# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Toyota Problems and Complaints - 614 Issues

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Problem with your Toyota? Our list of 614 known complaints reported by owners can help you fix your Toyota.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Drivers of Toyota Prius Plug-In Hybrid released in model years 2012 through 2015 - about 39,900 people - are being warned about a fuse in the hybrid drive system that may cause their cars to lose power while driving.

Toyota says the fuse may fail if a Prius has been "repeatedly operated in EV mode under high-load conditions, such as during a long hill climb." Though a dangerous possibility, no collisions have been reported due to this issue. Dealers will inspect and replace these fuses without cost to the owners.

RELATED: Take a look at the history of Toyota

In a separate recall, 28,600 Toyota C-HR crossovers are affected. While there have been no injuries or accidents reported, Toyota says some of the 2018 C-HRs may have a faulty electronic parking brake. To fix this issue, owners need to return their cars to a Toyota dealership for a free software update.

Owners of the affected vehicles will receive notification by mail starting in January 2018.

More from Aol.com:
Ex-Google executive Anthony Levandowski is founding a church where people worship an artificial intelligence god
Bill Gates just bought 25,000 acres in Arizona to build a new 'smart city'
Amazon has been quietly launching sportswear brands all year

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Toyota issues recalls for two very popular vehicles

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Drivers of Toyota Prius Plug-In Hybrid released in model years 2012 through 2015 - about 39,900 people - are being warned about a fuse in the hybrid drive system that may cause their cars to lose power while driving.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Toyota Motor Corporation Site introduces History of Toyota. Trace Toyota's development, from the birth of founder Sakichi Toyoda in 1867 to the sale of the millionth Prius.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The latest news, videos, and discussion topics on Hewlett-Packard

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
News about the Hewlett-Packard Corporation. Commentary and archival information about the Hewlett-Packard Corporation from The New York Times.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Share to facebook

Share to twitter

Share to linkedin

If you speak with startup founders or large-company CEOs, they'll probably tell you that hiring good people is their biggest challenge. It's no wonder there are thousands of recruiting firms in the U.S., all vying to help companies get talent in the door. But which recruiters are the most well-respected?

Forbes worked with analytics firm Statista to compile two lists of America's best recruiting firms. The first set ranks 250 executive search firms, defined as companies that place executives in positions with at least $100,000 in annual pay. The second ranks 250 professional search firms, which place employees in roles with less than $100,000 in annual income.

Click below to view the full lists:

To see the 10 most highly-rated companies in each category, open the gallery.

To conduct its research, Statista first consulted with sources like trade organizations and company databases, identifying about 4,000 recruiters in each of the two categories. Then it invited thousands of recruiters, employees who have worked with recruiters over the past three years, and H.R. managers to take an online survey. The survey asked them to recommend up to 10 recruiting firms (excluding their own), and it gathered a total of 20,000 recommendations. The companies with the most recommendations ranked highest.

Robert Half, a recruiting firm based in Silicon Valley, was the only company to make the top 10 on both the professional and executive recruiters lists. It has 16,400 employees, made $5.3 billion in revenue last year and is a member of the S&P 500. Robert Half places candidates in a range of industries, including finance, law, technology and marketing.

Korn Ferry took the top spot on the executive recruiters list. The Los Angeles-based company has 7,000 employees and works with 93% of the highest-grossing companies in the U.S. It places candidates in dozens of sectors, ranging from investment banking to industrial manufacturing and education.

New York had more recruiters on the lists than any other city, with 41 executive recruiting firms and 18 professional recruiting firms. Chicago had the second-most, followed by Atlanta.

Follow me on Twitter @JeffKauflin or email me at jkauflin[at]forbes[dot]com. Get the most important news on crypto and blockchain straight to you inbox -- Sign up to Forbes' CryptoConfidential.
I cover cryptocurrencies, blockchain, fintech and investing at Forbes. I've also written frequently about leadership, corporate diversity and entrepreneurs. Before Forbes, I worked for ten years in marketing consulting, in roles ranging from client consulting to talent manag...

MORE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There are thousands of recruiting firms in the U.S., all vying to help companies get talent in the door. But which recruiters are the most well-respected? Forbes worked with analytics firm Statista to compile two lists of America's best recruiting firms.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
HeadHunter - the #1 site for Retail jobs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
HeadHunter - the #1 site for Retail jobs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
HeadHunter is a recruitment site for management and executive-level candidates looking for their ideal career opportunity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
History Grand Hotel Marriott Resort - Alabama Gulf Coast Resorts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
History The Grand Hotel Marriott Resort is a luxury Alabama Gulf Coast Resorts in Mobile, AL. Golf, Spa, Weddings, Meetings, Tennis and Events. At the start of the Robert Trent Jones Golf Trail.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Address:

Website: www.marriott.com

Company Perspectives:

Of the many distinguishing qualities that define Marriott International and contribute to its success, perhaps the most notable is the company's spirit to serve, a core value shared by 192,000 Marriott associates worldwide.

Company History:

Marriott International, Inc.--formed in 1993 when Marriott Corporation split into two separate companies--is the world's leading lodging and contract services company. Marriott International has two operating groups: Marriott Lodging, which generates about 60 percent of company revenue, and the Marriott Service Group, its contract services operation. Marriott Lodging manages or franchises more than 1,350 lodging properties under 10 hotel brands worldwide. It also operates more than 30 timeshare vacation properties through Marriott Vacation Club International, and 25 U.S. conference centers through Marriott Conference Centers. The Marriott Service Group includes Marriott Management Services, which provides food and facilities management for business, education, and health care clients; Marriott Senior Living Services, which manages 75 senior living communities; and Marriott Distribution Services, which operates 15 distribution centers nationwide that provide food and related products to internal Marriott and external clients.

Roots in Restaurant Business

J. Willard (Bill) and Alice S. Marriott were newlyweds, recently transplanted from Utah, when they opened an A & W root beer stand in Washington, D.C., in May 1927. The Marriotts quickly noticed that soft drinks sold well during Washington's long, hot summer, but that business needed a boost during the cooler months. Tacos and tamales, the first Mexican food in the area, were added to their winter menu. The Marriotts called their restaurant The Hot Shoppe, and offered medium-priced food in a family environment. In 1928, the Marriotts opened their third restaurant, which offered curbside service. Business was strong and in 1929 the restaurant was incorporated as Hot Shoppes, Inc.

As Hot Shoppes evolved into a chain of restaurants, the Marriotts maintained close family supervision of all facets of the business; for many years Alice served as company bookkeeper while Bill ran the business with "benevolent and paternalistic labor relations and a flair for promotion," as Forbes reported in 1971.

Hot Shoppes remained popular in the Washington area through the Great Depression. In 1937 Marriott branched out from the restaurant business for the first time, pioneering in-flight catering with boxed lunches for Eastern, American, and Capital Airlines flights from Washington's old Hoover Airport.

Entered Lodging in the Late 1950s

In 1939 Marriott's food service-management business won an account at the U.S. Treasury building. In 1940 Marriott opened five new restaurants. In 1955 Marriott entered the hospital food service market at the Children's Hospital in Washington, and in 1957, another business segment made its debut when Marriott's first hotel, the Twin Bridges Marriott Motor Hotel, opened in Arlington, Virginia. Over the next few years, the company continued to open hotels as well as Hot Shoppes restaurants.

In 1964 Marriott handed the presidency to his son, Bill Marriott, Jr. At the time, the company owned 45 Hot Shoppes and four hotels, as well as its other businesses, and that year the company's name was changed to Marriott-Hot Shoppes, Inc. Bill Marriott Jr. wanted to accelerate the pace of growth. The new president first concentrated on the lodging segment of the business. Over the next six years, Marriott almost quadrupled in size, surpassing Howard Johnson and Hilton Hotels in both revenues and profits. The company grew both by acquisition and by starting up new businesses. Marriott became international when it acquired an airline catering kitchen in Caracas, Venezuela, in 1966. In 1967 the 22-unit Big Boy restaurant chain was acquired, and in 1968 the company started a fast-food chain, Roy Rogers. Also in 1967, shareholders approved a corporate name change to Marriott Corporation; and in 1968 the company's stock was first listed on the New York Stock Exchange.

By 1971 Marriott was "the most highly diversified company in the away-from-home market," Bill Marriott Jr. told Forbes. Marriott brought in new management techniques to help the company grow in an organized and controlled manner. He divided the company into three basic groups: food operations, in-flight services to airlines, and hotels and specialty restaurants. Each group was headed by a president who reported directly to Marriott. With the three groups further divided into 16 divisions, the company was never dependent on one segment for profits. Another management change came in the planning-and-research area, which became the most intense one in the industry.

Along with tight family control and cost control, Bill Marriott Jr., who succeeded his father as CEO in 1972, also agreed with his father that labor unions helped neither the worker nor the company. Marriott worked hard to keep unions out of all phases of the corporation because its executives believed that the company was much more flexible without union rules and that they could offer better benefits to their employees. Backing this belief was a generous profit-sharing plan and a system of incentive bonuses.

During the 1970s, casinos became a popular investment in the leisure market, but Marriott avoided that segment of the business and concentrated on hotels. Marriott's hotels generally catered to upscale travelers and concentrated on businesspeople willing to pay extra for quality. Marriott hotels continued to rise in both cities and suburbs. Because of their business orientation, most facilities had meeting rooms and banquet facilities. Convention hotels were built in growing convention cities such as Boston, New York, and Anaheim, California. As airline travel grew, Marriott also began to locate new hotels near airports. Over the decade, Marriott spent more than $3 billion on hotels, increasing its hotel rooms by an average of 17 percent a year.

Marriott planned carefully and came out ahead in the shaky economic atmosphere of the late 1970s and early 1980s. The company bought back a third of its stock, and in 1982 purchased the Gino's restaurant chain as well as Host International, an airport-terminal food, beverage, and merchandising company, making Marriott the largest operator in that business. During this time Marriott also kept building hotels, even as others pulled back.

Launched New Lodging Brands in the 1980s

By the early 1980s, Bill Marriott realized that the hotel division would not be able to maintain its growth rate by operating only in the upscale market. Finding that customers were least satisfied with middle-priced hotels, Marriott sent researchers out to discover exactly what customers were willing to give up in exchange for less expensive rates.

In 1983, after three years of research and planning, Courtyard by Marriott emerged. The first opened that year near Atlanta, Georgia. The 150-room, two-story Courtyards did not offer bellmen, room service, or large meeting and banquet facilities, but did offer the high-quality rooms the chain was known for. Costs were also kept down by building the hotels in groups of 10 to 12 and hiring one management team for each cluster.

Marriott's research team also indicated that several other segments of the residence market could be popular. One of these was timesharing, which Marriott decided to enter by placing timesharing units near its resorts. The venture began with the purchase of American Resorts Group in 1984. By 1989 the company owned four timesharing resorts in Hilton Head, South Carolina, and Orlando, Florida, and was in the process of developing several more.

Bill Marriott also realized that the company could grow faster if Marriott did not own most of its hotels. The company then tended to build hotels for later sale, but retained control through management contracts. Marriott believed that this system provided more rapid profit growth and limited risk while allowing more uniform service than franchising.

During the mid-1980s Marriott made several changes. In November 1985 the corporation bought the Howard Johnson Company. At the time of the purchase, it sold the Howard Johnson hotels to Prime Motor Inns but kept 350 restaurants and 68 turnpike units. Marriott's services group grew in 1985 with the purchase of Gladieux Corporation, and then Service Systems. The 1986 acquisition of Saga Corporation, a diversified food-service management company, made Marriott the largest food-service management company in the country.

A major disappointment in the restaurant segment occurred in 1987, when the company made an unsuccessful bid for Denny's, a chain of 1,200 restaurants. Had the bid succeeded, it would have made Marriott the largest operator of family restaurants in the country. Later that year Marriott sold franchise rights for the Big Boy system to Elias Brothers Restaurants.

To complement the Courtyards, Marriott decided to enter the luxury all-suite market, targeting extended-stay travelers. The new units, called Marriott Suites, were planned for suburbs and medium-sized cities. The first one opened in Atlanta, Georgia, in March 1987. Later in the year the company purchased the Residence Inn Company, an all-suites hotel chain that catered to extended stay travelers. At the other end of the spectrum, the first Fairfield Inn economy lodges were tested in the same year after three years of development.

In 1988 the company began to test market a new restaurant, called Allie's after Alice Marriott. First, 13 former Big Boys were converted to Allie's. After a successful test in San Diego, California, the company planned to roll out the restaurant nationwide by opening more than 600 units, both new and converted, by 1993. These family-style restaurants concentrated on all-you-can-eat food bars with such items as Mexican food and barbecue.

Also in 1988, the 100th Courtyard opened, in Chicago; 12 Fairfield Inns were in operation and 24 more Marriott Suites were added, for a total of 130. With Marriott Hotels and Resorts, Courtyard By Marriott, Fairfield Inn, and Residence Inns by Marriott, the company's business included more than 470 hotels by the end of 1988. In the crowded, competitive lodging market, Marriott's occupancy rates were about 12 percent over the industry average.

Marriott Senior Living Services was formed in the late 1980s, adding to Marriott's operations "lifecare community" residences, which incorporated retirement living with long-term nursing care when needed. After almost six years of research, Marriott felt ready to enter this market, long dominated by nonprofit organizations, in 1988. By the end of 1988 Marriott operated nine facilities--eight under contracts gained in the acquisition of Basic American Retirement Communities. During 1989, the company announced plans to build 150 "senior living communities" by the mid-1990s.

In late 1989 Marriott announced a major restructuring, which included the sale of the company's airline catering division to Caterair International for $570 million and plans to sell its restaurant business and to buy back 10 million shares of stock. The company subsequently sold its restaurants in April 1990 to Hardee's Food System for $365 million. After the restructuring, Marriott's three core businesses became lodging; food and services management; and food, beverage, and merchandise operations at airports and on turnpikes.

Marriott International, Inc. Formed in 1993

Marriott was forced to make a much more drastic--and dramatic move--in the early 1990s. Bill Marriott's method of building a hotel, then selling it but still managing it had worked for years. But a 1986 change in the tax law sharply reduced real estate tax shelters and came in the midst of a company building boom. Unable to sell as many of these properties as it wished, the company was left saddled with a large debt load of $3.4 billion, built up to finance all the building. By the early 1990s, the debt burden left Marriott unable to expand.

In 1992 Bill Marriott and his CFO, Stephen Bollenbach, conceived of a plan--announced in October of that year&mdashø divide Marriott Corporation into two separate publicly traded companies, one that would own hotel properties and another that would manage them. The following October, Marriott completed the division of its operations, with Host Marriott Corporation formed to own lodging properties, as well as handling Marriott's airport and turnpike concessions; and Marriott International, Inc. created to manage the Marriott family of hotel brands and the senior living communities, along with Marriott's food and services management business.

The division was initially controversial, mainly because about two-thirds of Marriott Corporation's $2.9 billion of debt was assigned to Host Marriott. But Host Marriott and Marriott International went on to post strong earnings well into the 1990s. (Host Marriott subsequently underwent a further split in 1996, when Host Marriott Services Corporation, another separate publicly traded company, was formed to operate the airport and turnpike concessions, with Host Marriott left to concentrate only on owning hotels and real estate.)

Marriott International managed about 760 hotels and other lodging properties at the time it was formed. By early 1997, the company had added more than 600 properties to its management portfolio, approaching the 1,400 hotel mark. Relieved of a heavy debt burden, Marriott International was free to aggressively pursue acquisitions and launch new hotel brands.

In April 1995 the company spent $200 million to acquire 49 percent of The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company LLC and planned to acquire the remaining 51 percent over the next several years. The deal brought Marriott International a leading brand in the luxury hotel segment, and by 1996 there were 33 Ritz-Carltons in 15 states and seven countries. In March 1996 Fairfield Suites by Marriott was launched as an all-suite economy hotel. In June of that same year, Marriott Senior Living Services was bolstered with the $303 million acquisition of Forum Group, Inc., a leading operator of senior housing in the quality sector. The following March, Marriott International sold 29 of the 42 Forum retirement centers to Host Marriott for $225 million in cash and $315 million in notes and assumed debt, but the company would continue to manage them. By 1996, Marriott International's revenues had surpassed $10 billion, increasing 14 percent over the preceding year, while net income was also on the rise, growing from $490 million in 1995 to $629 million in 1996, a jump of 24 percent.

Following the February 1997 naming of William J. Shaw as president and chief operating officer of the company (Bill Marriott remaining chairman and CEO), Marriott International continued to launch new brands and make major acquisitions. In February 1997, the company introduced Marriott Executive Residences, which are designed for the international traveler on an extended assignment and which were initially targeted for Europe (the first to open in Budapest, Hungary) and the Middle East (Jeddah, Saudi Arabia). The following month saw the opening in Newport News, Virginia, of the first TownePlace Suites by Marriott, which provided moderately priced lodging for the extended stay traveler.

Later in March 1997, Marriott International acquired Renaissance Hotel Group N.V. for $916 million in cash and the assumption of $54 million in debt, the largest acquisition in Marriott history. The addition of Renaissance doubled Marriott International's overseas operations, bringing with it the Renaissance brand of full-service, luxury hotels located throughout the world; high-quality, full-service New World hotels located in the Asia-Pacific region; and Ramada International mid-priced hotels located outside the United States and Canada. At the time of the purchase, Renaissance operated or franchised 150 hotels in 38 countries.

Marriott International neared the turn of the century with an impressive, and growing, array of hotel brands ranging from economy Fairfield Inns and Suites to the upscale Marriott, Ritz-Carlton, Renaissance, and New World brands. The company's continuing focus on managing rather than owning lodging properties was clearly paying dividends. With the hospitality industry predicted to grow healthily well into the 21st century, Marriott International was poised for further growth.

Principal Divisions: Marriott Service Group consists of three divisions: Marriott Management Services; Marriott Senior Living Services; and Marriott Senior Living Services.

Principal Operating Units: Marriott Lodging; Marriott Service Group.

Further Reading:

Binkley, Christina, and Jon Bigness, "Marriott to Buy Renaissance Hotel Group," Wall Street Journal, February 19, 1997, p. A3.

"Culture Is Destiny," Chief Executive, July/August 1988, pp. 30--34.

England, Robert Stowe, "Are Two Marriotts Better Than One?," Financial World, November 10, 1992, pp. 28--29.

Grube, Lori, "Making Room to Grow," Chief Executive, December 1995, pp. 18--19.

Koselka, Rita, "Marriott, Meet Marriott," Forbes, March 13, 1995, pp. 48, 50.

LaMonica, Paul R., "Old Gold: Why Marriott International Is Catering to the Geriatric Set," Financial World, June 17, 1996, pp. 34--36.

Lee, Daniel R., "How They Started: The Growth of Four Hotel Giants," Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, May 1985, p. 22.

Marriott, J. W. Jr., and Kathi Ann Brown, The Spirit to Serve: The Marriott Way, New York: HarperBusiness, 1997.

"The Marriott Story," Forbes, February 1, 1987.

"A Most Remarkable Man," Washington, D.C.: Marriott Corporation, [1985].

O'Brien, Robert, Marriott: The J. Willard Marriott Story, Salt Lake City, Utah: Desert Book Co., 1977.

Prewitt, Milford, "Marriott Looks Toward Future After Shareholders OK Split," Nation's Restaurant News, August 9, 1993, pp. 14, 71.

Raffio, Ralph, "Marriott Corp.: Company at the Crossroads," Restaurant Business, June 10, 1991, pp. 84, 86, 91--92, 97.

Rice, Faye, "Know When to Change the Game," Fortune, June 28, 1993, pp. 101--02.

Taylor, John H., "Don't Stop Now," Forbes, July 9, 1990, pp. 36--37.

Ward, Judy, "Marriott: The Sequel," Financial World, August 2, 1994, pp. 28--29.

Yang, Catherine, et al, "Low-Wage Lessons," Business Week, November 11, 1996, pp. 108--13.

Source: International Directory of Company Histories, Vol. 21. St. James Press, 1998.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Address: Website: www.marriott.com Company Perspectives: Of the many distinguishing qualities that define Marriott International and contribute to its success, perhaps the most notable is the company's spirit to serve, a core value shared by 192,000 Marriott associates worldwide. Company History: Marriott International, Inc.--formed in 1993 when Marriott Corporation split into two separate companies--is the world's leading lodging and contract services company.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A History of Putting People First - Marriott's Diversity & Inclusion Program

# data[].attributes.headline
Influencing People in Multinational Corporations

# data[].attributes.subject
Influencing People in Multinational Corporations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Multinational Corporations are the main actors driving economic globalisation which thrives when market forces are de-regulated, allowing essential goods and services to be allocated by commercial activity, not human need. The result is a world economy that favours affluent countries and their corporate interests whilst neglecting those living in extreme poverty who the market fails to reach. Below is a brief overview, some key facts and further resources that relate to multinational corporations.
Contents
Once considered dangerous and untrustworthy by governments, corporate enterprises are now the key players in the globalised economy, exerting substantial influence over governments and international organizations the world over. Their financial success seems endless; despite a widespread economic downturn in recent years, corporate profits are at an all time high, with the largest banks, oil, pharmaceutical and retail companies regularly reporting record turnovers. A significant proportion of these profits are reinvested not only in influencing politics and economics, but ensuring that people continue to consume their products.

Economic and Political Influence

Despite employing less than one percent of the global work force, 200 of the largest multinational corporations (MNCs) have sales equivalent to almost 30% of the world's GDP. Given their sheer economic might it is unsurprising that, in a period where economic growth is considered a panacea for development success, governments increasingly adopt pro-market policies and facilitate commercial activity. The result is a firmly established mutual-interdependence between corporations and governments, a phenomenon which is most evident in the United States which increasingly undermines a truly democratic representation of public interest.

While corporate-friendly policies of privatization, government downsizing and market liberalization continue to be propagated, large swathes of the public in both the North and South are suffering. As a result, there is now a significant worldwide backlash against many of the principles and effects of economic globalization. Transnational corporations, in their relentless drive to maximize profits and bolster share prices, have been re-locating their production facilities to developing countries where tax, labour and environmental restrictions are negligible - creating large-scale unemployment in the industrialized countries.

Many argue that this is a necessary sacrifice in order to secure economic growth and opportunity in the developing world, but in many cases the result is merely a glut of labourers working in inhumane factory conditions for comparatively miniscule pay. These workers often give up their families and rural life to migrate en masse to overcrowded cities, inadvertently buying into an economic state of play which promotes unsustainable over-consumption in already wealthy countries.

At the same time, food security has sharply declined in many developing countries as large-scale agribusinesses out-compete local farmers, exporting cash crops and not growing food for those who need it locally. Consequently, communities are no longer able to grow the food they need to eat, must import food instead, and are therefore at the mercy of increasingly volatile international markets - a factor at the heart of the current food price crisis.

Influencing the public

Far from supplying public demand, corporations actively dictate cultural habits and create demand by influencing the public through a sophisticated and well-funded combination of research, marketing, advertising and media manipulation. The result is the subtle, but quite apparent, alignment of public and corporate interest. This cultural homogenization of society both nationally and globally is fertile ground for maximizing profit. Whilst levels of unnecessary and unsustainable consumption increase globally, corporate longevity is secured.

The sophistication and effectiveness of advertising and marketing methods is well understood. The ubiquity of the television and the increasing number of hours it is watched, especially by children, is particularly disturbing. In the US, watching TV is the third most time-consuming pastime after sleeping and working.

As domestic markets become saturated, or public opinion turns against a particular product, corporations - using the same aggressive marketing tactics - shift their attention to developing countries with devastating effect. Nestle is notorious for its aggressive marketing of infant milk formula in poor countries in the 1980s. Because of this practice, Nestle is still one of the most boycotted corporations in the world, and its infant formula remains controversial. In recent years, as public awareness of dire health consequences of smoking tobacco have come to light in industrialized nations, tobacco giants have also had to shift their focus to increasing demand in developing countries. The WHO has reported that 84% of an estimated 1.3 billion smokers live in developing and transitional economy countries. A 1994 WHO report estimated that the use of tobacco resulted in an annual global net loss of US $200 billion, a third of this loss being in developing countries which consequently hampers development efforts.

Corporate Greed or Public Good?

The battle for control of the democratic process is clearly being won by those with the greatest financial and economic leverage, and the phenomenon of market forces is becoming more entrenched in every aspect of public life. As many industrialized nations call for democracy to be spread abroad, the economic ideologies they have vested our future in are cancerous to these same democratic principles. True democracy can only be established if the global public is empowered to make decisions that favour cooperation and economic efficiency over competition and self interest.

After 30 years of economic globalization and the decadent rise of multinational corporations, almost half the world is still denied even the most basic of goods and services such as clean water, basic food, energy and medicine. Whilst small to medium-scale business is crucial in a thriving and interdependent society, the commercialisation of all resources and their distribution through a tiny number of oligarchic corporations will never supply the most essential resources to those who need them most. Small-scale, localised industry combined with international economic sharing is likely to play a significant role in creating a sustainable future. This will only be possible, however, when corporate rights are scaled down to a level where corporations act in a limited and regulated capacity to serve the public's economic needs.

Size and Income

Many corporations have a greater turnover than the GDP of most countries. Of the 100 largest economies in the world, 52 are corporations and 48 are countries, and these corporations have sales figures between $51 billion and $247 billion.

Seventy percent of world trade is controlled by just 500 of the largest industrial corporations, and in 2002, the top 200 had combined sales equivalent to 28% of world GDP. However, these 200 corporations only employed 0.82% of the global work force.

In the US, ninety-eight percent of all companies account for only 25 percent of business activity; the remaining two percent account for nearly 75 percent of the remaining activity. The top 500 industrial corporations, which represent only one-tenth of one percent of all US companies, control over two-thirds of the business resources in the US and collect over 70 percent of all US profits.

According to the International Finance Corporation (IFC), inflows of foreign direct investment to the emerging markets have grown by an average of 23 percent per year between 1990 and 2000. The combined value of stock markets in emerging economies is set to exceed $5 trillion in 2006, and has more than doubled in the past decade.

Chevron's CEO received $37 million in total compensation in 2005, whilst Exxon's CEO received a $400 million pay and retirement package. In the meanwhile the minimum wage in America (£5.15 per hour) is at a 50 year low.

Corporate growth is around four times as high as global economic growth.

In 2005 the number of millionaires globally swelled to 8.7 million, 5.7 million of whom are based in North America and Europe. Forbes reported a 15% rise in the number of billionaires since 2005, who now have a combined worth of $2.6 trillion.

Job Losses

Between 1980 and 1993, over four million jobs were shed by the largest 500 industrial corporations in the US. Since President Bush took office, two million have lost their jobs and in 2004 nearly one in ten could not find a full time job.

The International Labor Organization (ILO) calculates that global unemployment rates are at an all time high. Of the 2.8 billion workers in the world in 2005, nearly 1.4 billion still did not earn enough to lift themselves and their families above the two dollars a day poverty line - the same proportion as ten years ago.

Health

Nestlé's fierce marketing of powdered milk in the 80's caused the deaths of an estimated 1.5 million children through the contaminated water used to make the infant formula.

Nestle is still one of the most boycotted corporations in the world, and its infant formula is still controversial. In Italy in 2005, police seized more than two million litres of Nestle infant formula that was contaminated with the chemical isopropylthioxanthone (ITX).

In recent years tobacco giants have had to shift their focus to increasing demand in developing countries. The WHO has reported that 84% of the estimated 1.3 billion smokers live in developing and transitional economy countries. A 1994 WHO report estimated that the use of tobacco resulted in an annual global net loss of US$ 200 billion, a third of this loss being in developing countries, stumping development efforts.

Human Rights

Chevron and Coca Cola have been indirectly involved in the violent killings of workers and union officials in developing countries in attempts to suppress workers rights. Instances of kidnappings, torture, discrimination, health violations, fuelling conflicts, privatizing and contaminating local water sources, using child labour and even sex trafficking have all been documented as occurring under the responsibility of the largest corporations.

Sweatshops are often used in developing countries by the apparel industry which usually pay negligible wages to under age workers who often work long hours in terrible conditions.

Corporate Welfare

Government support to farmers in OECD countries totalled $283 billion in 2005, representing 29% of total farm income. The majority of farmers who own small to medium sized farms do not benefit from these subsidies. 30% of farmers in the US do not receive any of the $26 billion of US subsidies, and over 85% go to only 20% of the largest farms, a pattern repeated in the EU.

The number of small farms in the US has decreased from 6.8 million in 1935 to 1.5 million in 1998. In global commodity markets these subsidies mean that producers in developing countries, many of whom produce their goods with more efficiency and less cost than the US and EU, cannot compete with agri-business suppliers.

The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports that 95 percent of corporations paid less than 5 percent of their income in taxes, and 6 in 10 paid nothing at all in federal taxes from 1996 through to 2000. The corporate share of taxes paid fell from 33 percent in the 1940's to 15 percent in the 1990's. The individual's share of taxes has risen from 44 to 73 percent.

Externalities

Every year corporations are fined hundreds of millions of dollars as their externalities create serious environmental catastrophes, neglect employee rights and even cause deaths. Examples include Chevron, guilty of some of the worst environmental and human rights abuses in the world such as the dumping of 18 billion gallons of toxic waste into rivers used for bathing water in the Amazon, devastating the health of the local community.

Taking the cost of these externalities into account, Ralph Estes estimated that the public cost of private corporations was over $3 trillion in 1995. His externalities included "workplace injuries, pollution, employment discrimination, consumer rip-offs, corporate white collar crime, tax abatements and all the other instances of corporate welfare, government contracting fraud and creative accounting"

The World Bank

Foreign direct investment now exceeds $1 trillion per year for World Bank projects such as privatization of public utilities and creating banking systems. 1% of all multinationals own 50% of the total stock of all foreign direct investment.

IMF

When these corporations made bad loans to developing countries, the IMF provided multi billion dollar bailouts. For example, it bailed out foreign investors in Russia with an $11 billion package and orchestrated a massive bailout of the big banks that made bad loans to Asian countries. In 1995, the IMF gave almost $18 billion to Wall Street investors who stood to lose billions with the peso devaluation.

WTO

WTO rulings have often resulted in national governments being sued by corporations simply for placing national interests above corporate profit. The overall effect is the harmonizing of international regulations and standards to their lowest denominator.

The success of corporate influence on the global economy is measurable, as 70% of global trade is now controlled by just 500 corporations

The developing world, where 75% of people's livelihoods depend upon agriculture, is the source of 90 per cent of all biological resources. Yet transnational companies based in developed counties hold 97 percent of global patents. Since 1985 there have been 10,778 patents on plants registered in the US. Overall, patent applications at the World Intellectual Property Organization have soared from 3,000 in 1979 to 67,000 in 1997.

Influencing Governments

Eighty percent of all corporations reside in the US and EU. Over 30,000 corporate lobbyists are based in Washington and Brussels, vastly outnumbering the US Congress and European Commission staff that they lobby.

The vast majority of lobby groups represent business interests who spend billions of dollars annually advocating their main cause, which is currently market access in emerging economies. In the US, corporations and their agencies spent $9.7 billion lobbying Congress between 1997 and 2000, about $4.5 million per year per member of Congress.

In his book Captive State (2000), George Monbiot lists 43 individuals who, since the 1997 elections in the UK, have been appointed as ministers, heads, chairmen, and advisors to as many government departments and independent committees. In each case their previous corporate positions (mostly as directors, chairmen or chief executives) and existing links to industry present a direct conflict of interest with their governmental roles.

The President, Vice-President, Commerce Secretary and National Security Adviser all have strong ties to the oil industry. The Bush family had strong ties to Enron-which was President G. W. Bush's largest corporate source of funding.

Vice-President Dick Cheney amassed some £50m-$60m while he was chief executive of Halliburton Oil Company. Condoleezza Rice was a director of Chevron. Secretary of Commerce Donald Evans held stock valued between $5m and $25m in Tom Brown Inc, the oil and gas exploration company he headed.

Influencing Society

In the US, watching TV is the 3rd most time consuming pastime, after sleeping and working. In the US, 75% of commercial television time and 50% of public television time is paid for by the 100 largest corporations. Projected global advertising expenditure for corporations in 2006 is over $427 billion dollars.

Public Relations

All major corporations, particularly those which have the greatest negative impact upon the environment, have repackaged themselves recently as having 'green' credentials to great effect. The oil giant BP's new green, flower-like logo and recent PR campaign is an excellent example. As a result, BP has successfully managed to shift public focus away from the fact that is one of the world's foremost polluters of the environment and considered by many as one of the top 10 corporate criminals.
Organisations Campaigns Reports Articles Books Further resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Multinational Corporations are the main actors driving economic globalisation which thrives when market forces are de-regulated, allowing essential goods and services to be allocated by commercial activity, not human need. The result is a world economy that favours affluent countries and their corporate interests whilst neglecting those living in extreme poverty who the market fails to reach.

# data[].attributes.body
We all need to be able to accept and value others

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
According to a recent demographic analysis conducted by the Pew Research Center, by 2055, the U.S. will no longer have a single racial or ethnic majority. This shift towards a more diverse population will have major impacts on the workforce and how organizations address diversity in the workplace.

In the coming years, organizations that understand how to manage diversity in the workplace effectively will hold a distinct advantage when it comes to recruiting and hiring talent. This post outlines how organizations can best approach and manage diversity in the workplace with actionable tips and advice.

What is Diversity in the Workplace?

For an organization looking to cultivate a more diverse and inclusive workplace, it is important to understand what constitutes workplace diversity.

Workplace diversity refers to the variety of differences between individuals in an organization. Diversity not only includes how individuals identify themselves but also how others perceive them. Diversity within a workplace encompasses race, gender, ethnic groups, age, religion, sexual orientation, citizenship status, military service and mental and physical conditions, as well as other distinct differences between people.

What are the Benefits of Diversity in the Workplace?

There are many benefits to having a diverse workplace. For starters, organizations that commit to recruiting a diverse workforce have a larger pool of applicants to choose from, which can lead to finding more qualified candidates and reducing the time it takes to fill vacant positions. Businesses that do not recruit from diverse talent pools run the risk of missing out on qualified candidates and may have a more difficult time filling key roles, which increases recruitment costs.

According to a survey conducted by Glassdoor, 67 percent of job seekers said a diverse workforce is important when considering job offers and 57 percent of employees think their companies should be more diverse. These numbers are telling. Not only can organizations fill positions with qualified candidates more quickly by recruiting from different talent pools, but a diverse workforce also benefits their employer brand which is crucial when it comes to getting the right talent.

Having a diverse workforce with multi-lingual employees and employees from varying ethnic backgrounds can also be helpful for organizations who want to expand or improve operations in international, national, regional and local markets.

More benefits to having diversity in the workplace:

Employees from diverse backgrounds imbue organizations with creative new ideas and perspectives informed by their cultural experiences

A diverse workplace will help organizations better understand target demographics and what moves them

A diverse workplace can better align an organization's culture with the demographic make-up of America

Increased customer satisfaction by improving how employees interact with a diverse clientele and public

How to Manage Diversity in the Workplace

Managing diversity in the workplace presents a set of unique challenges for HR professionals. These challenges can be mitigated if an organization makes a concerted effort to encourage a more heterogeneous environment through promoting a culture of tolerance, open communication and creating conflict management strategies to address issues that may arise.

For leadership to effectively manage diversity in the workplace, they need to understand their backgrounds and how their behavior and beliefs can affect their decision-making within a diverse environment.

Tips for managing diversity in the workplace:

Prioritize communication:

To manage a diverse workplace, organizations need to ensure that they effectively communicate with employees. Policies, procedures, safety rules and other important information should be designed to overcome language and cultural barriers by translating materials and using pictures and symbols whenever applicable.

Treat each employee as an individual:

Avoid making assumptions about employees from different backgrounds. Instead, look at each employee as an individual and judge successes and failures on the individual's merit rather than attributing actions to their background.

Encourage employees to work in diverse groups:

Diverse work teams let employees get to know and value one another on an individual basis and can help break down preconceived notions and cultural misunderstandings.

Base standards on objective criteria:

Set one standard of rules for all groups of employees regardless of background. Ensure that all employment actions, including discipline, follow this standardized criteria to make sure each employee is treated the same.

Recognize, and encourage employees to recognize, that one's own experience, background, and culture are not the only with value to the organization. Look for ways to incorporate a diverse range of perspectives and talents into efforts to achieve organizational goals.
Hiring
To build a diverse workplace, it is crucial to recruit and hire talent from a variety of backgrounds. This requires leadership and others who make hiring decisions to overcome bias in interviewing and assessing talent. If organizations can break through bias and hire the most qualified people, those with the right education, credentials, experience and skill sets, a diverse workplace should be the natural result.

Tips for hiring a diverse workforce:

Incorporate a diverse interview panel to ensure candidates are chosen solely based on suitability for the position.

Managers should be trained on what can and cannot be asked in an interview. For example, questions about an applicant's personal life, such as which church they attend, their romantic life and political beliefs, are off-limits.

Get creative when recruiting. For example, if an organization would like to hire more women in the engineering department, they could reach out to professional groups that cater to women in engineering and ask to advertise open positions in their newsletter or member communications.

Policies and Practices

Organizations that embrace diversity also need to ensure that there are policies and practices in place to protect employees' rights and stay compliant with government regulations.

It is essential for an organization to think about the impact that company policies and practices have on a diverse group of employees. Companies should create a way for employees to give feedback with surveys and suggestion boxes to gain a better understanding of how employees feel about diversity policies. Any feedback received, both positive and negative, is valuable. Companies need to be ready to adapt and change policies that may be interpreted as obstructions or not helpful for employees.

In addition to the written policies, it is also essential to ensure that the non-official "rules" of an organization are thoroughly explained to all employees to communicate company values and culture to all workers effectively.
Documentation of Policies and Procedures
Properly documenting diversity policies is an effective means of communicating an organization's stances on diversity. Once concrete plans are ready to be implemented, documents that outline each policy should be included in the employee handbook. Diversity policies should be reviewed with every new hire, and when updates to policies are made, they should be shared with current employees as well.

Employee handbooks should cover diversity in the following sections:

Code of conduct should outline the company's policy toward diversity

Non-discrimination policy lets employees know about diversity

Compensation and benefits policy

Employment conditions and termination

Zero-Tolerance Policy
Having a diverse workplace means that off-color jokes about ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation or religion need to be met with zero-tolerance enforcement. Slurs, name-calling and bullying employees for any reason has no place in today's workplace. Policies should be put in place to handle misconduct and communicate to employees that this type of behavior will not be tolerated.

Organizations will also need to make sure employees feel safe reporting any instances of inappropriate behavior by co-workers by establishing a formal complaint policy, so employees know how to report misconduct to the proper authority within an organization.

Employees need to be aware of how to coexist with a diverse range of people, as well as be cognizant of cultural sensitivity, to achieve harmony within a diverse workplace. Sensitivity training can help an organization manage diversity in the workplace by helping employees become more self-aware, which plays a vital role in helping employees understand their own cultural biases and prejudices.

Benefits to of sensitivities training:

Helps employees examine and adjust their perspectives about people from different backgrounds

Employees can learn to better appreciate the views of others

Shows employees what actions are offensive and why they are perceived as such

Teaches employees how to calmly communicate that a co-worker has offended them and how to resolve the conflict properly

Explains to employees how to apologize to a co-worker if they have indeed offended them unknowingly

All employees should be included in sensitivity training; adding specific training for managers makes it even more impactful. Some companies also offer sensitivity training online.

Stay Abreast of Diversity Laws
Managing diversity in the workplace means that businesses need to keep abreast of changing employer-related laws and trends, especially diversity-related changes. Organizations should regularly review internal policies, especially those around harassment and equal opportunity, and make sure they reflect the most current laws and regulations.

If an organization has an international or multi-state presence, it is necessary to track regional changes to laws and regulations as they vary from country to county and state to state.

Diversity law resources:

Conclusion

Encouraging diversity is the way forward for organizations. In a global talent market, businesses that can successfully manage diversity in the workplace will have a definite competitive advantage over others in terms of differentiation, innovation and employer branding.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Getting it Right: Understanding and Managing Diversity in the Workplace

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Getting it Right: Understanding and Managing Diversity in the Workplace According to a recent demographic analysis conducted by the Pew Research Center, by 2055, the U.S. will no longer have a single racial or ethnic majority. This shift towards a more diverse population will have major impacts on the workforce

# data[].attributes.headline
IKEA's Commitment to the Environment.  Many times we see a name and purchase the products, and not know the story or history.

# data[].attributes.subject
IKEA's Commitment to the Environment.  Many times we see a name and purchase the products, and not know the story or history.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
released its 2013 Sustainability Report this week, and the results in the energy arena are pretty impressive. The company continues to follow through on its commitment to develop and own renewable electricity supplies, with a 2020 goal of producing more energy than it uses. IKEA has numerous other sustainability-related goals, and is expanding its offerings to customers as well.

I spoke on the phone with Chief Sustainability Officer Steve Howard to discuss IKEA's aims, its overall approach to the issue of sustainability, and what the future may hold. One thing that was clear from the outset: IKEA is committed to 'future proofing' its company, and is proactively anticipating many of the challenges to be faced in the coming years.

Howard commented that values are critical to the entire endeavor.

If you start with a values-driven point of view, you can make a business case. Climate change and energy security mean you have to have a radical approach. We need a six, seven, or eight-fold decrease in carbon intensity. That's not business as usual. Energy efficiency only gets you so far. You have to decouple your business from carbon. Then you have to look at what's commercially scalable.

He notes that there is a solid financial argument to be made for their renewable energy investments.

There has to be a rational business decision with a decent payback. Any business with access to capital has a choice of where to invest. Of course, you can invest in growth of business, and we do that, but we also look at what delivers long-term energy security, a macro hedge on energy price rises and addresses carbon. IKEA also has a long-term business philosophy, where we own most of our stores, our factories, and the land they are built on. We have the capital, so why would we rent? It's the same with energy - if we can own our own energy production why would we not want to do it?

As a consequence, IKEA owns as many renewable energy resources as some energy companies, with 157 wind turbines (96 of which are already operational), with a capacity rating of 345 megawatts. The company has also installed 550,000 solar panels, totaling 90 MW.

In the U.S., IKEA's numbers are also pretty formidable, with an investment of $150 million in PV systems, making IKEA the second largest private commercial solar owner. Currently, 39 of their 44 locations are served by solar arrays, with four more installations planned in 2014 (including one on a new store). When completed, the combined capacity of IKEA's solar portfolio will total 38 megawatts. The company is also working on a geothermal system to heat and cool a soon-to-be-constructed store near Kansas City.

I asked Howard about how IKEA thinks about risk in making this type of investment. After all, IKEA makes furniture and consumer goods. It's not an energy company.

We think it's a good long-term investment. If you take wind or solar, of course there is a degree of risk, as there is in anything, but you can manage the risks. Where else can you invest capital with huge co-benefits and a good return with managable risks? We just need good long-term investments.

All of this makes for good press. It also makes good business sense, as the company is largely isolating itself from the volatilities of electric power markets - the most unpredictable markets on the planet. Essentially, IKEA is building out a long-term 'green' hedge, which -among other benefits - will allow them to much more accurately forecast future energy operating costs.

The company also realizes that the cheapest energy is that which is saved through low-cost efficiency measures. IKEA reports having saved $54 million in warehouse energy efficiency programs since 2010. These savings have resulted from a combination of lighting, HVAC, new energy management systems, upgraded boilers, and geothermal.

Howard's approach to this area is noteworthy. In his view, there are always new opportunities.

I think that the advantage of new technology is that the low-hanging fruit grows back. Efficiency investments that weren't commercially viable then become feasible...It's the same with renewables. We've been on a learning curve with renewable energy investments. Solar PV is also progressing nicely on the cost curve, so we can go back to existing locations and find applications that weren't cost effective before. Rooftops are easy, but when panels and associated kit drop in price, then you can go to car-park solar opportunities that now become cost-effective.

How did this laser focus on sustainability come about? It started with a commitment to culture and planning.

We have a nine person management team for IKEA group. If you could see the passion, engagement and energy in the room, you would say 'wow.' We have a totally engaged management team. We have a strategic landscape with sustainability as a visible cornerstone. Then we have 11 guiding group strategies, of which one is sustainability, which runs like a green thread through the others. We've been working with all competencies in the organization so that everybody understands what that means.

Howard is pretty clear that there is both a threat and an opportunity here.

Look, we have 3 billion people over the poverty line, coming in less than 20 years, who will have middle class living standards. We've got emissions that have to peak by 2020, and then we need a rapid decline in order to stabilize the climate. And we are building cities like never before. We have resource scarcity and climate change. So you have to say 'this has to be a transformative agenda.' Sustainability used to be a 'nice to do,' like planting trees, or doing incrementally less bad. It's about a mindset. If you're trying to reduce impacts here and there, that won't do -it's when you go all in that matters.

Going all in means committing to change, and looking at incrementalism as a mediocre approach.

Saying we are going to reduce CO2 emission by 10% over 5 years is one thing, but saying we are going to 100% LEDs creates real change. At one point, we were ready to make slightly better CFLs and halogen lights but instead invested all our money in fantastic LEDs. By transformation targets you make change. When you go for aggressive transformation, it creates all kinds of fantastic new opportunities from a business point of view. We have to make the commitments and then invest behind them.

He notes that the same philosophy that drives IKEA to invest in optimizing its own energy use applies to its customers as well, and cites lighting as an example. On the customer side, IKEA moved 22.4 million LED products, including 12.3 million LED bulbs. Earlier this year, IKEA was selling the 40 watt equivalent in the U.S. for under $4.

We now have fantastic LEDs, yet the world still sells 6 billion incandescent bulbs, which is a disservice to everyone who buys them. We already have 300 products today that help customers save resources, from LEDs to water efficient taps. We need to systematically help customers see and buy these products. If we don't do that, who's likely to do it? Sustainability has to be made affordable for everybody. There's no space for green premiums.

So IKEA is radically transforming how it thinks about and uses resources, and then applying those lessons to make products for its consumers. Howard ended our conversation with both optimism and a sense of visceral urgency, and a challenge.

I'm convinced we are in the middle of this clean revolution right now, but I'm also not convinced we are doing it fast enough. All the challenges are solvable with the solutions we have today, but we don't have the right leadership, policies and priorities in place. Most political and business leaders are in a state of denial. Sustainability will be a decisive factor in terms of which business will be here in 30 years time. It's also the future of business.

Forbes will be hosting a Reinventing America Summit March 26-28, 2014, which will bring together 300 top industrial executives, entrepreneurs, academics and elected officials who are leading the country's next Industrial Revolution. Please join us (more information is here).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
IKEA's Aggressive Approach To Sustainability Creates Enormous Business Opportunities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
released its 2013 Sustainability Report this week, and the results in the energy arena are pretty impressive. The company continues to follow through on its commitment to develop and own renewable electricity supplies, with a 2020 goal of producing more energy than it uses.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
IBM's Customer Success Stories with VMware NSX

# data[].attributes.headline
Simplicity is Complication Hindered by Hesitation Overcame with Frustration

# data[].attributes.subject
Simplicity is Complication Hindered by Hesitation Overcame with Frustration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
'I'm busy,' signals you don't have room for friends; be specific or cut back your calendar

I recently asked a friend I haven't seen in months if she wanted to get together and catch up. I envisioned us gabbing over cocktails at the new Vietnamese restaurant in our neighborhood. Or maybe I could fix her dinner.

Her reply: "Sure. Why don't you stop by for 45 minutes to an hour on Monday night around 8:30."

Copyright ©2023 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
'I'm busy' signals you don't want to make room for friends or family. Be specific about what's really taking up your time or cut back your calendar.

# data[].attributes.headline
Maya Angelou on Courage and Creativity - HBR

# data[].attributes.subject
Maya Angelou on Courage and Creativity - HBR

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Web Script Status 500 - Internal Error

500 Description:
An error inside the HTTP server which prevented it from fulfilling the request.

Message:
1029563689 Unable to render template [components/article/article.get.html.ftl]

Server:

Spring WebScripts - v8.29.0 schema 1,000

Diagnostics:
Inspect Web Script (components/article/article.get)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Web Script Status 500 - Internal Error 500 Description: An error inside the HTTP server which prevented it from fulfilling the request. Message: 1029563689 Unable to render template [components/article/article.get.html.ftl] Server: Spring WebScripts - v8.29.0 schema 1,000 Diagnostics: Inspect Web Script (components/article/article.get)

# data[].attributes.headline
15 signs you have emotional intelligence - World Economic Forum

# data[].attributes.subject
15 signs you have emotional intelligence - World Economic Forum

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dr Travis Bradberry looks at the qualities shared by people with emotional intelligence, based on data from more than a million people.

# data[].attributes.headline
Bill Gross - A Devotion to New Ideas - Stanford Entrepreneurial Thought Leaders (podcast)

# data[].attributes.subject
Bill Gross - A Devotion to New Ideas - Stanford Entrepreneurial Thought Leaders (podcast)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bill Gross - A Devotion to New Ideas by Stanford eCorner

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bill Gross thrives on turning innovative ideas into pioneering companies. He serves as founder and CEO of Idealab, which started over 75 companies since 1996. In this stimulating lecture, he shares how Idealab continues to bring incredible ideas to market, and his personal insights on starting and running successful organizations. Gross also describes the work of eSolar, a spin-off company of Idealab that works to make solar energy cost-competitive in the global marketplace.

--------------------
Stanford eCorner content is produced by the Stanford Technology Ventures Program. At STVP, we empower aspiring entrepreneurs to become global citizens who create and scale responsible innovations.

CONNECT WITH US
Twitter: https://twitter.com/ECorner 
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/stanfordtechnologyventuresprogram/ 
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/StanfordTechnologyVenturesProgram/ 
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/ecorner 

LEARN MORE
eCorner Website: https://ecorner.stanford.edu/
STVP Website: https://stvp.stanford.edu/

Support our mission of providing students and educators around the world with free access to Stanford University's network of entrepreneurial thought leaders: https://ecorner.stanford.edu/give.

# data[].attributes.headline
How to build an enduring, multi-billion dollar business - Sarah Tavel

# data[].attributes.subject
How to build an enduring, multi-billion dollar business - Sarah Tavel

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In my last post, I wrote that Uber built a multi-billion dollar business by using mobile to create a 10x better product than the incumbent (taxis), and did so at a lower price. The "and", as I wrote, is everything.

What's exciting to me is that Uber is not the first, nor will it be the last. Indeed, when you start to look for it, you realize "[10x product] and save people money" is the undercurrent running through dozens of breakout companies ranging from Airbnb to WhatsApp.

What's Amazon? Endless selection/convenience and the best price.

Remember Netflix's original marketing? More selection/convenience than your neighborhood Blockbuster, and no late fees.

Airbnb is all about unique accommodations and it'scheaper than a hotel.

Skype introduced presence/chat etc, and free international calls. WhatsApp did to international SMS what Skype did to international calls.

Alibaba, Craigslist, CreditKarma, eBay, Expedia, Poshmark, Priceline, Orbitz, Shutterfly, Transferwise, TurboTax, .... I could go on. (Oh, and if you're building one, I'd obviously love to hear from you: sarah at benchmark dot com.)

It shouldn't be a surprise that 10x + cheaper is such a killer combo for consumers. Who doesn't want something better, cheaper? It also happens to be a great catalyst for word of mouth. People love to talk about a new service they discovered that's better and saved them money - telling a friend how to save $20 can feel like actually giving the friend $20.

So how did they do it? Or perhaps more pointedly, how can you do it?

To me, there are two key ingredients:

1. It's about the [10x product]. Saving money is pouring gas on the fire.
As my former Pinterest colleague David Rubin pointed out to me, your service shouldn't lead with "saving money". You must create an offering that is so compelling, it stands by itself in the consumer's mind.

Case in point: when I first started to talk to people about my thesis, they'd push back. "Uber is just so much better than a taxi." "Amazon is all about convenience." "Airbnb is experiences you can't get at a hotel." Of course, they're right, but it's the "and" that accelerated the behavior change for most people. The 10x product is what kept those people as customers.

If you can get people to take your price advantage for granted, you've won. If on the other hand, your brand becomes more identified with saving money, then that's likely because your offering isn't sufficiently differentiated. Saving money is the feature. This puts incredible downward pressure on a company's unit economics. It's a lot harder to build an enduring business if you're forced to constantly optimize for price. Think: flash sale and deal sites.

The one exception I'd add here is that "free" is its own 10x product. If you can offer something for free that used to cost lots of people money (I'm looking at you Skype and Robinhood), growth will be the least of your worries.

2. Use technology to recast incumbent cost structures.
Okay, so you've got a 10x service. That's the easy part. Providing the 10x product cheaper in a sustainable way is where the rubber hits the road.

The key is to use technology to recast incumbent cost structures. This creates a structural cost advantage, and if you have economies of scale or network effects, an advantage that can endure as you grow.

Here are some of the strategies companies have used to do this:

E-Commerce

E-Commerce companies disrupted brick and mortar retailers by centralizing operations and benefiting from economies of scale.

Sharing economy

The "sharing" economy enables companies to unlock latent value in underutilized assets, and by doing so disrupts asset heavy approaches.

Peer to peer marketplaces

P2P marketplaces eliminate broker fees and middlemen, letting them pass savings to participants in their marketplace and reducing operation costs.

"Full stack" startups

More broadly, " full stack " startups use technology to fundamentally rethink services and disrupt the incumbents.

Emerging: AI, virtual reality, others?

Fast forward, and I've got to imagine that in addition to the existing techniques I mentioned, emerging technologies like AI and virtual reality will create a new class of 10x products that save consumers money.

For example, imagine not having to travel to the Serengeti because you can have an experience in virtual reality that's just like being on a safari, or getting a prescription almost immediately because you've been diagnosed by a neural network.

It's hard not to get excited for future startups capitalizing on these strategies.

What do you think? What emerging companies do you see doing this? I'd love to hear from you.

Follow me on Twitter @sarahtavel.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to build an enduring, multi-billion dollar business

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In my last post, I wrote that Uber built a multi-billion dollar business by using mobile to create a 10x better product than the incumbent (taxis), and did so at a lower price. The "and", as I wrote...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In a culture where being social and outgoing are prized above all else, it can be difficult, even shameful, to be an introvert. But, as Susan Cain argues in this passionate talk, introverts bring extraordinary talents and abilities to the world, and should be encouraged and celebrated.

# data[].attributes.headline
How Your Body Language Shapes Who You Are - TED Talk

# data[].attributes.subject
How Your Body Language Shapes Who You Are - TED Talk

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Your body language may shape who you are

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
(NOTE: Some of the findings presented in this talk have been referenced in an ongoing debate among social scientists about robustness and reproducibility. Read “Corrections & Updates” below for more details as well as Amy Cuddy’s response.) Body language affects how others see us, but it may also change how we see ourselves. Social psychologist Amy Cuddy argues that “power posing” -- standing in a posture of confidence, even when we don’t feel confident -- can boost feelings of confidence, and might have an impact on our chances for success.

# data[].attributes.headline
Madam C.E.O., Get Me a Coffee - NY Times

# data[].attributes.subject
Madam C.E.O., Get Me a Coffee - NY Times

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion | Madam C.E.O., Get Me a Coffee (Published 2015)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The sad reality in workplaces: Women help more but benefit less from it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The year 1777 was not a particularly good time for America's newly formed revolutionary army. Under General George Washington's command, some 11,000 soldiers made their way to Valley Forge. Following the latest defeat in a string of battles that left Philadelphia in the hands of British forces, these tired, demoralized, and poorly equipped early American heroes knew they now faced another devastating winter.

Accelerate your career with Harvard ManageMentor®. HBR Learning's online leadership training helps you hone your skills with courses like Leading People. Earn badges to share on LinkedIn and your resume. Access more than 40 courses trusted by Fortune 500 companies.

What you need to know about being in charge.

Learn More & See All Courses