View Single Post
Texrat's Avatar
Posts: 11,700 | Thanked: 10,045 times | Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA
#29
Originally Posted by speculatrix View Post
indeed, there seem to be two ways for a company to manage economic difficulties
1/ cut costs - this risks damaging the company sufficiently to make the situation worse, and the best staff will take settlements and run, and cost a lot to replace
2/ work better - make better use of the staff to innovate and become more productive to maintain market share and minimise loss of profits

unfortunately, shareholders usually only reward the quick fix, ie. 1, and so directors and upper management get forced into quick and stupid actions. take a look at the share price of a company when they announce job cuts, and compare with changes when they announce new investments/strategies!
You are right on the money.

The smart companies are the ones who set cash aside for a "rainy day" and hold on to their employees when the ride gets rough. It costs them money to let people go when trouble starts, and even more to hire people back when they pick up. They also tend to lose the subject matter experts they desperately need to prevent recurrance of stupid errors.

But too money companies operate on a razor margin. They live to appease shareholders on a quarter-by-quarter basis (and such shareholders are never really happy; they're more like daytraders). This is suicidal. They would do better to heed the advice dispensed by Warren Buffett, who more than most seems to have a great grasp of how business should operate.
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net