Anyone who has ever taken an economics class or attended a Dave Ramsey seminar will tell you that compounding is an extremely powerful tool for multiplying the value of your efforts. Very simply, compounding is the cumulative effect of taking the outcome of your effort and reinvesting it back in as input. The result is the yield of your effort creates its own yield, which in turn creates its own yield… the cycle builds upon itself ad infinitum. Cool, right?
But like all strategic tools, the compounding phenomenon can work both to the benefit and detriment of your organization. A lesson that most companies (and people) learn the hard way.
Right now, there is infection in five of my toes. I’ll spare you the details but know this: IT HURTS. I’m a pitiful sight right now, wincing and grimacing as I hobble around. But it didn’t start out like this. It started with my winter boots which, though functioning correctly, have a narrow “toe box” which caused my toes to rub against the inside of the boot.
Now add to that the fact that it’s winter and I wear the boots for extended period, the rubbing starts to become intense. Add to that the fact that (as a diabetic) I have poor circulation to my feet. Now my toes are being irritated and don’t receive a sufficient supply of “clean” blood to keep them healthy. What happens? Infection sets in and then spreads to the toes that have been weakened by the compounding effect of my constricting boots and lazy pancreas.
What started as a minor irritation quickly became a near-debilitating condition.
Now imagine a similar situation in your organization.
One member of your team (let’s call him ‘Tony’) is being slightly but continually irritated by a tool that isn’t quite what he needs. Annoying but no big deal, he’s team player and times are tight so he’s making due with the best he can.
Now imagine that some other part of your organization, say Human Resources, starts having problems. It doesn’t have to completely fail to function, like my pancreas has; it could be as minor as falling behind or forgetting to complete something on time. But as a result, Tony doesn’t get his pay check when he’s supposed to.
Now Tony is being worn down by a minor inconvenience and the flow of resources that he needs has been disrupted. As anyone who has ever had to deal with a missing pay check will tell you, Tony’s condition has just gotten a lot worse. The stress of his inefficient work environment is now compounded by the disruption that flows from another part of the organization. Tony’s pissed. Infection has set in.
Let unchecked, Tony will now start to have a detriment effect on those around him, compounding any difficulties they’re enduring. This is how the infection spreads. Suddenly, what started as a minor problem has compounded to a critical issue that will take a lot of attention to heal.
As entrepreneurs, leaders, and managers, you’re accustomed to working in less that perfect conditions. And in many regards inefficiency will always hinder our efforts. In order to accomplish our strategic goals we’ve learned not to sweat the small stuff.
But that doesn’t mean that we can ignore the small stuff completely. You need to pay attention to what’s happening around you. And it is especially important to keep a pulse on the “health” of your team and make sure that you are creating the right conditions for them to succeed in their positions. Because if you don’t, something minor can quickly compound into something major and hobble your efforts.
Don’t sweat the small stuff. But don’t ignore it either.
Research suggests that links exist between respondents’ perceptions of how different attributes of an organization (development stage, size, and geographic focus) impact BAM goals (Exhibit 7). [1]
(Note: The colored bars on the scale reflects specific opinions pertaining to General Businesses (not explicitly BAM) [yellow], Missions Organizations [red], and Business as Mission Companies [blue], respectively.)

Development stage (7.1-3)
Implication: the newness of an organization creates perceived benefits that are valued by the Business as Mission movement. Primary among these is the creation of new value in the form of products/service enhancements, additional wealth, and jobs in the economy. Start-up companies could also be assumed to be more dynamic and flexible which theoretically would make it easier for the company to incorporate BAM goals. Of course there is a trade off between the benefits of newness and the efficiencies and learning that a company gains as it develops. It makes sense that respondents seem to favor the benefits of maturity more for traditional missions organizations given that missions organizations do not create as much market value to offset early stage inefficiencies.
Implication: the relationship between a company’s development stage and “Provides access to many locations” may result from closed-access countries valuing existing companies more than entrepreneurial efforts. The established size and structure of a mature business may lessen the government’s fear of exploitation.
Size (7.4-6)
Implication: the preferences exhibited toward organization size highlight that size is proportional to perceived impact within a host country. However, the BAM movement strives to maintain a balance regarding size because of the perceived trade-off between size and ability to evangelize. The results suggest that there is a size at which it becomes more difficult for a BAM company to effectively evangelize. This belief (if validated) will greatly influence the goals set by the Business as Mission movement in terms of growth targets. Similarly, respondents may recognize that some developing nations or remote regions do not have the infrastructure needed to support larger companies, which tempers size preferences.
Geographic focus (7.7-9)
Implication: the results reinforce the central role that globalization plays in creating opportunities for Christians to further the kingdom through Business as Mission. The negative correlation between global focus and “Provides access to many locations” most likely is a consequence of reactions to the simplification of Business as Mission as a means for overcoming prohibitions against missionaries in closed countries.
[1] For all three attributes (development stage, size, and geographic focus), three questions were asked to gauge opinions on businesses (not explicitly BAM), missions organizations, and Business as Mission companies. Each question represented one opinion as superior to an alternative opinion and respondents were asked to rate the extent that they agreed/disagreed.
[2] The two primary differences between Business as Mission and micro-enterprise in view are size of operations (generally measured in revenue) and funding sources (micro-enterprise is typically donor dependent).
********************************************************
Did you enjoy this? Click here to purchase the full survey report. Enjoy instant access to the full survey report, including more in-depth analysis, charts, graphs and figures. Only $14.99. Purchase your copy today!
If you or your organization needs help with a Business as Mission strategy, I can help. To learn more about the services I can provide or to contact me please visit me HERE.
The following is another excerpt from the BAM Survey 2007 Report. The BAM Survey 2007 Report is an in-depth assessment of the state of the Business as Mission movement based on survey responses from 497 people in 38 countries. You can purchase an electronic copy of the BAM Survey 2007 Report for $14.99 here.
In order for Business as Mission objectives to drive the strategic management of BAM companies, the structure of a BAM company must align with those objectives. Analysis of the survey results suggests that correlations[1] exist between respondents’ perceptions of key elements of a BAM company (structural elements and management considerations) and perceptions of key BAM objectives.
Different strategies that integrate business activities with ministry efforts hold to different principles on how a business should operate. How each of these principles is manifest within a business is a subject of much debate. Core principles such as operating with integrity and honesty are universally accepted as important to Christians in business. However, research shows that three key considerations regarding structure (commercial function[2], licitness[3], and management oversight) are not universally accepted as vital elements of Business as Mission (Exhibit 5).

Exhibit 6 summarizes how perceptions of corporate structure as well as management considerations regarding oversight and sustainability correlate with the perceptions of the strategic objectives of the Business as Mission movement.

Corporate structure (6.1-2)
Management oversight (6.3-5)
Sustainability (6.6-8)
[2] Commercial function refers to the role a company plays in the marketplace, specifically the activities of providing goods and services and may involve financial, commercial, and industrial aspects. (Exhibit 5.1)
[3] Licitness refers to conformity to the applicable provisions of the laws of the countries of operation of a company. (Exhibit 5.2)
********************************************************
Did you enjoy this? Click here to purchase the full survey report. Enjoy instant access to the full survey report, including more in-depth analysis, charts, graphs and figures. Only $14.99. Purchase your copy today!