Being the Best versus the Biggest - by Ravi Patel

                                        

Entrepreneurs, what would you like your company to be – the best or the biggest? A quick, flippant answer would be to be both.

          

Becoming the biggest is a lofty objective, but achievable if you have a special niche in the marketplace. Being bigger, with reasonable profitability, allows access to resources for further growth. However, the entrepreneurship spirit is often lost as the size of a company gets bigger. More importantly, being the biggest says nothing about the quality of the organization. Being the biggest could mask inefficiencies in the short term.

                           

On the other hand, being the best reflects a philosophy regarding the quality of products and services, processes, customer service, people and so on. All these have to be exceptional to be the best. While short-term costs may be higher to achieve the status of being the best, the long term prospects for growth are phenomenal. Competitive differentiation is most pronounced with being the best and might allow a premium for one’s goods and services.

                     

Being the best allows you to become the biggest, but being the biggest does not automatically mean that you are the best.

                      

What would you rather strive for – being the biggest or the best?

 

Recent Tweets