As our business has picked up in early 2010, I’ve noticed something frustrating: Response time from our vendors isn’t what it should be. Nor is our own responsiveness, I must confess. Finding a way to quickly and effectively meet customers’ needs, in fact, may be the challenge of the year facing most companies.

There are two resources in business, money and time. Over the past two years, most companies have seen their financial margins evaporate, requiring them to trim every ounce of fat they can out of their operations. That means their margins of time are gone as well. Like a shoulderless highway  suddenly getting jammed with moving vehicles, there’s nowhere for oncoming traffic to go. It’s a problem that can only be solved by adding capacity, which isn’t always an easy option—assuming management even has the nerve to do so in a still-uncertain environment.

Last year I confessed that my second greatest fear (after “how are we going to cope with this mess?”) was “what if it all comes back at once?” While the economy isn’t exactly booming, it does appear to be showing signs of life. That’s a welcome sight, but it presents a whole new challenge to companies recovering from stalled growth.

Life is never dull.

As a follow up to my previous post, I just did the math. In the fifteen months prior to and following the launch of When Growth Stalls, I was on the road 45 times, an average of three times per month.

Not too bad, although considering the number of cross-country trips (eight visits to New York, three to Washington, D.C., three to Philadelphia, plus Baltimore, Atlanta and Orlando) it’s no wonder I’m tired. And—get this—I calculate that I was in the DFW Airport (the one with the bathroom plan designed by a camel) sixty times over that span. There are only so many times you can eat Taco Bell or Au Bon Pain, you know?

I also worked my way across the Midwest (Minneapolis, St. Louis, Kansas City, etc.) Southwest (Dallas, Houston, Phoenix and more) the Rockies (Denver, Colorado Springs, Vegas) and the West (San Francisco, Sacramento, LA, Orange County, San Diego). All in all a pretty good tour of the U.S.

I knew when the book came out what I was signing up for, and the growing footprint of McKee Wallwork Cleveland also played a part (we now have clients from coast to coast). It’s been hard, but it’s been fun. And since there are still a number of places I haven’t visited in the past year, I’d be happy to bring the message of When Growth Stalls to your city. Just click here and holler.

When Growth Stalls is officially one year old.

In dog years one equals seven, but I’m not exactly sure what it means in book years. Some books grow in influence over time, while others quietly fade away. My sense, at least for the time being, is that the influence of When Growth Stalls is anything but on the wane.

The recession has dragged on much longer than anybody anticipated, and companies are struggling now with sheer fatigue. As I’ve crisscrossed the country over the past twelve months sharing my message, I’ve noticed a growing sensitivity to the need for intervention, and a ready recognition of the havoc that can be wreaked by a lack of consensus, a loss of focus, a loss of nerve and inconsistency.

Of course, my research shows that in any given year some twelve to fifteen percent of companies stall, making the message of When Growth Stalls perennially relevant. But since that percentage continues to remain in the high double digits as we sit here in March, 2010, a great many companies still have to deal with the issues associated with stalled growth.

If you haven’t read When Growth Stalls yet, I encourage you to pick up a copy. As anyone who has heard me speak over the past year (five years, really) knows, I genuinely believe what we discovered can make a difference for struggling companies. I’ve been told it has by many of my readers, and I’ve seen it make a difference for my own firm’s clients.

If you have read the book, thank you. I hope it has made an impact on your company’s health during these difficult times. Please consider sharing the book or sending a copy to someone you know who could use it, and/or offering your thoughts in the form of a review at Amazon.com.

Here’s to a better 2010.

I had a powerful realization tonight in the Apple Store.

I took in a torn leather iPhone case that I had purchased there a couple of months ago. I didn’t have a receipt, but I figured since I paid forty bucks for it I should at least see if they’d do something about it. To make a long story short, the great people there did the right thing and took care of me. It was a positive, but not wholly surprising, experience. I had a sense they’d do that.

As I was checking out, I told the clerk that I was going to tweet about my positive experience. She thought that was cool. Actually, I had decided I was going to tweet about the experience no matter how it turned out. And that’s when the realization hit me. Not that I could tweet my pleasure or dissatisfaction (I’ve done both before), but how empowered I felt. It wasn’t little old me taking on a powerful (in this case) retailer, it was me and seven thousand of my friends. The odds seemed much more even than they used to be. And that felt good.

I realize that only a small fraction of my followers would even see the tweet, and most of them would pay it no mind. Still, it was nice to know that there was something I could do about my predicament, regardless of the outcome. And since I had also checked in at Foursquare when I entered the store, I knew that I had even more power at my disposal. Not to mention my Facebook friends, on whom I could call anytime.

Well done, Apple Store. You did good. This time.

The dean of automotive reporting, Paul Ingrassia, published a terrific interview with Alan Mulally, CEO of Ford Motor Company, in Saturday’s Wall Street Journal. Citing Ford’s $2.7 billion 2009 profit, and the fact that it was the only U.S. automaker not to duck into bankruptcy, Ingrassia noted how Ford might even surpass GM in market share for the first time in more than eighty years.

In When Growth Stalls, I document how struggling companies tend to keep themselves down through a combination of a loss of focus, a loss of nerve, a lack of management consensus and marketing inconsistency. I found it interesting that in Ingrassia’s analysis he inadvertently referenced how Mulally has dealt with three of these issues:

Loss of Focus: “[Mulally's] method has been to simplify, relentlessly and systematically, a business that had grown way too complicated and costly to be managed effectively. ’Improve Focus, Simplify Operations,’ reads one of Mr. Mulally’s many charts, which he repeats like a sacred mantra. Soon after his arrival Ford began shedding brands—Jaguar, Land Rover and Aston Martin among them—that the company couldn’t afford to support. Volvo will be next to go.”

Loss of Nerve: “The core Ford brand got an investment infusion to replace aging cars and revive a model lineup that had been heavily tilted toward gas-guzzling trucks.”

Lack of Consensus: “Mr. Mulally has overhauled the often-contentious culture in Ford’s executive suite. Most of his appointees are company veterans, but they’re the sort of people who typically got overlooked when style seemed to count more than substance, as it often did at Ford…Internal surveys show 87% of Ford employees believe the company is on the right track.”

Mulally summed up his recent success with a simple statement: ”It’s all about producing products people want.” That may be true of every company, but too few get it done–especially in the American automotive industry. I, for one, hope Ford’s comeback is a lasting one.

It’s hockey time at the Winter Olympics, and for anybody older than 40 that brings back vivid memories of the 1980 Lake Placid games and Team USA’s incredible victory over the Soviet empire.

There are some obvious comparisons to 2010. In 1980 the country was mired in the worst economic crisis since, well, today. We were also coping with a belligerent Iran. Gas prices were on everybody’s mind, and there was a great deal of public dissatisfaction with the nation’s political leadership. “Malaise” was the word of the day.

But there’s another parallel I’d like to draw out; one that serves as a metaphor for today’s business environment.

If you saw “Miracle,” the thrilling movie chronicling Team USA’s formation, ascent and ultimate triumph, you’ll remember one particularly compelling scene. After the young team mailed in a lame performance during its first European tour, coach Herb Brooks made the players stay behind for an extra practice session. He forced them to skate a seemingly endless series of sprints, shouting “Again!” after each one even as the young men choked and puked from fatigue. They had no idea when it was going to end, which only added to their misery. It was difficult to watch, and one can only imagine what it was like to experience. But it was a defining moment and played a pivotal role in their crystallization as a championship-caliber team.

It’s easy to remember the miraculous victory Team USA pulled out when it counted. It’s also easy to forget that these young players had no idea what they could (or would) accomplish when it hurt the most. All they could do was pick themselves up and skate as best they could, fighting through the pain and trusting that somehow it was all for their good.

The economy is still fragile, and capitalism is under attack. Yet we can all take heart from America’s energetic, entrepreneurial and perhaps somewhat naive 1980 hockey team.  They were able to face down a seemingly invincible foe and find a way to prevail only because when things were most difficult for them, they stayed on their skates, stepped up to the line, and sprinted forward. Again and again and again.

The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) says that small business optimism grew slightly in January. Slightly. The NFIB Optimism Index currently sits at 89.3, ten points below where it was prior to the recession.

Commenting on the index, Lawrence Mishel, president of the Economic Policy Institute, said, “To absorb the over 15 million officially unemployed workers in this country…job openings and hirings must rebound dramatically. This report offers no indication that this is happening.”

The NFIB’s report is consistent with Decision Analyst’s January Economic Index, a survey of several thousand households based on nine different economic measurements. The index remained unchanged for the third month in a row, stuck at 94, well below the 110 which signals an economic expansion. This index tends to lead the U.S. economy by up to a year, suggesting the economy will remain sluggish throughout 2010.

That’s what the CEO of Unilever, one of the world’s largest consumer product companies, is preparing for. Speaking of the economy, Paul Polman says, “It’ s not going to just drastically change in the next 12 to 24 months. We will be in for a long and slow recovery, and that’s what we’re planning our business on.”

Policy makers continue to point the finger at the difficulty of securing business credit. But the indexes above suggest the bigger problem is simply a lack of revenue growth, meaning employers simply don’t need to hire. That sentiment is borne out by the fact that fewer than one in ten owners surveyed by the NFIB added employees in January, while more than twice as many cut jobs.

Businesses don’t want to borrow money as long as economic uncertainty remains high. What we most need now is normalcy, not big ideas. Let’s hope the politicians are paying attention.

I don’t want 300 channels. I only want 18 channels. OK, the average person wants 18 channels. I really only want six. Why can’t I have just six?

I know, I know, it’s the economics of the industry. But industries change, don’t they? I mean, look what has happened to the music industry. I used to have to purchase an entire CD just to get the one or two songs I want, but now I can buy and build my own playlists song by song. It’s funny, but I’m sure I spend more on music now than I used to.

You should know I just bought an Apple TV box. That’s not your fault–since the Blockbuster Video stores near me closed (and RedBox, while cool, doesn’t exactly offer a huge selection) I didn’t really have a good option for renting movies. So I thought it was worth a try. Now I can select from a huge selection of movies and TV shows, and when I’m not in a buying mood I can use it to watch YouTube on my HDTV. I’m beginning to think of YouTube as the ultimate TV network–there’s so much on-demand entertainment there. (Hmm. You might want to make a note of that.)

Speaking of entertainment, I’ve held off on getting a Kindle because I knew Apple was coming out with a similar device. I’m excited to get my iPad, not only to check my email and surf the web but to download books. I guess Apple is shaking up the book publishing industry just like it did the music industry. “Saving it” is probably a more accurate description; I’m sure my book purchasing behavior will mirror my new music buying habits. I wonder if they’re thinking along the same lines when it comes to TV. I guess time will tell.

So if you don’t mind, I’d like to subscribe to individual cable channels. For that matter, I wouldn’t mind subscribing to individual programs. I know you won’t get as hefty of a monthly fee from me, but I’d be willing to pay more per network than you’re getting now. And I suspect other people would be too.

Anyway, it’s something to think about. But no pressure. If you don’t do it, I’m sure I can find other things to do with my time and money.

Cristobal Conde is CEO of SunGard, a leading global software and IT company. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Conde was asked what has been the best move he’s made during the downturn. He answered, “We could have generated more earnings by having more layoffs. We wanted to protect R&D.; We wanted products ready to go at the end of the cycle. I saw a huge competitive opportunity to protect programmers when others weren’t.”

Conde’s perspective is smart, but rare. Our research shows that most companies overreact to a downturn and cut not just fat, but muscle. If they go beyond what’s absolutely necessary, that can easily compromise their future. Conde turns the fear on its ear by asking his employees “What is it you need to do now so you will remember the crisis as a gift?”

Chilean by birth, Conde has developed a taste for a uniquely American institution: NASCAR. Perhaps it’s because he sees in racing similar patterns to those of business. “Going into the crisis is not that different from going into a turn,” he says. “You slam on the brakes. In the turn, the most important thing is your position relative to other cars. I’ve been telling people, ‘Focus on our relative market shares rather than overall volumes you can’t control. What are we doing to improve our position?’ After the turn, you take that better position.”

Conde can’t guarantee that SunGard will come out of the recession a winner, just as even the best NASCAR drivers don’t know when they’ll cross the finish line first and when they’ll come up short. But races are decided by the strategy of the driver as much as the speed of the car.

Drive smart.

After months of intrigue, Kraft finally made a successful bid for venerable British candy maker Cadbury, leaving archrival Hershey’s on the sidelines.

Kraft management predicts that the $50 billion combined company will be able to save $675 million over three years, but that’s not the primary reason for the merger. It’s all about global distribution and access to developing markets. Cadbury has it, Kraft wants it. Makes sense on paper.

Most mergers do make sense on paper, yet many become spectacular failures. The reason? A lack of appreciation for just how difficult it is to integrate not only global operations, but two proud and independent workforces.

Kraft is going to face this problem in spades with Cadbury. Todd Stitzer, Cadbury’s CEO, said that Hershey’s would have been a better cultural and operational fit. The company’s Chairman, Roger Carr, took it a step further by saying Kraft is “an unfocused conglomerate” with “unappealing categories” and management that “underdelivers.” Carr went on to say, “There is no strategic, operational, managerial or financial reason” for the merger.

Sure, Carr’s statement may have been a bit of strategic bluster to raise the value of the offer (which he succeeded in doing), but it sounds pretty categorical to me. And it was telling that not a single Cadbury executive was present on the conference call with analysts to discuss the deal. Hmm.

Kraft estimates it will take $1.3 billion to “integrate Cadbury.” I’m not sure exactly what that means or who came up with the number, but I don’t know how anybody could forecast the costs associated with the fear, resentment and internal jockeying with which Kraft and Cadbury managers and employees are now having to deal. The fact that Britons consider Cadbury a national treasure that has been overrun by ugly Americans sure won’t help.

Let’s hope Kraft doesn’t end up with a stomachache.