I’m reminded of a couple of things this morning. The first is the old sometimes overused saying, “We don’t plan to fail. We fail to plan.” The other is an account in my life from about 10 years ago which I would like to share.
Business acquaintances of mine were struggling with their business, a business that was the same as what my wife and I were doing. They too were a husband and wife team and I recall the day he came to me for help. As he began, he lamented of how he couldn’t get any customers and wanted to know how our business could be so successful while his was on the verge of collapse.
I said to him, “So, what have done to implement changes?”
You would have thought he had seen a ghost. He stared at me for a moment, with mouth agape and asked, “What do you mean?”
I knew he was in trouble so I explained a very simple thing – or at least I thought it was simple. I told him that one of the hard lessons I had learned in business over the years was that when things went awry, it was time to implement changes. Sometimes our customers just need to see a change to let them know you still care about them and appreciate their investment into your business.
But probably more importantly we have to examine the basic structure of our business, make sure we are doing all the basic things right and then take a long hard look and see if what we are doing meets with the demands, the changes of the marketplace.
Surprising to me anyway was the fact that the guy who came looking for help left mad that I had suggested it might be time for change – a real menu for continued failure.
Many of you have read my articles and perhaps heard some of my rants on my radio show about the need to fix the Endangered Species Act. I have said that at the time is was written, it was probably a good thing. The Act was legalized in 1973 and since that time there have been several changes to it.
There’s enough grumbling, moaning and groaning going on about the ESA, the relentless onslaught of lawsuits and the questions about its effectiveness, that I think it’s time to take a look at it. Is it accomplishing what it is supposed to accomplish and what changes can be made to allow for its implementation without the crippling affect from lawsuits? Is there better available science now that would help to define actions and purposes.
I have questioned whether or not the ESA was necessary but never seriously suggested it be completely tossed in the garbage, only to be revamped to find better ways of utilizing millions of dollars spent fighting lawsuits.
Should we act the way the fellow business man did and walk away mad simply because I am suggesting it’s time for changes? To me, that is a sure formula for failure.
Tom Remington
