Posts Tagged ‘new york times’

Your The Boss

May 11, 2010, 7:00 am

My Virtual Business Group

Staying Alive

All of these posts about business groups have been interesting. I’ve never joined one or even considered joining one, even though my uncle was executive director of Young Presidents’ Organization for many years. (O.K., I considered it then but didn’t qualify.)

Reading Jay Goltz’s thoughts and the comments they inspired made me wonder: hey, haven’t any of you heard about industry-specific Internet forums?  I participate regularly in a number that are found on the Woodweb Web site. You may find this surprising, but woodworkers are like doctors — there are many sub-specialties, each with its specific tool set and procedures.

The site hosts forums on each of these, along with a business and management forum, and one for everything that doesn’t easily fit a category. (There are also places to post job openings, solicit subcontract help, and sell surplus equipment, and a whole bunch of other useful stuff.) So I can post and answer questions on any aspect of my business or operations. The community is large enough that a variety of opinions are available. I don’t always agree with my fellow posters’ politics, but a huge amount of good advice is freely exchanged.

Here’s what I really like about this set-up:

o It’s free. The site is supported by advertising. If I were selling equipment or offering a job, there would be a nominal charge, but it’s cheaper than classified ads in the local paper.

o It’s moderated. Unlike Google groups or Usenet, spam doesn’t see the light of day and jerks get their posts deleted.  The site owners/administrators are accessible for questions regarding this. The site is their livelihood, and they are very attentive to regular posters. They recognize that good participants make the site interesting and improve their business.

o I can talk to my competitors. I found it odd that the groups mentioned in Jay’s posts made a big deal of the fact that you wouldn’t be placed in a group with your competitors. So what’s the point then? Those are the people I want to hear from most. I know that a lot of small-business owners are paranoid about someone stealing their great ideas, but that’s ridiculous. Really, there is enough business in this enormous country to go around. Once you get beyond your fear, competitors are the best people to talk to.

We have another cabinet shop on the floor above us in our building. I could spend a great deal of energy worrying that this competitor is going to harm me in some way, but instead we are the best of friends. When I moved in, we made an agreement not to poach each other’s employees, as that could be very harmful to both of us. With that settled, it’s been a terrific resource to have a competitor to check with regarding pay rates, the landlord, materials suppliers, etc., etc. The Internet forum puts me in touch with shops all over the country, so this benefit is multiplied many times over. I can get candid opinions on tools, suppliers, ways to deal with customers, and how to handle employees, all from people who live the same life I do.

o I can be anonymous if I want. I usually sign my posts with my real name, but I’m in the minority among regular posters.  Many use a pen name. Some are just plain anonymous, and I can take that option when I’m asking a sensitive question.

o I can spend as much or as little time as I want and still get what I need out of it. Reading takes a few minutes a day. Questions and answers can be as long or short as I want. The regular preparation for and attendance of a business group are big turn-offs for me.

For the face-to-face social aspects that can be found in a business group, I have a couple of alternatives: first, a weekly pick-up soccer game and, second, a monthly poker game. Some of the guys are small-business owners, some aren’t, whatever. Both of these groups are all male. The soccer is healthy sporting fun, the poker is boozy naughty fun. I use these groups to fulfill my need to hang out with people I like. I’d hate to be paying for a business group with people I don’t like all that much.

I have no idea whether Woodweb is unique or whether there are similar sites for many industries. I also have no idea whether Woodweb is profitable. But it has been around for at least six years.

Do any of you participate in similar forums?

Paul Downs founded Paul Downs Cabinetmakers in 1986. It is based outside Philadelphia.

Be the first to comment - What do you think?  Posted by Michael Carrillo - May 11, 2010 at 7:27 am

Categories: Blogs, Blogs that I follow   Tags:

Who’s Up for Building Bridges?

Published: April 6, 2010, New York Times

I’m no expert on American politics, but I do know something about holes. And watching the way the Republican Party is reacting to the passage of health care, it seems to me the G.O.P. is violating the first rule of holes: “When you’re in one, stop digging.”

Yes, I know, the polls show that the G.O.P. is not being hurt by its “just-say-no” strategy. But there is no groundswell moving its way either. Republicans will have to come up with more than “just-say-no-to-everything-except-lower-taxes-and-more-drilling” to field a credible 2012 presidential candidate. Here’s why:

If you step back far enough, you could argue that George W. Bush brought the Reagan Revolution — with its emphasis on tax cuts, deregulation and government-as-the-problem-not-the-solution — to its logical conclusion and then some. But with a soaring deficit and a banking crisis caused by an excess of deregulation, Reaganism has met its limit. Meanwhile, President Obama’s passage of health care reform has brought the New Deal-Franklin Roosevelt Revolution to its logical conclusion. There will be no more major entitlements for Americans. The bond market will make sure of that.

In other words, both major parties have now completed their primary 20th- century missions, first laid down by their iconic standard-bearers. The real question is which party is going to build America’s bridge to the 21st century — one that will strengthen our ability to compete in the global economy, while practicing much more fiscal discipline.

Obama is at least trying to push an agenda for pursuing the American dream in these new circumstances. I don’t agree with every policy — I’d like to see a lot more emphasis on innovation and small business start-ups — but he’s clearly trying. I do not get that impression from the Republicans, and especially those being led around by the Tea Partiers.

Obama-ism posits that we are now in a hypercompetitive global economy, where the country that thrives will be the one that brings together the most educated, creative and diverse work force with the best infrastructure — bandwidth, ports, airports, high-speed rail and good governance. And we’re in a world with a warming climate that is growing from 6.8 billion people to 9.2 billion by 2050, so demand for clean energy is going to go through the roof. Therefore, E.T. — energy technology — is going to be the next great global industry.

So, government matters. It needs to be incentivizing businesses to build their next factory in this country — at a time when every other nation is throwing incentives their way; it needs to be recruiting highly skilled immigrants; it needs to be setting the highest national education standards and funding basic research; it needs to be laying down the right energy regulations that will stimulate more clean-tech companies.

And — something neither Democrats nor Republicans have stepped up to yet — we will need to pay for all this by simultaneously raising some taxes, cutting others and by taking away some services to pay for needed new investments in infrastructure and education. We can’t get away anymore with a G.O.P. that wants to cut taxes but never specifies which services it plans to give up, or a Democratic party that wants to add services by taxing only the rich.

“Health care was the final act of the New Deal,” argues Edward Goldberg, who teaches global business at Baruch College and is writing a book on globalization and U.S. politics. “The 21st-century will require a mix of cutting, investing and innovation and entrepreneurialism beyond anything we have dreamed of.” To simply say that government is not the answer, he adds, “when we are essentially fighting four wars — Iraq, Afghanistan, the Great Recession and the retooling of the American economy” — is ludicrous. Smart government needs to be the leader or silent partner in all of these projects.

One reason the G.O.P. has failed to spawn an agenda for the 21st century is that globalization has fragmented the party. Its Wall Street/multinational corporate wing understands we need immigration, free trade, clean-tech and government support for better infrastructure and the scientific research that is the wellspring of innovation. The Tea Party wing opposes virtually all those things. All that unites the two wings is their common desire for lower taxes — period.

Globalization has also weakened the Democrats’ blue-collar/union base, but the Democrats have absorbed a new constituency created by globalization — what Goldberg calls the “ ‘Newocracy’ — which combines the multinational corporate manager, the technology entrepreneur and engineer, and the aspirational members of the meritocracy.”

These “Newocrats” previously would have leaned Republican, but now many lean toward Obama. They don’t agree with everything he’s proposing, but they sense that he is working on that bridge to the 21st century, while today’s G.O.P./Tea Party is just not in the game. Today, we have no real opposition party with its own pathway to the 21st century. We just have opposition.

Be the first to comment - What do you think?  Posted by Michael Carrillo - April 7, 2010 at 12:05 pm

Categories: Uncategorized   Tags: , ,