廣告

2007年10月30日 星期二

有趣的公司英文字母代號的聯想

有趣的公司英文字母代號的聯想
底下這篇的ZT和BDA讓我想起兩家"消失了的組織"
ZT 想到的TZT--一家台灣CONNECTORS製造商
BDA想到的是British Deming Association
可見這也是見仁見智的



巨人網絡踏上美國征途
2007年10月25日13:26



一家中國遊戲開發商希望在美國上市﹐其發行計劃有望成為同類IPO中規模最大的一個。

在開曼群島註冊的巨人網絡集團(Giant Interactive Group)本月向美國證券交易委員會(Securities and Exchange Commission)提交了在紐約證交所上市的招股書初稿。開發大型多人在線角色扮演遊戲(MMORPG)的上海征途網絡公司(Zhengtu Network)是其旗下子公司。

招股書稱﹐巨人計劃以每股12-14美元的價格發行約5,720萬股股票。該公司估計﹐如按每股13美元定價﹐則扣除各項費用後﹐發行淨收益約為6.57億美元。

征途網絡希望加入在美上市的中國遊戲開發商的隊伍。到目前為止﹐專門開發網絡遊戲的中國公司中在美IPO規模最大的是三維MMORPG開發商北京完美時空網絡技術公司(Perfect World)。該公司7月份在那斯達克市場上市﹐融資1.339億美元。征途網絡拒絕發表評論。

完美時空的股票迄今為止表現不錯。該股的IPO價格為16美元﹐週三收於27.60美元。

總部位於上海的征途網絡只有一款主打遊戲產品﹐而已在美國上市的盛大互動娛樂有限公司(Shanda Interactive Entertainment)和網易公司(Netease.com)均有數款熱門遊戲。不過分析師表示﹐整個行業仍在增長﹐儘管增長率可能放緩﹐但投資者現在涉足不斷擴大的中國網絡遊戲市場還不算太晚。中國目前已是僅次於美國的全球第二大互聯網市場﹐共有1.72億用戶。

征途網絡在業內以大手筆營銷而聞名﹐它在中央電視台第一套節目黃金時段播出廣告﹐並在全國各地的網吧大力促銷﹐其大多數業務也來自於此。

據北京科技研究機構BDA China的數據﹐征途第一款也是唯一一款投入商業運營的遊戲《征途》(ZT Online)是在2006年初發佈的﹐到第三季度就進入排行榜前五位。BDA稱﹐這款遊戲2006年第三季度的平均在線用戶數約為481,000人﹐最高約為888,000人﹐僅次於網易的《夢幻西遊》﹐它的平均同時在線玩家約為50萬人。

大型多人在線角色扮演遊戲提供了一個虛擬世界的平台﹐玩家在這裡扮演角色﹐通過完成任務升級或是同其他玩家爭奪更高的地位。要製作一款優秀的此類遊戲動輒需要花費數百萬美元﹐甚至更多。《征途》的玩家要進入一個虛構的中國古代帝國﹐使用各種神奇的武器﹐並練功習武降妖除魔﹐完成指定的任務。

網絡遊戲基本分為付費或在遊戲中出售虛擬道具這兩種模式。《征途》採用的是第二種模式。不過公司創始人史玉柱表示﹐可能會在今後的遊戲中採用根據時間收費的方式。這類遊戲的絕大多數乃至全部玩家都在中國﹐因為付費要用中國的銀行卡﹐或是從中國分銷商那裡購買點卡。

貝爾斯登(Bear Stearns)駐香港分析師James Rhee表示﹐中國的遊戲開發企業正在成熟﹐已經比過去更有經驗﹐資源也更加豐富。Rhee在6月份的報告中稱﹐前10位網絡遊戲(不限於MMORPG)中有一半是由中國大陸企業開發的﹐而在2001-2003年﹐主導中國市場的是《熱血傳奇II》(Legend of Mir II)等韓國遊戲。

他說﹐過去﹐能夠構思新穎遊戲並領導整個開發過程的設計人員非常缺乏。但現在﹐這些公司擁有了設計良好的產品系統、經驗豐富的設計人員和充裕的現金。

隨著中國互聯網用戶的增多﹐MMORPG遊戲越來越受到歡迎﹐而與此同時﹐其它形式的娛樂產品﹐如遊戲機和數碼音樂則因盜版猖獗而難以獲利。BDA的數據顯示﹐去年中國MMORPG的總收入為6.652億美元﹐高於2004年的2.81億美元。BDA預計﹐今年的市場規模將達到10.7億美元﹐隨後增長將會放緩﹐不過今後4年仍將保持兩位數的增幅。

BDA科技業分析師劉斌表示﹐《征途》是成功的﹐總體來說﹐玩家在這款遊戲比在其他遊戲上更願意掏錢。第二季度《征途》的用戶平均支出為人民幣295元(合39.31美元)﹐而整個行業的平均水平為40元。支出較高的原因之一可能是《征途》出售的產品中包括一個“密銀寶盒”﹐玩家花1元錢就能打開﹐其中可能什麼也沒有﹐但也可能有各種虛擬裝備。劉斌說﹐這種押寶式的體驗是個聰明的設計﹐可以刺激玩家花更多的錢。

根據巨人所提交的招股書初稿﹐征途網絡今年上半年的主營業務收入為人民幣6.874億元﹐而去年同期為8,240萬元。科技咨詢機構易觀國際(Analysys International)表示﹐截至今年第二季度﹐按收入計﹐該公司在中國網絡遊戲市場的佔有率接近15%﹐落後於盛大和網易﹐但領先於第九城市(The9)。上述三家公司都在那斯達克上市。

征途網絡有兩款遊戲正在計劃之中﹐一是定於年底正式推出的《巨人》(Giant Online)﹐一是將於明年推出的《萬王之王3》(King of Kings III)。不過分析師表示﹐MMORPG能否取得商業成功很難預測﹔而且﹐暢銷產品達到週期末端的時候就應計劃好新遊戲。

摩根士丹利(Morgan Stanley)駐香港分析師季衛東(Richard Ji)表示﹐網絡遊戲業務有點像電影製作﹐公司需要不斷有新的熱點作品推出......這家公司需要不斷創新。

LORETTA CHAO

有趣的Chrysler"見仁見智"發表會

有趣的"見仁見智"發表會


Robert L. Nardelli, the new Chrysler chief executive, has tried hard to sound like a "car guy" from the moment he landed in Detroit. But in a presentation Monday the former Home Depot chief talked about the auto industry in a way that suggested he was still in a home-improvement state of mind.

Go to Article from The New York Times»

At Chrysler, Home Depot Still Lingers


Published: October 30, 2007

DETROIT, Oct. 29 — Robert L. Nardelli, the new Chrysler chief executive, has tried hard to sound like a “car guy” from the moment he landed in Detroit. He boasted at his first news conference, in August, about his well-stocked garage that included a Jeep, a Plymouth Prowler and a PT Cruiser.

Skip to next paragraph
Jeff Kowalsky/European Pressphoto Agency

Robert Nardelli of Chrysler.

But in a presentation Monday at the Magazine Publishers of America conference in Boca Raton, Fla., Mr. Nardelli, who most recently ran Home Depot, talked about the auto industry in a way that suggested he was still in a home-improvement state of mind.

“I think a vehicle today has to be your most favorite room under your roof,” Mr. Nardelli said. “I really believe that. I mean, it has to bring you gratification, it has to be tranquil. It’s incidental that it gets you from Point A to B, right?”

That might give pause to horsepower enthusiasts and design buffs who follow grilles, chrome work and spoilers.

But Mr. Nardelli, who left Home Depot in January and was named to the Chrysler job in August, was clear about his perspective: “I’m a consumer, not a designer.”

Mr. Nardelli also said in the speech, which was broadcast online, that car shoppers want gadgets. “It has to have the latest technologies on board. It has to provide the comfort, it has to be kind of self-tutorial, on the education of it.”

An automobile also needs “cup holders — some for water and some for...,” Mr. Nardelli said, but he did not finish that thought.

A Chrysler spokesman, Mike Aberlich, said Mr. Nardelli’s comments might have stemmed from the briefings he received from the company’s marketing experts and car designers.

Their research has shown that customers are placing a greater emphasis on vehicle interiors. In fact, Chrysler has frequently referred to its minivans as “living rooms on wheels,” he said.

“I don’t know that it’s new, but it’s his own spin on it,” Mr. Aberlich said. “It’s good to have that fresh perspective, and he’s bringing that.”

From Netscape To Google: The Hottest Companies


這篇特別報導回顧過去10年的一些股市新寵之起伏
SPECIAL REPORT: From Netscape To Google: The Hottest Companies Of The Past Decade
Dow Jones

NEW YORK (Dow Jones) -- When MarketWatch launched 10 years ago, the hottest stocks hailed from the budding Internet economy, as Wall Street scurried to capitalize on the legendary initial public offering from Netscape, the granddaddy of all dot-com deals.

Launched in 1995, Netscape's became the first IPO from the Internet sector to double in value during its first day of trading.

Although the company had yet to book any significant profit, it offered investors access to a new mass medium: the Web.

Priced at $28 a share for their debut session on Aug. 8, 1995, shares of Netscape shot as high as $75 and ended that first day at $58.25.

Not long after, the 100% one-day gain became routine in the IPO market, as investors fell in love with a rosy vision of the nascent Internet age -- of a New Economy, even -- while overlooking the risks of betting on firms with little or no net income and only the briefest of track records.

The Net group's so-called story stocks rewrote the record book for the new- issues market. Eighteen of the U.S. IPO market's 20 biggest first-day gainers of all time took place between 1998 and 2000.

VA Linux Systems -- a firm operating in the hot area of Internet infrastructure and a potential competitor to another formerly hot stock, Microsoft (MSFT) -- still wears the crown as the hottest IPO of all time with its mind-numbing 627% jump on Dec. 9, 1999. Priced for the IPO market at $30, shares stood at $239.25 after the first day of trades -- a one-day gain of more than $200 a share for the bankers and others lucky enough to have scored allocations before the stock opened on the Nasdaq.

At the time, investors shrugged off the fact that the company hadn't earned a penny.

Although VA Linux was expected to lose money for years, its valuation of 76 times its yearly revenue seemed "appropriate" relative to its peers, one analyst noted in the happy talk that characterized the era.

VA Linux's first day eclipsed the Nov. 12, 1998, debut by TheGlobe.com, a community site that had held the No. 1 slot with a 606% IPO pop. TheGlobe still ranks a close No. 2 on the all-time list, nearly a decade later.

Even MarketWatch holds a place in the IPO pantheon as the No. 7 opener of all time with a 474% jump over its $17 price in its first day of trading on Jan. 15, 1999.

At the time of the MarketWatch offering, Wall Street put aside jitters tied to stock-market sell-offs in Asia and Russia and dove into MarketWatch as the first major Internet deal of 1999, having no difficulty recalling TheGlobe.com's Day 1 experience.

With their newfound wealth, Internet firms made their mark beyond Wall Street as icons of a short-lived golden age that included lava lights, Gap khakis, logo-emblazoned fleece wear, in-office foosball tables and lucrative employee stock options.

Some of it was pretty whacky. Pets.com never really made much of a splash as a stock because its IPO came too late in the cycle, but its sock-puppet mascot served as a silly symbol of the excessive advertising spending of the newly rich dot-coms.

Netpliance.com, Webex.com and Autotrader touted their wares on the 2000 Super Bowl, the most expensive possible place to advertise.

By 2001, however, Pets.com shriveled as its stock sank 99%. Webvan at one point had a market cap of $4.8 billion, with plans to build 26 grocery-delivery megawarehouses. By the end of 2001, it had gone bust.

CMGI (CMGI) , one of a handful of Internet holding companies to become day- trader darlings, saw its stock fade from triple digits to single.

MarketWatch was no exception. On Dec. 21, 2000, shares of the company closed below $2 a share, less than two years after it traded above $100 a share.

And good old Netscape was bought in March 1999 by another formerly white-hot star of the Net, America Online, for the price of $4.2 billion.

Not long after, AOL bought Time Warner (TWX) in what's since been called the single worst deal in U.S. corporate history.

Survivors of a paradigm shift

From the ruins of the dot-com bust, survivors emerged between 2001 and 2004.

Lawsuits and regulatory actions punished bankers for contributing to the IPO bubble by doling out shares of hot IPOs to their favorite clients, and for publishing sunny research reports to help boost their firms' investment-banking coffers.

Retail investors stayed away, in relative terms, from the stock market. The remaining investors no longer wanted story stocks -- they wanted solid names with established records.

The IPO market responded with defensive deals from bulletproof companies that had survived the meltdowns following not only the dot-com bubble bust of 2000 but also the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

Unproven Internet companies gave way to reinsurance providers and other financial firms such as CIT Group (CIT) and Genworth (GNW) .

IPOs could make it out the door if the companies had shown net income and a willingness to cut offer terms in the face of a bear market.

Excitement started building again behind financial-marketplace stocks such as the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) in late 2002 as well as select tech names such as Transmeta (TMTAD) .

By 2004, the stock market was well into a recovery when Google (GOOG) filed to go public.

Fashioning itself more a Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA) than a Yahoo (YHOO) , the Mountain View, Calif., company stepped into the IPO market -- albeit amid questions about its pre-IPO behavior and its unorthodox offering -- on solid footing, with a history of measurable net income and prospects of speedy advertising growth.

Although its Dutch-auction-style IPO drew resistance from bankers, Google managed to rise 18% in its first day of trades after pricing at $85 a share on Aug. 18, 2004.

The Google train kept picking up speed as the stock passed the $200-a-share mark within months and made multibillionaires out of co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page -- and along with them CEO Eric Schmidt, a Sun Microsystems and Novell veteran -- and joined the S&P 500 (SPX) .

Google remains one of the hottest stocks on the market, with a capitalization approaching $200 billion, a stock price of more than $600 a share, and plenty of irons in the fire through its ownership of YouTube and much speculation centering on wireless plans, plus a rich war chest for future acquisitions, so say nothing of further growth forecast in online advertising.

The Wall Street gauge of those prospects? For one, a fresh $800 share-price target following Google's latest earnings report.

Nearly as hot as Google of late is Apple (AAPL) , which began marching back into investors' good graces when Steve Jobs rejoined the company in the late 1990s. The stock has heated up even more in the past couple of years as the company revolutionized the music business with the iTunes online store and the iPod line, whose success ultimately gave rise to the iPhone -- and a $160 billion market valuation.

Although the energy sector is now navigating a market correction, leading lights of the oil, gas and electric businesses have been ablaze as oil prices have set new records.

With a market cap now handily exceeding $500 billion, oil giant Exxon Mobil ( XOM) has defied the law of large numbers by rising quickly despite its scale -- to $94 a share from $68 in the past year, while also paying out fat dividends and buying back billions in stock.

Stars of the alternative-energy game have also shined particularly brightly on Wall Street lately, with SunPower (SPWR) and First Solar (FSLR) posting big gains.

And, in the IPO market, tech- and Internet-flavored firms are once again playing a starring role, although it should be noted that the most popular offerings have more revenue and net income to show than did their counterparts in the bubble years.

IPO standouts of late have included VMWare (VMW) , Athenahealth (ATHN) and Compellent Technologies Inc. (CML) .

And, today, as a 10-year-old MarketWatch looks toward the coming 10 years, it seems safe to forecast that hot stocks will come and go, and booms will turn to busts (and, ideally, vice-versa). But the marks set by the market debutantes of the 1997-2000 era will likely stand for at another decade, if not for the next century.

  (END) Dow Jones Newswires
10-30-07 0103ET
Copyright (c) 2007 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

2007年10月29日 星期一

中國建築浪費或冠全球

[2007-10-30] 中國建築浪費或冠全球

放大圖片

 ■河南濮陽縣委縣政府綜合辦公大樓。資料圖片

  【本報訊】據《大河報》29日報道:跑遍歐美20多國家的東南大學建築學系教授鄭光復表示,「在發達國家不可能出現的建築業的鋪張浪費,正在中國大張旗鼓 地上演。」由中國建築工業出版社推出的《中國大型建築工程設計發展方向》一書中,中國工程院土木水利與建築工程學部批評一批新建大型公共建築淪為「巨型結 構遊戲」,並指出中國可能成為最大的建築浪費國。

 或許是關注視角的區別,專家們似乎更著意於「巨型結構遊戲」所帶來的能源負擔和環境污染,更樂於 表達他們對於物質世界的憂慮,而對於公眾更為關心的建築浪費背後的資金黑洞,以及相應的行政或公共決策因素,則像他們一貫的做法那樣,點到為止。但是,如 果慮及任何一座大型公共建築都得益於一套公共決策系統的運轉的實質,那麼「最大建築浪費國」到底意味著什麼呢?

 《中青報》強調,貪污浪費就是最大的腐敗。毫無疑問,對於納稅人稅款的浪費,以及「巨型結構遊戲」所揭示的對納稅人稅款的「揮霍遊戲」,而且無人來為這種浪費或揮霍負責,正是現代社會公權腐敗的顯著特徵。

浪費稅款=公權腐敗

 中國見慣一些「工程上馬,幹部落馬」的現象,但這裡面僅涉及的賄賂行為並不是建築腐敗的全部,它還 應包括決策失誤、豆腐渣工程等等。國際知名反腐組織透明國際2005年重點關注各國工程建設領域的腐敗現象,其年度報告就指出一些腐敗項目的一個共同的特 點是:均未產生任何經濟效益,並且均帶來嚴重的環境及社會問題。不難看出,這與專家所謂建築浪費所產生的後果幾無區別。那麼由此而言,「最大建築浪費國」 的名號是否同時意味著存在最嚴重的建築腐敗呢?

公共建築 業主模糊

 專家指出,重要的事實是,在責任追究方面,似乎也沒有準備去追究建築浪費決策者的責任,相關的法律 也根本沒有像一些西方國家那樣,將建築浪費上升到腐敗的高度。這也正是鄭光復教授提出的「一個目前在中國極為棘手的問題」是:對於用納稅人的錢建設的大型 公共建築,業主變為抽象化的國家,業主負責的機制如何落實? 專家強調,一套「透明度」、「參與度」和「問責度」兼備的公共決策機制,仍是避免建築腐敗的關鍵所在。




北京學者稱中國建築浪費冠全球 【中央社╱台北三十日電】 2007.10.30 10:03 am

中國建築浪費問題引起關注,中國東南大學建築學系教授鄭光復表示,在發達國家不可能出現的建築業鋪張浪費問題,正在中國大張旗鼓地上演。

香港「文匯報」報導,由中國建築工業出版社推出的「中國大型建築工程設計發展方向」一書中,中國工程院土木水利與建築工程學部批評中國一批新建大型公共建築已淪為「巨型結構遊戲」,並指出中國可能成為最大的建築浪費國。

報導說,「巨型結構遊戲」代表對納稅人稅款的「揮霍遊戲」,而且無人為這種浪費或揮霍負責,正是現代社會公權腐敗的顯著特徵。

近年來中國常見「工程上馬,幹部落馬」現象,建築腐敗問題除了涉及賄賂行為,還包括決策失誤、豆腐渣工程等。

國際知名反腐組織「透明國際」二零零五年曾關注各國工程建設領域的腐敗現象,該年度報告指出一些腐敗項目的共同特點包括未產生經濟效益,以及帶來嚴重的環境及社會問題。這顯示建築腐敗和建築浪費所產生的後果幾無區別。

專家認為,一套「透明度」、「參與度」和「問責度」兼備的公共決策機制,才是避免建築腐敗的關鍵。

【2007/10/30 中央社】

Maria Sharapova and Marketing Maria

Maria Sharapova and Marketing Maria

G.M. to Build Hybrid Research Center in China

英国《金融时报》杰夫•代尔(Geoff Dyer)上海报道
2007年10月30日 星期二

通用汽车(GM)计划在中国建立一个可替代能源汽车的研发中心。这一最新迹象表明,中国被视为新一代汽车的关键战场。

这家美国集团表示,通用汽车将在上海一个新“园区”投资2.5亿美元,其亚洲总部也将设在那里,而新的研发中心将是该投资计划的一部分。通用汽车计划明年将混合型汽车引入中国市场。

通用汽车是最新一家在中国开设研发机构的跨国企业,此举目的是利用中国日益增加的科学人才,并博取中国政府的好感。


通用汽车董事长兼首席执行官里克•瓦格纳(Rick Wagoner)昨日在北京召开的一次新闻发布会上表示:“我们相信中国具有率先采用可替代推进系统的潜力。”

译者/徐柳

阅读本文章英文,请点击 GM PLANS CHINA RESEARCH FACILITY


紐約時報

G.M. to Build Hybrid Research Center in China

Jason Lee/Reuters

Rick Wagoner, chief executive of General Motors, test drives a new car in Beijing on Monday.


Published: October 29, 2007

BEIJING, Oct. 29 — General Motors announced on Monday that it would build an advanced research center in Shanghai to develop hybrid technology and other advanced designs, in the latest research investment in China by a foreign automaker despite chronic problems with purloined car designs.

G.M. already has a 1,300-employee research center in Shanghai with its main Chinese joint venture, the Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation. The separate, wholly owned research center announced on Monday for the most advanced vehicle engineering and development could help G.M. keep greater control over new technologies than conducting the research through the joint venture.

Kevin Wale, the president of G.M.’s China operations, said that the company remained “very comfortable” with its partnership with S.A.I.C. and that S.A.I.C.’s recent introduction of its own sedans had shown “no significant impact” on G.M.’s own sales.

Rick Wagoner, G.M.’s chairman and chief executive, said that that it was essential to do advanced research in China so as to adapt technologies quickly to locally sold models. G.M.’s sales in China have grown to an estimated 1 million this year from 20,000 in 1999, making it the company’s second-largest market after the United States.

Mr. Wagoner insisted that G.M. could keep control of intellectual property in China even while doing cutting-edge research here. “We think it’s a prudent tradeoff and we think the risk is manageable,” he said.

Chen Hong, a top S.A.I.C. executive, said nothing on the new G.M. project but welcomed a separate plan on Monday for G.M. and S.A.I.C. to provide a $5 million grant jointly over five years for a much smaller research venture at Tsinghua University in Beijing. That project that will give G.M. closer access to government officials here

Chinese automakers have repeatedly triggered confrontations with Western automakers by introducing vehicles that appear identical to Western models, but there has not yet been a case of a Chinese automaker copying advanced Western engine technology.

G.M.’s largest hybrid car research efforts will remain in the United States, but research will also be done collaboratively in China and information will be shared with China from G.M.’s partnerships with universities around the world, Mr. Wagoner said, adding that, “For us, it’s not a question of either/or.”

Honda, Ford, Volkswagen and other foreign automakers have all announced their own research centers in China in recent months, although not one has been as aggressive as G.M. in transferring technology to China.

Planned for weeks, Monday’s announcement coincidentally came right after the Chinese government’s powerful National Development and Reform Commission disclosed on Friday that it is drafting stringent local content rules for alternative fuel vehicles to qualify for likely government subsidies. The rules will require that key components be made in China.

“They don’t want to give big incentives just for people to import stuff,” said Nick Reilly, the G.M. group vice president who runs the company’s Asia-Pacific operations.

The Chinese government’s move is aimed partly at Toyota, which assembles Prius gasoline-electric hybrid cars in China but ships the critical components in sealed boxes from factories in Japan.

G.M.’s existing joint venture research center mainly takes vehicle designs from G.M.’s American and European operations and tailors them to the Chinese market. It does so by adding features like wider pillars separating the rear side windows from the rear window — the wider pillars are popular because they provide greater privacy for rear seat occupants in a country where many hire chauffeurs even for mid-sized .

But the joint venture may start to do development work for G.M. operations elsewhere. “I don’t at all rule out the possibility of its doing additional work,” Mr. Wagoner said.

The prospect of more vehicle development here has long alarmed engineers in G.M.’s operations in the Detroit area and in Australia, a rival base for G.M. engineering for Asian markets. The joint venture makes use of Chinese engineers earning considerably less than half of their American and Australian counterparts’ pay, although Chinese engineering salaries are climbing swiftly.

G.M. executives have repeatedly insisted over the years that while G.M. and S.A.I.C. engineers work side by side at the joint venture, elaborate computer firewalls prevent confidential G.M. information from reaching S.A.I.C.

S.A.I.C. has rotated some of its best executives through the joint venture as part of a broad effort to learn the latest Western automotive technologies in preparation for eventual exports.

The new, wholly owned G.M. research center will work on alternative fuels like ethanol; electric vehicle technology, including hybrids and fuel cells; and energy efficiency in the manufacturing process, including by suppliers in the production of auto parts.

Larry Burns, G.M.’s vice president for research, development and strategic planning, said that the Chinese government did not want to rely on ethanol from corn and other food, so the research would focus on grass and other plants that are not edible and cannot be grown in areas suitable for growing food.

Mr. Wagoner initially said that the company would spend $250 million on the new research center, but later corrected himself to say that G.M. would spend this sum on a new corporate campus in the Shanghai area that would include administrative offices as well as research facilities. G.M. officials declined to provide the precise cost and employment at the new research center by itself.

G.M. and S.A.I.C. will jointly provide a $5 million grant over five years for a much smaller research joint venture at Tsinghua University in Beijing as well, a project that will give G.M. closer access to government officials here.

2007年10月28日 星期日

In Search for Manager, a New Leader Emerges

對於美國棒球我是一竅不通
這篇(紐約時報)吸引我的是標題:許多人將manager和leader之間做大區分
內容也有點意思

In Search for Manager, a New Leader Emerges

Matthew Staver/Bloomberg News

Joe Girardi, who is at the World Series as a commentator for Fox, was said to have impressed General Manager Brian Cashman with his managing experience.


Published: October 29, 2007

DENVER, Oct. 28 — The Yankees will make their final decision on Joe Torre’s successor as manager Monday, according to Hank Steinbrenner, with an announcement likely to come Tuesday at the earliest.

Skip to next paragraph

Keep up with the latest postseason news on The Times’s baseball blog.

Go to the Bats Blog »

M.L.B.

Yankees

Mets

Ed Betz/Associated Press

Don Mattingly has long been a favorite of George Steinbrenner to succeed Joe Torre.

“The decision will be finalized tomorrow, I would say so,” Steinbrenner said Sunday in a telephone interview. Asked if General Manager Brian Cashman had made a recommendation to ownership, Steinbrenner said, “Not as far as you know.”

Steinbrenner, a son of George Steinbrenner, the Yankees’ principal owner, offered no hints as to who the choice would be. But a person who has spoken with the Yankees’ decision-makers said he felt strongly that Joe Girardi would get the job. The person spoke on condition of anonymity.

Girardi, who is at the World Series as a commentator for Fox, said, “I’ve got nothing new for you.” He added that he had had no conversations with the Yankees since his interview last Monday.

Don Mattingly and Tony Peña have also been interviewed for the job, and Hank Steinbrenner said any of the candidates would be acceptable. “I think so,” he said. “They were all chosen for a reason. They were all impressive.”

If the choice is Girardi, George Steinbrenner could overrule it and select Mattingly, who has long been his favorite to succeed Torre. But Steinbrenner is all but retired now, and his sons, Hank and Hal, are running the organization. Hank Steinbrenner said he would listen to Cashman’s recommendation.

“The baseball people we have are the smartest guys in the game,” he said. “I’m not stupid. It’s not like I’m not going to pay attention to what they say.”

Girardi’s managing experience, as well as his reputation for being forward-thinking and impeccably prepared, are said to appeal to Cashman. Girardi, who spent last season as a YES broadcaster, is also highly sought by other teams.

The feeling around baseball is that if Girardi is not offered the Yankees’ job, he will be aggressively pursued by other teams. The same could not be said of Mattingly, who was Torre’s bench coach last season after three years as the hitting coach.

Still, while Girardi was the National League’s manager of the year for Florida in 2006, he was fired over differences with Marlins management. Mattingly’s personality would seem to be an ideal fit in the Yankees’ clubhouse and may translate better than Girardi’s with reporters.

Hank Steinbrenner said the fans and the news media must be patient as the Yankees wait to announce the decision.

“This is not Iran,” he said. “Everybody needs to relax. We will have another fine manager. We’ve got a lot of top prospects, and that’s going to bode well for the Yankees for the next 10 years, hopefully. Everybody needs to relax and enjoy what’s to come.”

2007年10月26日 星期五

如何確保醫療系統供應的可靠

Food Safety Smarts 美國 FDA的食品安全之痛

美再召回華制玩具 美泰佔3.8萬

洗手沒?

Better: A Surgeon's Notes on Performance

in health care.with special moral duties


開完刀 手術成功 不過所用的縫合傷口之網料卻是仿造品
醫療系統之供應已全球化
如何確保供應的可靠呢

TimesSelect Bad Medicine, Sneaking In

Published: May 12, 2007

As I read about the melamine-tainted pet food, and about the hundreds in Panama killed by phony glycerin from China, I remembered a patient I once saw. She was a dancer in her 40s who had hobbled into the emergency room one October night with a painful, bulging mass in her groin. I gently put my fingers to it. It was beet-sized and firm. When I placed my stethoscope on it, I heard gurgling. This was, I told her, a strangulating hernia — a rent in her abdominal wall had trapped a loop of intestine. The swelling was the knot of bowel; the gurgling, the fluid inside.

She was at risk of gangrene and agreed to an emergency hernia 疝 operation. It’s not a complicated procedure. But there are still plenty of ways it can go wrong. Inside her, I found the hernia defect — a one-inch gap in her muscle wall — and, protruding through it, a choked-off, purple, six-inch length of bowel. I opened the gap wider, pushed the bowel back in, and thankfully it pinked back to life. We’d gotten there in time. I closed the hernia with a polypropylene mesh (網;網狀物) cut to size. It was like sewing a patch onto a torn couch cushion. The next day, she went home. I saw her two weeks later. No infection. No troubles. She’d done beautifully.

Then I got an e-mail notice. The mesh manufacturer, Johnson & Johnson, was reporting that the mesh I’d put in was counterfeit. It was fake.

Someone had infiltrated the supply chain somewhere between Sherman, Tex., where the authentic mesh was manufactured, and Boston, where I’d operated on the patient. Apparently, mesh can travel through many hands. The original lot had gone to a Memphis warehouse, and then through at least two hospital goods distributors, which sell and trade medical supplies on what turns out to be a worldwide market, like oil. Somewhere along the way a counterfeiter replaced the lot with fake mesh packaged exactly like Johnson & Johnson’s, right down to the lot number. It is believed this happened someplace in Asia. But no one really knows.

The material looked like ordinary mesh to me. But according to the alert from the Food and Drug Administration, it wasn’t sterile. And although it seemed to be polypropylene, the fibers and weave were different from the manufacturer’s. It wasn’t clear what should be done. I called the patient to come see me.

I also began to wonder how I could trust anything I use. My sterile gloves come from the Philippines, surgical sponges from China, devices and instruments from Taiwan to Texas. The ingredients for medications come from all over the world.

This is how it is now. That’s not bad, I know. But it’s not all good, either. In the effort to get the best possible results for people, it seems hard enough make sure one’s decisions are right. I’d never considered that I had to worry about my supplies, too.

So what to do?

In the name of safety and simplicity, we could try to restrict medical manufacturing and distribution networks to our borders. This is, for example, the argument for blocking the sale of medications from Canada. It’s folly, though. Medicine’s success and affordability already critically depend on materials and distribution from around the globe. Yet market forces aren’t weeding out the shady operators, either.

So we’re left only with vigilance — police work. Put enough F.D.A. inspectors on the ground and tracing technology on the goods and we actually could block those who would put an industrial solvent in children’s cough medicine and fake, unsterile material in our surgical supplies.

This we don’t do, though. The number of F.D.A. inspectors has actually been cut — partly because of small-government ideology and partly because of tight budgets. And still they’re finding more cases than ever. (In recent years, they’ve found counterfeit Lipitor, Viagra, Botox, Zyprexa and birth control pills, among others.) We need many times more inspectors. But nothing like it has been considered. That is no longer acceptable.

I saw my patient and told her about the fake mesh. She was stunned. We then considered what to do. It wasn’t clear the mesh would hold; and in many other patients, it became infected and had to be removed. But she’d done all right so far, and redoing the repair is major surgery. So she decided to wait and see what happened.

Given the alternative, doing nothing and hoping for the best was a wise choice for her. But it’s a bad choice for the rest of us.

Atul Gawande, a surgeon at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston and a New Yorker staff writer, is the author of the new book “Better.” He is a guest columnist this month.

in health care.with special moral duties

洗手沒?

Better: A Surgeon's Notes on Performance



紐約時報 Guest Columnist來賓專欄作家這篇
談醫-藥業一項特別的道德考慮
--如何兼顧或取捨開發國家和貧民的"仁"與"利"

TimesSelect Doctors, Drugs and the Poor


Published: May 17, 2007

It’s one of those questions no one tells you about when you enter medical practice. What do you do when patients come who can’t pay? Some doctors decline to see them. I have expenses to pay and a family to feed, they’ll argue.

But I grew up in a rural part of Ohio where an inordinate number of poor people live. My mother is a pediatrician there, and from the start, she could not imagine turning children away. Up to 20 percent of her patients have been without insurance, and more than half were on Medicaid, which paid terribly and was refused by other doctors. Some patients were not very grateful. Some were not as poor as they claimed. But we could count on my father’s better-paying urology practice to cross-subsidize. So that’s what she did.

The message from my parents was straightforward: We are in medicine and that comes with certain moral obligations. So I’ve understood that part of my job is to see those who can’t pay — even if sometimes it hurts.

I’ve been thinking about this as I’ve watched the arguments unfold about what pharmaceutical companies should charge in the developing world. The history of H.I.V. drugs has not been pretty. First, for almost a decade, we in the West ignored the possibility that antiretroviral drugs could be used in the developing world. (Remember the 2001 claim of U.S. government officials that Africans couldn’t learn to take the drugs on time because they didn’t have watches?) Then, under international pressure, drug companies made some discounts, but they were not deep enough. (A year’s supply was still more than $1,000 per patient.) Only when an Indian generic manufacturer provided a copycat three-drug regimen for $150 per year and major donors stepped forward did distribution effectively reach poor countries.

We’re now in the throes of another round of H.I.V. drug battles, this time over advanced, but even more expensive drug regimens from Merck and Abbott Laboratories. Last week, the Clinton Foundation endorsed decisions by Thailand and Brazil to break the companies’ patents and purchase cheaper, copycat versions of the drugs. Abbott retaliated by withholding seven new drugs from Thailand, including an antibiotic, a painkiller, and a medication for high-blood pressure. The fight has become vicious.

In a way, it’s hard to see how the confrontation could be avoided. The cost of developing a new drug now approaches $1 billion, and companies do need profit margins to recoup that cost and encourage new innovation. Yet, once a life-saving discovery is made, it is clearly grotesque to make millions suffer or die while waiting for a 20-year patent to expire.

The experience with H.I.V. drugs is oddly heartening, though. There is, in fact, a spectrum of behavior among pharmaceutical companies — just like with doctors. Gilead Sciences has granted licenses to generic manufacturers to supply its blockbuster H.I.V. drug, Viread, to the world’s hundred poorest countries at the reasonable royalty rate of 5 percent of sales. Bristol-Meyers Squibb licensed its second-line drug, Reyataz, completely free of royalties to generic manufacturers for India and southern Africa. And through the World Health Organization’s bulk vaccine purchasing arrangements, manufacturers have been able to make significant profits selling vaccines at low cost but large volumes. This is the progress we want to build upon.

Pressure to broaden these efforts will grow, and it should. Agreement on regional pricing tiers and distribution networks for H.I.V. drugs show likelihood of solidifying in ways that make drugs available and support innovation, but we have nothing like it for drugs for heart disease, lung disease, or cancer. Meanwhile, the world is changing. The No. 1 cause of death in India, China, and Vietnam is not H.I.V. It’s heart disease. Cancer is in the top 10. Their people need clot-busting drugs, chemotherapies, and EKG machines just like everyone else. Manufacturers need to show the same willingness to make these life-saving technologies available to the poor.

Some will argue, hey, companies just invent this stuff; it isn’t their job to make sure every country gets some. But that’s not right. As Arthur Caplan, the bioethicist, points out, “You aren’t manufacturing pantyhose when you’re in health care. There are special moral duties attached.”

And one of them is: If you’re building a lifeboat, you have to think about how many you can get inside.

Atul Gawande, a surgeon at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston and a New Yorker staff writer, is the author of the new book “Better.” He is a guest columnist this month.

2007年10月24日 星期三

資訊產品的保固

Eee PC傳螢幕設計瑕疵 華碩︰個案

ASUS「Eee PC」 其中 "電腦發明..."有錯

〔記者李宜儒/台北報導〕華碩Eee PC傳出螢幕疑似有設計瑕疵,有消費者表示,自己在首購當天搶購到一台,隔天打開包裝卻發現螢幕由下到上裂了一大塊,但開機沒問題。

消費者認為,以一台正常的筆記型電腦來說,出廠前一定經過所謂的重重測試,當然也應該包括機殼承重測試,因此懷疑這會不會是Eee PC在螢幕設計上的瑕疵或是用料不良,還是出廠品管有疏失,才會造成此款問題。

華碩表示,該案件應屬個案,目前已提供代用機,並由維修工程師進行檢測。

華碩指出,Eee PC生產過程均與一般筆記型電腦相同,所應該經過的測試種類也沒有減少,絕不會因為售價較低而降低品管標準。

產品保固方面,目前Eee PC主機、變壓器保固時間為一年,電池則為六個月。但液晶螢幕部分,則不像其他筆電產品,有提供一到二年的無亮點保固。至於Eee PC的維修管道,則與公司其他筆記型電腦一樣,都是由皇家俱樂部負責。

公司強調,Eee PC雖然是一台簡易型電腦,但是從產品設計、用料及生產流程所採行的標準均與一般筆記型電腦相同,消費者不必有所疑慮。


hc是 T C Star中忠實顧客

傍晚去 全國電子(羅斯福路3段) 買 tc star tcn 350 mouse 299元 不過打開包裝 保証書 等竟然是"濕透" 不過 mouse 可用 請問 我該如何處理


廈門長庚醫院"有效管理 (???)"

廈門長庚醫院11月即將開幕,擔心衝擊台灣醫事人力,擠壓台灣民眾就醫權益,行政院 長張俊雄表示,醫事人力赴大陸需有效管理,相關法令會因應。而陸委會主委陳明通則強調將以「有效管理 (???) hc」原則,評估目前台灣醫事人力供需情形。

歷經兩年籌設,王永慶在中國廈門興建的長庚醫院計畫在11月24日開幕,即將落成的廈門長庚醫院總面積占70公頃,總投資高達18億人民幣,可容納2千個 床位,日後完全興建更將擁有4千5百個床位,目前長庚已招募200名醫護人員,預計明年8月還需增加2千5百人,擔心衝擊台灣醫事人力,影響民眾就醫權益..... (取材中央通信...

.自由時報


長庚調醫師赴中 政府緊盯

〔記者洪素卿、魏怡嘉、陳曉宜/綜合報導〕針對外傳長庚醫院因應廈門分院設立,可能調動逾百名醫師,長庚醫院昨否認這項說法,並強調向來調度皆以不影響醫療品質為前提。健保局則表示,已向長庚醫院瞭解,長庚表示醫師調動的幅度不會很大,但健保局仍會密切注意。

對此,行政院長張俊雄表示,將有效管理;陸委會主委陳明通則回應,若影響台灣人民醫療品質,將進行必要管制。衛生署長侯勝茂表示,若長庚醫院調派醫護人員,而影響台灣的急、門診,衛生署就會與陸委會商量如何因應。

民間監督健保聯盟表示,長庚在台灣為財團法人醫院,享有免稅等優惠待遇,若不能回饋台灣病患,至少也要顧及台灣病患就醫權益,長庚體系若出現醫師大調動,應在每個月前先公告。

民間監督健保聯盟發言人滕西華表示,長庚醫療體系因一定的床數及醫師數量,才經評鑑取得醫學中心的層級,並取得相對的健保給付標準,長庚不能隨便以一句他們有調動醫師的權利,讓醫師出現大量的流動,一旦醫師的配置低於醫學中心標準,衛生署及健保局即應介入予以處置。

BP 的教訓

BP is expected to plead guilty to U.S. criminal environmental charges and pay a $50 million fine related to a Texas refinery explosion. The company will also pay $303 million to settle civil charges for allegedly manipulating the propane market.

紐約時報
BP Settlements Seen on Safety and Price Cases By STEPHEN LABATON and LOWELL BERGMAN
The British energy company BP is preparing to settle accusations that it was criminally indifferent to worker safety and that it manipulated energy prices, officials say.

BBC 二零零六年
美國國會譴責英國石油公司

英國石油公司(BP)受美國國會指責
美國國會指責英國石油公司(BP)因為沒有適當地維護該公司在阿拉斯加的輸油管道而對美國經濟造成破壞。
美國國會眾議院能源和商務委員會主席巴爾頓說,英國石油公司多年來沒有檢查所指出的在美國的兩條最重要的輸油管道。
美國國會正在調查英國石油公司最近的決定,即關于把在Prudhoe灣油田的石油產量減半的決定,原因是管道腐蝕造成石油泄漏。
英國石油公司在北美的負責人馬龍承認該公司沒有達到自己制定的高標准,但是反駁了現在由另外一個公司接管這些輸油管道的說法。
在上月油田部分關閉以前,阿拉斯加油田產量一直占美國石油總產量的8%。

career imprinting

How "Career Imprinting" Shapes Leaders
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/4610.html


imprinting
M S Gorbachev:「每個人自己的人生命題,其實是由少年時期的切身體驗及所經歷的人生經驗所形成的。」((20世紀的精神教訓:戈爾巴喬夫與池田大作對話錄)(北京:社會科學文獻出版社,2005,頁十二)

2007年10月22日 星期一

德国癌症研究中心行政管理部把自己看作是实现共同目标的一部分

科学 2007.10.22
德国癌症研究与治疗同步

Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: 接受治疗的癌症患者

一般来说,新的科研成果往往需要经过很多年的时间才会得到实际应用,医学领域的研究成果尤其如此。但在德国的癌症研究重地海德堡,情况却大不一样。这里,科学研究从一开始就和实践密切结合,科研人员直接参与癌症治疗工作。

这里是位于海德堡的。现在这里正在大兴土木,进行彻底翻新,所有建筑都腾空一清。然而,这里不光是建筑将会焕然一新,就是科研工作方式也将展现全新的面貌。其实,工作方式的改变,2003年就已经开始了。那时,研究人员开始走出远离实际的象牙塔,开始进入医院,直接在医院进行科研。分子遗传学专业负责人利希特尔(Peter Lichter)教授介绍说:“我们过去的弱点无疑是缺乏机制,不能把基础研究成果足够快地介绍到医院。”

利希特尔教授是德国癌症研究中心的著名学者,曾因开发出一种新的肿瘤细胞诊断法而荣获德国癌症援助协会颁发的大奖。他的上司是维斯特勒尔(Otmar Wiestler)教授。从2003年开始,维斯特勒尔教授就任德国癌症研究中心的主任一职。他为自己制定的主要工作目标有一个,那就是打破纯科研的象牙塔,让癌症研究工作尽可能地结合实际。

他介绍说:“假如你刚刚上任,负责领导这样一个闻名世界的研究中心,你当然很快就会考虑,我们这个中心现在的情况怎么样,将来可以向哪些方向发展。我们迈出的很大一步就是准备将来更密切地和医院合作,原因很简单,那就是目前许多领域的癌症基础研究成果已经相当丰富,使我们开始了解癌症在人体内的发病原因和发病过程,使我们拥有全新的认识基础、全新的手段,完成我们这个研究中心的真正使命,那就是不光是研究癌症,而且也要协助医疗界将来更好地诊断和治疗癌症,甚至预防癌症。”

因此,2003年,德国癌症研究中心和海德堡大学附属医院一起合作,成立了德国的国家肿瘤疾病中心NCT,专门治疗癌症患者。利希特尔教授表示,这个中心可以说是聚集了德国癌症研究领域的精英,其目的只有一个,那就是为癌症患者服务。即使是对那些只从事基础研究的学者来说,比如说年轻的克林米勒教授(Ursula Klingmüller),他们的工作也是围绕癌症患者展开的。

克林米勒教授告知,她当初之所以申请到这个中心工作,就是因为这里的科研密切围绕实际。她说:“给我留下很深印象的一件事,是我们和行政部门的一次会面。行政部门代表先是问候我们,然后就说,无论是行政部门还是科研部门,我们大家的目标是一致的,那就是齐心合力为癌症患者服务,治愈肿瘤。这种态度,也就是的态度,在这之前我还从来没有听说过。这一点我觉得非常好。”

Judith Hartl

2007年10月19日 星期五

Green is hard work. It's messy.

vanish/go up/disappear in a puff of smoke INFORMAL
to disappear suddenly and completely:
One moment he was standing behind me, the next he had vanished in a puff of smoke.
All his hard work seemed to be going up in a puff of smoke.

(from Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary)


businessweek
COVER STORY
By Ben Elgin

Little Green Lies
The sweet notion that making a company environmentally friendly can be not just cost-effective but profitable is going up in smoke. Meet the man wielding the torch

podcast
COVER STORY PODCAST

Auden Schendler learned about corporate environmentalism directly from the prophet of the movement. In the late 1990s, Schendler was working as a junior researcher at the Rocky Mountain Institute, a think tank in Aspen led by Amory Lovins, legendary author of the idea that by "going green," companies can increase profits while saving the planet. As Lovins often told Schendler and others at the institute, boosting energy efficiency and reducing harmful emissions constitute not just a free lunch but "a lunch you're paid to eat."


Inspired by this marvelous promise, Schendler took a job in 1999 at Aspen Skiing Co., becoming one of the first of a new breed: the in-house "corporate sustainability" advocate. Eight years later, it takes him six hours crisscrossing the Aspen region by car and foot to show a visitor some of the ways he has helped the posh, 800-employee resort blunt its contribution to global warming. Schendler, 37, a tanned and muscular mountain climber, clambers atop a storage shed to point out sleek solar panels on an employee-housing rooftop. He hikes down a stony slope for a view of the resort's miniature power plant, fueled by the rushing waters of a mountain creek. The company features its environmental credentials in its marketing and has decorated its headquarters with green trophies and plaques. Last year Time honored Schendler as a "Climate Crusader" in an article accompanied by a half-page photo of the jut-jawed executive standing amid snow-covered evergreens.

But at the end of this arid late-summer afternoon, Schendler is feeling anything but triumphant. He pulls a company sedan to the side of a dirt road and turns off the motor. "Who are we kidding?" he says, finally. Despite all his exertions, the resort's greenhouse-gas emissions continue to creep up year after year. More vacationers mean larger lodgings burning more power. Warmer winters require tons of additional artificial snow, another energy drain. "I've succeeded in doing a lot of sexy projects yet utterly failed in what I set out to do," Schendler says. "How do you really green your company? It's almost f------ impossible."

Barely a day goes by without a prominent corporation loudly announcing its latest green accomplishments: retailers retrofitting stores to cut energy consumption, utilities developing pristine wind power, major banks investing billions in clean energy. No matter what Al Gore's critics might say, there's no denying that the Nobel Prize winner's message has hit home. With rising consumer anxiety over global warming, businesses want to show that they're part of the solution, says Chris Hunter, a former energy manager at Johnson & Johnson (JNJ ) who works for the environmental consulting firm GreenOrder. "Ten years ago, companies would call up and say I need a digital strategy.' Now, it's I need a green strategy.'"

Environmental stewardship has become a centerpiece of corporate image-crafting. General Electric (GE ) says it is spending nearly all of its multimillion-dollar corporate advertising budget on "Ecomagination," its collection of environmentally friendly products, even though they make up only 8% of the conglomerate's sales. Yahoo! (YHOO ) and Google (GOOG ) have proclaimed that by 2008 their offices and computer centers will become "carbon neutral." Fueling the public relations frenzy is the notion that preserving the climate is better than cost-effective. But Schendler, who only a few years ago considered himself a leading proponent of this theory, now offers a searing refutation of the belief that green corporate practices beget green of the pecuniary variety.

EMPTY BOASTING
Charismatic and well-connected among environmental executives, he has begun saying out loud what some whisper in private: Companies continue to assess most green initiatives with the same return-on-investment analysis they would use with any other capital project. And while some environmental advances pay for themselves in time, returns often aren't as swift or large as competing uses of corporate cash. That leads to green projects quietly withering on the vine. More important, and contrary to the alluring Lovins thesis, many major initiatives simply aren't money-savers. They come with daunting price tags that undercut the conviction that environmental salvation can be had on the cheap.

Schendler explains his confessional mood as the result of cumulative frustration: with foot-dragging colleagues, with himself for compromising, and with the entire green movement frothily sweeping through corporations in America and Europe. So far his candor hasn't cost him his job, though rival resorts have groused about Schendler to his bosses. His colleagues tolerate him with a combination of personal affection and periodic annoyance. "We have a very self-critical culture," says Mike Kaplan, Aspen Skiing's chief executive. "We wouldn't have Auden any other way." The company, Kaplan adds, has led its industry on the environmental front.

Schendler grits his teeth over the failure of modest proposals, such as his plan last year to refurbish one of the resort's oldest lodges to use less energy. He estimated the $100,000 project would have paid for itself in seven years through lower utility bills. But the money went for new ski lifts, snowmobiles, and other conventional purchases. "The availability of capital is not infinite," says Donald Schuster, vice-president for real estate.

Beaten back frequently, the environmental executive concedes that he made a mistake last year when he pushed the resort to make audacious green claims based on the purchase of "renewable energy credits." RECs are a type of financial arrangement that companies increasingly use to justify assertions that they have reduced their net contribution to global warming. But the most commonly used RECs, which are supposed to result in a third party's developing pollution-free power, turn out to be highly dubious (BW—Mar. 26). Aspen Skiing relied on RECs in declaring it had "offset 100% of our electricity use." Schendler now concedes the boast was empty.

Aspen Skiing is far from alone in making suspect claims of green virtue. Setting aside questionable renewable energy credits would wipe out the climate-saving assertions of dozens of major corporations celebrated for their environmental leadership. Office products retailer Staples (SPLS ) has used RECs to turn a 19% spike in emissions since 2001 into what it claims to be a 15% decline, the company's sustainability reports show. PepsiCo (PEP ) and Whole Foods Market have employed the credits to make declarations that every bit of pollution from electricity they use is negated. Johnson & Johnson has proclaimed a 17% reduction in carbon emissions since 1990, based largely on RECs. Without the credits, the pharmaceutical giant has seen a 24% increase, J&J executives acknowledge. "Recent corporate moves by J&J and others are pushing in the right direction, but it is still window dressing compared to the problem at hand," says Hunter, the former J&J manager.

Amid the overheated claims, some corporations have made legitimate environmental gains. Wal-Mart Stores (WMT ) helped spark the market for energy-saving fluorescent bulbs by giving them top billing, even though incandescent bulbs are more profitable. Office Depot overhauled lighting and energy in more than 600 stores, contributing to the company's real 10% decline in releases of heat-trapping gases. Dow Chemical (DOW ) and DuPont (DD ) have significantly trimmed their actual emission levels. But there is still reason to worry about long-term commitment. Dow says it invested $1 billion to help achieve reductions of 19% between 1994 and 2005. Because of technological challenges and costs, however, Dow predicts that additional cuts won't occur until 2025, 18 years from now.

Much corporate environmentalism boils down to misleading statistics and hype. To make real progress, genuine accomplishments will have to be sorted out from feel-good gestures. Schendler no longer views business as capable of the dramatic change he thought possible eight years ago, the sort of change that corporations have grown accustomed to boasting about. His own employer is "a perfect example of why this won't work," he says. "We've had a chance to cherry-pick 50 projects and get them done. But even if every ski company could do what we did, we'd still be nowhere."

`TRENCH WARFARE'
Auden Schendler felt nature's pull at the age of 14, when his uncle took him on a backpacking trip through the rugged Bob Marshall Wilderness in northwest Montana. Growing up in the scruffy New Jersey city of Hackensack, he always felt cramped and out of place. He escaped up the Atlantic coast to Maine, where he majored in environmental studies at Bowdoin College. "I became the person I wanted to be: a mountaineer, an outdoorsman." During this period he scaled Alaska's 20,300-foot Mount McKinley and made several trips up treacherous Mount Rainier in central Washington. On another adventure, he trekked alone on skis for nine days across a wintry Yosemite, sleeping in hand-carved snow caves. "I am at my happiest on a fall morning, in a high-mountain campsite, maybe 12,000 feet," he says. "The air is crisp and chilly, and some coffee is brewing on the campfire. What is better than that?"

After college he moved to Aspen and taught skiing and high school math. The state of Colorado provided his first paid environmental job, weatherizing the trailers of poor families to help them save energy. This involved crawling beneath flimsy homes, where he sometimes encountered the decomposing carcasses of raccoons. "It was gritty work," he says, "the trench warfare of climate change."

In 1997, he took a job at the Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) just outside Aspen, which Lovins had co-founded 15 years earlier. Lovins, a physicist by training, was collaborating with his then-wife, L. Hunter Lovins, and businessman Paul Hawken on a book called Natural Capitalism, which became a best-seller. By rethinking their operations and choosing materials wisely, the book argued, companies could produce far less pollution and earn more. "Auden is terrific," Lovins recalls of his "vigorous, smart, and dedicated" former employee, who did research for Natural Capitalism. An obsession with efficiency pervaded the institute: Schendler recalls being chastised for boiling water in the kitchen without a lid on the kettle. He idolized Lovins and went jogging with Hawken. "Instead of going to graduate school, I went to RMI," he says.

He heard in 1999 that Aspen Skiing, a complex of hotels and ski runs popular with wealthy vacationers, was looking for an environmental director. The job seemed a perfect fit. "When I left RMI, I felt that government was powerful but businesses were nimble enough and motivated enough by profit to make changes that we need," he says. "I was indoctrinated." The ski industry, which gorges on energy to create a fantasy of always-plentiful powdered snow and cozy alpine hideaways, offered an ideal place to put these abstractions into practice.

RESISTANCE FROM WITHIN
Aspen Skiing, privately owned by the Crown family of Chicago, which made billions on its stake in military contractor General Dynamics (GD ) and other enterprises, exudes an earnest concern about nature—not least because its business would melt away if temperatures rose just a few degrees. "My kids say: God, Dad, are we going to ski when we're your age?'" says Kaplan, the CEO. "I have to tell them: I don't know.'"

Then 29, Schendler received a genial welcome at Aspen Skiing's wood-paneled headquarters near the county airport. "Auden came with some great athletic credentials," recalls John Norton, then the chief operating officer. "He's a terrific kayaker and skier, and that's a guaranteed ice-breaker in a ski company." But when it came to spending the company's money, things became complicated.

He first took aim at the 90-room Little Nell Hotel. The luxurious lodge nestled at the base of Aspen Mountain devours so much electricity that Schendler assumed it would be simple to find efficiencies. He told its then-manager, Eric Calderon, he wanted to put fluorescent lightbulbs in all guest rooms. The new bulbs would last 10 times as long, use 75% less power, and pay for themselves in only two years. The answer was no. Calderon, who favors dapper blue blazers and chinos, worried that fluorescent light would suggest a waiting-room ambience, jeopardizing the establishment's five-star rating. "There's always a question of balance between environmental concerns and satisfying expectations of the clientele," he says.

Thwarted on guest rooms, Schendler switched to Little Nell's underground garage. Guests never saw it because valets park all cars. For $20,000, Schendler said he could replace energy-gobbling 175-watt incandescent light fixtures with fluorescent bulbs and save $10,000 a year. Unimpressed, Calderon again balked. If he had $20,000 extra, he would rather spend it on items guests would notice: fine Corinthian leather furniture or shiny new bathroom fixtures.

At the company's next senior management meeting, Schendler brought an unusual display to make his case for new garage lights. He had wired a stationary bicycle to show how much less energy fluorescent bulbs consume. Thirty managers watched as Schendler challenged a burly executive to hop on the bike. Sure enough, it took much more sweat to make several incandescent bulbs glow. But Schuster, the real estate chief, didn't believe the new lights would save money. "I was skeptical on the ROI [return on investment] calculations Auden had presented for the retrofit," Schuster recalls. "One of my concerns was that we were committing capital based on theoretical returns without any real opportunity for a look back on the actual returns."

It took Schendler two years to overcome resistance to the garage-light replacement, and then only after he secured a $5,000 grant from a local nonprofit. He acknowledges the strangeness of a corporation with annual revenue of about $200 million, according to industry veterans (the company declines to provide a figure), seeking charity to reduce its electricity use. With a hint of sarcasm, he notes: "This is the sort of radical action that's needed to get people over ROI thresholds."

WHEN BREAK-EVEN WON'T DO
Larger-scale versions of his lightbulb struggle are playing out at numerous other companies. Hailed as an environmental pioneer, FedEx (FDX ) says on its Web site that it is "committed to the use of innovations and technologies to minimize greenhouse gases." With 70,000 ground vehicles and 670 planes burning fuel, the world's largest shipper is a huge producer of heat-trapping gases. Back in 2003, FedEx announced that it would soon begin deploying clean-burning hybrid trucks at a rate of 3,000 a year, eventually sparing the atmosphere 250,000 tons of greenhouse gases annually from diesel-engine vehicles. "This program has the potential to replace the company's 30,000 medium-duty trucks over the next 10 years," FedEx announced at the time. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency awarded the effort a Clean Air Excellence prize in 2004.

Four years later, FedEx has purchased fewer than 100 hybrid trucks, or less than one-third of one percent of its fleet. At $70,000 and up, the hybrids cost at least 75% more than conventional trucks, although fuel savings should pay for the difference over the 10-year lifespan of the vehicles. FedEx, which reported record profits of $2 billion for the fiscal year that ended May 31, decided that breaking even over a decade wasn't the best use of company capital. "We do have a fiduciary responsibility to our shareholders," says environmental director Mitch Jackson. "We can't subsidize the development of this technology for our competitors."

Schendler faces the return-on-investment challenge on almost every proposal he makes. Earlier this year, he pushed his employer to bankroll a $1 million solar-energy farm on the outskirts of Aspen. Like most electricity consumers in the Rockies, Aspen Skiing's power comes primarily from coal-fired plants, which emit large amounts of carbon dioxide. With federal tax breaks aimed at encouraging clean energy, the football-field-size solar array might generate a paltry 6.5% return, meaning it would pay for itself in 15 years. It barely got approved, says Chief Financial Officer Matt Jones. "We put this together with duct tape and chewing gum."

Schendler's persistence eventually won him admirers even among executives who didn't agree with his entire agenda. "We were trying to run a very complex set of businesses—four ski areas, three hotels, two athletic complexes, and a golf course—but Auden never let us forget that he belonged in the family portrait," says Norton, the former COO and the man Schendler recruited for the bike-powered lightbulb demonstration. "Usually he elbowed in with good humor, but also sometimes with the grim single-mindedness that's the mantle of a true believer."

`I WAS GETTING KILLED'
Schendler, who is married and has two young children, ranks below top managers at Aspen Skiing but attends most of their important meetings. The company zealously guards salary amounts, and he won't reveal his, but a person familiar with Aspen Skiing estimates that he earns about $100,000 a year. Perpetually on the move, Schendler gets his hands into everything, fiddling with a boiler knob and inquiring why a building's lights were on the previous night. He sometimes seems self-conscious about his East Coast, elite-college pedigree, compensating with gestures like helping rewire a lodge's electrical circuits. Teasing follows him everywhere, he says. "I can't tell you how many times I've heard, Hey, Auden, I recycled a can today.'"

One of his proudest victories is the small hydro-power plant the company spent $150,000 in 2003 to install on one of its ski slopes. It's fed two months of the year by a stream that turns into a roaring creek when the snow melts. The other 10 months it's dormant. Inside the small hut containing the plant's steel turbine, he animatedly describes the hurdles overcome during construction: "We hit an underground gas line. I was over budget. I was getting killed." But it got done.

For all his hard work, however, Schendler began to feel a creeping disappointment. Combined, the hydro and solar projects eventually will generate less than 1% of the company's power needs. His colleagues felt they were stretching to accommodate him, but Schendler knew he was coming up short. Seeking to make an industry-leading gesture, he decided in 2005 to explore renewable energy credits.

Introduced at the beginning of the decade, RECs are supposed to marshal market forces behind wind and solar power. Developers of clean energy sell RECs, usually measured in megawatt hours of electricity, to buyers that want to counterbalance their pollution by funding environmentally friendly power. But often the REC trade seems like little more than the buying and selling of bragging rights, rather than incentives that lead to the construction of wind turbines or solar panels.

Schendler knew that RECs and similar financial transactions were swiftly growing in popularity, as more companies sought green credibility and REC brokers proliferated. He persuaded his superiors in 2006 to spend $42,000 a year, a 2% premium on the company's energy costs, to buy RECs at roughly $2 a megawatt hour. According to commonly accepted REC principles, this investment, less than a third of what it took to build the hydro plant, permitted Aspen Skiing to claim that it had offset all of its use of coal-burning energy.

Colleagues heaped praise on Schendler. In a press release, Pat O'Donnell, then the company's CEO, said: "This purchase represents our guiding principles in action." Accolades arrived from the EPA; local newspapers reported the feat. "It was seen as one of my biggest wins ever," Schendler says.

He spent hours thinking about how to describe the purchase of RECs for marketing purposes. The formulation he came up with was that Aspen Skiing had offset "100% of our electricity use with wind energy credits, keeping a million pounds of pollution out of the air." This wording was plastered on ski lifts, advertising brochures, and countless company e-mails.

But even as he helped launch this campaign, Schendler had a queasy feeling. At some level, he suspected the credits weren't causing any new windmills to be built. They weren't literally offsetting anything. He felt torn. "I'm well aware of what is right and what works and what matters," he says. "I'm also aware of brand positioning. Part of my job is to maintain [Aspen Skiing's] leadership." His industry "was going to do this in a big way. One small resort in California already had, and we needed to move. My solace was the educational value of the move. The discussions it would cause would be valuable, even if the RECs were not."

His prediction proved accurate. In the year and a half since his RECs purchase, more than 50 other ski resorts have made similar buys. No fewer than 28 claim to be "100% wind powered." Enticed by inexpensive green claims, companies in other industries have been equally enthusiastic. The top 25 REC purchasers have bought the equivalent of 6 million megawatt hours this year, nearly quadruple the volume from 2005, the EPA says.

Rather than enjoying his role as an REC pioneer, Schendler felt increasingly anxious. In private, he pushed REC brokers for hard evidence that new wind capacity was being built. Their evasiveness gnawed at him. He asked veterans in the renewable energy field whether his marketing message was legitimate. "They laughed at me," he says.

The trouble stems from the basic economics of RECs. Credits purchased at $2 a megawatt hour, the price Aspen Skiing and many other corporations pay, logically can't have much effect. Wind developers receive about $51 per megawatt hour for the electricity they sell to utilities. They get another $20 in federal tax breaks, and the equivalent of up to $20 more in accelerated depreciation of their capital equipment. Even many wind-power developers that stand to profit from RECs concede that producers making $91 a megawatt hour aren't going to expand production for another $2. "At this price, they're not very meaningful for the developer," says John Calaway, chief development officer for U.S. wind power at Babcock & Brown, an investment bank that funds new wind projects. "It doesn't support building something that wouldn't otherwise be built."

BAFFLEMENT AND IRRITATION
Schendler isn't the only environmental executive aware of the problem. In 2006, Johnson & Johnson spent $1 million on credits it says are equivalent to 400,000 tons of emissions. Based on this purchase, the company claimed to have shrunk its contribution to global warming by 17% since 1990. The World Wildlife Fund and other environmental groups have praised J&J, and the EPA gave the company a Green Power award in 2006. Asked about the doubts surrounding RECs, Dennis Canavan, the company's senior director of global energy, concedes that the credits "aren't ideal." They don't really reduce J&J's pollution, he says, and he hopes the company eventually abandons them. Still, he insists that "somewhere along the line, RECs do encourage new projects." He adds: "For the time being, this is the system available to us to offset CO2."

However, some companies employ more direct methods, like building substantial clean energy capacity themselves. In August, Jiminy Peak Mountain Resort in Hancock, Mass., turned on a new wind turbine standing 386 feet tall and capable of providing half of the resort's electricity. The project took three years to complete and cost $4 million.

Many larger corporations, however, defend their lower-cost approach. Mark Buckley, vice-president of environmental affairs at Staples, defends RECs, saying they "have clearly sent the right signal to the market." His counterpart at PepsiCo (PEP ), Rob Schasel, agrees, adding, "Absolutely, we're changing what's going into the atmosphere." Whole Foods Market (WFMI ) declined to comment.

This spring Schendler concluded that he had to reverse course, persuade his employer to back away from the renewable energy credits he had endorsed just months earlier, and favor more meaningful green projects. His colleagues reacted with bafflement and irritation. "Auden, you are the most confusing human being I have ever encountered," senior marketing manager Steve Metcalf wrote in an e-mail in April. "You have placed on us the responsibility of getting the environment message out—your message—as a company-wide endeavor. We have responded to your bidding and environmental passion with a gusto on the verge of maniacal. As mentioned, you are confusing to the point of complete exhaustion."

Schendler replied: "Relax, brah. I enormously appreciate all the support.... We're on the edge of this thing, figuring it out. If it were simple and easy, someone would have done it already."

THE CONFLICTED CRITIC
The company will continue to buy RECs through at least 2008, when its current contract expires. Executives say they're reluctant to stop any sooner, because they don't want to appear to be backsliding on the environment when competitors claim to be entirely wind powered. The company still touts its RECs purchases in some marketing material.

Schendler, meanwhile, has become a prominent critic of RECs, a potentially confusing role, since his employer buys them. In an April letter to the Center for Resource Solutions, a nonprofit group in San Francisco that certifies credits, he said that RECs have as much effect on the development of new renewable-energy projects as would trading "rocks, IOUs, or pinecones." That statement, which inevitably whizzed around the Internet, stung some in the ski industry who interpreted it as an attack. Schendler's immediate boss, General Counsel Dave Bellack, has heard from competitors asking that he stifle Schendler. Bellack has declined.

Now simultaneously an insider and an outsider in corporate environmental circles, Schendler relishes the notoriety. "I don't think I'm seen as a team player in this industry," he says, "but I don't care. This issue is so much bigger than just the ski industry." In March he told the U.S. House Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources that companies won't make serious progress without regulation of carbon emissions—a departure from his earlier faith that abundant, profitable green projects will transform the way business operate.

His former mentor Lovins says Schendler could find further cost-saving energy efficiencies with more support from his superiors. But this mind-set, Schendler warns, could influence companies to pursue exclusively projects with quick payoffs: "The idea that green is fun, it's easy, and it's profitable is dangerous. This is hard work. It's messy. It's not always profitable. And companies have to get off the mark and start actually doing stuff."


Kirin in Talks to Buy Japan Drugmaker Kyowa Hakko

Kirin in Talks to Buy Japan Drugmaker Kyowa Hakko (Update5)

By Kanoko Matsuyama and Maki Shiraki

Oct. 19 (Bloomberg) -- Kirin Holdings Co., Japan's biggest brewer, is in talks to buy Kyowa Hakko Kogyo Co. to triple the size of its drug unit as beer sales stall.

The talks, reported earlier in the Nikkei newspaper, were confirmed by Kirin spokesman Hiroki Umezawa. Kyowa Hakko shares surged to a seven-year high, pushing up the Tokyo-based company's value 17 percent to 560 billion yen ($4.9 billion).

Buying Kyowa Hakko would give Kirin a maker of allergy drugs and developer of cancer treatments that more than doubled first-half profit. Beer production in Japan fell in the first half to the lowest since records began in 1992.

``It's a good move for Kirin to strengthen its drugs and biotechnology business,'' said Shunichiro Manome, an equities analyst at Cosmo Securities Co. in Tokyo. ``There's little growth in Japan's beer market.''

The Tokyo-based beermaker is seeking to purchase more than 50 percent of Kyowa Hakko to merge with its own drug unit, the Nikkei said, without saying where it obtained the information. The acquisition would cost more than 300 billion yen if a 30 percent premium was paid, the report said.

Kirin, which makes the anemia drugs Espo and Nesp, had 67.2 billion yen in sales from pharmaceuticals last year.

Kyowa Hakko, maker of the allergy medication Allelock, had 131.5 billion yen in sales, accounting for 37 percent of the business. The rest of its revenue comes from chemicals and food products.

The company also owns the rights to a process known as Potelligent that increases the effectiveness of drugs used to treat immune disorders.

Technology Rights

It has licensed the technology to nine companies including Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Biogen Idec Inc. and Genentech Inc., the world's second-largest biotechnology company.

``The combination should be significant for Kirin's pharmaceutical business's growth story,'' Naomi Takagi, a JPMorgan analyst, said in a report to clients. ``Both companies possess relative strengths in antibody drugs.''

Kyowa Hakko shares rose 200 yen, their daily limit, to 1,402 yen on the Tokyo Stock Exchange today. The stock is the best performer on the 35-member Topix Pharmaceutical Index this year. Kirin shares rose 19 yen, or 1.2 percent, to 1,586 yen.

Kirin President Kazuyasu Kato said in February the company was looking to strengthen its drug business and acquisitions would be considered.

Japan's drugmakers have been merging as government price controls squeeze profit margins.

Mitsubishi Chemical Holdings Corp. agreed to buy Tanabe Seiyaku Co. in February. Astellas Inc., Japan's second-largest drugmaker, was formed by the 2005 merger of Yamanouchi Pharmaceutical Co. and Fujisawa Pharmaceutical Co.

Rising Costs

Kirin's first-half profit fell 12 percent on rising prices for brewing malt and aluminum beer cans. The company said today it will form an alliance with rival Suntory Ltd. to procure aluminum and cardboard packaging to reduce costs.

Revenue rose 6.8 percent to 836 billion yen in the half, bolstered by last year's purchase of a controlling stake in Japanese winemaker Mercian Corp. Sales of beer were little changed at 447 billion yen.

To contact the reporters on this story: Kanoko Matsuyama in Tokyo at kmatsuyama2@bloomberg.net ; Maki Shiraki in Tokyo at mshiraki1@bloomberg.net .

Last Updated: October 19, 2007 03:25 EDT

さんか 1 【傘下】

勢力のある人物や組織に属して、その支配・影響・庇護などを受ける立場にあること。翼下。
「大企業の―に入る」


・~の under the influence ((of)).
・~企業[組合] an affiliated enterprise [union].
・…の~に入る come under the umbrella [influence, control] of….

キリンHD、協和発酵を買収へ 医薬品事業を強化

2007年10月19日10時24分

 ビール大手のキリンホールディングスが医薬品中堅、協和発酵を買収する方向で最終調整に入ったことが19日、分かった。酒類の消費が伸び悩む中、医薬品 事業を強化するのが狙い。過半数の株式取得を目指し、友好的な株式公開買い付け(TOB)による買収案も検討している模様だ。協和発酵の時価総額は約 4800億円(18日終値)で3000億円規模の大型買収となる可能性がある。

 キリンは7月から持ち株会社制に移行しており、傘下に医薬品子会社の「キリンファーマ」を持つ。キリンは協和発酵を傘下に収めた後、キリンファーマと統合する考えだ。両社の医薬品事業の売上高を合計すると約2000億円となる。

 協和発酵は、ヒトの免疫を活用した技術で、がん細胞などをねらい撃ちにする「抗体医薬」の高い技術で知られる。キリンファーマも同分野で独自技術を持ち、相乗効果が期待される。新薬開発には多額の研究開発費も必要で、規模の拡大によるメリットとして大きいとされる。

  キリンは、主力の国内ビール事業とは別に、企業合併・買収(M&A)で事業拡大を急ピッチで進めてきた。06年にはワイン大手のメルシャ ンを買収、ヤクルトとも合弁会社を設立。今年7月には医療機器大手のテルモとの業務資本提携を発表した。協和発酵も薬価引き下げや研究開発費の増大で規模 拡大を迫られている。

2007年10月18日 星期四

Leadership not a rarity but requires vision

Leadership not a rarity but requires vision, K-State president says

By: Adrianne Deweese

Issue date: 10/18/07 Section: Today's News


One person can make a difference in a leadership role, said President Jon Wefald Wednesday morning in McCain Auditorium.

"Leadership is not necessarily a rare skill," Wefald said. "Indeed, most people can become very significant leaders in a variety of professions. A person's IQ doesn't necessarily have a lot to do with whether he will become an outstanding leader."

Wefald spoke as part of the College of Business Administration's Distinguished Lecture Series, which Commerce Bank and the William T. Kemper Foundation sponsored. He is the first university president to present a business administration distinguished lecture.

Wefald cited the late writer, management consultant and university professor Peter Drucker during the lecture. Wefald said Drucker emphasized leaders should always ask "What needs to be done?" rather than "What am I going to do?"

During his 21-year presidency, Wefald has received national recognition for improving K-State athletics and academics. When he came to K-State in mid 1986, he said he listened to needs addressed from K-State faculty, staff, students, alumni, the Kansas Board of Regents and Kansas legislators.

"When I came to Kansas State in 1986, I did not come with a preordained strategy," Wefald said. "I had never, ever stepped foot in the state of Kansas. So I knew I had to listen."

The first 500 attendees at Wefald's lecture Wednesday morning received a copy of "A University Renaissance: Jon Wefald's Presidency at Kansas State" by Robert J. Shoop, K-State professor of educational law and a senior scholar in K-State's Leadership Studies and Programs.

Wefald said he follows eight characteristics for excellent leadership, each of which is discussed in "A University Renaissance." The characteristics are as follows: have a vision and develop a game plan; communicate your vision; hire excellent people and delegate authority and responsibility; make decisions and take risks; admit mistakes and apologize when necessary; be trustworthy and care about others; never give up; and have a sense of humor.

Many people often look at the leadership characteristics and claim they practice and understand them, Wefald said.

"But the truth is they don't practice them. I do," Wefald said. "It isn't just theoretical to me. I take the principles in this book and put them into practice. I guess that's why I'm still here after 20 years."
Media Credit: Steven Doll

網誌存檔