Comments on: On Corporate Realignment

By: Ted

Ted — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 20:01:10 +0000

I assume you use the word “great” in its restricted meaning of “large,” and not of “good” or “excellent” or as contributing to anything valid. I coudn’t agree more with the article.

By: Theodore P. Savas

Theodore P. Savas — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 21:55:27 +0000

The elephant in the room is about quality, flexibility, and treating people right. You can run a big company for a long time, and even find and put out a mega bestseller like Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code, and still lose your job.

Why?

Well, let’s use a phrase my businessman grandfather often muttered when he took me somewhere for lunch or dinner and was disgusted by the service, the setting, or the meal. “Teddy,” he would say, shaking his head slowly as he withdrew his unlit cigar from his mouth, turned it over, and waved it around to make his point. “The people who are running this business today are not the people who built the business yesterday.”

–tps

By: Martin

Martin — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 11:11:09 +0000

She sounds like she knows what she’s talking about. And come to think of it: Has bureaucrats ever added value to a growing organization. I mean really? Seems to me that in most good organizations it’s time too move on when the zombie factor grows too large… Unless you’re a zombie yourself, that is 🙂

By: Wendy

Wendy — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 22:12:11 +0000

Amen and amen.

One more time….amen.

I would also add those in the publishing industry who solely relied on The Next Big Thing (Harry Potter, The Da Vinci Code, Twilight etc.) to carry them to the promise land – instead of cultivating a rich, deep catalog of talented midlist writers and encouraging outside-the-box newbie writers.

Lord help us all – but given the current state of the economy and the publishing industry, I think we’re in for even less risk-taking than we’re seeing now. If that’s even humanly possible.