From software patents to patented sports bar fare, Andy Gross is taking the franchise restaurant business by the (Buffalo) horns.

No previous experience working in a restaurant, check. No previous ownership of a franchised business, check. Unfamiliar with new geographic region, check. Unaware of eventual natural disaster, check. Oh, and wife pregnant during relocation and startup, check.

If ever there were a list of when not to take the entrepreneurial leap, it was compiled by Andy Gross. That was six years ago. Now, Gross is working on another list — five Buffalo Wild Wings Grill & Bar locations up and running, and two more opening within a month, plus a recently completed expansion (adding 2,100 square feet to an existing 6,700). He has committed to a total of 12 locations, with the potential for 15 in a territory that stretches from Davenport to Daytona. In addition, he has signed on for a new concept, called Smashburger, intent on building up to 20 such restaurants in Central Florida. (The signature burger is smashed on a grill to seal in flavor.)

In the searing heat of the restaurant world, that's like jumping from the frying pan into the fire. Yet, for Gross, leaps of faith are becoming about as routine as whipping up an order of Grilled Chicken Buffalitos, one of the favorites on his menu.

And to think Gross was a software engineer whose life revolved around creating patents before all this craziness began. He began his original career 18 years ago in Arizona before moving in 1995 to Colorado, where he “worked lots of hours and did lots of traveling.” Mostly, he realized, he was doing all that work for somebody else.

No particular moment drove him to change — just the steady gnawing feeling that a brighter horizon beckoned than what he could see from his Denver office. So, with few preconceptions about what lay ahead, he began his search.

“We [he and wife, Laura] actually just started driving around and looking at things and going, ‘Would we want to do that?’”

Hitching his wagon to a casual-dining sports-themed eatery such as Buffalo Wild Wings was far from his initial thoughts. Although he certainly enjoyed a sports bar atmosphere well enough, smaller operations, like sub shops or ice cream parlors, seemed better fits. After he and Laura had looked around for a few weeks, though, his uncle, who had run several businesses, made the suggestion. Even better, he offered financial help. That prompted Gross to drive about 30 miles from his home, outside Denver, to see one of the restaurants firsthand. He left duly impressed: “I could hang out there, I thought. I could own this.”

The idea of (saucy) wings took flight.

That was in 2001. The next three years weren't an easy ride. First, upon negotiating to open Buffalo Wild Wings sites in Denver and completing the requisite financials — including having a minimum of $800,000 total net worth per restaurant unit — Gross received word that the Minneapolis-based franchisor had decided to open corporate-owned restaurants there. “They kind of threw us for a loop,” he recalls. Gross could walk away or explore sites elsewhere. Since he was already qualified financially, he chose the latter.

Then there were the questions of where and when. Regarding where, no “aha” moment, again, occurred to seal his fate — just ample sunshine, inviting neighborhoods and the enticement of Central Florida's demographics, which matched the franchise's youthful customer profile. Not coincidentally, the name of his Longwood-based company is Sunshine Restaurant Group Inc.

As for when, wife Laura held all the cards. Pregnant, she simply demanded that any relocation happen before her final trimester. “As much as anything, that drove my timeline to get here,” says Gross, who had flown to Orlando about eight times, looking for housing and restaurant sites. “She wanted our son [Ryan] to be born in our new house.”

Such are the types of cloaked details behind any entrepreneur's startup story.

And there was still another chapter. Call it Summer 2004, authored by Charley, Frances and Jeanne. The first two hurricanes hit while the first Buffalo Wild Wings restaurant was under construction on International Drive. The third hit the week after it opened, promptly closing it down. “We definitely had our struggles in the early days,” he says.

Gross, still only 39, can smile a bit more easily these days. Since opening that first restaurant in September 2004, his Sunshine group has exceeded industry and Buffalo Wild Wings franchise standards on numerous financial metrics. In the five-year period from late 2004 through 2009, annual sales increased from $2.7 million (2005) to $14.2 million. The employee count grew tenfold, from about 40 to about 400. And the five restaurants served more than 3.3 million guests.

Most notably, even in the deep recession of 2009, Sunshine showed sales growth of about 3 percent, compared to the Orlando-area chain restaurant store average of about minus-10 percent. Sunshine’s average unit volume was 16 percent higher than the chainwide average, with sales increasing during the year by 37 percent. Eighty employees were added, and construction commenced on the two new units, one in Kissimmee (10,500 square feet) and the other in Clermont (9,600 square feet). Also, during its third anniversary party last October, the Buffalo Wild Wings in Waterford Lakes had the seventh-highest daily sales ever for any restaurant in the 27-year history of the chain, which has 650-plus restaurants.

“My hat's off to him,” comments T. Michael Ansley, president and CEO of Diversified Restaurant Holdings Inc., which operates 16 Buffalo Wild Wings in the Tampa area and Michigan, with 22 more to build. “Everybody wants to retire and go open a franchise in Florida. He's been able to do it very successfully.”

Heady success, for sure. Yet, Gross isn't ready to anoint himself Mr. Restaurant. Instead, with his engineering roots, his recipe for success lies in analysis, assessment and execution. He isn't afraid to roll up his sleeves and dive into a batter of breaded wings — yes, he's done that during a Super Bowl. The preference, though, is to focus on employee procedures, the fine print (not necessarily on the menu) and other minute details.

At the same time, he acknowledges what he doesn't know and sees the benefits of having an open mind. That attitude, in fact, is what drew him to Buffalo Wild Wings. Upon his characteristic scrutiny, he became impressed with the backgrounds that the franchisor didn't have. “Basically, the entire executive team wasn’t restaurant people,” he says. “They knew they didn’t know restaurants. They understood their piece of it. They weren’t there to run a restaurant; they were there to run a restaurant business.”

What the franchisor did offer was support. And the eatery's lively concept didn't hurt, either.

Typical support encompasses everything from site selection and floor plans to preapproved suppliers and a restaurant-opening training package. Additionally, Buffalo Wild Wings’ startup and ongoing training programs teach franchisees and their staff about running a location, including the preparation of menu items; effective food service operations; hiring and personnel management; and marketing, promotions and public relations.

The restaurant concept, meanwhile, is all about casual dining, including finger foods, chicken dishes, salads, burgers and full-bar drinks, presented in an atmosphere that is highlighted by large-screen TVs and dozens of smaller monitors broadcasting sporting events, with a series of National Trivia Network consoles mixed in for entertainment. The alignment of tables and chairs allows customers to easily group together or isolate themselves as desired.

Picture a dressed-up college hangout with enough polish to attract patrons outside the typical male, ages 21 to 35, sports bar set. And the place is especially geared toward big sporting events. During February's Super Bowl, his five restaurants sold 75,000 wings (50,000 of which were bone-in), both dine in and take out.

“You can ride their success,” Gross says of good franchisors. “Obviously, put your own spin and your own flavor to your stores, and you can build the brand locally. But you have that large corporation, doing their job, helping you out.”

At a cost. Since the time when Gross needed $800,000 per unit, the price has edged upward. “They’re not cheap to do,” he concedes. “It’s not a little sub shop; it’s expensive.”

Money isn't the only consideration, advises Gross, ever the analyst, who graduated from Penn State in 1992 with a B.S. in computer engineering and first worked at IBM. “To me, being a franchise is just a piece of a whole big puzzle. You have to put your whole business plan together. If your business plan and what you’re trying to do makes sense to be part of a franchise, and your business plan is acceptable to [the franchisor], that’s when franchising makes sense. If your business plan makes more sense to do something on your own, then that’s the plan to follow.”

Gross has immersed himself in the franchise. He handles the day to day, as well as locating sites, negotiating leases, overseeing construction — and making “lots of wings.” “I like to be involved,” he offers. “I know what it’s like. I know what my people [his employees] go through; I respect it. It’s a lot of work.”

Not only is Gross part of the franchise, but in some instances he's helping to drive it. He is chairman of the Buffalo Wild Wings National Franchise Association and a national director of the Coalition of Franchisee Associations, along with serving on the board of directors of the Central Florida chapter of the Florida Restaurant Association. “I haven't [seen] the passion and enthusiasm from anybody like him in a long time,” comments Christy Williams, executive director of the National Association Management Group, which manages the Buffalo Wild Wings National Franchise Association. “People want to participate but just don't have the commitment to put in the time because of their business obligations.”

There is more to come, too. The franchise agreement with Smashburger calls for him to develop and operate 20 Smashburger “better burger” restaurant locations in Central Florida over the next four years. Three of them could be open by year end. Turning promoter, he says, “Once you try a Smashburger, you’ll understand what everybody is raving about.” Sprinkled across the country, Smashburger is the newest retail concept funded from the private equity and concept development firm Consumer Capital Partners, based in Denver.

Clearly, Gross isn't planning to slow down — maybe just relax a bit. And this time, there was an epiphany.

Near the end of last year, Gross left town to attend a board meeting of the Coalition of Franchisee Associations. He recalled a year earlier, when he continually had to monitor his restaurants. “I don’t like being surprised,” he notes. Not this time. No such “check in” was necessary. “I now believed that my team could run this,” he says.

“You get the right people in place. You keep them and you keep them motivated. That’s how you build a business.”

That moment came on the heels of a successful opening, in early 2009, of his Casselberry restaurant, which finished the year among the chain's top locations nationwide in sales volume. The pieces, even if maybe on wings and a prayer, had fallen into place.

Not bad for a software guy who sought something new, building from scratch in an unlikely setting.

Still sounding very much like an engineer, he explains that the operations of the business are what excite him. And he makes this confession: “It was never my idea to work in a restaurant.”

---

5 Franchisee Musts

1. Choose something to own that you are passionate about. As with any business, the franchise you choose will be a major portion of your life. It’s important to own a company you enjoy.
2. Look at franchises that other successful franchisees are looking at as well. Successful franchisees are successful for a reason — they have picked winners in the past. Follow their lead.
3. Examine detailed financials provided by both the franchisor and a few of the franchisees. A franchisor’s role is to sell franchises and thus will present the best possible situation. You can verify their pitch by examining a few of their franchisees.
4. Choose a franchise that has shown a track record of success. This should be a given, but many times a potential franchise owner will buy into a good sales pitch or something that sounds like a good idea.
5. Look at the assistance provided by the franchisor for training, marketing, operations and other items. A good franchise will have multiple programs to help its franchisees succeed.

With an innovative and never-be-complacent business philosophy, Tupperware continually evolves in the face of global change.

Over the years, many established companies have neglected to introduce change when their tried-and-true methods of doing business became ineffective. Failing to understand the need to evolve and instead sticking with obsolete strategies has led to unmitigated disaster for these organizations.

Think RCA or Montgomery Ward.

When Rick Goings became chair and CEO of Tupperware Brands Corp. in 1992, the company was headed down this slippery slope. Its headquarters in Orlando was up for sale and the year before had suffered $100 million in losses. The problems ran so deep he seriously questioned his judgment in taking over such a troubled operation. Goings asked himself how the mighty could have fallen so far. After all, Tupperware had been a direct-marketing and storage container giant for decades.

Starting in 1946 — when Earl Tupper introduced his innovative line of plastic home products and pioneered the direct-marketing strategy with the Tupperware Party — Tupperware grew to become a household name throughout America. With the onset of the post–World War II baby boom, women dedicated themselves to caring for their families. The “Tupperized” kitchen was born — a well-organized place that featured a variety of Tupper’s versatile, convenient containers.

Through the years, the company enjoyed great success because it had no competition and a built-in marketing force of stay-at-home moms who saw the party sales method as an appealing career. In the 1970s, though, things began to change. More typically, women got out of the house to work full time, and competitors like Rubbermaid started to cut into Tupperware’s market share by offering cheaper knockoff products.

That’s the challenge Goings faced upon his arrival.

“Every business model works until it stops working,” says Goings. “The old business model wasn’t working anymore, so we quickly had to change the corporate attitude from ‘Let’s pretend it’s still the 1950s’ to ‘Nothing lasts forever.’”

---

Global Approach

As a longtime global executive with Avon, Goings came to Tupperware with a keen understanding of why the world keeps changing and how external forces, such as new technologies and products along with the modernization of cultures, dictate that companies either evolve or die.

Tupperware needed a sustainable, competitive advantage to get itself back in the game. Goings realized the company could do this by differentiating its products, but it first had to contemporize them. Deciding that he wasn’t going to compete with Rubbermaid, he instead went upscale by introducing new product categories, including kitchen tools and gadgets, cookware, food-preparation items, cosmetics and microwave cooking technology.

“We also needed to create a new type of selling dynamic,” he adds. “The old Tupperware Party was designed in the 1950s, when the American family was a different entity. Today, our parties are more interactive and entertaining, but we’ve also expanded our direct-selling demographic to include emerging markets around the globe.”

More than anything else, this strategy has put Tupperware back on track.

Goings, a self-proclaimed globalist, began implementing this strategy in 1994. Today, 54 percent of the company’s sales come from places like China, Russia, India, Indonesia and South Africa. Sixteen years ago, Tupperware was an American company that limited its international reach to places such as Canada and Australia, because the people who lived there spoke English. Now, it’s a conglomerate that reaches nearly 100 markets across the world.

“Tupperware’s direct-selling business model allows it to expand into emerging markets with relative ease, and to update and refresh its product portfolio in developed markets on a regular basis to keep its distributor force energized,” says Douglas Lane, managing director of equity research for Jefferies & Co. in Boston. Lane has performed equity research coverage on Tupperware’s stock for the past seven years.

“Another unique feature is its ability to provide a healthy income opportunity to people in emerging markets, particularly women who may not otherwise have much of an opportunity to independently make a living,” he adds.

One of the reasons Tupperware was able to successfully integrate into these markets is the diversity of its management teams, whose members are similarly international. Having a diversified workforce gives the company the experience needed to decide which regions are best to target, Goings believes. The criteria: markets with limited retail infrastructure and limited earning opportunities for women. Calling it a “boots-on-the-ground approach,” Goings credits his management teams with knowing where to go.

On a recent trip to India, he learned that only 30 percent of women there are employed and that two-thirds of them are underemployed. “These women are looking for business [opportunity], and we’re providing it for them,” he says. “As she [the Indian woman] goes out and sells products, her confidence and influence grows. We’re not just selling products, but we’re changing lives one at a time.”

The strategy of taking an independent contractor who has no experience in direct marketing but who has a strong desire to establish a business, and providing that person with free training and the tools necessary to succeed, has enabled Tupperware to reach out to women around the world.

As Tupperware personnel interact with different cultures, they’re realizing that women, regardless of where they’re from, basically care about the same things. Friends, family and personal development all represent high priorities. Goings reflects on a speech he made in Mumbai, India about Tupperware’s mission, model and mindset: “It wasn’t rah-rah stuff. We were talking about the women they are and the women they want to become.”

---

Adapting to Cultures

One might ask how high-end products can sell well in emerging markets. Citizens of developing nations spend most of their money on food, clothing and shelter, explains Goings, so if the company can show people how to save money on food preservation, it becomes a logical priority for them.

Understanding cultures and adapting products to sell to those cultures is something Tupperware has mastered in recent years. In Latin America, for example, women spend 20 times more on beauty products than on any other Tupperware product line. As a result, the company expanded its product base to include a portfolio of beauty and cosmetics brands. Sales have been strong, driven by the continued strength of the Mexican, Central American and South American markets.

In India, a plastic container paired with a spoon has become a "masala keeper" for spices. In Korea, stain-resistant canisters are deemed perfect for kimchi fermentation. Larger boxes are promoted as safe, airtight "kimono keepers" in Japan. In Mexico, thermal “tortilla keepers” keep fresh flatbreads warm and moist. The company also diversified its product line to encompass cookbooks and baking products in France.

“We don’t change people’s eating habits,” says Goings. “We just create products that best complement cultural preferences.”

Not coincidentally, Tupperware now has more than 1.9 million independent consultants. And the company ranked No. 2 for the second consecutive year in the Household Products Category of Fortune’s recently released “World’s Most Admired Companies” list. Already boasting strong 2010 sales and profits, the company has been relatively untouched by the economic downturn, partly because most of its business comes from high-growth overseas markets while high unemployment has boosted its sales force, which is paid on commission.

“They’ve changed their corporate culture to reflect the environments in which they operate,” comments Ray Gilley, president of the Metro Orlando Economic Development Commission. “They’ve helped millions of people around the world become successful entrepreneurs; they’re a unique and fascinating company.”

---

Community Partner

The biggest piece of the puzzle for Tupperware over the past two decades has been its focus on people. The company mantra: “If we can recruit, develop and empower the best people, we will flourish as a company.” The idea is that together they can create the new strategies that give the company a sustainable competitive advantage and create a corporate culture that never allows a letup whether they have a good year or a bad one. “We have a warrior culture here,” acknowledges Goings. “We have a ‘Bring it on’ attitude. If the economy is bad, we’re committed to figuring out how we can work around it.”

This type of fighting spirit closely aligns with the company’s community service outlook. Big believers in civic involvement, Goings and other executives have developed a culture where people accomplish great things by their actions, not their words. Tupperware’s community is the world, so its community service is global.

“Tupperware is a very responsible corporate citizen,” says Gary Cain, president of Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida. “They’ve empowered women across the globe, and they take a real interest in a variety of women’s and children’s causes.”

Notably, while Tupperware has focused on the needs of children from less-advantaged circumstances, it has been involved locally with Boys & Girls Clubs. The company also conducts a vigorous United Way campaign and involves its employees in many issues of importance to the local community. “This dedication to community is based on the company’s commitment to personal growth and development,” adds Cain, “as well as a sincere interest in helping people achieve their dreams and aspirations.”

Tupperware’s reputation alone helps market the Central Florida region to other top businesses around the country, as well. “Tupperware has helped us with creativity and recruitment efforts,” says Gilley. “Company representatives relate their experiences in Orlando to others, and they talk about the opportunities that exist here. For them to be engaged like this helps us showcase the region as a global player, and we’re very appreciative of that.”

Indeed, just as Earl Tupper’s early plastic products revolutionized food storage and preparation, today’s Tupperware products continue to enhance lifestyles. And, while the world will continue to change, it’s apparent that Tupperware will continue to evolve right along with it, using a modern approach to marketing and global outreach to achieve company goals.

“Great businesses use successful formulas,” says Goings, “and they give people the tools they need to do well regardless of experience or education.” Or change.

Dawn Gluskin gave birth to a baby girl. Seven months later, she founded SolTec Electronics. Today, clients rely on her to deliver what many competitors can't even find.

 

Dawn Gluskin has always been a focused, determined, career-minded individual. Yet, the truly defining moment in her professional life actually occurred two years ago, when at the age 31, she gave birth to her daughter, Calista, an experience that changed her perception of the way things ought to be. And out of that cathartic moment a wildly successful entrepreneur emerged.

With her maternity leave all planned out, Gluskin took a few weeks off from her job and then started working part time from home to take care of both her work and her parental responsibilities. She worked as much as she possibly could and delegated any extra tasks to some of her co-workers. Her employers, entrepreneurs in the semiconductor industry, were totally agreeable to this arrangement, they said, as long as she held up her end of the bargain. They were totally agreeable, that is, until the plan actually was put into place.

As timing would have it, Calista was born right at the start of the current economic downturn. As Gluskin’s employers started feeling the crunch and saw revenues declining, they put enormous pressure on Dawn to get back to work and produce out of the office. You couldn’t blame them: She was one of their top sales reps, and they needed her back to help their bottom line. She was uneasy, though, due to feelings stemming from her core instincts: She had just given birth to a tiny baby girl who needed her mother, and she was determined to spend time with her, knowing she wouldn’t be her little baby forever. She didn’t want to miss out on a cherished life experience “to go right back to making somebody else a bunch of money!”

On the other hand, she felt it could affect her career if she didn’t get back in the saddle as her bosses wanted. It was a classic dilemma, and she was torn.

In the end, she felt so inspired and motivated by the experience of becoming a mother that she immediately soured on the idea of working for others and playing by their rules. She became weary of being a gross-profit statistic on somebody else’s spreadsheet. Life, she now believed, was worth more than that.

Having dabbled in, and thoroughly enjoyed, some entrepreneurial music promotion and sales adventures earlier in her career, Gluskin knew what she wanted to do and immediately began writing a business plan to carve out her own niche in the electronics sector. Approximately seven months after Calista was born, her mother officially turned in her resignation and SolTec Electronics was born, in her living room, with the gracious help of her mother, who took on the role of nanny.

The rest, as they say, is history.

SolTec Electronics, headquartered in Melbourne, is an independent distributor of obsolete and hard-to-find electronic components. By definition, an electronic component is a basic electronic element usually packaged with two or more connecting leads or metallic pads. Components are normally connected by soldering them to a printed circuit board to create an electronic circuit with a particular function (e.g., an amplifier, radio receiver or oscillator). Components can be packaged singly (resistor, capacitor, transistor, diode, etc.) or in complex groups as integrated circuits.

In today’s fast-paced supply chain markets, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) and electronic manufacturing services (EMSs) must keep their production lines up and running. This means that waiting long periods to get components and redesigning out obsolete components aren't valid options for them. Enter SolTec Electronics— an independent distributor that offers strategic procurement solutions to those electronic component issues.

Under Gluskin’s leadership, the company has a 2,500-square-foot office and warehouse facility, seven employees and a stellar reputation among clients and peers. The company is also on track to secure $1.5 million in revenue by the end of this year.

“I understood the need for these services,” says Gluskin, who has been in sales and marketing since she was age 18. “There are a lot of high-tech companies in this region, and they’re constantly looking for components. So this was a perfect place to start this type of operation.”

It may have been a good place to open shop, but the risks of starting a new business still loomed large, even for Gluskin and her unbridled entrepreneurial spirit. Although a successful sales rep in the industry, she had no clue how to open and run a business. Thus, learning the entire operation was imperative to her success.

Raising capital also represented a daunting challenge. It was impossible to get a bank loan, so she used her entire 401(k). Her husband, Dave, who is the company’s vice president of operations, also went for broke. Together, they used their entire savings and maxed out their credit cards to get the operation off the ground. “I guess I believe in the no-risk, no-reward axiom,” she says, “but the truth is it was very scary, especially with a newborn.”

It was a calculated risk, and one that Gluskin was willing to take because she recognized her strengths. She felt confident her sales background was a sufficient platform for moving forward and making SolTec a success. The unlimited supply of potential clients also was something that was too provocative to overlook. Reality dictates that components on circuit boards eventually become obsolete or defective, and when these parts need to be replaced, it’s often very difficult to find them. For the OEMs and EMSs, buying new replacement parts is not an option because redesigns are too time consuming, so unless the older parts are secured, entire production lines can go down and products don’t get to market.

Gluskin understands this, and she continues to work hard to establish strong relationships with vendors throughout the world to be able to find any component a client might need. With her global network of suppliers, she can find a part “as long as it exists.” If the part doesn’t exist, she offers alternate solutions. She also works with affiliate companies to offer value-added services to clients such as electrical testing, product programming, counterfeit detection and compliance testing.

To ensure delivery of a component, she often buys inventory of canceled product lines to stock in the warehouse in case a client needs a discontinued part. Indexed on Google, SolTec receives lists of everything various vendors have in stock, and those lists are uploaded and published on the SolTec Web site. If a buyer is looking for a part number, he or she can type it into this index and SolTec will come up.

“Our customers are usually repeat customers, which is good,” comments Gluskin. “We have competitors, but some don’t have the same quality standards or aren’t good with customer service. We try to set ourselves apart by being prompt and delivering what we say we’re going to deliver. This seems simple, but it’s so important for any business. Customer service is everything.”

Clients would agree.

“Dawn is the best in the business,” says Daryl Grimes, product manager for Smart Start Inc. in Irving, Tex. “She’s very open and upfront, and it’s easy to do business with her because you know what you’re getting is her very best effort.”

Smart Start produces ignition interlock products, which are essentially breath alcohol analyzers that keep drivers with DWIs/DUIs from operating vehicles if their breath alcohol level is over a preset level. The devices provide a cost-effective alternative to jail or license suspension and allow defenders to keep driving. “It’s a very unique product,” explains Grimes, “so we need to find very particular components in a timely manner in order to keep our product line going. We use many overseas distributors, and lead times with them tend to be very long. So we call on Dawn to go out and find the parts from alternative channels, and she always comes through.”

Smart Start is a midrange company competing with big boys like Motorola and Sony for these materials, and distributors tend to favor the bigger companies when it comes to putting their needs first. “Having a broker who can get you parts quickly and cheaply is imperative for us,” says Grimes. “She’s amazing, and if she can’t find it, she comes back with 12 other options for us.”

Integrity is an important trait in the electronic component arena as counterfeit parts are prevalent, and installing them can compromise a product. Quality is compromised and reputations sullied if it’s discovered that a manufacturer used lesser-quality components. “We depend on our vendors to tell us the truth about their parts, and Dawn would never supply counterfeit parts,” Grimes continues. “She’ll tell us if she doesn’t have a good feeling about an overseas source, and she’ll test the parts as an added service to make sure they’re genuine.”

Ultrablend LLC provides paint dispensers and mixers for companies like Home Depot and Benjamin Moore. They’re precise machines that require constant maintenance. Leslie Hoehne is an Ultrablend quality engineer who deals firsthand with the electronic components that make these machines work. “We need very specific parts, and sometimes these parts are hard to secure in a timely manner,” she says. “To add to this, some of our machines are 30 years old, which makes it hard to find parts at all sometimes.”

Hoehne met Gluskin years ago when she was a buyer for another company. She needed specific parts back then as well, so Gluskin would give her a list of vendors who had the parts at decent prices. They became fast friends and are still good friends. “Dawn is very detail-oriented, which is a must in this business,” says Hoehne. “She’s so thorough she even catches mistakes in my purchase orders, and the truth is, to this day, Dawn can find parts nobody else can find. She’s like a bloodhound, and she finds it cheap.”

As a testament to Gluskin’s hard work and dedication, SolTec Electronics was selected as one of 10 women-owned businesses that won the Make Mine a Million Dollar Business competition sponsored by Count Me In, a nonprofit organization that encourages and supports women entrepreneurs. The competition is for women who own companies that have the greatest potential of reaching $1 million in revenues for the year. Gluskin had to give a three-minute elevator pitch in front of 600 people at the most recent Women’s Business Summit in Houston as part of the final selection process. True to form, Gluskin nailed her pitch and was awarded a business/life coach for a year and a line of credit with American Express OPEN.

The future is bright for SolTec Electronics, which is music to the ears of Gluskin’s clients, all of whom depend mightily on her to get the job done. In light of her success, she’s an ardent believer that if you dig deep inside, believe in yourself and go for it, you will succeed.

“That precious little girl of mine has been such a source of inspiration and motivation,” she concludes. “I want to provide for her future but also want to be a positive role model as a woman who can do and be anything.”

Gluskin's 6 Musts:

1. “What do most all successful businesses have in common? A well-thought out, written business plan. Especially when you are getting ready to start a new business, it is such a great exercise to do a formal business plan covering all aspects from finances to sales and marketing to daily operations. You will learn so much about your business going through this formal process. The Small Business Administration Web site, www.sba.gov, has some great resources on writing a business plan.”
2. “Cash is the oxygen to a business. Make sure you don’t run out. It takes a while to start turning profits in a new business, so make sure you have enough money tucked away to pay your bills until the cash starts coming in. Some business owners don’t pay themselves at all the first year or even longer. Also, make sure you have a backup plan when capital starts running low. Most traditional banks won’t even consider lending to a business until [it is] at least three years old. In the meantime, turn to personal savings and retirement funds, credit cards, home equity loans, or friends and family to buy into your dream. And, when you are doing your budgeting, make sure you factor in some extra padding for any unforeseen expenses that might come up.”
3. “You must have passion. Being the ‘boss’ is not all glitz and glamour. You must love what you do. There will be long hours, stressful circumstances that arise and all sorts of obstacles to hurdle while building your dream. When all else fails, this passion deep inside of you is the only thing that will get you through it. And, through it all, you might just even have a smile on your face.”
4. “Think [outside] the box. A successful businessperson has to be able to think on [his or her] feet and be open to new ideas. Sometimes plan A or B might not turn out exactly as you planned, but don’t give up. The most successful businesses learn to adapt, even in the toughest times. Keep thinking creatively. Plan C or D might just be the ones that take you to the next level.”
5. “Use social media. If you are not on Twitter and Facebook, you are missing out on many great networking opportunities as well as potential clients looking to buy from you. These are free marketing tools that, with a little creativity and some manpower, you can [use to] really generate some buzz for your business. Even if social media is not your cup of tea, you should at least look into hiring a college intern to help you get started. What do you have to lose?”
6. “Have a great support group around you. Get your friends and family on board with what you are doing. They will be there to congratulate you when things are going great, or even to give you a shoulder to cry on if things are going a little rough. In addition to that, find groups of like-minded businesspeople that you can network and exchange ideas with. I think women really have an advantage in this realm because there are so many great organizations for women business owners out there. Count Me In [www.makemineamillion.org] is the nonprofit organization that sponsors the M3 program [from which I received an award]. And, Big Fish Nation [www.bigfishnation.com], which I am also a part of, is a yearlong business development [program] for women entrepreneurs who dare to soar. The advice, support and encouragement I have received from these groups has really helped push me along to where I am today. There are tons of other organizations out there as well. Get to Googling with your particular interests in mind to find the perfect one for you.”

 

Harold Mills isn't merely setting the pace as a CEO. He's also changing rules in the race while taking innovation to new lengths.

Harold Mills was sprinting on the corporate America fast track to CEO stardom.

That’s what happens when you jump out of the gates with an MBA from Harvard Business School while accelerating through management training at General Electric and leading expansion of an emerging tech business into 37 states at Ameritech (now AT &T). All as a relative yearling. Read more

The writing is on the chalkboard. Wanted: scientists, technicians, engineers and mathematicians.

Jim Jardon was able to build a company virtually from scratch. In 1990, he founded JHT Inc., which began as a small business that developed training programs for the Department of Defense and affiliated agencies. Since that time, JHT steadily has expanded services and grown from its Orlando roots to reach 30 states. Read more

One solar step at a time, Robert Reynolds and Solis Energy can help light the way for aspiring entrepreneurs everywhere.

Robert Reynolds readily concedes he once knew little about solar energy. So he went to school, almost literally.

Reynolds had agreed to team with his teenage son on a summer project that involved creating a solar unit to generate power in their home’s Florida room. Reynolds bought the requisite solar panels and batteries. He Googled and asked business associates. And he goofed up, a lot. Read more

While the debate over reform continues, an analysis of key economic factors reveals fractures, strains and general weakness. The diagnosis: no easy Rx but maybe a glimmer of hope.

As our leaders in Washington look to overhaul our healthcare system, it’s clear the challenge they face is daunting. That is, if you want to call increasing coverage, containing (and ideally reducing) costs and improving the overall quality of care daunting. Yet, when you hear the politicians and pundits debate and spin the issue, their arguments all too often have the substance and efficacy of my teenage sons’ Yankees/Red Sox debates.

Still, something must be done. The cost of healthcare nationwide is on an inexorable, and unsustainable, rise. So, in an effort to fight through some of the noise, it may be worth investigating some of the main economic factors that frame the healthcare debate.

---

Big Price Tag

Healthcare expenditures account for roughly one of every six dollars spent in this country. This means that more than 16 percent of the money spent in our economy goes for services that, all things being equal, people would rather not buy. This proportion is roughly twice that of the rest of the developed world. A claim can be made that nothing is as important as health, so paying more for better care is a worthwhile expense. And, arguably, the best healthcare in the world is available in the United States. At the same time, in the aggregate, our system isn’t the best performer. Care is uneven at best. By many metrics, our healthcare system is actually less effective than those of other countries. For example, looking at infant mortality, survival rates after heart surgery and life expectancy (a pretty big metric), the United States is below the average of the industrialized world.

Thus, as a nation, we pay more for substandard service.

---

Why So Much?

Our current healthcare architecture creates unique drivers that contribute to the spiraling costs. Domestically, healthcare is paid largely through employer-provided, private health insurance. This is a distinctly American phenomenon. In the rest of the industrialized world, the government picks up the bulk of the healthcare tab. As it happens, there was no grand design in implementing our system. It developed from World War II–era wage controls, as firms were compelled to offer benefits in lieu of pay raises to retain and attract employees. Through the years, tweaks to the tax code have solidified this arrangement.

From an economic standpoint, the system has numerous shortcomings. When workers depend on their employer for health insurance, labor mobility is suppressed as many are deterred from seeking new job opportunities, ultimately resulting in a less productive, more stagnant workforce. In addition, the tax deductibility of employer-provided insurance premiums distorts the true cost of the service. Much as the tax code drives up the cost of housing through mortgage interest deductions or the prices at upscale steakhouses get inflated through the deductibility of business dinners, the ability of business to write off health insurance premiums results in the ramping up of prices. An economically unfair twist is that those who pay for their own insurance are, therefore, forced to pay artificially high premiums yet receive no tax break. And when employer-provided health coverage premiums rise, wages get depressed.

Alas, most of these cost drivers are well concealed, a situation that economists would find to be other than ideal.

Another factor affecting cost is the industry compensation structure. Doctors are paid on a fee-for-service basis. As such, they have a clear financial incentive to prescribe numerous, often expensive and sometimes unnecessary procedures. Certainly, this isn’t always the case, and quite often the doctor recommending treatment doesn’t personally benefit. But, generally speaking, this structure inevitably leads to extra services and higher cost of care.

When the insurance company picks up the tab, patients typically pay only a small amount out of pocket. Therefore, they have no real incentive to question, or limit, the recommended services. In addition, since bills are sent directly to the insurance company, most patients have no idea how much their care costs. Inevitably, they’ll consume more than they would otherwise. It’s the buffet effect. Diners at an all-you-can-eat buffet eat more than they do in a restaurant where they have to order each course from a menu. Patients in the United States consume more medical service than their counterparts elsewhere in the developed world. And the typical insurance plan, with its small copay, is the medical buffet.

The insurance industry is often able to pass along these elevated costs via the higher premiums they charge to businesses. Since the premiums are deductible, firms are less likely to fully scrutinize the costs. Consequently, the tax code often makes business, the primary consumer of health insurance, a poor consumer, far too willing to pay full retail for the service.

To sum up, we have a supplier (the doctor) with a distinct financial interest in offering numerous and often excessively premium services, an end user (the patient) who has no real incentive to limit consumption of these services and a buyer (the business) not particularly inclined to seek out competitive pricing to drive down costs.

It’s no wonder that costs spiral out of control.

---

More Cost Factors

Another cost driver is the depressing, and rising, share of the population that has no health coverage. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 46 million people in this country are uninsured. One in four Floridians has no coverage. Many of these people are young and healthy and choose not to obtain coverage — which, given the audacity of youth, is not a surprising choice. (Young people, you should at least get catastrophic coverage!)

Most uninsured people, though, don’t have the means to pay high private insurance premiums. Some, the very impoverished, qualify for Medicaid. A huge swath of the populace, though, is at an income level where paying $12,680 per year for healthcare (the average cost per U.S. family in 2008) is just not feasible. All too often, they face this decision: food and shelter, on the one hand, or go to the doctor, on the other.

In reality, they are covered by society, just not efficiently. The emergency room all too often becomes a well-care facility for the uninsured, and properly, in my view, hospitals do not turn away the sick that show up at the doorstep. But there’s a price to be paid in this scenario.

Hospitals, doctors and whoever else cares for the uninsured ultimately have to pass on the cost of that care to their paying customers. And, typically, by the time an uninsured person gets to the doctor or emergency room, the problem, and the bill, have mushroomed far beyond what they would have been if treatment had been provided earlier. This stealth cost is considerable, and it tends to feed on itself. As costs rise, many of those paying their own insurance, as well as many small businesses, are forced out of the private health system, swelling the ranks of the uninsured. Increasing numbers of uninsured patients show up at the hospital, and the cost of care gets spread across a smaller base of paying customers, which further drives up the price of insurance. As the ranks of the unemployed swell and more and more people lose health coverage, which we’re experiencing in the current economy, this effect gets exacerbated.

The cost of malpractice insurance is also a significant driver. Doctors and hospitals pay a staggering amount to insure against liability. We’ve all heard of some of the outsized monetary awards handed down by juries, many of which seem to defy economic logic. The threat of malpractice suits naturally (and understandably) causes doctors to practice defensive medicine. To shield themselves from potential jury scrutiny, they’re inclined to recommend extra testing, extra medication — extra everything — ultimately overdoctoring many cases. This amounts to a second incentive for doctors to recommend additional care.

---

Pain Prescriptions

So, we now have something of a diagnosis. But what is the Rx? One area to pursue is an emphasis on preventive medicine.

Healthy people consume less healthcare than sick ones. Three-fourths of costs in the system result from four conditions: cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and obesity. Much of this is preventable. Many companies have made efforts to rein in their healthcare expenses through implementation of “preventive maintenance” programs for their employees, giving them incentives to lose weight, to stop smoking and to exercise. These efforts have significantly reduced these companies’ healthcare costs. Some form of national rollout of this idea appears to be in order.

The structure of compensation for healthcare providers can be addressed. Clearly, the fee-for-service model creates perverse incentives and results in excessive treatment. Most doctors are not paid a fixed salary, and even fewer are rewarded for performance. Perhaps a system should be instituted of paying doctors a fixed salary (and I’d argue they deserve a handsome wage because we need the best minds to be attracted to the field) along with bonuses based on performance metrics. From an economic perspective, this would align their financial interests less with volume of service while maintaining a focus on quality of care.

Another obvious target in combating runaway costs is a serious effort at tort reform. It’s encouraging that the federal government has shown a willingness to address reform in malpractice lawsuits. If a cap on awards could be implemented, particularly the amount granted for pain and suffering (this amount is, by nature, completely subjective and, as a result, awards are very unpredictable), the costs of malpractice liability coverage could be reduced. At present, roughly half of malpractice awards go to lawyers and overhead costs. Malpractice suits serve a legitimate purpose, but as currently employed, they’re a huge drain on the system.

Opportunities exist in technology that could reduce costs. One proposal is a national patient database, which would introduce significant efficiencies into the overall system. Countless hours are wasted on redundantly providing basic medical history to multiple caregivers. Why can get a complete diagnostic history on a used car from CarMax, but I have to update the same information every time I visit a new doctor? Implementing this database would require a significant upfront investment, but eventually it would save patients’ and doctors’ time and money, as well as reduce numerous errors and omissions. (As an additional benefit, fewer errors would result, one would think, in fewer malpractice suits.)

Technology also could be used to conduct studies to determine the most effective methods of treatment for many conditions. This information could then be more efficiently disseminated throughout the entire medical industry.

---

Taking Control

Our current model, relying primarily on private health insurance, has fundamental flaws. When you think about it, isn’t there an over-reliance on using insurance for healthcare? Is there any other service in the economy where insurance is utilized to pay for virtually every expense? Shouldn’t insurance be purchased for large, catastrophic healthcare expenses, and more routine care be paid out of pocket? But perhaps that’s a discussion for another day.

Private insurance companies have a duty to their shareholders to maximize profit. To that end, their mandate is to maximize premiums and minimize claims. They shouldn’t be faulted for that; that’s what a free market is all about. But there exists no economic model by which a private insurance company will choose to cover a person with a pre-existing condition and no realistic ability to pay the premium. Economically speaking, with our current private structure, a reasonable percentage of the population is uninsurable.

Addressing this dilemma brings us to the most controversial debate: the introduction of some sort of public healthcare option to help provide universal coverage. What eventually comes through the legislative process, particularly with respect to this issue, is anyone’s guess. Those opposed to a public option argue that any sort of government competition will eventually crowd out the private insurance industry. A tangent to that viewpoint is that the government generally mismanages most of its functions. This argument seems a bit inconsistent: Why is it that the government, which some people contend can’t run anything, is suddenly going to drive private insurance out business?

Devising a public health plan that accomplishes the goals of increasing coverage, driving down costs and preserving the innovation that comes from private industry is a heck of a challenge. As proposed by the Administration, the public option is meant to be just that, an option. It would provide basic and catastrophic care to a wide swath of the population. Those with private health insurance could keep it. Proponents claim that the government, through economies of scale, can drive down many of the costs in the system, ultimately reducing the cost of private insurance. Opponents claim that this unfair competitive advantage will drive out the private insurers, eventually leading to greater costs and substandard care.

A popular, and certainly legitimate, fear of a public option is that it will produce a sclerotic system in which important decisions are made by bureaucrats. That said, anyone who has had the pleasure of wading through the Byzantine process of dealing with the claims department of a private insurer knows that sclerosis is not confined to government bureaucracies. Critical medical decisions are currently being made by bureaucrats, but they’re just not in Washington.

---

The Prognosis

The cost of healthcare is an issue that has been at the forefront of the nation’s attention seemingly forever. Essentially, nothing has been done, and the situation has only gotten worse. Clearly, our current healthcare structure does not allow free market principles to work. And, in reality, healthcare in America is not a true free market enterprise. Free markets work when there is choice, accountability, competition and transparent pricing. Our current system fails in those regards.

The privately uninsurable is one hurdle for our private insurance–based system. Another is the nature of the industry. In most businesses, consumers will shop for better value alternatives, shopping at Wal-Mart for some goods rather than at Macy’s. Yet, when it comes to healthcare, there’s very little market information and transparency. A higher-priced doctor sends a clear market signal, inferring superior quality. That may or may not be the case, but who’s going to choose the cheaper alternative when it comes to their health? In my view, private industry is not ideal for every enterprise. The military is one example. Perhaps a solely private health industry is not the proper solution, either.

The idea of changing something as vital as healthcare is understandably frightening. But the reality is that our current system, in many ways, is just not working. In my view, doing nothing is untenable. Any argument against a specific proposal should not just oppose but should also offer a better alternative. Sacrifices will need to be made throughout the system, from the patient on up. We will not get something for nothing. A drastic solution is required.

Unfortunately, it appeared in early December that any bill that ultimately makes it to the President’s desk, if any bill actually does, will not fundamentally change the economic inefficiencies of our uniquely American healthcare system. Lobbyists for the drug companies, insurers, device makers, hospitals and doctors have effectively deflected any big systemic changes from being incorporated into the proposed legislation. The dream of a complete overhaul, in which an efficient economic model is applied to the entire industry, is just not realistic.

So, I’m reasonably certain that our friends in Our Nation’s Capital will not devise a perfect, unassailable remedy. There’s no black-and-white answer, only gray.

But a demographic time bomb lurks just around the corner, as the baby boomer generation races toward retirement. As Peter Orszag, director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, puts it: “The ‘long term’ keeps getting closer and closer.”

I, for one, am tired of having this issue come up every election cycle, only to see nothing change. In fact, the economics only get worse. Hopefully, the dire circumstances will force action, ideally with an effective, thoughtful, nonpartisan compromise. Hopefully, this time, our elected officials will have the wherewithal to make the really tough choices. Hopefully, they can devise a reasonable system that dramatically increases the coverage universe and reins in the spiraling costs, but retains the free market principles that drive innovation and improved care.

We need to have hope, right?

Craig Gile, formerly a managing director at Citigroup, is a 12-year veteran of the banking and finance industry.

A look back, a look ahead.

Unemployment under 3 percent and a surge in new jobs and population as people sought to experience the economic boom — that was Orlando in 2006. The housing boom peaked later that year, and the economy began to slow. Fewer jobs were being created and unemployment rose slightly, but all was still OK.

Then the boom turned to bust, followed by a crash. Read more

Locals know that the City Beautiful also is the City Entrepreneurial. So, what does the rest of the world think? And how did we become such a fertile breeding ground for startups in the first place?

by Sarah Sekula

Zappos!

A zippy little word, indeed, and a worldwide phenomenon for the apparel and footwear obsessed.

For the ranks of the uninitiated, it’s a nontraditional kind of company — inspired by the Spanish word for shoes, zapatos. Consumers choose from a vast selection of products ranging from Manolo Blahniks to high-tech baby joggers to aviator-framed sunglasses. Read more

Despite the global economic downturn, the popularity of organic foods has more than maintained its roots. The challenge now is keeping up with sprouting demand.

Hop off the Washington, D.C., Metro at the Smithsonian stop and head toward the corner of 12th Street and Jefferson Drive. There, on the National Mall you’ll find the “People’s Garden.” Jam-packed with hordes of organic romaine lettuce, vibrant arugula and jalapenos (plus a handful of bats serving as natural pest eliminators), it’s a six-acre beacon of the sustainable agriculture movement.

Read more

Next Page »