On Sun, 11 Feb 1996, Johanna Rothman wrote:
> If management chooses to only compete in one market, sure,
> that market will mature. The point is to continually find new markets that
> can use your capacity, and then to create new capacity to fund new
I agree. I've found that the complexity rises almost exponentially if
more markets are pursued if there is no standard methodology being
applied to manage complexity though.
I was in a catch-22 double bind for a long time; I wanted to be able to
sell and deliver to different markets since I didn't want to work in one
market, but the complexity was so unmanageable when dealing with multiple
markets that I couldn't do things win/win, so I just didn't do anything
at all for a long time since I didn't want to "just do things the small
way" - work in just one market.
I found (I think) a way out of the double bind - increase my capabilities
to manage complexity for delivery and operations.
The tricky part is that it seems to me that the standard complexity
management methodologies are tailored to _delivery_ and operations rather
than to sales and marketing - so I have to adapt the complexity
management methodologies to sales and marketing so that I can manage the
rise in complexity of selling to different markets.
I don't have the luxury of having a fixed income stream from a product or
service - I have to start from scratch. Having a start-up that is
"finely tuned" operations wise but doesn't sell anything isn't really a
business..... (Note: there is another double bind here - If I can't
manage complexity when selling to different markets then I can't do
things win/win so I might as well not do anything at all.....)
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to clarify (somewhat) my thoughts on
Isn't serendipity great?
-- Andrew Moreno <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <email@example.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>