A few days ago, from @Changsha eating and drinking and playing micro-blog broke the news, the call technology CEO Yuan Bingsong in Changsha Liberation Road west VDVC mall a shocking theft incident, the call technology CEO actually stole the competitor’s shared charging treasure cabinet, the whole process was monitored.
Call CMO Ren Mu had said to the time of financial yuan Bingsong will not come out to apologize. Ironically, Mr Yuan’s subsequent internal letter said: “Destroying and stealing equipment is no secret in the shared charging industry. “We need to hit it back hard in the market.” He said.
In fact, similar adverse competition events have occurred in the shared charging bank industry. If the pure judgment of the call technology CEO’s behavior, at most is not likely to come on stage as a means of competition, but this time the incident has a point worth paying attention to, is the call technology CEO role. This makes people wonder why the ethics and values of the CEO of Laidian Technology have such problems. What kind of blow will it bring to the enterprise?
Incalculable negative effects: cultural distortion and market aversion
At the very least, judging by the behavior of the caller TECH CEO, one thing is certain: his personal morality and values are in question. The CEO is the primary decision maker, the person who is supposed to lead the company into the future, but now seems to be drifting away. The downside of this incident is twofold, as caller tech needs to be prepared for the unknown and the known.
In terms of corporate culture, such practices will undoubtedly set a bad example for the enterprise, such as distorting some healthy values that still exist in the enterprise. Although the caller is in the competitive industry of charging bank sharing, the CEO’s behavior can be said to add fuel to the fire.
On the one hand, as a start-up enterprise, the caller needs an aggressive and hard-working corporate culture, but the BEHAVIOR of the CEO sends a very negative message to the whole company from top to bottom: Caller can take any bad behavior in order to compete. This will undoubtedly have a subtle impact on the company’s entire competitive strategy, to be specific, it will affect everyone’s competitive values.
On the other hand, under the guidance of bad competition genes, the call obviously cannot guide the development of the enterprise with a relatively healthy corporate values. From the perspective of future development, the call is likely to fail in the distorted corporate values, which is a kind of death trial for the start-up company.
At the industry level, this behavior may cause an indelible stain on the brand, thus losing customer loyalty. As more and more users start to shift their attention from the product to the development of the enterprise, if the enterprise has problems, then the willingness of users not to buy is likely to be continuously amplified in a casual moment. Users then attack the company, and it becomes infamous.
In short, the development of the enterprise needs a positive spirit, such a CEO must not lead the enterprise to go further, at the beginning like to call the capital side now how to feel? Was it a reflection, or gnashing of teeth, or sorrow for its misfortune and anger?
The dilemma that calls: bad competition gene, financing condition is unfavorable
From the occurrence of this matter has been able to see the call CEO personal values, a closer look at the call CEO this move, can not be separated from the call is not too healthy enterprise status quo.
First, it has to do with bad competitive genes in telephony. Bad competition genes here can be understood as malicious competition measures taken because of dissatisfaction with the current situation of market competition, just like the events of bike operators destroying each other in the boom of shared bikes in the past.
Second, the financing situation of the call is unfavorable. According to public documents, The last round of financing was $20 million in April last year, but both small and street electricity companies in the same echelon received more financing than the caller. Time Finance wrote in a recent report, “Unlike Street, Small And Monster, which went through multiple rounds of financing and saw a significant dilution of the founding team’s equity, the Caller team was not diluted too much, whether it was a war of words or a patent fight, the ultimate goal may be to raise money or cash out.”
As far as the track of shared charging treasure is concerned, financing is a signal of whether the capital market approves or not, and it is also an indirect proof of whether the enterprise’s own development is healthy or not. Since the call has not reached the ideal profit state, it can be understood that the capital is not friendly to it to a large extent, and there is no financing. It is also unclear how long the technology can survive without clear profitability.
However, whether the electricity technology itself may have adverse competition gene, or say rivals hammered, or the financing is in bad condition, to science and technology of today’s situation is not optimistic, if not as soon as possible to solve the problems on operation, strategy and finance, must let the electricity tortured finally still is his.
The core of business competition: market share and healthy operation
The case of calling CEO can be regarded as a typical counter example, especially in today’s increasingly dazzling business competition, we should think about, what kind of business competition is healthy, what kind of strategic vision can lead to the dream of Rome? What is primary and what is secondary to a startup?
To answer the first question, what is the core of business competition? In recent years, the new economy industry is very busy, and sharing economy has become the most concerned army. However, for shared charging banks, just like shared bikes, in order to gradually grasp advantages and gain the upper hand in commercial competition, it is necessary to compete for market share, that is, to occupy the offline scene. In order to maintain a close connection between the product and the market, a healthy operation mode is also essential. There is no doubt that this logic is at the heart of the business competition of shared charging banks.
On the other hand, small moves and porcelain touch means first deviate from the normal competition track, so it is not to mention touch the core of commercial competition. When it comes to new retail and sharing economy industries, behaviors with similar attributes have long been proved to be just short-sighted competitive thinking of drinking poison to quench thirst.
However, the occurrence of the call CEO also makes us have to think about what kind of entrepreneurial environment and thinking is needed by capital and market. At present, at least two conditions should be met. One is to always have healthy values for development, and the other is to constantly create value for the market and users.
In conclusion, normal business competition should start from healthy operation and increasing market share, instead of doing some small actions that destroy the market ecology. Today’s call may be hard to please capital markets.
Article/Liu Kuang public account, ID: Liukuang110