As our big bosses always say, there is no room for constant linearity in the realm of business and so does in real life's businesses.Thus, we should always feel paranoid about things that might happen.
I was tasked last time by our CM, since my bosses went outside the country to attend a regional convention, to get the market share of a certain product in the country over the last 5 years (compounded) on a quraterly basis and compare it to the overall contributions of different multinational and national companies that basically offer the same product.
Personally, there was a certain degree of uneasiness when our Big boss approached me to do the assignment. For one, at this/that specific point in time, I am/was still in the process of learning our system and our database. Second is because my bosses were not around during that time to help me on my queries (due to business trip).
Thank God though, my other colleagues are generous enough to accommodate my kakulitan every time I have queries.
Thank God, I was able to do what I was tasked to do.
On the results of the assignment, I found out that no matter how big you are as a company, that does not give you immunity of being kicked out from the business cycle. (And i am talking about companies which are not from the financial sector.These are multibillion-worth of companies which I think,and you might also think, stable enough and were already tested by financial tsunamis during the past decades)
These Gargantuan companies, overtime, tend to fluctuate in terms of their performances (like from 1000 going to 0 sort of fluctuation in 3 or 4 consecutive years).Some maintained their rankings or market shares, some ceased their operations, and some had join the merger club.
What I'm trying to point out here is that, Some companies could have maintained or even elevated their shares and possibly surpassed another financial tragedy if only they had correct information about their products and markets. They could have gotten a close-to-reality simulation using the correct info and consequently, prevented their downfall. They should not had relied much on their internal findings. They should have sought some more info.
Please translate the lessons above to per individual level.
What I'm trying to point out here is that, Some companies could have maintained or even elevated their shares and possibly surpassed another financial tragedy if only they had correct information about their products and markets. They could have gotten a close-to-reality simulation using the correct info and consequently, prevented their downfall. They should not had relied much on their internal findings. They should have sought some more info.
Please translate the lessons above to per individual level.
