Jul. 21, 2018 "Entrepreneur: Can you really take the afternoon off?": Today I found this article by Harvey Schachter in the Globe and Mail:
Toronto management consultant Patrick O’Neill titled his recent book on his journey from working in a large international public relations firm to setting out on his own The Only Certain Freedom. It’s an important message, one that entrepreneurs will immediately recognize, although I didn’t realize it traced back to Robert Frost: “The only certain freedom’s in departure.”
One can overstate that freedom, of course. Most entrepreneurs are still chained to an enterprise or mission and, indeed, it may demand more of them. They can find customers even more demanding than the bosses they once had in a large firm.
And the theory that, as your own boss, you can take off an afternoon whenever you want, is just theory for most entrepreneurs. Still, just as we diversify our investments, there can be security in having a number of clients providing our income rather than one boss.
And the theory that, as your own boss, you can take off an afternoon whenever you want, is just theory for most entrepreneurs. Still, just as we diversify our investments, there can be security in having a number of clients providing our income rather than one boss.
Entrepreneurs tend to divide into two types, which Derek Lidow, a professor of entrepreneurship at Princeton, labels bedrock entrepreneurs and high-risk entrepreneurs.
Bedrock entrepreneurs are the vast majority – he suggests 99 per cent – leaving an existing employer to start their own business to achieve personal goals. “Because they largely fund their businesses out of their own pockets and the pockets of their family and friends they try to minimize losses and avoid failure.
They start small, seek profitability early on, and plow their profits back into the business, methodically growing their businesses over the long haul, sometimes to great size after years of patient toil,” he writes on the ChangeThis website.
Bedrock entrepreneurs are the vast majority – he suggests 99 per cent – leaving an existing employer to start their own business to achieve personal goals. “Because they largely fund their businesses out of their own pockets and the pockets of their family and friends they try to minimize losses and avoid failure.
They start small, seek profitability early on, and plow their profits back into the business, methodically growing their businesses over the long haul, sometimes to great size after years of patient toil,” he writes on the ChangeThis website.
But I’d break that group down, as well, in two ways. Some seek Mr. Frost’s departure willingly and others find themselves booted out of the firm – after a downsizing or a disagreement – and become reluctant entrepreneurs. I think bedrock entrepreneurs also vary on how big they want their new enterprise to grow.
Michael Gerber rocketed to fame when he advised in his 1986 book The E-Myth that smart entrepreneurs work on their business, focusing on growing it, rather than getting immersed working in their business, doing the mundane stuff that customers buy.
So don’t open a coffee shop to serve your unique brew and chat with customers; figure out how to build a chain of people doing that work. It’s logical advice, but some of us love working in our business – that’s the joy we seek.
Michael Gerber rocketed to fame when he advised in his 1986 book The E-Myth that smart entrepreneurs work on their business, focusing on growing it, rather than getting immersed working in their business, doing the mundane stuff that customers buy.
So don’t open a coffee shop to serve your unique brew and chat with customers; figure out how to build a chain of people doing that work. It’s logical advice, but some of us love working in our business – that’s the joy we seek.
None of this seems to relate to Steve Jobs or Jeff Bezos. Although they also departed conventional employers at one point, they are the epitome of the second group Mr. Lidow identifies, high-risk entrepreneurs who he says are often motivated by a desire to achieve great wealth and recognition.
I’m not sure on that last point: Many just started with an idea they fancied and wanted to pursue. Joseph Boyett and Jimmie Boyett studied more than 70 well-known entrepreneurs for their 2001 book The Guru Guide to Entrepreneurship and reported: “Our gurus repeatedly maintained that they are not and were not motivated by money.”
They were excited by the challenge of building their firms or offering something valuable to customers. Ted Turner declared: “If you think money is a really big deal … you’ll be too scared of losing it to get it.”
I’m not sure on that last point: Many just started with an idea they fancied and wanted to pursue. Joseph Boyett and Jimmie Boyett studied more than 70 well-known entrepreneurs for their 2001 book The Guru Guide to Entrepreneurship and reported: “Our gurus repeatedly maintained that they are not and were not motivated by money.”
They were excited by the challenge of building their firms or offering something valuable to customers. Ted Turner declared: “If you think money is a really big deal … you’ll be too scared of losing it to get it.”
Fear, of course, is what deters most people from becoming entrepreneurs, even of the bedrock variety. But most entrepreneurs try to mitigate risk, even the oversized ones who capture our imagination by what seem like daring ventures.
Still, it’s worth listening to this bit of advice from Mr. O’Neill: “There’s a fool inside every entrepreneur. Only a fool would willingly leave the security of full-time employment for the vagaries of entrepreneurial life. Only a fool would risk everything on an idea, a hunch, a premonition. Who but a fool would allow him or herself to be seized by a dream?”
Earl Graves, founder of Black Enterprise magazine, has offered a different metaphor in the guru book: A junk-yard dog. “True entrepreneurs don’t let go. If one venture fails, they try another. If one product doesn’t sell, they look for a better idea. If one company official isn’t buying, they look for another who is. Like the junkyard dog, they hang on no matter how much they are shaken, cursed, beaten and kicked because they stay focused on the task at hand.”
It’s the only certain freedom.
Cannonballs
· Employee engagement is not an employee engagement problem, says consultant Paul Hebert. It’s a problem that begins and ends with the manager. If you want to impact employee engagement, you must impact the manager.
· Are you a control freak? Trainer Dan Rockwell suggests assessing how much of your time, attention and energy is spent by getting involved in trivialities.
· The average age of founders of firms with the highest growth in the first five years of operation is 45, research shows, rather than our mind’s image of 20-something. Another interesting research tidbit: Startups founded or co-founded by women generated 10 per cent more in cumulative revenue over a five year period than those founded by men.
The word "Entrepreneurs" should be banned for 10 years, along with "reaching out"
"Companies experiment with reducing work hours in a bid to boost productivity": Today I found this article in the Globe and Mail. No writer, but "Wellington, N.Z".
A New Zealand firm that let its employees work four days a week while being paid for five says the experiment was so successful that it hoped to make the change permanent.
The firm, Perpetual Guardian, which manages trusts, wills and estates, found the change actually boosted productivity among its 240 employees, who said they spent more time with their families, exercising, cooking, and working in their gardens.
The firm ran the experiment — which reduced the workweek to 32 hours from 40 — in March and April this year, and asked two researchers to study the effects on staff.
Jarrod Haar, a human resources professor at Auckland University of Technology, said employees reported a 24 percent improvement in work-life balance, and came back to work energized after their days off.
“Supervisors said staff were more creative, their attendance was better, they were on time, and they didn’t leave early or take long breaks,” Haar said. “Their actual job performance didn’t change when doing it over four days instead of five.”
Similar experiments in other countries have tested the concept of reducing work hours as a way of improving individual productivity. In Sweden, a trial in the city of Gothenburg mandated a six-hour day, and officials found employees completed the same amount of work or even more.
But when France mandated a 35-hour workweek in 2000, businesses complained of reduced competitiveness and increased hiring costs.
But when France mandated a 35-hour workweek in 2000, businesses complained of reduced competitiveness and increased hiring costs.
In Perpetual Guardian’s case, workers said the change motivated them to find ways of increasing their productivity while in the office. Meetings were reduced from two hours to 30 minutes, and employees created signals for their colleagues that they needed time to work without distraction.
“They worked out where they were wasting time and worked smarter, not harder,” Haar said.
Andrew Barnes, the company’s founder, said he believed his was the first business in the world to pay staff for 40 hours when working 32; other firms have allowed employees to work shorter weeks by compressing the standard 40 hours into fewer days, or allowed people to work part time for a reduced salary.
Barnes said he came up with the idea for a four-day workweek after reading a report that suggested people spent less than three hours of their work day productively employed, and another that said distractions at work could have effects on staff akin to losing a night’s sleep or smoking marijuana.
He said the results of Perpetual Guardian’s trial showed that when hiring staff, supervisors should negotiate tasks to be performed, rather than basing contracts on hours new employees spent in the office.
“Otherwise you’re saying, ‘I’m too lazy to figure out what I want from you, so I’m just going to pay you for showing up,’” Barnes said.
“A contract should be about an agreed level of productivity,” he added. “If you deliver that in less time, why should I cut your pay?”
He said working mothers stood to benefit most from the policy, since those returning to work from maternity leave often negotiated part-time hours, but performed the equivalent of full-time work.
Tammy Barker, a senior client manager with the firm, agreed with Barnes’ assessment.
Barker, a mother of two who lives in Auckland, said she spent her day off each week running personal errands, attending appointments and shopping for groceries, which allowed her to spend more time with her family on weekends.
She had realized during the trial how often she jumped between tasks at work as her concentration waned.
“Because there was a focus on our productivity, I made a point of doing one thing at a time, and turning myself back to it when I felt I was drifting off,” she said. “At the end of each day, I felt I had got a lot more done.”
Noting that the company had seen lower electricity bills with 20 percent less staff in the office each day, Barnes said the change in work hours could have wider implications if more companies adopted such a strategy.
“You’ve got 20 percent of cars off the road in rush hour; there are implications for urban design, such as smaller offices,” he said.
Perpetual Guardian’s board will now consider making the change permanent.
The government’s workplace relations minister, Iain Lees-Galloway, said too many New Zealanders worked overly long hours, and it was “great to see a company finding a better way.”
“I applaud this instance of working smarter and encourage more businesses to take it up,” he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment