Why Large Firms are Slow to Change

Why Large Firms are Slow to Change

I think that large firms are so slow to change because of the sheer size. In the physical world the larger an object, the more massive an object, the greater the force needed to overcome frictional force, the force required to get an object moving. Once you overcome that frictional force it generally takes less force to keep the object moving. If you imagine that a company with few employees is better able to incorporate drastic change because in essence it is easier to communicate with all employees and the success of the business depends on each of those employees taking on a much larger workload than an employee involved with a larger sized firm. Combine this with what Frederick Duffy says: “In the age of the Internet, at the dawn of the knowledge-based society, it is strange that we tolerate buildings . . . that assume that everyone comes in at nine and leaves at five, and sits solidly at a desk for five days a week. The model, of course, is still the factory where supervisors had to put enormous emphasis on synchrony to force a barely literate proletariat to work at the loom and the lathe. When the bell rings, the work begins. When the siren blows it is over – for the day . . . rolling out formulaic solutions has become the norm in office design”. I imagine this being the norm across the country that employees are factory workers and generation after generation exists in this format and is subsequently passed down from generation to generation than the amount of frictional force it would require to overcome nation-wide change simultaneously would be enormous. Then imagine the late twentieth century comes along and with this a booming technology called the internet and the pressure begins to build. The world is getting bigger and more interconnected. Globalization makes for stiff competition and the ability to survive or sink is a matter of how fast a company can evolve with change and the output it can receive from each employee. Where once upon a time a company could take its time changing maybe once a decade or two now exists a time where one must contend and update every couple years or be left behind. But it’s still too soon and there is not enough total pressure but the ball is rolling change overnight but what...

Read More

Is There Such a Concept as “Good Will” in Reality and is it Transferable?

Is There Such a Concept as “Good Will” in Reality and is it Transferable?

After thinking about it for a while I started to think about charities for some reason or another. Red Cross in particular. Perhaps the word itself had something to do with the association I began to think. It became apparent to me that good will does in fact exist as an intangible asset as I began to think about other charitable organizations in relation to Red Cross. If we were to compare XYZ charity who started up this year and had all the tangible value of Red Cross it would be logical to say that these companies are of equal value. But in fact they shouldn’t be. No not in a world where image, rapport, and reputation do have value. Now I am imagining there may be some confusion in talking about the good will of companies that do good will work but I hope to alleviate that potential confusion. My basis of comparison is more based on trust in an industry where there are charitable companies that are trusted more than others when it comes to who we choose to donate to when disasters occur. There are times when people donate to random charitable organizations (XYZ in this case) when disasters occur. But after a number of controversies came about that some charities are scams it began to change the way people donated, at least it did for me. But there was one charitable organization that I never doubted through the drama. Isn’t that worth something in and of itself? For example when I heard that there was something I could do to help with the disaster in Japan I instantly responded to the Red Cross’s ad even though I had seen plenty of other organizations ads for support that I had never heard of or if I had were obscure. I think that had a lot to do with the fact Red Cross not only has been around the block but it has also lived up to its brand. Though these other charities claim to be about good will the line that separates them from Red Cross begins to emerge. In talking about the good will of companies I think that the discussion of good will companies is a logical one. Red Cross has built its name on good will, trust, and sacrifice, and the vast majority of donations going to places that need it. When it...

Read More

Is the Need for Achievement Necessary for Success in Small Business?

Is the Need for Achievement Necessary for Success in Small Business?

The question of whether the need for achievement is necessary for success in anything is a more relevant question.  Of course we must also define how we measure success for this is a relative term defined by the observer.  I have contemplated this question for days and still I find it difficult to grasp all of the possible scenarios and circumstances that may lead to success in business other than the need for achievement, and alternative definitions of what success means to each of those who would define it in their terms of measure.  I find it beyond me or any one man or woman, limited to genius IQ, to give any universally definitive answer.  Since I am limited and not by any means genius I am constrained to answer the first part of this question relative to my experiences, who I am, my values, and what I believe success to be, reserved to small business. I leave it up to the readers to juggle my viewpoints with this philosophical debacle and agree or disagree with any or all parts of it.  The first issue is the various ways in which success can be measured, in relation to small business anyways.  One could say that to most people, I propose, success would be defined strictly by monetary aspects.  How much money do I make or how much money have I made?  Perhaps the measure of success does not lie in how much money is made but in the longevity of the small business.  Then again success might also be the impact that the business had on the world whether it made any money or lasted very long.  Napster is a perfect example of this case because it went bankrupt and lasted for a short period of time but its impact devastated the music industry and forever changed it.  Shaun Fanning believed his vision to be a success but measured by monetary or longevity standards others would call it a failure.  Now that we are on the same page as to some ways I have thought up that define success in business it will be far easier for me to convince you that achievement lays at the foundation for each of these potential success stories.  Yes for without the need to achieve an individual would not even venture to start a business or build a product, to make money, run...

Read More