Английский язык для экономистов - Малюга Е.Н.
ISBN 5-469-00341-8
Скачать (прямая ссылка):
The rest is history. Lou Gerstner, with no background in computing, was brought in to rebuild IBM. Seemingly, overnight half of the far-flung 450,000 devoted, loyal, programmed IBM-ers were banished. The rational model had been shown to be flawed.
Since the 1990s various studies have reinforced the idea that 1,000 employees in one location is about the maximum size for any company if it is to retain the advantages of the economies of scale and minimize the human diseconomies arising from adding more people.
IBM did clean out 50 per cent of its workforce — but controlling size was not the main way the company reinvented itself. Its most important decision was to offload its entire hardware and components manufacturing. Outsourcing was its most spectacular strategy.
In the latest McKinsey Quarterly, the logic and effect of outsourcing as a strategy and how it affected IBM are examined. The research question posed by the authors is: has outsourcing gone too far?
The logic of outsourcing is that by shedding assets companies can concentrate on the interesting work. Employees are remotivated to develop product or services, discover solutions and be innovators or supply chain integrators. Liberation leads to an increased rate of return on invested capital.
TheJournal provides sensible, practical insights into the sort of questions companies should ask before embarking on outsourcing. If internal suppliers can meet industry standards within a set time and present a competitive advantage, an internal solution may be preferable. If, as well, the internals are not readily substituted outside and are vital to the corporate culture and reputation, the company should resist outsourcing. 40
Английский язык для экономистов
Conversely, if there are dramatic cost savings available from cheaper labour sources or the skills are hard to acquire or suppliers have greater productive capacity and higher levels of expertise and knowledge, the case for outsourcing is strong.
Rarely is outsourcing an either/or decision. So the authors discuss a mixture of tactics in which the company gets the best from both sources, internal and external. They rightly question the general assumption that outsourcing is always best.
One issue that the authors do not discuss is dependence. This is often critical. How dependent does a company become once it has transferred all its information technology processing to a supplier? Transferring staff is fine if the explicit and tacit knowledge is readily available elsewhere. It may be dangerous if it is not.
By the mid-1990s IBM had redefined its core business as e-business services and solutions, research and design and semiconductor architecture and manufacturing and spun off its hardware and components manufacturing business. By 2000 it reported revenues of $ 8.09 bn.
What does all this tell us? First, by outsourcing manufacturing IBM made possible a massive strategic shift. Lesson: outsourcing is not just a tactic for transferring costs, or people problems.
Second, IBM's leaders could not have known in 1994 how the company's future would evolve. This was not change based on a clear vision and a rational plan. Lesson: To outperform the competitors, companies must take risks, follow a shared hunch and tolerate ambiguity about the outcomes.
Third, this transformation was achieved by relentless segmentation into smaller units. Lesson: Schumacher's argument on the human diseconomies of size was valid. For innovation and creativity, free forming self-governing teams are essential. Small in this sense is beautiful.
H.2. Answer the following questions.
I. What human benefits did Schumacher have in view when he coined the phrase "small is beautiful"?
2. Did other economists and industrialists share his opinion?
3. How did industrialists intend to minimize possible human error or deviance in a large company?
4. What other strategy besides controlling size did IBM use to reinvest itself in 1990s?
5. Was outsourcing strategy an efficient measure? What is the logic of this strategy? Unit 2. Production and Costs
41
H.3. Match up the words and definitions:
1) economies of scale;
2) to erode;
3) deviance;
a) something that is different from what is socially acceptable;
b) a person who expresses support, performs, or is an example of a stated thing;
c) the advantages that a big factory, shop, etc. has over
a smaller one because it can spread its fixed costs over a larger number of units and therefore produce or sell things more cheaply;
4) exponent; d) to perform better than anyone else;
5) outsourcing; e) to wear or to be worn away gradually, esp. by slow
action of water, wind, etc.;
6) to outperform; 0 if a company, organization, etc. employs another
company to do a part of its contract;
7) far-flung; g) a situation, when there is more than one possible
meaning or interpretation; unclear;
8) ambiguity. h) spread over a great distance.
