The nation-state has long served as the planet’s default operating system, but the code is creaking. Satellites now rent cloud capacity above every frontier; smart contracts manage treasuries larger than many central banks; fandoms and faiths funnel billions through apps that answer to no capital city.

This two-part essay is exploratory: we scout the places where sovereignty itself is decoupling from soil, flag and parliament, migrating instead to servers, stages and shared myths.

Part one traces the cultural franchises that already behave like embryonic kingdoms. Part two will sketch the wilder scenarios that could jolt Southeast-Asian boardrooms and regulators.

Consider what follows an exploratory map—drawn in pencil, not ink—of a frontier whose co-ordinates (or lines) are still being coded.

Seoul’s idol-state, Rome’s click-cathedral and the stadium sovereigns

South Korea’s entertainment giants may have built the world’s first metaverse micro-kingdom. Zepeto, the Naver-backed avatar universe, boasts 400 million registered accounts and roughly 20 million monthly active users.

Within its digital walls, HYBE’s fan-token experiments let holders vote on merchandise drops and playlist decisions—an embryonic parliament for a population larger than many Pacific island states. With low-Earth-orbit (LEO) compute leased from satellite operators, even the Montevideo Convention’s “territory” box is partly ticked.

The Catholic Church is taking a parallel road in cassock rather than sequins. A “digital baptistry” project run by the Vatican Apostolic Library awards non-transferable NFTs to donors and aims to register sacramental records on-chain, widening Rome’s flock through Web3 rails. Where indulgences once rang through bronze coffers, stable-coin alms may soon glide across blockchains.

Then come the stadium sovereigns. Taylor Swift’s Eras tour has grossed about US$2.1 billion, overtaking the annual GDP of several UN member states. Dynamic pricing, resale taxes and geo-fenced AR quests turn her ticketing stack into a de-facto central bank for “Swifties.”

Lady Gaga’s fan economy, meanwhile, channels cosmetics revenue from Haus Labs into LGBTQ+ mental-health grants, knitting welfare functions into a merch machine. Across the Pacific, China’s animated blockbuster Ne Zha 2 has become the first domestic film to smash the CNY10 billion (US$1.4 billion) box-office mark, spawning deity NFTs and VR temples that rally Mandarin speakers as effectively as any passport.

Also Read: How to scale voluntary carbon markets with DeFi and Web3

If digital congregations can already levy taxes, adjudicate disputes and defend virtual borders with copyright takedowns, how long before their “citizens” demand a seat in the General Assembly?

When super-apps become shadow states

Southeast Asia already hosts contenders for post-national power—and they hide in plain sight on smartphones.

Grab logged 44.5 million monthly transacting users in early 2025. Those riders and diners possess an e-wallet, a credit score and a tiered loyalty status; one firmware update could re-badge that status as a passport and float GrabRewards as a sovereign token. If a K-pop agency can run a playlist legislature, a super-app can convene a budget committee for promo subsidies.

The blueprint—and the competitive threat—comes from the north. Tencent’s WeChat fields about 1.38 billion monthly actives , issues tax receipts, settles court fines and, during the pandemic, controlled internal movement through health-code passes. Mini-program “consulates” already handle property transfers for Chinese expatriates; bolt on a dispute-resolution DAO and WeChat begins to look less like an app and more like an administrative capital floating above 190 jurisdictions.

GoTo, Indonesia’s home-grown giant, wields a different asset: religious affinity. The group counts 20.6 million monthly transacting users and dominates local halal commerce. Imagination: picture GoTo launching “Home-to-Haram”—a single flow that books a scooter to Soekarno-Hatta, bundles an e-visa, charters a group flight, hails a ride in Jeddah and settles all fees with a Sharia-compliant stable-coin. In effect, one app would shepherd pilgrims from doorstep to the Kaaba, minting a Sharia Cloud-State whose jurisdiction is faith, not latitude.

Hovering above these contenders is a purely borderless behemoth. Ethereum now lists more than 321 million cumulative unique addresses and, at roughly US$300 billion in market capitalisation, would rank comfortably inside the G-20. Its protocol upgrades (EIPs) function like constitutional conventions; its 2016 hard-fork—The DAO bailout—was effectively a civil-war reconstruction act.

The inflection point

Combine a tokenised treasury, an on-chain court, rented LEO compute and—crucially—millions who recognise a claim of sovereign immunity, and a network no longer fits inside any national rule-book. Enforcement tools built for banks and telcos fail against smart contracts that migrate chains at block-confirmation speed. The result is not an outlaw realm so much as a shadow state—negotiated with, taxed lightly, but increasingly able to set its own rules.

Next we examine how ASEAN and global frameworks might—perhaps unintentionally—midwife these entities, and what happens when the child pulls away from the midwife’s arms.

Borrowing the rule-book, then setting it on fire

ASEAN’s legal scaffolding is, ironically, primed to help the first borderless “cloud-state” get off the ground.

The upcoming Digital Economy Framework Agreement (DEFA) pledges trusted cross-border data flows, common e-ID standards and interoperable e-payments across the ten-member bloc. National privacy laws are converging too: Malaysia’s refreshed PDPA guidelines now codify how firms may export personal data overseas, provided they tick transparency boxes.

On the payment side, Singapore’s PayNow already pipes retail QR transfers into Thailand’s PromptPay network, with caps of SG$1 000 per day, while Malaysia’s DuitNow wallet now scans Indonesia’s QRIS and Singapore’s NETS codes at thousands of stores.

For a cultural or faith-based DAO, these look like a ready-made customs union, for example:

• Step one: use DEFA’s “free-flow-of-data” clause to host an on-chain census in a low-cost data centre.
• Step two: rely on PDPA reciprocity to shuttle member data around the region without forced localisation.
• Step three: plug into the QR-linkage mesh; tithe payments clear in seconds from Chiang Mai to Penang.

The moment of sovereign over-ride

But what if, having exploited the plumbing, the DAO decides it no longer needs the plumber?

• Declaration of immunity – a super-majority vote writes a new article: “Our treasury and token holders are exempt from national securities and AML statutes.”
• Network recognition – millions accept the clause; merchants follow the money; satellite operators lease compute because the DAO pays on time.
• Enforcement gridlock – regulators issue takedown orders, only to find there is no domain registrar, no bank account, and smart contracts that migrate chains at the speed of a block confirmation.
• Host-state competition – smaller economies, hungry for data-centre jobs, quietly offer the DAO tax holidays and legal “innovation zones” in exchange for being named an official edge-node capital.

Also Read: Building foundations, not just speed: Why Web3’s next chapter must be about meaning

In effect, the same DEFA clauses designed to knit ASEAN together also allow a digital polity to step outside the stitching. The plumber hands over the wrench—and the house declares itself independent.

Conclusion: A frontier of risks and rewards

What unites a K-pop avatar kingdom, a pilgrimage super-app and an on-chain commonwealth is not geography but gravity: each pulls people, payments and purpose into a centre of authority that sits outside the Westphalian grid. For Southeast-Asian companies and investors, this presents a two-sided frontier.

On one flank lie the opportunities—new revenue ladders (fan taxes, pilgrim-as-a-service packages, tokenised loyalty float), cheaper entry to overseas markets via cultural or faith networks, and first-mover advantage in edge-compute or language-model infrastructure that tomorrow’s digital polities will need.

On the other flank gather the risks—regulators struggling to tax or tame borderless treasuries, brand damage if cultural tokens misfire, and new choke-points where a satellite licence or API ban can strand millions of users overnight.

Whether these proto-sovereigns mature into recognised partners or remain tantalising anomalies will depend on how quickly policy catches up with code—and how deftly firms hedge across both realms. The border between digital and physical; corporation and country is blurring; so too is the line between customer and citizen. In such terrain, map-making becomes strategy.

Part two will chart the wilder horizons (e.g. DAO freeports) and suggest early markers that companies and investors should watch. See you then!

You can also find me on my podcast and newsletter, where I share regular insights on geopolitics and leadership.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Join us on Instagram, Facebook, X, LinkedIn, and our WA community to stay connected.

Image courtesy: Canva Pro

The post Beyond borders, beyond brands: Why the next sovereign might be a concert tour – Part 1 appeared first on e27.

2.5 days. Three brands. Three locales. Nine languages. One person — and Claude.

I built a custom e-commerce platform covering Singapore, Hong Kong, and Japan. Different business rules, offerings, and compliance requirements for each market.

The team? Me, Claude Opus 4.5, and Claude Code — multiple instances running in parallel.

What would this have taken with an offshore team?

The hidden tax

For decades, the dominant model for software development looked like this: Product managers sit near the business. They write detailed specs. Those specs get shipped to a large development team — often offshore in the Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia, and India. Each developer gets a well-defined slice. They implement exactly what’s described. Ship it back.

The economics seemed compelling. Local engineers cost more. Offshore developers cost a fraction. Scale up the team, ship the specs, get the code back.

But much of the logic rests on a fallacy Fred Brooks identified in 1975 in his classic software text: if it takes a woman nine months to have a baby, can nine women have a baby in one month?

Brooks’ The Mythical Man-Month taught us that adding people to a late software project makes it later. The corollary: throwing bodies at software development doesn’t scale linearly. Communication overhead grows exponentially with team size.

And yet the offshore model doubled down on exactly this fallacy — betting that cheap labour would compensate for coordination costs.

It doesn’t.

A systematic literature review of offshore software development identified 18 problem areas. But they all boil down to, in one form or another, the bandwidth, latency, and cost of communications.

What you save in labour, you lose in agility and velocity.

Also Read: Why Singapore startups are sleeping on their secret weapon (spoiler: it’s not AI)

What we built

Let me be transparent: nothing we — me, Claude Opus 4.5, and Claude Code — built was groundbreaking. It’s foundational platform work — the kind of thing that’s been sitting in someone’s product backlog “for way too long.”

A multi-brand, multi-locale e-commerce platform supporting Singapore (English, Mandarin, Malay, Tamil), Hong Kong (Simplified Chinese, Traditional Chinese, English), and Japan (Japanese, English). Each locale with its own business rules and compliance requirements.

But this platform enables what comes next:

• AI Agent for Pre-Sales Consultation on features and benefits
• AI Agent for Pre-Appointment Consultation — gathering the information that matters before a customer meets with a representative and making that appointment for the face-to-face meeting
• AI Agent for Customer Support and Success
• A next-generation customer database

We laid out 14 sprints. Cleared 7 in 2.5 days. Halfway there — and tracking toward something I’m excited to show in the New Year.

What’s coming is harder. But the foundation is solid.

And that foundation? A two-pizza team without AI would have taken at least a week. Maybe longer.

The workflow

A solid workflow was what made this possible — and it started with augmentation at the meta level.

I’ve spent months developing an AI-Augmented Writing workflow. Project instructions that evolved from three sentences to over 2,000 words. A system of editorial calendar chats, handoff briefs, and sprint-style execution.

To bootstrap the development workflow, I took those writing instructions into a new Claude Project in a chat dedicated to creating and evolving project instructions for AI-augmented Development. Then I worked with Claude Opus 4.5 to identify what was different between writing and coding.

The gap was smaller than I expected. The same patterns that make AI-augmented Writing effective — sharp instructions, short time horizons, iterative refinement, clear handoffs — translate directly to development.

Call it augmentation, augmenting itself. I used AI collaboration to build a better system for AI collaboration. Yes, this might be a bit too meta, but then I’m a nerd, and the results speak for themselves.

The workflow:

• Project-instructions chat: Establish the workflow and working agreements — bootstrapped from my writing system
• Product-definition chat: Lay out the vision, analyse existing platforms, generate a product spec
• Mission-control chat: Break the spec into sprints, create handoffs for each sprint, coordinate the whole, and keep track of everything (including reminders for me)
• Sprint chats: Individual chats for each sprint, feeding work to Claude Code

But here’s what made even greater velocity possible: parallel workflows and automated validation.

I used Claude Chrome — which Anthropic opened to all paid plans on December 18 — with shortcuts to automate the analysis phase. Nine websites across three brands and three markets, each captured and audited automatically. Those audits fed directly into the product definition.

I had separate chats for mundane automation: translation verification, repetitive code generation, quality gates, and testing. And I used Claude Chrome integrated with Claude Code to validate work in the browser — catching errors, verifying before the next sprint.

Original expectation: one sprint per day. Blindingly fast compared to non-AI-augmented teams.

Actual result: seven sprints in 2.5 days. Framework running locally in two hours. Up and running in the cloud with CI/CD pipeline the same day. With time and bandwidth to tackle even more.

The formation that emerged:

Jordan
(orchestrator)
    │
    ▼
Claude Opus 4.5
(planning + coordination)
    │         │
    ▼         ▼
Claude Code #1   Claude Code #2
(core features)  (content/polish)
    │         │
    ▼         ▼
Working Software

While one Claude Code instance worked, I planned the next sprint. Claude Opus 4.5 tracked time on tasks and prevented conflicts. After every sprint, a quick retro is conducted to revise the project instructions.

I’ll publish a detailed breakdown of the Claude Chrome workflow next Tuesday, December 30 — the shortcuts, the automation patterns, and what I learned.

Also Read: Why Asia sits at the centre of the global AI chip disruption?

The cost

I used to be a Claude Pro subscriber at US$20/month. That was sufficient — until Opus 4.5.

To get the capacity I needed for this kind of intensive work, I upgraded. First to Max 5x at US$100/month. Then to Max 20x at US$200/month.

US$200/month for what would have been weeks of a distributed team’s time.

Have the ups and downs of Claude’s stability the last few days been frustrating? Sure. But I’ve worked through them and am still moving fast.

The fluency insight

Here’s what struck me: we’ve been applying the wrong framework. With people, not just AI.

For decades, we tried to “automate product development” by sending work wherever labour is cheaper and plentiful. Directed Contribution work — well-defined tasks in unambiguous contexts — shipped over the wall.

The result is what we see when we have AI write for us instead of writing with AI. Slop.

And more slop.

We were using the fluency framework wrong.

In my previous piece, I described three modes of contribution:

• Directed Contribution: Under someone’s guidance, executing well-defined tasks in unambiguous contexts
• Independent Contribution: Operating autonomously, first in well-defined situations, then in ambiguous ones
• Working through others: Setting vision and direction, guiding others toward outcomes

The offshore model was built on Directed Contribution — the work AI now handles.

But software development requires augmentation and collaboration. Human-AI collaboration (and human-human collaboration). High-bandwidth communication. Real-time problem-solving. The ability to clarify the problem space as you go.

You can’t do that across communication gaps — whether those gaps are time zones, organisational silos, or oceans.

What this means for Southeast Asia

The offshore model that built much of SEA’s IT services industry is dying.

Vietnam produces 50,000 IT graduates annually. Over 45 per cent of its developer workforce operates at the junior level — trained to do Directed Contribution work. The Philippines has built a massive tech services industry on similar foundations.

The question for the region isn’t whether AI will disrupt this model. It already is.

The question is whether Southeast Asia can compete on value, not volume.

Can the region produce engineers who operate in Independent Contribution mode? Engineers who understand the What and Why, not just the How? Engineers who can be part of elite, co-located teams — whether those teams sit in Singapore, Jakarta, Ho Chi Minh City, or alongside clients in Tokyo, Sydney, or San Francisco?

The opportunity isn’t to fight the transformation. It’s to ride it.

Small teams. Co-located. High-bandwidth. Fully exploiting AI augmentation.

For this project, I was flying solo, but I built what would have taken a distributed team weeks, or a co-located two-pizza team at least a week. This is solo development — team workflows are still being invented. But it proves the thesis: a small, focused team that can understand and clarify the problem space in real-time can build and deploy at a velocity that human waves cannot match.

The equation has changed

Labour cost arbitrage no longer compensates for the collaboration tax.

The hidden costs — communication latency, coordination overhead, the telephone effect, revision cycles — matter more when AI handles the Directed Contribution work that justified the offshore model.

It’s time to reshore. Not to human waves in different locations. To small, AI-augmented teams that can think, iterate, and ship.

The question is whether you’re building the team that leads, or the team that gets left behind.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Enjoyed this read? Don’t miss out on the next insight. Join our WhatsApp channel for real-time drops.

Image generated using AI.

The post It’s time to reshore: Why AI-augmented development changes the equation appeared first on e27.

The terms “vicious cycle” and “virtuous cycle” originate from Latin – circulus vitiosus (flawed circle) and circulus virtuosus (excellent circle). This describes self-reinforcing feedback loops where negative outcomes perpetuate decline or, when positive, outcomes compound growth.

Welcome to the Fractional Executive hiring playbook. This is the field guide for leaders who are intrigued by the fractional promise but terrified of the potential fallout.

Part one: Is this role even fractionalisable?

Do you need a scalpel or a Swiss Army knife?

• Scalpel (fractional friendly):

You have a specific, well-defined problem. IE: “We need to be SOC2 compliant in 10 months” / “Our Series B pitch deck needs a complete overhaul”

These are projects for a specialist.

• Swiss Army knife (full-time required):

The role is a blend of strategy, team management, cultural leadership, and crisis-of-the-day firefighting. “We need a lead to build our culture from scratch and also manage payroll”. That’s not a fractional job; that’s a co-founder you haven’t hired yet.

Can the outcomes be measured independently?

• Yes (fractional friendly):

The success of the role can be tied to clear, objective metrics. “Increase the headcount of the R&D team by 10 per cent.” “Reduce customer churn by 50 per cent.” “Successfully implement the new systems by Q4”

• No (full-time required):

Suppose success is deeply intertwined with team morale, cross-functional collaboration, and lots of cultural influence. These are nearly impossible to achieve in 15 hours per week.

What’s your corporate bureaucracy score? (be honest)

• Low (fractional friendly):

A Fractional Executive can get a decision from the CEO in a single discussion. They have access to all the data and people they need.

• High (full-time required):

Decisions require three committees and a VP’s sign-off. Accessing data involves a formal request to another department. If your Fractional Executive needs to spend the duration of their entire retained time emailing back and forth, they will leave out of frustration.

Part two: Spotting the master from the Mercenary

Once you have confirmed that the role is fractional friendly, the next filter would be a series of interview questions you should not forget to ask. This is not for assessing skill; you are assessing mindset.

Fractional talent interview questions:

Walk me through your most successful and least successful fractional engagements. What was the difference?

• A maestro will talk about client readiness, clear objectives, and their own abilities. A mercenary will blame the client for the failure.

Here’s our current challenge. (Describe your scalpel problem.) What would your first 30 days look like?

• Look for a bias towards action, and an analytic mind towards diagnostics. They should be talking about looking into your data, interviewing key team members, and delivering a concise plan – not about “getting to know the culture.”

How do you usually handle knowledge transfer at the end of an engagement?

• This is the million-dollar question. A great Fractional leader is obsessed with making themselves obsolete. If they have a clear methodology for documenting their work, plus training your internal team, and ensuring a seamless handoff, you’ve won. If they look confused by the question, they are the type of consultant who plans to be on your payroll forever.

Like every successful relationship, an immediate note-taking of red and green flags would be of interest for a successful fractional project outcome.

Also Read: Why inclusive hiring matters for a startup ecosystem

Red flags to watch out for:

• Mr Big (Name Dropper) – talks more about the big logos on their CV than the specific problems they solved
• Madame Woof – a process-worshipper, they are dogmatic about a specific methodology, “We have to use my eight-step framework”, without first understanding your needs and context.
• Mr #ForeverAlone – has a lone wolf mentality and is likely to be found in the jungles of Bali as a buff digital nomad. They seem uninterested in mentoring your team. They see their job as doing the work, not upgrading your organisation.

Part three: Onboarding blueprint pitfalls and pleasures

Not all gloomy news here, though. Research shows that there is a high success rate in hiring Fractional talent – it comes with a giant, bold print: if onboarding is deliberate. A fractional executive that is poorly onboarded is just a very expensive consultant.

Here is what deliberate onboarding looks like:

• Effective meetings

The CEO and our hire sit down with the executive team. The CEO gives the mandate: “Ms Lee is here for the next six months with one goal: to fix our hiring needs. She has my full authority to get it done. Your job is to help her, not hinder her.” This grants our Fractional hire the political capital they need to be effective.

• Be good at interviewing, and interview the right folks

Week 1 consisted of interviewing all the people that matter, right from the senior exec us to the junior analyst who actually knows where the data is buried. This provides powerful context for our hire.

• Data-driven immersion

Weeks 2–3: Our Fractional hire takes a deep dive – unrestricted access to all relevant dashboards, reports, and historical data without any delays.

• The Master Plan

By Week 4, they present their 30, 60 and 90-day plan to the executive team. It should be strong, outcome-focused and have concise metrics. This document becomes the capstone of the engagement.

A big plus: the Fractional Executives who do not forget about the exit plan – if he is a true maestro, he should begin planning his departure from day one. Their last deliverable might be a comprehensive playbook that documents everything they’ve built, why they built it, and how to maintain it. It’s the instruction machine for the machine they’ve created.

Final thoughts – Escher’s staircase – The two fates of fractional hiring

Four years prior, I was lucky to have the time to visit the exhibition of M.C. Escher’s work in Europe. There is a paradoxical beauty to M.C. Esher’s 1960 lithograph, Ascending and Descending. It depicts a monastery rooftop where two lines of identical, cowled monks trudge alone a squarish, continuous staircase.

One line shuffles endlessly upwards, the other, endlessly downwards. They are busy; they are moving with purpose. Yet they are trapped in an impossible loop.

This architectural illusion is known as the Penrose Staircase, an impossible object that can be depicted in a 2D drawing but cannot exist in three-dimensional space. It creates the paradox of a perpetual climb or descent.

For a leader, this is the unintentional perfect allegory for the two destinies that await any company that steps onto the path of fractional hiring.

Also Read: Levelling the playing field: How AI can transform SME hiring

Here’s how to avoid the descending staircase

For a startup founder, the risk of accidentally building a Penrose staircase to nowhere is particularly high. Here are four steps on how to avoid it:

• Hire for the battlefield, not the boardroom

Prioritise hires who have recent, relevant experience in your startup’s size and stage. A VP from a 10,000-person company has a different skill set than someone who helped a 50-person company get to 200.

• Define the mission, not the title

Be ruthlessly specific about the one or two key outcomes you need. This forces clarity and makes it easier to measure success. Don’t just hire a “Fractional CMO”, hire a “Lead Generation Builder for a B2B SaaS Product.” A vague title invites a vague approach.

• Rent the scalpel, not the surgeon

You are not hiring a person, you are hiring a specific, high-impact skill for a limited time. Make it clear from the start that their goal is not to “run the department” but to solve a specific problem and, most importantly, to upskill your internal team in the process.

• Give them a crowbar, not a suggestion box

If you’ve decided to bring in an expert, empower them. A Fractional leader bogged down by politics and bureaucracy is a waste of everyone’s time. Grant them the authority to make changes and show your team that the hire has your full support. If you are not ready to do this, you are not ready for a fractional hire.

Consider how hiring the right fractional talent can create a positive, self-reinforcing loop.

The five-step virtuous cycle

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Enjoyed this read? Don’t miss out on the next insight. Join our WhatsApp channel for real-time drops.

Header image credit: Canva

The post Fractional executive hiring: Break the vicious cycle, build the virtuous one appeared first on e27.

Marketing for startups has been a buzzing topic for many years. Still, no matter how much it gets discussed, early-stage tech startups often wrestle with some persistent misconceptions about how to handle marketing.

Let’s clear up the confusion and steer you away from some of the classic marketing pitfalls, so your startup gains unstoppable momentum right from the very beginning.

“Our product is so good, it’ll sell itself”

This is a phrase often spoken by founders who come from a strong technical background. The reasoning often is: “We’ve invested considerable effort into creating something exceptional—surely it will naturally attract attention and draw people in.”

The truth? Even remarkable products need to be seen and understood to catch on.

As a mentor, I’ve met a hardware startup that dedicated all its resources to perfecting the technical side of its product. However, when they finally launched, they realised that their brand was virtually unknown to their potential customers. This forced them into a costly scramble to create quick advertising campaigns just to appear on their customers’ radar. Had they started their marketing efforts earlier, they could have avoided this scramble and used their resources more efficiently.

“Marketing means advertising”

Many technical founders consider marketing as synonymous with ads—Google banners, Instagram promos, maybe a couple of paid posts on digital media. But that barely scratches the surface.

Marketing is much broader: it is how you figure out if your offering fits what your potential customers actually want, what price they’re willing to pay, and how you’re different from (and better than) your competition. A smart marketing plan is as much about understanding people’s problems and mapping their journey as it is about running campaigns.

Ideally, you start thinking about this the moment you’ve got a product hypothesis, not waiting until launch time.

Also Read: The human factor: B2B marketing in 2025

“We’ll just handle marketing ourselves”

It’s tempting to try everything yourself, especially when budgets are tight. But unless you have a knack and experience for marketing, it’s easy to get stuck running inconsistent campaigns, trying random tactics, and chasing what your competitors are doing.

Sometimes, bringing in marketing expertise—even if just for guidance—helps you stretch your limited resources much further. For instance, one deeptech company realised early on that they needed help with product marketing and positioning. By working with a marketing advisor to define their positioning and messaging before launching, they set themselves up for a much stronger debut and better long-term outcomes than if they had gone it alone.

“We’ll start marketing once we launch (or gain traction)”

It’s common for founders to want to wait until the product’s “ready”—or even until there’s already traction—before thinking about marketing. But doing so misses out on the huge value strategic marketing brings earlier in the journey.

Getting marketing involved from the get-go means you’ll better understand market needs and avoid costly missteps. You’ll be far less likely to end up launching something nobody’s interested in. The sooner you start, the stronger your launch will be—and the faster you’ll find your real target audience.

Of course, there are other myths out there, but these four tend to pop up again and again. If you’re a founder, rethinking these beliefs can unlock new possibilities and significantly improve your startup’s chances for success.

The post 4 marketing myths early-stage startups fall for (and how to avoid them) appeared first on e27.

Many of us discover new things by accident. A curious click, a small experiment, a playful idea. That is how Aunty Good Good began.

When I first started playing with AI, I did not plan to build a project or brand. I was simply curious about how AI could speak Singlish, make videos, or tell stories. It was meant to be fun, a bit of learning mixed with laughter.

But somewhere along the way, that fun became something more serious. Play turned into purpose. And that shift is what creativity in the age of AI is all about.

Curiosity is not childish

Adults often forget how to play. We are taught to be efficient, serious and productive. Yet curiosity is the first step of every innovation we admire.

Playfulness opens space for discovery. It gives us permission to fail safely. And when there is no pressure to be perfect, imagination comes alive.

When Aunty Good Good started teaching Singlish through AI, it was not part of a business plan. But the laughter that followed showed something deeper. People learn faster when they are relaxed. They connect better when they can laugh at themselves.

Small experiments lead to big ideas

Every major innovation begins with a small “what if.” What if AI could speak our language? What if seniors could use AI to tell their life stories?What if midlifers could create digital art without training?

These small questions are seeds. When we water them with play, they grow into solutions that serve real needs.

In my workshops, I notice that once adults stop saying “I am not creative,” ideas begin to flow naturally. A little curiosity removes fear. A little success builds confidence. That combination creates transformation.

Also Read: A prettier you: How AI avatars make storytelling easier for midlifers

The mindset that matters

Technology changes fast, but mindset changes slowly. The people who thrive in the AI era are not the ones who know the most tools. They are the ones who stay curious, adaptable and open.

You do not need to be a coder to be creative. You only need to ask better questions and dare to explore.

When we treat AI as a partner instead of a threat, we rediscover the joy of making things again. That joy is what keeps us relevant. It turns learning into living.

From curiosity to contribution

Purpose is born when curiosity finds direction. Once you learn to play with AI, you start to see ways it can help others.

Teachers use it to personalise lessons. Artists use it to explore new media. Midlife creators use it to tell stories and reconnect with their communities.

Play opens the door. Purpose keeps you walking through it.

When I see learners light up after completing their first AI project, I realise that the real innovation is not the tool itself. It is the courage to try.

The gentle reminder

Play is not a waste of time. It is practice for a purpose. When you allow yourself to explore without fear, clarity follows.

The age of AI rewards the curious. Those who start small today will lead with wisdom tomorrow.

So the next time you open an app or try a new tool, do not worry about results. Just play. You might discover not only how AI works, but how imagination works inside you.

—

The post From play to purpose. How curiosity can lead to meaningful innovation appeared first on e27.