And over on John’s blog, we have been engaging in our first ‘interactive review’ - opening up our pages to the author to respond and exchange ideas with the critic.
The discussion threw up some interesting ideas and, being the FT, they were discussed in a suitably civilised way.
I’m sure a lot of readers have thoughts on this so feel free to pitch in with your comments (registration is required but this isn’t too onerous).
Our story in today’s paper that Mars has launched Fling, a chocolate bar targeted at women (”Naughty, but not that naughty”) is part of that contant trend among consumer goods companies to change what they produce and how they market it. Consumers are changing and the company’s selling them products are trying to keep pace with how things are evolving.
One reason, of course, is the global downturn. And to get a sense of how significant an impact it is having, you should take a look at Procter & Gamble, maker of Pampers nappies and Gillette razors. The company has decided to start making cheaper products.
How this change will affect business, which had been legally required to reserve an equity stake of 30 per cent for Malay investors, will be interesting to see.
A lot of it seems to be down to the leadership of the recently appointed prime minister, Najib Razak (pictured), who has surprised observers with his reformist zeal.
Many promises are made at the altar during a merger or an acquisition. Most of them get broken. It is worth reminding yourself of this now, before the next wave of whirlwind corporate romances arrives.
So far this year there has been only mixed evidence of renewed appetite for M&A. Sure, the proposed £40bn ($66bn, €47bn) merger between the mining companies Xstrata and Anglo American caught the eye, just as Oracle’s $7.4bn deal to buy Sun Microsystems and GlaxoSmithKline’s $3.6bn move for Stiefel Laboratories did.
The past three months have been relatively quiet, however, as businesses wait to see how robust any potential economic recovery really is, and whether finance will be available. Getting valuations right at a time like this is in any case extremely difficult.
The remainder of the article can be read here. Please post comments below.
Oprah Winfrey is taking her entire staff and their families on a luxury holiday - for the second year running. Stuart Jeffries offers some reasonably plausible reasons why it might not be a great idea
Apple is so protective of its operations, that it senior managers have apparently released false information in internal meetings in order to identify the source of stories that had made it into the public domain
David Rohde, a New York Times reporter, recently escaped from the Taliban after being held as a hostage for seven months. Unusually, particularly in the world of the 24-hour newscycle, the NY Times managed to keep the story of his abduction quiet with the co-operation of a raft of other news organisations.
Bill Keller, the paper’s executive editor, explained to CNN how they worked with their sometime rivals and also dealt with the bloggers who are often thought to be more difficult to control.
Why aren’t businesses and organisations more innovative? Are they filled with dull, unimaginative people? Are they lacking crucial “core competencies”? Or are their people just not working hard enough?
The answer to those last three questions is no, no and no. Something else must explain the inability of companies to display greater innovative flair. What is it?
The problem for senior managers is that, as you walk round the business or study the organisational chart, nothing much may seem to be wrong. People are at their desks or in meeting rooms, hard at work. Something that looks like two-way communication appears to be taking place. And then there are all those e-mails, instant messages and texts. You can be confident that good ideas must be flowing freely within the organisation.
The remainder of the article can be read here. Please post comments below.