Perception Isn’t Reality
You could make a case that Wall Street analysts and many
wealthy investors are obtuse, or at the very least ignorant. These
“experts” on operating a company reward some questionable
decisions.
For example, every time the economy heads a little south,
they reward managers for “downsizing.” Now, some companies are in
trouble, made some bad decisions, and can’t financially support their
current employment level. Some —
not everyone; so why reward everyone for the same solution to the profit
problem?
Most companies have cut all the fat they can afford.
ADVERTISEMENT
|
Few
companies we interview are overpopulated. Instead, most tell us they
can’t find enough skilled labor to handle current workloads.
They’re automating to try to compensate, but there are just some
functions best done by people. So you have to wonder, just what are analysts
thinking?
As just about any engineer knows, you can’t automate
every task or function. For one thing, it’d be too expensive, which would
drain those precious revenues and profits.
Remember when employers talked about hiring robots to
automate all assembly tasks? They would never complain, never take a sick day,
have child-care emergencies, take a coffee break, go to the bathroom, take a
smoke break, etc. A big problem, however, was that robots couldn’t handle
articulated motion as well as a person. And it would cost millions or more to
develop such capability. In the end, it turned out a person was a lot cheaper.
(Analysts, you ought to like that.)
Sometimes downsizing is a management tool. For example,
managers may change corporate culture to improve competitiveness or to shake
out complacency. But this sword must be wielded carefully, especially during a
slowing economy.
Management studies have pointed out the fallacy that layoffs
or downsizing actually help a company. The American Association of Management,
for example, found that about 60 percent of companies that downsize either see
no increase in profits at all, or
experience a decline in profits.
We won’t mention the other costs of downsizing. These
are realized after the economy recovers, which it will. Costs like finding new
labor to replace the employees let go. Costs like training, retaining your best
employees, recapturing customers after your company has ticked them off because
of poor service. No, we won’t mention those long-term costs, only the
quarterly ones are important.
Analysts are already in trouble for their recommendations
during the dot-com craze. How come they bought the pitches about these
“new” business models that promised to spin gold out of thin air?
Yes, I know hindsight is 20/20, but they should have known
better. And it doesn’t speak well of investors either who supposedly made
their money through business. They should have had first hand experience at
operating a business (something analysts apparently lack) and should have known
they were being pitched a rich vein of fools’ gold. (Anyone mention
greed?)
Controls and systems are properly viewed as a capital
investment. Employees are too. They work with controls and systems, handling
motions no automation device can do. They also offer creativity and
intelligence companies must have to survive and thrive. In many cases,
employees have a lot more intelligence for what it takes to regain profitability
than many analysts and investors. Maybe management should ask them about
solutions before compulsively downsizing to appease the analyst and investor
“gods.”
Leslie Langnau
senior technical editor
llangnau@penton.com