ideasarehere

Funny how a seemingly simple phrase can be interpreted in various ways. In his best-selling book, Michael E. Gerber wrote “The business model should be such that the employees needed possess the lowest possible level of skill necessary to fulfill the functions for which each is intended.”

In Linchpin, his latest book, Seth Godin now concludes that this kind of thinking will not be the one to create a sustainable business, because cheap labor produces cheap results, which leads to fighting over price, creating a race to the bottom instead of the top.

My take on this is a little different, because M. E. Gerber came out with his phrase in the context of systems. So I think what he really means is to create a system that does not require excellent people to run properly. To design a system that is (continually being) so refined that it allows more freedom for the employees, that they can focus on doing what’s important and don’t get stuck in the paperwork or whatever keeps them busy. Despite its name, business is not about keeping your employees busy but keep them working, creating more value.

I also believe that as an entrepreneur you have a social responsibility. Everybody has a right to work (and to get paid for it), regardless of their intellectual capabilities. And it’s quite unsocial to expect everybody to give you (and your products) a chance when you don’t give everybody a chance to be part of it. And this will only work when it’s not necessary to be you to do your job. That’s why systems are created. The key to scale and replicate the business. The only difference is that your system can grow a lot quicker with an excellent person in charge.

It’s important to constantly review your business in terms of what you are really doing. Once you lose track and start looking at your business from just one angle, you run the risk of missing the next step you need to take to stay in business. Basically, you can have one or more of the following roles: Buyer, Supplier or Catalyst.

As a Buyer, you do exactly that. Which is why most businesses aren’t Buyers, because even though they might need to buy commodities or services, they alter them and make them available to another Buyer.

Which could make you a Supplier. A Supplier is a source of a certain good, and (ideal for himself) the only source of this good, or service. Whenever someone is in need of this particular item, she addresses the Supplier in order to retrieve what is needed. This is classic industrial economy.

And now for the Catalyst. In chemistry, a catalyst is an element that makes a reaction happen quicker or more efficient, without being affected by it. Certain reactions even just need the catalyst as an ignition spark and then proceed by themselves. A lot of new businesses are like this, say Social Networking or Bookmarking Sites. When you go into business today, chances are quite high that your business is a Catalyst. The risk of this is that you may very quickly become redundant. Which is why you better keep a critical eye on whether you’re still needed, and how you can improve and evolve, because that’s the only two ways that will keep your business alive. You cannot rely on what you’re doing today will save your bacon tomorrow.

After some more in-depth inquiry, my new acquaintance with the local bus company has come up with some more information.
Quote: “There are no scientific studies about the effectiveness of markings in the bus doorway, but numerous findings from everyday experience.” No need to give this statement another whack on the head, we’ve heard it much too often. Beep. Next.

Quote: “We do not understand why a possibly curt request to free the doorway is not considered to be compatible with the basic ambition to satisfy our customers.” It’s really hard not to get sarcastic here. Considering the possibility that they actually mean it, there’s a lot of work that needs to be done.

And finally, they told me their campaign was published on posters (sorry, that’s too much information on them and thanks to my cool new iGadget I’m not quite bored enough to read a dozen paragraphs on the verge of insulting me),  a press release (who wants to read an article about a company starting a no-fun campaign?) and a brochure that was mainly spread at schools (finally, mass marketing to an audience who will not listen — why should they?). And the web, of course! The last resort. Buried in the clutter, it didn’t save them.

I’ll send them a final mail to round this off, containing two questions: What have you learned from this and what will you do different in the future?

It’s interesting to see what happens when organizations start opening up, no matter if they are really doing it (most aren’t). Because now the angry mob has a forum to vent their emotions. Everybody who has never been asked, listenend to or been treated badly now has a chance to speak up. And guess what, they do. But the question is, will this really make a difference? Will this be an opportunity that’s not going to waste? Will the ones in charge see the signal, listen to the conversation and review what they are doing?

I wouldn’t bet on it. Sorry to sound that pessimistic, but changing the mindset of the people of an organization requires more than opening a customer forum and start staff blogs. If it were that easy, you wouldn’t be reading this.