logan marshall
Recent Activity
logan marshall commented on Sustainability in a Financial Crisis on June 30, 2009, 6:12 PM
It seems that Mr. Stewart conflates two different notions of 'sustainability.' On one hand, he uses 'sustainability' in a general sense, referring the measures a business may take in order to adapt their models to ever-changing conditions in the surrounding world -- e.g., the current financial crises. On the other hand, he also seems to be using it in an environmental sense -- e.g., matters of energy production, use and regulations. This conflation is confusing, but I think that perhaps his point is analgous if his formulation of how you measure the cost of sustainability at a broader, more conceptual level to all business sustainability. Aside from regulation, another important factor to consider -- especially in this climate -- seems to be how the government will take a pro-active role in my given industry, as it already does now in energy, agriculture, vice goods and a variety of other facets of the American economy. As a small business owner, I believe that many pro-active measures the government takes to support small business are ultimately going to serve this country well. Beyond regulation, government interventions, I think, is going to play an increasingly important role in the American economy -- perhaps now more than ever.
logan marshall commented on What CEOs of the Future Need to Know on June 30, 2009, 5:58 PM
Though admittedly I've had limited chief executive experience, I certainly agree with what Sheppard says about the multifarious nature of the types of knowledge a CEO must possess. Any sort of high-level decisions, especially in a world where business collaboration and partnerships across disciplines and genres are necessary for marketing and promotional purposes, moderate knowledge of a wide variety of disciplines is necessary in order to remain competitive. But, I think the question of how we spend money on fostering innovation is perhaps a more interesting question. As a leader of a small business myself, I wonder at times what exactly I'm paying for, in terms of improving how I run shop -- especially when it comes to developing the marketing side of my business. Viral marketing, for instance, is a certain type of innovation I may incorporate into my business model, but it costs me significantly less than a traditional marketing campaign. I suppose my point is that 'innovation spend' -- i.e., spending on fostering environments in which innovation can grow -- isn't necessasrily a good proxy for determining how innovative a society may be. I'd say, if anything, cultural movements and simple but important innovations are ones which we should be caring about. That is, it only takes one good idea to change the course of how an economy develops -- e.g., the personal computer or the Internet. Needless to say, that's just my two sense. I think, too, that this perspective is more congruent with Sheppard's insights into how CEOs should be more fox-like.
logan marshall commented on Can We Afford the Iraq War? on June 30, 2009, 4:58 PM
To consider Krugman's point that we are only now considering the opportunity costs of the economic expenditures on war versus other vital needs in the US: there are many instances in American social governance that we explicitly choose to ignore what seem to be overt instances of unbalanced cost-effectiveness. For instance, through its implementation of US Disabilities Act, the government forces institutions -- both public and private -- to build handicapped entrances to buildings, when the money spent on costly ramps would perhaps be better spent on other needs -- e.g., more personnel and equipment. But, the government makes these types of choices every day -- not because of their cost-effectiveness, but because of their moral weight. War, I think, is one of those topics which demands a greater placement of weight on the topic, due to the conditions that characterize such situations. Like in issues of basic human dignity, the call to war -- at least in some cases -- is powerful, certainly costly but also (some might say) necessary. Whether the Iraq War was a necessity is a separate issue (as Americans may have been deceived by their government), but making categorical statements about considering opportunity costs is wrong, Mr. Krugman.
logan marshall commented on Van Jones on Profiting From a Green Economy on June 30, 2009, 4:21 PM
I think it's absolutely ridiculous that Jones says that, "Reaganomics is over. The verdict has been rendered. We wound up with an economy that unfortunately was based on..credit and not creativity." The American entertainment industry has defined this world's culture for the past half century. We are leaders in the most innovative techniques, formats and technology to entertain people. Whether it's our movies, music or websites, our hegemonic effects on world culture are felt now, and will be felt for years to come. One may question what benefit US cultural hegemony has actually brought the world. However, this is an entirely separate issue which hinges on subjective judgments on the value of culture. This is an intractable debate and one which I think we should leave for another day. The fact remains, however, that the US is the biggest formers of world culture in recent history. Sorry, Jones, but don't get ahead of yourself.
logan marshall commented on Boosting Morale During Massive Layoffs on June 30, 2009, 6:34 PM
I tend to agree with Luke Star's (two comments above) comments about Glocer's (and other executives') seeming callousness toward the human element of companies' roles in our society, not to mention our economy. But, I also understand that executive roles require making tough decisions which may or may not dramatically affect the life outcomes of its constituents/employees. The role of the private business in a social economy is extremely tough to define -- not only from a pragmatic vantage point, but also moral and political reasons. At the core of these problems, I think, is a problem with American business culture. Or perhaps the problem isn't with business culture, but American culture in general. The is a certain lack of concern for country and compatriots that characterizes the behavior of many executive-level decision makers in the US. Again, however, the issue is more complicated than it seems. The notion that the US' general welfare hinges on the success of its private companies is important. But 'success' shouldn't mean lining the pockets of companies: it should involve reinvesting into the company to encourage growth on the company-level not the individual level, in addition to fostering an innovative environment and team-minded mentality among co-workers. The Japanese haven proven to be much more effective at this, I must say, from what I know about how their executives interact with their colleagues at work and how their general day-to-day engagement with their companies' matters differ from American executives'.