3 ms·

And what good is there in having many small companies instead of one bigger company?

• yardie 15y ago
  Funny, every large company I've worked at tried to emulate a bunch of small companies. Need X widget from the X widget department? You can't just send an email and say make me 500 widgets. No, an internal purchase order has to be created and "money" is transferred from X Widget developers to X Widget makers. Hell, even the IT department has gone this route where your division has to license an exchange or IMAP server through the IT department.
  • dagw 15y ago
    Sounds depressingly familiar. My department gets most of if its server infrastructure under the radar from external companies since getting the IT department to set up a server for our needs is far too slow and expensive.
• ap22213 15y ago
  Sorry, I thought most people here liked smaller companies. A few advantages, off the top of my head: * more market diversity (e.g. more niche offerings) * less consolidation of power (e.g. Apple / Oracle / Google / Microsoft, etc) * more social incentive to reduce corporate-to-corporate transaction costs * improved specialization * increased competition * development of new market sectors Currently, small companies don't work as well as big ones because of the transaction cost overhead. It seems to me that if a society could reduce transaction costs between corporations, better services and more specialization could emerge. In my experience, small groups are more agile and able to do an incredible amount of work. Why do you need 1,000 - 100,000 people in one company?