Of the S&P 500, CEO degrees:
#1 Engineering - 22%
#2 Economics - 16%
#3 Business Admin - 13%
#4 Accounting - 9%
#5 Liberal Arts - 6%
Most people graduate with a liberal arts degree, yet the most in demand degrees are the top four listed above.
It is not that liberal arts people do not make good leaders. Rather, being focused on short-term immediate gains, employers are trying to hire those with a very definitive set of skills and are avoiding people with BAs.
Look at the state of the economy. The "engineering mentality" is what sunk the banks, offshored the jobs, etc.
During the boom, most CDOs were divided into tranches, or levels, reflecting the estimated creditworthiness of the underlying debt. Investors received higher returns for the so-called equity tranche, which held the riskiest investments. As it turned out, the ratings of many if not most of CDOs proved to be overoptimistic.
It's basically a multi-trillion dollar pyramid scheme.
If what SNK is saying is true, then what he predicts will be a good thing in the long run. It could be the end of excessive greed in America, along with excessive outsourcing and greedy CEOs gutting corporations.
Well, given two extremes, being that the project could have been 100% outsourced (in theory) or 0% outsourced, you would outsource that which didn't demand in-house intellectual capital. In other words, you'd outsource a fraction to cut some costs. You'd be conservative, knowing that the project could fail because it's complexity was being managed over several continents.
And we agree more than you think. Cutting costs is seldom the answer. There is a non-linear relationship with cutting costs and losing marketshare. Meaning, that you might cut costs by 4% and maybe lose a bit of marketshare, but cut costs by 7% and you might lose 20% of marketshare.
Outsourcing is an enormous risk that itself needs to be carefully managed.
Charts indicate that the worst might be over. Emphasis on "might".
Downtick on delinquency rates. Downtick on unemployment claims. Uptick on personal consumption expenditures. Trend towards increased consumer sentiment.
What this means is that there might be some inertia on the horizon. The market might have absorbed the excess capacity generated a few years ago....or at least enough to allow capital to flow a bit more freely than it has in 2008, 2009, and 2010.
I never said that outsourcing aint no big thang. I argued that a one-dimensional perspective is responsible for the mistaken belief that if it can be outsourced, it should be outsourced. This one-dimensional belief is often touted by engineering and accounting types, who are looking at the situation at ground level. What you need are those who can give a perspective from 10,000 feet. That perspective includes "conservative outsourcing" rather than the progressive outsourcing yo are donkey-baying about.
The plane never got built because too many engineers (and MBAs with an engineering background) spread dem tomatoes out a bit too far. Their incentive was to cut costs because they could see no other perspective. MBAs or people from different backgrounds could have had enough sway (by being on a committee) to reduce the level of outsourcing. A reduction in the level of outsourcing could have saved the dreamliner project.
That "kind of shit" got us "here" through financial chicanery via the housing bubble.
Look, corporations are indeed sitting on cash (as well as increased liabilities and owner's equity). They are borrowing this cash at historically low rates. After Obama's insane tax proposals are finalized, this will reduce uncertainty in the marketplace. Soon after, companies will begin to invest this cash through product development and other channels. This will hopefully stimulate job growth. However, a full recovery will take a long time, but the point is that we will finally begin to recover.
Steering committee might be a more accurate phrase in this case.
You must be an engineer.
Can you tell from the flow of this discussion how narrow minded your perspective is? I don't mean that as a personal dig, either.
The logical error that you are making is that you lambaste MBAs and others and suggest that corporations should hire the right people for the right jobs. In your mind, only engineers should lead other engineers. The entire company should be composed of and led by engineers.
Many of the MBAs that you lambaste have an engineering background. These are the guys willing to offshore work to save costs *now*. To them, it is entirely quantitative, composed of dollars and units.
Those with a different background look at outsourcing with a qualitative lens. They'll ask questions such as: "how is this going to effect our intellectual capital five years from now?"
I never said that an engineering group should be managed by someone with a liberal arts degree. However, having a well-rounded group providing guidance to the engineering team (guidance committee) composed of a couple of liberal arts folks is never a bad idea (for example).
Any project that is solely led by engineers is doomed to failure.