Posts: 901
Threads: 113
Joined: Jun 2007
The article "Rebooting their systems" on pages 73-74 of the March 12-18 issue of The Economist discusses prospects for HP and Dell. It is interesting readiing. Here's a sentence from the article:
Quote:
HP's boss will also need to decide whether the computers-to-calculators company, which has $126 billion of annual revenues and 325,000 employees, can continue to dabble in so many areas.
Posts: 2,448
Threads: 90
Joined: Jul 2005
$388.000, revenue per employee
Posts: 1,248
Threads: 33
Joined: Aug 2007
I guess you are using the European radix.
In my little company, I would consider one fourth of that to be wonderful.
Posts: 308
Threads: 26
Joined: Jul 2007
When we were targeting ourselves to be bought (or other 'exit strategy' perhaps) we were trying to achieve/exceed the magic > $1 million per employee that investors love. That's the sign of growth + a lean operation.
Bill Wiese
San Jose CA
Posts: 1,193
Threads: 43
Joined: Jul 2005
These kind of ratios (revenue/employee, etc.) are meaningless and misleading, except for a few cases where other data is also taken into account. Revenue is not the same than profit, profit is not the same than return from investment, and so on. But, sadly, many decision makers make their assesments just based on such ratios... Some of the consequences are visible almost everywhere.
Posts: 2,448
Threads: 90
Joined: Jul 2005
Yes!
You could have $2millions revenue per employee, but be borrowing to make their paychecks....