 call for coming. Okay, so before we get started, I want to do a quick experiment. Can I see a show of hands if you would consider yourself to be within the underrepresented category either by reason of gender or race or ethnicity? Okay, one over there. Oh, interesting. So the majority of the audience is not preaching to the choir for a change. That's very exciting. Okay, I'm going to call that a step in the right direction. It does feel like we are in a slightly new era of what is been a very long extended discussion in this industry, one that's marked by actions, sort of policies, programs, unless by waffly talk about good intentions. So in the spirit of that, I would love if you guys could introduce yourself briefly, but in the context of what have you been working on? What have you been attached to that has moved the needle in diversity and inclusion in the last year, in the last two years? I get to go first. Lucky me. So hi everyone, I'm Rachel Palmer. I had VC and startup partnerships across the Europe, Middle East and Africa for Google. So that means I work with the top VCs such as Atomico to utilize Google in the best way possible. I also look at very specific initiatives and really think about what does the ecosystem need and how can we change it? What can we do? And I think we can all agree last year was a bit rough overall. We had COVID. We had a bunch of different things happening. We had a lot of racial equity stuff pop up. At Google, we believe that if we want technology to work for everyone, it has to be built by everyone. And right now that just isn't happening. I think we could clearly see that in the numbers that were produced last year, the shocking numbers across Europe, less than .5% of VC funding goes to Black Founders, which is a little nuts. Only 38 Black Founders are funded in the UK over the last 10 years, which is crazy. And so we wanted to do something about that. And so we thought of a three-prong strategy as we thought about, well, what can Google do to really help? And so the first thing is we need data. You cannot change anything if you don't have data. And so we launched last year the Black Report, which was the first report in Europe that looked at the Black Founder population. We also did something. So we pulled together a $2 million Black Founders fund. It's non-equity-free cash. And we distributed it to 30 startups across Europe. We also gave up to $220,000 in ad and cloud credit and the support of Google behind each founder. After that, we also got another $3 million, and we did the same in Africa for 50 startups. The final part is, look, change can't happen alone. So we worked very closely, are working very closely with partners, VC partners such as Atomico and others that I won't announce yet, but you'll hear from us soon to really work together to change what we see. And we definitely get, it takes time and commitment. So that's what we're doing where we are. Those sound tangible as people say, if you want to help, what is it? Make the higher, send the wire. And that sounds like cash in hands, which is what we want to see coming. Do you want to top that, hero? How is Atomico showing up? Yeah. I'm hero. I'm a partner at Atomico. I work on investments in both consumer and on the software side. And I've been doing this now for quite a long time. It feels like 25 years of working with entrepreneurs of very diverse origin. I've had the privilege of investing and working with entrepreneurs from Asia, from Latin America, from Europe and the US, varying degrees of race and religion. So it's something that is very near and dear to my heart. But equally, I think as Atomico, we've tried to be a thought leader as far as best we can in Europe through tangible action. And so there's a few things that we've done within diversity, inclusion, equality that I think are things that matter to us sincerely. One is an aspect on the investment side, having targets in terms of what we would like to achieve in terms of D&I-related targets in our portfolio companies, actually having measurements of what they're doing on an annual basis is something we track very seriously. And we also share that with our investors so that it passes through and people understand how important it is. And I can come back to the fact that it's not just because it feels like it feels good. I think it's actually a competitive advantage when you think about diversity and inclusion. It's about attracting that talent that has different perspectives that are going to make you more competitive. We also have two other things that we do tangibly, and maybe there's three actually. One is also ourselves and our team. What does that look like in numbers? We've kind of gone from an era of majority male minority female to now, that was probably like 65% to 35%. Now we're at 54 and 40. I heard you crossed that 45% female milestone. Those are all very important. This is the whole organization but also the investment side. And that, I think, of the partners, of the five partners we have to our female, there's a lot of good stuff that I think we're seeing. But the point is we're holding ourselves accountable to this. I think the other two things that I think are having really good impact is one is through our angel program. So enabling our angel network to invest in both, you know, ethnically and gender diverse founders, we're getting really good statistics. It's like the pass through rate is like 65% of those that are getting funded through that program are gender or ethnically diverse. I mean, that's great. But it's only the beginning. Yeah. There's also the last part, which I'll say is, you know, what we call our Fund of Funds program, where, you know, their first time general partners that are launching funds, a lot of them, you know, that we've done over the last five years, let's call it 12 of that 63% or so are either female mixed founders of these funds and or ethnically diverse. Okay, so we're seeing that in terms of who you're hiring in terms of who you're investing in and in terms of the future investors of the ecosystem, you guys are seeding change. Gun to head, where do you where do you put automaco relative to other sort of major or mainstream funds like are they doing more? Are they doing less? Are they matching you guys? It's hard to compare what, you know, I think you can measure that in some meaningful way. I think there's different industries that have existed, you know, prior to venture capitals, you know, blossoming that have more structured approach to some of this and the ESG inclusive DNI. I think in VC, it's still kind of a lot of headroom for all of us. So it's I don't know that we're, you know, we're doing our part as best as we can. But again, I think the important part is there's a lot more to do. Okay, I was not going to throw mud. So I will say that you're doing significantly more than most other funds. But what is interesting, though, is in what a difference it makes when there's a different mindset internal and organization suddenly exponential change becomes within reach. So I think it's interesting to try and unpack that a little bit. What are some of these mindsets that are still holding people back at a point when there are so many options, like in front of investors as to what to do? What are some of the ways people still think about diversity that are still, I don't know, acting as impediments to them pushing things forward? I think you had a slightly, a slightly hilarious, if depressing anecdote that came up backstage. And I'd love if you could, if you could share, I think it sheds light. Sure. So when it happened, I was literally thinking, oh, I probably shouldn't be sharing this broadly. But now I share it with the world because I think the world needs to hear it. So COVID was an interesting time. It allowed us to gain access to rooms we usually don't get access to anonymously at times. And that happened to me in 2020. I was able to get into this posh conference with all these top top VCs. But it was virtual because no one was meeting anyone at the time. And so I was in a session and George Floyd had just died, Black Lives Matters was happening. It was a very crazy kind of time with a lot of focus and racial equity. And one of the topics was about investing in diverse founders. My camera was off. I was probably being a bad employee. I was tapping away, had one ear in, one ear out. And I didn't upload my pictures and all they could see was RP is here. And it was a room full of majority men. There were about two other women in there. And one of the VCs piped up. And he said when talking about investing in diverse founders, he said, Well, my LP told me that my job is returns and to leave the charity to him. I was like, Whoa, that's crazy. So I quickly tuned in with both ears. And I turned on my camera. And I asked him this, I said, Well, for your next round of funding, are you are you going to take his money? And the answer was yes. And so I think the real core of that is the sentiment. I started to talk to other friends that were in BC and all that. The sentiment was that investing in diverse founders is not a returns gig. It's a charity gig. And that's how people, a lot of people, and I'm not saying all, but a lot of people are seeing it. And I think it served as kind of the thinking of the strategy behind our black founders fund. So obviously, when we got this cash and we're trying to figure out how to distribute it, we there was conversations, there's a lot of press black people are struggling, our businesses are dying, we're just just so destitute. And people are like, We need to give this to people that need it. And I was like, No, I remember that conversation. We need to give it to the absolute best black founders out there. And that is exactly what we did. We're not saving anyone. We're not doing anything like that. We are funding the best black founders. And the whole point is to prove to the industry that there are returns in this community. And I can talk about the impact when you're ready, but we definitely have some. You're grinning from year to year. So I think you kind of want to share. So what is some of the impact? It's a pretty nascent program. So yeah, I would love to hear some of the things that you guys are proud of. So sure. So our 2 million that went in today, in less than five months, the cohort of 30 has raised 55 million in follow on funding. So that's a 27x follow on, which is fantastic. We've seen an uptick 21% increase in number employees across the cohort. We are seeing breakthrough startups right now, which are building those proof points for the industry to show that there are diverse founders that can make it. So we've got Define Lee, which will be raising their series a soon. They have 15 x their early investors money, which I think is a pretty good return. And we also have audio mom, which did their very successful series a and they have 10x more than 10x their early investors money in less than a year. And I'm going to point them out over there right there. Raise your hand because and all of you do not swarm Christian and Wilford, but when they're ready to raise, they're right there. This is the new face of successful black founders right there. Raise your hands and let everyone see you. What are some of the highlights in your end? Because I think we talk so much about how far we have to go. And I think we don't talk any linear enough about how we know it is changing. At a recent conversation with Carl Loco from Black Seed is a friend of mine. He had a very distinct point, which is, you know, something that kind of I thought about while you were speaking, Rachel, it's with the amount of capital that's available to the universe of entrepreneurs. It is shambolic. The amount of in this conversation, we're talking about, you know, the amount of capital available for black founders. And you know, he had a very distinct point that cut through a lot of the noise, which was capital, need capital to provide capital is a very distinct solution that over time will play out. And it was it was a very refreshing one, because there could have been a lot of different fluff in that conversation about, you know, and he's not saying that, you know, the contributions that people are trying to make on the peripheral periphery of support. But you know, you can only mentor someone so far, they can't pay for office space if they can't hire, and it doesn't matter. This was this was an incredibly, you know, like, poignant conversation that I had recently. And and so it only kind of heightened the awareness for myself, which I share with, you know, the people in my organization, like, we need to we need to help trigger that more. And this is why, like, I feel like with all the things we can do to support it, that's the thing that we need to really try to prioritize. And I think it will happen over time. This isn't like an overnight success story. The feel good factor, just because, you know, Black Lives Matter, whatever the movement might be, is a moment in time. But I think consistency is probably like a core element that should stick in people's mind when they're thinking about like taking this seriously. And so, you know, if I want to bring it back to how we continue to to remind ourselves as an organization, you know, I think one of the first things we did, which quite frankly, I was also like quite, I had, you know, a decent amount of anxiety is make public all our goals in terms of ESG, DNI, and share that in an open source way. And this is really comes from Nicholas's thought process of being open about a lot of it. He is a true believer that this will set us free. And it will also create commercial value, which is worth for, you know, those of us that participated in Skype all the way to Atomica, it is kind of how we roll. Yeah. And that is what we're doing to remind ourselves every year and saying, where did we come short? Because most of the time we are right. And this is why I'm saying there's a lot of headroom and which is why like it has less to do with what the market is doing and the competitors are doing or other colleagues are doing other firms. It's like just saying, okay, does this make sense and getting feedback from you guys and, you know, and saying, Hey, is this like, do you think this is a good level setting of what we're trying to do? Those are the things that matter. 100%. So we know that capital makes a meaningful difference. We know that a starting point when you're thinking about how to move the needle should be what, like, where can we get capital and how can we redirect it into the founders that need help? What do we want to see less of? What do we know isn't really working anymore? What's still kicking around? Is there anything that you've come across that you're a little bit tired of you want to set aside? If there isn't, that's also fine. Maybe it's a good sign that we've cut the fluff already. But if we really think we're hitting that point of sort of exponential change, then we imagine then that we've nailed it on strategy, at least, even if we still have a ways to go in execution. So what are my annoyances? Is that what you're asking? All right, I got you. So I hate the comment by VCs, because I do hear it a lot around it being a pipeline problem. It is not a pipeline problem. You know what? We put out two million into the ecosystem, and we had 800, almost 800 applications across 16 countries. And in Africa we had almost 3,000 applications across 36 countries for 3 million in funding. Funny thing happens when you put out money for people that generally don't have access to it, they come. So pipeline problem? No, I don't like hearing that. And anyone that does decide to tell me that, I invite you to come read applications with me, because it was a lot to get through. Full problem at some point. There was something interesting somebody said where if you take an island, you sit in tune, then you do everything you can systematically to make the gap between where you are and where individuals are as wide as possible. And then you don't build any bridges. You don't put any of the work to bring that land back together, and you're like, you can come over here if you want some funding, and you're like, but they just don't want to come. And you're like, what about this massive void between where you are and where they are that you've instrumentally done? So I think some of those like step to step things are really critical. What are some of the things that you guys did that meant that you were exposed to the founders who needed to hear about the program, that they were encouraged to? What are some of the things that you did that meant that you saw those 800 applicants where some people say, well, we tried to hire a female associate. We tried to hire or we tried to invest in black founders and we didn't find them. Sure. So I think one of the things that we did, a couple of the things we did was we made sure that we tapped into black networks. So there are definitely community players that have a voice in the ecosystem. There are groups of black people that convene and we made sure the message went out. I definitely heard about other programs that I'd launched previously where from the black community, well, we didn't know about that. How are we supposed to apply? So I made sure that as we decided to launch this fund, myself and Marta Krupinska, so my colleague on this amazing colleague for this, I made sure that when we did this, that we made sure that we tapped those ecosystem players to really get the word out about the funding. In terms of other annoyances, I have another one when you're ready, but we can stay on this topic if you'd like. Let me know when you're ready. Okay, go on. I'll take another gripe. Okay. I'm curious if you have any, too. The other thing that kind of gets to me when we launched this fund and even before, you know, a lot of others came to us and, hey, we want to work with you, we want to help and all that. Black people in general, we are over-mentored and underfunded. When I look at our founders, they are struggling to figure out which program do I apply to, like there's a lot there, and we really need value add. So, over-mentored, underfunded in the startup ecosystem in corporates. We're over-mentored and under-sponsored. It's the same struggle. And so I would say, like, if you want to help, bring real value. I learned a lot from some of our startups when talking about raising. I particularly remember one conversation when they were like, another investor came. This was, you know, a startup that was getting attention. And they came and they said, what can you offer? They asked them, oh, strategic advice? Well, you know, we get a lot of that nowadays. Google exists. Thank you. Yes, real value is what they're looking for. So if you want to, you know, help in this cost. Funding, if you have the cash and other things, if you have a service that you can offer, offer it. Here, I'll give you the option. Are there any gripes? But if not, also, is there anything missing in terms of our strategic toolkit? Is there anything we aren't doing yet? Something you want to see more of, whether from Tarmacore or from the broader ecosystem or even from other stakeholders, that would move the needle, meaningfully? I mean, there's a lot of things that are probably, you know, worthy of annoyance. I could think of quite a few. But maybe one angle to think about it is, for me, my biggest annoyance is sometimes myself, which is, you know, there's, I come from a faraway place, too, but, you know, I can call Europe at least my home after a decade plus of being here and also working with a huge variety of diverse founders, even in Europe. So, you know, I have a lot of, and it's also a place where it's accepted me on, you know, varying levels of, you know, being part of the ecosystem. So, I feel like there's a lot of potential. But the annoyance is, again, back to myself, which is, I feel like there's a lot more I could potentially do. But, you know, and, you know, I think we do make a genuine effort, both personally and as an organization. But, you know, the loss, getting lost in the tidal wave of the things that you have to do every day is the one thing that I always get annoyed with. And then there are moments that you come back to these discussions and you're like, man, I'm not doing it now. I'm just mean something to me, because I'm also a party to it. But, yeah, you know, there's, it doesn't happen as consistently. So, it really does annoy me that I'm not, you know, it, and it's, it's, it's inevitable on some level, you know, I'm not making an excuse, but I think there's, there's a lot. Absolutely. I think it's always really interesting, because by default, your bandwidth as an investor is zero, right? You're already doing more than you have room for few funds or operationally set up such that people actually have headspace for innovation in any sense or deep thinking in a broader sense or even the learning on new themes, let alone the active work of restructuring the society around them. But what are, like, you know, clearly if we say that, I'm willing to say it, if you're not that Atomica has gone a little bit further in terms of how it's able to innovate and, and, and implement change in this space clearly as an organization, you're doing a better job of creating that headroom, creating that space for people to bring their whole selves to work so they can do that work. What has been, what has made the difference that what do you want to do more of? Maybe that's what you're committing to. I think that, I think it goes back to maybe the point that, you know, also, you know, when, when we're up here within FARM, we're talking about that same thing and a lot of different portfolio companies find competitive advantage in diversity and a broad range of the definition, but I, I'd say that for us, when I think about it today versus maybe five years ago, I feel like it's the opportunity, right? There is a huge arbitrage opportunity that will emerge because of the efforts of you guys, because of the efforts of other groups that are trying to sponsor entrepreneurship over the next five years, this seed will then create a moment where there will be a lot of upside. So if you start thinking about it, even in that very maybe crass commercial, you know, perspective, that's the point though, right? The point is, it's not a charity. It's not, this is an opportunity set that will emerge. And if you start thinking about it that way, I feel like you have a different kind of way of thinking about it. You make different decisions in terms of the investment. You put it, you're like quantum is the future, but you have no specialist within your fund whose job it is to make sure that everybody's educating themselves, everybody's putting in time for the workshops, then nothing changes. And I think it's. But you know, it just came to mind because the other part of the annoyance component has something to do with maybe a success factor in if you turn it around is, you know, I think in the whole organization, if you can infect yourself in that way of like kind of productivity and opportunity rather than obligation, I think it starts to change like how people approach it. And it's not just one person who is like some D and I responsible person that has to run around and like champion the cause and, you know, get on stage and talk about it because it makes everyone feel good for a few minutes. It changes everything because a lot more people in an organization engage to say, oh, wow, this could actually be, you know, you know, dare I say a profitable, right? And this is the thing that really is like nice when you can get more people to kind of like move in that direction. I think that's the one thing it's an annoyance, but it's also maybe a little bit of an unlock to do more is if you can get, don't put one person in charge, get more people involved but also change the narrative. Yeah. How do you make it everybody's business? Not just the business of the person who is the most skin in the game. Pardon the pun. I will add, you know, just so everyone's aware, my job is not a diversity role. I have a commercial role. Exactly. But when I look at the ecosystem, part of what needs to happen in Europe is that we need to transform. We need to capture these opportunities. I have, you know, I guess it's the benefit of being American. I've seen there probably a little bit more ahead in terms of the diversity conversation and I can see what's happened there and I can see where we're at. So everyone out there, be aware, my role is not a diversity role. This is a commercial thing. This is part of the problem, right? You know, you wear two hats all the time because you're not able to switch off the party view that is aware of the discrepancy in the room of who isn't there and who doesn't have a seat at the table. You don't really have the luxury of putting it down at any point. And so you end up as a result doing that role. So I think it's incumbent on organizations to say this burden exists one way or another. Can we spread it around? And actually, as you say, flip it from a burden instead. This is an opportunity and we are just not where we need to be on it. Nobody thinks it's OK to have no idea about a new technology phenomenon. It's an investment. Nobody thinks it's OK to say, well, I just don't have time to study. Yeah, you do figure it out. Exactly. That's right. I think something that's always really, really great to end on when we have these conversations is to think specifically about some sort of endpoint so that we don't constantly think that we're in the Sisyphean endless. When do you think we don't have this conversation anymore? When don't we have this panel? When do you think parity is either already achieved or is so close to non-entity anymore? Like, is it is it two years? Is it 100? Is it 50? Like a sense of that proportion, I think, can really make the difference in terms of like, are we on track? Like, I think something changed significantly in the climate discussion when we went from when is it better to in 2030, this is what would happen in 2050, this is what happened. And suddenly we were thinking differently about whether we were close to far away. But when do I no longer have to do this panel again? So I'm going to say, I mean, I hope this isn't disappointing, but I think change will take time. I think, you know, when we... Wow, somebody's having a good time over there. I think, I definitely think change will take time. I mean, when we think of the whole idea of if we look at the pure incentives of many funds, and this is fair, right? Even an LP, I was asked to be an LP. I was like, hey, where is my money? We're going all around. And returns, right? When we start to think about that, and really proving returns, when people are trying to select to invest in, people naturally, the human naturally decides, like, they use singles, they cheat, right? What school do they go to? Do they look like me? Do they, all that sort of stuff, right? And so I think we need to build great proof points. And that takes time. Build the audio mobs of the world, or the definelies of the world, and build more of those, huh? How much time? I'm going to put in my calendar and call you that day and either we celebrate or we throw something at the wall. So we need to build those, and that takes time. And then I think, I guess, if you think about pure metrics, when do we meet parity? I would say, I would love to see the funding distribution match the population distribution, because right now it's quite far off. Do you want to take a stab when you? Yeah, I mean, it's, you know, if we could do what we might suspect takes 10 years to do in five. Okay. You know, I think this is not a microwaveable problem. It's not something that you put in and it comes out all good, all quickly. I think it takes time, but you know, I think that the reality is these, it's like business building, right? In three, if five is three, that's great. But I think we need to see progress in a timeframe of three to five years. I don't know if we're not going to be sitting here, but at least there is something to think about in terms of what does the world look like in three years, in five years? That to me is something that I'm deeply interested in. Like that, that's relatively hopeful. We've been about 10 years in the inception phase of it and we're hoping for three to five. As a sure, what do we think? Three to five years, as a sure of hands, do we say yes, no? It'll take longer, it'll take less time. I would like to leave on a hopeful note. Who says three to five years is when we will reach parity? Hands up. Wow, this is an incredibly, I think we can incredibly pessimistic group of people, but fair enough. I think we can accelerate that though with the help of all of you. So I think, look, we have, in our cohort, we have amazing life founders. Help fund them, if you can. Help support them. There are plenty of diversity programs that have identified great founders. Support them, if we do it together, we can get there a lot faster. Excellent, I think. Let's say it's happening in three years. If it's not in three years, I will find each and every one of you and you can explain to me why you haven't done enough. Well, we'll be back next year. Thank you so much for your attention. Thank you.