What kind of Warrior are you?
 

Do you were a frilly pink skirt and frolic along with your wicker basket singing "La La La" or are you fit, camouflaged, well (but lightly) armed, and ready to decisively "do in" every opponent who crosses your path? All else being equal, the winning businessman is the more ruthless.

- Craig

Humbug!!
 

Over my 40 years in the business community I have found the exact opposite to be true.

I can't count the times a "ruthless" businessman has climbed over me on the ladder of success; stomping my fingers ... then watched as he took a headlong dive back down.

Those who truly believe this hogwash are those who have never made it - or - they are making it now by being ruthless (until the day of reckoning which inevitably comes).

Hey ... I been there, done that, bought the tee-shirt, too.

Jim


FREE Money Making Reports & Resources!

I request a vote
 

Howdy group!

Is Jim right? Let's voice our opinion. Will someone volunteer to create an internet poll on this subject?

- Craig

Re: I request a vote
 

> Is Jim right? Let's voice our opinion. Will
> someone volunteer to create an internet poll
> on this subject?

my opinion is that everyone can succeed, from
the dali lama to attilla the hun. Let's face it,
a lot of mean s.o.b.s succeed and don't fail.
And a lot of nice guys too. Don't think you can
make a rule. Can't think of his name right now,
but the former navy seal that now writes under the
name of the rogue warrior, has made a fortune
teaching people to be tough in business. Quite
frankly, I think this country needs that. And
Dan Kennedy makes the point that if you don't have
a thick skin you'll never succeed in business.

I think a lot of people think you can succeed in
business without a backbone because they want to
believe it...it sounds nice. But having a back-
bone doesn't mean not having values and ethics.
Look at our new president (gee, isn't it great
to have someone in the oval office who is a good
example?), he stays on course, on message and is
going to do what he came into office, but he's
cordial and civil at the same time.

So, I guess I'm back to what we've always known,
it takes all kinds.....

Your "focus" is wrong!
 

With all the businesses I've started...in many different market areas...never once did I concern myself with my COMPETITORS!

MY "focus" was on ME...and what "I" could offer the market...NOT what my competition was doing. The only reason I bothered to spend any time at all looking at what my competitors were doing was to see exactly what they were doing so I could "sell myself and my team" on the fact that I had a better "mousetrap".

As far as spending any time trying to run over or squash my competition...hogwash. I was too busy getting sales...AND, whenever a prospect mentioned a competitor to me or any of my salespeople we simply said we did not "Own or have any control over our competitors...and whatever they did or didn't do...was no concern of ours!"

I never blasted my competition or even cared what they were doing...except to say that once in a while when they got a job away from me or found a beter way to do something...my "competitive juices" started flowing.

Here's an example: Many yrs ago I created a new idea for a PhoneBook Cover. I hired salespeople, trained them and sent them out.

Well...as will happen in most "sales organizations"...at least one of your salespeople will consider going in competition with you after you've spent money and time training them.

Well...I set up my first program in Aspen, CO (where I was living at the time)...hired some salespeople...trained them and sent them out. And, as is usually the case...some will drop out.

Well...I finished with Aspen...and then decided the next area would be Grand Junction. To my surprise (but not shock) when we started selling we found that someone else was ALREADY THERE offering basically the SAME product and program.

Turns out one of my salespeople took my product and program and started an identical operation in GJ.

This got me "fighting mad". What this sort of thing does is MOTIVATE me more. So, I came up with a few extra goodies that would make MY program better...and for the next 4 weeks MY sales meeting were held at 4:30 in the afternoon instead of 8am...which is the time my competitor held his AND...I made it a point, every morning, to drive by my competitor's office at 8am and see his and his salespeople's cars sitting there in the parking lot...while I was on my way to my first sale.

This spurred me on to "sell like a demon"! And the results being I sold out my program in record time while my competitor took twice as long and only got the program half-filled.

Competition has only motivated me.

Also...while I'm on my soapbox...still, to this day, I hear the comment;
"You can't go into THAT market...it's SATURATED!" Or, "Someone is ALREADY doing that!"

Horsehockey! I've NEVER found a market I thought was "saturated"...there's ALWAYS ROOM for a "good competitor" like ME!...and if I found I wasn't as "original" as I thought because I found someone else doing the same thing...that only
REINFORCED my thinking about my product or service.

SO...go about YOUR business without concern for competition...and IF you stay MOTIVATED and FOCUSED...you WILL get your market share.

And...as far as trying to go out of your way to "Trounce on competition"...forget it! Spend your time on YOUR biz!

Don Alm

> Do you were a frilly pink skirt and frolic
> along with your wicker basket singing
> "La La La" or are you fit,
> camouflaged, well (but lightly) armed, and
> ready to decisively "do in" every
> opponent who crosses your path? All else
> being equal, the winning businessman is the
> more ruthless.

> - Craig




Unique, Home-Based bizes

Why business is different from war....
 

Hi Craig,

Well, those who have posted already are themselves highly successful in business, so they know what they're talking about....

I've read Don Alm's posts over the years, and I ALWAYS pay attention to what he says. He's someone who's succeeded MANY TIMES in business....

Jim Straw is a HUGE success too, his many successful business ventures are well-known (just read a few of his reports).

I agree with what Joe Makowski said too -- you gotta have a backbone. But you can still be a nice person and also have a backbone too.

Even if you want to go the "warrior's" way, no country ever survived by being in a continuous war. War is draining to both parties....

Think about it -- the ultimate aim of war is peace. Continuous war is not what you want.

Someone who takes this approach will make many enemies, and I believe that's what eventually will probably be their downfall....

I've studied military strategy to a degree (out of interest), but now I believe it has only limited application to business.... The reason why is because war is a "win/lose" game. If someone wins, someone else loses.

Business is different. While there are *some* "win/lose" aspects to business, there are also "win/win" aspects too. Military strategy is not developed to recognize or take advantage of "win/win" situations, which is why it is limited in its scope when it comes to business.... Here's an example.

Why, do you think, do you often tend to find a large number of Italian restaurants clustering together in one part of town?

At first you might think this is silly to do, since each restaurant will just be taking business away from each other. These restaurants are often right next door to each other. It would seem to make more sense for them to spread themselves out among the city, so they compete with each other less.

But that's an example of "win/lose" thinking. However, it's a fact that restaurants do cluster like this.... This shows that there's some value in it.

The value is that it increases the quality of that *area* as a place to go eat Italian food. So, if someone wants to eat Italian food, they'll be willing to drive further just to eat in that particular area.

"Win/lose" thinking is about how to slice up the pie.

"Win/win" thinking however is about increasing the size of the pie for everybody.

So, let's say that if ten Italian restaurants were each in their own area, each of them would get 100 customers per week (or 1000 customers total between them all). But let's say that ten of them cluster together, the TOTAL number of people who would travel to that area specifically to eat Italian food from around the whole city might now be 1500 per week. That breaks down now to 150 customers each (if they divided themselves equally among restaurants). This is how an understanding of win/win situations could create added profits....

I don't think there's an equivalent to "increasing the pie" in military strategy, because you can't create more land. But profits is not like land, you can "increase the pie" for everybody when you're talking about profits, which is one way in which business is different....

Just my opinion.... :)

- Dien

Excellent post Dien!! (DNO)
 

I Guess You Never Heard of Bill Gates (DNO) (DNO)
 

Interesting point.... but....
 

I don't think that Bill Gates's business is "reproducible."

Some incredibly good luck, along with some skill, combined to give him an effective monopoly. When you have a monopoly in something that people need (like he does), then you can effectively dictate what you're going to do.

However, very few companies are in that kind of position.... I don't think it's something easy to achieve (a lot of luck is required, I would think)....

That's why when I look the the billionaires, I personally prefer to study those whose histories look more "reproducible" -- people like Warren Buffett, Kirk Kerkorian, Richard Branson, and so on....

Many of these have had multiple businesses (like Kerkorian and Branson, for example)....

With Bill Gates, if he lost Microsoft and all his money, I doubt he'd be able to do it again. How do you get another giant company like IBM to give you a deal with such an incredibly wide open loophole for you to exploit? And, it's been said that Gates's mother was on the board of IBM too.... How do you reproduce that?

But I have no doubt that if Warren Buffett, Kirk Kerkorian, or Richard Branson lost all their money, that we'd see them back again, with great financial success once more!

That's why I personally don't think Bill Gates is a very good role-model.... Better to model yourself on those who, if they lost their money, could do it again....

- Dien

But you missed the point...
 

Bill Gates did indeed have competition along the way, but in the tradition of a great warrior one by one he decapitated them. Your example of losing their money is the old Henry Ford line, I would put my money on Gates against your three, he is much smarter and more cold blooded. If you don't think he is ruthless, and he wouldn't have achieved the success he has without being a killer at heart, just ask Oracle's Larry Ellison, or many others. Contrary to Jim Straw, he stepped on people all the way to the top, and if Jim got in his way he would step on him also, and I don't think there would be much he could do about it other than pout.

Another example of a business warrior is Sam Walton, in his down home way he destroyed Kmart, Sears etc, by being ruthless in a good old boy way. Sam Walton is one no one speaks of in being a tough businessman (I know he is dead), but just look at the competition they know he was one bad dude.

SS

Walton also plowed under plenty of Mom & Pop's
 

Plowed under plenty of Mom & Pop operations, and got a Presidential award from Bush Pere. Old Sam snooped around in his competitor's stores in disguise. He was fortunate to have escaped retribution. You're wrong, Alm.

- Craig

Sam Walton, Larry Ellison, Bill Gates....
 

Craig and S. Shady,

It's interesting (to S. Shady) that you mention Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, and Sam Walton....

I don't know too much about Larry Ellison, but what I've read is that nowadays, he's trying to model himself on Gates (even though Gates is his arch-competitor). Essentially, Larry Ellison is trying (with Oracle) to gain an effective monopoly in databases, the way Microsoft has an effective monopoly in operating systems. His reasoning is because database software is important to much of the power of the internet.... If he can corner the market in databases, he feels he can make incredible profits.

However, I still think that Gates's history is not really reproducible, because there's a lot of luck there, particularly when you look at the deal he did with IBM. It's that deal which gave him the effective monopoly in operating systems, and he managed to leverage that into his various other gains....

But, moving on....

Sam Walton is an interesting case. I've never walked into a Wal-Mart, but Wal-Mart made it big in small cities and towns, whereas others (like K-Mart) were focusing on the big cities.

I wouldn't say Sam Walton was aiming to "do in" all his competitors. His competitors were the small Mom and Pop stores (not K-Mart, since K-Mart was in the big cities, not the small cities and towns).

But, rather, I think Walton essentially has tried to give the consumers the best deal possible. What you're interpreting as "doing in his competitors," I interpret as giving the consumers a better deal. People shopped at Wal-Mart because they could buy things there cheaper than anywhere else.

Because Wal-Mart is a mass retail outlet, it could sell things more cheaply than the small Mom and Pop stores. But as far as I'm aware, he never did anything to "attack" these stores. He just gave consumers a better deal.

So I would say he "won over" the consumers, rather than "did in" his competition.... As Don Alm said, it's a matter of a different focus....

It's one thing to talk from theory, but another to talk from experience.... I pay a LOT of attention to what people like Jim Straw, Don Alm, and Gordon Alexander say, because they've "walked the walk" -- they've DONE it. They've already proven that they know what they're talking about....

Anyhow, it's okay to disagree in opinion.... Let's remember not to take disagreement of opinion personally.... :)

- Dien

Ruthlessness in Business
 

I've come across numerous people that have this idea -- that the only way, or the best way, to succeed in business is to be ruthless. Fight to win the best advantage, rally the troops to gain new ground, smite your competitors and win the consumer dollar.

Although being ruthless *can* have advantages when applied to deal-making and securing a position, I think it's important to remember that such a business approach does have disadvantages too.

For one, those you have been ruthless against you may come up against again, or you might develop a reputation for it, in which case some people may be less likely to deal with you.

Sure, you might argue that a rational businessman wouldn't take into account your reputation when dealing, but would just look at the bottom line -- but the fact is, not everybody is or acts rationally.

But back to the issue at hand -- Is ruthlessness essential in business?

I don't think it is. But I also don't think you have to not be ruthless to succeed, either.

The world of business is an enormous one -- there are a huge amount of business successes out there, and the ways people have succeeded is tremendous.

That being the case, I don't think you can really limit it down and say "this is the only way to do it" -- there are many ways to do it.

If you're not naturally ruthless, and don't feel comfortable being so, then don't! There are many businesspeople who have become successful without being so. Warren Buffett comes to mind.

If you like being ruthless, enjoy the thrill of the kill, and don't have a moral problem with it as many of us would, then be ruthless. Just make sure you're aware of the consequences.

Personally, I choose not to be ruthless in business.

I aim to offer the best to consumers, and if that should harm my competitors, then that's ok. The difference is in the approach -- attempting to screw people over, force people into things, destroy competitors -- acts some would consider ruthless that I wouldn't do much of, if any.

- Thomas. :)

> Do you were a frilly pink skirt and frolic
> along with your wicker basket singing
> "La La La" or are you fit,
> camouflaged, well (but lightly) armed, and
> ready to decisively "do in" every
> opponent who crosses your path? All else
> being equal, the winning businessman is the
> more ruthless.

> - Craig