Three Circles of Family Business

What is a “Family Business?” A large percentage of small companies have some family involved. For most, it is simple a case of providing employment to family members. If the founder of the company is also the principle revenue generator, it may be a spouse (most often the wife) who keeps the books and runs the office.

Employment of children who can’t (or won’t) find another job is common, and more so in the current economy. In most instances it is just a matter of income transfer with some value attached. The owner could keep handing over money for the child’s living expenses, but he or she wants the offspring to “earn” that money. The business becomes a vehicle for parenting; teaching life lessons about responsibility. In fewer cases, it is a recruiting tool. The owner tries to get the child interested and involved in the business, with hopes that they will seize the opportunity to become part of a succession strategy.

There are scores of variants, such as the absentee family employee who is really just a charity case. Performing no duties, and frequently not even in the same geography of the business, employment is simply a mechanism for the owner to make tax-deductible contributions for someone’s support.

The three circles of this title refer to when the engagement of multiple family members in the business involves a blood (or marriage) relationship, participation in management decisions, and ownership. For our purposes, all three must be present in order for it to be a “Family Business.”

When all three factors are present, they set up a structural conflict that is challenging to deal with. Issac Newton postulated laws governing mass and attraction; the effect one body has on another in relation to its size. The problem with Newton’s laws is that they apply to two, and only two, bodies acting on each other. When there are three bodies of mass the laws become chaotic, since each change in one body not only alters its effect on the others, but immediately alters their effect on each other.

So it is with the laws governing family business relationships. When there are only two roles, effects are fairly predictable. One role, of course, is always the kinship between the parties. If only one of the family members has ownership, the roles in the workplace are pretty plain. If other family members have ownership, but don’t work in the company, their input can be anticipated and occurs within defined parameters. When family members hold two roles in the business, both employee/manager and ownership, each action in one area causes unequal and unpredictable reactions in the others.

In one business, a brother and sister were sold ownership, but until the parents were paid, the siblings remained dependent on their paychecks for normal living expenses. The brother worked long hours, kept a careful eye on expenses, and ran a “tight ship” when it came to employee issues. The sister came in late, left early, and was fond of showing employer largess by issuing unplanned raises to favorite workers. Her sibling and ownership relationships made it difficult to deal with her radically different management style. She felt that she had an equal “right” to run the company as she wished, even if it was the polar opposite of her brother’s style.

In this case, the brother’s solution was to force his sister to sell her stock, and continue to give her a salary conditioned on her no longer coming to the office. The company is better off, but they don’t speak to each other any more.

In another, a brother’s division of the family business underperformed those of his siblings. Eventually he left to work in another company, although he retains his ownership and they still get together for holidays.

The pressure of decision-making and implementation in a family business adds complexity to every situation. Is Dad overriding our opinions because of his greater experience and wisdom, or is it because he regards any dissent from his children as disrespect? Is Mom against the new initiative because she really judges the market to be weak, or is it just her natural inclination to protect what we already have? Has my brother really studied that opportunity, or is he just trying to do something on his own, without his big brother’s shadow over it?

Family members know each other too well to ever make a completely unbiased analysis. The best you can do is recognize the three circles that influence every action, and discuss the mass and attraction of each one when making decisions.

Posted in Entrepreneurship, Exit Options, Exit Planning, Leadership | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

3 Responses to Three Circles of Family Business

  1. Julie Herrington says:

    Ouch, I am living this situation. Vision and leadership is the challenging issue. There is not one right way to run company. I learned from you that each business reflects business owner’s personal values and style. Great article and if others respond too, hopefully you will share more on this topic and transitioning family business.

  2. Bill Seelig says:

    Additional Information,
    Actually the most stable relationship system is a three party system where the third party acts as a calming, reasonable voice that facilitates constructive communication and decision making. In family business succession work we have long advocated a three system view: Family, Business and Board. In the latter we work toward a balance of participants between family representatives and respected, independent outsiders with experience and expertise relevant to the current and future work of the business. We typically do not recommend professionals – lawyers, accountants, consultants… who are aligned and indebted financially to the business. The challenge is to start this process long before succession – through family education and involvement of key family members in learning about and appreciating the complexities of running and growing a successful family business. The earlier the better…
    Bill Seelig,
    bill@seeligs.com

    Bill Seelig

  3. Legal succession planning is also important for family businesses. This is especially true when one beneficiary of the owner’s estate is clearly the right person to take over operations and another beneficiary is clearly not interested.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The New Terrain: 2011-2020

The five-part series “The New Terrain 2011-2020, Winning the Battle in a Slow Economy” is now available as a white paper at http://www.johnfdini.com. It discusses issues and strategies for success in a lethargic economy.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

2 Responses to The New Terrain: 2011-2020

  1. Clare Taylor says:

    Sweetheart! I miss you… your 11 Things is great.
    Sign me up for this one please. Come back again in the spring please…
    a fan.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You Don’t Know What You Don’t Know

This past week I’ve been interviewing prospective participants for our new “Noise Reduction System®” training which was created by Larry Linne. It focuses on teaching Second-In-Command (SIC) managers (anyone who answers directly to the owner, the First-In-Command or FIC) how to communicate, lead and think more effectively.

Last week in “Never, never, never, never give up” I discussed the resistance we get from employees to change. How your employees prefer to learn one way of doing things, and push back when owners try to innovate.

Perhaps I should have read my own column more carefully, because this week I went right out and ran into the same problem I had just warned you against.

Several of my interviews were with both the FIC and the SIC together. I realized that the SIC’s were campaigning against enrolling in the program! In every meeting, the FIC was trying to say why he thought it was a good idea, and the SIC was rebutting him point by point.

I was surprised, since the whole purpose of the NRS approach is to make the SICs more valuable to the owner. Why wouldn’t they jump at the chance to become an even bigger element in the company’s success? What was the harm? Who would it hurt, especially since the boss was in favor of it already?

I couldn’t change the meeting participants on the fly, so I began listening more closely to the dialogue that passed between the three of us.

FIC: “So tell me, what will my SIC get from this?”

JFD: “Well, we work with a number of tools to teach your SIC how to keep you better informed, and how to walk through a decision making process that is based on your vision for the company.”

FIC: “That sound great.”

SIC: “But boss, when do I make decisions you don’t approve of? I always do exactly as you want, that’s why you depend on me.”

It continued throughout all the points. “We will help your SIC understand how to better communicate with you on a daily basis… ” SIC: “But boss, we talk together all day long. You know about everything I do! What don’t you know?”

“We can free up much more of your time to do the things you do best…” SIC: “But boss, all you have to do is tell me what you need me to do. Don’t I do it? Do I not do anything you tell me to do?”

The class itself wasn’t a threat to the SIC. Every one of them admitted that he or she would like to be in a peer group, and have a place to discuss and learn more about running a business. In fact, they were worried that the FIC’s interest in the program is because they (the SICs) are somehow failing in their job performance.

Because the SIC is in the room, the FIC can’t discuss what he or she would like to see happen without embarrassing the SIC in front of a stranger. Every owner wishes for someone who would take more from them; who would proactively look for ways to free up the owner’s time and attention. Every owner wants an SIC (or several) that keeps them fully informed about what they need to know, and acts as a cut out for the “noise,” the things that they don’t want to deal with, but have to do because no one else does it.

The approach of any effort to improve SIC performance is to take the responsibility on yourself. It is what we do as owners and leaders every single day. You would say “I have delegated, and you have taken, everything I think you can. I know you are able to be an even bigger asset to this business, but I’ve been unsuccessful in determining how to make that happen to the level I would like. If I am to be more effective, it has to come from you proactively identifying what you can do, not from what I think you can do.”

Your key employees hold their positions because they accomplished things that others couldn’t. They are proud of that distinction, and of the recognition that their title and responsibilities gives them. If you want them to be even better, it can’t come from making them feel that they aren’t doing the job well enough. They just don’t know what they don’t know. Growth will come by giving them permission to stretch without the fear that they will fail.

Posted in Leadership, Management | 1 Comment

One Response to You Don’t Know What You Don’t Know

  1. Julie Herrington says:

    John,

    I very much enjoy the information you share. These articles are excellent and I pass them along to others. I miss being in the presence of your great drive and insight. You have an amazing gift for speaking the truth and providing direction even when the truth is hard for us as individuals to recognize about ourselves.

    Thanks again,
    Julie

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Never, never, never, never give up.

I kind of see everything as connected. Last week we hosted Larry Linne, author of “Make the Noise Go Away,” a book about the roles of first-in-commands and second-in-commands. I will be writing about a couple of things Larry said in his presentation in the next few weeks.

One Larry’s key points was about the tendency of a first-in-command to give up. Not giving up on the business, or on working hard, but giving up on change. We get so much push back from those we employ. “Not another change! The way we do it is working well!” “I just got comfortable with the old way.”

He made a joke about the employees who weren’t at the event. How they were back at the business saying “Oh no! She’s at one of those business seminars again! She is going to want to change things when she gets back.”

The CEOs in the audience laughed. They know that it’s true. How may employees say some version of “I wish they would just leave me alone so I can do my job?”

You didn’t become the owner of a business by doing things the way they were always done. You would still have your old job if that were the case. You changed things. If they didn’t work, you changed them again, and again. You experimented, and probably paid some uncomfortable prices for experiments that didn’t work out.

When things start to work, we stop changing them. You may think they could work better, but there is always a risk that they won’t. Your employees certainly aren’t as comfortable with risk as you are; that’s why they work for you. They push back, you have doubts, so you leave things the way they are. “If it ain’t broke…don’t fix it.”

That way lies mediocrity. It’s one of those sayings that tries to make Hunters into Farmers. “We didn’t do it that way last season. What if it doesn’t work? What if the crop fails?” Farming seeks incremental change. Let’s see if we can increase yields by a few percent. Hunting is new and different every time you step out the front door.

I explain to my employees that it is their job to follow procedures. It is my job not to. You have a responsibility to try new things, because you are the best qualified to judge if those things can accomplish what you want for my business.

Of course, if new ideas don’t work out, You are also the one who bears the consequences. In the end, the cost of everyone’s experiments is yours. That gives you, not them, the right to experiment.

A client of mine had a manager who began changing things. As happens so often, the “new” things he tried had been done and discarded as bad ideas a long time ago. When asked why he wasn’t following procedure, the manger replied “I have my own vision about the way things should be done in this business.”

The owner’s reply was beautiful. He said “You are welcome to your own ideas and your own vision, but you’ll have to go start your own business. This one is mine.”

Last night I put on an old t-shirt from one of my son’s wrestling tournaments at Winston Churchill High School. It made a connection for me. The wrestling team’s motto was the Churchill quote; “Never, never, never, never give up.”

That should be a universal motto for business owners who want to try new things. It’s your job, and don’t let anyone tell you to stop doing it.

Posted in Entrepreneurship, Leadership, Management | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Fighting on Level Ground

Poland has been conquered numerous times in history. Since the 11th century, it has been partially occupied, partitioned, or fully subjugated by the Germans, Russians, Austrians, Mongols, Tartar Muslims, French (under Napoleon), Prussians and Hungarians.

The Poles aren’t a timid people, and they have given good account of themselves in numerous battles. Their role as repeated door mat is largely due to a single factor. Bad luck.

First, Poland straddles a historical divide between western Europe and Western Asia. It is on the path of anyone from either side who wants to get to the other.

Second, Poland is mostly rolling plains with limited forests. It’s the easy way through. It was also ideal terrain for cavalry manuevers, and later for tanks. If you want to put your military muscle and technology to good use, Poland is just the place to do it.

Understanding the Battlefield

This is the last of a five-part series on dealing with a flat economy. Like Poland, you are just suffering a spot of bad luck. If you were running your business in the 1960’s, 70’s, 80’s or 90’s you had a rising tide. The economy was growing, the population was growing. Americans were largely young, ambitious and hard-working. Technology was driving productivity. Like a tank commander in Poland, if you pointed in the right direction and didn’t run into problems, you could go a long way.

Now you are a foot soldier, and it is winter. Think of Napoleon’s long retreat from Russia (which included Poland at the time). He invaded Russia with 500,000 men. He left with 40,000. I don’t think the business climate of the next few years will be that bad, but it will not be kind to the unwary and unprepared. If you think that the recession will end, and things will go back to the way they used to be, you are among the businesses at risk.

I will briefly summarize again, at the risk of sounding strident. The largest and most ambitious generation in American history is leaving the workforce. Technology continues to drive productivity, but at the cost of eviscerating the middle class. Consumers are saddled with massive debt, largely secured by overvalued real estate that has collapsed. Emerging economies are permanent and powerful competitors in the world market. An economy that is predicated on people performing services for other people is facing precipitous shrinkage in both their prime target customers (Boomers who were too busy earning money to do things) and the disposable income of all their customers.

These are neither predictions or opinions. They are facts. If you take them into consideration as you plan your business, you can still win. Ignoring them is like pretending that it won’t snow in Russia this winter.

The Battle Plan

We borrow many business terms and vocabulary from the military. One of those is strategy. Roman commanders were discussing strategy 2,000 years before there were corporate “retreats” (another military term that hasn’t fared as well in the translation).

You’ve heard it before, but now it is time to pay attention. Businesses that have written plans are far more successful than those who don’t. Most of the studies done by academia are on “strategic” plans for start-ups, and they show little correlation between the plan and funding.

You are not running a startup. You are running a business with people who need to know what is expected of them. Who need a yardstick to tell them if they are on target or not. Who need to understand when they are supposed to have something done. That is a business plan, not a strategic plan.

Begin with SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats.) Strengths and Weaknesses are internal to your organization. Opportunities and Threats are external.

Validate them! If you think your strength is great customer service, survey your customers to see if they agree. If one threat you identify is an industry that is in decline (yours or your customers’), dig through economic or trade association reports to see if it’s true, and by how much.

Now you can set goals for the coming year. How do you develop goals? It’s easy. Think of things that will leverage a strength, fix a weakness, capture an opportunity or eliminate a threat. For example, opening a new market for your labeling machines, which have traditionally sold to bulk mail houses, might come under any of the four. Leverage your expertise in processing (strength), diversify from a customer concentration (weakness), pursue new markets (opportunity) and exit from a failing industry (threat).

Limit your goals to a few (In The Alternative Board we focus on three to five) and make sure they are Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic and Time-sensitive. You are now 90% through the “difficult” part of planning. All that remains is laying out the steps for execution.

In our label machine example, you can easily fill in the blanks. What do you need to do? Understand the other industries that need labeling machines. Find out which one is biggest, or most lucrative, has weak competitors, or would benefit most from your expertise. Get a list of prospects. Test their receptiveness to your product. Roll out a marketing and sales plan.

At any step along the way, you might decide that this isn’t a good idea. That’s the whole point! You move on to the next idea while your competitor continues to knock on the doors of the wrong prospects, or promotes the wrong product. If you fail in a new initiative that was begun on the fly, you seldom know whether it is a bad idea, or whether you abandoned a good idea just because you executed it badly. Goals that are approached step-by-step help you avoid that vagueness, and the wasted resources associated with the lack of a plan.

Battlefield Tactics

With goals you pick the ground you plan to take (or defend). Now you have to deploy the resources to make it happen.

Here I will bow to Sun Tzu, the Chinese warrior who wrote down the basic concepts of battle tactics 2,600 years ago. He gave us the major concepts you need to employ to grow in a flat economy.

“Find out the conditions by comparing five things- the way, the weather, the terrain, the leadership and the discipline.”

The way: Do you have a plan, and do your employees know what it is? Do they know what they are expected to do?

The weather: Watch for competitors who don’t consider the weather.  Prepare to flank those who stall or get bogged down. There isn’t enough business for everyone. When a competitor looks weak, focus your efforts on making him weaker. Target his customers, recruit his employees, solicit his vendors. This isn’t a game, and we can’t all win.

The terrain: You know it is going to be flat. That means you are putting your attention towards finding new business and diversification. (An army can take ground with cavalry, but can only hold onto it with infantry.) Let others cut back and wait for things to get better. You can’t economize your way to growth, and they will still be waiting for things to improve when you have moved past them.

The leadership:Your ability to inspire and retain good people is critical. (See last week’s post.) More on that further down.

The discipline: Here is where many entrepreneurs fail. You have to stick to the plan. You will get tired. You will get discouraged. There’s more on his topic in today’s post, as well.

Leading the Troops

Good employees will still be hard to find, and keeping them will be harder. In “Beating the Boomer Bust,” the presentation I give to business owners around the country, I discuss the differing values and motivations of the next generation of management.

You will need to lead all the time. Many of us are accustomed to charging up the hill, and then resting for a while. The pressure will be constant, and resting will find you later trying to make up for lost ground.

Share results, I belive every company should have at least a limited form of open book management. Employees want to know that they are doing a good job, and that their work helps to make your business successful.

Build loyalty. All that “warm and fuzzy” stuff means more to the current generation of workers than to any before them. Recognition needs to be built into the system. Your business will have to be a place where they can grow, even if it means helping them to move on to the next phase of their lives. They aren’t going to stay forever, but they will stay longer if they like what they are doing.

Winning the War

What is your long-term objective? If you are over 50, it is probably a lucrative exit. If you are younger than that, it is growth and financial success.

All of your strategy and tactics need to support the long-term objective. If you are in growth mode, watch competitors for acquisition opportunities. Make acquisition planning a business goal. Talk to your banker and local business brokers to see what it would take to but a company. You might be surprised at how inexpensively a business can be bought from a tired owner with declining profits.

If you are looking for an exit, begin planning how to make your company more attractive than others. It will be a competitive, buyers’ market as the Boomers sell their businesses. You may need to reduce your extra perquisites to improve operating margins. You should know your industry numbers, and how you stack up. You’ll need a stable management team that can function without you.

In fact, I advocate building your own exit strategy, by developing your managers as the next generation of owners. Here is a shameless plug: Check out my exit planning website; The Exit Map® or my book “11 Things You Absolutely Need to Know about Selling Your Business.”

Protecting the General

Did you ever notice how troop formations are arranged to give the maximum protection to the top officers? (Another military-to-business term, there.) There is a reason. Armies have understood for millenia that if the general gets killed, they lose.

You have to protect yourself for the good of your company. If you are working harder than ever before, stop! You need to pace yourself for a long run. If you are saving money by doing the work of three people, stop! You don’t have time to plan, to innovate, and to analyze the world around you. That is far more dangerous than the cost of an extra salary.

Once you accept that things aren’t going back to the way they were, or at least they aren’t for quite some time, then you can start to look at your business with fresh eyes.

Once you understand that doing more of what you used to do won’t change the world around you, you can do something different.

And here is the last piece of good news; the ray of sunshine in all this talk about battles and war. You are a guerilla fighter, the indigenous resistance movement of the business world.

A small business doesn’t have to take over a whole country. You don’t have to protect a long supply line, or defend cities. You get to choose where and when you will fight. You pick the time and the place, execute your plan, win and go home.

And as proven in wars from the American Revolution to Viet Nam, those tactics can work very well for a long, long time. In fact, they can work until the bigger, more powerful and more sophisticated armies give up and go home.

 

Posted in Exit Planning, Leadership, Thoughts and Opinions | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

One Response to Fighting on Level Ground

  1. A terrific conclusion to an informative and important series, John. The case for business planning has never been laid out as clearly or cogently as you have. Bravo.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *