Front page, News, Sports, Money, Life, Weather, Marketplace
Inside News
Nationline
Washington
World
Politics
Opinion
Columnists
Snapshot
Science
States
Weird news

Search
Newspaper
 
Archives
Our site

Resources
Index
Feedback
What's hot
About us
Jobs at USA
  
TODAY

02/03/98- Updated 12:17 AM ET

Business race isn't always to the swift

By Alan Webber

You may think that the one person who knows the most about theU.S. economy is Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan. And youmay also believe that the one person who can spot winning companiesbetter than anyone else is legendary investor Warren Buffett.

But for my money, there's one guy who's the best at both: DavidBirch. He may not hold a high-ranking public office (althoughthe king of Sweden stays in touch with Birch and, a few yearsago, the Swedish government awarded him the equivalent of a "babyNobel Prize" for his research in entrepreneurial studies).He may not be the wealthiest investor in the country (althoughhe has compiled a database of the nation's fastest-growing entrepreneurialcompanies). In fact, you may never have heard of him.

But to people who follow the performance of the U.S. economy atthe grassroots level and who are fascinated by the dynamic changesgoing on in the world of business today, David Birch is the fountainof knowledge.

And he has been for quite some time - roughly since the economybegan its dramatic shift from an industrial to a knowledge base.I first came across Birch's studies about 20 years ago, when Iwas trying to figure out where jobs in this country were comingfrom. At the time, the U.S. industrial base was under a tremendousassault from foreign competition. Autos, steel, rubber - all thetraditional industrial powerhouses - were in trouble. And yetnew jobs were cropping up - quite a few of them, in fact.

Birch, who was working at MIT at the time, came up with the answer:Through fine-grained business analysis, he demonstrated that 82%of all new jobs in the country were being created by smaller companies."It was a major reversal in what people thought was goingon in the economy," Birch says today. "What I demonstratedwas that the structure of the economy had changed."

It was a revelation. And since then, revelation has been Birch'sstock in trade. (Another Birch calculation: more people in theUnited States work for female-owned businesses than for Fortune500 companies.) He's taken his training as a particle physicistand applied it to the study of business. "I study the economyone particle at a time," Birch explains. "I startedin the late 1960s in New Haven. I interviewed every single start-upcompany in the city. I always thought that macroeconomics wasthe equivalent of ether. Its ludicrous to think of the economyas anything other than the atoms that create it."

Today, as the president of Cognetics Inc., a Boston-based consultingfirm, Birch has turned his attention full time to tracking thewinners and losers in the new economy. When it comes to growth,the losers are easy to identify. "We haven't added one industrialjob in this country in 50 years," Birch declares. "We'vecreated 70 million jobs over the past five decades, and not onein manufacturing."

Birch is equally clear about who the winners are. "Virtuallyall growth in this economy is attributable to small business,"Birch says. "About 276,000 companies account for 70% of alljob growth. That's just 3% of all U.S. companies. And of thosecompanies, 97% have 100 or fewer people working for them whenthey start growing."

These are companies Birch has dubbed "gazelles" forthe twin attributes that make them so successful: speed and agility.Interestingly, gazelles are spread out across the economy; only1.8% of all gazelles are in high tech, according to Birch. Butif gazelles can be in any business, nevertheless, says Birch,they all share three attributes: They rely on the inspirationof one individual, one person who sees an opportunity no one elsesees; they use technology as a competitive weapon; and they startout with a global view of the marketplace.

These high-growth start-ups may share common traits, but theycan be located anywhere, Birch says. (For the record, he namesSalt Lake City, Utah, as the hottest of hot spots.) But again,gazelles can be drawn by specific factors: A good airport (gazellesemploy lots of road warriors). A great university. A terrificquality of life. And a culture that welcomes and appreciates entrepreneurs.

Now, if Birch is right about all this - and he's been pretty muchspot on for the past 30 years - it's not hard to rewrite the rulesfor success in the new economy.

Rule No. 1 It's a unit-of-one economy. Forget about thepower of huge corporations, bricks and mortar, and hundreds ofthousands of workers. One person with a great idea and enoughtechnology can reinvent an entire industry, overturn establishedcompanies, and build a job-creation machine. And, oh yes, makea lot of money.

Rule No. 2 Different is better. Why are all the new jobscoming from smart, innovative, young start-ups? The conformityof big companies is a straitjacket on the kind of creativity ittakes to imagine your way into the land of the gazelle. No wonderBirch says, "Nothing will kill a gazelle faster than an MBA."

Rule No. 3 Check your corporate DNA. Gazelles get it -from birth. They've got the genes to run smart, fast and agile,and to keep running as far as the eye can see. The challenge forthe big, slow companies is to see if they can engineer a DNA transplant,to bring some of those gazelle-like genes into their organizations,and then take a test run at the horizon.

Rule No. 4 Geography isn't destiny. Used to be, if youwere a computer company, you had to be in Silicon Valley; an advertisingagency needed a New York City address; and auto retailing hadto come out of Detroit. Not anymore! Thanks to an economy of ideas,you can live where you like, collect a talented team that wantsto work with you, and use technology to take you where you needto go.

Rule No. 5 Speed kills - the competition. Gazelles arefirst to see an idea, first to seize on it, develop it and takeit to market. Once they start growing, they use speed as a wayto blow by the competition. Gazelles have mastered the art ofthe quick: They have internal approaches and fast decision-makingprocesses that let them move with maximum agility in a fast-changingbusiness environment.

So while the race isn't always to the swift, in an economy ofgazelles that's sure the way to bet.

Alan Webber is founding editor of Fast Company magazine anda member of USA TODAY's board of contributors. He can be reachedat awebber@fastcompany.com.


To comment

If you would like to comment on editorials, columns or othertopics in USA TODAY, or on any subjects important to you: Sende-mail for letters to the editor only to editor@usatoday.com.Please include address and daytime phone numbers so letters maybe verified. Letters and articles submitted to USA TODAY may bepublished or distributed in print, electronic or other forms.


AND from the Grinch:
Data for employment:

"Small firms with fewer than 500 employees created 92 percent of the net new jobs between March 1992 and March 1993. The smallest employers (those with 1-4 employees) were the most prolific, generating 55 percent, according to a new Census data base under development by a team of economists led by the SBA's Office of Advocacy. More than 1 million of the 1.9 million net jobs created were in firms with 1-4 employees.

"The data set is the first U.S. government longitudinal job creation data available by firm size for the entire U.S. economy... "Employment in small firms grew 20.9 percent, compared with just 0.4 percent employment growth in large firms with more than 500 employees...

"Small firms also gained jobs in four of the ten industry groups that lost the most jobs. In commercial banking, for example, small firms increased their employment by 8.9 percent, even though the industry had a net loss of 58,992 jobs.

"In telephone communications, small firm job increases of 45.4 percent helped offset the net job loss. The same can be said for the fire, marine, and casualty insurance, and search and navigation equipment industries, where small firms increased employment while the industry as a whole lost jobs..."

http://www.sba.gov/advo/press/97-32.html

For perspective, overall figures for the same period using the "under 500 employees" definition of "small firm"...

Number of firms
All 4,610,829
Big 12,988 0.3%
Small 4,597,841 99.7%

Receipts
All firms $11,612 billion
Big firms $ 6,226 b. 54%
Small firms $ 5,386 b. 46%

Employment
All 86,857,000
Big 41,051,000 47%
Small 45,806,000 53%
Payroll
All $2,125 billion
Big $1,126 b 53%
Small $ 999 b 47%

http://www.census.gov/epcd/www/smallbus.html

In reply, kenfran@arkansas.net wrote:

> From 1980 to 1994, the top 500 US
> corporations increased their assets from $1.2
> trillion to $2.7 trillion.
> Surely even YOU can see that it (my claim that Big Business
> plays an ever bigger role in the US economy) was not so
> far off the mark at all.

Hi,
The WAY you think about these issues has me puzzled.
You quote figures saying the top 500 US corporations (Fortune 500?) are growing slower than the US GDP. So they must have a lower fraction of the total wealth as assets in 1994 than they had in 1980, right?

I mean that in 1980 the US GDP was $2708 billion and in 1994 it was $6633 billion. So in the interval you cite, the "top 500 corporations" assets grew by 2.7/1.2 = 2.25. while the country's GDP grew 6633/2708 = 2.45.

But you seem to think this means that they are gaining ever more political (or economic, or some kind) of power or influence. And remember that the 500 biggest corporations in 1980 are NOT the SAME corporations that are the biggest ones today.

I don't get it???
--
AND
gstebbin@pacbell.net (George Stebbins) wrote:

> In just what way is the collapse in new hirelings by big business
> good.

Hi,
I was not offering a value judgement on the relative growth of big vs small business in the US, just reporting on the facts.

But the issue did come up as a result of the claim by kenfran that big business is taking over the country and that is BAD. However I predict that when he discovers that big business is being displaced by small business, he will decide that this too is BAD.

For some people, no matter what happens, it is BAD.

jim blair (jeblair@facstaff.wisc.edu) For a good time call http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/4834


Front page, News, Sports, Money, Life, Weather, Marketplace

©COPYRIGHT 1998 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.