Derek van Bever
OK, kind of weird to reply to myself, but a question occurred to me: We’ve been trying to study where companies come up with employment impact estimates (like this one, where Intel estimates that it will create 10,000 jobs:
We tried to get Intel to comment on this number, or how it was developed, or what it was based on, but no dice. What do you think? When companies publish these estimates, what are they based on? Are there rules of thumb they use for direct/indirect impact? This seems too important to be smoke and mirrors.
This is a really interesting question. From personal experience, I can say that I have never been in a meeting where we were planning an innovation or a platform extension where we used job creation as a goal–as an objective function of the exercise. But at the same time, whenever we would rattle off growth milestones–for investors, for our clients, or for our parents (!)–we’d always mention our employee headcount, and with pride.
As I’ve been doing this research with the team, talking to management teams at world-class companies, I’ve seen this same phenomenon, but on steroids: A lot of leaders of first-tier companies take satisfaction from job creation, and yet they would seldom highlight this fact in an analyst call, or in a chairman’s letter. In fact, Donald Trump has done more than anyone else I can think of to move this issue front and center (though I disagree with his preferred solution).
What do you think? Does your company care about job growth? Do you?