Making sense since 1984.
  • Home
  • CV
  • I See Living People
  • Maailmanpuolustusvoimat
  • REAL LEADERSHIP GAP
  • Start with what

Introducing: the new entrepreneur (sorry, the customer is not always right)

29/5/2017

 
A real entrepreneur is someone who builds a business of something that the world needs - not vice versa.
​As proper members of a market economy, we are used to thinking that if someone is willing to pay for X, X “creates value” and is worth doing.

Respectively, if no one wants to pay for Y, Y must be pretty useless and is not needed.

As a consequence of this logic, the job of the entrepreneur is to come up with stuff people would like to buy. Preferably something that is a little bit new, so that folks have a reason to buy it, but not too new, so that they still recognise it as stuff they’re used to wanting. This is what in business bullshit bingo we call solving the customer's problems.

More often than not, we are quite far from problems and even farther from solving. What is actually happening is that we're fashioning little minor-to-mediocre needs, and crafting new toys to cater for them. To make this seem rational, we love to say “the customer is always right”.
What happens if we only optimize what sells easily? If we look for stuff where the threshold for people to buy is as low as possible?
We end up producing a lot of adult pacifiers to our varying cravings, insecurities and fears. Not only the obvious ones such as cigarettes, nicely branded organic candy bars, cozy micro-brewery beers and easy solutions to minor newly invented problems. But also more subtle stuff: Ways to feel good and mindful at work even when your company is doing meaningless or even harmful things. Ways to distract ourselves from the overwhelming big problems by engaging in tinkering around small things we can still control - such as cool new bikes, artisanal coffee and restricting our diets to match with "what cave men used to eat".    ​
Picture
The prevailing thinking in business (“the king is he who manages to sell a lot of stuff to people”) has not only led us to be pretty boring in marketing and produce a lot of more of the same. Its more significant consequence is that by using our limited resources (time, intelligence, passion, the planet’s resources) for this kind of short-term pleasing, we fail to create and market products and services that bring about big, difficult and needed changes - that are significantly harder to sell but critical to the development and/or survival of humanity.
But things are changing. It is all part of a bigger transformation happening in business value creation: the special role of business as an agent free from the boring restrictions of ethics has come to an end. 
The reason is simple: Just a century ago, almost any type of business did add some value in the real world. When a farmer in a village grew more crops and made his business grow, most likely that had a net positive impact on the whole village (more dudes employed on his fields, more knowledge on what crops grow where and how, more food on the table for everyone, tax dollars to build a school building, etc). When increases in our material wellbeing had a positive correlation with our wellbeing and development overall, monetary business profit was a pretty good proxy for whether some activity created net value or not.  

However, things have changed more than just a bit in 100 years in terms of what really creates value in the real world. We don’t need a whole lot of more toys, gadgets, and other crap. Almost all of us reading this sentence right now could theoretically eat, drink and entertain ourselves to oblivion any day. Some of us do, I guess. Consuming more isn’t making us happier anymore. 

In a world where we don’t need that much more stuff for individuals, but rather solutions to really big problems where we are jointly owners, who is the entrepreneur?
The Most Amazing Type We Should All Want To Be (MATWSAWTB) is not he who manages to sell a lot of stuff tapping into some existing weakness/craving/addiction of ours. That’s simply an opportunist.

The MATWSAWTB is he who asks himself what the world really needs, starts to relentlessly do that thing - and manages to make people want it and pay money for it.
For me, that’s the heart of entrepreneurship. At least of the kind we actually need. Harder? Yes. The only way for us to move forward and for business to be reborn to serve 21st century challenges? Hell yeah.
Picture
There are essentially two big blocks preventing many of us from transforming into MATWSAWTBs right away:

  1. Listening to yourself about “what the world really needs" is hard (and you may not always like the answer)
  2. Selling stuff that creates a change for the better is a lot harder than selling stuff people are already buying (i.e. products that maintain the status quo)

Some things are significantly harder to sell than others. Anyone who has kids, dogs, cats, husbands, or boards of directors can testify to this. Try to get a 2-year-old to eat a meal when he’s hungry, use the toilet instead of pooping under the sofa or go to sleep when all he has energy to do is scream. 

Same is true in business: a major part of today’s business activity is not aiming at making humanity thrive, but to cash out on our less attractive characteristics - such as pettiness, laziness, greed and jealousy. Think how much harder it is to market a product that encourages for example honesty than one that utilizes, let’s say, our will to gossip (such as the countless sites and magazines for learning about the marital problems and poor choices of clothing of random famous people)? 

The fact that it’s hard doesn’t mean you shouldn’t. You should. You really should. The real hard sales happens for things worth fighting for. 


One of the biggest pitfalls we fall into is the “customer is always right” mantra used wrong. We let the “the customer will pay for this, but not for that” thinking guide our decisions, as it’s easier. It allows us to skip block #1, which can be a real bitch.

All of this sounds hard. So if I'm just a businessman, why should I bother?
Here’s why: Trends in consumer, employee and even investor behaviour are powerful. The companies that will be the winners of global competition in 10 years are the ones who have found a way to align their EBITDA with their (net positive) impact on something that matters.
The competition for the best doers is getting more and more fierce, as a smaller and smaller percentage of the global workforce is creating a bigger and bigger percentage of all value (money). If your company needs talented people to do great things, it's time to start thinking about your impact. At the same time, consumers are becoming increasingly aware of what they buy and why, and finally the technology is there for us to start effortlessly use transparent facts in purchasing decisions, instead of just anecdotes and marketing stories.
Picture
There already are many companies that think and act this way: energy companies that put enormous amounts of work into figuring out how to make renewable energy business cases work; mining companies that are creating new technologies to extract stuff out of the ground in a much more environmentally friendly way and make that profitable; behavioural change service companies that are fighting like crazy to build their business around making it easier for people to actively execute the changes they want and need. A certain MATWSAWTB who has made solar roofs cheap not because it was easy, but because it was pretty necessary for our planet.

I believe it is crucial for the future of both business and humanity that we start to make the difference between these companies, or rather business models, transparent. That’s why I’m building a quantification system that allows us to see what companies really do and what follows from it. Capitalism needs new tools. ​

The lesson for all of us as marketers/entrepreneurs/CEOs/action women? Simple. Before we ask the customer does he want to buy our product, let's first ask ourselves: What is the product I really believe in selling?

Start with WHAT - why action eats intention for breakfast (and "culture" for a midnight snack)

5/4/2017

 

Companies influence the world and hold more power today than ever before. As a consequence, what they really do matters more than ever - and we should start demanding more facts and less slogans. The technology is ready, but are we?
​
“WORK HERE BE HAPPY!” screams a billboard the size of a decent basketball field to my face on a street in San Francisco. “NO SHOPPING NO COOKING NO PANTS”, proposes another bus stop poster advising how I should source my tortillas and pizza this evening. “By joining us you would be working with the most ambitious problem solvers in Europe and Asia", suggests a more subtle email from an employer candidate in my inbox.

We are obsessed with how things are done.
Today, companies define themselves increasingly by how they do what they do. “We attract the best talent, we grow faster than our peers, we offer superior tools and toys for our people, we host a vegan barbeque every Tuesday”. Or, “our product development culture is the most agile in the industry, we have the highest customer satisfaction ratings, we write the best code”. 

We master every how you can imagine.

That’s great. But: to do what?
Picture
The problem with seeking competetitive advantage mainly by tweaking the way of doing is that we tend to end up doing a bunch of unnecessary things - which keep us busy but don’t really create much real value. As a result, humanity finds itself with companies that are harmless day-care centers for adults at best - and really bad ways of using the scarce (natural, human, monetary, etc) resources and hindering our development as a species at worst.

For the first time in the history of mankind, we are in a situation where almost none of us would have to work. In the past 100 years, the percentage of people working to produce and distribute things critical to survival for human beings (food, water, shelter and warmth) in Western economies has decreased dramatically from 90+ to 3-15 percent (disclaimer: very rough estimates for US and Finland). And as we all know, that percentage is going down every day, as we are learning to automate more and more processes that produce the necessary and unnecessary things for our survival.

Now, if an alien was looking at us from a cool planet, it would probably say: “Wow, way to go humanity! You must have solved all mundane problems of yours and risen to a whole new level of consciousness, wisdom, intelligence and fun!”
Picture
Unfortunately we haven’t, really.

​Not only do wars and diseases still exist, but people are far from “free from work”: they are dropping out of the work force at record speed due to either exhaustion, boredom, or a wicked mix of both. Also, an interesting proxy for where humanity is going is to study what the smartest and most skilful 2 % of every generation have been doing in different evolution phases. Right now, looking around at the most talented and privileged young doers, it seems they are building dating apps for dogs or making the delivery of fast food to lazy white people two minutes faster than it used to be.


The good news is that the lure of the how is short-lived: human beings are too smart to be tricked by "the way of doing" for too long. Whether we are conscious of it or just start to develop symptoms we don’t even understand ourselves, we begin to demand common sense and an ambiguous thing called "meaning" to the impact of our hard work. After having enjoyed the perks of a wonderful way of working (whether it’s free sushi and playing complimentary arcade games at Facebook HQ, a great salary at a successful corporation, or intoxicating adrenalin in the life of a wild startup) for a couple of years, our subconscious starts to crave something more meaningful than nice perks and toys as a result of our relentless work. 

Being better at something (anything!) might work when you're 23, full of testosterone and willing to do anything to prove yourself. Once that source for motivation has been depleted, the enthusiasm to tweak a random company’s operations may start to decrease. Many feel puzzled when it is unclear to them if it even matters a whole lot if their company does somewhat useless things a bit faster or slower, with slightly better or worse design/technology/culture/processes/rigour. 

What then?

Some think the answer might lie in starting with WHY, as also Simon Sinek’s hit book suggests. Why does your company exist? What is the purpose behind all of this? This has sparked a welcome wave of purpose-driven business, that puts a strong emphasis on what drives a company to do what it does.

This is a great step in the right direction, as it calls management, owners, investors and employees alike to stop and ask: besides making money as a viable business, what are we pursuing? However, it can also be the quickest way out of the frying pan and into the fire: when what you 
de facto do is produce plastic forks, calling its mission “We bring families closer together” doesn’t really change your impact in any way. Sadly often companies use their WHY to try to cover flaws in strategy - rather than fixing them. Intention is great, but next to action it is pretty powerless.
Picture
If how and why are both either misleading or inefficient, what should we do then?

I have come to the conclusion that the only sane way to lead a company is to start with WHAT. What is it that your company de facto does and what are all the things that follow from the choices you make? It's time we go from intention to action: start to focus on what companies actually do.

The planet does not ask whether we meant to destroy it.

Humanity does not get smarter by companies willing to be smart. Humanity gets smarter when companies produce and distribute more new knowledge, instead of just deploying existing intelligence. 

What does this mean concretely for management and owners?

​First of all: if you are having a hard time cooking up a good purpose for your company, challenge what you do - not the slogan. A purpose statement that doesn’t affect strategy in a material way is nothing but (often poor) marketing and talent attraction/retention.
Picture
And concretely?

​On a company level, (re-)starting with what means asking: what resources do we have and what are we currently producing with them? Is there something more relevant we could be doing with the same resources - when optimizing against our values and beliefs of the world as entrepreneurs/owners/leaders? What difference do we really make, and which relevant problem are we solving? Given the trends in preferences of top 5 % of young doers
in the past decade, this is not only nice for humanity but also a prerequisite for running a successful business if you are willing to employ the smartest people or compete for the smartest customers (or anyone for that matter).

What about employees and consumers?

For all of us, it means starting to demand actual transparent facts of both positive and negative impacts of companies instead of relying on anecdotes, news headlines and sporadical data (“OMG Uber is being bad to its employees! Mean company! I'm shifting to Lyft and feeling better about myself!” or “They donate 100 dollars per month to dolphins —> they must be a nice green company, and I'm helping dolphins by buying bottled water from them!”).
Picture
This spring I am starting an adventure with a mission to gradually shift the way we measure net impact of companies to put technology in use to enable more fact-based decision-making for consumers, employees and investors. If this resonates with your thoughts, a bit more about it here.

And now. Are we ready to move from intention to action?

What is this blog?

5/4/2017

 
This is a blog about creating a new way of measuring value creation and net impact of companies. I am passionate about updating capitalism to better serve the future of humanity, and this spring I'm starting a new project/company around it.

In this blog I share some thoughts about why I think it all starts with what the company de facto does. The project itself will be published later during 2017.

Our current way of measuring net impact of companies is stuck in an economy that no longer exists.

I'm currently building a new quantification model for measuring net impact of companies, to enable more fact-based decision-making for (existing and potential) employees, consumers and investors. The idea is to make proxies across impact categories comparable and trade-offs transparent ("by using XX tons of carbon footprint we produce YY and ZZ", instead of just doing sub-optimization based on one category). 

The aim is to build real business incentives for companies to maximize the upsides of their "impact" - not just minimize the downsides (where the focus of majority of "sustainability talk" is at the moment).

We need carrots.

​I don't believe the needed transformational change is going to happen via sticks (regulations, laws, restrictions) - but by incentivizing the best entrepreneurs of our time to start to make things that make sense via the power of the masses, i.e. consumers and employees.

Technology is ready for us to start having transparent and comparable data on how companies de facto impact the different values we as societies and individuals say we have (e.g. economic impact, environment, health of people, equality, creation of new knowledge). It’s time we utilize it to help humanity focus its time, effort and materials to things that actually take us forward.

You are welcome to think, challenge and wonder with me!

    Author.

    Annu. Engineer and action woman, who thinks it's time we update our way of measuring net impact of companies. 
    Picture
    Obsessed with building a better version of capitalism.
     
    Haunted by incomparable data, poor logic, misunderstandings among people and other nerd nightmares.

    Excited about what can happen when we change this.

    Posts.

    What is this blog?

    Start with what - why action eats intention for breakfast

    Introducing: the new entrepreneur (sorry, the customer is not always right)

    RSS Feed

© Annu Nieminen 2017