In certain sectors, SMBs have the advantage of navigating local regulations more easily, which can put larger, organized players at a disadvantage.
Wholesale markets often operate in cramped, unsafe buildings, avoiding the higher costs associated with adhering to safety norms.
Street vendors and small footpath shops typically avoid rental expenses, although they might offer small “payments” to authorities to secure prime spots.
Many pharmacies in India sell medicines without mandating prescriptions, a practice that is too risky for a scaled online pharmacy.
Middlemen in the agricultural supply chain often overload trucks beyond permissible limits and are involved in other practices organized players cannot afford to engage in. Startups in this space have realized the advantages these unorganized players have. Few are pivoting to create products & services to support these middlemen rather than competing head-on with them.
In the above cases, small businesses reduce costs through practices that local authorities may overlook whereas the same activities would get scrutinized (by media, competitors etc) if attempted by larger companies. This flexibility often allows SMBs in those sectors to remain more competitive and viable.
On the flip side, SMBs face regulatory disadvantages as well. Unlike larger companies, their associations often lack the influence to shape regulations in their favour. Additionally, small businesses can be acted upon swiftly, whereas authorities must weigh various factors, such as the impact on employees, creditors etc before acting upon a larger firm.
When considering entering a fragmented industry, it’s crucial for startups to carefully evaluate these less obvious advantages that SMBs possess. Sometimes, the cost of competing with them outweighs the potential benefits.
What examples have you observed of SMBs successfully navigating local regulations?
Link to next post in this series SMB #3
Link to previous post in this series SMB #1
