If you’re looking for more evidence that the way we live and work is changing, then check out a new startup called Roam. They describe themselves as an international network of communal spaces. So far, they have locations in Ubud (Bali), Miami, and Madrid. Buenos Aires and London are coming soon.

The way it works is that you start by signing a lease for either a week or a month. You get a private room and bathroom, but everything else, from the co-working spaces to the kitchens, are shared amongst the community. Like other co-working and co-living environments, the community they build is critical.

However, what really differentiates Roam is that you can sign one lease and then live all over the world, freely traveling across their properties. All of the locations are offered up at the same price and you can stay for as long as you’d like.

In my line of work, I don’t have the flexibility of living like a global nomad. But today, there are many people who can. And I also know that there are many people who would prefer to live like this. It’s liberating in so many ways.

My friend and I actually had a similar idea to this back in University and we spent some time working on it. At the time, and this was over a decade ago, we felt that there was a segment of people who increasingly wanted to live like global citizens. I still believe that to be true and, clearly, so do others.

To date, Roam has raised $3.4 million in funding.

Image: Ubud kitchen via Roam

If any of you are in the business of creating – whether that’s a mobile app or a building – I’m sure you understand that the product or thing you’re working on will naturally evolve and change over time – probably in unexpected ways.

In fact, I usually take this as a positive sign. When I have my head in a project and I’m focused on solving problems, ideas will naturally start to flow. I start thinking of things that I never would have thought about at the outset. That’s why I generally think of creativity as a process, rather than as some divine gift.

But the challenge with all of this is that many of our existing business processes are not set up to deal with this kind of ambiguity. If anything we try and punish these sorts of deviations. If it wasn’t pre-meditated at the beginning of the project, we call it “scope creep” and charge extra for them as “change orders.” These two words equal death in construction.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I completely understand the realities of running a business and the importance of managing scope and resources. It’s a balancing act. Without some structure, nothing would get done. 

But the more that iterative lean methodologies and “design thinking” can be embedded into our processes, the more value creation I believe we will see.

My thinking is as follows: At least part of the reason that innovation comes from startups and new market entrants is that the founders aren’t usually sitting around talking about defined scope and laying out elaborate business plans. They’re focused on creatively solving problems and doing whatever it takes to get there.

It’s also one of the reasons that conventional wisdom dictates that tech startups shouldn’t outsource development. It’s too core a competency and you can’t “move fast and break things” if you don’t have that in-house and you’re constantly worried about eye-popping invoices hitting your desk.

I have always seen lots of parallels between startups and architecture. In both of these worlds, the idea you start with is rarely what you end up with (at least that’s the case in architecture school). You research, learn, and iterate along the way and that leads you in new and unexpected ways.

And in my view, that’s often what the path to innovation looks like. Because if you define the entire path at the outset, how can you expect to go anywhere new? And if you’re not going anywhere new, how can you expect to outperform the market?

A new startup out of San Francisco, called Rentberry, has just launched, allowing tenants to openly bid on rentals in the city. Think of it like a rental auction. Landlord lists property. And then tenants compete for it by submitting offers. 

Not surprisingly – especially since we’re talking about San Francisco – there’s concern that this will do nothing but drive up the city’s already high rents.

But I think the key detail is that the platform will make public the total number of applicants. As a tenant, it’ll even tell you how your credit score compares to those of the other bidders (presumably, so you can gauge how aggressive you might need to be on your bid).

The real estate industry is rife with information asymmetries. So anything that improves transparency is something that catches my attention. If you’ve ever bought or rented a place in a competitive market, you know that one of the worst things you can hear from the broker is: “We have another offer.” (Even worse: “We have 12 other offers.”)

It’s frustrating because it now means you’re competing. But even more frustrating is the fact that you have no way of assessing whether or not that statement is fact or fiction. Yes, I realize that there’s a code of ethics that’s supposed be followed, but you and I both know that games are played all the time.

In fact, I think someone could easily make a full career out of just trying to correct the information asymmetries inherent in the real estate industry. Who knows what sort of impact they might be having on the market. So I’m excited to see how things pan out for Rentberry.