Growing A Company That Doesn’t Grow

“Customers really don’t care if you’re profitable” – Paul Jarvis

The heart of Chapter 4 lies in Jarvis’s reminder that for companies of one, challenging the idea of constant growth, or choosing not to scale, does not mean the company remains stagnant or is resistant to change (p. 68). This distinction reframes what it means to evolve as a business. Growth does now always have to mean bigger offices, more employees, more investors, or expanded markets. Sometimes, it simply means you become better at what you already do.

In this chapter, Jarvis (2019) explores four common reasons why companies feel compelled to grow: inflation, investors, churn, and ego. While inflation and customer churn1 can be practical considerations, the pressure from investors and ego often leads to unsustainable practices. Investors typically demand rapid growth and high returns, which can force companies to compromise their values or overextend their capabilities (p.62-63). Ego, perhaps the most dangerous reason of all, can push founders to chase vanity metrics—more customers, bigger teams, higher revenues—without considering whether such growth actually improves the business or its offerings (p. 63-64). To counter this mindset, Jarvis emphasizes that customers do not care about your profit margins or company size; what they care about is whether your product or service makes a meaningful difference in their lives (p. 65). A business can be highly profitable on paper, but if it fails to serve its customers in a way that is relevant and impactful, that profitability will not last. Customers will not remain loyal out of sympathy for a company’s bottom line and will leave the moment the product or service no longer meets their needs.

Real success lies not in appearing successful but in continuously delivering value to your customers. This emphasis on value naturally leads to a critical business strategy: focusing on the customers you already have (p. 61). By prioritizing customer retention, businesses can develop stronger, more authentic relationships with their customers, which creates advocates who spread the word naturally and credibly (p. 61).

But I think Jarvis fails to fully acknowledge that, in some business models, acquiring new customers, while riskier, can be a strategic move with the potential for higher returns if executed successfully.

My previous employer in the property management field was far more focused on acquiring new tenants than on retaining current ones. The belief was that it was easier to charge higher rent to new tenants than to gradually raise rent for existing ones. However, in practice, this approach often backfired. It was rare for a lease to be renewed, and the cost of turnover (repainting, repairing flooring, marketing and showing units, and preparing rentals for new occupants) frequently ate up any potential profit that would have been realized from the increased rent.

While I understand the desire to aggressively increase rent prices, it became clear to me that retaining tenants could be more financially beneficial in the long term. Beyond the direct costs of tenant turnover, there were also indirect consequences, such as the disruption of cash flow from extended vacancies, tenants’ inability to pay the full rent amount on time, and the loss of community stability. Friends often moved with friends, so the loss of one tenant often resulted in the loss of several. If the company had taken a closer look at its customer acquisition costs, I believe it would have seen the financial gain that would have come from focusing on retention.

That said, it is also very important to note that attracting new tenants (or customers for your company) is often a higher-risk, higher-reward strategy. My employer and I had different visions for the company, and that shaped our perspectives and risk tolerance. He prioritized immediate cash flow needs and aimed to show high rents on paper in order to refinance properties to secure funding for future investments. I, on the other hand, focused on long-term stability and sustainable profitability. For me, success meant seeing more black than red in the company’s finances. For him, he just needed to show the rent potential and not the actual rents coming in. This example highlights a valuable takeaway that I wanted Jarvis to mention in this chapter: your goals will ultimately determine which strategy is best for you and your business.

But regardless of your strategy, it is important that we move away from having solely transactional relationships with our customers. When a business is only focused on selling more to more people, it risks losing the human connection that fosters loyalty and trust (p. 65). However, by taking the time to truly understand your customers’ needs and helping them succeed, you build a foundation for long-term stability and profitability. As Jarvis states, “customer success is the cornerstone of a profitable company of one” (p. 65). This philosophy turns the business model on its head and changes the way success is measured; not by how much you sell but by how well you serve.

Ultimately, this chapter serves as a call to action for entrepreneurs and small business owners to rethink what success looks like. Instead of blindly pursuing scale, Jarvis encourages readers to refine, adapt, and focus on what truly matters: building a business that serves its customers well. Growth, in this sense, is not about expansion and chasing after more; it is about improving what you do and the relationship you have with your customers. A company of one thrives not by becoming bigger, but by becoming better.

Some questions to get you thinking…

  • Have you ever experienced a situation in your workplace where customer retention was undervalued? What was the outcome?
  • What are some low-cost strategies businesses can use to deepen relationships with existing customers?
  • Do you think ego-driven decisions are easy to spot in business settings? Why or why not?
  • How do you define success for your own career or business? Does it align more with growth or refinement?
  • Have you calculated or considered your own customer acquisition costs? If not, what would you need to gather in order to do so?

References

Investopedia. (2024, March 21). Churn Rate: What It Means, Examples, and Calculations. Retrieved from Investopedia: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/churnrate.asp

Jarvis, P. (2019). Company of One: Why staying small is the next big thing for business. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.

1 Customer Churn: “the rate at which customers stop doing business with an entity.” (Investopedia, 2024)

5 responses to “Growing A Company That Doesn’t Grow”

  1. Freddy Colindres Avatar
    Freddy Colindres

    Hi Samantha,

    As someone working in higher education, this chapter resonated deeply—especially Jarvis’s emphasis on refining over expanding. In our field, there’s often a push for institutional growth: more programs, more students, more campuses. But I’ve found that meaningful impact often stems not from expansion, but from improving the quality of the student experience and strengthening relationships with those already within our academic community.

    Jarvis’s point about ego driving unsustainable growth is particularly important. In higher ed, this can manifest in chasing rankings or flashy new initiatives that don’t necessarily improve student outcomes. Just as Jarvis argues that customers don’t care about profit margins, our students aren’t impressed by optics alone—they care about whether they’re supported, challenged, and prepared for life beyond graduation.

    I also appreciated the author’s insight into customer retention. In academia, “retention” is often a metric we track but don’t always invest in strategically. Yet we know that a student who feels seen and supported is far more likely to stay, succeed, and become an advocate for the institution. Much like the example from property management, failing to focus on retention can be costly—financially and reputationally.

    Ultimately, this chapter challenges us to rethink success not just in terms of scale, but in terms of depth. In my own work, that means focusing less on growing enrollment and more on enhancing student success. That’s the kind of sustainable growth that truly matters.

    Like

    Reply
    1. Samantha Ellithorpe Avatar
      Samantha Ellithorpe

      Hi Freddy,

      In my line of work, “retention” is a strange and somewhat nuanced metric. Most of our “customers” are faculty who already have established relationships with sponsors and receive continuation funding annually. Their decision to return is not necessarily a reflection of our outreach or relationship-building efforts, but more so a result of their initiative and their longstanding rapport with funders.

      We are trying to grow our impact in more intentional ways by identifying and engaging new faculty through targeted outreach, sharing funding opportunities, and conducting research development meetings designed to build excitement around pursuing external funding. But even then, so much is out of our control, especially in today’s increasingly competitive and uncertain federal funding landscape. The availability of funding, shifting agency priorities, faculty bandwidth, and tenure and promotion requirements all play a huge role.

      At the same time, our office serves as a required touchpoint for proposal submissions due to institutional policy, so there is a degree of built-in “retention” that happens by necessity. This makes it even more important for us to focus on the quality of our interactions and support services. We want to be seen not just as a checkpoint, but as a true partner in the process.

      You mentioned strengthening the relationships you have with those within your academic community. How does your institution approach “refinement” when it comes to student engagement or program improvement? Do you find that initiatives are more often driven by internal insights or by external pressures like enrollment goals or funding mandates?

      Like

      Reply
  2. meaghan17j Avatar
    meaghan17j

    Hi Samantha,

    You brought up a great point on how success looks different for each business based on its goals. One business could define its success with growth, where another could define it as gaining a loyal customer they could count on to shop the business’s items. I think your example of your previous job really showed how you and your boss had two different visions of success and how that could affect the business overall.

    I agree with your point that gaining new customers can be a good strategic move if done successfully, I also think timing plays a part in the execution. You mentioned towards the end of your post how a company of one doesn’t thrive by getting bigger but better, depending on the timeline and overall goals of a company of one, I think they could also grow successfully if they are prepared to at that time and can sustainably execute that decision.

    Your question of “Do you think ego-driven decisions are easy to spot in business settings?” really stood out to me from the list. I think it all depends on perspective. I have often had to ask myself, ‘How do they not see their bias or ego getting in the way’ more times than I can count. I feel that it depends on the level of self-awareness each person has, along with the tools they use to help with that self-awareness. I may be able to spot my coworkers’ ego affecting a project that they can’t see, but I also have to keep my bias and ego in check. If you have two non-self-aware people pointing fingers, nothing would change.

    I really enjoyed your reflection this week and look forward to catching up on the rest!

    Like

    Reply
    1. Samantha Ellithorpe Avatar
      Samantha Ellithorpe

      Hi Meaghan,

      Thank you for your response! I really appreciate the way you expanded on the idea of success looking different for each business. You are absolutely right – timing plays a huge role in whether or not growth is a smart and sustainable decision. A company of one can grow successfully if it is intentional and aligned with its long-term goals, and not just driven by outside pressure or comparison.

      I also agree with our comment on ego. It is often much easier to spot someone else’s ego at play than our own. I have found myself in that same place of wondering how others cannot see their blind spots, only to realize later that I had a few of my own that I wasn’t catching either. I like what you said about two non-self-aware people pointing fingers. Emotional intelligence is so important to have in leadership and collaboration. This is something I’m working on, and reflections like yours are a great reminder to keep that ego in check.

      Thanks again for your response, and I enjoyed reading your perspective!

      Like

      Reply
  3. GaVonne Hamilton Avatar
    GaVonne Hamilton

    Samantha, I fully agree with your assertion that regardless of the strategy, moving away from purely transactional relationships with customers is vital. Jarvis’s idea that “customer success is the cornerstone of a profitable company of one” really shines through here. When businesses prioritize understanding and helping their customers succeed, they build a foundation of loyalty and trust that transcends mere price points or fleeting promotions. This focus on long-term value creation is what truly distinguishes a thriving business from one that is constantly going in circles.

    Also, your post makes me wonder if businesses often underestimate the indirect costs of customer churn, not just the direct ones. Things like negative word-of-mouth or damage to brand reputation can be hard to quantify but have a significant impact.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment