₦airaland Forum

Agluvs9ja: e be like your backbone dey shook the baby o! see how she dey frown


#babiesarenotsmiling#

When a prosperous company buys a struggling company you have to wonder what they're really buying.

Here's how to think about it. A company is defined as the sum of three values: resources, processes and priorities (RPP). Everything of value can be classified into these three categories.

When one company buys another, it's the equivalent of one set of RPPs trying to engulf or swallow another set of RPPs. The simplest (naïve) interpretation is that an acquisition is the purchase of Resources in terms of customers, sales, profits, etc. It might be of assets like employees, intellectual properties, brand etc. I say this is naïve because Resources are the easiest to value – they can be measured – and valuing only what can be measured while ignoring what can't be measured is deeply mis-pricing.

So most people look for the "R" value or the value of Resources in an acquisition. It may be naïve but it is what markets typically value because it's what they can price. But what happens when the "R" is flimsy or fleeting?

The answer has to be that it's the Processes or even Priorities which are valued by the acquirer.

These are difficult to value which, as I've argued in The Innovator's Curse, is why they are not reflected in a share's price. When there is a price paid for these fuzzy assets, they are often interpreted as a "premium" to the market price. But that may not be the way a buyer sees it.

When buying a set of Processes, a buyer may see a bargain because their costs for building a similar process could be enormous, even infinite. In the case of Nokia, the process of building hardware may be infinitely valuable to Microsoft as they have had dreadful luck doing it themselves. But they're seen as value free to the market because it seems that there are many others who are building hardware.

The trickiest thing to perceive though is the value of a set of Priorities. Priorities are the answers to the "Why" question as much as Resources are the answers to the "What" and processes are to the "How." If you were to think in terms of software engineering, Priorities are the "Specifications" where the Resources are the data and Processes are the algorithms. They determine the direction and reasoning of why a company even exists. If you have bad specs, it never matters whether the algorithm is efficient and you have all the data: you are building the wrong thing.

Acquiring Priorities is also fundamental in that they are usually exclusive. A company typically only has room for one set. If there are conflicting priorities, they need to be sorted out else the company can end up in a state of internal conflict and dysfunction. So if you're acquiring a set of Priorities, it's likely that you'll have to discard your own. It makes most sense when a company which might otherwise be prosperous needs to change direction.

So, in a way, an acquisition of Priorities is almost a reverse acquisition. The acquired is actually "buying" the acquirer. The acquired company's Priorities (and hence Processes and Resources) become the guiding principles in the acquirer. It's what happened when Apple bought NeXT and may have happened when Disney bought Pixar.

Some companies are "Resource-heavy", some are "Process-heavy" and some are "Priority-heavy". Great companies tend to have great sense of priority. They may also have greatness in the other asset classes but it's rare to find a great company without a great sense of purpose.

So the question for the Microsoft Nokia deal is "What is Microsoft buying?"

Resources? Sure, there is IP and a team. But the chances are that not all the team members will be kept on. See what happened to Motorola after it was acquired by Google.

Processes? Absolutely. Microsoft needs device development processes desperately. They may seem a commodity but it turns out that running great hardware businesses is hard, very hard.

Priorities? Here we have to pause. To acquire Nokia's priorities means acquiring its business model – its belief system. Perhaps they will be discarded and they're not valued. Perhaps, as is often the case, the acquirer becomes allergic to the new priorities.

But Microsoft has made it clear that they are now a "Devices and Services" company. As much as Apple changed its name to exclude "Computer," Microsoft is almost changing its name to exclude "software". It will still make software, to be sure, but for it to get paid it needs to integrate that software into hardware and services.

My first thought on this is that Nokia's priorities are not sufficient for the company that Microsoft wants and needs to become, but there are some priorities which are necessary and which it values.

It may be too much to say that with respect to Priorities, Nokia acquired Microsoft, but insofar as Microsoft is having to transform its business model, what Nokia devices bring is an integral component of the new Microsoft.

You’re attending an event. Someone asks, "What do you do?" How do you answer?

Maybe you say, "I own a restaurant." Or, "I'm a manager at Acme Industries." Or, "I'm a teacher."

Whatever you say, I bet your answer won't include the word "and.” But it should, regardless of the stigma often associated with being an "and."

Take me. I ghostwrite books. I photograph weddings. I consult on productivity improvement. If I may say so -- what the heck, I will -- I'm pretty good at all three.

But here's what happens. Say I’m shooting a wedding. Invariably an aspiring photographer will sidle up and want to talk about the business of wedding photography. Keen to plug in another variable on their revenue projection equation, almost every one eventually asks how many weddings I do.

"Just 10 or so a year," I answer.

"Only 10? Can you make a decent living on that?"

"Depends on how you define decent," I say. "I do weddings and I'm also a writer."

"Oh..." they say, their voices trailing off… and immediately they look at me differently. To them it doesn't make sense: I should either be a photographer or a writer -- certainly not both. Successful people do one thing. Unsuccessful people are forced to do a variety of things to make ends meet. The fact I am both a photographer and a writer implies I must not be successful at either one.

So, no matter what their initial impression of me, no matter how big the wedding, no matter how sophisticated the equipment we bring, they no longer see me as a good photographer… because I don't photograph weddings full time. I must not be good enough to specialize.

The same is true with ghostwriting. When I tell people I also photograph weddings they typically assume I have to do weddings because I'm a struggling writer forced to find other ways to make money.

To most people, “specialization” indicates accomplishment and success.

The opposite is true. You, me we’re too good to specialize. None of us is one “thing.” All of us possess a variety of skills – including skills we aren't using. And no matter how successful we are in one pursuit, we all have other skills we would enjoy developing and using. Regardless of how fulfilling a current business or job may be, we all have other things we would enjoy doing too… especially if we got paid to do them.

Go ahead. Take the steps that allow you to include an "and" in how you describe yourself professionally. Just don't think about what others do or what others can provide. Think about what you do or could do well -- and most importantly would enjoy:

Maybe starting a small business on the side would be fun. You can start very small and even take a risk if you like, especially since any income you generate is supplemental.
Maybe diversifying your current business would be fun. If you sell products, find ways to expand your range by providing related services. Or provide unrelated services. Why not? You already have most of the business infrastructure in place...
Maybe teaching, or consulting, or working part-time, or going back to school would be fun. Other people want to learn new skills. Other business owners need outside expertise; outsourcing is a fact of life for most companies, and providing services part time is a perfect way to tap that market. How does, "I'm a supervisor and I'm halfway through an MBA program," sound?

What you do to create an “and” isn't nearly as important as making sure that whatever you do is what you want to do. That way your "and" doesn't take focus away from your primary pursuit; instead it helps you recharge and refresh... and pick up new perspectives... and makes it even easier to be extremely focused and on-point when you're pursuing your primary pursuit.

And don't say you can't afford to spend the extra time on an "and" – in many ways you can't afford not to spend the time. When you do, if nothing else you create a buffer against downturns, and shifts in market conditions, and the possible loss of a job… and you get to have a lot more fun.

Be an "and." Other people might not understand... but who cares?

sunday478: Undo many things, mostly my evil doings,

Emmyk: Why not check the kinda bullet on Alhaji's body and see if it's from the guy's gun?

onila: Black barbie lmaoo

https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/531552_255209271282719_747674802_n.jpg

manpo2k: He took this shot! That's me with an iPad and him standing beside me. Please vote for Carrot, he's good and deserves to win!

emmadiva: it is not wise to date a nursing mother oo ..u want make d pikin suck ur spuerm

segzi cres: As long as she will be the one to buy the artificial milk im not bothered.

jidowu84: Thanks to all dat have contributed to dis thread. God bless u all. IJN. But dia is a real life issues dat bothers me for some years now. It is COBWEBS issue. I do experience this webs on my face even in a banking hal

hornipipe: I only listen to music.

hornipipe: Traffic makes me sick, operating my phone or reading a book in a moving car makes me sick to my stomach and feel like puking, good thing I know how to handle it now.

Enegod: I don't sleep and i don't pray while on traffic