I see it as a double shortcome and a deceptive bonus on the other hand too. This lead me on to think of the way for business to live and benefit and enrich other businesses in the same sector, and to do it willingly, to overcome comeptition with branding and service versatility. In fact competition would be side cast with many other methods based on constructive growth.
- affiliation with others
- B2B
- conglomeration
- benchmarking
- outsourcing
- partnerhips
- mergers
- synergetic effect of mergers - both businesslines work better than either alone
Be friendly to your fellow business
I would propose this simple slogan to address this paradigm. Seems like interesting so i might write more on friendly business.
Healthy and unhealthy competition
My defintion for the difference would be in these terms : if there is macroeconomic benefit it is healthy competition, else if there is harm to macroeconomic indicators it is unhealthy. (I know it is perhaps improper to use concepts from medicine or physics but there is precedence since )the beginning. A good mathematical falsificatrion would show that in most situations use of even unhealthy competition would not result in harm to macroecomies (cleaning unnecessary businesses and creating more value and therefore tax, reducing prices more radically).
This idea is not to end healthy competition - it is to add a new system that would keep on growing. So the plan involves more on creative assemblages of business.
Studies just shoe that punishment harms the overall development in society. Those societies that use tit for tat do better.
In additon classes in schools have better scores for students if they cooperate with other classes.
Evolution of business
it is fairly clear that businesses which follow Schumpeterian capitalism would grow a few steps and reduce a few steps businesses that use compassionate business grow on growth and therefore offer more geometric growths for investments.
No comments:
Post a Comment