How to grow a small business?

 

IT’S what everyone who’s ever wanted to start a business or already running one aspires to achieve - to grow big. But growing a small business is riddled with challenges.

The following, though not exhaustive, are some examples that will set you on the path to growing your still minuscule venture.

Technology

SMI Association of Malaysia president Teh Kee Sin acknowledges that technology adoption is often an issue for small companies.

“It’s always a challenge. They see technology adoption more as an expense rather than an investment. It’s something that they would rather avoid.

“But adopting technology into your business should not be seen as an immediate expense and rather, a long-term investment.”

Teh admits that one of the biggest nitpicks of small companies is the inability to secure financing to “move to the next level.”

“Many small firms complain that financial institutions demand a lot of unnecessary documents and information that is difficult to be fulfilled. So they get stuck and are not able to move forward.”

Teh says there needs to be more Government involvement so that support from financial institutions can be improved.

Branding

Branding Association of Malaysia (BAM) president Datuk Eric Chong says branding is extremely important for business organisations, regardless of the size of the organisation.

“Big and medium-sized businesses usually understand the importance of branding. They would not be where they are had they not understood and practised the art of branding along the way.

“Small businesses, however, usually struggle tremendously in this area. It is a chicken and egg situation for these small guys - should they make money and maximise profits first, or invest in their brands from day one?”

Chong adds that what a lot of small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) operators fail to understand is that branding isn’t just about spending money on advertising.

“While advertising is an essential part of branding, it takes much more than just splashing money around if one wishes to brand something properly. It is just like gardening - you need to sow the seeds and nurture the plants with consistency. A beautiful garden reflects the absolute commitment of the gardener; similarly, a good brand reflects the absolute commitment of the CEO and his team.

“It is about finding the right brand positioning, creating the right image, building a great brand culture, ensuring superb customer experience, communicate effectively with the market, etc. So is branding essential for SMEs? Yes, it lays the foundation and paves the way for a small entity to, someday, become a respectable player in the market.”

Talents

Leaderonomics chief executive officer Roshan Thiran notes that for many SMEs, leaders want growth but do not want to invest their time or energy to grow their people.

“This ultimately results in their company not growing either. Every company, even SMEs, are limited by the growth of their people. So, as long as your people are not learning and growing, don’t expect your organisation to grow exponentially either.

“As the business world changes, even small companies have become more attractive to young talents. Many start-ups can attract great talents in spite of their size or funds.”

Roshan says that many youths view working at start-ups more attractive than multinational companies.

“SMEs need to leverage this by their own personal inspirational leadership. People are attracted to work in an SME not because you pay well or have a big reputation.

“Instead, it is because of the leader. A great way to attract talent to your organisation is for the leaders and the leadership team to develop their own leadership skills. If you become an inspirational leader, the likelihood of you attracting talent rises significantly.”

Training

Peoplelogy group founder and chief executive officer Allen Lee says many small firms first complain that they have “no time” for training.

“Whenever they say they have no time, I always tell them to ‘make time lor.”

The next complaint, says Lee, is “what if I send them for training and they leave?”

“My response to them is always what if you don’t send them for training and they stay! If this is the case, how could these employees help small business to improve productivity and efficiency, cost savings and customer retention, for example? This also means that you will not have a chance to improve on your sales, cost efficiency, profitability and even your competitive edge.”

Lee believes most companies spend 60% to 70% of their money on people’s salary.

“And yet, they spend less than 1% of their total budget to develop the people. And most companies, in fact, spend more time and money on maintaining their buildings and equipment than they do on maintaining and developing people.

“If people get results, then it certainly makes good sense to invest in people. People are an asset to organisation anyway, regardless if it’s a big or small business.

Diversification

Established in 1974, PKT Logistics Group Sdn Bhd initially offered only customs brokerage services - but is now providing total logistics services.

PKT group chief executive and managing director Datuk Michael Tio believes that diversification was they key to how the company transformed itself into the total logistics provider it is today.

“As we started to diversify our services, our revenue grew. So the first step of growth was to continue to diversify services within the logistics industry by providing more services.

W started off as a custom agent, then subsequently expanded to freight forwarding, haulage, warehousing and so forth.”

Tio says the next step was to look for foreign partners to grow the business.“We found Japanese and Korean partners.

The Japanese provided us with a cushion during the currency crisis and the Korean partnership gave us entry into the automotive logistics sector.”

He adds that PKT started to observe how other multinational logistics companies expanded their revenue.

“We ended up competing with them in the fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) segment because 60% of the industry, or RM2bil, were controlled by them.

We had to overcome several challenges in order to compete with these companies, namely know-how, acquiring new technology, modern infrastructure and most importantly, moving up the value chain.”

  - Contributor: EUGENE MAHALINGAM  eugenicz@thestar.com.my

China's First Lady Peng Liyuan leading by example

China’s First Lady Peng Liyuan made a fashion statement during a recent visit to Russia and Africa. 

AS Xi Jinping continues his first official visit to African countries as the Chinese President, his wife Peng Liyuan is as much of a star attraction back in China.

The close attention on Peng is not so much due to her new role as China’s First Lady but rather the fashion statement she made during the trip.

Peng arrived in Moscow, Russia, on March 22 with her husband in a double-sided buttoned navy blue coat with a black handbag.

Her clothes matched perfectly with that of her husband’s.

She wore a jacket decorated with motifs of blue flowers and birds over a black dress and carried a black purse when attending an event at the MGIMO University in the Russian capital.

In Tanzania on Monday, she appeared in an all-white jacket and skirt.

The navy blue coat and black handbag she wore and carried in Russia started the “Liyuan-Style” mania.

Soon, word spread on the Internet that the coat and handbag were not from luxurious foreign brands but were made by Exception de Mixmind, a Chinese brand established in Guangzhou in 1996.

After confirmation of this by the Guangzhou City Administration of Quality and Technology Supervision on its microblog, many Chinese praised Peng for supporting local brands and for carrying the pride of China during her visit.

Some Netizens said Peng looked “elegant” and “nicely-matched” with her clothes, while many others started creating forum threads on what clothes the First Lady would wear next.

Beijing Institute of Fashion Technology art and design department head Xie Ping was quoted by Beijing News as saying that the coat was designed based on a classical Western army uniform.

Qingdao Municipal Textile and Fashion Association secretary-general Zheng Mingmei said that the coat and handbag that Peng used in Russia fitted her personality and character well.

“What the First Lady did by wearing a local brand has no doubt increased the reputation of China-made brands internationally and boosted the confidence of our fashion brands in Qingdao,” she told Qingdao Morning News.

According to reports in China, major search engines and online shopping websites have seen a significant increase in the number of search words such as “Liwai (Exception in Mandarin)” and “Wuyong (Useless which is the sister brand of Exception)”.

The Exception de Mixmind outlets in Chengdu and Qingdao have received more customers than before, with many asking about the navy blue coat and black handbag worn by the First Lady.

The staff at the outlets told customers that they did not sell models of the coat and handbag.

Despite that, many customers still walked away with handbags resembling that of Peng’s.

Prices of its spring collection cardigans and long cotton shirts ranged between 1,000 yuan and 2,000 yuan (RM490 and RM980) while new handbags were priced between 2,000 yuan (RM980) and 3,000 yuan (RM1,470).

Qingdao Morning News reported that Peng’s coat should belong to last year’s winter collection series and cost around a few thousand yuan while the handbag similar to that of Peng’s was estimated to have cost 5,000 yuan (RM2,450).

“Compared with other coats and handbags around the same range, design and craftsmanship, the coat and handbag used by her were not too pricey,” said a staff.

Even before the First Lady fashion mania, Exception de Mixmind had already been quite an established brand.

Chinese tennis star Li Na wore a stand-up collar white shirt with black motifs during her photo call after her triumph in the French Open in 2011, and that shirt was from Exception’s 2007 “Tea Energy” series.

At that time, Exception founder and chairman Mao Jihong quashed rumours that the company sponsored Li Na’s fashion wear, saying that she was never their brand ambassador but they were delighted to see her wearing their label.

Of course, this time, it’s a bit different.

With Peng’s stature as the First Lady and a celebrity (Peng is one of China’s top female sopranos who sings a repertoire of ethnic and patriotic songs), this gives the brand more recognition.

In its editorial, Beijing Morning Post said there were three reasons why Peng received so much attention from the people and media.

One was that she was using made-in-China goods, second the clothes and handbags were not from luxury brands and third being her poise in leading by example.

“Nowadays, luxury consumption has be­c­ome a trend to show off one’s wealth.

Peng’s handbag is in a way a wake-up call for many Chinese who pursue luxury goods.

“After the Chinese Communist Party’s national congress (last November), the government outlined eight guidelines on improving its working style.

“Peng showed an important detail which was advocating austerity and a frugal lifestyle,” it said.

MADE IN CHINA BY CHOW HOW BAN

Related posts:

President Xi: Russia ties ensure peace; foreign debut illuminates China's 'world dream' 

Wife of China next president Xi Jinping

China newly elected President Xi Jinping and Premier Li ...

China's first lady Peng Liyuan sang for Tiananmen troops ...

彭丽媛 1999年访谈 China's First Lady Peng Liyuan (1999)

People as a product!

In digital space, users are increasingly being shaped as commodities by various sites and services.

LAST week, social photo-sharing application Instagram caused an uproar when it announced changes to its terms and conditions.

The changes were related to its advertising policy, and were interpreted by many people as the company reserving the right to share user information and pictures with advertisers (or to be used in advertising) without permission.

Instagram has since reversed that policy and apologised for the “confusing” language, stating: “Legal documents are easy to misinterpret.” (You can read its response at http://bit.ly/U79Nld.)

This seems to have pacified some users, but many are still fuming, while others have opted to try different photo-sharing apps as an alternative.

There are two primary issues with this. One is a privacy issue, in that the company would even consider sharing user information and pictures with its parent company Facebook and other third-party organisations (including advertisers).

The other is copyright; in the same response, Instagram co-founder Kevin Systrom wrote: “Instagram users own their content and Instagram does not claim any ownership rights over your photos. Nothing about this has changed.”

Users had every right to be upset. These are serious issues with severe repercussions, and it is becoming more and more common that online sites and applications are usurping the rights and control of their users. Facebook’s constant changing of privacy settings is legendary. The deeper we embed ourselves within such social network sites, the more we seem to get walled in.

As the days wear on, we find it increasingly harder to escape – most of our connections are in our social network of choice, our memories are stored within our profiles, and we are relying on it to be our source of information.

In many cases, we have come to depend on it for almost all of our interactions – we no longer need to remember people’s birthdays, we can send messages to each other conveniently without the need to store addresses, and we can broadcast our lives to all our friends at the click of a mouse.

Whether or not the reliance on such technology is a good thing is a different debate, but the fact is that the services these sites provide – it doesn’t matter if we never needed them before – are extremely useful.

However, many users don’t realise that this is still a service. Such technology has become so embedded in our lives that many of us have taken it for granted.

The fact that it is also primarily operated on the Internet has contributed to this sense of entitlement. Why buy newspapers when you get the news online for free? How many of us still send text messages via SMS now that there is iMessage, Blackberry Messenger and WhatsApp? With Skype and Viber, who needs to make traditional phone calls?

In some cases, it is easy to see how the companies behind them are making money. Newspapers now provide news for free (some have paywalls) with the hope of driving more traffic to their sites, which are plastered with advertising.

Apple and RIM, the maker of the Blackberry, promote their messaging systems to encourage people to buy their devices. Skype has a premium service that users can pay for as well as cheaper computer-to-phone rates which helps supplement its income. In that sense, the products these companies offer are obvious.

Social network sites like Facebook, Instagram and Twitter also have a product: You and me.

What they essentially do is no different from the media outlets – they sell their user base to advertisers. Unlike the print and broadcast media, however, these sites tend to have more information on their users which can be sorted or mined to help advertisers reach their target market.

Each update we post on these sites contains more information about our lives and what interests us – whether it’s in the words we use, the places we check in from or the photos we upload. And they have a lot of information. Citing European policy law, a student from the University of Vienna made a request to Facebook to hand over all the information it had on him. And Facebook provided it – all 1,200 pages of it.

The point here isn’t about how scary it is that a company has so much information on each of us – this too is a different debate.

The concern is that as technology advances, we are increasingly being shaped to be a product, and this is an awareness we have to carry with us constantly. It is pertinent to note that this is not a new phenomenon – the whole basis of the advertising industry is based on consumers being the product.

This is why newspapers are able to subsidise publishing costs to sell their products at a relatively low price (or in some cases, offer it for free) and why we get to watch television for “free”. Or pay very little.

We need this awareness because it will help us make decisions about how we navigate our digital lives. It will also help us reclaim some of the control – and our rights.

Instagram may have reversed that new policy for now, but there’s no saying it won’t come back in another form. Facebook has gotten away for many years with changes that its users do not like because few people are willing to walk away from it.

This is not to suggest that what these companies are doing is right. But the adage that nothing is free rings true in this situation. There are alternatives but each comes with a price.

The alternatives to these sites – some of which are on open-source platforms – may not be as polished and lack the critical mass to be as effective as the big social sites. Then there are the commercial entities which charge you (Flickr, for example, is capitalising on a sudden exodus from Instagram to its platform, offering its paying customers an additional three months of service).

It is only by carrying this awareness with us always that we can truly make the right decision – whether to stick with these companies, or stick it to them.

ReWired By Niki Cheong

Niki has just completed his MA Digital Culture and Society at King’s College London. Connect with him at http://blog.nikicheong.com or on Twitter via @nikicheong. Suggest topics and issues on digital culture, or pose questions, via email or on Twitter using the #Star2reWired hashtag.