Forums: Discussions for entrepreneurs and small business.

I`ve been totally fascinated, lately, as our business is starting to grow from nothing but an imagined idea. We had no money, and our startup capital was about $400. We`ve had to learn skills, apply just about everything we`ve ever learned, and do everything free or on the cheap. Yet we`re growing.

Of all the things we`ve held as absolute, it`s been the quality of our product and our attention to details. Next to that has been our attention to customer correspondence, without exception. No question gets ignored or blown off, and we keep our customers in the loop throughout the entire process of their purchase, to when they can expect it to arrive at their home.

Good, so far. I also read about return on investment (ROI), and how to calculate what sort of money return you get for the time or materials invested in making your product or doing your service. That`s fine, too, and pretty easy to understand.

So the other day we went out shopping, to buy an office chair. They`re fairly expensive, and only a year ago, would have been totally out of reach, financially. Yet now, we can afford to buy one because of the money we`ve earned with the business. The wonders of capitalism, that`s for sure!

What we also came to understand is that we had a tremendous amount of fun shopping for that chair. We looked around, found what we wanted, and we were very happy with the purchase. I`d say we were more happy than when we`ve bought other things, and it`s because we knew that our customers are really happy when they receive our product.

All this got me thinking, in my rambling sort of way, particularly about the Life Plan the Sloan brothers talk about. The whole point of having this business is to make our lives better, more enjoyable, and happier. There`s a balance here, I think, and it`s between the happiness we provide to our customers, and the happiness we gain when we take our "returns"---the money and profits we earn---and apply it to our own lives.

What do you guys think about this, in terms of calculating ROI? Can`t we say that there are returns that are so seemingly unrelated to the direct process of investing in materials, operations, labor, and so forth, that they can`t be factored into an ROI equation? Is it legitimate to equate the balance of happiness that`s the final result---the last consequence---of conducting business?

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

Natalie Berrett
Part of the largest and fastest growing bookstore franchises in the world!
100% Money Back Satisfaction Guarantee!
www.MyBookWise.com/LiveWise
FREE Preferred Customer Membership.
Save up to 42% on books, CDs, DVDs, and college textbooks. Video games are coming soon.
A portion of the profits goes towards helping abused kids and fighting illiteracy.

It`s interesting, isn`t it, that it comes down to a fundamental approach to life between the mutual benefit of a society, as opposed to the predatory nature of the individual. What`s even more interesting to me, albeit part of my philosophic interests, is that we have the same sort of undercurrent of thought throughout science and anthropology.

At the moment, most scientists subscribe to the theory that motivation is based on the genetic mandate to spread one`s DNA---to carry on the line. Evolution and natural selection fold this into that system, with the strong genes tending to want to dominate. If you carry that logic forward, it leads to the hunter-gatherer society, tribes, and top-down hierarchies of strength, force, and dominance.

But if that`s so, then how do we explain the development of societies? What natural selector would override the DNA spread, leading to interaction? I say it`s that social organizations more often than not conserve resources and ensure the survival of the species, not just the individual.

The way I see it, on the one hand we have the animal nature holding sway, where the person sees "the others" as prey. On the other hand we have the human being nature emerging, seeing "the others" as helpmates in the problems of survival.

Whether we`re dealing with the foundations of anthropology, or we`re dealing with the difficult concept of a sociopath; either pathway means that no amount of education or seminars will change the core basis for customer service in different types of people.

Then again, education might make a difference, and I wonder if it wouldn`t be worthwhile to maybe teach young business students about this balance in happiness, and incorporate the principle into the mathematics of ROI calculations.

Personally, I think the commonly understood definition of "wealth" is too restrictive. There are lots of things that constitute wealth that can`t be broken down into monetary units, including happiness.

"But if that`s so, then how do we explain the development of societies? What natural selector would override the DNA spread, leading to interaction? I say it`s that social organizations more often than not conserve resources and ensure the survival of the species, not just the individual."

There`s a fair amount of research into this very thing with regard to memes. Essentially, memes work just like genes but mentally rather than physically; successful social organizations are the result of memes that manage to propagate themselves, which requires the survival of the group as opposed to just the individual. Best example of this is memetic systems that require or encourage some individuals to sacrifice their own lives in some way -- that is, override their evolutionary imperative to reproduce, in deference to the group. Examples might be kamikaze pilots; suicide bombers; religiously-motivated celibacy; or depression to the point of suicide.

"The way I see it, on the one hand we have the animal nature holding sway, where the person sees `the others` as prey. On the other hand we have the human being nature emerging, seeing `the others` as helpmates in the problems of survival."

I tend to see it the other way around, with the advent of civilization acting as fulcrum. Before civilization, undomesticated humans lived in an animist world in which they stood in relationship with all other beings, both human and non-human; the evil "other" didn`t emerge... couldn`t emerge, cognitively... until that relationship was broken at the advent of civilization. Civilization really is not much else than humanity trying to separate itself from nature... our efforts to break the relationship.

"Then again, education might make a difference, and I wonder if it wouldn`t be worthwhile to maybe teach young business students about this balance in happiness, and incorporate the principle into the mathematics of ROI calculations."

If you did that you`d have to introduce the idea that accumulating money isn`t the end-all, be-all goal of life. Your chair purchase was satisfying and enjoyable because of the accomplishment it represents, not so much because the chair itself is grand, is that correct? If you were a chairbuilder, you could have the same sense of satisfaction building yourself that chair, with almost no outside transaction. Business students might decide to start businesses that put accomplishing something satisfying above generating money. If enough of them got on board, it could be bad news for the GDP even though everyone would probably be at least somewhat happier for it. Which, IMO, demonstrates why currency units aren`t a very accurate measure of true wealth.

—paula

Alright, there`s wealth as in money, and the metaphoric wealth of friends, family, enjoyment. We also have balance, as in "what comes around goes around."

I think what I`m trying to say is that there`s a direct relationship between this intangible feeling of happiness in two nearly unrelated situations: the customer, and the seller. Yes, many people say that good customer service leads to happy customers (satisfied customers), who then come back as repeat customers, thereby improving the bottom line.

But what I`m seeing is that there`s another dynamic taking place as well.

It comes back to those terrific MasterCard commercials, where they evaluate the concretes, then end the commercial with an intangible and the tagline, "Priceless!"

How many business owners get, feel, or sense this relationship between their own, personal happiness and the fact that their happiness is a direct result and consequence of their "output?" It`s not mystical, and it isn`t a balance in Nature taking place, I guess is what I`m saying. Instead, it`s maybe a moral justification?

I`ve been thinking about how some people have no particular conscience, so they don`t really care if what they`re selling makes the buyer unhappy. It does revolve around the idea of morality, and the capacity to empathize with other people.

We don`t have to get into memes or deeply metaphysical concepts to say that if you`re a moral person....virtuous?...and you sell a good product, then knowing that you`ve increased the happiness in your customers has an effect on your own life.

We also have the age-old expression that it`s better to give than to receive. I dunno about that; it`s definitely a whole lot of fun receiving stuff! :-) But the point is that if you have an abundance and you`re happy and content, there`s a real and sensible feeling/emotion that comes from making someone else happy.

I think this dynamic; this "happiness equation" can (and should) be factored into any analysis of ROI.

Well if you already have your opinion and aren`t interested in discussing it, then why bother posting?

Um...how does one have a discussion without having an opinion?

By asking a question. You do this all the time... pose a question as if  you`re interested in starting a discussion, then when people give their thoughts on the matter you declare everyone wrong and state The Truth, without acknowledging that you even really understand what anyone has said.

if you`re trying to practice your platonic dialogue skills, it would be helpful to know that up front so we can make an informed choice whether to engage in the discussion or not. Otherwise, what`s the point of posing a question when you`re going to disregard peoples` answers?

—paula

Paula, you and I apparently have two very different concepts of what constitutes a discussion. If I have a question and I`m totally stumped, I ask the question, explain the predicament and why I need an answer, and leave it at that. Then when someone answers the question, I have questions to further help me understand, or I have arguments where I can`t see how the answer would benefit me. That`s one form of discussion.

The overall purpose of a discussion is to exchange opinion, perhaps persuade someone to shift an opinion, expand one`s perspective, and to generally examine a topic from different viewpoints. In an online forum, the purpose of discussion not only is the previous, but also to drive traffic to a site, build community, and improve the mix of thought and advice.

Platonic dialog (Socratic dialog) is based on short questions, each being very closely limited to a point of logic, and usually works in courtrooms. Discussion forums aren`t limited to people having no idea at all about an answer, hoping that someone else will give them that answer.

A lecture, article, review, comment, or story isn`t always meant to form a discussion, and so they tend not to get a lot of activity in a discussion forum. But to hold that a reply to someone is final, requires no discussion or no argument, no disagreement, no analysis, and no further questioning is, to me, far too limiting.

Craig -- I certainly owe you an apology. I had a surgery yesterday and have been in a fair amount of pain and doped up on medication.... in my grumpiness, I chose to respond to your post rudely instead of readingn it thoughtfully. I do apologize.

—paula