July 28, 2025 • 13 mins
Vanta Raises $150M, Valuation Hits $4 Billion, Serving 12,000 Customers Including Atlassian
Amazon's Acquisition of AI Wearables Startup Bee Raises Privacy Concerns
Why your power users are your biggest product risk
#startups, #powerusers, #productrisk, #Vanta, #Amazon, #AIwearables, #privacyconcerns
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Welcome to Innovation Pulse, your quick, no-nonsense update covering the latest in startups and
(00:10):
entrepreneurship news.
First, we will cover the latest news.
Vanta, a cybersecurity-compliant startup, raised $150 million at a $4 billion valuation
while Amazon acquired AI wearables Startup B.
After this, we'll dive deep into the power-user paradox and how it shapes product development.
(00:32):
Stay tuned.
Vanta, a San Francisco-based startup, is revolutionizing how businesses manage cybersecurity and privacy
compliance.
The company recently concluded a $150 million funding round, boosting its valuation to approximately
$4 billion up from $2,445 million last year.
(00:57):
Vanta's software aids companies in adhering to cybersecurity frameworks like SoC2 and
ISO 27001 crucial for mitigating risks from cyber attacks.
This is particularly relevant as incidents like the recent Microsoft SharePoint vulnerability
highlight the importance of robust cybersecurity measures.
(01:20):
Co-founded by Christina Catiopo and Eric Goldman in 2018, Vanta has rapidly grown to employ
over 1,000 people and serves more than 12,000 customers, including tech giants, Atlassian,
and Snowflake.
The startup's ability to expedite security reviews makes it valuable not only to tech
companies but also to those outside the industry.
(01:44):
This efficiency allows businesses to engage with external suppliers more swiftly, enhancing
operational agility.
Investors in the latest round include CrowdStrike Ventures, Wellington Management, Atlassian
Ventures, JP Morgan Chase, and Sequoia Capital.
Since 2021, Vanta has raised a total of $504 million, underscoring its strong market position
(02:10):
and growth potential.
Vanta has acquired B and AI wearables startup, which offers a Fitbit-like bracelet and an
Apple Watch app that capture ambient sound to create reminders and to-do lists.
B's innovation lies in its aim to develop a cloud phone that mirrors user devices, providing
(02:34):
seamless access to accounts and notifications.
This makes B's wearable a personal assistant that encourages user reflection and memory,
offering a more intimate and accessible AI experience.
The devices are priced at $49.99, with a $19 monthly subscription, making them more accessible
(02:58):
compared to competitors like the Humane AI pin at $499.
These privacy policies claim that users can delete data anytime and that audio recordings
aren't stored or used for AI training, although its AI learns from user data.
The startup plans on implementing boundaries to pause learning and on-device AI processing
(03:22):
for enhanced privacy.
Amazon's acquisition of B indicates a shift towards developing wearable AI devices, distinct
from its existing Echo speaker line.
However, the acquisition raises questions about data management, given Amazon's controversial
history with user data privacy.
(03:44):
And now, pivot our discussion towards the main entrepreneurship topic.
Hey everyone, I'm Dana, and welcome back to Innovation Pulse, where we dig into the
ideas that are reshaping how we build and think about products.
Today I've got Yakov Lasker with me, a product strategist who's been in the trenches for
(04:07):
over a decade.
Yakov, you sent me this article that honestly made me question everything I thought I knew
about user feedback.
Oh, Dana, wait until you hear this.
So picture this.
You're a product manager, quarterly review comes around, and your sales director walks
in with a detailed roadmap.
Sounds great, right?
Except it's not your roadmap.
(04:29):
It's theirs.
They've basically designed your entire product strategy around what they think will close
more deals.
Hold up, that sounds like a dream scenario.
Your biggest advocates telling you exactly what they want.
That's what you'd think.
But here's the kicker.
This company wasn't building a tool for sales directors.
(04:49):
They were building a platform for everyone from part-time customer service reps to C-suite
executives.
The sales team's wish list would have turned it into something completely unusable for
95% of their actual users.
Okay, so we're talking about the people who love your product most, actually.
Poisoning it for everyone else?
(05:10):
Exactly.
It's what the article calls the power user paradox.
Think about it like this.
Imagine if your local coffee shop only listened to the guy who comes in five times a day and
orders the most complicated drink possible.
Pretty soon, they'd have a menu that intimidates everyone else who just wants a simple cup
(05:31):
of coffee.
Oh wow, that's a perfect analogy.
So let's break this down step by step because I think there are some fundamental concepts
we need to understand here.
First, what exactly makes someone a power user and why do their voices carry so much
weight?
Great question.
Power users are typically your most engaged customers.
They use your product daily.
(05:53):
They know every feature inside and out.
And here's the crucial part.
Their vocal.
They show up to user interviews.
They submit detailed feature requests.
They're active in your community forums.
From a product manager's perspective, they feel like the voice of your user base.
But that's where the trap lies, right?
(06:15):
Because the people who have time to write detailed feature requests aren't necessarily
representative of your broader audience.
Bingo.
And here's where it gets really interesting.
The article shares this perfect example.
A company built this amazing call transfer feature because their power users in the call
center were super vocal about how clunky the existing process was.
(06:39):
They painted this vivid picture of lost deals and frustrated customers.
Let me guess.
They spent months building it and then…
Adoption was absolutely terrible.
Turns out most agents rarely transferred calls at all.
The vocal minority had convinced them to solve a problem that affected maybe 5% of their
user base.
(07:00):
Meanwhile, everyone was struggling with slow load times and confusing navigation.
Basic usability issues that would have helped 100% of users.
This is fascinating because it reveals something deeper about how we process feedback, doesn't
it?
It's like our brains are wired to pay more attention to the loudest voices rather than
the most representative ones.
(07:21):
Absolutely, and there's actually a psychological principle at work here.
In research, we call it the availability heuristic.
We tend to overweight information that's easily recalled or recently encountered, so
when your power users are constantly in your face with feedback, their problems feel more
urgent and widespread than they actually are.
(07:42):
So how do you keep these champions engaged without letting them hijack your entire strategy?
Because surely you don't want to alienate your biggest advocates.
This is where the article gets really smart.
Instead of just saying no and risking their advocacy, the company got radically transparent
about their broader mission.
They walked the sales leaders through their vision for mass adoption and explained how
(08:06):
their success actually depended on serving a much wider audience.
Wait, that reminds me of something.
Wasn't there a situation with LinkedIn where they had to balance power user demands with
broader platform health?
Oh, perfect example.
LinkedIn's in-mail feature was generating significant revenue from power users, recruiters
and sales professionals who were sending tons of messages.
(08:29):
But it was also increasing spam and degrading trust for everyone else on the platform.
They had to figure out how to serve their paying customers without poisoning the well
for casual users.
So it's not just about individual features.
It's about ecosystem health.
That's a much more complex way of thinking about product decisions.
(08:50):
Exactly.
This connects to something bigger that I think a lot of people miss.
When Tinder added aggressive fraud detection because power users were concerned about fake
profiles, it accidentally started blocking legitimate high value users.
Every change ripples through your entire ecosystem in ways you might not anticipate.
(09:11):
Okay, so this is starting to feel overwhelming.
If you're a product manager listening to this, how do you actually make these decisions?
Is there a framework for thinking through this complexity?
The article lays out this brilliant four-part framework.
First is what they call ecosystem impact assessment.
Before building any power user requested feature, you ask whether it could negatively impact
(09:36):
non-power users.
If it could, you either contain it through premium tiers or find alternative solutions.
So it's like creating separate swimming pools instead of mixing everyone in the same water.
Perfect analogy.
The second part is second order effects audit.
Mapping out how a feature might ripple through your entire user base.
(09:58):
Then there's the resource allocation rule.
Roughly 70% of development resources to mainstream user needs, 30% to power user requirements.
That ratio is really specific.
Is that based on research or more of a rule of thumb?
It's more of a guiding principle, but it makes intuitive sense when you think about
it.
(10:19):
You want to maintain that balance between keeping your product accessible while still innovating
for advanced use cases.
The last part of the framework is what they call champion conversion strategy.
Exploring whether you can solve power users underlying needs through better communication
or documentation rather than building new features.
(10:39):
Oh, that's clever.
Sometimes the solution isn't a new feature, but helping them use existing features more
effectively.
Exactly.
And here's what I find most interesting about all this.
It's not really about ignoring power users.
It's about getting better at extracting insights from them without letting them drive the roadmap.
So what does this mean for someone listening who maybe isn't a product manager but works
(11:02):
with products every day?
How should this change how they think about giving feedback?
That's such a good question.
I think it means being more aware of your own perspective and its limitations.
When you're giving feedback, ask yourself, am I representing just my own needs or the
needs of people who use this differently than I do?
(11:24):
And if you're in a leadership position, be conscious of how your voice might be disproportionately
loud.
It also seems like it changes how we should think about user research more broadly.
Instead of just listening to who speaks up, we need to actively seek out the quiet majority.
Absolutely.
And there's a practical takeaway here for anyone building products.
(11:45):
The next time your most vocal user presents you with a detailed feature request, pause
and ask yourself, are we solving a problem for the 5% or building value for the 95%?
That's such a powerful reframing.
Instead of what do our best customers want, it becomes what do most of our customers need.
And here's the thing that really gets me excited about this framework.
(12:08):
It's not just about products.
You can apply this thinking to team management, to organizational strategy, even to personal
decision making.
Any time you're getting loud feedback from a vocal minority, it's worth asking whether
that represents the broader reality.
So next time you're in a meeting and the most senior person in the room has strong opinions
(12:29):
about the direction you should take, remember that volume doesn't equal validity.
Thanks for walking us through this, Yakov.
This has completely shifted how I think about feedback and advocacy.
Thanks for having me, Donna.
And to everyone listening, keep questioning those assumptions.
Your quiet users might have the most important things to say.
(12:50):
That's Innovation Pulse for today.
I'm Donna.
Catch you next time when we dive into why the best ideas often come from the edges,
not the center.
And that wraps up today's podcast.
Vanta's impressive $150 million funding round underscores its role in enhancing cybersecurity
(13:12):
compliance, while the Lasker's exploration of the power user paradox offers a framework
for balancing product development to meet the needs of both advanced and mainstream
users.
Don't forget to like, subscribe, and share this episode with your friends and colleagues
so they can also stay updated on the latest news and gain powerful insights.
(13:35):
Stay tuned for more updates.
Welcome to Innovation Pulse, your quick, no-nonsense update covering the latest in startups and
(00:10):
entrepreneurship news.
First, we will cover the latest news.
Vanta, a cybersecurity-compliant startup, raised $150 million at a $4 billion valuation
while Amazon acquired AI wearables Startup B.
After this, we'll dive deep into the power-user paradox and how it shapes product development.
(00:32):
Stay tuned.
Vanta, a San Francisco-based startup, is revolutionizing how businesses manage cybersecurity and privacy
compliance.
The company recently concluded a $150 million funding round, boosting its valuation to approximately
$4 billion up from $2,445 million last year.
(00:57):
Vanta's software aids companies in adhering to cybersecurity frameworks like SoC2 and
ISO 27001 crucial for mitigating risks from cyber attacks.
This is particularly relevant as incidents like the recent Microsoft SharePoint vulnerability
highlight the importance of robust cybersecurity measures.
(01:20):
Co-founded by Christina Catiopo and Eric Goldman in 2018, Vanta has rapidly grown to employ
over 1,000 people and serves more than 12,000 customers, including tech giants, Atlassian,
and Snowflake.
The startup's ability to expedite security reviews makes it valuable not only to tech
companies but also to those outside the industry.
(01:44):
This efficiency allows businesses to engage with external suppliers more swiftly, enhancing
operational agility.
Investors in the latest round include CrowdStrike Ventures, Wellington Management, Atlassian
Ventures, JP Morgan Chase, and Sequoia Capital.
Since 2021, Vanta has raised a total of $504 million, underscoring its strong market position
(02:10):
and growth potential.
Vanta has acquired B and AI wearables startup, which offers a Fitbit-like bracelet and an
Apple Watch app that capture ambient sound to create reminders and to-do lists.
B's innovation lies in its aim to develop a cloud phone that mirrors user devices, providing
(02:34):
seamless access to accounts and notifications.
This makes B's wearable a personal assistant that encourages user reflection and memory,
offering a more intimate and accessible AI experience.
The devices are priced at $49.99, with a $19 monthly subscription, making them more accessible
(02:58):
compared to competitors like the Humane AI pin at $499.
These privacy policies claim that users can delete data anytime and that audio recordings
aren't stored or used for AI training, although its AI learns from user data.
The startup plans on implementing boundaries to pause learning and on-device AI processing
(03:22):
for enhanced privacy.
Amazon's acquisition of B indicates a shift towards developing wearable AI devices, distinct
from its existing Echo speaker line.
However, the acquisition raises questions about data management, given Amazon's controversial
history with user data privacy.
(03:44):
And now, pivot our discussion towards the main entrepreneurship topic.
Hey everyone, I'm Dana, and welcome back to Innovation Pulse, where we dig into the
ideas that are reshaping how we build and think about products.
Today I've got Yakov Lasker with me, a product strategist who's been in the trenches for
(04:07):
over a decade.
Yakov, you sent me this article that honestly made me question everything I thought I knew
about user feedback.
Oh, Dana, wait until you hear this.
So picture this.
You're a product manager, quarterly review comes around, and your sales director walks
in with a detailed roadmap.
Sounds great, right?
Except it's not your roadmap.
(04:29):
It's theirs.
They've basically designed your entire product strategy around what they think will close
more deals.
Hold up, that sounds like a dream scenario.
Your biggest advocates telling you exactly what they want.
That's what you'd think.
But here's the kicker.
This company wasn't building a tool for sales directors.
(04:49):
They were building a platform for everyone from part-time customer service reps to C-suite
executives.
The sales team's wish list would have turned it into something completely unusable for
95% of their actual users.
Okay, so we're talking about the people who love your product most, actually.
Poisoning it for everyone else?
(05:10):
Exactly.
It's what the article calls the power user paradox.
Think about it like this.
Imagine if your local coffee shop only listened to the guy who comes in five times a day and
orders the most complicated drink possible.
Pretty soon, they'd have a menu that intimidates everyone else who just wants a simple cup
(05:31):
of coffee.
Oh wow, that's a perfect analogy.
So let's break this down step by step because I think there are some fundamental concepts
we need to understand here.
First, what exactly makes someone a power user and why do their voices carry so much
weight?
Great question.
Power users are typically your most engaged customers.
They use your product daily.
(05:53):
They know every feature inside and out.
And here's the crucial part.
Their vocal.
They show up to user interviews.
They submit detailed feature requests.
They're active in your community forums.
From a product manager's perspective, they feel like the voice of your user base.
But that's where the trap lies, right?
(06:15):
Because the people who have time to write detailed feature requests aren't necessarily
representative of your broader audience.
Bingo.
And here's where it gets really interesting.
The article shares this perfect example.
A company built this amazing call transfer feature because their power users in the call
center were super vocal about how clunky the existing process was.
(06:39):
They painted this vivid picture of lost deals and frustrated customers.
Let me guess.
They spent months building it and then…
Adoption was absolutely terrible.
Turns out most agents rarely transferred calls at all.
The vocal minority had convinced them to solve a problem that affected maybe 5% of their
user base.
(07:00):
Meanwhile, everyone was struggling with slow load times and confusing navigation.
Basic usability issues that would have helped 100% of users.
This is fascinating because it reveals something deeper about how we process feedback, doesn't
it?
It's like our brains are wired to pay more attention to the loudest voices rather than
the most representative ones.
(07:21):
Absolutely, and there's actually a psychological principle at work here.
In research, we call it the availability heuristic.
We tend to overweight information that's easily recalled or recently encountered, so
when your power users are constantly in your face with feedback, their problems feel more
urgent and widespread than they actually are.
(07:42):
So how do you keep these champions engaged without letting them hijack your entire strategy?
Because surely you don't want to alienate your biggest advocates.
This is where the article gets really smart.
Instead of just saying no and risking their advocacy, the company got radically transparent
about their broader mission.
They walked the sales leaders through their vision for mass adoption and explained how
(08:06):
their success actually depended on serving a much wider audience.
Wait, that reminds me of something.
Wasn't there a situation with LinkedIn where they had to balance power user demands with
broader platform health?
Oh, perfect example.
LinkedIn's in-mail feature was generating significant revenue from power users, recruiters
and sales professionals who were sending tons of messages.
(08:29):
But it was also increasing spam and degrading trust for everyone else on the platform.
They had to figure out how to serve their paying customers without poisoning the well
for casual users.
So it's not just about individual features.
It's about ecosystem health.
That's a much more complex way of thinking about product decisions.
(08:50):
Exactly.
This connects to something bigger that I think a lot of people miss.
When Tinder added aggressive fraud detection because power users were concerned about fake
profiles, it accidentally started blocking legitimate high value users.
Every change ripples through your entire ecosystem in ways you might not anticipate.
(09:11):
Okay, so this is starting to feel overwhelming.
If you're a product manager listening to this, how do you actually make these decisions?
Is there a framework for thinking through this complexity?
The article lays out this brilliant four-part framework.
First is what they call ecosystem impact assessment.
Before building any power user requested feature, you ask whether it could negatively impact
(09:36):
non-power users.
If it could, you either contain it through premium tiers or find alternative solutions.
So it's like creating separate swimming pools instead of mixing everyone in the same water.
Perfect analogy.
The second part is second order effects audit.
Mapping out how a feature might ripple through your entire user base.
(09:58):
Then there's the resource allocation rule.
Roughly 70% of development resources to mainstream user needs, 30% to power user requirements.
That ratio is really specific.
Is that based on research or more of a rule of thumb?
It's more of a guiding principle, but it makes intuitive sense when you think about
it.
(10:19):
You want to maintain that balance between keeping your product accessible while still innovating
for advanced use cases.
The last part of the framework is what they call champion conversion strategy.
Exploring whether you can solve power users underlying needs through better communication
or documentation rather than building new features.
(10:39):
Oh, that's clever.
Sometimes the solution isn't a new feature, but helping them use existing features more
effectively.
Exactly.
And here's what I find most interesting about all this.
It's not really about ignoring power users.
It's about getting better at extracting insights from them without letting them drive the roadmap.
So what does this mean for someone listening who maybe isn't a product manager but works
(11:02):
with products every day?
How should this change how they think about giving feedback?
That's such a good question.
I think it means being more aware of your own perspective and its limitations.
When you're giving feedback, ask yourself, am I representing just my own needs or the
needs of people who use this differently than I do?
(11:24):
And if you're in a leadership position, be conscious of how your voice might be disproportionately
loud.
It also seems like it changes how we should think about user research more broadly.
Instead of just listening to who speaks up, we need to actively seek out the quiet majority.
Absolutely.
And there's a practical takeaway here for anyone building products.
(11:45):
The next time your most vocal user presents you with a detailed feature request, pause
and ask yourself, are we solving a problem for the 5% or building value for the 95%?
That's such a powerful reframing.
Instead of what do our best customers want, it becomes what do most of our customers need.
And here's the thing that really gets me excited about this framework.
(12:08):
It's not just about products.
You can apply this thinking to team management, to organizational strategy, even to personal
decision making.
Any time you're getting loud feedback from a vocal minority, it's worth asking whether
that represents the broader reality.
So next time you're in a meeting and the most senior person in the room has strong opinions
(12:29):
about the direction you should take, remember that volume doesn't equal validity.
Thanks for walking us through this, Yakov.
This has completely shifted how I think about feedback and advocacy.
Thanks for having me, Donna.
And to everyone listening, keep questioning those assumptions.
Your quiet users might have the most important things to say.
(12:50):
That's Innovation Pulse for today.
I'm Donna.
Catch you next time when we dive into why the best ideas often come from the edges,
not the center.
And that wraps up today's podcast.
Vanta's impressive $150 million funding round underscores its role in enhancing cybersecurity
(13:12):
compliance, while the Lasker's exploration of the power user paradox offers a framework
for balancing product development to meet the needs of both advanced and mainstream
users.
Don't forget to like, subscribe, and share this episode with your friends and colleagues
so they can also stay updated on the latest news and gain powerful insights.
(13:35):
Stay tuned for more updates.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.