining it on TechCrunch in the next web. So let’s talk about how you define the term a little bit. It seems like you consider growth hacking to be very integrated with product. When I read your pieces, that’s kind of the feeling I come away with is growth hacking a product are deeply connected. Are things you call growth hacking a subspecialty of product and marketing? What do you mean by that? How is it a subspecialty of those two?
Aaron: Basically, I like to say that both the growth team or Growth Hacker has the same goals as a marketing as your marketing team. But the tactics are very different. You drive marketing with with products and antigens as the sort of classic example or is like sort of theme is a compound interest. Basically, you’re developing a scalable and repeatable and like basically experimental testable way of growing your product. And that’s like the only genuinely way to do that is through a through product. Like it’s hard to develop a strategy with existing marketing channels or traditional marketing channels. So typically it comes from your own user base finding some way to share content that that’s new to your platform. And, and you’re trying to develop this, this almost self-perpetuating engine that’s driving itself. And generally the best way to do that is product. Also, the fact of that product is generally where most of the decision making power resides. And so a growth person needs to have that sort of authority to really thrive. Otherwise, like they’re would they could be they’re not as efficient growth. People need to have this sort of almost autonomy or either have an organization that’s that’s very growth driven otherwise because their goals are very different. Like my goal is simply like one metric. While a general product team’s goal may be a bunch of features or overall engagement with like sort of myopic, singular focus, it’s very different from the rest of the product team.
Bronson: Yeah, no, I got you. You mentioned the word self-sustaining or self. Perpetual is kind of the goal. You build something that a product that self-perpetuating, this growth that almost seems like the Holy Grail, right? Because, you know, the system that does the work itself and it compounds itself. The interest compounds. Yeah. Is that possible? I mean, so many people have never been a part of a startup that actually achieved it. How realistic is it to have a self, perpetual, you know, self maintaining machine because of how you integrate with the Facebook API or how you did some other thing within the product? How realistic is that?
Aaron: I mean, it is very difficult, but it’s also like when you find that like it’s when you really you can you can discover that sort of channel or so that sort of strategy. Like the more diligent you are, it’s a really hard work. It’s not easy at any means. And it’s a lot of testing, a lot of failing. And you may you may find like very intuitive, but in the process, you’re also still growing your product. Whether or not you actually have a result standpoint is another issue, but you provide the same level of diligence that any growth person has that has achieved a perpetual or compounding interest growth or growing startup. You are still at least grow your company. Whether or not you change the levels that it has like that often depends on your type of product, like a SAS product, which can be very difficult to achieve that sort of that that sort of growth. So I see SaaS companies as following a different way of inbound and creative growth strategy, while like a more consumer product follows much more line of trying to develop this sort of upward trending curve with like layering and layering and layering on top of different product iterations. Okay.
Bronson: On that. Walk us through that because I think that’s important thing. We all look at Instagram and say, oh, my SAS company can become like that. Right. Or, you know, we we mix those two. We muddle the waters. Why is a SAS company probably not going to experience that compounding interest self-perpetuating machine where Instagram or something consumer face that’s not SAS could. What’s the difference.
Aaron: It’s basically that when you say self-perpetuating, it means we’re just like a product that’s moving itself forward. It’s basically utilizing the user base to do that, and that requires sharing or some other mechanism. There’s very little there’s very little sharing elements in most SAS products. Most of time, it’s like a one player experience, the products that have sort of just this self-perpetuating or that. And I, I was using that word about like basically having this strong growth trend typically have a two player experience. For example, the most common example is like Dropbox or Yammer that have been probably the most successful CSC related companies. And they had a very a pretty strong two player experience and I was given the ability to grow quite quickly. Now there is a difference between like virality and like invites and what I’m talking about as well. Like more often than not, virality in most companies, even their successful growth is probably less than one considering lifecycle. And so like you have to, you’re basically utilizing the continents being created by our users to also influence other inbound channels, not just sharing. And and often in a SAS product, you don’t have the ability to use the content being created inside of the product because they’re paying for a specific service that they don’t want share typically.
Bronson: Yeah, no, it makes a lot of sense. Do you know of any examples of SAS that has grown in a really remarkable way without a direct sales team, without, you know, kind of, you know, just a lot of ad buying where they really created something in the product. I can’t think of one personally, so I’m just wondering if you know of any SAS companies that have even got close to the one kind of viral coefficient? No.
Aaron: No, no, I wouldn’t know. I mean, even even most companies that have grown successfully probably did not have a viral coefficient of one. So no, I don’t know any, any, any, any SAS companies have had such amazing growth with our sales teams. The sales teams itself is like is a sort of a reflection of a growth team in some way because a sales team has a sort of singular focus on one metric and they’re using a channel to to grow that metric. And, you know, sales is is not a it’s a sensory channel in the sense a lot of people do it. However, like I can, I can probably see how you could grow it pretty effectively, even though it is an existing channel because it’s a different product within that channel. So. But, but yeah, I mean, sales are in many ways sales of which having like a singular focus on a metric and moving electric and everything you do is of in a metric very similar to a growth team. So yeah.
Bronson: No, that’s good. I like the way you’re talking about it’s bring up new thoughts in my mind, even as you speak, it’s almost like the growth occurs embedded in the product and a typical sales team is kind of outside the product, but they’re both just completely singular focused, which is why they’re necessary in different circumstances. Let me ask you this because of how well integrated you see product with growth hacking. Could it be possible in a really small startup for the product manager to be the growth hacker? Could that be one in the same person eventually to probably split off? But I mean, what do you think about that?
Aaron: So. And I think whether or not you have a growth hacker team, I think it all depends on the certain needs of your company and the state of your company and where you are as sort of the product market fit level, at least where you believe you are at. And and I would say in the earlier that you are the more overlapping obviously you need to be. And the more that the engineer is a CEO or the PM that has a great focus, the better and just has that capability of being that. I was actually asked this question by an eight man team at a while ago and they asked, you know, what should the PM be the same thing as a growth person? And I said, Well, like the best thing is if you had the capability of the person to do both. But obviously like the sort of uniqueness of the growth person is that they’re very singular focus. Mm hmm. And like growth, people generally are product managers because they have good product empathy. And so they get they could be product managers. And most of them are in some form used to be, but like they choose to be focused on this singular metric. And that’s where they want to like, you know, live and breathe. So like that, you can probably find a growth person that could be both. But like I would say, try to default to a person who is a growth person who could be, could, could do it that could do that and do the normal product management stuff rather than a product manager trying to do growth related things because it a habit of, you know, most or most product or most product managers is to build more features. And often typically features by themselves do not drive growth features with distribution, do drive growth. And that last element distribution is usually not a high emphasis on most product and most typical product teams.
Bronson: Yeah. Perfect. Thank you. You also define growth hacking by pointing to the left brain and the right brain functions that I growth hacker has to possess. You say they love data, but on the other hand, they’re creative and they’re curious. Someone that like you that works as a growth hacker, 9 to 5, that’s what you do. Tell us how these three characteristics are manifested in a typical day. How is it that your left brain and right brain, how did the data come together with creativity and curiosity? How does it look in a given day?
Aaron: I would say like it’s taking and, you know, you’re you’re trying to design outcomes and it takes a level of just curiosity about product user behavior to really understand how to create the next thing or to create that’s really going to move the needle. So I would say that that how that flows out is in the sense of when I have an idea, the idea is usually typically generated by either one of the most probably undervalued asset to a growth person is his network, which he talks to about other ideas. And then so like I sometimes go to that for any ideas, but most time it’s like looking at the existing data and sort of seeing what is going on at the user base and where is or potential potential arbitrage is areas that need to be that could be like low hanging, low hanging fruit of sorts. Yeah. And, and then from that I try to think of like, okay, I know that’s a problem, but the data in the data is telling me it’s a problem and it is not telling me what to do. And that’s where the creative aspect comes in. Because even if you’re saying like, you know, let’s say your conversion rate on your on your landing page or let’s say somewhere like two or 1%, you know, you probably can do better, but the data isn’t going to tell you, here’s what you need to do, right? It’s going to tell you it sucks. So that’s where the creative element comes in. And combining both of those into one person allows or typically that’s Anupam allows the PM to take that data and then influence his team to say, okay, here is a number we’re moving, here is why. Here are the different ideas at which we can do that. You still need a creative process in which to understand the, the, understand the science that say you need the R&D, you need the science. And that’s what what makes it unique is that is that most people you that are and some people in science. But there’s very little people who can say, you know, I don’t like the things I do are driven, like we always say, data driven organizations. Yeah, but the reason why that sort of slogan is around is because the difficult to combine both those two and often they in most organizations they separate because they’re are there are 2 to 3, typically two different types of people.
Bronson: Yeah, no, thank you so much. You also call growth hacking a mindset more than a toolset. So tell us real quick personally for you, what is the mindset of a growth hacker? Just simply, what is that mindset as clear as you could say it?
Aaron: I would say the mindset is a someone. The mindset simply you’re driven. You’re driven to move a number or deceive, to grow, to grow a number. And you do that through like a Metacritic means or that your goal is simply to move the number and whatever it whatever it takes to do that is what you do. It can be your idea. It can be someone else’s idea. It can be multiple tests. It could be saying, you know, your idea sucks and like, my idea sucks. And that’s, you know, it’s all about just the number. And and there isn’t any, like, ego in that. There isn’t any like. Sort of in the best way to say it is. There’s a lot of like arrogance when it comes to product and the person doesn’t come with any arrogance and say, okay, my goal is move this and I’m going to do whatever it takes to do that. And I don’t lead the team to do that. But in general, like ideas, wherever they come from, like our goal is that that number and that’s a very like that mindset. It’s a very different way. It’s a cultural change, it’s a huge culture change versus how most product teams are ran, which is like a run is through, ego is through. Like I believe that the product should do this or I think the user wants that or I think this is the best as I read, this is the best sign Growth Hacker doesn’t come with any of those sort of assumptions. They say like or if they do, they understand that’s an assumption that needs to be tested. So a critic or doesn’t believe in he doesn’t believe his own crap like he he wants to go want the test himself. He wants to improve upon himself.
Bronson: Yeah. I like that quote. Move the number. What is growth hacking, Aaron, and move the number.
Aaron: Yeah, that’s that’s that is basically at.
Bronson: The heart of it. All right. Let’s talk about your history a little bit. We’ve kind of got an overview how you kind of see the landscape. You helped lead growth for the Mitt Romney campaign. You’re now at StumbleUpon. You mentioned you were at simply before doing health care kind of related things. Of the things you’ve done, some of the companies you worked with, which was the most challenging from a growth perspective and why?
Aaron: I would say probably simply it was probably the most difficult because I had to. It’s much more of generating buzz, generating traffic. So a lot more hustling elements to it. And so Mitt Romney was was easier here in the sense that there was a high level of attention. And so a large portion of that was just converting traffic that was already existing. But Mitt Romney had a lot of other unique challenges in the sense of like you’re working in a political organization. Yeah, essentially political organizations are driven by power and ego, which is what politics is. And and growth and sort of technology is very male. It’s all about autocracy, it’s all about data. It’s all about metrics. And so as a mitt Romney was a challenging it’s challenging from the cultural perspective, but simply was probably the most, you know, generating hustle a lot more. It simply.
Bronson: Yeah. No, I totally understand that. What would you say is your biggest growth success that you had at any of the companies, any of the projects you’ve been involved with?
Aaron: Let’s see. Brag a little bit again. I guess I don’t like bragging. I’d say at StumbleUpon, we had a we had a very successful test that used gamification, that basically our magic moment is a certain number of stumbles. And, you know, we’re testing different assumptions around that. Like, is it, you know, 20 stumble, 30 stumbles, and like, what’s the ending? Like what? Like what is sort of the unique profile for a user who is more likely retained to retain? And like we, we basically gamified stumbling to where we improve the number of people reaching our magic moment by 30% which which over the course of a day is excuse me is hundreds of thousands of users. You can reset that moment. And so we haven’t deployed that because we’re working on sort of the finer details of of like I’m digging in deeper about the different the different types of users that reached that point and why, like whenever, whenever we have unsuccessful tests is often important to segment that time. We use it to reach the end versus the control which didn’t have the gamification elements like what type of people reached that point as well. And figuring out what elements of that of that successful test were people who were never likely to retain, who are now retaining, or were you pulling in more people into the into the bucket of being like are far likely to retain. So it’s understanding like the the keep going in a next level deeper understanding what specific users made it is successful test.
Bronson: Yeah what the data is actually saying not just that there’s good data up into the right maybe you can’t reveal this but what are you doing to gamify it. I’m a StumbleUpon user, you know. I lay in bed at night on my phone, I flip through, I do it on the computer. Sometimes I’m interested, like, what would you be doing? What would you be showing me as a user to get me to keep going? You know.
Aaron: I basically it’s a. More or less. It’s a progress bar.
Aaron: So here we have you saying that per session you had to finish X number of stumbles. Okay. And and it’s sort of or base lining what we think a new user, I gather, user, a user that’s likely to retain has an X profiles or we’re trying to get most users to that X profile to test whether or not they are like likely retain. But you also have these that the good the good heart law because the good hearts law that’s saying like whatever you measure you will also be basically whatever you measures is is you alter the outcomes at the same time. So by us measuring against that, we are also altering the probably like what is the metric we’re trying to achieve? What is that number? So that’s what I was saying about like getting in deeper into the data and saying like, yeah, we had more people reach this, this, this moment because we’re measuring against it. Yeah. But didn’t actually, you know, improve retention over the course of two weeks and, you know, you had to wait for two weeks to see that. But what we’re exploring this idea at some point of guiding people through a stumbling session and allowing them to go different directions based upon what they see in the page. But basically, you’re having we’re exploring this idea of when you’re stumbling, you’re having this history and this exploration, and we’re trying to make a connection between each different stumble.
Bronson: So it’s not like a choose your own adventure. Here’s the past you’ve already, you know, chosen. Yes. Make it more of an experience, not just I’m here now and this is all there is. Yeah, that’s cool. And with the progress bar, is there any incentive like, hey, you’ve completed it. Now you get this gold star in your profile? Or is the progress bar enough? Because that’s just the way humans are wired. They just want to finish what they start.
Aaron: We don’t have anything successful for them at the end. It’s just the way people are wired. They see a progress bar and they see that they have X number to go and they just keep going. Yeah. And like, it’s interesting to see the type of behavior too that comes out of a progress bar, which is, you know, they people read more. They go into this sort of hyper activity mode really, because they think that they’re optimizing something. And so whether or not we actually use it, we learned a lot about how people people behave. Mm hmm. Whenever they get an indication of that and now they go where we are applying it to different parts of of our product. But like whether or not it happens in the news or onboarding, we’re and we’re sort of waiting for like solid retention data on that.
Bronson: Yeah, great. So you’ve worked at a few different companies. Here are the tools and the processes and the tactics generally transferable? I mean, did you take what happened at Romney and pull it in Istanbul upon? Did you take from simply and pull it into Romney or is it just completely different universes? And the only thing that, you know, stays the same is the mindset, but you have to rethink everything else. How transferable is this stuff? Can somebody actually learn from this interview or is it just let it go figure it out? There’s nothing you can get from here.
Aaron: Yeah, you can learn from other companies because most of the time all your other companies are trying to do something similar and use their products different. For example, invites onboarding, utilizing a SEO, utilizing social media channels. How you doing? The open grab like you can learn from other companies and you can try like, oh, like, look at that idea. Mm hmm. I see how we can apply that to our own product. You cannot do cookie cutter, right? You cannot like, I cannot copy Instagram’s invite flow because it works for Instagram, right? But in my flow, it can be very different on what works. But Instagram had certain techniques they used that could be transferable and could inspire your team to do something different. So. Oh, yeah. Like a lot of the girls can.
Bronson: Store there for a second. Back up just real quick. He said some things are transferable and then I’ll ask you and I’ll edit this part out right here.
Aaron: Okay. So like I said, yes, like you can transfer concepts to different starters, but you cannot cut out, you know, certain elements of the product into it and put it into another into your own product. Because then, you know, your, your, your framing and your use for each product is very different. Yeah, but there’s a reason why the growth community talks so closely to one another is because they’re getting ideas and concepts from each other on like how are they’re leveraging growth and like it’s an exploration like definitely. So you need to have this idea of learning and failing often to find that like nugget to like get to that nugget as fast as possible. But like I say, the mentality is probably the most common thing between each other. But there are still like key concepts that are shared among, you know, almost all products that are growing healthily.
Bronson: Yeah, now that makes a lot of sense. You also mentioned online about the importance of acquisition and engagement, and I think you actually say it’s 50%, one, 50% the other in general, you know, when you zoom back and what you’re trying to do as a growth hacker at StumbleUpon right now, what are you more focused on? Are you trying to bring in new users and acquire them, or are you trying to get that hyperactivity and let them reach that magic moment where they keep stumbling? Where are you trying to do acquisition or engagement right now?
Aaron: My team is focused on the first session of a new user, so converting that visitor to a new user. And this first session experience, I have other product team members that are other PMS that are focusing on the engagement element, which we call persistence. And so she is focusing on how do we leverage our user base to do more, how do we get people to come back more often. So my on my hook is definitely on the acquisition part.
Bronson: Yeah. So you’re actually divvying up the different parts of growth and putting different people in charge of them. You’re in charge of this initial user experience. You’re in charge of the engagement. And so that’s kind of interesting to hear how segmented out you make it to some degree.
Aaron: Mm hmm. I think it is because both those metrics could conflict. So like, guess you could pour in more users. But, you know, let’s say your metrics also retention, then your attention use. Typically it will fall unless you do something to counteract it. So like you need to have each team focus specifically on one number that doesn’t conflict like that. Mm hmm.
Bronson: Yeah, absolutely. All right, last question. You you’ve seen a lot. You’ve written a lot. You have obviously a wealth of experience and knowledge to share. What’s the best advice that you can give anyone who wants to become a growth hacker? Where would you say to start? What would you say to read? Or, you know, what content should they be devouring? What kind of job should they take? What projects should they start? What do they do to get to where you’re at?
Aaron: I would say that the quickest way probably to learn is if you started your own company and you try to grow that product because you have a lot of pressure to succeed because otherwise your company will die unless you have success. So that’s a pretty strong incentive. Second way is to work on a growth team. Typically, those, you know, those positions are pretty sparse, but like, you know, they hire regularly. I would also say learn some element of like, you know, be technical and some in some capacity, like start doing that. But I’d say that the best way, the most efficient way is to add a product and try to sell it. And then you’ll learn all these things about, okay, like what are different ways that I need to be basically a lean marketer should say. And then that and then plies into like things like lean marketing is correlated to like that same mentality is correlated to you to a growth hacker.
Bronson: Yeah, that’s great advice there. Well, it’s been an incredible interview. I know you’re actually getting ready to go to work at StumbleUpon and getting ready to have some meetings there. So I’m not going to keep you any longer, but we’re very appreciative of you taking this time out your schedule and and just sharing with our community how you see the world growth hacking and how you’re actually implementing it. So thank you so much, Aaron.
Aaron: Yeah, thanks.
Get the strategies, motivation, and in-depth interview with all the details every week!