Understand anything and everything

On this Armistice Day, I’m reminded of the wisdom of the Vets who influenced my life. Typically, this means lessons learned from my dad and father-in-law, who both served as B-52 mechanics (Presque Isle, Carswell, etc). Seems that the harder the lesson was to understand and learn, the more value it holds.

Watching the election returns come in reminded me of an old joke that a successful landing is any landing you can walk away from. When the context of survivors is “political parties who do things the way they’ve always done them”, it’s too early to tell if anyone survived Tuesday’s landing.

For those who didn’t come here for politics, have no fear, we’ll circle back to a place very much in context with you and your clientele.

I have often noted that anything you do is everything you do, and Tuesday was a world-class illustration.

Hearing what you want to hear

After the Presidential votes are counted, everyone’s a pundit. We know what happened through the view seen from our own window on the world. Some saw it as a shocker. Some as a GOP mandate. Some as a long overdue rejection of the political establishment. You can count me in the third group.

It’s like the “crazy” family member at Thanksgiving dinner. If you don’t know who it is, it’s probably you.

Collectively, the RNC couldn’t believe they had to run with Trump until they had no choice. Likewise, the DNC couldn’t believe their “luck” that the RNC was stuck with Trump. I suspect the RNC couldn’t believe their luck when Hillary was nominated.

Neither party realizes they’re the crazy family members at the table.

Each party’s echo chamber remains in pre-election condition. Before long, I expect you will start seeing signs of “not getting it” in each party’s behavior. I’d like to be wrong about that, but it’s difficult to change organizations of this type, particularly when they say what they say so they can hear it again.

Listen to, understand and know your clientele

Neither party seems to understand one of the messages the election sent: “Stop sending us the same old candidates who do whatever the party wonks say while delivering nothing the candidate promised“. That it was delivered to both parties by the same candidate is noteworthy.

This happens after decades of not listening to your clientele (yes, voters are a clientele). It happens after decades of telling your clientele you’re going to deliver, but you never do. Not that they delivered two days late, or two months late but NEVER.

With that, let’s start to tie these events to your business.

Circling back with understanding

Until it happens, it’s extraordinarily difficult to understand what it’s like for a factory to close in your town. Most politicians think they understand it because they’ve seen photos and spreadsheets, talked to the former plant manager and toured the factory. You can’t really understand it without living it. Unless you worked there, live in the town, know the people, know their kids, see them them at ball games and grocery stores, it’s difficult to understand. Even then, unless your job is one of the ones that was lost, you don’t really get it.

The business owner has a parallel. They’ve lost customers, or lost or closed a business in the past. They understand that every day, their business is up for re-election.

If I asked your clientele to vote anonymously for your business’ survival, what outcome would you expect? Every stop or visit to your website is a vote of confidence. If they’re tired of your place or want a change, it’s a vote in the other direction.

Like a politician, you have two choices. You can depend on your echo chamber like those political parties, or you can get nose to nose, toes to toes with your clientele and learn what really makes them tick, what makes them worry, what takes away their pain and why they like (or don’t like) you. It’s hard (sometimes exhausting) work much like campaigning.

When you know your clientele better than anyone, it changes anything and everything. Your behavior, service, team, products, marketing and reaction to events that affect your clientele – they all reflect that knowledge.

If you’re a politician… it works roughly the same way, notwithstanding the votes you get simply because you’re a member of a particular party.

Why do startups fight city hall?

This past weekend, I had a brief discussion about Uber, France, tech startups and the need to “fight city hall”. It all started after I posted a story about an upcoming Paris taxi strike, which is designed to send a warning message to the French government and French people from a highly entrenched monopoly.

The message is “Don’t support something that threatens our monopoly or we will shut down the city.

The key thought in the article was that French government’s handling of the Uber situation is an illustration of what’s wrong with entrepreneurism in France and that the situation affects all French startups rather than solely impacting Uber.

It seems the laws in France are designed to frustrate entrepreneurs attempting to enter established markets, if not to suppress all new business entries. The article goes on to make note that all of this goes on while France’s leadership talks about how they want to encourage entrepreneurship.

Why care about what happens in Paris?

What in the world does this have to do with small business in the U.S.?

Similar things occur here in the States and in many cases, startups end up feeling forced into a situation where they are left with no choice but to fight city hall – often because the alternative is to be legislated out of business with the help of an entrenched competitor. Sadly, this “competitor” isn’t the least bit interested in competing. They’re happy to use the local and regional governments’ desire to protect the citizenry as a means of raising the bar into entering “their” market.

Most U.S. based entrepreneurs tend to avoid such battles because they are expensive, frustrating and quite often do nothing more than waste a business owner’s time and money.

Yet startups like Uber are often found doing that very thing – taking on governments to eliminate protections that were once created due to a public safety interest but have been perverted into something that seems perfectly designed to preserve and protect entrenched businesses not only from new entrants into the marketplace – but from their clientele as well.

Why startups?

Why are tech startups picking on established markets? And why do so many of them seem to want to fight city hall?

They often do this because that’s where the market is. We talk about the opportunity you create simply by improving service to clients here on a regular basis – and do so because it is one of the easiest ways to transform your business. Service – one of the essential things a business delivers – has gone from a foregone conclusion to a differentiating factor.

Uber is perhaps the most obvious and the easiest example to make note of, but they are far from alone on this one. Part of their attraction to consumers is how easy they make it to use their services when compared to most of their competition. Even now, their obstacle isn’t that cab companies all over the world have increased the quality of their cars, the ease of booking and paying for a ride, etc. No, their biggest obstacle is local / regional governments, many of whom have fought to keep Uber out.

The thing is, it isn’t really about Uber. They’re simply today’s easiest and most visible example to understand. What this is really about is creating more barriers to entry into a market.

Old rules that favor one company or one technology are what start ups deal with every single day. In fact they often focus on those areas because they make the market attractive. Markets with poor service often slowly become that way because of a lack of competition created by artificially created barriers to entry. Often companies in those markets treat their customers so poorly that people do business with them only because have no other choice.

These are markets that have repeatedly sent a message to their clientele that they need to be taught a serious lesson. Most local entrepreneurs can’t afford to fight City Hall. Only those who are highly capitalized have that luxury in most situations – the luxury of out-waiting and perhaps, out-spending city hall, something no small business owner can do.

As any small business owner knows, there are plenty of barriers to entry as it is. Be careful not to ask your representatives to help you create more of them, as the next time, it could be your business that’s targeted the next time. Each one of these barriers that is successfully installed makes it easier to create another one.

Starting a new business is hard enough as it is. Let’s not create more barriers.

What does your community’s welcome mat say?


Creative Commons License photo credit: archerwl

A state association of businesses has pushed legislation into our state house that would limit the on-premise retail sales volume of a related group of businesses.

Yes, we talked about this recently, but today let’s go beyond this one business, this one time.

That situation is just a symptom of a far bigger concern.

For an established business with good wholesale distribution in place, retail sales limitations wouldn’t be a big deal – except that those same businesses already have legislated production and sales volumes that limit their growth.

These production/sales limitations brilliantly restrict both growth and new businesses in that market.

One of our town’s newest businesses, started by a young family, is placed in jeopardy by this legislation just weeks before their doors open.

That doesn’t mean the “other guys” don’t have grievances to settle (such as a level compliance playing field), but those grievances aren’t going to be cured by artificially limiting sales numbers.

Even so, it shouldn’t be about one business group over the other – both have the right to do business. I know business owners and employees on both sides. I believe these two groups have much more to gain by cooperating.

While the specifics of issues like this will change from year to year, what concerns me most is the message these situations send.

What’s the message to young families and entrepreneurs?

Last week, we talked last week about what communities do to encourage young families and businesses to put down roots or return to the area. Governments and community economic development groups put a lot of effort into these programs. Meanwhile, legislative proposals that limit the growth of new small businesses fly directly in the face of that work.

My question to those in the State House is this: Does legislation that chooses one market over another send the message you want to send from your state, much less your community?

Do laws like that encourage young families to stay and invest in your community? Does the legislature realize that when a small business person sees this done to one business niche, they can’t help but wonder if it will be done to another niche in the next session?

The message we heard then

When we moved our family and our business here in the late 1990s, one of the reasons we chose Columbia Falls was the warm response we received from folks around town. When we said we were considering moving here, the typical response was something like “That’s great. We’d be happy to have you here.”

While schools, the Park and recreation opportunities were important, the overwhelming “this is the right place” feeling came from the welcoming nature of the people we met.

The message I heard back in the 90s was not “Be a no-holds-barred success at all costs.” It was “Build it here. Be a good corporate citizen, a good employer, a profitable example for others who want to build / relocate a business here, and an asset to your community. Become a member of the family.”

If things didn’t work out or legislation targeted my business, I could always move it out of state because it isn’t tied to a brick and mortar retail location. It’s a by-design luxury and a property of the kind of work we do.

Thing is, brick and mortar retailers, restaurants, microbreweries and most services businesses really don’t have that choice.

What’s the message now?

No matter what the state house is working on, they must be careful about the message being sent by legislation that artificially manipulates markets and favors one group over another. It’s a message that other business owners and entrepreneurs look for when they choose a home. Business is hard enough as it is without having to fight off competition from the state house.

This session’s controversy in your state house, whatever it might be, will likely be old news next session.

The real concern to have is this: What our legislators do sets out your state’s welcome mat.

Do you want it to say “Welcome to our state” or “Build it somewhere else”?

It’s a bad time

Time Bandit
Creative Commons License photo credit: Ian Sane

Over the weekend, I had a brief conversation about a Wall Street Journal article I had posted to Twitter about the average nationwide earnings of a partner in a U.S. law firm.

I almost didn’t post the link because I had the feeling it would generate a political conversation. Politics was not the point of the post, but given the season…it was bound to go there.

The reason I posted it was to note that someone who typically has started at an entry level position and worked 60-80-100 hour weeks for a decade or more, was doing quite well for themselves and that this wasn’t just Wall Street lawyers.

The number is a nationwide average rather than a “gotta-live-in-a-city-of-5-million to make this kind of money” number. Successful firms with 15-20 lawyers – even those in a town of 50,000 people – will have partners. Maybe even junior partners, even if they aren’t at this “average” pay level.

Oh, the politics

The political end of the conversation was actually a good thing. It turned to us vs. them and executive vs new graduate – specifically that the executive rakes it in while the new graduate struggles to find a lawyer job.

Tell me, if you worked your tail off for a decade after going to college for seven years, would you expect to make what a new grad makes? Would you expect to make what the manager of a successful local restaurant makes? Probably not. When you make partner, you get a percentage of the firm’s profits in part because you are responsible for producing your fair share of them. Responsibility.

Today’s law graduates are probably looking forward to that juicy partner salary, as they should. Unlike the made-for-TV movie where junior graduates on Friday and starts at $200K with a glass-walled office on the following Monday, the “average” new law grad is reportedly in a tough market, according to a June 2012 story in the WSJ.

What prompted me to write about this situation was the assertion that it is a “bad time” to graduate from law school and pass the bar.

In my mind, it’s a great time. Better than next year. Better than the year after that. Frankly, there’s never a bad time to pass the bar, given the gatekeepers that depend on checking that box.

It’s a bad time to be average

I do agree that it is a bad time for some things. It’s certainly a bad time to be an “average” law school graduate. Not because there are 18 quadrillion lawyers and the world doesn’t need another one. Not at all. The world could probably use thousands more great ones. What we don’t need is another average one.

Just like we don’t need another average anything else. Today, “average” means you’re going to struggle.

What else is it a bad time for? It’s a bad time to be average. At ANYTHING. Note: Don’t confuse average with inexperienced.

The conventional wisdom is that it’s also a bad time to start a business. Either the economy is bad or you should just be happy you have a job and wait things out rather than working toward getting a better one or egads, starting a business on the side. Waiting is comfortable. It’s easy.

Yet if you wait, a year from now you won’t be any closer to having that business. Hopefully you’ll still have the job.

The conventional wisdom says “Wait.”

It seems to make sense. “Don’t start something now when the economy is down and the holidays are coming.” Will the economy be better in a year? You have no idea. Oh, but there’s an election coming, so you should wait. Except that there’s another election after that.

Next year, all the people who are starting to look at buying what you would be selling will already have their first vendor. Taking someone away from another vendor is harder than being their first vendor, even if their current vendor isn’t making them happy.

Next year, you’ll have the same job and the same excuses (or corollaries to them) and your biggest regret will be that you didn’t start last year.

It is a bad time for one other thing. It’s a bad time to wait.

The Price of A Hug

Recently, a small business owner hugged the President.

He wasn’t tackled by the Secret Service, or cuffed and taken to jail.

Instead, his business’ Yelp page was inundated with fake reviews from political loyalists from sides of the aisle.

Yelp is a social media business rating/review websites. The timely, personal reviews on this site, like those at UrbanSpoon and TripAdvisor, are highly influential because they come from real customers who post reviews during or immediately after visiting a business.

The mass of reviews weren’t just from those against the hug. Supporters reacted too. Likewise, those reacting to the prior two groups. And those urged on by pot stirrers on both sides.

Thousands of people descended on the review page for this man’s family business, and as is played out every day on newspaper comment sites and blogs all over the world – a “flame war” erupted. The reviews weren’t about the service or the pizza and they weren’t from people who had actually visited the restaurant.

They were about red and blue. Good and evil, evil and good.

The irony of it all: when the business owner was asked about his business, his politics and his impression of the President’s small business policies, he said “My business is stronger than it was four years ago, and that’s because I take accountability for my business,” he said. “I personally run and operate my business, and I don’t depend on the government to help me.

Somehow I suspect neither group of fake reviewers would have expected that.

This is our best?

I struggle with the possible damage inflicted on this business, despite my repeated assertion to business owners that “Anything you do is everything you do.” Usually, that’s about service, marketing and product quality. Today, it includes politics.

Business owners have to be careful about their “public facing persona” because everything they do is on the public’s radar. Whatever you do and say, not only in your business but in public actions and comments, will be evaluated. If you rub the wrong group the wrong way, that group will be quick to dogpile your business. Their efforts could go beyond actions taken from the safety and anonymity of a keyboard.

In the “good old days”, political reactions included lynchings, burning churches and shooting people at medical facilities. Today, reactions could include a “church” members picketing Veterans’ funerals or drive-by shootings. Is the next step is torching pizza joints?

It should make you think before you act/speak.

A choice

What should business owners do about publicly stating political opinions? It’s bigger than a national corporation being boycotted until their issue is pushed off the public’s radar by the latest reality star’s escapades. “Will they burn my building?” or “Will they come after me, my family or my employees?” is a real possibility – as is no reaction at all.

Do you choose to alienate half of your customers by saying something, or say/do nothing publicly in an attempt to avoid angering a cause’s most volatile followers? Does it matter?

For me, these conversations usually have little substance and rarely change minds. In some cases, they serve only to isolate, anger and create divides among people who had no idea they needed to argue about something. My political opinions are no one else’s business until I decide to share them. So far, I see no benefit to the listener for me to share them.

But not everyone agrees with that. Some feel they deserve to know your stance – and that’s their choice, not yours.

Silence has its risks

Silence is often interpreted as tacit approval of a situation or cause. If I don’t publicly react against something, it implies to some that I’m for it.

Make sure everyone understands that the off-hours behavior of management, owners and staff can impact your business. While you can’t regulate their political activity outside of work, it still reflects upon your business and could create conflict at the office – something you have to manage.

Whatever you do, be sure of yourself, your opinions and your actions, and be willing to accept the public’s response, because the one thing you can’t control is the public’s reaction to a hug.

Maker, Taker, Patriot.

Wall Street Journal senior economist Stephen Moore recently wrote a column about “takers and makers“, revealing that “More Americans work for the government than work in construction, farming, fishing, forestry, manufacturing, mining and utilities combined.

Twice as many people (22.5 million) work in government than in manufacturing (11.5 milion).

Upon hearing this, many will launch into their political persuasion’s talking points (regardless of leanings). But it isn’t that simple.

It’s not the 60s anymore

In 1960, about 8.7 million people were government employees. In 51 years, that number has almost tripled. I don’t have a breakdown of the increase in front of me, but a 300% increase is large no matter how you look at it.

Moore derisively calls these 22.5 million “bureaucrats”, which to me coveys the image of the corrupt Daley regime in Chicago or an uncaring, inefficient Department of Motor Vehicles (not what you get in Kalispell’s blue building).

Based on the comments I hear, most don’t view rank and file firefighters, police officers, teachers, train conductors, military personnel and the like as bureaucrats.

In one example, Moore mentions the doubled public school employment between 1970 and 2005, referencing a University of Washington study, as an example of government inefficiency given that standardized test scores haven’t doubled in that time.

Electric shock and cages

In the 1960s, students with Down’s Syndrome, mental deficiencies, autism or physical challenges were treated as second class citizens. Today, they learn as a part of mainstream student populations, just as employers do. Doing this requires increased staff. Some kids have a single staff member dedicated to them. Today we teach topics in school that didn’t exist in 1960, like computers, robotics and computer-aided design (CAD).

I don’t think anyone, with the possible exception of the current Montana Legislature, would wish for a return to the 1960s. Yes, that was sarcasm. Mostly.

If you look at the manufacturing and industrial changes since the 60s, it’s hard not to see the migration of the steel, textile and heavy industries overseas as having a significant impact on employment numbers.

While government numbers have gone up markedly, Moore didn’t address the disappearance of manufacturing and industrial jobs during that same period.

The falloff of employment in those industries didn’t happen in a vacuum.

Blame the third world

The industrial revolution in the U.S. transformed business: Steam, electricity, internal combustion.

In the last 20-30 years, it happened again; fueled by computers, industrial automation and the rise of the third world.

While these changes were decimating U.S. presence in industries like heavy equipment, steel and textiles manufacturing, we retain a reticence to pay anything above 1960s prices for commodities like steel, lumber and textiles.

We kept prices down and competed with cheap overseas labor through industrial automation and computers, but that cost jobs. When someone is laid off from a foundry job, where do they go?

If someone laid off after two decades in one of these industries has an opportunity to share their skills with young people looking to learn a trade, and in doing so, keeps their family off of taxpayer-funded public assistance – are they a maker, a taker or a bureaucrat?

If in that 20 years they didn’t take the initiative (on their personal time) to remain employable by learning a new skill (welding, software, repairing industrial robots, etc), who’s responsible?

Meanwhile…

Industrial automation is replacing cheap third world labor with labor that’s even cheaper. China supplants India, who “stole” the work from US workers. Advances in automation allow us to keep prices low and allow our businesses to avoid paying modern wages for dangerous work now done by machines, but they also eliminate third-world jobs here in the states.

Are those jobs we want? That laid off industrial worker who now teaches…do we *want* them teaching a 1960s or 1970s skill in a 2011 economy?

Businesses of all sizes outsource work because it’s not efficient to keep people on staff to do that work. Business is then more flexible and the jobs we keep are usually more secure, but low-value employment is hammered by it. Is that good or bad?

Nothing is as simple as the politicos and power hungry want you to think.

Want to be patriotic? Invest in yourself, make something that people want/need, and create your own future.

The President of You


Creative Commons License photo credit: dev null

Been talking about this for a good while, glad to find someone else who agrees.

There is one President who matters to your business: The President of you.

What you do today, tomorrow, the next day and every day to improve your products, services, customer support, and to continue to provide better value to your customers makes a ton more difference in the results seen in your business than anything done by anyone else, regardless of party, regardless of office.

Quit fussing over elections and political issues. If you want to make a difference in your business, get to work.

PS: Happy Veterans Day. Thank you to Veterans for all you did. Thank you to active duty personnel for all you’ve done and continue to do.

Driving Miss Daisy… at 6000 mph

You might be aware that the Google Fiber for Communities applications are due Friday.

And yeah, I’m a little annoyed about it.

See, I watched the “big city” media interview local internet providers in Bozeman and Missoula and managed to avoid throwing shoes at my monitor as I listened to their management universally declare that there was more than enough bandwidth in place already.

This self-serving response came when they were asked to react to the Google Fiber applications filed by Bozeman and Missoula.

This Google project has communities all over the U.S. applying to be one (or more, perhaps) of the lucky communities where Google will install one *gigabit* internet service.

Once built, it won’t be free, but it’s a little crazy to think about what that kind of bandwidth would mean to business, education, industry and so on.

One gigabit internet service. One billion bits per second.

Currently, I use Bresnan’s 15mb/second (15mb down, much much less up). Given that 10 years ago, we were on dialup here in Columbia Falls, things could definitely be worse.

On the other hand, to listen to these people say “we have all we need” makes me want to trade their regular coffee for Folger’s.

100 times

Google’s fiber is supposed to be roughly 100 times faster than the average best speed (across all local providers here) that you can get now.

If I could safely drive the 140 or so miles to Missoula 100 times faster than I do now, I could get there in 15 minutes. Would that change the economy of your area? Probably.

BUT that’s really only 10 times faster.

At 100 times faster, I could be in Missoula in slightly more than 90 seconds and Billings or Seattle in less than 5 minutes. Thanks Dr. Porsche!

The obvious question

“What would you do with that kind of bandwidth? You can’t even use it all.”

Yeah and all I need is 640 meg of RAM, right Mr. Gates?

Horse biscuits.

So what *would* I do with all that bandwidth?

Here are a few people who’d impacted by it: radiologists, remote medical clinics, telecommuting programmers, doctors (especially remote ones), graphic artists, video editors and other creative types, corporate educators, K-12 and other educators, among others.

Oh and maybe something related to that health care bill a few people have been talking about.

If you take that bill and you shake the business out of it, you’ll find a massive pile of programming projects and medical technology opportunities.

Remember how things changed when “everyone” could afford a refrigerator?

Consider that effectively removing (for now, at least) the impact on work and more importantly, the design thought process, if bandwidth constraints were no longer a design consideration. Kinda like someone inventing a cheap fridge and giving it to a caveman.

Jobs

Maybe we’d eventually be overrun with geeks, but you know what else we’d be overrun with?

Jobs. Someone has to manage the geeks. Someone has to feed them. Sell them a car. Run their servers. Plow their parking lots. Build their homes. Teach their kids. Pour their beer. Serve their meals. Drive their families to the airport. Do their taxes. Divorce them. Marry them. And so on.

Oddly enough, situations like this tend to mushroom. Some of those people quit the companies that brought them here and start something more important (to them, and maybe to us).

If it seems like a long shot, consider what happens if the community that gets that service happens to compete with 6 (or 60) of the best / biggest / strongest / most innovative employers in your area.

Or with you.

Suddenly, that community is the hottest thing going. It’s in the news. Confidence there soars. Home prices start to rise, allowing upside down homeowners to get out if they want. Everyone wants to move their business there. All that stuff.

Coulda been your town.

Where were you when the iPhone and Kindle were being designed?

Indian Sign
Creative Commons License photo credit: truedudi

As we discussed yesterday, anti-competitive businesses sometimes do “unfair” things.

Occasionally, they commit illegal acts to gain an edge. Commonly mentioned examples include bribing officials to get contracts or have them look the other way on enforcement or quality issues.

Sometimes the unethical things are illegal, such as refusing to sell spare parts to repair shops that compete with the manufacturer’s repair department.

The CPSIA/Mattel inspection situation is an example that surely makes you wonder. Legal (perhaps), but unethical handling by both Mattel and the CPSC.

Ultimately, competitive behavior has two sides. Let’s discuss a few examples…

Where were you when Pittsburgh, Tokyo and Guangzhou were investing in internet and manufacturing infrastructure?

  • Were you talking about how your infrastructure/facilities were “good enough”?
  • Do you (or did you) laugh at the quality of products that say”Made in China”? Do you find better alternatives locally?
  • When other companies moved call centers to India, did you follow suit in order to cut costs? Or did you follow suit because they provided better service to your customers?

Where were you (and what were you up to?) when Apple was designing the iPhone? When Amazon was designing the Kindle?

  • What – besides stare and/or cuss – have you done to respond to those “threats”?
  • If you aren’t the most strategically advanced vendor in your market – what have you done about that this year? Next year, will you be in a higher position strategically than you are now? How will you get there?

Where were you in the 90s when Amazon was investing in the long term, developing their e-commerce platform and despite their youth, doing e-commerce far better than anyone else? Note: “investing in the long term” often called “losing tons of money” on Wall Street.

  • Did you spend any time figuring out how your business could incorporate e-commerce – or if it even made sense to do so?
  • When the Kindle came out, did you buy one to better understand the competition that just popped you in the mouth with a right cross?
  • When Costco and WalMart started offering best sellers at or below your wholesale cost, did you complain about unfair competition or did you do something to make your business a better place for readers to buy books?

Where were you over the last 30-40 years as Wal-Mart laid the foundation for today’s domination? (and then continued to improve upon it – and did so right in front of your eyes)

  • Were you making it easier to buy?
  • Were you making it easier to park and enter your business?
  • Were you making is easier to pay your invoice, shop, ship, get a refund, repeatedly place an identical order, or talk to customer service?
  • Were you giving your customers more reasons than ever to come to your store instead of the local box store?
  • Did you start to build(or enhance) a high-value relationship with your customers that no minimum wage employee in a blue vest could *ever* break?

Where were you when Mumbai built business centers out of slums, trained tens of thousands of workers, and built a modern communications infrastructure?

  • Were you enjoying your existing legacy, built 40-50-60 years ago? (Ask Woolworth where that got them).
  • Were you letting your city or your manufacturing plant rot while holding out for another government bailout or sweetheart contract with a government entity?
  • Did you spend more on lobbyists in the last 5 years than you did on educating your employees?

Where were you when colleges and secondary schools in China and India were ramping up the quality and technological level of the training they deliver?

  • Were you complaining about your school taxes or local school boards?
  • Were you complaining about the parking problems caused by the local university?
  • Were you whining about the foolishness of having a local community college?
  • Did you sigh in disgust after interviewing yet another unqualified prospective employee?
  • Did you complain to your CPA or another business owner about the cost of training your staff?
  • Were you still running Windows 95 in your schools?
  • Were you ignoring the fact that most of the local school’s students are more technologically savvy than their teachers or administrators (much less their parents)?
  • Have you ever looked at the budget for your local school board? For that matter, do they make it readily available?
  • Have you thought to yourself “Yeah, but we can’t do that here, this is *your town’s name*?”

When things go south

When things go south, our culture (I’m speaking of the U.S., primarily) is to find someone to vilify…to blame. Generally speaking, we must point the finger at someone because it can’t possibly be our fault.

You’ll be glad to hear that I can save you some time there.

If you insist on laying blame, the person who can pull you out of it is the same person can blame: You.

Tomorrow, we talk about that and the ROI (return on investment) of blame.

After 3 days, we’re finally going somewhere positive and useful with all of this.

Do your homework, someone in China is starving for your job

That’s Tom Peters via YouTube.

Initially, he talks about teenagers when referring to a quote from Thomas Friedman, but if you step back a bit, “do your homework” could – and should – be applied to all of us.

Perhaps Tom felt it was easier to make the point about China and India (especially given the “clean your plate” anecdote), but it really isn’t about China or India at all (more on that in a moment).

It’s about competition in general.

Depending on what you do, your fiercest competition might come from Seattle (Amazon), Bentonville (WalMart), Guangzhou, Pittsburgh, Mumbai, Memphis (FedEx) or right down the street.

Once someone has put you out of business (CPSIA and similar issues notwithstanding), it really doesn’t matter where the competition came from, whether it was WalMart, Amazon, Radio Shack or Joe’s Electronics.

No matter how you slice it, the people selling all those cheap Chinese-made electronics (or whatever) put you out of business.

Or your competition ships all their customer service or manufacturing jobs offshore, cutting their costs drastically. “Suddenly”, you can’t compete.

Once your payroll checks start bouncing, you’re still history, no matter what the cause.

If only Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, Obama, your Governor or Congress had done something

Please leave a comment and tell me… who/what do you blame?

We’ll talk more about this as the week progresses.