by winston » Thu Jan 09, 2020 2:50 pm
Avoid Multiplying by Zero
by Vishal Khandelwal
Two academicians were debating on the superiority of their respective fields of study.
"What would you do if I brought Alexander The Great's army in front of you?" The history professor challenged.
The mathematician rolled his eyes and replied, "I'll enclose the army in a bracket and multiply by zero."
In an additive system, each component adds on to one another to create the final outcome. Such systems are unaffected when they encounter a zero.
Multiplicative systems, on the other hand, are non-linear because anything times zero must still be zero, no matter how large the string of numbers preceding it.
A zero can wreak havoc on multiplicative systems. Like it did to Alexander's army.
Shane Parrish, on his excellent blog, explains the functional equivalent of multiplicative system in the world of business -
Most businesses, for example, operate in a multiplicative system. But they too often think they're operating in additive ones: Ever notice how some businesses will add one feature on top of another to their products but fail at basic customer service, so you leave, never to return?
That's a business that thinks it's in an additive system when they really need to be resolving the big fat zero in the middle of the equation instead of adding more stuff…
General Motors, founded in 1908 by William Durant and C.S. Mott, came to dominate the American car market to the tune of 50% market share through a series of brilliant innovations and management practices, and was for many years the dominant and most admirable corporation in America.
Even today, after more than a century of competition, no American carmaker produces more automobiles than General Motors. And yet, the original shareholders of GM ended up with a zero in 2008 as the company went into bankruptcy due to years of financial mismanagement.
It didn't matter than they had several generations of leadership: All of that becomes naught in a multiplicative system.
Benefit of looking at the downside or what can go wrong is efficiency, writes Peter Bevelin,
"Take investments as an example - If you first eliminate what doesn't work or what won't achieve what you want, you don't have to spend a lot of time and attention of analyzing the company.
If there is a huge downside - for example a catastrophe risk of the key factors that are needed for success aren't there or any other disqualifying factors like no sustainable advantage, bad and untrustworthy management of something else - just say 'no thank you.'"
Source: Seeking Alpha
It's all about "how much you made when you were right" & "how little you lost when you were wrong"