Forums: Discussions for entrepreneurs and small business.

I`ve been coming across an odd sort of mindset, the past few years, in talking with small business owners and entrepreneurs. It`s a belief that competition ought to be defined (and limited) by the size of a company.

Let`s say I`m a writer....oh wait...I AM a writer! One day I woke up and decided I`d like to be a writer. I talked to a couple of folks, and of course heard about how there are lots and lots of writers in the world.

Some opinions tell me that a writer has an awful lot of competion in today`s world. Plenty of other writers are going after contracts, success, and money. But other opinions tell me that whatever I write, if it`s interesting and different, it`ll find a way to "get out there"---that the writing itself "does something."

Following the logic of the first opinion set, I look out over the world and see only today (and the past decade or so). I consider myself a newbie, a little guy, untried and without a provable past history. "Things" look really large, and I`m at the bottom of some sort of ladder, having to work my way up to some sort of destination. Enh....pretty much hogwash. :-)

The second opinion set is more interesting. Anyone who writes stuff, leaves behind that stuff. It`s in the world...in the wind...in history. So as soon as I decide to put pen to paper (Can we still use that expression?), I enter into competition with Plato, Shakespeare, Thomas Jefferson, JK Rowling, and Ed Frisbee.

Never heard of ol` Ed? Neither have I...I just made him up. But he`s a writer, too, just like Plato. We`re all in compettion based on *product* not on size!

As a writer, I`m not in competition with Citibank. I`m not in competition with McDonald`s. The former sells money, the latter sells food. I sell words. So I don`t at all concern myself with the size of those types of companies.

On the other hand, Ayn Rand has already sold bazillions of words. I`ve only sold a few thousand words. Does that mean I can`t compete, or I`m not competing well? Is it the number of words, or the size of my products that defines competition?

Competition is a function of existence. As soon as I come into existence as a "something," I immediately enter into competition with all other entities in the same set. If I sell hot dogs on a corner, I enter into competition with all entities who sell food, all entities who occupy street corners, and all entities making exchanges for money.

So: How do you perceive competition? What is it? Is it a natural function of simply existing, or does competition come knocking one unknown afternoon? Is competition a framework of reality, or do you "build it" as a feature you want to sell in your line of business?

Craig -

I don`t look at those in the same business as me, whether it be identity design or writing, as competition at all.  I prefer to accept them as peers and potential collaborators.  When people get all stressed about their "competition" they seem to spend way too much time looking over their shoulders to see who is gaining on them.  I prefer to keep the focus of my business looking in a forward direction as I progress in my career.

- J.




-------------------------

Jeff Fisher | Jeff Fisher LogoMotives | Tweet! Tweet!

To me competition is only one of several kinds of relationships I can have with other businesses in my niche, or with other businesses generally. Evolutionarily speaking, symbiosis, adaptation and cooperation will get you a lot further than competition.

Now having said that, my whole business plan is based on the idea of small, local businesses cooperating to compete together as a bloc. So, in the end, I`m not sure how to answer the question. :)

—paula

Interesting! The reason I wrote the topical post is that it appears to me as if people think of competition as some sort of controllable action or set of actions. If they have a niche, they believe it`s a niche *because* they have set constraints on their competition "force"---their competitiveness.

I disagree; it`s a niche because their product has a limited market. Only a subset of all human beings want that product, thereby making it a small, constrained marketplace. The only personal control over competition, in this case, is their choice of product. It has nothing at all to do with their decision to "compete less."

Jeff, in your post, I take your point that the way we perceive competition most certainly affects us, our actions, our planning, our personality, and many other aspects of our lives. But even so, it almost sounds as though you don`t consider yourself in competition---you don`t "look at them as competition"---therefore, you`re not?

I`m going to argue that competition is an external force, essentially natural selection. In nature, the struggle to survive leads to the best survival traits. In the marketplace, the external force is the "cloud" of the sum of all attitudes, wants, desires, and human motivations.

You know that old saying, "May the best man win?" We can parse that in two ways. Either each person actively competes for a prize, or they passively sit back and let the judges decide, based on merit. So let`s put that into context, maybe getting on to the Home Shopping Network, that TV show that sells products.

You have 15 minutes to make your presentation, then it`s "on to the next." Isn`t that competition? The real question, though, is whether or not competition is a never-ending, all-encompassing framework. Whether you choose to act upon it or not, the competition still exists---as soon as you identify yourself as part of a set.

You may choose to act on a competitive course, or you may choose to remain passive, deny that it affects you, or be apathetic. I`d argue that you can do whatever you want, but the competition will continue all around you, within the set of similar entities.

Another reason for this topic is that I`m fascinated with the number of people who put up a Web site, then sit back and wait for the world to marvel at their amazing feat. Either they sense no competition whatsoever, or they somehow fail to understand that competition is an ongoing course of action.

I`m just digging a bit below those choices. All of life is in competition; plants for sunlight, animals for food, roots for water, businesses for customers, and the list goes on and on. At issue is whether or not an individual has the slightest affect of control on that competition or not. I say they don`t.

There`s another expression: "He who stands in the middle of the road gets run over." Although we choose to act as though nothing is happening around us, that doesn`t mean it isn`t happening.

Craig... you don`t think it`s possible that someone would deliberately choose a niche because they don`t have the resources to compete on a broader scale? Seems to me choosing a niche is a pretty effective adaptive strategy to the natural selection forces of the market. In nature, species do this all the time and in fact it is the primary way survival occurs. Each species represents a particular  niche in its ecosystem.

Personally, I think if markets were truly free we`d have a far greater diversity of products, services, sound financial instruments and the like because of this principal. (Truly free markets would probably even save the planet because government subsidies screw up the allocation of scarce natural resources... but that is another rant.) Competition requires ENORMOUS expenditures of resources, whether for a species, a business, or an industry — competition is, in short, a really inefficient form of long-term survival compared to adaptation, symbiosis, and cooperation. Nature is a riot of diversity because of this principal. Imagine how many more kinds of beverages the world might have if Coke and Pepsi ended their cola wars and instead started targeting smaller niches.

I`m not sure I follow your analogy about plants competing for sunlight, roots competing for nutrients in the soil, etc. Maybe I took too many evolutionary biology classes in college a few years ago but "competition" has a really specific meaning in biology, and roots growing down into the soil isn`t a matter of competing for anything. It`s just metabolism... growth is what life does.

on another note, I highly recommend this book, I think you would find it fascinating if you like thinking of markets as natural selectors: Bionomics — economy as ecosystem & the inevitability of capitalism. Ha check it out, there`s a copy on sale for 36¢.

—paula

Alright,........no.

I wrote a whole post, and maybe someone`s read it already, but I`ve deleted it. Talking with Kathy, as often happens, suddenly clarified the whole point.

You have two basic dimensions of self: Who you are, and What you do. In fact, Cookiemonster made a great discussion about how this applies in branding a business, building it, and so on....I just hadn`t seen the connection to competition.

One view of competition is that it`s something you do. I`m disagreeing. I`m saying that competition is who you are!

If you start a business, changing what you do all the time to please the market, customers, or the "audience" (remember, I`m coming from a musician background), then you`ll go nowhere. You`re competing with nothing other than a few people and their disinterest.

Instead, you should start a business based on who you are. You stay who you are, regardless of what other people like or don`t like. You compete on who you are, not on what you`re doing. The "doing-ness" is the effort and resources you have, to push forward as your identity.

One view is that it doesn`t matter who you are---you do what you`re told. Countless businesses start that way, and some even almost succeed. The other view is that it doesn`t matter what anyone tells you, you "play" your own music, you create that music from who you are, and you see if anyone wants to buy it.

Competition is either the framework surrounding who you are, or it`s a feature of what you do. I hope that makes more sense? (It does to me, at any rate...)