Knowing your limits

There is always this tug of war between those who would prefer to work within their limits and those who would try to push the envelope. When it comes to the latter, if they succeed they will be lauded as bold pioneers. If they fail, they will be castigated for being rash fools. And the former? Whether they are playing it safe or being sticks in the mud...THAT decision will depend on their success as well. Like, it WAS playing it safe to stick to film photography as a main-stay business but it was not safe for Kodak, was it?

Tiru is advocating the staid play it safe school of thought here...or is he?

Udaiththam valiyariyaar ookkaththin ookki idaikkan murindhaar palar - Tirukkural

Many have fallen because they their enthusiasm made them run ahead of their capabilities - Loose Translation

Tiru is asking you assess your capabilities and plan for what is possible. Which IS conservative advice, yes, but is not exactly a blueprint for sticking in the mud.

The first thing that you should understand is that it is QUITE possible to be rash even when you are sticking in the mud. AND equally as possible to plan conservatively when your business is innovation. Like, a grocery store can overextend itself by trying to become a mall by borrowing hugely. AND a start-up can try being frugal with its finances even while operating at the cutting edge of technology.

In other words, the fact that you are taking a risk by trying to develop a business in an, as yet, unproven area is not a license to splurge capital on huge salaries and plush offices. Fiscal prudence does not mean that you stint on research...but that you squeeze every rupee till it squeaks. Yes, it could well mean concentrating initial efforts on one line of innovation instead of splurging it on various experiments that peter out.

In like terms, just because a business is being conservative in its core areas does not mean that ANY expenditure that they make is necessarily conservative. If such were indeed the case, such companies would only die of technological obsolescence and not because of fiscal imprudence. Well...the commercial landscape is littered with examples to the contrary.

So, yes, when someone advices prudence, it is an idiot whose hackles will be raised even as he screams, "I am a risk-taker!" There ARE such risk-takers - in casinos and dangerous sports and the like - but those are not the ones that the world of commerce chooses to laud.

In general, the practical world prefers those who take calculated risks. AND the foremost calculation you need to make is about the limits of your capabilities.