Opinion
Redefining Business Success
G
etting new business used to
be predictable. New customers
called, we wrote proposals and
got orders.
Like other entrepreneurs, I had 15
years of experience and confidence that
I could sell, manage and deliver when I
created The Luminous Group in 1999.
Our mission: to help engineering and
quality professionals eliminate problems
during product launches. We removed
variation in quality and improved proj-
ect outcomes, serving one industry: top
automotive OEMs and Suppliers like
General Motors, Chrysler, Borg Warner
and Magna.
When things went well, revenue
increased; we had five employees and
kept a handful of contractors busy. Our
reputation grew and some of our cus-
tomers required their suppliers to use
our training. Within the circle of com-
panies we served, we developed a recog-
nizable, respected brand of services.
The strategy was good: 1) exceed
expectations and 2) obtain word-of-
mouth referrals within Fortune 500
multi-facility companies. We earned
introductions to Purchasing and
Supplier Quality functions and were
referred down their supply chain.
Sometimes, it was deliberate, some-
times subtle; but I never had to ask for
a referral. It just happened. Like many
from passive to active sell-
companies, we didn't have to do
ing, do business deliberately
much to get new business.
— evaluate our strengths
I felt successful and smart
and weaknesses, be realis-
and split my time between
tic about who needed our
working on client projects and
services and who we were
managing my business. It was
likely to access. We needed
a subtle shift and we should
prospects who weren't just
have seen it coming; but start-
"thinking" about getting
ing in 2008, the phone stopped
help, but were truly in pain
ringing.
M urray
and ready for a cure.
With the collapse of the
Sitt
samer
In the same way, we give
mortgage lending and banking
Corn munity
clients a fresh pair of eyes,
industries, and the recession
V iew
we started redefining our
hitting the auto industry hard,
own market, goals and
many businesses faced the
approach. We reduced unproductive
same problem. Having no other signifi-
selling time by qualifying (and disquali-
cant source of income, I felt alone and
fying) prospects quickly. We challenged
embarrassed.
our traditional beliefs.
Existing customers cut back. The rev-
We left our modern office building
enue stream slowed to a trickle. We did
to work — like so many — from home
the same great work but faced problems
and, Panera and Starbucks. We lever-
of finding customers who appreciated
aged technology — server, cell phones,
our services; we needed access to deci-
texting, scanning — connecting staff,
sion makers with the authority to hire
customers, documents and data.
us.
The hardest part was accepting that
After months of trying to change
it's OK to shrink. Corporate perception
what happened, I realized what needed
has always been that bigger is better —
changing was my thinking. We couldn't
gleaming glass offices, poised secretar-
undo the past; we had to look forward,
ies answering phones, big clients.
at potential markets that needed our
But customers seldom visited our
services. Unless our thinking changed,
offices ... we went to them. The light
we were destined to go the way of many
bulb shone bright: Customers valued
competitors... out of business.
In the new economy, we had to change our work — not the size of our space.
We couldn't undo the
past; we had to look
forward, at potential
markets that needed
our services. Unless
our thinking changed,
we were destined to
go the way of many
competitors ... out of
business.
My staff and I surely enjoyed the office
banter and team lunches, but value
even more the flexibility and proximity
to family. The recession has not only
strengthened my business; it has helped
balance my work and home life.
While we might think success looks
like an ascending graph of numbers and
people, I now see success as having the
flexibility to shift and change. I'm so
glad to be done with time-consuming
commutes and be able to spend more
time with my daughters. Less stressed, I
Flotilla Group: Terrorists?
Washington
T
he Turkish charity that spon-
sored the ill-fated flotilla to the
Gaza Strip in late May is now
coming under fire from Congress. As
a result, the U.S. Treasury Department
could soon list the IHH (Insan Haklari
Ve Hurriyetleri Vakfi) as a terrorist orga-
nization.
In July, Rep. Ron Klein, D-Fla., asked
the State Department's counterterror-
ism department to take up the matter.
In early August, State responded with
a letter indicating that IHH might not
qualify as a foreign terrorist organiza-
tion, but that "U.S. government agencies
are taking a close look" at it because
"serious questions of support to terror-
ist organizations have been raised?'
There's also House Foreign Affairs
Committee Chairman Howard Berman,
D-Calif., and Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif.,
the ranking member of its terrorism
46
September 2
a
2010
to a terrorist organization.
subcommittee. They recently
In 2008, Treasury
sent a letter to the Treasury
announced that the Union
Department, stating that evi-
of Good and its network
dence "strongly supports" des-
was "facilitating financial
ignating the Turkish charity
transfers ... to Hamas — and
IHH for supporting terrorist
Hamas-controlled organiza-
groups, and urging Treasury
tions," including the al-Salah
to take action.
Society, which it also desig-
It is puzzling that IHH has
nated in 2007. The Treasury
not already been designated.
press release estimated that
The group advertises its mem-
Jonathan
the funds amounted to "tens
bership in the Saudi-based
Schanzer
of millions of dollars a year?'
umbrella organization Union
Special
IHH could argue that it
of Good (Ittilaf al-Kheir). In
Commentary
has
never contributed funds
November 2008, Treasury list-
to
the
Union
of
Good. But even if that
ed the Union as a terrorist entity, stating
is
true,
the
Union's
top officials include
that the group was "created by Hamas
Hamas
members,
as
well as Yemeni
leadership to transfer funds to the ter-
national
Abd
al-Majid
al-Zindani, whom
rorist organization."
the
U.S.
Treasury
designated
a terrorist
The fact that IHH voluntarily belongs
in
2004
for
providing
support
to al-Qai-
to the Union automatically qualifies it
da.
IHH
could
thus
be
viewed
as
"owned
for designation. If IHH provided any
or
controlled"
by
specially
designated
funds to it, Treasury can also build a
global terrorists — further grounds for
case that it provided financial support
designation.
Foreign intelligence sources have also
taken notice of IHH. French magistrate
Jean-Louis Brougiere testified in 2001
that IHH had an "important role" in
Ahmed Ressam's failed "millennium
plot" to bomb the Los Angeles airport in
late 1999, adding that it was "basically
helping al-Qaida when [Osama] bin
Laden started to want to target U.S. soil."
So IHH could be tagged for providing
support to a designated terrorist group.
Germany banned its IHH affiliate
in July, noting the group's close and
continuing ties to Hamas, which the
European Union classifies as a terror-
ist organization. We can presume that
Germany has shared its findings with
Washington.
The Israelis also have their own cause
for concern. They banned IHH for its
terrorist ties in 2008. In the aftermath
of the skirmish in May, an Israeli mili-
tary spokesman announced that one of