‘Inflation tapeworm’ makes companies more susceptible to shocks | “通胀绦虫”使企业更易受到冲击 - FT中文网
登录×
电子邮件/用户名
密码
记住我
请输入邮箱和密码进行绑定操作:
请输入手机号码,通过短信验证(目前仅支持中国大陆地区的手机号):
请您阅读我们的用户注册协议隐私权保护政策,点击下方按钮即视为您接受。
FT英语电台

‘Inflation tapeworm’ makes companies more susceptible to shocks
“通胀绦虫”使企业更易受到冲击

The risks of a corporate mis-step are rising and the potential impact is deepening
企业失误的风险正在上升,潜在影响正在加深。
00:00

The writer is chief executive of Fidelity International

“Inflation acts as a gigantic corporate tapeworm,” Warren Buffett wrote in 1982 when US consumer prices rose just over 6 per cent over the year. “That tapeworm pre-emptively consumes its requisite daily diet of investment dollars regardless of the health of the host organism.”

With apologies to those reading this over breakfast, Buffett’s graphic assessment still rings true 41 years later. Open a company annual report published in the past three years and you are likely to read a litany of events such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the Covid-19 pandemic that have blown the best-laid strategy off course and often into uncharted waters.

However, while the initial market impact of these has dissipated, the longer-term legacy remains in the form of increased energy and food scarcity, disrupted international supply chains and, in some countries including the UK, high levels of inflation.

After dealing with a series of sharp operational shocks, chief executives have had to adapt once more, this time to rising input costs. In this environment, companies fall into two categories: those that can find ways to raise their product prices to protect margins while maintaining volumes, and those that can’t.

The best businesses in the latter category, according to Buffett, are those that don’t need to make significant and continuing capital investments. But that constrains their ability to innovate for the future. It is a truism that you can’t cut your way to growth.

There are other ways to deal with an inflationary environment for both types of companies. Building a solid brand to maintain market pricing power and volume is valuable in times of rising prices.

Adapting products and services swiftly to new realities is another strategy, changing their composition or components to mitigate the pressure. According to a McKinsey study of the impact of inflation on corporate decision making and supply chains, some car manufacturers stripped down features to maintain production, pricing and sales amid shortages or to handle rising input costs.

During the pandemic, many companies established response centres to co-ordinate recovery efforts. Similarly, some have set up central, cross-departmental inflation centres to manage the potential downside of inflationary pressures.

These silo-busting efforts can help reduce interdepartmental friction and decision-making times, ensuring that investments are identified and made more quickly, or unnecessary costs halted at an earlier stage.

This creates a market environment where the strong companies are more likely to get stronger compared with their weaker competitors, as the cumulative effect of rising costs on the bottom line takes hold over time.

And the high inflationary environment of the past 12 months is finally showing signs of cooling following central bank action. At the height of inflationary pressures towards the end of 2022, producer prices in the euro zone area briefly rose at annual rates exceeding 40 per cent following increases in energy prices.

Now, inflation in the US is back down to 3 per cent, while levels in the UK and the eurozone have returned to single digits. Longer term, we may also find that positive productivity shocks from artificial intelligence, advances in computing power and more efficient energy transmission will allow companies to do more with less reinvestment.

On its own, inflation does not necessarily present a problem for executives, particular for today’s raft of C-suite executives with well-toned crisis management muscles. Reasonable increases in input costs can be measured and mitigated.

But the fragility of the post pandemic economy, combined with the fractured nature of global politics, makes business models more susceptible to further unexpected shocks. These conditions, when mixed into an environment of price instability, increase the risks of a corporate mis-step and deepen its potential impact.

It’s harder, too, to keep other choices open when capital is constrained. Optionality, already a valuable commodity in a changing world, becomes more expensive on a relative basis.

There are no easy answers. Inflation has been billed as a cost of living crisis, which it is. But it also represents a cost of capital crisis, a cost of investment crisis and a cost of hiring crisis, challenging company leaders to find new ways of living with — or preferable expunging — the inflationary tapeworm.  

版权声明:本文版权归FT中文网所有,未经允许任何单位或个人不得转载,复制或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵权必究。

华尔街对大型科技公司2000亿美元的人工智能支出感到担忧

本周,美国四大互联网集团的AI效益初现端倪,但也警告说将增加支出。

地中海已经变成危险的“汽油桶”了吗?

暴雨的部分原因是海水温度的危险上升。

从错失的投资机会中得到的教训

我是如何错过OpenAI、BrewDog和英国电信的?

决定特朗普贸易政策的内部竞争

在这位共和党候选人的第一个总统任期,其政府内部内斗不断。

政府顾问表示,英国应简化人工智能专家的签证程序

马特•克利福德关于促进科技产业发展的建议还包括设立数据中心特区。

为什么卡玛拉•哈里斯会赢

因为这仍然是经济问题,傻瓜。
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×