Blog: Core vs. Non-core

Many readers probably agree with this statement. I will certainly agree with the confirmation of this statement, but I would like to add a comment: I do not think it is a trend of our time.

Also in history specialization was common in the practice of professions. That specialization was known as 'mastery or craftsmanship'. These terms have fallen into oblivion. Whether replacing these terms with the term specialization is an improvement or a deterioration I leave open. What matters to me is that since the existence of mankind it has been recognized that skill goes a long way. A lot of practice, trying out, making and improving mistakes, absorbing knowledge, mirroring and other experiences are necessary before a person can call himself/herself competent in something.

If there had not been people with the internal drive to become skilled; for example, cathedrals would never have been built, no displays of art or other historical landmarks would have emerged, in all kinds of places around the world which are still visited by thousands of tourists every year.

Mastery doesn't just mean choosing to be very good at something, it also implies a clear choice not to control other things, because they only distract.

Master in Trade Compliance

Analogous to the same considerations of choosing to master something, in the business environment, the trade-offs for 'core vs. non-core activities for an organization' are made in the boardroom. These strategic considerations, which activities are core and which are non-core, will have to be regularly examined over time. In that light I cannot understand why there are still multinationals that carry out trade compliance related activities themselves. It is becoming increasingly difficult to attract the right employees with the right expertise, to subsequently offer the required continuity and to make a connection between your own IT systems and those of the authorities. And if a company is able to keep it running successfully, then there is hardly any appreciation for correct compliance, because it is and remains a non-core activity.

Not understanding something says a lot about me, so I like to make time for people who can explain to me why trade compliance activities are carried out in-house. I would like to thank you in advance because I continue to learn and challenge myself to be and remain a master in trade compliance with our Pincvision organization. Of course I am also happy to discuss how Pincvision van use its mastery for your organization.

So what do you think? Trade compliance: core or non-core?