For long yes – but with much thinner margins, and requiring much higher levels
of skill, and far, far lower levels of staffing.
They [as in a generic large IT company] will need to pare themselves to the
bone (the middle management layer is one that is bloated beyond all reason, and
ridden with politics) before they can get better at what needs to be done.
The other part is being too process driven for their own good.
IBM theoretically celebrates so called “wild ducks” – a concept that goes back
to the TJ Watson days. People who are independent, innovative, skunk works
type engineers.
Those are what a large company needs, in key positions and seeded up and down
their hierarchy. Unfortunately by the time they grow to the size they are, all
the “process” (and even more of the politics and inefficiencies and ..)
eventually become a shotgun that decimates wild ducks wholesale, or at least
sends them winging off to greener pastures regardless of the fact that they
might have spent the last 20+ years in the organization.
--srs
On 22/10/16, 7:39 PM, "silklist on behalf of Sriram Karra"
<silklist-bounces+suresh=hserus....@lists.hserus.net on behalf of
karra....@gmail.com> wrote:
It is not a law of nature that Infosys and its ilk will keep making PAT in
excess of 20%+. Even if profits halve in the next 2 years to 10% - does
that constitute a death of the industry? Pai's point is is that these are
high cash flow businesses, with enough margins and buffer to keep them
afloat and going for long. Further it's *my thesis* that these companies
have enough strengths they can leverage to turn it around. Yes, there's a
lot of pain in the short to medium term and many things will need to get
reinvited - such as change of hiring strategies that many have mentioned in
this thread, but this is just a bump in the larger scheme of things.
