When I was an entrepreneur, the only thing I scheduled was meetings with investors (and potential investors) and meetings with customers (and potential customer

When I was an entrepreneur, the only thing I scheduled was meetings with investors (and potential investors) and meetings with customers (and potential customers.) When I went over to the investing side I had to change that: everything is scheduled (except the entrepreneurs whose companies I've invested in can call me on the phone any time they want.) The difference is just volume. When my company was 40 people, whoever needed my attention could just walk up to my desk and talk to me, or I could walk over and talk to them. Now I get 50-60 inbound emails a week asking for a meeting. I'm not well-known like Brad Feld, I can only imagine how many he gets. The question becomes quantity or quality? Do you have more, shorter meetings or fewer, longer meetings? Neither strategy is optimal. Brad wants more, shorter meetings (and has changed how he meets to accommodate that.) I went for fewer, longer meeting (because I invest in people and it takes me a little while to get a feel for a person.) It's definitely a different world. There's no getting around that as an investor you're dependent on sorting through inbound and so you're necessarily somewhat reactive. As an entrepreneur, everything was proactive (because nothing happened unless we made it happen.) It seems backwards, but to be effective when you're reactive, you need more rigorous structure and process than you do when you're proactive. When you're proactive, you can make madness work.