56. This statement is ambiguous. It could mean, literally, that business success
: L, V+ s/ _5 r+ r7 C( J6 O/ tdepends on knowing more than anyone else about one's operations, products and
* ]6 e, z" h. F& ?( d9 A- S8 ?: z7 Z$ \2 omarkets. Or it could be a subtle recommendation to acquire privileged information, by
! g5 {9 g5 y6 I" {; xwhatever means, to use for one's own advantage. I agree with the statement in the first
9 t& r. ^% A% gsense. However, I strongly disagree with many implications of the second possible 0 x, [! `& L% \/ B) Z9 H( T
meaning.
5 a) ]' E8 i4 k8 U. {: z/ ] It goes without saying that competitive edge in business is a function of ( [, a# ?, x8 x. o
knowledge. It is crucial to fully understand the technology and uses of one's products; 4 L# H& s H$ p/ t! @- T" r4 p
and it is prudent to micromanage operations, knowing as much as possible about the
$ \+ w2 E; e4 [1 ]- o6 Usmall details that can add up to a significant economic difference. It is also prudent, and 6 N/ a4 {6 {" r, w8 A+ R; p8 c6 `# a
legitimate, to take every measure to protect that knowledge as trade secrets, since they
+ I% ]& d+ L! K, {5 Zoften play a pivotal role in a firm's competitiveness.
' n' z7 I8 `+ V! i( {( D9 ^ But the advice to know something that nobody else does could easily become 2 x3 U" T( c) K2 B2 }5 B
distorted. If taken another way, the advice could recommend that one dig up dirt in # \ g6 m7 Z9 X3 E% Q$ Y
order to damage or discredit a rival. It could also be taken to recommend stealing trade
3 V1 P3 _2 _( t1 V; ]1 psecrets or other inside information from a competitor in order to gain an unfair business
2 V9 @' m* t0 B& j$ N! T# g) Wadvantage. All of these tactics are some also violate civil and criminal laws. Moreover, - x. V o" s& z4 }% g
the recommendation to find and use any information, even unfairly or illegally, can - T; W0 ? z/ B
backfire. People who follow such advice risk civil liability, criminal prosecution, and - g; d& [. w4 E& W9 p3 ^( }" p
the loss of an important business asset—their good reputations..
1 V' Q& a3 w, e/ l) i In sum, I agree with the statement up to the point that it validates detailed and
3 n& y6 w( I [8 h9 ^even proprietary knowledge as a key to competitiveness. Insofar as the statement + B* N! v3 ?* ]- ]) A# s2 K
sanctions unfair practices, however, following it would be unethical, bad for business,
9 m: f; E3 V' n- S- R) h. uand damaging to the character and reputation of the perpetrator. |