« Concord in Seattle, Part 2: How to ignore the needle in the haystack | Main | FQ.06.51: Favorite Quote for This Week »

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c0c869e200d83467672169e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Grow or Die:

» Escher as Marketer, Tag I'm it from Altos Research Real Estate Insights
The blogosphere is packed with self-referential commentary. Bloggers-on-blogging, conversing about the conversation, that sort of thing. I look to the topic as an entertaining lesson in effective marketing. The Escher staircase tumbles across my desk to [Read More]

Comments

Yep. You can't shrink your way to success.

I ran a remote profit center for a company. Was classified as a cash cow and starved. Guess what. The cow and the cash died due to a lack of investment.

I see this in a number of large companies today. Not possible to consistently grow the bottom line faster than the top line once all the fat has been cut. Yeah, yeah. Six Sigma and all that. Process cures everything. Stock buybacks.

BS.! Innovate or die, says I.

But your debt to GDP clock is going up and up. What gives? And the OMB reports show it continuing to go up and UP.....in spite of massive tax cuts that should be paying for themselves.

muirgeo:

There is a lag between the Treasury's numbers (spending and tax receipt growth rates) and their effect on the ratio of debt to GDP. Eventually the debt to GDP ratio should track in the same direction. Another factor is that tax receipts are growing faster than GDP, and that causes some of the difference. New GDP numbers are due out soon; we'll see if that reverses the clock.

In the retail industry we always said, "Volume cures all ills." However, in the most successful operation in the retail industry, we led with the motto, "Go to WAR, everyday!"

Growing an economy, like growing profits, is not simply cutting costs or spurring revenue; it is attitude, especially attitude toward innovation and employees, that is decisive.

In that "attitude," one finds the critical difference between 'managing' and 'leading': Managers manage numbers; leaders lead people. A Harvard MBA is a gilt-edge degree in managing, not in leading.

'Be free.'

The comments to this entry are closed.