Study: why executives are nervous about the next economic upswing

By Joe McKendrick | Oct 12, 2009 |

The consensus of economists surveyed by the National Association of Business Economists (NABE) is that the recession of 2007-09 is over. More positive economic prospects should be reason for rejoicing. But the financial hemorrhaging of the recent downturn resulted in companies scrambling with short-term fixes and painful cuts. Now, as a result of such increased short-term thinking, executives feel they are not in a position to ride the next economic upswing. And companies are going to need every resource they have to keep pace with the new hyper-competitive markets we will see.

Even when times were flush, there was concern that too much short-term thinking had dominated business thinking. Now, Forbes has just released a new study of 200 large companies, underwritten by SAP, that shows leading executives are concerned that all the cutting that took place over the past year has hobbled their future growth prospects.

Talent recruitment efforts in one area where companies have cut too far and wide. Strategically, organizations need to be aggressively courting the best talent available, and planning and developing the next workforce. However, operationally, organizations are still in bare-bones cut mode. More than one in five executives surveyed (22%) said their company’s recruiting and retention efforts did not accurately reflect current or updated strategic goals. Furthermore, a quarter (25%) indicated that their organizations’ training and development programs didn’t align with strategic goals.

This may not be surprising, the study’s authors note. But executives interviewed say that short-term operational thinking will not help long-term growth:

“Workforce reductions and hiring freezes have been key elements of the cost-cutting measures companies have had to take through the current recession. With staffing taking a backseat to other measures, executives are not necessarily focused on talent issues. For example, recruiting, retaining, and training employees ranked 12th on the list of current operational priorities and only moved to 9th on the list for priorities in 12 months. Yet with economic recovery, companies can expect additional pressure to retain their most valued employees and they will face a more competitive market for recruiting new talent. So aligning human capital management to strategic and operational goals may be more important than ever for future success.”

Short-term, operational thinking is also hobbling organizational prospects in other ways. For example, the Forbes-SAP survey finds that half of organizations are yet not prepared for the next economic growth wave. The study finds that nearly all corporations (93%) indicated they had updated or revised their corporate strategies and priorities to address the recent economic slowdown, and 83% said that the recession had put them under additional pressure to focus on aligning strategy and execution. Twenty-none percent say they were under pressure to emphasize short-term costs versus ROI as a result of the current economy.

But only 51% said that their organizations had an updated plan in place to guide strategy once the economy turns around, and 41% said they were currently working on the plan. Just six percent said there was no recovery plan in place at all. As the study’s authors put it: “Economic volatility has put companies under greater pressure to align strategy and operations. This alignment could be more important post-recovery as they ready their plans to capitalize on new market opportunities.”

Don’t blame these companies entirely for their short-term mentality, however. As the survey reveals, they are scrambling, often unsuccessfully, to keep up with their markets and customers: Asked to identify the primary barriers to aligning strategy and operations, executives pointed to changing market conditions that may impact their companies’ execution, which was cited by 46% of respondents. The study observes that “sudden, unexpected shifts in customer demand have put enormous stress  on companies to manage their costs, resulting in short-term thinking that is less focused on long-term returns than immediate bottom-line impact. The financial pressures being felt on the front lines may, in fact, be driving a wedge between strategy and operations.”

Visit any conference session or read any analyst report, you’re going to see or hear lot of talk about “alignment.”  Within the information technology space, I hear project failures incessantly being blamed on lack of “business-IT alignment.” Unfortunately, The term “alignment” gets a lot of lip service, to the point where it’s overused and meaningless.

But as this study shows, business leaders recognize there’s a potential cost to organizations when things get too far out of whack. When times get tough, short-term operational thinking takes over, to the detriment of long-term strategy. These are two areas that need to be brought back into alignment at all possible speed — the economy may improve, but markets are becoming even more unforgiving.



 
Reply to Story

SmartPlanet TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Subscribe to this discussion via RSS

  •  
    1

    kingtj

    10/12/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Study: why executives are nervous about the next economic upswing

    They *should* be nervous! I'm not even "sold" yet on the idea that we're going to see an economic up-swing that lasts. Given the huge (and growing!) national debt, and a need for federal govt. to reign back in all of the incentives they funded to "stimulate" things, we could easily see massive inflation and tax increases appear shortly after the economy picks back up, forcing it back into recession, part 2.

    I think too many people still have a false sense of confidence that things will soon be back to where they were before the crash. But in reality, we were all riding an unsustainable bubble. Given our terrible import to export ratio of goods and outsourcing of services, it's not logical for the USA to expect an economy that's a whole lot better than where we're at now. If it DOES go back to pre-crash status any time soon, it probably indicates we've been collectively suckered into the next unsustainable bubble.

  •  
    2

    goff256

    10/12/09 | Report as spam

    Instead of being positive

    Let's all be negative and paranoid. That'll help the economy. /sarcasm

  •  
    3

    JohnMcGrew@...

    10/12/09 | Report as spam

    End of recession does not mean good times are on their way.

    It just means we've seen the worst of it, for the moment. But it
    hardly means we're ready for boom times next quarter. Faced with such
    threats from Washington as higher or mandated health insurance costs,
    cap-n-tax legislation, a VAT tax, and higher taxes and regulation in
    general, most businesses I've been dealing with are in "entrenchment
    for survival" mode. How is it possible to plan and execute a competent
    and confident business plan when you don't have a clue as to how these
    issues are going to play out over the next 3 years?

  •  
    4

    goff256

    10/12/09 | Report as spam

    It amazes me that people talk about taxing being the problem

    When the taxes on corporations was around 49% with a 30% excessive
    gains tax during the 50's-60's and we had great economic development.
    In fact, we had a 4% annual GPD growth during the 50's.

  •  
    5

    adornoe@...

    10/12/09 | Report as spam

    goff256: Can you think of anything that was happening in the 50s & 60s


    that could account for the growth of the period?

  •  
    6

    JohnMcGrew@...

    10/12/09 | Report as spam

    Nice try with the revisionist history

    Goff fails to mention that JFK fought for and got taxes lowered in
    the name of growth in the early '60s. This growth was stunted by the
    end of the decade, due to massive growth of the Federal government
    due to the "Great Society" and cost of the Vietnam war. (Starting to
    look familiar?)

    Also consider that during the '50s and '60s, the available deductions
    were quite extreme. Relatively few wealthy people were ever taxed at
    the highest rate because by the time you deducted everything the code
    permitted, there wasn't all that much left to tax. In fact, the
    entire reason the Alternative Minimum Tax was created in 1969 was
    because Congress discovered that 155 taxpayers who paid no taxes
    because their deductions completely eliminated their tax liability.
    Because Johnson needed more funds to pay for the Vietnam War,
    congress passed the Alternative Minimum Tax, just to catch those 155
    taxpayers. Today the AMT affects over 3 million taxpayers, mostly
    middle class.

  •  
    7

    goff256

    10/12/09 | Report as spam

    JFK lowered taxes in the 60's... or not

    That doesn't account for the 4% annual growth rates of the 50's.
    Genius, I wasn't talking about the individual tax brackets of the
    1950's and 1960's. I was talking about the corporate taxes, and
    excessive gains tax, and the like. NICE JOB FAILING AT READING.
    Also, the Revenue Act of 1964 was the one where taxes on the highest
    bracket were lowered to 70% (as opposed to 91%) and corporate taxes
    were lowered from... wow, I had it a bit low. It was apparently 52
    and lowered to 48. The problem with that date, of course, is that
    JFK was dead by that time.

    As for the other factors, I would say that another important factor
    was the fact that we had relatively nice tariffs at the time. This,
    along with the taxes from corporations, allowed for the United
    States to have good infrastructure and industry. We need both, and
    both lead to growth of the GDP.

  •  
    8

    goff256

    10/12/09 | Report as spam

    look at the numbers yourself

    http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/legislation/1960.cfm

  •  
    9

    adornoe@...

    10/13/09 | Report as spam

    goff256: You still didn't address the big reasons for economic growthwt

    The 50s and 60s are the closest decades to WW2. The country was in recovery mode from the war years, and the many veterans returning from war were a big shot in the arm to the economy. Returning veterans were given the tools and the money (even if it was through government loans) to go out and make new lives for themselves and their families. The government did help, but the government did, for the most part, stay out of the way of the people.

    The country needed to build infrastructure, both for the economy at large and for the big military expansion which brought the U.S. into the dominant force in the world. Back then the whole set of circumstance became known as the "military/industrial complex". The economy was growing because the people were hyped up from the end of a war and everybody was optimistic about rebuilding their lives.

    Also, don't forget that economic growth from the war years carried into the 50s and 60s. The war years were an impetus which started the recovery from the depression. Once the recovery got going from the war, it was logical that it would continue after the war. The rebuilding of our military and of our economic infrastructure, were again given a boost by the Korean war, even if that war was a drain on our federal coffers. We nowadays don't want to admit that wars can be the triggers for economic recoveries, but, it is a fact that from the military needs, many sectors of the economy will find growth. Thus, even a socialist or communist country will find its economy growing from the need to fulfill the military needs of a war.

    And, although many people would like to be dismissive of the JFK tax reductions, it is a well-known fact that the economy did get a boost from those cuts. It's simply logical that with more money being kept by companies and individuals to invest and to pay out in salaries/benefits, that most companies would see growth, and by extension, the country as a whole. Tax cuts have always produced economic growth and jobs expansions. With economic growth and with more "tax paying" people employed, the government's tax revenues have always increased after tax cuts. The tax-cutting logic is very foreign to liberals. even when the proof of growth from tax cuts can be easily demonstrated. But, liberalism is more about control over the people than economic growth.

  •  
    10

    goff256

    10/14/09 | Report as spam

    With more money being kept by companies, the economy grows

    So the US Economy should be great right now, because of the low taxes
    on businesses. Right? Oh, wait, you can't cut taxes and still expect to
    be able to do anything concerning government. Now look at the economy
    now and tell me that the tax cuts from Bush helped our economy grow.
    Tell me that with a straight face. Then again, while you speak about
    the liberal control? I think your credibility on the subject is
    COMPLETELY GONE.

  •  
    11

    goff256

    10/14/09 | Report as spam

    Oh, and we're at war right now

    and our economy is still sucking. Fancy that, Mr "Tax cuts will save
    the economy!"

  •  
    12

    waqueau

    10/14/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Study: why executives are nervous about the next economic upswing

    People, people... can't we all just get along? And why has no one mentioned the fact that in the 1950s and 60s Europe and Japan were re-building from a devastating war? China was recovering from its civil war. India had just won independence. We had no competition! No wonder the economy was booming. Oh, and the statement that, "even a socialist or communist country will find its economy growing from the need to fulfill the military needs of a war" is false. Gorbachev discovered that 60% of the Soviet economy was tied up in the military and that's what was choking growth. There was no output for the masses. Read "Arsenals of Folly" to get the full story. (And, no neo-cons, it wasn't Reagan's brilliance that forced the Soviets to that conclusion; it was the devastation caused by Chernobyl.)

  •  
    13

    mejohnsn

    10/19/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Study: why executives are nervous about the next economic upswing

    I see a lot of people are skeptical about the arguments conclusions. Yet I am surprise no one has yet commented on the conclusion I found hardest to believe: that the executives who cut back on staff so severely during the recession have now actually figured out they cut back too far.

    Come on now! They NEVER learn that lesson. They failed to learn it in the previous recession too -- just as they failed to learn it in every preceding recession. Yes, they always cut back too far, driven by kibbitzing from Wall Street.

    After all: if, as most of them, they are public companies, they have to please the Street whether the Street's desires make sense or not.

  •  
    14

    Professor8

    10/21/09 | Report as spam

    because their compensation packages may not soar

    They're nervous because they might actually have to hire and pay people a
    decent amount, reflective of increased productivity, for a change, and their
    own compensation will no longer soar regardless of how poor of a job they
    do.

    In the employment figures, I haven't seen a genuine recovery from the
    1987 crash; it's all been smoke and mirrors as some people try to
    artificially pervert the economy to dump risks and costs on other people
    and keep the gravy all to themselves. Body shopping (including cross-
    border body shopping and the off-shoring it facilitates) is a significant part
    of this scam to shift compensation to executives and away from
    production workers.

    Let stock-owners have reasonable controls on executives' compensation,
    thus bringing it back into the purview of the markets, and some of this will
    be corrected.

The following tags are supported in Smartplanet comments:
<b></b> <i></i> <u></u> <pre></pre>

Leave a Reply

  1. Name: You are currently: a Guest |
advertisement

Quick Poll

advertisement
Click Here
advertisement
Click Here
advertisement

Heather Clancy

Heather Clancy is an award-winning business journalist in the New York area with more than 20 years experience covering the high-tech industry. She has a passion for green IT and regularly covers business technology issues and trends. Her articles have appeared in Entrepreneur, Fortune Small Business, The International Herald Tribune and The New York Times.

Clancy previously was editor at Computer Reseller News, the leading B2B trade publication covering news and trends about high-tech channels of distribution. In that role, she set editorial direction and led a staff of close to 30.

While at CRN, Clancy was the featured speaker on dozens of video netseminars, covering a wide range of topics including Software as a Service, managed services, convergence, IT security, mobile computing and high-tech channel program strategy. She has moderated numerous conference panel discussions and roundtables, and frequently was rated the top session facilitator at CMP Media's XChange conferences.

Prior to joining CRN, Clancy was a business writer with United Press International, where she covered everything from corporate mergers to the early days of the high-tech industry. She holds a B.A. in English literature from McGill University in Montreal, Quebec, and is a graduate of the Stanford Professional Publishing Course.

Heather Clancy

I’m sure cynical investigative reporters would discover that my lifestyle is about as sustainable as the average American, which is to say not so much. But I try. Really hard. Honest. And writing publicly about what the high-tech industry is actually doing to get greener or more sustainable is one way I figure I can contribute more meaningfully to the effort. I’m also a big OMG-kind-of-fan of smart leadership, which is why the goodly folks who publish this blog let me go on about this topic and why I am always on the hunt for forward-looking business management ideas.

My freelance hours are focused on looking for topics for my blogs, GreenTech Pastures and Business Brains, and writing articles for mainstream publication. I also contribute articles and blogs about VARs, resellers and systems integrators that deploy IT solutions for media company Tech Target. Occasionally, I’ll pop up at an industry conference in some sort of speaking capacity. In cases where a speaking engagement involves a sponsor that may be covered in this blog, this will be disclosed in coverage as appropriate.

My consulting activities include a relationship with SWOT Management Group, a firm in New Jersey that provides high-tech channel strategy and sales engagement insight to high-tech vendors. In the event that my commentary (in written, audio or video form) mentions a company for which I have provided consulting advice, I will disclose that fact. However, there is no connection between these projects and the topics that I’m covering in my blog.

Joe McKendrick

Joe McKendrick is an author and independent analyst who tracks the impact of information technology on management and markets. Joe is also SOA community manager for ebizQ, and speaks frequently on Enterprise 2.0 and SOA topics at industry events and Webcasts. He also serves as lead analyst and author of Evans Data Corp.'s highly regarded bi-annual SOA/Web Services and Web 2.0 surveys. Joe writes a regular column for Database Trends & Applications, and has authored numerous research reports in partnership with Unisphere Research for user groups such as SHARE, Oracle Applications Users Group, and International DB2 Users Group. In a previous life, Joe served as director of the Administrative Management Society (AMS), an international professional association dedicated to advancing knowledge within the IT and business management fields.

Joe McKendrick

Joe McKendrick is an independent consultant and editor. Joe has performed project work for the following companies in the IT marketspace: IBM, Systinet/HP, Teradata. He has performed project work for the following organizations in partnership with Unisphere Research (Unisphere Media): IBM, Oracle Corp., International Oracle Users Group, Oracle Applications Users Group, Professional Association for SQL Server, International DB2 Users Group, International Sybase Users Group.
Business Brains focuses on management issues that revolve around the key question: How do I make my business, family, and coworkers smarter? The blog examines the management issues facing a variety of businesses and debunks the technology you need to know