Does Cream Rise To The Top?

The Richard Report has a major theme that brokering 'something' is best achieved by the market deciding who or what is best using the 'wisdom of crowds' rather than the seal of approval of the broker. But is it that simple?. At Connect, a key selling point of our service is that we help put forward the best propositions to investors so they don't waste their time filtering out the 'bad uns'. Can Web technology ensure the cream of the crop rise to the top without the broker being the ultimate discriminator of what is best?

How do you find 'good uns'? If you follow the natural selection approach, you need an innovation ecosystem that encourages mutations and experimentation and let the marketplace decide those that are best i.e. most likely to survive and hence reproduce. As Nobel laureate Linus Pauling said: “have lots of ideas and throw away the bad ones…. You aren't going to have good ideas unless you have lots of ideas and some sort of principle of selection.”

With MyDealMaker we are trying to develop this approach to complement and extend our physical pitching events. Within reason anyone with what they think is a bright idea can put up their profile. We can try to give some quality assessment based on our engagement with the entrepreneur. Have they gone through our Investor Readiness Programme? Have they taken the trouble to fill out a detailed profile etc. But where it gets interesting is if, as Richard's suggests, the portal offers the functionality necessary for the market or software itself to promote the best and demphasise the rest.

But lets not get too carried away with all this. Online screening is just that: its a filtering process that can reduce the many to a few based on something more than a one dimensional view of quality or who you stood next to in the queue for the food at a networking event. But just like you don't buy an house based on its profile on RightMove, entering into a meaningful relationship with a business advisor or investing in what appears to be a bright idea on paper requires a little more interaction than can be done online. Physical engagement is still needed to seal any deal!

So I'm with Doug Richard on this - the brokerage need to provide the marketplace first and foremost and this provision and any signposting ideally should not consume a signicant percentage of the transaction it facilitates. Online brokering portals that match those with a need with those best able to provide it have the potential to change the balance of responsibility between brokers, providers and consumers and more importantly improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the marketplace.

Small but Perfectly Formed

When I was in merger talks with a larger company (OK read takeover!) I commented to their CEO that they had muscles in placed we didn't even have places! When things get big, do they really need to become more complex or does it go with the territory?

When businesses grow to more than eight people, holding company meetings in the rest room is no longer as feasible as it once was. Structure need to be put in place and when a job becomes bigger than one person, departments evolve.

The trick is to align related functions together and put in process orientated 'glue' to make sure the external world doesn't get exposed to (necessary) internal complexity. 'Join up thinking' and 'non-silo mentality' seems to be the in vogue phrases. Trying to have one department doing everything, so no glue is required, is about as bad as having individuals pulling in different directions and having loads of gaffer tape holding them together (which to be fair is what is invariably the end result of any growth phase for a business).

So I am not quite sure how to react to the government target of reducing 3,000 support projects down to 100 by 2010. Don't get me wrong, I am sure this can be done but why stop at 100? I thought 42 was the answer to life the universe and everything. But as Einstein said: Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler.