Newsletters
Business Advice
Departments
Fresh Inc.
Recent Entries
Inc.com Featured Blogs
Archives › June 2004
June 30, 2004
Field Report: Giant Births
Posted by at 3:59 PM
I am unfamiliar with the birthing process, particularly when it comes to giants, although I have to imagine it's a rather painful experience...especially if the respective Mothers of Paul Bunyan, Goliath, Jolly Green or Shaquille O'Neal are regular-sized...I certainly can't fathom it...
I also can't fathom creating a company from scratch and taking it to the point of being worth real scratch (grosses of $1,000,000) by the age of forty, which is why the Birthing of Giants is a fascinating microcosm of how today's entrepreneurs think.
Birthing of Giants is an executive educational program that brings CEOs together for three days each year for three years in a row. Since Inc. is a co-sponsor, I decided to stop by and hear what was on the minds of the best and brightest entrepreneurs.
It was my second year with the "Class of 2005." Since it's only a three-year program, last weekend was a combination sophomore/junior year for the group. You remember those days, glad to no longer be a lowly frosh, but still unsure of an identity, desperately trying to fit in with the popular kids and praying none of the seniors make you their designated human pinata.
Okay, so it's nothing like that, but there was one lonely writer sitting in the back room, hoping one of the popular rich kids would invite him to sit at their table...which they did. Unfortunately, it was a poker table where a bush-league, junior-high, gimmicky, why-not-just-make-all-the-red-cards-wild type of game where four nines gets beat by five freaking queens and one player ends up handing over all his chips to a CEO who doesn't need the money in the first place...
But I digress. Here's what really happened at the Birthing of Giants, year two, held June 23-26 at M.I.T.'s Endicott House:
***This group is by nature optimistic, but I got the sense during each company's update presentation to the group that many of them felt like their companies were headed north along with the general economy. Even those who had flat sales and minimal growth seemed to feel like they were through the recessionary looking glass. Whether this is perception or reality remains to be seen, but there was a collective exhale.
***The BOG is off-the-record so that CEO's can share whatever is going on in their personal and private lives if they so desire, but from what I can tell, everyone is hitting on all cylinders. Admittedly, I didn't hear all of the updates and didn't sit down with each and every participant, but the horror stories I heard were few and far between. I bring this up only because I'm curious if the BOG'ers (and their local YEO brethren) are being honest with each other.
Continue reading "Field Report: Giant Births"
June 29, 2004
How Rude! Chatter in the Office Loo
Posted by Nadine Heintz at 1:36 PM
Each week, Inc. staff writer Nadine Heintz will help you tackle office etiquette problems both big and small.
Dear Nadine,
Coworkers always try to strike up conversations with me in the men's room. I'm a very private person, and I don't like chatting while I'm using the facilities, but I don't want to seem unfriendly. What should I do?
Jason from New York
Dear Jason,
Unless you plan to fake a handicap like George Costanza, who scored his own private bathroom, there's no surefire way to avoid chit-chat in the office loo. But there are techniques you could try to disourage potty talk. Supply brief responses when coworkers try to strike up a conversation in the stalls. If it's a personal question about, say, how your weekend was, a cordial "fine, thanks" will do. Then, you could always pick up the conversation later on in a more comfortable environment, such as the kitchen or the hallway. Interactions with the boss require a bit more tact: if he asks you, say, how a project is going, enlist a similar strategy: smile, respond briefly, then tell him that you'll stop by his desk in a minute to give him a full report. If you feel comfortable being more direct, simply tell your loquacious coworker that you don't enjoy conversing in the lavatory (don't try that approach with your superiors, though). Eventually, they'll figure out that you want to be left alone. You may not be the most popular person in the office, but at least you'll have your privacy.
Have a dilemma for Nadine? Send her an e-mail and check back here Tuesdays for the answer.
June 24, 2004
FTC on Spam: Sorry, Too Big a Problem
Posted by at 11:03 AM
The "Do Not E-Mail" list seemed like such a simple idea based on a common outcry: Someone, for the love of God, save me from the 200 pieces of unsolicited e-mail, or spam, I get everyday. The Federal Trade Commission was ordered by Congress to have a look at the feasibility of such a list. Last week, the FTC offered its conclusion: the list would create more problems than already exist. The reasoning was that giving spammers a centralized list of emails like that would only give them more people to spam. It makes sense, but at the same time, if you violate that trust, couldn't the government prosecute? Apparently, spammers are just too wily.
So this brings us to the FTC's proposed solution: private industry, with your knack for innovation, please intervene and rid us of this colossal annoyance. Interesting. Often we look to public officials to save us from our problems (scary, yes. But true). This time, the government admitted it was beaten. Is this disturbing or refreshing?
June 23, 2004
What Would You Do If...
Posted by Bobbie Gossage at 11:26 AM
Okay, I'll admit it. I got a little chuckle out of this guy, who reportedly put the "sexual" in sexual assault conference. As far as I know, there aren't any laws against dirty dancing, but if he were one of your employees (as opposed to the attorney general for New Hampshire) at a work-related conference or gathering, how would you handle the situation if the person began acting in the way described? Would it make a difference if it was a company-only event or if it were a more public venue? And would it make a difference if it were a high-level manager or an employee with less leadership responsibility? What would you do if someone you employed acted in the same manner that the New Hampshire attorney general reportedly did?
June 22, 2004
Washington's Small-Business Tussle
Posted by Rod Kurtz at 11:02 AM
As the presidential campaign season chugs along, I've come to realize that the time-honored tradition of candidates kissing babies has been replaced by candidates kissing up to the small business community. Along the way, it seems, somebody realized that babies aren't swing voters, and that makes perfect sense to me. Then again, I write about small business for a living.
Here at Inc., we're often quick to point out that small businesses generate roughly 75 percent of new jobs, as evidence of their sweeping -- and generally underrated -- influence. The Blue Chippers command the headlines in the business section, but the entrepreneur can have just as much impact on the economy.
Last week, I attended the National Small Business Summit in Washington, D.C., organized by the National Federation of Independent Business, and got to see President Bush's play for the small business vote first hand.
Though the three-day summit felt at times like a campaign rally -- with at least one attendee telling me that the president's re-election is the biggest challenge facing her company -- it also provided a window into the issues affecting a cross section of small businesses across the country. Perhaps more than anything else, I heard complaints about a broken and costly health care system, with near-universal support for Health Savings Accounts, and the proposed association health plans -- a piece of legislation snaking its way through Congress that, supporters say, would essentially allow small businesses to band together and purchase more affordable insurance.
As focus shifts to November, both Bush and Kerry are trying to paint themselves as the small business candidate, and their supporters are lapping it up. The small business owners I spoke with last week certainly see Bush as a friend in the White House. Whether their policies reflect a genuine commitment to entrepreneurship is, like everything else in Washington, up for debate.
But regardless of your political stripes, the president made a comment during his speech that I think, deliberately or not, speaks to the influence entrepreneurs can and should have in this election. "The way I see it is," Bush said, "what's good for small business is good for America." It's funny, I always thought what was good for General Motors (read: the aforementioned Big Business) was good for America. Sure, it's largely stump speech boilerplate with no tangible effect. But like I said, I write about small business for a living. And this kind of recognition on the campaign trail -- from both candidates --is, if nothing else, encouraging to see.
Bully Bosses
Posted by Bobbie Gossage at 10:27 AM
Do you have a bully in your midst? According to a very interesting article in the New York Times today ("Fear in the Workplace: The Bullying Boss"), bully bosses and managers are motivated differently than childhood bullies and have a different effect on the workplace environment than one might imagine. They're also hard to spot because their underlings are afraid to complain, and often retain a high productivity level. In other words, bullies look like good managers.
Another interesting finding in the article: while a strong, bully boss causes those below him or her to adopt the same behavior, a strong, kind boss's behavior also influences the staff to adopt similar traits.
June 16, 2004
The Chicken-and-Egg Marketing Dilemma
Posted by Laura Rich at 2:55 PM
I know the owner of a small computer animation company who for the last two years has been toiling away, along with his trusty staff of two full-timers and a bevy of freelancers, in pre-launch mode. Very few people know about this company. They've had their heads down creating the pieces to what they aim to make the next "Shrek."
Now, they're at a point where they are thinking of telling people about what they're doing. The product is advanced and ready to make its (partial) debut. The entrepreneur has two goals in this next phase: one, to develop partnerships with other companies where there will be a shared audience and a mutuality of their products; and two, to create demand for his product -- or, at least, to get a better sense of the demand from the anticipated audience. He and his staff are proceeding with caution. They have approached some potential partners where the entrepreneur or his staff already have a relationship, but they haven't begun cold-calling or otherwise spreading the word at random.
This is always a tricky point in a company's evolution. How much of the company or product do you -- or should you -- want known before delivering your product? How fair is it to play coy with consumers or other business partners?
What Would You Do If...
Posted by Bobbie Gossage at 2:22 PM
I recently heard about a CEO whose largest competitor called him up. The competitor said he was interested in acquiring the CEO's company in order to expand his market share. The CEO was interested in selling, but was naturally skeptical of his competitor's motives. In order to buy, the competitor would, of course need to see the CEO's company financials and understand its inner structure. But in giving that information, the CEO would be in a very vulnerable position if the deal fell through. What would you do if you were the CEO?
The Rich Get Richer...and More Numerous
Posted by at 9:36 AM
2003 was a very good year for the very rich: taxes were down, stocks recovered, the real estate market continued its climb. The wealthy even had more people who could relate to just how tough it is to be, well, wealthy: the number of millionaires worldwide swelled to 7.7 million in 2003, up half a million, or 7 percent, from the prior year, according to the 2004 World Wealth Report compiled by Merrill Lynch and the consultancy Capgemini Group.
These individuals' wealth, measured in financial assets excluding the value of homes, grew 7.7 percent to $28.8 trillion in 2003.
The biggest gain in the number of new millionaires came in North America (U.S. and Canada), which increased to 2.5 million, up 13.5 percent from 2002. The wealth of these individuals increased by 13.6 percent last year, to $8.5 trillion. Not bad in an economy that saw 1.66 million bankruptcy filings, moderate GDP growth of 3.1 percent and 1.5 million jobs lost.
The Wall Street Journal (subscription required) covered the survey in more detail, spending some time describing the United States' well-known disproportionate distribution of wealth. Not sure how many people would be surprised to learn that the gap between the rich and the poor may very well grow in future.
However, The Journal did suggest that many of the nouveau-rich were entrepreneurs selling their small and not-so-small businesses in a year that was resurgent in terms of acquisitions and initial public offerings. This year is shaping up to add more to the list.
For those who make it to the end of the article, there's a little aside that says in the next 50 years there will be an estimated $41trillion to $136 trillion transferred by inheritance. If you happen to be looking to build a new enterprise, The Journal points out that the wealthy shopping to minimize the tax hit are driving growth in estate planning and tax advising businesses.
Let me make another suggestion: lobbyist. With that much money on the line, people aren't going to hand it over to the government without a fight. However, while the few have a disproportionate amount of wealth, they're short on votes. Expect the so-called "Death Tax" to outlive us all, unless, of course, we all become millionaires.
June 15, 2004
How Rude! Careless Clippings
Posted by Nadine Heintz at 2:22 PM
Each week, Inc. staff writer Nadine Heintz will help you tackle office etiquette problems both big and small.
Dear Nadine,
I work in a very professional environment in midtown Manhattan. Shockingly enough, my boss often clips his fingernails during meetings. I find this mortifying, but I'm not sure how to let him know without getting fired...or jeopardizing my raise. Any advice?
Mortified in Midtown
Dear MIM,
You're not the only one facing this problem. I've seen people clip their fingernails on the Staten Island Ferry and on the subway. And just today, a friend was complaining that the person in the cubicle next to him was clipping his nails. I must admit that if I have a jagged nail, I may discreetly remedy the situation with a pair of cuticle scissors at my desk. But never on the subway...or in a meeting! To perform a full-on snipping in public is just plain wrong. It's a private affair that should be attended to in the privacy of one's home, or, in emergency situations, in the nearest restroom. To make matters worse, most people who have the gall to pare in public also seem to think it's perfectly acceptable to let their snippings fly through the air with reckless abandon. Is this just a New York thing?
Sadly enough, most public clippers seem to get off scot-free. In the subway, I'm usually afraid to say anything lest I provoke a stabbing with the offending instrument. In the meeting room, it's even tougher. How can you tell your boss he's grossing you out? Unless he has a great sense of humor, that wouldn't go over too well. I don't think addressing the issue in front of others is a good idea, either. That would be embarrassing for both of you. In fact, it may be wise to handle the whole matter anonymously. Perhaps you could type up a polite note asking him to stop, and leave it on his desk chair while he's out of the office. Or, you could even print out this page and leave it in his mailbox. It's perfectly plausible that he may not even realize that other people have a problem with his clipping. When he finds out, he may be slightly embarrassed, but he'll probably leave his nail kit out of the meeting room. As far as I can see, the only other alternative is to keep your mouth shut and sit as far away from the flying fingernails as possible.
Have a dilemma for Nadine? Send her an e-mail and check back here Tuesdays for the answer.
June 14, 2004
Saving on 401(k) Costs
Posted by Darren Dahl at 11:59 AM
A new poll says that many employers may be thinking of how to cut the costs of their employees' 401(k) plans. One key target: mutual funds.
Mutual funds are increasingly seen as more expensive and riskier, with growing management fees and the ongoing investigation into the industry. In a poll given by Hewitt Associates, more than 60 percent of the 140 respondents said they plan to diversify their 401(k) plans away from mutual funds to discounted alternatives like institutional funds.
Institutional funds offer lower fees, but are typically only available to larger companies ($20 - $30 million). Other alternatives can be unbundled investments where a plan manager works with different individual stocks. The study says that choosing alternatives can save 1 to 2 percent on fees a year.
This is one way to go, but is it necessary? And is dropping mutual funds the only answer? It seems like a bit of bandwagon behavior, to me.
June 10, 2004
When New Stadiums Come to Town...
Posted by Darren Dahl at 3:36 PM
In New York City, where Inc. is located, the city is considering adding two new stadiums: a new Brooklyn home court for the New Jersey Nets and a state-of-the-art sports stadium on the west side of Manhattan that would serve as both home to the New York Jets and the crown jewel of New York's 2012 Olympic bid. Estimated price tag for taxpayers: somewhere between $600 million and $1 billion. Local politicians and businesses love the idea. Residents hate it.
When your hometown decides to spend your money on building you a new sports stadium, is it a boon for your business? Or is that the time to move out?
There are about a dozen cities that are considering funding new sports stadiums to either lure new franchises or pacify existing tenants, a list that includes Miami, Newark, Dallas, D.C. and even New York City.
The days are largely gone where teams finance their own construction, so that means shelling out by taxpayers. Mayors and team owners crow from their soapboxes that investing tax dollars in sports stadiums will give a healthy boost to the local economy – that it will mean oodles of new jobs.
But what kind of jobs? Many economists have gone on record to say that new stadiums actually wreak havoc with existing businesses and replace stable neighborhood employers with seasonal minimum wage service jobs. Seems like a poor return on a billion dollar investment to me.
How do you think a new stadium in your hometown would affect your bottom line?
June 9, 2004
Mourning in America: Father of the Era of Inc.
Posted by at 12:03 PM
The television folks are taking their typically subtle approach [free registration to Philadelphia Inquirer required] to the passing of Ronald Wilson Reagan, allowing for personal reflection upon what the controversial 40th President meant to the United States. A citizenry steeped in examining the human strengths and weaknesses of the men who lead their nation from the Oval Office needs the complexities that only round-the-clock TV can provide, so in these quiet moments, let us ponder Dutch's legacy and ask if these words ring true today.
"We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we are in a time when there are no heroes just don't know where to look...There are entrepreneurs with faith in themselves and faith in an idea who create new jobs, new wealth and opportunity." --From Ronald Reagan's Inaugural Address, January 20, 1981
Reagan came into office on a wave of optimism and a simple platform -- shrink government, cut taxes and enough with the containment of the Commies already. Although not an intellect, Reagan had grand ideas and an unwavering belief that America was the "shining light on a hill," destined to win the Cold War and spread capitalism around the globe. If Shakespeare is to be believed, and all the world is indeed a stage, the former B-movie actor rose to Olivier-esque heights when he performing for a receptive audience (including an often overlooked character named "Gorby". Reagan appealed to many, alienated his fair share and left many of us somewhere in the middle during his two terms as Gipper-in-Chief.
Reagan came of Presidential age in what I like to call, the "Era of Inc." -- trademark pending -- when mentioning entrepreneurship in an inaugural address wasn't solely to show off a fancy vocabulary. The two healthiest American economies happened during "Era of Inc." under beloved and beloathed two-termers Presidents Reagan and Clinton (and it will be interesting when Fox News doesn't fawn over Clinton to the same degree when he passes on, but hey, they just report, you decide. For now though, it's Dutch's day, we'll save Bubba for another time).
I wonder, though, Did Reagan have anything to do with the "Era of Inc.?" Do Presidents influence and spark entrepreneurship?
Perhaps it's because he got the federal government off the backs of business. Although one of the great fallacies of Reagan's years in office was his penchant for advocating small government while running up the deficit to heights heretofore unseen. Unlike in small businesses, government deficit spending is necessary at times, but that's why it's interesting that he is revered by so many entrepreneurs who would never run up bills that big that eventually come due. Just ask George Bush Sr. Perhaps it is because of the 40th president's held belief in deregulation -- although that isn't a guarantee of an equal entrepreneurial playing field. Sometimes rules and regulations make it easier for the little guy; sometimes they don't. It has more to do with seizing an opportunity within a particular industry, no? And, let's not forget: less governmental oversight attracts another kind of "entrepreneur." For every Apple home computer there's an S&L crisis.
I think Reagan's greatest entrepreneurial strength was as a salesman, and his product was the good ole' U.S. of A. He was known as the "Great Communicator," but I think that's too benign and squishy. Maybe the "Great Salesman" isn't dignified enough for a POTUS, but the only people hung up on communicating are in couples therapy. Every business owner knows that sales are essential and Reagan sold the idea of his America back to the country. And millions bought into it. It wasn't everybody's America, but until oxygen becomes a commodity, not everyone is going to buy the same things, but if they buy more of what you're selling, then you win a whopping 1,014 electoral votes in two presidential contests.
Gorbachev certainly bought enough of what Dutch was selling, and together, the Iron Curtain was relegated to an I Love the '80's segment. Salesmanship. It's the essence of capitalism -- provided the unlimited military checkbook is factored out, which is to say the soul of Ronald Reagan.
Regardless of what the TV people say, it's fair to debate President Reagan's successes (invigorating America, booming economy, ending the Cold War, bolstering the beleaguered jelly bean market, moving a more conservative GOP into the mainstream) failures (huge deficits, cutting social services, ignoring AIDS, Iran-Contra, moving a more conservative GOP into the mainstream), and whether he's the "Father of the Era of Inc." -- trademark pending -- even while he lies in state.
Culture
What Would You Do If...
Posted by Bobbie Gossage at 11:42 AM
There's a great Luther Vandross song, "Love the one you're with," and often coworkers do. Many companies have policies against office dating, but a lot of them don't (and often even with the policies, sometimes employees date anyway). If you found out that two of your employees were dating, and you didn't have a written policy in place, how would you handle the situation? Would it make a difference to you if one managed the other or if they worked in the same department? If there was a messy breakup, how would you handle that?
June 8, 2004
How Rude! Bully Bosses
Posted by Nadine Heintz at 12:20 PM
Each week, Inc. staff writer Nadine Heintz will help you tackle office etiquette problems both big and small.
Dear Nadine,
I used to work for a manager as an architect in a design firm. When the manager perceived that I (or any other female in the office) had done something he viewed was wrong, he would immediately turn red-faced and start screaming. He also called female employees into a conference to discuss our work and usually berated us for our incompetence. Despite our complaints to the owner, nothing was done to stop the manager's abuse. I was too insecure to threaten a law suit. What do you think I should have done to get the manager to stop abusing the women, besides quit? (Eventually most of the women did quit.)
Angry Architect
Dear AA,
Unfortunately, being a jerk isn't against the law. (If it was, half the country would be in jail.) Yelling only becomes illegal when it involves slurs against gender, race, relgion, and the like. In other words, you may not have had grounds for a lawsuit even if you had worked up the gumption to threaten one. That said, abusive managers spell trouble for business: yelling often leads to increased turnover and a higher incidence of stress-related illnesses among employees.
Luckily, there are a few things beaten-down staffers can do. The first step would be to confront the boss directly. Don't stoop to his level and get overly emotional. When he yells at you, calmly ask him to stop and speak to you in a more respectable tone. In your case, you were probably too intimidated to approach the bully. I don't blame you, given his short fuse. Going over his head to the company owner was the next logical step. It's a pity he didn't take your complaints to heart. (My guess is that bully boss is a real workhorse, so the owner's willing to overlook his tyrannical management style as long as sales are solid.) Next time, try submitting written complaints to human resources, and encourage other berated co-workers to do the same. After all, a mounting pile of angry letters is harder to ignore than verbal complaints. The higher-ups might eventually get the hint and fire the jerk, or, at least, give him a good talking to.
In the end, you made a good choice. Sometimes quitting is the only way to free yourself from a bad relationship with your boss. Look at it as a learning experience, and take some prophylactic measures to make sure you don't get involved in another abusive situation. The next time you're job hunting, request to have an interview with the manager who you'll be reporting to. That's the upside to having survived one bully boss: now you know to look for.
Nadine
Have a dilemma for Nadine? Send her an e-mail and check back here Tuesdays for the answer.
June 7, 2004
Making Money V. Doing Good
Posted by Laura Rich at 3:06 PM
Is it okay to be profitable at the expense of being socially responsible? Shoe maker Birkenstock has chosen good over money and Michael Lewis takes the company to task for it in this week's New York Times Magazine.
Social awareness is an issue that weighs on the minds of many corporate executives these days as the pressure for companies to look good in the public eye looms larger than ever. But small businesses, Lewis argues (Free registration to NYTimes.com required) have little reason to think about giving back to the community: they should focus on growth and when they get big, then they can think about giving back.
This issue has no easy answers. But is Birkenstock doing the right thing, while Lewis, the good capitalist that he is, blinded by the gleaming light of cash? Or is it Birkenstock in the wrong, and the one that should get its priorities straight by thinking a bit harder about the bottom line?
June 4, 2004
Leaving It All Behind
Posted by at 3:54 PM
Can you get away from it all? Well, according to a new survey by American Express OPEN Small Business Network, a lot of small business owners would like to think so. I say bon voyage and good luck.
The speed of information and the need to stay in the know makes getting away almost impossible. It's become obligatory to check your email every 8 seconds. Do you realize I checked three different accounts twice each while writing these first two paragraphs? Make that three times each. That doesn't even mention the fact that cellphones, Blackberrys, Wi-Fi, etc. let the office follow you around everywhere.
But what makes it so hard to just let go? Is it a lack of trust in employees to do the job? It's certainly in the entrepreneurial spirit to simply do things yourself.
Vacation time is precious, so why do we ruin it with worry? We've all dreamed of the five weeks of mandatory paid vacation required in many European countries. But, honestly, could you manage that much time away from work?
Fact is, it's essential to take off. Otherwise, productivity suffers. Health suffers. Your employees suffer. But what's the best way to manage the office when you're away and, at the same time, actually get away?
June 2, 2004
Planning for Life After Entrepreneurship
Posted by Laura Rich at 3:31 PM
This month's issue of Money features a look at best places to retire. Before you say you can't imagine quitting, consider that next month's issue of Inc. highlights four of you who have successfully sold your businesses and moved on to a committed leisure lifestyle.
As you contemplate life after entrepreneurship, check out the special features in the package on CNN/Money. One great suggestion: think about buying a home now that you'll move into when you're ready to retire. Why? "There's a concern that the prices of properties most desired by boomers may get of reach," says David Hehman, CEO of EscapeHomes.com, a San Francisco realty firm specializing in second homes.
Another feature will walk you through the process of determining the ideal place to retire on where to locate, with a list of questions to ask yourself, such as the types of neighbors you want; your proximity to travel options; the availability of the kind of work you might want to do; and, of course, medical care and safety.
What is your experience with planning for retirement? Aside from the common practice of saving for such an event, have you begun planning and preparations for the retirement lifestyle you'd like to lead?
Leadership
What Would You Do If...
Posted by Bobbie Gossage at 9:26 AM
A few years back I spoke with a business owner who had a problem. His star, high-performing employee had a negative attitude that was damaging morale and performance among the rest of the staff. But he didn't want to fire his star employee.
How would you handle it if you were the business owner in this scenario?
June 1, 2004
How Rude!
Posted by Nadine Heintz at 1:31 PM
Each week, Inc. staff writer Nadine Heintz will help you tackle office etiquette problems both big and small.
Q. I am the founder and CEO of a small commercial general contracting and land development firm. Because we are a small company, our environment tends to be less structured than most (family like). But it has caused us to lose a few employees who needed that structure. These losses have caused us to rethink our corporate culture and seems to be pushing us toward a highly structured environment. This is not my vision for this company. Why can not employees handle the idea that a relaxed environment requires greater discipline than the alternative of manuals and structured working programs? What can be done to secure this environment for those who thrive in a self-disciplined work environment and thwart off the typical pitfalls that have ranged from habitual tardiness to a sense of entitlement in a few employees?
A. Don't beat yourself up too much. Figuring out how to create an unstructured yet productive office environment is a big challenge for most company founders. I even wrote an article on the topic, called Why Can't We Be Friends? for Inc.'s January, 2004 issue. The good news is that you can introduce more rules and structure into your office without sacrificing your vision for a family-like company. One of the business owners I wrote about in the story had a similar experience to yours: a relaxed environment worked well during his company's start-up phase, but got out of control as the business grew. You might want to take a page from his book: he hired a COO to establish some more structure, while maintaining a friendly vibe. The COO now handles all HR issues like hiring, firing, and employee reviews, freeing up the founder to focus on his company's strategy. While they still have, say, office pizza parties to celebrate milestones, gone are the days when the whole office, including the CEO, had dinner and drinks together a few nights a week.
If you can't afford to hire someone to perform HR functions or delegate those duties to someone else, there are still things you can do on your own. First off, you may want to distance yourself a bit from your employees. Not many employees can handle being pals with the boss, so don't be too quick to make friends with them. The friendship will only work if both of you are able to separate your personal relationship from your professional one, which is something easier said than done. That doesn't mean you can't chat with your staff about their weekend plans or look at their baby pictures. But listening to the nitty-gritty details of say, their marital problems, blurs the line between boss and pal. That, in turn, may foster a sense of entitlement. Also, semi-annual employee reviews might be a good way to remind staffers about getting in on time and what's expected of them. When you're hiring employees, you may want to get a sense of what kind of environment they've worked in before, and whether or not they're self-disciplined. If you hire someone who's not a good fit, it will probably become clear pretty quickly. Give them a chance to adjust, but don't wait so long that they start poisoning the rest of the staff.
Above all, keep in mind that it's not easy to change an office environment, so don't expect a complete turnaround in just one week. Unfortunately, being the boss isn't always fun. But, in the long run, your employees will probably appreciate an environment that's a little more structured, but still family-like. They'll be able to concentrate more on work and less on office drama. And you'll be able to focus on your top priority: the success of the company.
Have a dilemma for Nadine? Send her an e-mail and check back here Tuesdays for the answer.
Pushing Customer Loyalty
Posted by Carole Matthews at 9:26 AM
The nation's hotel chains are getting a bit pushy about their customer-loyalty programs these days. In an effort to promote their frequent-guest programs -- and populate their sparse customer databases with critical information -- the chains are making aggressive efforts to get business travelers to sign up. Some hotel chains are even rolling up such necessary business travel perks as free phone calls and Internet access into their loyalty program benefits to force business travelers to cough up the data.
According to chain representatives, their main objective for forcing travelers to sign on is to better serve their customers. But, not so suprisingly, they're also using the detailed data to better target their marketing campaigns to reel in more business travelers.
Try a RISK-FREE Issue of Inc. Today!
Select Services
- Home |
- Contact Us |
- About Us |
- Subscribe |
- Advertise Online |
- Legal Disclaimers |
- Media Kits |
- Press |
- Privacy Statement
Copyright © 2009 Mansueto Ventures LLC. All rights reserved. Inc.com, 7 World Trade Center, New York, NY 10007-2195
Mansueto Digital Network: Inc.com | FastCompany.com | IncBizNet.com | IncTechnology.com | FastCompany.tv