(Repost from a Selling to Small Business blog to which I contribute.)
In a comment posted to [an earlier] entry, a reader noted that so many "stories are the same". That is so very true, even with rock stars- one more boy from south central LA; one more girl from Topeka, Kansas; one more aged star launching a comeback tour. There isn't story we haven't heard before. I often wonder how many iTunes tracks can actually be sold from singer-songwriters singing soft, halting guitar ballads about love and loneliness. Apparently, the answer is a staggering amount.
There are two very similar reasons. First, people want to hear it. They have an emotional connection to it. They like to hear something that reminds them of their youth, their passion, or their softer side. It reminds them of a part of themselves. Second, there will always be young males and females making the music, because there will always be youth, heartache, and beauty. People will sing about. And because everyone experiences those things, at least some of us will listen to it. See reason number one.
Small business has the same connection with most Americans. It is the American way. Everyone either has done it or would like to do it one day, if only... It is about taking risk, seeking independence, and taking care of your life. When they tell their story to the average American, they get quiet looks of admiration and respect. They are accustomed to this position in life, despite where it has actually gotten them on the totem pole. They have fought the good fight or are still fighting it.
A small business owner may have a similar story to the one you heard yesterday. The fact is that their story has subtle differences from the other. Those differences indicate the most important struggles that the business owner overcame. Despite the similarity of today's story to yesterday's story, that story is very real. It impacted the business owner in dynamic ways and changed who they are. Listen carefully: it IS who they are. A story like that has soul, funk, a bass line and a harmony. It might sound like last year's hit, but it is this year's hit, and more importantly, it is your potential customer's hit. Until you recognize and revere that story, the story of a rock-star, small-business owner, you will never be truly effective at selling to small business. You'll just get lucky sometimes.
If you want to build a relationship with a small business owner, take the time to hear their story. They always love to tell it. If they don't offer it, look around, it is probably on the walls of the small front office. Ask questions about pictures and awards you see. Be impressed. You should be. And then ask the big Hollywood question, "What gave you the idea for this business? How did you get started? Could you tell me how you got this GREAT idea?" Then sit down and let them tell you a story. When they are done, recognize their accomplishments (that they are, indeed, a rock star) and note how impressed you are that they got to this point.
If you have the time in your sales cycle, spend your entire first call listening to the story. Then say "Whoops! Look at the time! I have to go! Mind if I come back next week?" Without even pitching your pitch. I guarantee that when you return next week, they will look at you with more open eyes. They may even ask to hear your story!
Showing posts with label blog. Show all posts
Showing posts with label blog. Show all posts
Saturday, April 26, 2008
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
What's the trend that is going to impact business landscape 10 years from now?
As all types of resources become more in demand, we are moving to more commodity-driven market places. Oil has lead the way, with wheat and corn close behind. These three items drive cost of living indexes, and the daily patterns of us all. We like to think we live in the age of technology, and to be sure, innovation is increasing rapidly. However, it is traditional commodities that now drive our markets in ways we could never have imagined.
Globalization only expounds this phenomenon. Commodities are much more heavily contested and traded (driving prices further). We are feeling the full weight of population explosions, as global population growth and consumption has finally outstripped our ability to increase resource delivery. As the American dollar plunges in value, the USA's ability to purchase resources becomes crippled, while other nations abilities is enhanced. (There is a positive side to this, as the USA has the opportunity to become more of a producer of resources, mitigating its huge consumption trend.) This upset will take years to stabilize, and will create new way of doing things. Off/on-shoring will take an entirely new meaning.
What does this mean for technology? Technology will move to a more utility role. It will be the medium/tools that the new global commodity market is driven with. Innovations will center more on telecommunications, logistical mapping and control, trading, and process analysis. Business solutions, as opposed to consumer solutions (which have driven technology over the last 5 years). As consumer consumption slows down and business demands increase, this is already beginning to show in the market. Technology will always be innovating, however it will now be the tools of innovation, not the product of innovation.
As with technology, everything else will be driven by the acquisition and transfer of resources. Developing countries are well positioned to take advantage of this, which will ultimately balance the global economy in a way that is difficult for us Americans to imagine. The great fortunes, innovations, and entrepreneurs of the next age will be the innovators of this model.
Globalization only expounds this phenomenon. Commodities are much more heavily contested and traded (driving prices further). We are feeling the full weight of population explosions, as global population growth and consumption has finally outstripped our ability to increase resource delivery. As the American dollar plunges in value, the USA's ability to purchase resources becomes crippled, while other nations abilities is enhanced. (There is a positive side to this, as the USA has the opportunity to become more of a producer of resources, mitigating its huge consumption trend.) This upset will take years to stabilize, and will create new way of doing things. Off/on-shoring will take an entirely new meaning.
What does this mean for technology? Technology will move to a more utility role. It will be the medium/tools that the new global commodity market is driven with. Innovations will center more on telecommunications, logistical mapping and control, trading, and process analysis. Business solutions, as opposed to consumer solutions (which have driven technology over the last 5 years). As consumer consumption slows down and business demands increase, this is already beginning to show in the market. Technology will always be innovating, however it will now be the tools of innovation, not the product of innovation.
As with technology, everything else will be driven by the acquisition and transfer of resources. Developing countries are well positioned to take advantage of this, which will ultimately balance the global economy in a way that is difficult for us Americans to imagine. The great fortunes, innovations, and entrepreneurs of the next age will be the innovators of this model.
Friday, March 21, 2008
The Story of a Rock Star
(Repost from a Selling to Small Business blog to which I contribute.)
In a former life, I was in the music industry. I met the right star at the right time, and my entrepreneurial spirit did the rest. I was a part of an innovative group that developed new versions retro grass roots marketing and distribution. We dabbled in internet distribution before most people knew what the internet was. We had some star power behind us and we had a lot of fun!
To the public, the star is everything. In the industry, the star is simply the leading edge marketing tool. They are the story and the talent that leads consumers to products. Talent is important; the star has to have a great media presence, a great voice, inherent performance compulsions, and a moderate ability to think on their feet. Talent in one area is not hard to find. Talent in all areas is in abundance in every major city. But talent with a great story is rare. These are the stars. They sell products.
I was fortunate to work with one of the best star stories of the last decade. I first met this star before her 20th birthday. She lived in her van, and sang nights at a coffeehouses and bars. She was fortunate enough to get a spot in a San Diego club and was surrounded by some leading talent of the early nineties. She studied them and learned from them. There were more talented people around her, but she was the one to receive a big contract. She had one of the biggest debut albums of all time, with a number of subsequent albums.
There are many aspects to her story that can illustrate the points that I am getting to, but I'll just share one. I attribute a single reason this songwriter became a star. While all the very talented musicians around her spent their time between and after sets, hanging out back stage and drinking (among other things), the teenage girl did something different. She met her fans and really talked to them. She told her story at every show. She positioned herself at the exit and shook every patron's hand. She asked people if they liked her music. She asked people to come back and see her. One of those hands she shook was an executive from Atlantic Records. They came back to see her, and brought a contract.
This is my first contribution to a new Evan Carmichael blog. They are a few analogies I will draw from this story over the next months. The basics are these: Every small business owner is a rock star. Every small owner has a story and some degree of talent. Every small business owner wants you to know their story, not just their "music". Later we'll talk about how every small business owner only wants to sing and tell their story, just like a rock star. If you are going to sell to a rock star, you must understand these things. Finally, we'll talk about how to take this and shape into a sales strategy. We'll talk about how to convince a rock star that you are the best agent. And if you are still reading, we'll talk about how to get a rock star to sell product.
In a former life, I was in the music industry. I met the right star at the right time, and my entrepreneurial spirit did the rest. I was a part of an innovative group that developed new versions retro grass roots marketing and distribution. We dabbled in internet distribution before most people knew what the internet was. We had some star power behind us and we had a lot of fun!
To the public, the star is everything. In the industry, the star is simply the leading edge marketing tool. They are the story and the talent that leads consumers to products. Talent is important; the star has to have a great media presence, a great voice, inherent performance compulsions, and a moderate ability to think on their feet. Talent in one area is not hard to find. Talent in all areas is in abundance in every major city. But talent with a great story is rare. These are the stars. They sell products.
I was fortunate to work with one of the best star stories of the last decade. I first met this star before her 20th birthday. She lived in her van, and sang nights at a coffeehouses and bars. She was fortunate enough to get a spot in a San Diego club and was surrounded by some leading talent of the early nineties. She studied them and learned from them. There were more talented people around her, but she was the one to receive a big contract. She had one of the biggest debut albums of all time, with a number of subsequent albums.
There are many aspects to her story that can illustrate the points that I am getting to, but I'll just share one. I attribute a single reason this songwriter became a star. While all the very talented musicians around her spent their time between and after sets, hanging out back stage and drinking (among other things), the teenage girl did something different. She met her fans and really talked to them. She told her story at every show. She positioned herself at the exit and shook every patron's hand. She asked people if they liked her music. She asked people to come back and see her. One of those hands she shook was an executive from Atlantic Records. They came back to see her, and brought a contract.
This is my first contribution to a new Evan Carmichael blog. They are a few analogies I will draw from this story over the next months. The basics are these: Every small business owner is a rock star. Every small owner has a story and some degree of talent. Every small business owner wants you to know their story, not just their "music". Later we'll talk about how every small business owner only wants to sing and tell their story, just like a rock star. If you are going to sell to a rock star, you must understand these things. Finally, we'll talk about how to take this and shape into a sales strategy. We'll talk about how to convince a rock star that you are the best agent. And if you are still reading, we'll talk about how to get a rock star to sell product.
Monday, January 21, 2008
The Pitfalls of Deferred Compensation
I have recently been asked if I would "jump-in" to a start-up for 100% "deferred compensation" or equity. My answer was a definitive "NO".
My experience (on both sides of the coin) is what drives my agreements for "jumping in". I have found that unless there is at least minimal salary paid ($2k-$4K month) plus long-term, success-driven compensation (stock, equity, profit sharing, etc.), one or more of the following things WILL happen (usually all of these to some degree):
1. The company will not fully value the energy and investment the individual puts in (particularly before it creates revenue, when all the hardest work happens).
2. The individual will not full value the company and invest their time and energy fully (driving the company to revenue as rapidly as possible). This is inevitable and can kill a company (I don't care how motivated either is).
3. The company will probably lose a key individual at a critical moment because they got a great offer from a later stage company that brings their personal finance to a high cash flow positive (instead of cash flow negative). As a result, the company could lose the contract (or investor).
4. The company founder gets tired and folds. The partner/employee is left with nothing.
You could get lucky and find someone with great personal resources that will work for deferred salary/equity. In fact, it happens often. See number 2 again. It will happen. Let's say I have $7 million in the bank, but I like work, so I get involved with you. Then my daughter gets married. And I invest in an exotic resort in the Caribbean that I like to visit. I buy a new boat to play with. My energy involvement in the company slows; the company's growth slows. You may find a capable executive that has a reserve of cash or a severance agreement. See number 3. The chance of one of these two being the case is about 90%.
A minimum salary creates commitment and loyalty between the company its contributors that an equity stake just can't create. I have seen this happen both ways time and again.
I've been the start up guy with "my" company. On the part of the company, we want to take the smallest risk possible. We want our employees to take that risk with us, though they will not reap nearly the reward we will when success is reached. (Their ROI is not as high for the risk) In doing so, we create more risk around our success. With limited resources this seems necessary, but there are often ways to create a little cash flow to create this commitment. The key is to make the commitment in the right areas first.
A better path for business/corporate development is to allocate a small salary for that individual to pay their household bills (hence creating loyalty). Compliment this with significant bonuses associated with sales/investment milestones. Then ice the cake with a long-term vesting equity stake. This would interest me, and I could bring some a great wealth of experience and talent to bear on both business development and corporate development.
I am so clear on this that I won't get involved any other way. This may be tough for a founder to hear, but any talent looking for a great opportunity will probably say the same.
If the time to grow your business is right now, you may also look to your board of directors for help. At this stage, you should have picked board members that can provide limited resources part time, but can commit to a number of years. This is significant talent. These people will be contributors of one or more primary pieces of success. They will be strategic partners, possible clients, or experts. They will bring resources to the table. Standard practice for board members of a start-up is to compensate these board members with vesting equity. However, if you need someone to hit the phones, visit clients, or create documentation- you will need to hire.
Entrepreneurs are brave and courageous. They deserve respect and loyalty. But they must also grant this to those that help them realize their dreams. Properly executed this will pay dividends to the success of the business over the years.
My experience (on both sides of the coin) is what drives my agreements for "jumping in". I have found that unless there is at least minimal salary paid ($2k-$4K month) plus long-term, success-driven compensation (stock, equity, profit sharing, etc.), one or more of the following things WILL happen (usually all of these to some degree):
1. The company will not fully value the energy and investment the individual puts in (particularly before it creates revenue, when all the hardest work happens).
2. The individual will not full value the company and invest their time and energy fully (driving the company to revenue as rapidly as possible). This is inevitable and can kill a company (I don't care how motivated either is).
3. The company will probably lose a key individual at a critical moment because they got a great offer from a later stage company that brings their personal finance to a high cash flow positive (instead of cash flow negative). As a result, the company could lose the contract (or investor).
4. The company founder gets tired and folds. The partner/employee is left with nothing.
You could get lucky and find someone with great personal resources that will work for deferred salary/equity. In fact, it happens often. See number 2 again. It will happen. Let's say I have $7 million in the bank, but I like work, so I get involved with you. Then my daughter gets married. And I invest in an exotic resort in the Caribbean that I like to visit. I buy a new boat to play with. My energy involvement in the company slows; the company's growth slows. You may find a capable executive that has a reserve of cash or a severance agreement. See number 3. The chance of one of these two being the case is about 90%.
A minimum salary creates commitment and loyalty between the company its contributors that an equity stake just can't create. I have seen this happen both ways time and again.
I've been the start up guy with "my" company. On the part of the company, we want to take the smallest risk possible. We want our employees to take that risk with us, though they will not reap nearly the reward we will when success is reached. (Their ROI is not as high for the risk) In doing so, we create more risk around our success. With limited resources this seems necessary, but there are often ways to create a little cash flow to create this commitment. The key is to make the commitment in the right areas first.
A better path for business/corporate development is to allocate a small salary for that individual to pay their household bills (hence creating loyalty). Compliment this with significant bonuses associated with sales/investment milestones. Then ice the cake with a long-term vesting equity stake. This would interest me, and I could bring some a great wealth of experience and talent to bear on both business development and corporate development.
I am so clear on this that I won't get involved any other way. This may be tough for a founder to hear, but any talent looking for a great opportunity will probably say the same.
If the time to grow your business is right now, you may also look to your board of directors for help. At this stage, you should have picked board members that can provide limited resources part time, but can commit to a number of years. This is significant talent. These people will be contributors of one or more primary pieces of success. They will be strategic partners, possible clients, or experts. They will bring resources to the table. Standard practice for board members of a start-up is to compensate these board members with vesting equity. However, if you need someone to hit the phones, visit clients, or create documentation- you will need to hire.
Entrepreneurs are brave and courageous. They deserve respect and loyalty. But they must also grant this to those that help them realize their dreams. Properly executed this will pay dividends to the success of the business over the years.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Entrepreneurship: To be King, or to be Rich?
In my last post, I talked about two styles of entrepreneurship, "Lifestyle" and "Impact". There is another way to look at entrepreneurship and what you want from it. This is not so different from the last discussion, but has a different view point of the same thing.
When engaging an entrepreneur, I ask them the question, "Do you want to be King, or do you want to be Rich?" Most reply that they want to be Rich, without hesitation, but when I look at their business, I see that they are King, which prevents them from being Rich.
Undoubtedly, every entrepreneur has a bit of each. It takes ego to be an entrepreneur, and ego likes to be King. However, it is only through the discipline of suppressing the King ego can we become Rich.
Kings, at least in the old days, had absolute control of their kingdom. They were the end-all of decision making and had absolutely power. Most small business today is run in such a way. This is not to say it is inefficient or unprofitable, but that profit's growth is limited by the organizational structure. Without delegation of power, an organization's growth is limited to only what the King can handle. Different Kings has different limitations, but the limitation exists none-the-less.
Kings often hold all the expertise and believe that they alone know the best way to rule their kingdom. Again, this has growth limitations that are obvious. Kings are often married to one goal as well. That their kingdom will be most successful doing X and Y in the Z market. And they know this better than anyone.
To become truly Rich, one must let go of all these limitations. Responsibility and expertise must be delegated. Control must be relinquished. Others must be allowed to participate in the growth and the rewards. Bill Gates did not become the wealthiest man in the world alone. Microsoft created dozens of billionaires, each with ownership of one piece of that success.
Here is the key distinction: Is it more important to you that you be successful or that your company is successful? Do you want to be King, or do you want your company to be King? Are you willing to give up some Kingship to be Rich?
When engaging an entrepreneur, I ask them the question, "Do you want to be King, or do you want to be Rich?" Most reply that they want to be Rich, without hesitation, but when I look at their business, I see that they are King, which prevents them from being Rich.
Undoubtedly, every entrepreneur has a bit of each. It takes ego to be an entrepreneur, and ego likes to be King. However, it is only through the discipline of suppressing the King ego can we become Rich.
Kings, at least in the old days, had absolute control of their kingdom. They were the end-all of decision making and had absolutely power. Most small business today is run in such a way. This is not to say it is inefficient or unprofitable, but that profit's growth is limited by the organizational structure. Without delegation of power, an organization's growth is limited to only what the King can handle. Different Kings has different limitations, but the limitation exists none-the-less.
Kings often hold all the expertise and believe that they alone know the best way to rule their kingdom. Again, this has growth limitations that are obvious. Kings are often married to one goal as well. That their kingdom will be most successful doing X and Y in the Z market. And they know this better than anyone.
To become truly Rich, one must let go of all these limitations. Responsibility and expertise must be delegated. Control must be relinquished. Others must be allowed to participate in the growth and the rewards. Bill Gates did not become the wealthiest man in the world alone. Microsoft created dozens of billionaires, each with ownership of one piece of that success.
Here is the key distinction: Is it more important to you that you be successful or that your company is successful? Do you want to be King, or do you want your company to be King? Are you willing to give up some Kingship to be Rich?
Two Styles Create Two Outcomes of Entrepreneurship
There are many different ways to become an entrepreneur and many different styles of entrepreneurship. However, entrepreneurship can be very roughly categorized into two styles. These can best be defined by their desired outcomes.
The first is a "Lifestyle Entrepreneur". This entrepreneur wants to create a good income for themselves, wants to be in complete control of that income, and wants the flexibility to make lifestyle decisions- such as take the day off to go fishing, or take three weeks off to take a family vacation. In this path, lifestyle may take precedence over overall return on investment. As long as a substantial income continues, the entrepreneur is happy. Most "mom and pop" businesses fall under this category. Most small businesses also fall here, as well as independent professionals such as doctors, dentists, accountants, and attorneys. The risk is often relatively short lived and minimal. One can make a very good living as a Lifestyle entrepreneur,and if they manage their finances smartly, can become independently wealthy. However, at times, lifestyle may trump finances. The business then runs into problems.
The second style of entrepreneurship is what I call a "Impact Entrepreneurship". The desired outcome is high-growth. This type of entrepreneur typically wants to grow from a small business to a large business. They want to either make an impact on the world or create great wealth- often a combination of both. These people are willing to undertake larger risk over an extended period of time with the vision of large returns. The organization is designed (or should be) for constant and radical growth (2-4x revenue each year). Margins are thin in the first 3-5 years. However, once high-growth has been achieved, some very attractive exit strategies materialize. A first or second round of funding can occur to take growth to the next level. Or the company for a significant profit to the owner. Both can create great wealth, the first allows the entrepreneur to continue to create an impact or "change the world".
Sometimes a lifestyle business will accidentally convert to a high-growth business. This may be driven by changing goals of the the entrepreneur. However, sometimes it just happens because the business is at the right location, in the right industry, with a rapidly growing demand. In these cases, the entrepreneur must make a choice to change personal goals and lifestyle, or to suppress the business. This decision is often be delayed because the entrepreneur is uncomfortable with the related decisions. Delay serves to suppress the business. Organizational, financial, and quality control decisions that support high growth are not made. The business can begin to crumble. Perhaps not immediately, but surely over time.
Lifestyle entrepreneurship is most often engaged to create a sense of independence, that the entrepreneur is not reliant upon anyone for income, expertise, and lifestyle decisions. It takes time to achieve this goal. Lifestyle entrepreneurs are often frustrated with slower results. Further, if presented with a high-growth opportunity, Lifestyle entrepreneurs are often reluctant to give up independence and decision-making power. Impact entrepreneurship is dependent upon many factors. Financial obligation exist to investors, banks, or both. Expertise is generally held by an employee or partner. Decisions must be delegated. The market is often more volatile. Business travel is required. Time obligations are intense. This is a much different lifestyle.
The rewards are different. Successful Lifestyle entrepreneurship creates financial freedom and a fluid lifestyle relatively quickly. It creates a "family" business that can be passed on. It creates the satisfaction of being a business owner. Successful Impact entrepreneurship creates significant personal wealth, but is delayed 5-15 years. This personal wealth creates greater freedom and can be passed on to family or charity. It creates the satisfaction of having made an impact on the world around you.
Neither is the right way. But both have distinctive requirements and a conscious decision should be made at all times to engage in one or the other. You may have to make this decision every year. Your personal goals may change. Life is like that. But we must make the decision and take responsibility for the obligations and rewards associated.
The first is a "Lifestyle Entrepreneur". This entrepreneur wants to create a good income for themselves, wants to be in complete control of that income, and wants the flexibility to make lifestyle decisions- such as take the day off to go fishing, or take three weeks off to take a family vacation. In this path, lifestyle may take precedence over overall return on investment. As long as a substantial income continues, the entrepreneur is happy. Most "mom and pop" businesses fall under this category. Most small businesses also fall here, as well as independent professionals such as doctors, dentists, accountants, and attorneys. The risk is often relatively short lived and minimal. One can make a very good living as a Lifestyle entrepreneur,and if they manage their finances smartly, can become independently wealthy. However, at times, lifestyle may trump finances. The business then runs into problems.
The second style of entrepreneurship is what I call a "Impact Entrepreneurship". The desired outcome is high-growth. This type of entrepreneur typically wants to grow from a small business to a large business. They want to either make an impact on the world or create great wealth- often a combination of both. These people are willing to undertake larger risk over an extended period of time with the vision of large returns. The organization is designed (or should be) for constant and radical growth (2-4x revenue each year). Margins are thin in the first 3-5 years. However, once high-growth has been achieved, some very attractive exit strategies materialize. A first or second round of funding can occur to take growth to the next level. Or the company for a significant profit to the owner. Both can create great wealth, the first allows the entrepreneur to continue to create an impact or "change the world".
Sometimes a lifestyle business will accidentally convert to a high-growth business. This may be driven by changing goals of the the entrepreneur. However, sometimes it just happens because the business is at the right location, in the right industry, with a rapidly growing demand. In these cases, the entrepreneur must make a choice to change personal goals and lifestyle, or to suppress the business. This decision is often be delayed because the entrepreneur is uncomfortable with the related decisions. Delay serves to suppress the business. Organizational, financial, and quality control decisions that support high growth are not made. The business can begin to crumble. Perhaps not immediately, but surely over time.
Lifestyle entrepreneurship is most often engaged to create a sense of independence, that the entrepreneur is not reliant upon anyone for income, expertise, and lifestyle decisions. It takes time to achieve this goal. Lifestyle entrepreneurs are often frustrated with slower results. Further, if presented with a high-growth opportunity, Lifestyle entrepreneurs are often reluctant to give up independence and decision-making power. Impact entrepreneurship is dependent upon many factors. Financial obligation exist to investors, banks, or both. Expertise is generally held by an employee or partner. Decisions must be delegated. The market is often more volatile. Business travel is required. Time obligations are intense. This is a much different lifestyle.
The rewards are different. Successful Lifestyle entrepreneurship creates financial freedom and a fluid lifestyle relatively quickly. It creates a "family" business that can be passed on. It creates the satisfaction of being a business owner. Successful Impact entrepreneurship creates significant personal wealth, but is delayed 5-15 years. This personal wealth creates greater freedom and can be passed on to family or charity. It creates the satisfaction of having made an impact on the world around you.
Neither is the right way. But both have distinctive requirements and a conscious decision should be made at all times to engage in one or the other. You may have to make this decision every year. Your personal goals may change. Life is like that. But we must make the decision and take responsibility for the obligations and rewards associated.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Entrepreneurial Advantage Over Legacy Businesses
I subscribe to The Ladders jobs site, not just because I am always seeking new opportunity to make a difference, but because I believe the site seeks to provide excellent service and does not fleece the customer in the process. It is a job site that offers true value just for providing your e-mail address, unlike some of the other sites which are just posting board revenue-generators. As a consumer, I like that.
Each week I receive a newsletter from The Ladders that includes a blog-like story from the President, Marc Cendella. Much to my delight, I often find these interesting. I recommend them to anyone that is in the job market or thinks they may be someday.
Today, Cendella posted a newsletter that really made me smile and get on my soapbox. I've included a link to the full text of "Man, I hate American Airlines". (Catchy title, eh?) The general line of the excerpt was this: Cendella was on an American Airlines flight (we all know how bad that can be!) and encountered a flight attendant wearing a pin that said, "I have no idea why I work here." His reaction was this:
"And while Mom said if you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all, I wish the Katherines and the American Airlines of the world nothing but failure. Failure in their campaign to pull down the productive people, failure in their efforts to keep winners from winning, and failure in the marketplace so that better people and companies can serve American Airlines customers."
Wow. Cendella really hit the nail on the head. I too wish these companies and people nothing but failure. They hold us back. They hold our culture back from achieving excellence by forcing us to deal with complacency. Our government (supposedly Republican) has taken to bailing these businesses out of their own self-created problems. Let them die I say. They are dinosaurs, struggling to survive in a world no longer suitable for them. It is time they go extinct.
The typical argument to this path is a lamentation about "all those jobs". That is extortion and altogether bogus. If those people are enterprising workers and seriously about their careers, they will quickly find jobs with new, growing airlines that deliver great rates and great service. or they will find jobs with new companies that will emerge in the cities in which they live. They will prevail and be better for it. We can teach them and help them do that.
But we can no longer subsidize complacency. It will cripple our economy and our culture. Not just for the inertia it creates, but for the opportunity it blocks. Just as the dinosaurs gave way to better adapted and ultimately more successful mammals, these crippled legacy business must give way to new, innovative, flexible ventures. The opportunity we are missing is the opportunity to build something bigger, better, faster, more efficient, which is most easily done from the ground up. Let's take those industries completely apart and rebuild them. Already you can see this happening all over the world, mostly in Asia. New car companies, new airlines, new electronics, building better products for less money. They will inherit the earth. They are entrepreneurs.
Each week I receive a newsletter from The Ladders that includes a blog-like story from the President, Marc Cendella. Much to my delight, I often find these interesting. I recommend them to anyone that is in the job market or thinks they may be someday.
Today, Cendella posted a newsletter that really made me smile and get on my soapbox. I've included a link to the full text of "Man, I hate American Airlines". (Catchy title, eh?) The general line of the excerpt was this: Cendella was on an American Airlines flight (we all know how bad that can be!) and encountered a flight attendant wearing a pin that said, "I have no idea why I work here." His reaction was this:
"And while Mom said if you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all, I wish the Katherines and the American Airlines of the world nothing but failure. Failure in their campaign to pull down the productive people, failure in their efforts to keep winners from winning, and failure in the marketplace so that better people and companies can serve American Airlines customers."
Wow. Cendella really hit the nail on the head. I too wish these companies and people nothing but failure. They hold us back. They hold our culture back from achieving excellence by forcing us to deal with complacency. Our government (supposedly Republican) has taken to bailing these businesses out of their own self-created problems. Let them die I say. They are dinosaurs, struggling to survive in a world no longer suitable for them. It is time they go extinct.
The typical argument to this path is a lamentation about "all those jobs". That is extortion and altogether bogus. If those people are enterprising workers and seriously about their careers, they will quickly find jobs with new, growing airlines that deliver great rates and great service. or they will find jobs with new companies that will emerge in the cities in which they live. They will prevail and be better for it. We can teach them and help them do that.
But we can no longer subsidize complacency. It will cripple our economy and our culture. Not just for the inertia it creates, but for the opportunity it blocks. Just as the dinosaurs gave way to better adapted and ultimately more successful mammals, these crippled legacy business must give way to new, innovative, flexible ventures. The opportunity we are missing is the opportunity to build something bigger, better, faster, more efficient, which is most easily done from the ground up. Let's take those industries completely apart and rebuild them. Already you can see this happening all over the world, mostly in Asia. New car companies, new airlines, new electronics, building better products for less money. They will inherit the earth. They are entrepreneurs.
Friday, October 26, 2007
Leaping is fun with a parachute!
A leap faith is often noted as a blind jump into the unknown. I take issue with this. When the topic comes up, I respond that, "Leaping is fun with a parachute!" I currently and frequently have taken huge leaps of faith. I have, as often as not, plunged to the ground. As time passes however, I find myself soaring more often. I have learned two important lessons that help me create a parachute.
First, your single biggest responsibility is absolute commitment, with no doubts. It is critical to hold the vision. Never look back from the leap. The minute you let the vision go, your commitment falters, and with it your performance, creativity, and motivation. You become part of the problem. You then MUST accept full responsibility for any failures that follow, even those not directly related to you. Because doubt is contagious.
Second, because leaps require such commitment, it is essential to remove risks as early and quickly as possible. You should never leap into thin air. Learn critical assumption planning. Identify where assumptions are being made by yourself and other principals. Remove those assumptions by testing. Do so very early, before taking the leap, if at all possible.
It took some hard falls to learn these lessons, and they are reinforced daily. But those lessons create growing success and I have learned to relish the results.
First, your single biggest responsibility is absolute commitment, with no doubts. It is critical to hold the vision. Never look back from the leap. The minute you let the vision go, your commitment falters, and with it your performance, creativity, and motivation. You become part of the problem. You then MUST accept full responsibility for any failures that follow, even those not directly related to you. Because doubt is contagious.
Second, because leaps require such commitment, it is essential to remove risks as early and quickly as possible. You should never leap into thin air. Learn critical assumption planning. Identify where assumptions are being made by yourself and other principals. Remove those assumptions by testing. Do so very early, before taking the leap, if at all possible.
It took some hard falls to learn these lessons, and they are reinforced daily. But those lessons create growing success and I have learned to relish the results.
Monday, October 8, 2007
Intrapreneurship: Anyday, Everywhere Entrepreneurship
I recently learned a new term that delights me: Intrapreneruship. Wikipedia defines an intrapreneur as "the person who focuses on innovation and creativity and who transform a dream or an idea into a profitable venture, by operating within the organizational environment." This delights me for two reasons. First, it steps outside the box that entrepreneurialism is typical placed in. Second, it describes much of my career in a word.
In my bio or my personal elevator pitch, you will frequently find the words "worked within an entrepreneurial environment for much of his career". Now I can just say "career intrapreneur" and be done with it. How great is that? I have not yet started my own high-growth entreprise. I will, later in life. But I have helped many people bring their dreams to fruition. Is that not entrepreneurship just as much as the founding father/mother? The fact of the matter is that entrepreneurial behavior is everywhere. It drives growth in every aspect of life. It is the foundation of evolution. We would not have the wheel or fire without entrepreneurial activity.
For us to package entrepreneurs in a box that says "Sole Proprietor", or "Start-Up", or "Small Business", or "Venture Capital" is completely missing the point. The fact of the matter is that our the word entrepreneur is like the word "snow", one word used to describe an entire variety of actions. The Inuit have more than four dozen words for "snow", each to describe a different type of snowing, or a different type of snow flake. Entrepreneurialism is the same. Here are just a few other words for entrepreneurs: Project Manager, Preacher, Farmer, Broker, Mother, Architect. Entrepreneurs are creators and innovators. They are people that drive change, create growth, and embrace progress. They are everywhere. They are our future.
Post-Script: Anytime that I discuss entrepreneurship in this blog, I am also directly referencing intrapreneurship. The founding principles are one in the same.
In my bio or my personal elevator pitch, you will frequently find the words "worked within an entrepreneurial environment for much of his career". Now I can just say "career intrapreneur" and be done with it. How great is that? I have not yet started my own high-growth entreprise. I will, later in life. But I have helped many people bring their dreams to fruition. Is that not entrepreneurship just as much as the founding father/mother? The fact of the matter is that entrepreneurial behavior is everywhere. It drives growth in every aspect of life. It is the foundation of evolution. We would not have the wheel or fire without entrepreneurial activity.
For us to package entrepreneurs in a box that says "Sole Proprietor", or "Start-Up", or "Small Business", or "Venture Capital" is completely missing the point. The fact of the matter is that our the word entrepreneur is like the word "snow", one word used to describe an entire variety of actions. The Inuit have more than four dozen words for "snow", each to describe a different type of snowing, or a different type of snow flake. Entrepreneurialism is the same. Here are just a few other words for entrepreneurs: Project Manager, Preacher, Farmer, Broker, Mother, Architect. Entrepreneurs are creators and innovators. They are people that drive change, create growth, and embrace progress. They are everywhere. They are our future.
Post-Script: Anytime that I discuss entrepreneurship in this blog, I am also directly referencing intrapreneurship. The founding principles are one in the same.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
