<A HREF="http://TheEconomist.s.maildart.net/link_29319_6468878_3_141296846_868081
20_1_9f">http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=805800</A> Friends, Below paragraph is from the above The Economist article. This paragraph is about the "sharp review" of business strategies. I have been observing a change in the mood of "upper-managements" of a few companies, particularly towards out-sourcing and sub-contracting [being a sub-contractor in out-sourced project(s)] much before the terrorist attacks. Does anyone have any emprical evidence for or against this? Best, Sabri Oncu ++++++ Business strategies are also coming under sharp review. Although the spread of multinationals has brought great benefits to both companies and countries, it has made manufacturers more vulnerable to disruption from forces outside of their control. While companies are unlikely to want to give up trying to seek globally competitive suppliers, they may become a bit more cautious and try to reduce their exposure to the risks of international terrorism. Some firms may want to build in extra safeguards against business disruption, for instance by demanding that certain critical suppliers set up operations close to or even within local factories or keep more buffer stocks. Even if the immediate threat of terrorist attacks recedes, the conduct of business seems unlikely to return unscathed to methods widely used before September 11th.
