Downsizing Literature LO4294

Andrew Moreno (amoreno@broken.ranch.org)
Sun, 17 Dec 1995 14:23:09 -0800 (PST)

Replying to LO4291 --

On Sun, 17 Dec 1995 HankHeath@aol.com wrote:

> RF> It is interesting that the major reason given for down-sizing is the
> amount of overhead in American companies compared to their international
> competition -- 27% of costs in the US, 22% in Germany, and 18% in Japan.
> Those differences are astounding.
>
> Whenever I worked for a large corporation, I was part of the overhead.
> That is to say, I contributed thoughts and directions rather than
> production.

It took me a long time to learn how to position myself to other people so
that they put a high value on my contributions. And I still haven't got it
right.

Percentages aren't precise enough to define WHAT the differences are and
how to customize the approach to those differences. Customization of
approaches according to differences is a key part of positioning.

Producers and thinkers unconsciously apply persuasion patterns
to position their contributions as valuable in a company to the
shareholders. Unfortunately, in the present business environment, the
rise of the Internet has decrease the perceived value of thinkers.

The solution for thinkers? Automate their thought contributions in
software, patent them and then sell the software to corporations and
then work as external consultants to facilitate application and usage of
the software. Obviously, HPS has figured this out. They put strict
controls on the usage of their Stella learning networks.

Another solution would be to apply their thinking skills to organizing
producers/LIMITED partner investors into new companies. I'm not sure if
all thinkers can do this. Thinkers' present tools aren't precise enough to
enable them to organize resources.

Andrew Moreno

--
Andrew Moreno <amoreno@broken.ranch.org>