Greetings, Karen, I think that some of the brightest employees left the company I described, as the impact of the switch to share-price oriented activity emerged. But I'm afraid that for everyone one that left, many were, as planned, motivated to join the quest for money.
Your question -- and listening to some early Jefferson Airplane this morning -- leads to me ask: Does anyone know of any exmaples of alternative life- and work-style communities that have flourished over the long term, and that may even be in existence today? I wonder if we shouldn't be taking a second and serious look at these. Best regards, Lawry > -----Original Message----- > From: Karen Watters Cole [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 11:21 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: FW JK Galbraith on corporate mess > > > Let's not forget the middle management and lower employees who have been > discouraged and demoralized by the fixation of quarterly profits as the > primary corporate strategy. My business friends have complained > increasingly over the years that no matter how hard they worked > to bring in > a new international client, say in China, that corporate > headquarters in its > shortsightedness would change market strategies inexplicably. People need > value to their work and even at the lowest levels, meaning. > Of course this is not scientific, but my instincts tell me many men and > women are quiet with their complaints because of the insecurity of the job > market. So few people are self-sustaining or even self-employed > that there > is a growing dependence of the corporate empire, even as the affected > peasants simmer in their rage. > Will the baby boomers rediscover simple living values? Is the strong > tendency towards nesting and cocooning significant of other sociological > changes or transitions? > Maybe it is just wishful thinking on my part, but I am interested > in how or > to what ends this discontent and distrust will manifest itself? > I know some > of you have those answers and opinions..... > Karen Watters Cole > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Lawrence DeBivort > Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 7:05 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: FW JK Galbraith on corporate mess > > I'm afraid it is even worse than you suggest, Arthur: If all it was was a > concern with quarterly earnings, we would simply have > shortsighted business > strategy, and a higher rate of corporate bankruptcies. But the focus is on > stock prices: this is where the incentives of senior executives lie. Huge > options are given by Board members (whose fees have, I suspect, risen > proportionately), leading to a situation where even the modest > rise or fall > of stock prices can make a differences of millions of dollars to someone > with large holdings and large options. > > I once worked for a company whose new CEO decided that the executives > weren't sufficiently stock-conscious. He handed out options to the > executives and had the current stock price posted daily at the entrance to > the executive suite. Guess what happened? The execes became VERY aware of > the stock prices and could readily, being a bunch of bright guys, > figure out > how much they were worth as they walked to their offices in the > morning and > then to their cars in the evening. > > And indeed the company did things -- legitimate things -- that led to a > phenomenal rise (14-fold) in stock prices. Eventually, though, the company > made a couple of very bad business decisions, in the hope of bolstering > stock prices. The analysts saw through it, and the stock prices went into > free fall, the CEO, after a couple of other embarrassments, was fired. > > There is no question in my mind that the company would have done a lot > better without its obsessive interest in stock prices, but when > the word was > out that there was 'gold in tham thar hills', it was irresistible. > > Lawry > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 9:30 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: FW JK Galbraith on corporate mess > > > > > > Ethics is best understood in the context of "enlightened self-interest." > > With the prospect of real prison sentences, or the reality of the mob > > storming at the gate--enlightened leaders quickly learn to > govern in their > > long term self interest, ie., consider the "little people." > > > > Our society seems to know no other way. The concept of 7 > generations has, > > in today's corporate environment, given way to quarterly earnings. > > > > arthur cordell >
