Small company vs large company
Last year, before the recession hits the States, I met up with some friends and we started talking about small company vs large company. Most of them say that large companies will be better since they’re more stable, consistent and productive. The small ones, to them, are too risky since these companies might suffer from cashflow problem, headcount problem, etc.
The small guy will be able to outrun the big guy and make him tired 
I told them, that mentality is true and applicable for 2008 but not in the future. Why? Because there will be more and more changes ahead, more so that the large companies might not be able to handle them. Most of us know that large companies are very process-oriented and they have a certain set of procedures you need to follow for every action. I used to work for a Fortune 500 company, and at 1 point, I requested to upgrade my laptop memory to 2GB. The whole process took 3 weeks since it needs the approval from some IT managers in the States. 3 weeks…for something worth RM 200-300.
Anyway, as I’ve predicted, many so-called large companies are falling and falling fast. Retrenchments are not being made by small companies only….but also big companies (some are formerly known for being the best employers in their respective industry). In fact, most of my friends from large companies are suffering job losses or pay cuts but those in smaller companies are only suffering from pay cuts (they only lose their jobs if the company get closed down ).
The thing here is that large companies tend to spend too much time handling their processes and procedures, while the small companies (the good ones) are spending their time changing and adapting to the new environment. In this ever-changing world, whoever can adapt the fastest will win. This is something important and everyone should remember…..but sadly…not many believe in it.
So if you’re still thinking that large companies are better than smaller companies…….think again. 
In my opinion, it’s better to keep it small or medium for now since changes will be inevitable in 2009 onwards. You wouldn’t want to be the last in the queue to make the changes.
Related posts:
- Be positive, you’ll need it I’ve been saying this for a long long time now...
- Don’t depend too much on your company As some of you know, my salary will be reduced...
- Signs that your company is not doing very well 2009 is not a year where a lot of companies...
- Showing off your past awards? Think again. Today I drove pass the WD building in PJ (next...
- Working hard = spoiling the market? I’ve been working pretty hard for the past few weeks...
After glancing through your entry, I would feel that it’s not more of the size of the company but the industry it belongs in I reckon presently. Perhaps?
I’m going to graduate this year if every goes smooth. With current economy, I really scared that I can’t get a job.
I hope those med and small company can hire me.
hyperXs last blog post..Intel Atom and VIA Nano
Small and big has its good and bad. Being in a big, you get more exposure
Saying a big co. is better than a small co. is like saying a big house is better than a small house. Big co’s have big co. problems. Small co’s have small co. problems. Each has its own problems. Some ppl who are deemed useless in big co’s become extremely successful when they move to small co’s and vice cersa. There’s no hard & fast rule.
@ Hinching
Industry does play a role but in every industry, there will be big n small companies.
@ hyperX
Brush up your communication skills and other softskills. They do help a lot in order to make the interviewers remember you.
@ Harmony
It doesn’t mean you’ll get more exposure than smaller companies.
Being in a big company means you will be assigned to a certain division.
@ Damien
Hmm, I was talking about which will handle the recession better in 2009 and 2010…the big ones or the small ones?
I reckon the smaller ones…or the big ones who’ve removed those unnecessary layers of complications
( PROCESSES!! PROCEDURES!! )
Ah… right. The bigger the co., the more things can go wrong and the more controls you’ll see.
You’re right, unweildy processes can prevent co’s from reacting fast. Some big names like McDonalds seem to be able to adapt well to the crisis though, despite the process nightmare they live in. Other process hogs similar in size has gone bust. So IMO, unweildy processes are usually counterbalanced by financial management and smart marketing. Its what banks do, where internal processes make you cough blood but they somehow outlive economic storms.
@ Damien
McDonalds somehow can do it pretty well. I guess their processes are designed that way or maybe their industry is supposed to be that way? Same to banks.
But well, if banks screwed up, they will just get bought over or get some bail out money.
There is always pro and con for everthing, depend on what line are you in..
anything to do with food mostly can survive, for construction the small player are almost dying, it have been taken over by big comp
@ horizon
Let them disappear by themselves can be a better idea.
Different industry different scenario and situation. Mmm, actually, taking over a small player is not always a good idea.
LOL, let them disappear mean they would die, then i guess malaysian’s population will go down tremendously..
horizons last blog post..Investor Relations in Malaysia: The AMMB Twist
@ Horizon
But…population going down? Hmm, how can something like a business’ disappearance…cause that?
When these businesses disappear / die, people will just flock to other businesses.