For products or by Brand?

Kings and emperors are known for having long titles to their names. Among the many official titles of King Charles are “His Royal Highness… Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall… Lord of the Isles… Knight Royal Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, Extra Knight of the Oldest and Most Noble Order of the Wild Thistle… and so on. Back in 2011, on a visit to Tanzania, a Masai tribe conferred on him the title “Oloishiru Ingishu”, or ''he whom the cows love so much they call for him when they are in times of distress''.

Not everyone gets job titles that baffle, befuddle and amuse, but the real problem with many is that they are hastily crafted inflations of what they actually entail. And yet they inevitably become part of the identity of their bearer. Our job titles can hint at some of the skills we possess or what we are responsible for - if we are lucky - but they can never capture the true and complete essence of who we are. Not only because they are conferred by others. We wouldn't be able to come up with meaningful job titles ourselves if we had to. One of the most infamous self-defined titles was held by Idi Amin - once president of Uganda who bestowed on himself the title: "His Excellency, President for Life… Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Seas and Conqueror of the British Empire in Africa in General and Uganda in Particular", on top of his claim of being "the uncrowned king of Scotland"!

It is much easier to spot the many ironies of Idi Amin’s title than our own. In fact we may even think it perfectly reasonable to dedicate our lives to titles we want to achieve, assuming the overarching purpose of our lives would be to become a “CEO, “Analyst”, “Lawyer”, or “Manager”.?

In reality though, even the best-defined job titles can only describe what we ‘produce’ as a professional. Just as owning a truck - by itself - doesn’t make a trucking business, one's title is a poor description of the person bearing it. That is why I find it meaningful to think of myself as a business and encourage others to do the same. Because a business is much more than what it owns or produces.?

In fact, the products of a business are the end result of a unifying vision that is able to bring together time, knowledge, creativity, relationships, capital and assets into a harmonious process that can transform them into something that is more valuable than the raw sum of all its inputs.

Life bestows many job titles on us whether we choose them or not. I started my life as a son, a grandson, a nephew and cousin. Then I held many other titles such as a friend, a student, a colleague, a writer and husband among others. Sometimes I was known for the prizes won or for my humiliating failures. Five years ago, I became a father, just two weeks after I had started a new job as a ‘Supply Chain Improvement Lead’. A month earlier, I had been working as a financial analyst at a different organisation. Of all the titles I have held or still hold, only a fraction is mentioned on my resume and LinkedIn profile.

Perhaps one can argue that some of the above titles are more important or critical than others - the same way that a business would sometimes focus on its core product range. These are usually a small fraction of products that bring in the largest share of revenue or profits. That's one of the many ways the 80/20 rule applies to business. Having a core product range usually means that a business is dominant in a niche market where those products are very successful. Why then, would a business bother with the larger and usually more difficult to manage range of products that do not contribute proportionally to profits?

That's because even though niche products can be very successful in specific market segments, there is no such thing as a niche business. While a business should target a niche market where it can be successful, it must have a strategy to defend itself from disruptive threats that emerge from the periphery.?

Perhaps many of us would recognise this story from the car industry.

European and American car makers which had entrenched positions in the upper-mid range of the passenger car market were rightly not interested in competing with cheaper Japanese brands as they emerged through the 60s and 70s. Margins were lower at the bottom of the market and competing with Japanese brands would have destroyed the prestige of their established brands. However, Japanese carmakers (like the Koreans and Chinese after them) kept improving and created new brands to which the established carmakers are now forced to cede market share.

Thinking of myself as a business in my own right has helped me take stock of my entire product range and identify the various market segments, I need to do business in. While success in some markets I operate in is measured in profits, in others I would care more about market share, or growth, or just maintaining a firm foothold. The length of their business cycles varies, as well as the currency in which the dividends are paid in.

Every business operates in markets whose value-chains may span multiple industries. As a business in my own right, I cannot escape the fact that too I am part of a societal-scale intergenerational value-chain that I did not create or control, but one I need to integrate with to be fruitful. And I need to understand and respond to all my customers, shareholders, partners and competitors. Each of them may recognise me by a different job-title. Perhaps they will be forgiving when I mistakenly ship them a batch of faulty products, but it is the dependability of my brand in their eyes that will define my ultimate success or failure.