I recently had a conversation with a CEO who was lamenting about the disparity between public company valuations and those of privately held concerns. As of July 2011, the S&P is trading at a multiple of 14, while private company multiples remain in the 5-6 range. Investors value public company access to capital, and scalability into large consumer markets.  Of the Top 10 U.S. companies by size, none are pure play B2B companies.

Small companies come in all forms; some compete with larger branded companies, and some market directly to them.  In the age of confluence, some do both. How can small companies survive in a land of giants?

The primary difference between Fortune 1000 companies and smaller ones is more fundamental than which markets they serve. Intel founder Geoffrey Moore makes a distinction about business architecture – the difference between “complex systems” and “volume operations”[i].

Many smaller B2B companies are built to support specialized and custom solutions, while most Fortune 500 companies are built from the ground up to serve the masses. While customization may command higher prices (per transaction) than generalization, high volume companies cross a threshold where their infrastructure promotes a lower cost per unit and the experience curve takes full affect. Thus, B2B companies face an inherent profitability disadvantage.

Where Microsoft offers its highly useful suite of Office products at around $400 per license, Apple’s B2C model (which is often utilized by small businesses and micro-businesses such as designers and the like) offers Pages and Numbers at $9.99 each. One offer is based on high intellectual capital value and the other on mass appeal and ease of use.

For smaller B2B companies to reach new levels of profitability, requires they find a path to scalability. Of course not every business wants to be big. Some entrepreneurs prefer a “family culture” and more tempered growth (with less risk).

One way to effect profitable volume is to find a balance, where products and services are “mass customized”. Mass customization is all the rage in consumer products where individuals can even build their own handbags and Nike basketball shoes to their specifications.

Smaller companies (B2B and B2C alike) should seek out solutions that allow for better utilization of existing solutions across more customers. In other words, the provider should not need to reinvent the wheel with each project. Often, optimizing margin requires leverage of a base product or service that can be replicated, at times with features configured to the customer’s individual needs. To configure from a menu of choices is considerably different than satisfying each specific whim, which may offer greater intimacy with the customer, but may also require the business to sacrifice profit. For every feature created for an individual customer, there is a resulting opportunity cost (time, money and energy that could be invested elsewhere).

The other requirement for getting big is a shift towards systems thinking, where management teams make decisions within the framework of their company’s capabilities. For a new initiative to succeed requires careful analysis of the resources required to implement it. The key for smaller companies who aspire to do business with larger ones it to utilize systems and processes consistent with the expectations of the customers they serve.

Competing against larger companies requires a unique mindset. Often small businesses use concepts like judo (where the larger opponents energy is often used against him) to beat the larger foe at the point of attack. Consider the depth and width of the market you want to serve, and scale your resources accordingly.

There is an old saying in poker; if you can’t see the sucker in the room…it is probably you.  The same can be said of advancements in technology. Forrester’s recently forecasted increases in IT spending of 8% in 2011 and 2012[i]. Recent M&A activity suggests the sector is heating up.

In many industries, market leaders create proprietary technologies and information systems that improve the customer experience directly or indirectly through information flow, efficiency, cycle time, etc.  At the current rate of change, a company either realizes a technological advantage, or is likely at a competitive disadvantage.

We have numerous clients who are either in the midst of ERP implementations, or considering similar upgrades to their systems. At some point the business owner must ask the strategic question; are our technology improvements truly game changers, or only an enhancement to existing ways of doing business?

More than 90% of ERP type systems are delivered late, and their implementations can be taxing to small and mid-market businesses. It is not difficult to spend $1 million+ (in hard and soft costs) in such systems, which is a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of disappointing customers due to errors or missed timelines.  If entrepreneurs are going to expend valuable resources (time and money) on technologies, they had better select the right ones, and prime their organization to implement them seamlessly.

I find there are often two extremes during such implementations.  In some companies, functional department heads (such as sales, engineering, design) lack experience in software integrations and do not become invested in the deliverables until it is too late. Other times, companies become so fascinated with perfection, they lose sight of the objective, and become paralyzed in analysis. If a company’s enterprise system becomes dated because of their inability to act, competitors can seize the upper hand.

If you are considering such upgrades to your technology, it is often sensible to take the aggressive but measured approach. In other words, the strategist is always looking to leverage technology that reshapes the customer experience, improves efficiency or reduces costs in some material way while simplifying or automating processes.  Such decisions should not be left to the technologists, but shared by the leadership team who must be equally responsible for selection, scoping and integration.  Failure is not an option as an unsuccessful project can put a company years behind.

Don’t be the sucker.

This week, I want to expound on a series of unrelated events shaping our world:

Last year, a deluge of rain in Australia and Canada, and drought in Argentina and Russia sparked a worldwide rise in food prices.  On Dec. 17^th, after months of poor supply, Tunisian produce vendor Mohammed Bouazizi was mugged by police and then set himself on fire in protest.  Reaction to his plight set off a revolt in the Middle East. Beyond the radar to us overly indulgent Americans is that the world is on the verge of a global food shortage.

Ironically, the U.S. growers have reaped the rewards of higher prices for U.S crops and futures contracts. Wheat prices were up as much as 74%, (corn 87%[i]) and net farm income is up 20% this year. Demand is rising for dairy, meat and poultry to support a burgeoning global middle class.[ii] Spring planting of key crops will dictate food prices later in 2011 but farmers may be hesitant to plant in a period of high fuel and fertilizer costs.

While unrest continues throughout the Middle East, social states who provide strong entitlements such as UAB, Kuwait and Oman will likely not be threatened. Similar protests in oil rich Iran or Iraq would be more unsettling to world markets.

——————————————————————————————————–

As Motorola revealed its Xoom tablet this week, the Microsoft vs. Apple war took on a new dimension. The real war may be tablet vs. PC as a new generation of devices operating on Honeycomb-Android (Google) and other operating systems hit the market[iii].  Electronics makers are currently developing over 100 designs of new models, many of which sport more business friendly applications.

The second generation of iPads has been somewhat under wraps but is expected to be lighter, faster and include a camera and video conferencing capabilities. Apple’s advantage is its burgeoning iTunes and App Exchange platform.  Apple only spends about 7% of revenue on R&D, about half of what Google and Microsoft[iv] spend, providing a significant competitive advantage. I was in a meeting last week with 7 other people; everyone had a tablet.

Meanwhile, Microsoft (Office 365) and others are developing new Small Business Enterprise applications to better leverage the combination of mobile devices and low cost cloud computing options. The paradigm shift to storing all documents on the internet is emerging as a revolution coined as “cloud productivity.”

————————————————————————————————————–

Cisco’s new “telepresense” conferencing systems are all the rage, providing a far more realistic teleconference then the 1^st generation systems. With concerns over fuel costs and the environment, more companies may be moving towards adopting such technologies.

If you want to see an amazing video on future technologies, see “A Day Made of Glass…Made Possible by Corning” on YouTube.

—————————————————————————————————————

It is expected that the U.S. post office will eliminate Saturday delivery by the end of 2012.

_________________________________________________________

It is “hurry up and wait” for small businesses looking to minimize their insurance costs.  The health care bill requires that each state set up “health care exchanges” by 2014[v]. Most states are dragging their feet, and waiting to see what legal challenges emerge.  California has already pushed through legislation but other states are dragging behind.

It is expected that “exchanges” once enacted may actually bring about market conditions that will lower costs for small groups (in the neighborhood of 50 lives)  who will be better able to leverage buying power and have more predictable premiums. Let us pray.

[ii] The Kiplinger Letter Vol 88 No.

[iii] Motorola’s Xoom Starts Tablet Wars by Walter Mossberg WSJ 2/24/11

[iv] Mobile Wars Bloomberg Business Week 2/21/11

[v] The Kiplinger Letter Vol. 88, No. 7

Depending on whom you talk to, a product, company or industry may have five or six stages in its life cycle.  In the case of an industry, or perhaps a technology, there is the initial development, followed by introduction, growth, maturity and decline.   These phases can take months or years. The key is to optimize the most profitable periods in a life cycle (in the maturity phase, a company is able to build volume leveraging existing infrastructure), and to reinvent as to avoid decline.

Netflix recently reported it has 17 Million subscribers as of September, up 52% from the prior year.  Meanwhile, cable subscriptions in the U.S. dropped during the last two quarters, for the first time since the inception of cable.[i] While businesses such as cable TV and DVD’s wane, Netflix successfully adjusted its model to remain relevant. Amazon, Apple and others are expected to enter the fray, permanently changing the delivery system for media content including television and film.

Retailers carefully measure “same store sales”, to measure when particular locations have peaked, a sign that their offering may be stagnating or that competition has changed the playing field.  Entrepreneurs intuitively know when decline has arrived. If a business has flat lined for two or three years, one needs to ask; are the fundamentals likely to change in any material way that will spark some type of competitive advantage? If the answer is no, then drastic modification of the business model is critical for survival.  One trend is a return to vertical integration where companies are buying up their suppliers to create advantage in the face of price competition.

Businesses need to recognize what phase they are in, and adjust to build the right infrastructure including systems, processes and talent (that supports the stage). I have come across entrepreneurs who wait too long and fail to recognize that decline is imminent; leading their products and services to extinction. Don’t be a dinosaur!  If your business is flat, take note, and do something about it. 2011 should be a good year.

Happy Holidays to all.