“There is a difference between leadership and management. Leadership is of the spirit, management is of the mind. Managers are necessary, but leaders are essential. We must find managers who are not only skilled organizers, but inspired and inspiring leaders.” Field Marshall Slim
You can buy someone’s physical presence, but you cannot buy loyalty, enthusiasm or devotion. These you must earn: Successful organizations have leaders who focus on the future, rather than cling to the past. Leaders bring out the best in people. They spend time developing people into leaders.
Here – in my humble view – are the qualities of a genuine leader: Leaders have a clear vision of what they are working towards. They don’t keep their vision a secret – they communicate it to their people. Leaders are consistent – they keep their principles and values at all times. Leaders can and will do what they expect of others – they are prepared to walk the talk. Leaders are not threatened by competence – they enjoy promoting people and are quick to give credit to those who have earned it. Leaders enjoy developing their people into leaders, not followers – they train people to take on more challenging tasks and responsibilities. They develop people’s confidence. Leaders don’t betray trust – they can treat confidential information professionally. Leaders are concerned about getting things done. They don’t get embroiled in political infighting, gossip and backstabbing – they encourage those around them to do likewise. Leaders confront issues as they arise. They do not procrastinate – if something needs fixing, they do it right away, even if it is uncomfortable. The longer things are left, the more difficult they become. Leaders let people know how they are doing – they reward and recognize performance that is above expectations and they help people identify ways of improving poor performance. Leaders are flexible. They welcome change – they do not stick to an old position simply because it is more comfortable. Leaders are adaptable – they see change as an opportunity rather than a threat. Leaders are human. They make mistakes – when they do so, they readily admit it. Leaders reflect on and learn from their mistakes – they see errors as a chance to improve their skills. Leaders enjoy challenge. They are prepared to take risks and encourage others to do likewise – if they fail, they treat the exercise as a learning experience. Leaders focus on the future, not the past. They anticipate trends and prepare for them – they develop a vision for their team and communicate it to them. Leaders are open to new ideas – they demonstrate their receptiveness by supporting change. Leaders treat staff as individuals – they give closer attention to those that need it and lots of space to those that deserve it. Leaders encourage and reward co-operation within and between teams.
Team Leadership Leaders develop guidelines with their team – they constantly enlarge the guidelines as the team becomes willing to accept more responsibility. Leaders change their role according to the demands of the team – for example, they become more of a coach or facilitator. Leaders listen to their team members. Leaders involve people in finding new ways to achieve agreed-upon goals. Leaders create the opportunity for group participation and recognize that only team members can make the choice to participate.
In Summary
Without managers, the visions of leaders remain dreams. Leaders need managers to convert visions into realities. For continuous success, organizations need both managers and leaders. However, as most seem to be over-managed and under-led, they need to find ways of having both at the same time. Perhaps the best way to handle this paradox is for managers to aim to be managers when viewed from above, leaders when viewed from below and to remember that the need for leadership grows as we move up the organization. This is only one of the challenges that can make working life fun.
If you’ve been in business for any length of time, you’ve had at least one bad client. While some entrepreneurs seem to be born with an invisible force field that repels bad clients, others attract them like a picnic lunch draws ravenous ants.
If you’re in the latter category, there’s hope. You too can learn to spot bad clients before they become a drain on your time and on your business.
There are many different types of bad clients, typified by certain undesirable traits. Here are six of them.
1. Time wasters.
Time is money, and the financial success of your business depends on using your time efficiently. Clients who tell you they want one thing and then change their minds time and time again after you’ve provided exactly what they said they wanted waste your time and make you less productive. There are only a limited number of hours in a day, so don’t squander them on bad clients who continually disrupt your workflow.
2. Energy zappers
Along with time, energy is an entrepreneur’s most valuable and salable commodity. Uncommunicative, uncooperative or just plain obnoxious clients drain your energy. Their tactics can range from persistent passive-aggressiveness to outright verbal abuse. Worst of all, their negativity is contagious. Try to drop these vitality-vampires like a bad habit before you get sucked in.
3. Fee hagglers.
Clients who pester you to lower your fees don’t truly value what you provide, and most likely never will. However, there are exceptions. Clients who are trying to get their business off the ground may have limited funds, or may be working for a cause that you passionately support. Just be aware of what really matters to you, and set clear boundaries when deciding whether to accept “charity” cases.
4. Commitment phobic.
Some people like to “shop around” and consider all their options before they choose how to spend their money. There's certainly nothing wrong with that, as long as their actions can signify that they’re serious about finding the right fit for their particular needs. Beware. Their indecisiveness could be a red flag warning they may well repeat that pattern once you start working together.
5. Criticizers and complainers.
Some customers are never satisfied, no matter what you do to please them. When clients provide negative feedback about your pitch or the work you’ve done, it’s important to determine its validity and make improvements as indicated. But some people make it a habit to continually criticize and complain about everything because nothing is ever good enough for them. It’s good sense to avoid these bad clients whenever possible.
6. Late payers.
You have a business to run, which requires steady cash-flow, so clients who don’t pay invoices on time disrupt your financial viability. But perhaps more importantly, people who constantly delay payment don’t sufficiently appreciate the value you bring to their business. When clients fail to meet payment deadlines, stand your ground. If you’ve met your obligations, they need to meet theirs. Those who repeatedly don’t pay up promptly are less-than-ideal clients.
To run a successful business, you can't spend your time nursing bad clients. Avoid them (or fire them) and you will have more room to focus on clients who are a joy to work with and appreciate you.
To prosper in the face of turbulent change, organizations need to improve how they deal with unexpected disruptions to complex supply chains. Companies can cultivate such resilience by understanding their vulnerabilities — and developing specific capabilities to compensate for those vulnerabilities. Joseph Fiksel, Mikaella Polyviou, Keely L. Croxton and Timothy J. Pettit
In an interconnected, volatile, global economy, supply chains have become increasingly vulnerable. Disruptions — even minor shipment delays — can cause significant financial losses for companies and substantially impact shareholder value. Globalization has made anticipating disruptions and managing them when they do occur more challenging. The potential risks of disruptions are often hidden, and the potential impacts may not be understood. This often results in “black swan” events that can be understood only after the fact. As author Nassim N. Taleb has warned, “Our world is dominated by the extreme, the unknown, and the very improbable ... while we spend our time engaged in small talk, focusing on the known and the repeated.”1
Although companies originally moved production offshore to countries such as India and China to take advantage of lower labor costs, events like Iceland’s 2010 volcanic eruption and the Japanese tsunami in 2011 have shown that the vulnerabilities of extended supply chains are real and serious. For example, according to the U.S. Federal Reserve, 41% of Minnesota manufacturers said that Japan’s tsunami had affected them negatively.2 As a result, many manufacturers have reevaluated their sourcing options, and some are shifting operations back to their home markets. While these companies perceive other advantages to reshoring, including improved responsiveness and domestic job creation, reducing their exposure to risk has been an important driver.
The reality is that supply chain practices designed to keep costs low in a stable business environment can increase risk levels during disruptions. Just-in-time and lean production methods, whereby managers work closely with a small number of suppliers to keep inventories low, can make companies more vulnerable due to the lack of buffer capacity. For example, many companies that followed the lean inventory model were severely impacted by Japan’s tsunami: Within a week, General Motors Corp. temporarily shut down its Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon plant in Shreveport, Louisiana, because it lacked components supplied from Japan.3
Supply chain practices designed to keep costs low in a stable business environment can increase risk levels during disruptions. Just-in-time and lean production methods, whereby managers work closely with a small number of suppliers to keep inventories low, can make companies more vulnerable.
While companies tend to focus on the supply side of their operations when scanning for potential risk factors, they also need to pay attention to the customer side. Increasing demand volatility is an important factor that can affect a company’s operations and ultimately its revenue. For example, in March 2013 Cardinal Health Inc., a distributor of pharmaceuticals and medical products based in Dublin, Ohio, announced that its contract with the drugstore chain Walgreens would not be renewed. Walgreen Co., based in Deerfield, Illinois, had been one of Cardinal Health’s largest customers, accounting for more than 20% of revenue for 2012. The news caused Cardinal Health’s share price to plummet by 8.2%.4 However, the company was able to recover quickly and continue its growth thanks to deliberate efforts to expand and diversify its customer base.
Coping With Supply Chain Risks
Traditional methods for coping with supply chain risks are based on the notion of stability as the “normal” state of affairs: Events such as explosions or floods are seen as unwanted deviations from the norm. In recent decades, most large private enterprises adopted systematic approaches to managing their risks, notably through insurance and active mitigation of supply chain risks. The importance of risk management was elevated by a number of high-profile disasters, including the deadly release of poisonous gas from a Union Carbide plant in Bhopal, India, in 1984, which resulted in thousands of deaths. Further motivation came from standards set by nongovernmental organizations such as the International Organization for Standardization and from government legislation, including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s requirements for disclosure of “material” business risks and the German “Law for Control and Transparency in Business Entities.”5
A more integrated approach to risk management, called “enterprise risk management (ERM),” became popular in the mid-1990s and has been widely adopted by large corporations.6 It gives company executives a detailed and comprehensive view of the risks associated with different business activities, enabling managers to make more informed decisions about how to manage risk portfolios. Another risk management process, known as business continuity management (BCM), incorporates elements from disaster recovery planning and crisis management, including how to respond to disruptions and maintain backup capacity for operational systems.7
While processes such as ERM and BCM can help companies avoid supply chain disruptions and recover normal operations quickly, they also have serious limitations. To begin with, they rely too heavily on risk identification. In a complex and turbulent global supply network, many of the risks that a company faces are unpredictable or unknowable before the fact. These “emergent” risks are often triggered by improbable events whose causes are not understood, and their potential cascading effects are difficult to understand a priori. Clearly, it would be impractical for companies to identify and investigate all the potential risks that may be hidden in their global supply chains.
Second, ERM and BCM depend on statistical information that may not exist. Risk assessments are limited by the quality and credibility of the assumptions upon which they are based, and faulty assumptions or data can lead to misallocation of resources. Of particular challenge are low-probability, high-consequence events for which there is little empirical knowledge; managers may underestimate the probabilities of these events or the magnitudes of their consequences because they have never experienced them.8
Third, the traditional ERM process of risk identification, assessment, mitigation and monitoring is based on a simplified, “reductionist” view of the world. Each risk is identified and addressed independently, and hidden interactions are seldom recognized. This procedural approach can lull organizations into a false sense of complacency that could be shattered by an unexpected event (for instance, an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico). The complex, dynamic nature of global supply chains requires constant vigilance to discern systemic vulnerabilities, as well as exceptional agility and flexibility when disruptions occur.
Finally, traditional risk management is predicated on the goal of returning to a stable operating condition; risks represent potential deviations from this “normal” state. However, a more realistic view is to recognize that every disruption represents a learning opportunity that may suggest shifting to a different state of operations. For example, a company that anticipates increased flooding in Southeast Asia might migrate its supply base elsewhere. Identifying latent opportunities in the risk landscape will enable a company to exploit those opportunities faster than its competitors.
The Need to Cultivate Resilience
We believe that organizations need to improve how they deal with supply chain complexity and unexpected disruptions so that they can prosper in the face of turbulent change. Organizations tend to become less resilient as they grow more complex. However, they can cultivate resilience by understanding their supply chain vulnerabilities and developing specific capabilities to cope with disruptions. They can try to emulate some of the behaviors seen in natural systems — tolerance for variability, continuous adaptation and exploitation of opportunities created by disruptive forces. Resilient systems don’t fail in the face of disturbances; rather, they adapt. Depending on the type of disturbance, the adaptation can be rapid or gradual.
A decade ago, authors Gary Hamel and Liisa Välikangas described the quest for resilience as seeking “zero trauma.”9 Few corporate managers believe that zero trauma is a realistic goal today, but some now recognize that resilience can be an important success factor that complements their traditional risk management processes. We define resilience as “the capacity of an enterprise to survive, adapt and grow in the face of turbulent change.”10 In practical terms, resilience means improving the adaptability of global supply chains, collaborating with stakeholders and leveraging information technology to assure continuity, even in the face of catastrophic disruptions. Resilience goes beyond mitigating risk; it enables a business to gain competitive advantage by learning how to deal with disruptions more effectively than its competitors11 and possibly shifting to a new equilibrium.
A classic example of supply chain resilience occurred in 2000 when one of Finland-based Nokia’s key cellphone part suppliers suffered a major fire. By identifying the crisis quickly, Nokia was able to secure alternative supplies and modify the product design to broaden its sourcing options. By contrast, Swedish multinational Ericsson, which was reliant on the same supplier, lost about $400 million in sales due to its slowness in crisis response and eventually exited the cellphone business.12(However, Nokia subsequently made serious missteps in its efforts to compete in the smartphone market and ultimately sold its devices business to Microsoft Corp.)
Supply Chain Vulnerabilities and Capabilities
Our SCRAM (supply chain resilience assessment and management) framework enables a business to identify and prioritize the supply chain vulnerabilities it faces as well as the capabilities it should strengthen to offset those vulnerabilities.
Over the past seven years, we have worked with a number of companies, including fashion retailer L Brands Inc. (formerly known as Limited Brands), Dow Chemical, Johnson & Johnson and Unilever to develop a comprehensive framework for assessing supply chain vulnerabilities and addressing them through enhanced resilience capabilities. (See “Supply Chain Vulnerabilities and Capabilities.") To develop our taxonomies of vulnerabilities and capabilities, we studied existing literature and also conducted interviews and focus groups with managers and employees at Limited Brands and other companies that had experienced supply chain disruptions.13 Subsequently, we identified linkages between specific vulnerabilities and capabilities, enabling us to suggest proactive strategies for improvement, and we developed an assessment tool for business use.14 The resulting framework, which we call supply chain resilience assessment and management (SCRAM), is based on an explicit characterization and prioritization of an organization’s vulnerabilities and capabilities. (See “About the Research.”)
Identifying Resilience Factors and Linkages
Based on our research, we identified six major types of supply chain vulnerabilities, which we define as “fundamental factors that make an enterprise susceptible to disruptions.” A frequently cited factor was turbulence. In the context of our framework, turbulence is defined as changes in the business environment that are beyond a company’s control, including shifts in customer demand, geopolitical disruptions, natural disasters and pandemics. Another category of vulnerability isdeliberate threats, such as theft, sabotage, terrorism and disputes with labor or other groups. Additional vulnerabilities came from external pressures that create constraints or barriers (such as innovations, regulatory shifts and shifts in cultural attitudes); resource limits that have the potential to constrain a company’s capacity (such as availability of raw materials or skilled workers); thesensitivity and complexity of the production process; and the degree of connectivity in the company’s supply chain, which implies a need for coordination with outside partners. Finally, supply chains are vulnerable to disruptions that could affect their multiple tiers of customers and suppliers. (See “Supply Chain Vulnerability Factors.”)
Supply Chain Vulnerability Factors
Our framework includes six major vulnerability factors, each broken into subfactors. Vulnerabilities are typically inherent to the business and difficult to avoid.
In addition to helping us formulate the list of vulnerabilities, focus groups also helped us define a list of capabilities that companies can call upon to respond to their particular vulnerability patterns. In all, we identified 16 relevant capabilities, which we define as “factors that enable an enterprise to anticipate and overcome disruptions.” These are: (1) flexibility in sourcing, (2) flexibility in manufacturing, (3) flexibility in order fulfillment, (4) production capacity, (5) efficiency, (6) visibility, (7) adaptability, (8) anticipation, (9) recovery, (10) dispersion, (11) collaboration, (12) organization, (13) market position, (14) security, (15) financial strength and (16) product stewardship. (See “Supply Chain Capability Factors,” for explanations of these 16 capabilities.) Using the lists of vulnerabilities and capabilities as a template, we tested them at eight companies to understand their interrelationships, with the goal of creating a managerial tool for improving performance. We identified 311 separate “linkages” whereby specific capabilities can counteract specific vulnerabilities.
Supply Chain Capability Factors
The framework includes 16 capability factors, each of which is broken into subfactors. Companies can strengthen appropriate supply chain capabilities to offset the vulnerabilities they have.
Our resulting SCRAM framework provides a general methodology for companies to identify their most important supply chain vulnerabilities and to set priorities for capabilities that need to be strengthened. For example, a company that faces unpredictable market demand could strengthen a number of capabilities: flexibility in manufacturing to satisfy surges in demand; accurate, up-to-datevisibility of demand status to support timely decision making; early anticipation and recognition of market changes to enable strategic responses; and close collaboration with customers and suppliers to ensure coordinated action. Similarly, a company concerned with dependence on a complex supply network could work on flexibility in sourcing by identifying alternative sources, flexibility in manufacturing by reducing lead times, and anticipation by recognizing early warning signals of possible disruptions. Based on the results of their SCRAM analysis, managers can develop a portfolio of capabilities to address important resilience gaps and strengthen overall competitiveness.15
Putting the SCRAM Framework to Work
Although similar organizations are likely to share some similar features, different companies — and even business units within companies — will have their own distinct profile of vulnerabilities and capabilities. An organization with high vulnerabilities that does not have adequate capabilities will be overexposed to risks; in response, it should invest resources in improving the particular capabilities in question. Conversely, an organization that faces low vulnerabilities but invests heavily in capabilities may be eroding its profits unnecessarily. (See “Finding the Zone of Balanced Resilience.”) Clearly, there is no “one-size-fits-all” approach. Organizations need to pursue a balanced resilience strategy by developing the right portfolio of capabilities to fit the pattern of vulnerabilities that they face.
One company that has incorporated the SCRAM framework into its way of doing business is the Dow Chemical Co. Since 2010, Dow has implemented this framework at more than 20 of its global business units, achieving significant business benefits. For example, after applying the SCRAM process to its P-Series family of glycol ether products, Dow identified several disruption scenarios, including a production site shutdown, a raw material supply outage and an internal raw material allocation shortage. The company developed a simulation model to test the consequences of these scenarios and was able to confirm a 95% service level with its existing capabilities. Moreover, the analysis revealed opportunities for reduction of fixed assets and working capital, resulting in $1.1 million in annual savings.16 Another Dow business used SCRAM to improve its resilience to raw material supply shortages and identified more than $1.5 million in preventable losses.
The SCRAM approach represents a systems view of supply chain dynamics, helping companies to understand the inherent vulnerabilities that could lead to disruptions and the capabilities that are within their control. By learning from experience and developing a better understanding of their vulnerabilities and capabilities, companies can reduce the frequency of disruptions and the severity of their impacts, resulting in increased customer satisfaction and reduced supply chain operating costs. While reducing inherent vulnerabilities may be difficult, there are many options for improving capabilities. The cost of the improvements must be balanced against the expected supply chain performance benefits.
Early adopters of resilience thinking have already demonstrated how they can augment traditional risk management practices with new capabilities that help them to anticipate, prepare for, adapt to and recover from disruptions. In some cases, they are able to treat disasters as opportunities for gaining competitive advantage. For example, before the 2010 eruption of the Eyjafjallajökull volcano in Iceland grounded millions of air cargo shipments, DHL, the international shipping company, had an emergency plan in place. It was thus able to rapidly redirect 100 flights from its hub in Leipzig, Germany, to destinations in southern Europe that were less affected, and also to shift many deliveries to ground vehicles. Ultimately, DHL was able to avoid significant financial impact while strengthening customer loyalty.17
Early adopters of resilience thinking have already demonstrated how they can augment traditional risk management practices with new capabilities that help them to anticipate, prepare for, adapt to and recover from disruptions.
Building resilience is not a substitute for other methods of ERM. Rather, it is an ongoing process that enables companies to embrace change in a turbulent and complex business environment by expanding their portfolio of capabilities. The field of supply chain resilience is still young, and there is a great need for additional research, both to understand the resilience of complex industrial systems and to develop innovative methods and technologies for improving enterprise resilience.18This research will benefit from drawing upon multiple disciplines, from ecology to social sciences to systems engineering. From a management perspective, executives need to understand the cost-benefit trade-offs associated with building capabilities in order to judge the return on their resilience investment; this will require additional empirical research. Finally, there is a need to expand resilience thinking into other aspects of enterprise management, such as organizational resilience and behavior change. Establishing a culture of resilience will help companies to thrive in an age of turbulence.
REFERENCES (18)
1. N.N. Taleb, “The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable,” 2nd ed. (New York: Random House Trade Paperbacks, 2010).
2. U.S. Federal Reserve Board, “The Beige Book” (April 13, 2011), www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/beigebook.
Getting on the internet marketing bandwagon can prove to be the best decision an entrepreneur decides to take when they start their new business. This is because this form of marketing aligns along with the nature of customers who make decisions regarding purchases. Marketing through internet allows the business to build a relationship with their customer and even their prospects. This method of communication with both is cost effective, regular, and is a form of mass marketing. Here are some more benefits of internet marketing for small businesses online.
Convenience for International Customers and Prospects
The internet allows you to do your business around the clock and that too internationally. No more worrying about getting your store open on time anymore, or about keeping an eye over your employees. By offering products directly to the customers online, you are allowing them a convenient option of shopping. They can easily browse though all categories, read through the product descriptions, and talk to an active customer representative when they need help. Not to forget the payments options, which they can select, according to which one is best suited for them. If they have the experience they were expecting from your services, they will refer your website to more customers, increasing the amount of traffic.
Costs
Doing business online and doing business in a physical retail outlet has differences when it comes down to the cost. When you own a store online, you do not need to hire many employees; one or two are enough. In addition, you will not need to buy displays, shelves, freezers, coolers, or anything which may increase the amount of money you are investing. An online store needs someone who can attend to customers, someone who is handling calls and emails, and a couple of helping hands who are stocking the inventory in the warehouse. No need to pay rents, property tax, and major saves on utility bills as well.
Social Platform Advantages
Internet marketing allows an online business owner to make the most of the internet in almost every aspect. Free publicity through platforms like Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, drive massive numbers of traffic back to the business’s website. If everything is properly managed, the business will be a major success, and majority of the reason behind this success is going to be none other than internet marketing.
This instructive and astute montage centers around Brad Sugars’ formula for the 5 Ways to Massive Profits. The author of “Instant Cashflow” and “The Business Coach,” Brad Sugars explains step-by-step his “business chassis” to increase profits and build an amazingly powerful, super-producing, profit-yielding business
A proactive strategy in a business involves anticipating the dynamics of the market and the probable changes in competition, well in advance. This approach includes predicting and identifying the change before it actually occurs and adopting a suitable alternative strategy as a result.
This approach revolves around the concept that it is essential to be well aware of the dynamics of the market, and thus, take actions to prepare in advance, and shift the organizational responses to different altered environmental factors.
Businesses that are active in the technological industry; need to keep abreast of the new ideas being introduced within the market, and design appropriate plans of action to quickly adapt to an ever changing market environment.
Adopting a proactive approach helps spend time and money in the right way, while building the organization. It helps the organization save both, time and money, in the short and long term as well. With a clear idea of what to expect in the future, an organization and its employees are prepared with a strategic plan, to counter the effects of a major policy change or critical alteration in the industry procedures.
By opting for a proactive approach, a business can build the company right, from the start, by designing a structure which is well aligned to their own goals, mission, vision and objectives, with the future in mind. This will help the organization take every business decision on the basis of their short and long term objectives that are planned in advance, keeping the probable changes in the market dynamics in mind.
A reactive approach is tantamount to giving a reaction, once a major change has taken place in the market. It is just like opting to change the entire outdated software and technological system within the company, after the latest advancements have taken the industry by storm; speeding business processes and leaving you unable to cope.
As opposed to this, an organization which works with a proactive approach, will update its system processes with the first proved advantage of the new technological systems, and will improve their efficiency to increase their market share, where a reactive approach organization is still scrambling to regain their former clients.
Given the marked differences in both approaches, which approach would you want to opt for in your business?
My definition of a business is a commercial, profitable, enterprise that works without me. 80% of businesses fail within 5 years of start-up and most fail because the owner didn’t know what to do. Business is like a game, if you want to play the game, you need to learn the rules. You need to learn from someone who’s succeeded at the game, not from scorekeepers (accountants), the rule makers (lawyers), the spectators (employees), the money holders and collectors (Bankers) and not from D- grade players (business owners who are just going to fail).
Here are the 5 Levels of Entrepreneurs to give you a framework that’ll allow you to understand yourself and the thoughts you have that got you to where you are now, as well as the tools to grow from where you are now to where you want to be…
Level 0 – The Employee
Everyone starts here but it’s not the most recommended strategy for wealth creation. Your income is at the mercy of someone else’s decision on how much they decide to pay you. Many employees relate to money that it is scarce, that there never seems to be enough, but that’s not true if you look a little deeper.
Level 1 – The Self-Employed
Here is the first jump someone takes from being an employee to being-self employed, however it is quite common that people will get stuck here. Rather than it being their business, they’ve become an employee to their own business. You get stuck working IN the business rather than working ON the business.
Level 2 – The Manager
You’ve finally grown your business and now have employees and you’re starting to feel like your business has started gaining momentum… It’s easy to get stuck on this level as well, especially when you find yourself working harder, longer hours, doing your own work and fixing other people’s mistakes. In order to get out of this level you want to work on your systems, you must have good systems that allows the business to function smoothly.
Level 3 – The Owner/Leader
If a business stops growing, it begins dying. As the Owner/Leader you have more time on your hands than you ever had before. Previously your focus was on cashflow and now your focus will shift into profit. At this level you will now be receiving profits rather than making and/or earning money.
Level 4 – The Investor
Investors have a very different way of thinking when compared to those on previous levels. As an investor you make your money selling businesses, not running them. You buy the business, build them up and then sell them to other people. Look for the best investment return.
Level 5 – The Entrepreneur
This is the most exciting level to be on. At this level you begin making money by raising capital. You use other people’s money to build paper assets like shares, franchises and licenses. Sell the dream, and then work like heck to make it a reality. Never give up. Stay focused and committed and always keep your mind focused on what isn’t real but soon will be.
Trust yourself and your team, to turn it into a reality.
