Small Giants are companies that aspire to be the best they possibly can be; something that – surprising – doesn’t involve growing. But can these companies survive in an age of cashing-in and selling-out? I review the book by Bo Burlingham to find out.
It’s rare to see a quality debate from two people who have the backstory to lend credibility to their arguments. It is an interview about business models, bubbles, capitalism, market share vs. profit share, running a business vs. scaling for exit… and that’s just the first ten minutes. Buckle up, we’re about to pontificate up-in-here.
Normally I do a round up of the weeks inspirational/useful links in Friday’s Wunderkammer post. However, this was just too good not to share. From “You’re a Little Company, Now Act Like One”.
I’ve long been a fan of Douglas Rushkoff (previously mentioned in discussion on virtual currencies [here and here], speculative economies, and media viruses). Honestly, how many other hardcore media theorists also have written a fairly successful line of comics? And while implementing his more profound ideas remains puzzling (at least for me) the overarching themes are incredibly seductive.
His latest book, a successor to ‘Get Back in the Box‘, is Life, Inc. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen such succinct, forceful answers result in stunned silence on the Stephen Colbert show (you could hear a pin drop after his line that “It would be best for GDP (gross domestic product) if everybody in the audience would get cancer). Video embedded below.
| The Colbert Report | Mon – Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Douglas Rushkoff | ||||
|
||||
Thought provoking stuff. I love this kind of analysis. It’s that along with the business ideals discussed at events like Small and Special that make me hopeful that mutually beneficial, niche ecosystems of like-minded, small teams have a place.
Last week I had the distinct pleasure of attending the Small and Special Conference, an event about people that had turned their passions into businesses. It was put on by Jackson Fish Market, a quirky software development firm made up of ex-Microsoftees (full recap is now available on their site). There were a number of takeaways – the inspiring stories of overcoming adversity, the eye opening diversity of how people are able to make money, etc. However, for me and my Vox Pops, what was most valuable was the reinforcement that there are alternatives to going big and selling out.
There has been a lot of discussion lately among similarly size conscious firms about labeling. What do you call an organization intent on staying small, nimble, and cash-flow positive? Till now, “Lifestyle Businesses” is about the only thing that has stuck. The problem with that term is manifold, as the 37 Signals blog rightfully points out:
The question was put to many: “Do you want to build a nice lifestyle business or do you want to build a real business.” How condescending is that? I’m not positive I understand the subtleties and nuances of these labels, but I think I have a good idea of what’s meant by them: A lifestyle business is for the hacks and amateurs while a real business is for the big guns and grown-ups.
The Redeye VC blog is currently calling upon its readers for new name ideas. My favorite so far? Freestanding Business. There’s no reference or implication of diminutive size, sounds strong, and reinforces the notion that the doors will stay open without wheelbarrow of investment.
I’ll finish with a great video featuring David Heinemeier Hansson. Sure, he’s a pretty boy. But in a world enraptured with quick wealth and completely automated income its refreshing to hear there are other measures of success.
Want More? Signup for Vox Pop Pages, a free monthly email newsletter from Vox Pop Design.