![]() |
|
Current Events Help understand the world by talking about things happening in it |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 |
UNDER CONDITIONAL MITIGATION
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 20,012
|
Is it primarily a function of the fact that the businesses are conglomerating and thus are themselves bigger? A smaller company always does things faster.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
The future is unwritten
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
|
That makes sense, they're congealing, and we know that's slows things up.
![]()
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | ||
Read? I only know how to write.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
|
Quote:
Where this problem was solved, the solution was easy. Sergio Marchionne solved Fiat's problems by firing or replacing most all top management in 60 days. Ford used another solution - reduce the layers of management from 48 to 5. Bell Labs, once a benchmark of American innovation, no longer is so productive. Some of its famous graduates include Carly Fiorina who then went on to do massive damage to Hewlett Packard in only four years. She had no idea what electronic instrumentation did. HP's was a world's best (only the best hospital ERs once used HP equipment). So she spun these off for a fraction of their value. Then hired plenty of subordinates to explain what printers and computers might do. They then recommended a disastrous Compaq merger. Increases in management layers (and therefore excessively long decision making) is a symptom of business school management. Where knowing anything about the product is irrelevant. And where answers must be extracted from spread sheet analysis. Paul Weaver demonstrates his experience in Ford. Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|