Defending Jack Welch in 1980 for his SELECTIVITY and Willingness to make tough decisions. (View of a NY TIMES Editorial" )

In the 1980's Jack Welch was being criticized for his exiting and divesting some businesses and focusing on the areas that he believed were the most attractive for GE. He received the nickname: "Neutron Jack" since he kept the buildings but destroyed the people. I defended Jack and this is the NEW YORK TIMES editorial and my response.

ON G.E. AND EATING OUR SEED CORN

An article May 13 (''Are We Eating Our Seed Corn?'') discussed the extent to which many large American corporations, and the General Electric Company in particular, are buying back their stock and thus spending less on research and development and missing opportunities to develop innovative products. Business executives, members of Congress, academics and other experts on American industrial policy said in the article that such financial engineering often reflects short-term thinking and is sapping American competitiveness. G.E. officials defended the plan to buy back $10 billion of its stock over the next five years, pointing out that the company is a world leader in those fields in which it has chosen to compete and that its research and development is adequately funded.

Some of the letters received in response to the article follow.
A Sharp Focus is No Fault
To the Editor:
General Electric's John F. Welch Jr. should be complimented and not criticized. G.E. has learned over the past two decades that it could not be all things to all people. Since the 1970's, G.E. has objectively evaluated its entire business portfolio and determined in which markets it could be the profitable market leader. It has learned to evaluate its global competition and to focus its research, people and funding on those markets. The market and profit results have been very positive. Unfortunately, this means that it has been forced to de-emphasize and even leave businesses and technologies at which it could not be a profitable leader. The company has recognized that its resources are limited and rather than ''sub-optimizing,'' it has focused for maximum yield. In short, G.E. and Jack Welch have applied successfully the principles of ''strategic thinking and management.''

I believe that the Sony Corporation and other globally successful companies have done many of the same things. Sony's president, Akio Morita has a track record of being selective. Sony demonstrated the ability to be the quality and niche leader in consumer electronics, a model that has been duplicated by the Honda Motor Company and other leaders. These companies invest in research and product development in related markets and are not trying to do everything. I would like to see an American equivalent of Morita in consumer electronics, but there is no evidence that this must be at G.E.

I wish that more companies (and the Federal Government) would learn to be strategic leaders, be selective and make the tough decisions. This means putting resources where they will yield the best results, even if some things are not done. If this happened, I am confident that American companies (and the United States in total) will regain their global leadership position.
WILLIAM E. ROTHSCHILD
Norwalk, Conn., May 13
The writer is a management consultant.

PS...I still believe that having a strategic portfolio and focusing on the most attractive pieces is the essence of success and I WISH THAT OBAMA and his team would recognize this reality.

"CANDIDATES (everyone else) DESERVE BETTER

The article in The Conference Board Review (Winter 2010 edition) is worth reading and can even go beyond what Laurie Ruettimann was saying. Laurie describes how JOB CANDIDATES are being treated and how it is not only WRONG, but will impact negatively on many companies, large and small, future.

She describes how job candidates are being mistreated, since companies today believe that they are in command and can do whatever they want to candidates, since jobs are scarce and they are not in any hurry to hire. She says that things will change and that this reputation of "candidate abuse" will be remembered when the tables turn and there is a shortage of candidates.

I totally agree and have heard of many situations where candidates are invited to interview, forced to have many visits and then not even given the "common courteous" having a " THANK YOU for coming"..but this attitude is not just with hiring...it PREVADES all of America today.

During my forty plus years as a Senior Executive in a primier company and as a personal consultant to many major companies, I have never seen such a lack of COMMON COURTESY and COMMON SENSE about dealing with all of the key stakeholders. When I was in recruiting I always sent an immediate response to all candidates, even if they were college students on an entry program, I always sent a response to letters and especially to anyone interested in the company or may consulting services... this is not the case today... You write a personal letter to a CEO and nothing happens, you make a proposal, which involves many hours of preparation and nothing happens, even with MAJOR COMPANIES.

The executives and professionals of today have been taught in the MAJOR Universities to be SENSITIVE but it has had a NEGATIVE impact... today's leaders are NOT SENSITIVE and the illustration of TREATING candidates badly is just ONE ILLUSTRATION of BAD MANNERS, LACK OF COURTESY and those who practice it will suffer the same response and suffer the long term consequences..

BE COURTESEOUS.. TREAT OTHERS LIKE YOU WANT BE TREATED...

Bill ROTHSCHILD...CEO ROTHSCHILD STRATEGIES UNLIMITED, LLD, where we treat our stakeholders with COMMON COURTESY.

NO SUCH THING AS PRE-DESTINATION

In my FRESHMAN YEAR at FORDHAM, I took a course led by LT Hickman, as a member of the AIR FORCE ROTC, entitle GEO POLITICS.

This course focused on the GeoPolitical forces over hundreds of years. it plotted the CENTER of POLITICAL and ECONOMIC power and it demonstrated how this power had moved from CHINA to the MIDDLE EAST, to EUROPE and then the UNITED STATES.

Lt. Hickman predicted that his CENTER of POWER would move from the US to CHINA in 50 years.

Of all the courses, I took since this year, I remember this predictation AND is amazed that it happening as LT Hickman and the GeoPolitical course designers predicted, namely..the balance of political, economic and military power is moving from the U.S. to China.

This reinforced by REALITY and confirmed by this weeks ECONOMIST.. and its headline and featured article about CHINA/ US relationships and how they can impact the world and that OBAMA and his Administration must stand up and FIGHT!

I believe that history goes through cycles and the reality is that when nations believe they are the leaders and no one will displace them, it is when the world experiences unpleasent and negative events. The only thing that can change this and its negative results is that REAL leaders appear and change the PREDESTINED course.
I hope that OBAMA and his team, change their desire to CHANGE THE WORLD and focus on the real issues... like GOOD PAYING, REAL JOBS and allow the U.S. to MAKE THINGS and not pretend it can win by "IMAGINATION and THINKING OUT OF THE BOX", since 98% of us work on REAL THINGS and not IMAGINATION or DREAMING"

Bill Rothschild..author of the only objective assessment of what has made, GE, a 127 year success, THE SECRET to GE's SUCCESS.. all based on LATIN..but the book and learn what LATIN is..

Bill Rothschild..author of THE SECRET TO GE's SUCCESS..the illustration of strategic leadership that may be a model for both US and China success.