The building sector is suffering because it's overpriced and poor quality, I've looked at New Build houses and the workmanship (if you can call it that) is shoddy.

Normally a consumer-led recovery (as we have more or less had since the 2008 crisis) is followed by increased business investment which makes a recovery sustainable. This has not happened this time and that is another reason the UK economy looks to be heading for trouble.

Lack of investment is partly due to uncertainty, a changing world were tangible assets are less important than intangibles but mainly because the leaders of major companies (that so called world-class talent pool, that must be paid a lot) are useless. They prefer to return capital to shareholders and achieve easy targets for their bonuses than take a risk or have a strategic vision. A study in the US has shown that those companies that have not returned funds to shareholders but reinvested are on average vastly outperforming those who did (the latter often receiving plaudits from the City and Wall Steet). The whole economic system is broken and has been hijacked by the fast buck mentality. It needs re-engineering.

On a separate point, the future looks bleaker for the many as the winner takes all economy progresses and AI comes on stream too. We are heading for a modern version of the mass proletariat and mill-owner / pit-owner model. This time though it will be the ultra-wealthy few and a mass of care workers, bar men, waiters, etc. as middle class office jobs go under AI and we are left just with those jobs that require more brain-power such as cleaning, serving and caring.

Partly the issue of lack of investment is the banks unwillingness to lend. How many companies SME's have seen their overdraft replaced by ID facilities as the banks continue to de-risk.

I think most CEOs have a desire to stay in the job as long as possible - that means selling a strategic vision - yes there is a need for investors to get a return but good shareholders understand the cyclical nature of business the fact that greedy fund managers don't is an issue.

Banks want to sell you services not money.

As you may recall I have been a long-term critic of CEO and the bonus culture saying they / it cause loss of value all round. Seems from this article this evening that somebody has done a study that shows just that: www.standard.co.uk/business/anth ... 69946.html

As you may recall I have been a long-term critic of CEO and the bonus culture saying they / it cause loss of value all round. Seems from this article this evening that somebody has done a study that shows just that: www.standard.co.uk/business/anth ... 69946.html

Quote ="Dally"As you may recall I have been a long-term critic of CEO and the bonus culture saying they / it cause loss of value all round. Seems from this article this evening that somebody has done a study that shows just that: www.standard.co.uk/business/anth ... 69946.html'" He also blames the low productivity on a our inability to get rid of the deficit - so what do you suggest is done about that. CEO's driving profit will actually increase CT take so should help the reduction of the deficit - you can't have it both ways? As I have always said on here if you look hard enough you will always find an article to support your stance - is it fact no its just opinion and should be treated as such.

Quote ="Dally"As you may recall I have been a long-term critic of CEO and the bonus culture saying they / it cause loss of value all round. Seems from this article this evening that somebody has done a study that shows just that: www.standard.co.uk/business/anth ... 69946.html'" He also blames the low productivity on a our inability to get rid of the deficit - so what do you suggest is done about that. CEO's driving profit will actually increase CT take so should help the reduction of the deficit - you can't have it both ways? As I have always said on here if you look hard enough you will always find an article to support your stance - is it fact no its just opinion and should be treated as such.

1. explain?
2. Someone's read a management book
3. correct - large corporations are sitting on huge cash reserves, and not investing them back into their businesses - one factor used to explain that is their fears over the economic cliff edge that is Brexit

I know you don't like experts who don't agree with you, but [url=https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/21/productivity-crisis-uk-real-wage-growththis[/url is quite balanced and informative. It's the Guardian, so you may need to wash your hands afterwards.

In this country we appear to have an inability to embrace change an example would be the NHS - I was in hospital earlier in the year for an operation - all my notes were still on bits of paper - that's inefficient most commercial businesses would have abandoned that for digital technology.

Why was Brailsford thought of so highly - because he used a Kaizen culture of micro improvements (marginal gains) to gain competitive advantage on his rivals. You may not agree with his treatment of people - although Steve Redgrave defended it on 5 live on Sunday - but his methods of better suits, better bikes better training has proved incredibly successful. If this were the norm in the UK nobody would have batted an eyelid. How many companies outside of those owned by the Japanese actually have Kaizen programs or programs of continual improvement.?

Brexit only happened a year ago - lack of investment has been going on since the crash - that is because its very difficult to borrow money from the bank - they don't want to sell money

A little bit confusing. You say as a country we don't embrace change, but then say that most business have indeed embraced change? Ideally of course the NHS would be adopting any technology that would enable it to perform more efficiently (providing they have the funding and expertise available to deliver it). Also, in the commercial world you have competition as a factor driving such decisions, you have the movement of labour between companies taking with it new ideas & ways of thinking.

Regardless, there are extensive transformation projects going on in the NHS currently. Also, there are examples where technology has been embraced. I can book GP appointments online, I can check in at the GP surgery using the tablet they have there, things like that. Certainly room for improvement I accept, but I don't think it's as old fashioned as some might think.



I suppose the answer would be how many don't? Most large companies have their own transformation departments that drive an increase in efficiency and reduce cost. There's no doubting Brailsford's methods achieved results, but now easily can this be rolled out en-masse, and what are the negative impacts?



It's a bit of both. Bren is right in that there is a fear of what will happen during & post-Brexit and companies are keeping their powder dry to an extent, but there is a reluctance to lend. I have a business that relies predominantly on the ability to secure finance to be able to make further capital investments. A year or so ago (post crash), you're right, it wasn't easy to borrow, but in the past year or so it has gone to the next level. Lenders are being extremely careful, and the level of risk they're willing to take very very low.

You wholly miss the point. If CEOs had invested in their company's futures rather than their own those companies would be MORE profitable and paying more CT, thus reducing the deficit.

No you miss the point - they didn't invest because it would hit profits in the short term until the ROI kicked so reducing the CT paid.

didnt take long for pledges in the manifesto's to get dropped

lied too again

no wonder some people dont vote, might join them till manifesto pledges are made law. wont happen like.

all bent

Brailsford's methods e.g. Kaizen will work in any environment it mostly common sense and having a desire to change outdated practises. Most businesses should have identified low hanging fruit but a 1% improvement in 10 elements in a process is a 10% improvement in the process as a whole. When put like that its appears more achievable.

On borrowing it depends how much you want and what you want it for - however getting them to give you an overdraft is a whole different ball game

I dont think you were necessarily lied to this time.
Mrs May, when she set out her manifesto, probably intended to use her huge majority to push through further cuts and reduce the tax burden for the better off.
Unfortunately, the "expected" "huge" victory turned into a hung parliament, possibly with the DUP helping, although, their help is not yet assured.
If you propose contentious policies, you need a hefty parliamentary majority to push through those policies, if not, you are politically impotent, full of intent but, not able to perform.
Mind you, Mrs May cant make her mid up about very much these days so, perhaps we have all been saved.
Our influence with the EU has already disappeared and Mrs May is like the teenager who has misbehaved and has to see the headmaster after school and other EU leaders will only see her later on today, when they have sorted their own affairs.

By running through a field of wheat for example?

I appreciate that but again you are guilty of immediate term thinking rather than thinking what would be the case if they had not acted in such a self-interested fashion these last 15 or so years and grown these companies by investing cash piles in new ventures - by your analysis CT receipts could be much higher than they currently are.

You are guilty of thinking those companies of 15 years ago would still be big companies - look at the FTSE 100 from 15 years ago and compare to now and see how many companies are still in it? What is driving the growth of those companies that replaced those from 15 years ago? Surely its capital investment?

Again, lack of investment has in many cases caused decline in former leaders.

This is far too glib; I work in the H&S Care sector - the private bit - and continuous improvement is very much part of the culture across the sector. I'd suggest that's driven by increased regulation - and a need to demonstrate improved outcomes to justify our use of public money.

Kaizen as a formal process however, doesn't deliver anywhere near so well in knowledge work as it does in manufacturing - which is where it came from; it's likely that since we don't manufacture much any more in the UK and our economy is much more reliant on the service sector, the application of Kaizen by managers who undertake an MBA and get all excited when they study it, is less effective in the modern world of work. To suggest that modern companies don't practice continuous improvement however, is just silly; to suggest that they don't use Kaizen methods is probably true though - and rightly so.

I have worked for 2 Universities who deliver MBAs. I have worked with several people who have undertaken MBAs. I have not been impressed the outcomes at all.

They're not there to impress you, they must have been impressive to get an MBA!

Why?

Have you got one?

No. Never seen the point. It would be irrelevant to me.

Looks like the Tories are adopting all Corbyns policies anyway - everyones a winner!

When are re-nationalising the trains etc, have students had their tuition fees stopped have we agreed to increase salaries in the public sector at the rate of inflation do we have a public utility company has CT suddenly changed?

Dillusional