It is the same with most things. You can’t measure how hard it is to get a haircut, or how many times you’ve been called out to the bathroom. You can’t measure how many times you’ve asked your mom if she’s been working too hard, or how many times you’ve had your head in the sand.
What makes a company successful is the intensity of its competitive behavior. If a company has a competitive behavior that is so intense that it makes the customers and employees stop taking their work seriously, it will lose. But if a company has a competitive behavior that is so intense that it makes other companies take their jobs seriously, then that company can win. So if you want to make sure your company is successful, you need to set the intensity of its competitive behavior high.
I don’t disagree with the premise of that statement, but a company’s competitive behavior needs to be intense enough to make customers, employees, and other competitors stop taking its work seriously. I think this statement could be made in a more quantitative way.
Another way to think about this question is to say it goes like this. When a company has a high competitive intensity, its employees and customers feel as if they have a lot of power. The more power they feel in the world, the more they feel like their job is important. The higher the level of intensity the company has, the higher the level of power felt by the employees.
This is a great example of how I’ve used a measure of the intensity of company performance to explain the “power” of employees. An example I like is for a company that has a very high “power” with its employees, the CEO’s job is to be the main force that keeps the power “real,” which is to make people feel powerful.
If the CEO feels that his job is important enough to keep, then he will be able to keep that power. If the CEO feels like his job is not important enough, then he will stop that power.
This is the kind of thing that a power struggle usually happens between two companies. You have the CEO, who is in charge of keeping the power, and the employees who feel like they have a role in maintaining the power. The CEO’s job is to keep his employees from being scared and taking the power away from him. The employees need to feel like the CEO is on their side.
The CEO of a company wants to keep the power, but the employees aren’t interested. The CEO tries to keep his employees involved, but it won’t always be possible. When it’s not possible, or for no good reason, the CEO puts the pressure on the employees and the employees try to stop the CEO from doing what he wants. The CEO is trying to keep the employees happy, but it’s not always possible to do that.
When I think of the intensity of the competitive behavior between companies, I think of an old saying. When I was in high school, I would hear people say, “the difference between the two is whether you get the girl or the car.” Now I know that one is a relative term. The car is a better way of paying for a college education, but the girl is better in many ways.
The whole point of this post is that most people would agree that if you want a car, and you’re not getting one, then it would be a poor move to keep the quality of that car low. I think it is important to look at this as a competitive strategy. If your company has the best car in the world, then it can’t possibly be worth working for because the competition is that much more intense.