A Quote by Sandra Lerner

If you look at any of the big companies, whether it is IBM or L'Oreal, they have a corporate religion and corporate self-image that makes it very difficult for them to execute in different areas.
We've got a big happy, one corporate family now uniting the corporate Democrats and the corporate Republicans.
Behind all the hype shaping the electronic highway are corporate interests. These huge companies are doing the most natural thing in the world to them; following their own corporate interest.
The truth is, our corporate income taxes are some of the highest in the world, and frankly, in my judgment it's unpatriotic if you're not for reducing the corporate income tax. We want to make it so American companies are on a more level playing field competing with companies around the world.
For me, the anarchy movement is hilarious. It's all under .org, which is of course government sponsored websites, and then they're all wearing corporate clothing from the Dr.Martin's to the back sacks and the cell phones, they're all flying around on corporate jets and using corporate highways. Very anarchistic!
People who get higher pay are more willing to relocate--especially to undesirable locations at the company's behest... A corporate secretary may change companies in the same town; a corporate executive is more likely to change towns with the same company. A talented corporate secretary sees an invitation to relocate as an invitation; a future corporate executive sees an invitation to relocate as an opportunity--and an obligation.
The challenge will be to get the big corporate customers giving them their business, but it might be difficult in reality.
In the days when corporate downsizing was all the rage, Wall Street took a lot of flak for judging companies too harshly and setting the bar for corporate performance so high that executives felt their only option was to slash payrolls.
As a professor of marketing, I have a professional interest in examining how companies create integrated messages when communicating a corporate image.
Are you going to divest in the banks and pension funds? Plenty of people are willing to invest in stock of those companies. You can argue that when a lot of people divest, it makes the stock price artificially low, which makes their price-to-earnings ratio more favorable, which makes it a better investment for the people who don't give a damn - - and is it really going to change corporate behavior? It begins to create a climate of antagonistic opinion, the result might be that the corporate executives will retreat even more into their own selfjustifying narratives.
Corporate houses and big companies can be meaningful distribution channels for start-ups.
Companies should increasingly see themselves as major corporate citizens with a wider responsibility to the community. Nothing less than their reputation - their image - is at stake.
I think the corporate world is pretty starved for personality. The reason you have comic strips like 'Dilbert' and sitcoms like 'The Office' is that people just can't be genuine human beings in a corporate environment. So if you can really be your own self, even if it's a little bit different, I think people are really drawn to that.
At D.O.J., we don't want to go after the corporate wrongdoers simply as an end unto itself; we want to decrease the amount of corporate wrongdoing that happens in the first place. We want to restore and help protect the corporate culture of responsibility.
We all look in the mirror and see us a little blonder or a little thinner or a little younger, whatever that ideal might be and most of the people that I'm photographing are selling something, you know whether they're on the front of an album cover or a magazine or they're a corporate person ready to switch companies or a doctor selling a skincare line... so I want to help them achieve that.
Any approach to strategy quickly encounters a conflict between corporate objectives and corporate capabilities. Attempting the impossible is not good strategy. It is just a waste of resources.
Politics has become very corporate. There's a whole farm system for the teams. There's decisions made at the top. There's a lot of literal corporate involvement, PAC money involved in selecting and backing candidates.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!