Posted by admin on January 29, 2008 under Articles | 
It can’t be said that every franchisee is cut out for multi-unit franchising. You must love what you do and be committed to it, and don’t forget you need lots of capital to weather the storms and get started. Being good with a single unit doesn’t automatically mean that you will be great with multiple units. As with any business, if you grow to fast you’re going to experience growing pains. Take it easy and make sure you can handle a second, or third unit, both financially and mentally before diving in. Growing pains can equal bankruptcy, and a learning experience like that can just cost too much.
You’ve also got to look at why your single unit might be performing well, and will that performance move over to multiple units. Don’t forget location, location, location is the saying that holds true for every business. Be sure your first location isn’t a unique experience.
The model of a successful business owner can be, but isn’t required to be, someone who has a high level of business success, a high level of management experience, and a high net worth. (Half a million +) You also can’t forget that “Cash is King”, and having a high amount of cash on hand will be required.
Loving your business was glanced over at the beginning of the article, but it really is the most important aspect of the requirements for having success in multi-unit franchising.
Posted by admin on January 23, 2008 under Articles |
Authored By: RAND Corporation
Companies recognized for exemplary diversity may follow a core set of motives and behaviors, but best practices alone do not always contribute to a high level of diversity, according to a RAND Corporation study released today.
While diversity programs help boost raw diversity numbers — ensuring a racially and ethnically mixed workforce — they may fall short of promoting personal development and higher levels of job satisfaction among both minority and non-minority personnel, according to the report.
“Numbers alone are an inadequate measure of diversity,” said Jeff Marquis, the study’s lead author and a political scientist at RAND, a nonprofit research organization. “To reap the true benefits of diversity — like enhanced productivity, profitability and overall job satisfaction — a company has to accept and integrate an inclusive diversity program into its social and business fabric.”
The report, titled “Managing Diversity in Corporate America,” lays the groundwork for a fact-based approach to diversity management by determining to what extent best practices literature describe the ways to enhance a company’s diversity.
Researchers found that companies often strive for “surface diversity” by focusing on short-term recruiting to attain a certain percentage of minority employees, rather than seeking comprehensive diversity management programs.
In determining what constitutes an effective diversity management program, the report compares the actual practices of eight successfully diverse companies ranked among Fortune magazine’s “50 Best Companies for Minorities” against what existing diversity literature says about motivations and effective strategies for achieving diversity.
The authors then made a second comparison, contrasting these companies against six others classified under Fortune magazine’s “100 Best Companies to Work For” — those recognized for their exemplary human resources departments, but not for their level of diversity. The selected companies were chosen to represent a mixture of different sizes, locations and industry types.
Not surprisingly, firms recognized as leaders in diversity management were more likely than those known for their superior human resources practices to support strong diversity initiatives, the report concluded. And while best diversity companies favored diversity for reasons related to boosting business performance, best human resources companies stressed non-business reasons like an enhanced work environment that results from improvements in basic recruiting, retention and promotion programs.
“Much of the diversity literature places a huge emphasis on diversity as a way of improving a company’s bottom line,” Marquis said. “The relationship between performance and profitability is an important motivator for companies to adopt comprehensive diversity management programs, even if it is not the case in every situation.”
Besides motivations for diversity management, both groups differed in terms of implementing best practices concerning leadership and methods of evaluation, according to researchers. The best diversity companies generally fulfilled all or the majority of best practices, while the best human resources companies fulfilled none or just a few of the best practices.
The study also highlighted the limitations of existing diversity literature, pointing out that it lumps all companies together, rather than taking into account each unique company’s unique goals, resources, number of employees, business locations, product lines and customer bases.
Among other key finding of the study:
• Best diversity companies were concentrated in certain industries, such as accommodation/food and arts/entertainment, while best human resources companies tended to be in the health care and professional services sector.
• Factors that may have a significant impact on a company’s level of diversity include its size, age and geographic location.
The study was conducted in the public interest and supported by RAND using discretionary funds made possible by the generosity of its donors and the fees earned on client-funded research. Other authors of the report are Nelson Lim, Lynn M. Scott, Margaret C. Harrell and Jennifer Kavanagh.
The study was done through RAND Labor and Population program, which examines issues involving U.S. labor markets, the demographics of families and children, social welfare policy, the social and economic functioning of the elderly, and economic and social change in developing countries.
The report is available at www.rand.org.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world. To sign up for RAND e-mail alerts: http://www.rand.org/publications/email.html
Article courtesy of the Recruiting Blogswap, a content exchange service sponsored by CollegeRecruiter.com, a leading site for college students looking for internships and recent graduates searching for entry-level jobs and other career opportunities.
Posted by admin on January 21, 2008 under O'Naturals |
This is not an endorsement of the company, nor the franchise and its business model systems. This is simply a general observation that a million people have said, “I wish there was a place where I could stop and buy food quickly, yet not buy a 2000 calorie burger.”, and finally there is a company trying to go national with the idea. IMHO, America needs this but the question is will Americans actually use it, despite having asked for it?
O’Naturals is apparently an upcoming fast food restaurant started by the founders of Stonyfield Farm frozen yogurt brand, because like many others Gary Hirshberg “was held hostage” by junk food while on the road or when in a rush.
A quick thought on the positives and challenges.
- Founder has successful business experience.
- Multiple locations open and company owned before franchising.
- Growing slowly, as opposed to quickly selling hundreds of franchises.
- Large capitalization required.
- Fast food industry is saturated.
- Healthy food is niche, and not widely accepted.
- Will healthy food ever catch on in America? Big Question.
What are your thoughts? Did we miss any challenges? Many missed positives, but we’d like to stick to the business side of the question. We know that the company is environmentally concerned and community focused.
Tags: , chain, chat, eating, fast, food, franchise, healthy, O'Naturals, restaurant, stonyfield
Posted by admin on January 19, 2008 under Articles |
Article By: Elevator Going Up!
Have you ever been at a social function or a networking event and had someone surprise you with a simple and direct question like, “So, what type of job are looking for?” – and then stumbled over your answer? We all have. Well, here’s a tip taken from the sales and entrepreneurial worlds – have an “elevator pitch” ready to whip out at a moment’s notice.
Most of you probably know the concept of an elevator pitch. It is a brief and concise overview that you could deliver in the time span of an elevator ride (say, thirty seconds or 100-150 words). The term is typically used in the context of an entrepreneur pitching an idea to a venture capitalist or a sales rep who finds him/herself face to face with a decision maker.
So, why can’t a job seeker use the same concept? It’s powerful (and confidence-building) to be prepared to deliver your own personal elevator pitch. How do you create one? First, write down the basics:
* Tell them what you want. Describe (as specifically as you can) what type of position you are looking for – and why.
* Emphasize what attributes make you unique. Think about your skill set, your experience, your education or training, personal characteristics, etc. Market yourself. Describe why you will be an asset to anyone you work for.
* Focus on the “take-away”. Hit the essentials. What is the key thing you want this person to take away from your conversation? If they had a position, would they be able to match you to it? Would they be able to accurately describe you to others?
* Ask for something. Do you want this person to consider you for a position? Do you want them to pass along your information to others? Don’t forget to offer them your contact information.
Next, (and this is the really hard part) boil it down to the key elements. If you’re like most of us, your first cut will probably be much longer than 60 seconds. Challenge yourself to get it down to under one minute. You will find that this exercise will force you to whittle your pitch down to the key essentials.
Finally, practice, practice, practice. Try it out on spouses or friends. Once you have the elevator pitch down cold you will be very confident in delivering it anytime, anywhere, and to anyone.
Go get ‘em!
http://blog.globalpitch.com
http://www.globalpitch.com
Article courtesy of the Recruiting Blogswap, a content exchange service sponsored by CollegeRecruiter.com, a leading site for college students looking for internships and recent graduates searching for entry-level jobs and other career opportunities.
Posted by admin on January 16, 2008 under Articles |
Nepotism is one of the worst things that can happen to a business. Particularly in a franchise system, because there is no accountability on the part of the franchisor once you’ve paid your franchise fee. They now have full control over who the vendors and suppliers are, and closest friend or relative can get the nod over the most qualified.
If you run your own business and use unqualified help, its your own fault, and you succeed or fail because of your decisions. In a franchise system you lose that control and failure can be the fault of bad decisions out of your control. After signing that UFOC you can be forced to buy from over priced, under qualified companies formed just to supply a particular franchise. The kickbacks and inflated pricing amounts to hidden fees that weren’t mentioned in the UFOC going directly to friends and family of the franchisor. If that hurts your local operation and cuts into your profits, you will have absolutely no recourse.
This is a gross abuse of power that is hard to pick out in the UFOC. It is one of those questions you might never think to ask, but when you find out about it, it’s way to late to do anything. The lack of accountability for a franchisor is why some franchises are doomed to fail eventually. If there was some type of system where you could force a franchisor to drop a bad vendor. it would help immensly. No known franchisor will give up that power because of the lack of foresight that democractic system actually works and the utter ignorance that they think they know what is best for everyone and everything. In the end they’ll do what is best for them, and you’ll be left writing the check for it.
It goes back to, research… research… research. Then wait, take a break and research again. You cannot know enough about someone (and apparently their family either) when you’re going to give control of financial decisions over to them.
