Hi Eric, of course coming back on a decision can have some effect of
board-member/stockholder confidence.
(mostly (or exclusively) looking at daily ups-and downs)
Yet considering how "Public Perception" can be the main underlying
driver of -confidence-,
and that in turn being the main driver of basically -everything- in an
organisation, ..
(the whole purpose of "marketing" (sometimes taking-up 60% of entire
budjets) is all around "perception")
The effects of persisting on a decision or actions that may widely be
perceived as "not right",
( especailly when it's true (!) )
can absolutely far outweigh or dwarf the effects of reconsideration of
such actions/decisions.
Shaken confidence can bring any organisation to it's knees,
regardless of it's size in a matter of "seconds" or days.
ie; only when a small (almost insignificant) textile factory crumbled,
did large manufactuers start spending billions in public campaigns,
armies of lawyers,
(or a less insignificant % of revenue) on actually real reforms,
in respects to minimum standards in their "sweatshop" operations.
Resulting in some actions being only superficial,
others temporary t'il things blew over, and others more genuine.
Yet the only thing that motivated such actions was -public awareness-.
..
So what can make large machines turn around when exactly that ends up
actually happening,
is when certain abstract fuzzy lines have been crossed,
thus affecting perception, therefore -confidence-.
While sometimes those reversals are from actual internal people waking,
more or less coming to grips with their moral compass,
and/or in other cases, merely or mostly just not to look too bad while
plastering their stuff "non-sweatshop-made",
with all sorts of varying degrees in between...
(machines are run by regular everyday people after all)
.. yet the fact remains that, when something is widely perceived as
wrong or unfair,
especially when you can't really hide, mask or distract attention,
is when the *RIGHT* thing has indeed the best chance of actually happening.
On 03/15/14 17:31, Eric Thivierge wrote:
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Meng-Yang Lu <ntmon...@gmail.com
<mailto:ntmon...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Heh, it'd be less work just undo-ing the EOL decision instead of
reinventing the round wheel to a square one.
But how would that look to stock holders / board members? Confidence
would plummet hard. It would do more damage then just sticking with
it. Business-wise, there is no going back.
--------------------------------------------
Eric Thivierge
http://www.ethivierge.com
