Archive for February, 2013

Small Business Reclaims Made in America as an Economic Virtue


For the last several years politicians have tagged the economic idea of Made in America as a protectionist philosophy. The truth is manufacturing at home and exporting to countries overseas improves the American economy. Net exports (over imports) is what the economy needs to grow. Although importing can produce cheaper goods and services, quality problems and service has declined as a result. For example, lead in toys and brake problems in automobiles have resulted in recalls. Foreign manufacturers have stolen American intellectual property. The list goes on.

One small business has defied the protectionist name calling and built a successful business producing digital radiology equipment. Radlink, Inc. is a California-based company with 22 employees manufacturing its product in the United States and selling to China, Latin America, and the Middle East (“Small and medium…,” 2011).

Radlink calls on Dr. Peter J. Julien, the director of thoracic imagining at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles to provide expertise in reading x-rays and transmitting the results using the company’s state-of-the-art equipment. Thomas T. Hacking, Radlink’s chairman and chief executive officer, explained how Radlink’s digital equipment saves “time, money, and space,” (p. 772) while providing high-quality digital images needed for surgical accuracy (“Small and medium…,” 2011).

Small business is the engine for domestic manufacturing and Radlink sets an excellent example for other companies wanting to reclaim the Made in America economic virtue. Do you want your company to help lead the United States back to economic prosperity? Do you want to learn more?

References

Small and medium business technology alliance; SMBTA highlights an American small business success story. (2011). Investment Weekly News, 772. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/908910659?accountid=35812

Advertisements

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

1 Comment

Attack Never Defend: An Entrepreneur’s Key to Success


Entrepreneurs do best in the face of uncertain conditions, but mature firms have a hard time with uncertain conditions because they plan for what is certain and has worked for them in the past. Entrepreneurs can succeed by doing what they do best and creating uncertain conditions for mature competitors.

ImproMed is one such company that has made “attack never defend” its mantra. Ron Detjen, ImproMed’s founder and president, says his company continues to grow and add employees because it keeps a competitive attitude. Detjen argues companies that go on the defensive can never grow as fast as companies that go on the offensive. Detjen encourages his employees to go on the offensive by finding something they excel at and keep working on it (Anonymous, 2011). What an excellent approach!

ImproMed is a company that helps veterinary practices deal with complex recordkeeping needs and has developed the world’s leader software products for both the business and medical needs of veterinary practices. ImproMed stresses a consultative approach for its employees is the key to its extraordinary growth (Anonymous, 2011).

A company that focuses on what its employees do well wins. Employees are critical to a small company because they are responsible for how the company performs. Encouraging employees to focus on strengths puts competitors at a distinct disadvantage because they do not know what to expect. A good entrepreneur works from his or her strengths and not weaknesses.

How does your company attack? I would love to hear your comments. If you want to know more about how you can design a way to attack using strengths you can learn more here.

References

Anonymous. (2011). 2011 Winners small business success stories Corporate Report Wisconsin, 26(7), 30-35. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/864104598?accountid=35812

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

Small Business Needs Another Resurgence


Economic recovery depends on restoring middle class workers to the prominence they once had. Many large firms have moved operations overseas leaving holes in the market both from the absence of middle class jobs and tax revenues lost from large companies that moved overseas. The logical choice to fill these holes comes from small business. Small businesses quickly adapt to market voids and offer the creativity to fill holes, but small businesses grow into larger firms and lose their flexibility. Schumpeter (1975) coined the term “creative destruction” to describe when large firms falter and lose their adaptability to create. A blurred line exists about when “creative destruction” happens, but this condition is a normal part of the business cycle.

Most of the goods and services produced in the United States up to the mid-19th century came from small business. By 1914, firms with 500 or more employees accounted for about a third of the industrial workers with another third working in firms with 100 to 499 workers. Smaller firms developed market niches or supplied larger companies with 500 or more employees to compete in the markets until the mid-20th century (“The Limits of Small Business,” 1992).

From 1952 to 1979 the percentage of business receipts from small businesses plummeted from 52% to just 29%, but by the late 1970s and early 1980s the United States experienced a resurgence of small businesses. For example, out of 17 million businesses less than 10,000 firms employed more than 500 workers. By 1986 small firms produced 64% of the 10.5 million new jobs created (“The Limits of Small Business,” 1992). History repeats itself.

The time has come for another resurgence to replace the void left by large firm that have migrated overseas and take the country back to its roots. Small business is in the right place because small business is closest to consumers and has the ability to adapt and create what consumers want and need. The resurgence takes time to gather steam to propel the United States economy out of the recession. Small business entrepreneurs can sense holes in the market and will rebuild what the market has lost to “creative destruction.”

Are you up for the challenge? Learn more.

References

The Limits of Small Business. (1992). Available from EBSCOhost lkh. (03633276). Retrieved Summer92, from Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lkh&AN=10129578&site=lrc-plus

Schumpeter, J. A. (Ed.). (1975). Creative destruction from capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment