個案總覽

For the foreseeable future, governments will take a keen interest in how executives manage. In the U.S., industries and sectors representing more than a third of the nation's economy - including financial services, automobiles, health care, and telecom - are being reshaped. But don't expect a return of old-style regulation, which would stifle innovation. Government will coax businesses rather than curb them by offering incentives for desirable conduct. Private-sector managers will need to develop a new mind-set and skill set so they can partner with government rather than fend it off. Change has actually been on the horizon for years. It's the culmination of several long-term trends, such as a deepening distrust of business, greater ties between the interests of business and society, and decreasing regulatory control across national borders. Over time, economies worldwide will settle on versions of the system that's beginning to emerge in the United States. Governments will make use of taxes and tax credits to promote wanted behavior, such as investing in renewable energy or hiring veterans, and to discourage unwanted behavior, like emitting excess carbon. They will also take a more active role in coordinating public and private interests through rules on how businesses and individuals are compensated.

The furor over offshoring knowledge work is a tempest in a teapot.

While many contemporary American corporations continue to exemplify high levels of corporate social responsibility, virtually all publicly held firms are finding themselves under growing pressure from the investment community to maximize shareholder value. As a result, the interests of the firm's non-shareholder constituencies are being neglected. The government must step in and function as arbiter, enacting rules and regulations that define what we expect of corporations in the way of such things as working conditions, environmental protection, and job training. But since the political process constitutes the only remaining vehicle for the expression of non-shareholder stakeholders, if corporate managers wish to be free to maximize shareholder value, it is inappropriate for them to also participate in shaping public policy.

Global negotiations are increasingly between the people of the United States and global managers, rather than between American companies and foreign nations. These global managers are supranational corporate players who have no particular allegiance to any one nation. The United States is disadvantaged in negotiations because states and cities bid against each other, permitting global managers to play us off against ourselves. To remedy the situation, Reich suggests the creation of a U.S. Investment Representative and a GATT for Direct Investment.

Combination of 90111 and 91206. Unadvertised.

Because of globalization, the U.S.-owned corporation headquartered in the United States is no longer the vehicle for achieving U.S. competitiveness. Foreign-owned corporations that invest heavily in U.S.-based production facilities and their workers may actually contribute more. U.S. government policy should open the borders to foreign investment and promote human capital rather than assuming that corporations will lead the way. This is true for a number of reasons: corporate ownership is less important today; control is less important; work force skills are critical; and foreign-owned corporations help U.S. workers add value.

Two stories illustrate the American way of thinking about entrepreneurship. The first is the story of the entrepreneurial hero--found in every story by Horatio Alger--who uses energy, effort, daring, and good luck to rise in the world. But the story has an unhappy ending. The second story holds more promise, focusing not on the individual but on the team, as in Tracy Kidder's description of how a group of engineers pooled their talents to design a new computer. The differences between these two versions are profound. The first celebrates the individual and the second celebrates the group--even the organization.