When I studied abroad in Kyoto, every day I would bike or walk past tiny shops that looked like they had been selling the same thing for decades. Sometimes they were next to ancient temples; other times they were across from shiny new modern stores. I often wondered how they survived–could a tiny dumpling shop pay the bills every month?
As it turns out, these stores survive because they’re run specifically for that purpose. They’re built to endure, not to grow.
I learned about this in a recent NY Times article that focuses on a mochi restaurant called Ichiwa. Ichiwa is over 1000 years old. No, that’s not a typo–it first opened in the year 1000!
According to the article, Japan has over 33,000 businesses that are at least 100 years old (of all businesses in the world, these comprise 40% of the total). As business professor Kenji Matsuoka is quoted saying in the article, the reasons these businesses have endured for so long is because they prioritize carrying on. “Each generation is like a runner in a relay race.”
This is distinctly different than a growth-based strategy, which is always focused on more: More revenue, more employees, more products, more subscribers.
I don’t necessarily think that either strategy is inherently better than the other. But I also think that growth for growth’s sake isn’t good, just as staying the same simply for the sake of staying the same isn’t good either. There must be a purpose behind your strategy.
For example:
- Would you rather have 10,000 subscribers on your e-newsletter, YouTube channel, or Facebook page who hardly ever pay attention to the content you post…or 1,000 subscribers who consistently engage whenever you share an announcement, a video, or post?
- Would you rather release 12 new products every year, with each having the briefest of spotlights before people move on to the next product…or 2 new products that people are talking about, buying, and upgrading throughout the year and for years to come via reprints and expansions? Bard Press does this with books–they publish exactly 1 book a year, and they put everything into making that book as good and successful as possible.
- Would you rather have 250 Kickstarter backers, leaving you well under your minimum order quantity…or 5,000 early adopters whose pledges allow you to produce thousands of products at significantly lower manufacturing costs due to economies of scale?
I used to read a lot of business magazines, and whenever they’d dole out year-end awards, they’d make a big deal out of the number of employees at each startup. That always baffled me, because it seems like the quality of the people is much more important than the quantity. If you have a small, talented team of of 3 people with good work/life balance who generate over $10 million in revenue every year, isn’t that better than 20 people who generate the same amount?
I think a big part of it may come down to your goals. I’d love for Stonemaier Games to be a sustainable business for a long time. As a result, growth isn’t the goal. If there is growth, it happens organically when one of the few products we release each year becomes something people want well into the future (or, in terms of personnel, only when it makes complete sense to bring on someone new–that’s why I was the sole full-time employee here for 7 years). It’s a slow and steady, risk-averse approach that has never required debt.
So perhaps that’s my preferred strategy: A focus on endurance with the hope of organic, manageable growth. What’s your method of choice?
Before I suggest a few related articles, I wanted to mention that my book publisher, Berrett-Khoeller, currently has a sale on all of their books, including A Crowdfunder’s Strategy Guide. If you’re looking for a gift to inspire the entrepreneur in your life, feel free to use the code ONWARD to save 40% through December 15 (free shipping to the US plus digital options).
Also read:
- Starting and Sustaining a Kickstarter-Driven Business
- An Open Letter to Game Designers
- I’m No Longer the Only Full-Time Employee at Stonemaier Games!
If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content!
19 Comments on “Growth or Endurance: What Does Your Organization Value More?”
Leave a Comment
If you ask a question about a specific card or ability, please type the exact text in your comment to help facilitate a speedy and precise answer.
Your comment may take a few minutes to publish. Antagonistic, rude, or degrading comments will be removed. Thank you.
[…] Also read: Growth or Endurance: What Does Your Organization Value More? […]
Great info Jamey. You see this with a lot of tech companies too. Super focused on growth and they don’t focus on keeping interest long term.
That being said, my question is around how to get that manageable growth. Obviously Stonemaier has had good growth. What is the best path towards this? Trying to maximize sales on one hit game? Sounds like you’re not about getting a bunch of games out and hoping you have multiple hits. Did you try to get international quickly or maximize North America first? Get into as many retailers as possible or focus on a few and increase skus they carry? Basically any things you focused on or an order of things to drive your growth?
Thanks Ryan! Our approach is slow and steady: Focus on one brand at a time, trying to create and produce it in such a way that all the up-front time and effort results in an evergreen product. Part of that has been our inclusive approach: We try to include people worldwide by working with distributors and fulfillment centers around the world. Brick and mortar retailers want to carry games they know they can sell, so the first few products they carry of yours will make a lasting impression based on whether or not they sell, so make sure to get those products right (and keep them available for retailers if possible)! :)
This article is awesome! It’s pretty validating too because I’ve been striving to follow an endurance model for years. (And getting sideways glances from some, hehehe.) I’m a designer and illustrator who started a little design company in 2007 and I’ve been able to release new creations occasionally while slowly upgrading current offerings.
It’s always been more important to me to focus on production quality, small batch stock quantities, and hiring help only when crucial. Learning from others has been a big part of this. From the Japanese principle of Kaizen to bits of help from folks like Paul Jarvis and Seth Godin.
Real quick, speaking of Seth, he mentions this: “There’s no correlation between things that are good and things that are famous. There are many things that are good that are not famous.” Such a great perspective to keep in mind as indie creators.
Admittedly, the lack of in-person sales has impacted my release goals. But, I can only improve with online efforts given some time! Thanks for this Jamey. Be well. Appreciate all you do to cultivate community here.
–E
Thanks Eric! I appreciate those words of wisdom from you and Seth. :)
The examples seem a bit off the topic. An enduring business would be focused on a reprint each year, not new games. The would correct typos and update art; Think boutique versions of Monopoly, maybe.
You like new games. You want engaged fans. Your business grows when it reaches more people.
I suspect a 1000-year-old mochi maker survives due to many, varied supports.
Absolutely, we’re focused on giving each new product so much time and attention that we can reprint it for years to come. That’s our primary focus. Hence: “Would you rather release 12 new products every year, with each having the briefest of spotlights before people move on to the next product…or 2 new products that people are talking about, buying, and upgrading throughout the year and for years to come via reprints and expansions?”
Great Post Jamie. Thanks for sharing it.
At 2Tomatoes we are more into the enduring approach, working hard every day to be able to grow organically thanks to our products.
We try to avoid debt. If your investments go wrong, you can easily get into a very scary debt spiral and lose your company. Or at least part of it. Too risky for us.
IMHO, debt is riskier in boardgames than in other sectors, as the average publisher launches several games per year, and most of them will have a quite short lifetime in store shelves.
*Jamey
(sorry)
Hello Jamey;
i think that this attitude: “A focus on endurance with the hope of organic, manageable growth”, would be a necessary prerequisite for all sectors of the economy to bring about a climate change.
For the board game industry, your attitude was also the attitude of Bernd (Brunnhofer) and for me always the ideal image of a publisher for board games. 4 – 5 titles a year, maybe 1 – 2 of them as licenses, for me the requirements to publish games with good quality. I can only recommend you to keep this attitude.
Phantastische Grüße
Lutz
Thanks so much for this post. Time to add that mochi store to my go-to-list in Japan.
Personally I think there is so much focus on “getting more” in corporate America. At my old corporate job I felt so disillusioned with the quotas and the constant need for cost-savings. To what end? I would ask myself. Just so the stock price can go up a penny?
In any growth vs endurance discussion, I think of the planet we live on, and the finite amount resource it offers us. There’s a fundamental disconnect between unlimited growth and a finite planet. Why does the growth option never have a limit, say like “We’ll grow to this size and then stop.” It always seems to be either or. Or am I missing something?
Good point. The planet is finite.
Some economists forget/don’t understand it.
Great post, Jamey. Great thoughts to explore.
For me: Endurance.
From day one of GKG I had a “want to feed my family” mindset. I want to sustain long-term in distribution, and in the hearts of my customers. I want people to love Gate Keeper Games and THUS buy our dice.
Growth is beautiful when it comes, but chasing it carries a risk that a family man might not want to take.
Provide for my family. Treat customers like my family. Provide for my customers.
Kind of my unofficial motto.
I love that motto, John! Thank you for sharing.
Good question I’ve asked myself in my own business, unrelated to gaming. Seems like perhaps a personal choice that symptomatically results in growth or endurance. Are you the kind of leader who enjoys delegating responsibility to others so that they can also grow and reap the rewards of their own growth OR do you prefer to emphasize quality and consistency in each product or service you provide? Not that these are entirely mutually exclusive, but I think personality at the top drives this effect. I think maybe moving from directing to delegation is the hardest thing I’ve ever done in my progression as a leader. The thing that made me so successful (attention to detail, work ethic, etc.) are quite difficult to find and almost impossible to instill in someone.
Russ: That’s a really interesting question about leadership. My hope is that they’re not mutually exclusive, as I like to delegate when appropriate AND I like to create quality products. As I write that, I think the two can go hand-in-hand when you work with the right people (and when you know which tasks to keep for yourself).
That was a fantastic read. I look forward to getting emails from you guys; I look forward to the changes in the current status chart — checking to see what red dots have turned to yellow, what yellow dots have turned to green, what code-names have turned to actual game names… wonderful stuff.
I do not have access to the inner workings of your company. What I do have is an appreciation for the way your company appears to be ran (from an outsider’s perspective). I truly appreciate the work and dedication of your small team, the openness of your communications, and the quality of the work that you do.
Keep it up. You are doing great.
Thank you, David! I’m glad you enjoy our progress charts, and I appreciate your support of the way we run Stonemaier.