I've got this client, he is all (100%) operation based thinker. Even when we talk strategy it's operational strategy. Even when we talk about how he is going to get paid back from this venture (which he said is a main goal) we talk about operations.
After a while I feel like I'm beating a dead horse. So now I venture to some experts to help me find some new ways to beat my clients over their heads with strategy. My schpeel is something like this, "Strategy is how you get from where you are to where you want to be and tactics are the things you do in between to get there." I usually get some perplexed looks but in general I think it helps.
My general problem is getting people, who don't get it, to apply the concept to their own business. Sometime we back into strategy by defining all the things they are doing to 'move the ball' then describe the entirety of the tactical collection as strategy.
Another way is to get even more granular. We jump to business modeling and break down the business into bite-size pieces. This can backfire by either a lack of patience or, the other way, we open a can of worms. In general, this is a fantastic tool.
Here's what some others say about strategy:
http://www.thinkingmanagers.com/business-management/business-strategy.php
http://www.planware.org/strategicplan.htm
http://www.briefcasebooks.com/formisano01.pdf
http://www.the-business-plan.com/what-is-business-strategy.html
So, I think, 'how can I get this guy to think strategically about his business?' He already thinks he is thinking strategically. So then it starts to take shape. We share a passion for the mountains. Let's incorporate our shared passion for climbing into this lesson. I look at the idea (mountain climbing) and I think about the options for strategy. One option would be to define the objectives. Which to me are to have fun, be safe, and push our limits. Usually there are route options and approach options, and of course the choice of the mountain, and multi-day vs day trip, etc. But the strategy is ultimately what? How we decide to get from the bottom of the mountain to the top. It's as simple as "that way", as I point with my finger. What we do in between is all tactical. Whether it be hike, technical ice climb, scramble, ski, alpine style, expedition style, whatever. Those are all tactical decisions. The strategic part is the terms and conditions that it is climbed and whether it should be climbed at all.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Non-Profit vs Profit
I'm Back! I'm not really sorry it's taken so long (now I'm sorry I'm not sorry) Guilt is a wily beast.
Ok, so I'm obsessed about this opportunity to help this non-profit organization transition to the next level of development. Much like some of my consulting clients this organization has organically developed and is now kind of on a hamster wheel making it happen, led by a fantastic all volunteer board (so, no real leadership). Anyway, I'll go into more about the organization later. My penchant to write today was initiated by a frustration that one, very influential, board member is stuck on the idea that the person that does this work must have non-profit leadership experience. I mean, really!? As an entrepreneur/make-it-happen problem solver it seems that a lot of non-profit experience could be a bad thing. (ie, career politician)
Mission based is good but it's not limited to non-profit! Many so called for-profit companies operate mission based too. I do. My firm has a mission to support our clients and if we do a good job then we expect to get a reasonable compensation. Wow! Seems like the 'right' way to do business, huh?! Profit NEVER comes into play with our fees. Although we do help our client's with their profits (And How!).
Take a look at these links. There is no operational difference in leading or running a non-profit vs for-profit. Each needs money to support it's initiatives and mission. Each operates to provide some kind of value (in product or service). And if a non-profit operates at break-even every year...that's a problem!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_6Te-Q2tMc
http://chuck.hubpages.com/hub/For-Profit-vs-Non-Profit-Form-of-Business
http://nonprofit.about.com/od/qathebasics/f/nopvspro.htm
http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/10/30/the-shrinking-gap-between-nonprofit-and-for-profit/
Ok, so I'm obsessed about this opportunity to help this non-profit organization transition to the next level of development. Much like some of my consulting clients this organization has organically developed and is now kind of on a hamster wheel making it happen, led by a fantastic all volunteer board (so, no real leadership). Anyway, I'll go into more about the organization later. My penchant to write today was initiated by a frustration that one, very influential, board member is stuck on the idea that the person that does this work must have non-profit leadership experience. I mean, really!? As an entrepreneur/make-it-happen problem solver it seems that a lot of non-profit experience could be a bad thing. (ie, career politician)
Mission based is good but it's not limited to non-profit! Many so called for-profit companies operate mission based too. I do. My firm has a mission to support our clients and if we do a good job then we expect to get a reasonable compensation. Wow! Seems like the 'right' way to do business, huh?! Profit NEVER comes into play with our fees. Although we do help our client's with their profits (And How!).
Take a look at these links. There is no operational difference in leading or running a non-profit vs for-profit. Each needs money to support it's initiatives and mission. Each operates to provide some kind of value (in product or service). And if a non-profit operates at break-even every year...that's a problem!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_6Te-Q2tMc
http://chuck.hubpages.com/hub/For-Profit-vs-Non-Profit-Form-of-Business
http://nonprofit.about.com/od/qathebasics/f/nopvspro.htm
http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/10/30/the-shrinking-gap-between-nonprofit-and-for-profit/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
