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