Comments on: Overhead, HQ, and the global financial crisis http://michaelkeizer.com/humourless/2009/overhead-hq-and-the-global-financial-crisis/ Logistics for global health and aid Thu, 29 Jul 2010 00:14:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: A Humourless Lot» Why third-party logistics is part of the future of global health and aid http://michaelkeizer.com/humourless/2009/overhead-hq-and-the-global-financial-crisis/comment-page-1/#comment-25160 A Humourless Lot» Why third-party logistics is part of the future of global health and aid Fri, 26 Feb 2010 10:54:49 +0000 http://michaelkeizer.com/humourless/?p=593#comment-25160 [...] or wrongly (and if you followed this blog you know where I stand on that question), there is a big push from donors to economise on ‘HQ’ or ‘overhead’. This means that the [...] [...] or wrongly (and if you followed this blog you know where I stand on that question), there is a big push from donors to economise on ‘HQ’ or ‘overhead’. This means that the [...]

]]> By: A Humourless Lot» Logistics questions around the Haiti earthquake – Logistics for health and aid: A Humourless Lot http://michaelkeizer.com/humourless/2009/overhead-hq-and-the-global-financial-crisis/comment-page-1/#comment-18490 A Humourless Lot» Logistics questions around the Haiti earthquake – Logistics for health and aid: A Humourless Lot Sat, 16 Jan 2010 23:16:33 +0000 http://michaelkeizer.com/humourless/?p=593#comment-18490 [...] And finally: spread the word about these issues far and wide, so that people start giving for emergency preparedness and not only the response; including the building of capacity within the aid organisations, like expertise at HQ level. This is one of the reasons why aid organisations spend money on ‘overhead’, and why it is so silly to judge aid organisations by the percentage spent on overhead. [...] [...] And finally: spread the word about these issues far and wide, so that people start giving for emergency preparedness and not only the response; including the building of capacity within the aid organisations, like expertise at HQ level. This is one of the reasons why aid organisations spend money on ‘overhead’, and why it is so silly to judge aid organisations by the percentage spent on overhead. [...]

]]> By: A Humourless Lot» Logistics, health and aid - Three months on: looking back http://michaelkeizer.com/humourless/2009/overhead-hq-and-the-global-financial-crisis/comment-page-1/#comment-1563 A Humourless Lot» Logistics, health and aid - Three months on: looking back Mon, 18 May 2009 07:04:55 +0000 http://michaelkeizer.com/humourless/?p=593#comment-1563 [...] not bad. However,  if you would ask me to name my favourite posts, it would probably be the one on overhead and how to deal with it in a more rational way than we do now, and the mini-series on the logistics of logistics. These posts get surprisingly little attention, [...] [...] not bad. However,  if you would ask me to name my favourite posts, it would probably be the one on overhead and how to deal with it in a more rational way than we do now, and the mini-series on the logistics of logistics. These posts get surprisingly little attention, [...]

]]> By: Michael Keizer http://michaelkeizer.com/humourless/2009/overhead-hq-and-the-global-financial-crisis/comment-page-1/#comment-815 Michael Keizer Mon, 27 Apr 2009 01:30:42 +0000 http://michaelkeizer.com/humourless/?p=593#comment-815 Ah, yes, "Schumpeter's gale". I hadn't thought of it in those terms (the last time I thought seriously about Schumpeter was in 'Advanced Economics 2', about 15 years ago), but it is a good one. Although: wasn't Schumpeter's creative destruction basically a form of economic Darwinism, supposed to be caused by innovation and progress from nimbler organisations -- leaving the behemoths crippled behind, unable to cope with their colleagues' progress? Hmmm... back to my study books. BTW: the moment I see the words 'paradigm shift' in the title of an article, is the moment I need to struggle mightily not to switch off. That must be the most abused piece of misunderstood jargon around. Kuhn must be spinning in his grave. Ah, yes, “Schumpeter’s gale”. I hadn’t thought of it in those terms (the last time I thought seriously about Schumpeter was in ‘Advanced Economics 2′, about 15 years ago), but it is a good one.

Although: wasn’t Schumpeter’s creative destruction basically a form of economic Darwinism, supposed to be caused by innovation and progress from nimbler organisations — leaving the behemoths crippled behind, unable to cope with their colleagues’ progress? Hmmm… back to my study books.

BTW: the moment I see the words ‘paradigm shift’ in the title of an article, is the moment I need to struggle mightily not to switch off. That must be the most abused piece of misunderstood jargon around. Kuhn must be spinning in his grave.

]]> By: JG http://michaelkeizer.com/humourless/2009/overhead-hq-and-the-global-financial-crisis/comment-page-1/#comment-794 JG Sun, 26 Apr 2009 14:00:02 +0000 http://michaelkeizer.com/humourless/?p=593#comment-794 Lawrence Haddad of IDS called for "creative destruction" http://idsbetacms.ids.ac.uk/go/news/070109 Lawrence Haddad of IDS called for “creative destruction”

http://idsbetacms.ids.ac.uk/go/news/070109

]]>