Leaders of change EIU report Jan_11

Leaders of change
Companies prepare for a stronger future
A report from the Economist Intelligence Unit

sponsored by

Leaders of change

Preface

Leaders of change: Companies prepare for a stronger future is an Economist Intelligence Unit report,
sponsored by Celerant Consulting. The Economist Intelligence Unit conducted the survey and analysis and
wrote the report. The findings and views expressed in the report do not necessarily reflect the views of the
sponsor.
The report’s quantitative findings come from a survey of 288 senior executives, conducted in November
2010. The Economist Intelligence Unit’s editorial team designed the survey. Paul Kielstra was the author
of the report and Gilda Stahl was the editor. Mike Kenny was responsible for the design.
To supplement the quantitative survey results, the Economist Intelligence Unit conducted in-depth
interviews with relevant experts. We would like to thank all interviewees for their time and insights.

January 2011

About the survey were in senior management. Respondents hailed
from North America (44%), Western Europe (40%)
and Latin America (16%). Survey participants came
A total of 288 senior executives participated in the from a wide range of industries, with just over 75%
change management survey, which was conducted from organisations with annual revenue greater than
in November 2010. Of those who responded, 42% US$1bn. For more details on the survey sample and
were C-level executives or above and the remainder results, see the appendix of this study.

© Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2011 1

Leaders of change

Introduction

T he focus of change management has shifted, according to a survey conducted by the Economist
Intelligence Unit and sponsored by Celerant Consulting. Although companies remain, as always, cost
conscious, they are putting much more emphasis on growing market share and preparing for the future.
Similarly, organisations are increasingly devoting their attention to the sales and marketing functions.
This further reﬂects the shift in emphasis towards growth and the future and away from cost cutting.
Apparently, executives are leaving the preoccupations of surviving the downturn behind.
Yet companies are still, all too often, unable to execute change. The responsibility inevitably resides
with their leaders.

2 © Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2011

Leaders of change

Looking to the future

A lthough downside risks remain, the world’s big economies appear to have returned to growth, albeit
slowly. The Economist Intelligence Unit forecasts that GDP in North America will increase annually by
around 2% in real terms and in Western Europe by a little less than that. The engines of growth, however,
will now be in the developing world: China and India should average annual real GDP growth of over 8% in
the next few years, and Latin America should average around 4% per year.

Contraction and recovery: actual and estimated GDP growth, 2006-14
(%)
North America Western Europe Latin America China India
15

12

9

6

3

0

-3

-6
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Source: Economist Intelligence Unit, Global Forecast.

Meanwhile, companies are adjusting to the new landscape, moving beyond the emphasis on survival
that dominated considerations during the economic downturn. This does not mean returning to strategies
that worked in earlier, better times; the world has changed too much. Instead, the three main goals of
corporate change initiatives over the next year—according to respondents to a survey conducted by the
Economist Intelligence Unit and sponsored by Celerant Consulting—are increasing revenue (cited by
55%), preparing the organisation for the future (52%) and cost reduction (50%).


Leaders of change

What are the main forces driving change at your company?
(% respondents)
Consumer goods Energy & natural resources Healthcare, pharmaceuticals & biotechnology

Competitive/cost pressures
56
63
46
Customer demand (eg, for better quality, service, different products)
44
34
21
Regulation
10
31
31
Desire to increase market share
51
26
33
Merger or acquisition
12
14
36
Exploiting emerging market opportunities (sourcing and sales)
24
3
18
Investor expectations
17
23
26
Reducing complexity within company
37
17
26
Change for the sake of change
2
0
0
Sustainability/green initiatives
5
9
5
Reduction of headcount
7
3
13
Source: Economist Intelligence Unit survey, November 2010.

The overall survey findings represent a discernable shift from the responses to this question in two
previous surveys conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit and sponsored by Celerant, where cost
concerns dominated. Last year, for example, 66% of respondents cited cost reduction as the primary goal
of change initiatives, while preparing for the future (46%) and increasing revenue (37%) lagged behind.
As Rosabeth Kanter, Ernest L. Arbuckle Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School
and author of Supercorp: How vanguard companies create innovation, profit, growth and social good,
remarks, “Change management activities definitely follow the economic cycle. There is a great deal of
interest in tightening processes in leaner times. When that runs its course, companies start focusing on
growth.”
In this year’s survey, the perennial challenge of the overall competitive and cost environment remains
by far the leading external driver of change (60%). However, customer demand (36%) comes in second,
followed closely by a desire to increase market share (34%). The last two findings strongly indicate
a renewed focus on sales and growth, especially in certain sectors. In the consumer goods industry,
the drive to grow market share (51%) and customer demand (44%) are cited nearly as often as the
competitive and cost environment (56%).


Leaders of change

According to Dean Nelson, founder of KKR Capstone, “Most companies have recently focused change “Down markets are
management on cost”. To improve further, “they need to focus some of their resources on growth”. Down ideally the best
markets, he adds, are ideally the best times to engage in growth-related change, because they experience times to engage
the biggest shifts in market share. in growth-related
Although the emphasis on market growth and the future is increasing in line with the economic cycle, change, because
it is important not to exaggerate the shift. This year’s survey results suggest a different emphasis, rather they experience
than a sea change in where ﬁrms are focusing their change efforts. One-half of companies surveyed still the biggest shifts
see the reduction of costs as a primary aim. Ultimately, notes Robert Tartaglia, chief operating ofﬁcer in market share.”
(COO) of Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty, a Munich-based large corporate and specialty insurer, Dean Nelson, founder of KKR
Capstone
“Change is driven by the needs of the company,” not some “initiative du jour”. At the moment, for many,
those needs relate increasingly to the future.


Leaders of change

Sales and marketing function is in the
front line of change

T he survey underscores the fact that the focus of change management programmes varies by industry.
For example, a leading focus for chemicals firms in the last year has been the supply chain (cited by
45% of respondents from the sector). In contrast, the supply chain was the focus of change management
for only 17% of energy and natural resources companies, for which the most common focus of change
programmes has been finance (31%).
Overall, though, sales and marketing was the most common function to experience change in the
last year (41%), coming in first in every region polled and at or near the top for every industry. For
manufacturers the figure hit 60%. In the previous year’s survey (using a different methodology), we
found that overall sales and marketing experienced significant change, but on a par with procurement,
information technology (IT) and general management, and behind finance. This year’s focus on change in
the sales and marketing function further reflects the shift in emphasis towards growth and the future and

Which areas of your organisation have been the focus of change management initiatives in the last year?
(% respondents)

Sales & marketing
41
Supply chain/procurement
26
IT
24
R&D/innovation
22
Finance
20
Human resources
15
Customer service
14
The company as a whole in an overarching change initiative
14
Asset optimisation
13
Legal & compliance
10
Senior management as a whole within the company
8
None
1
Don’t know
1


Leaders of change

Which areas of your organisation have been the focus of change management initiatives in the last year?
(% respondents)
Consumer goods Energy & natural resources Healthcare, pharmaceuticals & biotechnology

Sales & marketing
46
29
41
Human resources
12
20
13
IT
32
23
15
Finance
17
31
18
Legal & compliance
5
9
18
Asset optimisation
15
9
5
R&D/innovation
24
17
36
Supply chain/procurement
37
17
23
Customer service
0
20
5
Senior management as a whole within the company
2
14
10
17
9
18
None
0
0
0
Don’t know
2
0
0 Source: Economist Intelligence Unit survey, November 2010.

away from cost cutting. Professor Kanter says, “Marketing always leads growth. You can’t manufacture
more if you are not attracting new customers. So, marketing expenditure goes up when aiming for top-
line growth.”
A function that interacts with ever-shifting markets and consumer demands will inevitably attract a
large number of change programmes. For example, Scott Wicker, vice-president, sustainability, at UPS,
an international shipping and logistics business, notes that as customers have become increasingly
interested in carbon issues, the company has been training and educating its salesforce in how to use its
emission-reduction record and sustainability performance as a sales draw. “We realised that we had an
advantage and needed to sell it,” he says. “Sales and marketing is being affected the most.”
Sales and marketing need to recover from deep budget cuts implemented during the economic
downturn—especially in North America and Western Europe, where the declines in spending were
substantial. Many companies, though, have been changing the sales/marketing function rather than
simply restoring previous budgets, because the markets where they are selling are now substantially


Leaders of change

different. Growth is largely occurring in less-developed economies and these require different marketing
approaches. With evolving communication channels, such as social networking technology, businesses
would have to adjust rapidly anyway. Two years of cutbacks only make the need for some companies to
act more pressing. Mr Nelson explains, “The sales and marketing function is a higher-return place to
implement real change than management on the cost side. The customer base has changed; the world has
changed. People realise that they need to change their sales and marketing approach.”
Broad organisational retooling holds some advantages over a narrower focus on a single function,
however important. According to the survey ﬁndings, companies that have not engaged in change to the
sales/marketing function most commonly implemented initiatives that addressed the company as a whole
(24%). Professor Kanter points out that sales strength is less of an issue than an ability to innovate across
the company and in product offerings. “In the long run”, she says, “you need to be investing in constantly
renewing products and services. Innovation is the only way to have sustainable growth.”
Larger companies, in particular, are addressing the problem of complexity. For those businesses
with over US$5bn in annual sales, simpliﬁcation is the second-biggest aim of change. Such change is,
in Professor Kanter’s words, “an exercise that goes on periodically”. Large organisations add on layers
and roles—particularly in good times—and then need to shed them. Mr Tartaglia of Allianz says, “I’ve yet
to embark on a change initiative or project where one of the ultimate objectives is not the reduction of
complexity”, because of the costs that it brings. Complexity reduction can have multiple advantages. A
programme at P&G, a global consumer-products company, to simplify its European distribution system,
notes Peter White, its director for global sustainability, decreased carbon emissions and costs.


Leaders of change

‘A’ for effort, but ‘E’ for execution?

A s companies make their strategic choices about how best to change in order to face current and future
challenges, change programmes are consuming ever more corporate resources. Sixty-three percent
of survey respondents report that more senior executive time was devoted to change management
initiatives over the past year, against just 7% noting a decline. The equivalent ﬁgures for increased
spending are 47% and 11%.
Nevertheless, most companies are still remarkably unsuccessful at implementing change. Respondents
say that on average only 56% of change initiatives are successful. This is no surprise to Allianz’s Mr
Tartaglia. Surveying the corporate world as a whole, he sees “a lot more experienced people out there and
a better understanding of best practice, but I can’t say I have seen any empirical evidence that companies
are doing better [at change management]”.

On average, to what extent…
(% respondents)
…have the resources spent on your …has the amount of senior executive time spent
organisation’s most significant change on your organisation’s most significant change
initiatives altered over the past 12 months? initiatives altered over the past 12 months?
Increased greatly
10
21
Increased
37
42
Stayed the same
38
27
Decreased
9
6
Decreased greatly
2
1
Don’t know
4
3 Source: Economist Intelligence Unit survey, November 2010.


Leaders of change

In your view, approximately what proportion of change initiatives has been successful at your organisation over
the past five years?
(% respondents)

Few
13
Around one-quarter
10
Around half
36
Around three-quarters
11
Most or all
27
None
0
Don’t know
3

Any reassurance that the low success rate might give to executives about their own company’s failings
is false. KKR’s Mr Nelson says, “If you are not getting better at change management, you are probably
becoming irrelevant.”
If anything, the shifting focus of change is likely to make some elements of change harder—especially
leadership. Although change management literature often discusses the processes of change divorced
from the content, what is being changed matters. Mr Nelson notes, “Where people struggle is when the
nature of what they are trying to change changes a fair amount. They may have been very good on change
related to costs, but it might be hard for them to change sales or product development.” Professor Kanter
adds that such shifts present a leadership challenge: “It is very different to lead people to engage in
innovation than encouraging people to ﬁnd efﬁciencies.”


Leaders of change

Where the buck stops: a challenge for leaders

T he symptoms of leadership difficulties do not always manifest themselves at the top of the company.
Survey respondents cite middle management (38%) as the employment level where bottlenecks occur in
change initiatives, well above senior management (26%) and the C-suite (5%). Significant variations exist
in individual industries: for energy and natural resources, around one-quarter of respondents cite senior
management, middle management, line management and front-line workers as the most likely obstacles,
while in the healthcare sector senior managers (31%) lead middle management (28%).

In your view, which group of employees presents the greatest bottleneck to change management initiatives?
(% respondents)

Middle management
38
Senior management
26
Supervisors/line managers
19
Front-line workers/operations
13
C-suite
5

This finding requires a caveat: all of the survey participants were at the senior management level
or above and leaders at some companies may be reluctant to acknowledge their own shortcomings. Of
C-level survey respondents at companies where a change initiative has failed in the last year, 36% cited
a poor plan as the single biggest cause of the problem. Only 17% blamed a lack of senior management
commitment, almost as many as pointed to employee resistance (15%). For less senior respondents,
though, 28% blamed a poor plan, but 25% cited lack of senior management commitment, and just 10%
mentioned employee resistance. Moreover, at those companies where successful change initiatives are
few, survey respondents indicated that senior management created the biggest bottlenecks (42%), rather
than middle managers (28%). They also named lack of senior management commitment as the biggest 1. Malcolm Higgs, Deborah
Rowland, “Emperors with
barrier to change (40%), more than twice as often as other respondents (19%). This is consistent with clothes on: The role of self-
a recent article in The Journal of Change Management1, which found that corporate “leaders’ ‘blindness’ awareness in developing
effective change
to organisational systems and/or a focus on their own ego needs led them into a range of ‘traps’ that leadership”, December
seriously damaged the success of change interventions”. 2010.


Leaders of change

Change management in practice: a focus ventures in which the benefits are partly intangible.
on sustainability Mr Wicker therefore stresses the need to blend
environmental with financial gains clearly, as both
are a part of sustainability. Similarly, Dr White says,
“You need a clear line of sight for sustainability to the
The requirements of successful change management company’s purpose.” This ideally should include social
are often described in broad terms. The details, and environmental, as well as financial elements, and
however, also matter, and invariably differ from field P&G changed its formal statement of purpose to do so.
to field. For example, the integration of sustainability The strong link between sustainability and efficiency
into companies in recent years has involved substantial frequently helps here as well.
change efforts. The experience of P&G and UPS Planning: Effective change requires a good
illustrates the process of applying broad rules in roadmap, including clear delineations of responsibility
particular circumstances. and steps, preferably with initial easy wins to boost
Leadership and communication to create a morale and momentum. This is as true in sustainability
sense of urgency: Successful change requires a as other fields, but those working in this area face
widespread belief within the organisation that action particular complications. Mr Wicker notes that
is necessary. This requires a consistent message from initiatives tend to involve multiple departments
senior executives—otherwise employees will assume and sometimes even external stakeholders such as
that the issue is not important within the business. communities or non-governmental organisations
UPS and P&G start their sustainability efforts with (NGOs). Co-ordinated planning and execution are
an unambiguous commitment from the CEO and the therefore typically more difficult than for initiatives
Board. Both also have extensive internal educational relating to single departments.
and communication efforts to explain the concept. Selecting the appropriate metrics for success may
So far, this does not vary noticeably from the general not be as straightforward as initiatives focused on
template for change. For companies seeking to become money saved, or a company might not even measure
more sustainable, though, success does not depend so them before a given initiative begins. The accurate
much on winning people over to individual initiatives as measurement of carbon emissions related to a given
convincing them of the need to embrace sustainability activity, for example, can be highly complex. Yet
more broadly. Here developments in the outside world such measurement can provide additional business
certainly help. UPS vice-president, sustainability, opportunities: UPS, for example, finds it valuable to
Scott Wicker, says that increasing awareness of climate be able to give customers information related to the
change has made it far easier to win hearts and minds. carbon produced in their shipments.
“The emergence of climate change as a business issue is Focus of change: Although in parts of the business
driving sustainability,” he notes. the focus of changes has varied with the economic
Yet P&G’s Dr White points out that sustainability cycle, sustainability provides an example of one that
can be managed in terms of corporate behaviour. This has not. It certainly could have fluctuated between
approach requires greater corporate change, but once concentrating on efficiency initiatives that reduce cost
employees have been won over to its logic, these flow and those that focus on preparation for the future. Yet
more easily. Dr White says that the downturn and recovery brought
Building support for particular initiatives: A “no real change” to the balance between these two.
sense of urgency must be converted into a willingness Similarly, Lynnette McIntire, who heads sustainability
for the company to provide resources to any given communication at UPS, says that recently, “We’ve not
programme. With companies carefully shepherding been shifting efforts from cost cutting to opportunity;
resources, it can be difficult to advocate sustainability it is more of everything.”


Leaders of change

For the change initiatives in your organisation that did not succeed in the past 12 months, what was the single “Powerlessness
most important factor in determining their failure?
(% respondents) corrupts. People
C-suite non-C-suite
who are powerless
Lack of clearly defined and/or achievable milestones & objectives to measure progress
36
and hemmed in
28
Lack of commitment by senior management
by rules become
17
25
excessively
Poor communication territorial.”
14
16 Rosabeth Kanter, Harvard
Employee resistance Business School
15
10
Insufficient funding
3
7
Other
7
7
Don’t know
8
7

That said, middle management’s reputation is not purely accidental. Professor Kanter believes that
the finding “definitely rings true”. The reluctance of middle management to embrace change initiatives is
understandable. Programmes imposed from above can radically shift middle managers’ job descriptions—
even their job security. Middle managers also frequently face multiple demands—including for increased
profits—while being told to find ways to give practical effect to visions of change ordered from above. Mr
Tartaglia acknowledges the problem, but lays much of the blame for this behaviour elsewhere: “Middle
managers are critical, but it has to start from the top.” Professor Kanter adds that resistance to imposed
change is predictable, especially where it is threatening. “Powerlessness corrupts,” she says. “People who
are powerless and hemmed in by rules become excessively territorial.”
Poor communication is a particular problem. Mr Nelson explains that senior executives can forget that,
whereas they have been involved in 30 to 40 conversations relating to an initiative before launching it,
middle managers may be ill-prepared. “If senior people say that managers need to be, for example, more
innovative and think that this is enough to get people to act differently, then they are wrong,” he says.


Leaders of change

Conclusion

T he global economy is always evolving and companies need in turn to adjust. Businesses, however, are
simply not that good at change—failing nearly half the time, according to the Economist Intelligence
Unit survey. As this study shows, getting the most out of change initiatives requires going beyond the
basics of leadership commitment, good planning and communication. The following principles emerge.

l Treat change programmes as a key, but limited strategic resource. In practice there are limits
to how much change a company can absorb—on average survey companies make just 3.6 change
initiatives annually. Competitors will be looking at other areas than just cost cutting, including trying
to grab some of your market share. Aligning the focus of change with the most pressing strategic
priorities has therefore become more important than before.
l In preparing for the future, consider whether your sales function needs an overhaul or you need
to address an overarching company-wide issue. The most popular area for change programmes
over the past year has been sales/marketing. Other businesses, meanwhile, are making a strategic
choice to look at company-wide change such as complexity reduction. The key consideration is where
change will best prepare the firm for the new competitive environment being shaped by the multi-
speed global recovery.
l Sweat the details. The broad principles of change management may vary little, but the details vary
in ways that matter. As executives opt for new goals and locations for change programmes, they
will need to understand the resulting specific requirements of success. These will likely differ from
the requirements of changes in the depths of the downturn. Cutting costs, encouraging growth and
promoting sustainability need distinct playbooks.
l Treat bottlenecks as a symptom not a disease. If middle management is a difficult bottleneck to
change, then leadership needs to improve. Bring middle managers into the change process earlier,
have them work on the planning, and use them as champions of change. Leadership is not about
telling people what to do, but getting them to do it. If more senior employees are the problem, then
leadership is dysfunctional and needs to address its conflicts quickly.

“Change management”, says Professor Kanter, “is a very broad term for a lot of different activities that are
all a part of leadership”. Such leadership will, as ever, be essential as business prepares itself for the future.


Leaders of change Appendix
Companies prepare for a stronger future Survey results

Appendix: Survey results
Percentages may not add to 100% owing to rounding or the ability of respondents to choose multiple responses.

What will be the main motivations for your organisation’s How many change management initiatives do you believe your
change management initiatives over the next 12 months? organisation will launch over the next 12 months?
Select up to three. (% respondents)
(% respondents)
One
Increasing revenue 15
55 Two
Preparing the organisation for future challenges 24
52 Three
Reducing costs 18
50 Four
Increasing market share 7
27 Five or more
Better engagement of people (eg, improved communication & involvement) 24
26 None
New organisation structure with new roles 3
22 Don’t know
Acquisition/divestiture/merger 9
19
Cultural change
11
Other In your view, what proportion of change initiatives has been
5 successful at your organisation over the past five years?
(% respondents)

Few
How many change management initiatives do you estimate 13
your organisation has launched in the last 12 months? Around one-quarter
(% respondents) 10
Around half
One 36
13 Around three-quarters
Two 11
24 Most or all
Three 27
23 None
Four 0
6 Don’t know
Five or more 3
24
None
2
Don’t know
8


Appendix Leaders of change
Survey results Companies prepare for a stronger future

For the change initiatives in your organisation that did not On average, to what extent have the resources spent on your
succeed in the past 12 months, what was the single most organisation’s most significant change initiatives altered over
important factor in determining their failure? the past 12 months?
(% respondents) (% respondents)

Lack of clearly defined and/or achievable milestones Increased greatly
& objectives to measure progress 10
31 Increased
Lack of commitment by senior management 37
21 Stayed the same
Poor communication 38
15 Decreased
Employee resistance 9
12 Decreased greatly
Insufficient funding 2
5 Don’t know
Other 4
7
Don’t know
7
On average, to what extent has the amount of senior executive
time spent on your organisation’s most significant change
initiatives altered over the past 12 months?
What is the most important measure in determining whether (% respondents)
a change programme has been successful in your
organisation? Increased greatly
(% respondents) 21
Increased
Behaviour change in the organisation 42
35 Stayed the same
Increased profitability 27
29 Decreased
Customer satisfaction 6
10 Decreased greatly
Savings delivered 1
9 Don’t know
Increased market share 3
9
Employee satisfaction / employee turnover
2
Other In your view, which group of employees presents the greatest
4 bottleneck to change management initiatives?
Don’t know (% respondents)
2
Middle management
38
Senior management
26
Supervisors/line managers
19
Front-line workers/operations
13
C-suite
5


Leaders of change Appendix
Companies prepare for a stronger future Survey results

Which areas of your organisation have been the focus of In which country are you personally located?
change management initiatives in the last year? (% respondents)
Select up to three.
(% respondents) US
39
Sales & marketing UK, Germany
41 8
Supply chain/procurement Belgium, Canada, Brazil
26 5
IT Italy, Mexico
24 4
R&D/innovation Switzerland, Netherlands, Portugal
22 3
Finance Colombia
20 2
Human resources Chile, France. Sweden, Ireland, Turkey, Denmark, Finland,
15 Norway, Peru, Poland
Customer service 1
14
14
Asset optimisation What is your primary industry?
13 (% respondents)
Legal & compliance
10 Manufacturing
Senior management as a whole within the company 15
8 Consumer goods
None 14
1 Healthcare, pharmaceuticals & biotechnology
Don’t know 14
1 Energy & natural resources
12
Chemicals
11
What are the main forces driving change at your company? Financial services
Select up to three. 7
(% respondents) Professional services
6
Competitive/cost pressures Retailing
60 4
Customer demand (eg, for better quality, service, different products) Automotive
36 3
Desire to increase market share Construction & real estate
34 2
Reducing complexity within company Education
27 2
Investor expectations IT & technology
22 2
Merger or acquisition Telecommunications
20 2
Regulation Transportation, travel & tourism
19 2
Exploiting emerging market opportunities (sourcing & sales) Agriculture & agribusiness
19 2
Reduction of headcount Entertainment, media & publishing
11 1
Sustainability/green initiatives Government/Public sector
6 1
Change for the sake of change Aerospace/Defence
1 1


Appendix Leaders of change
Survey results Companies prepare for a stronger future

What is your company’s annual global revenue in US dollars? What are your main functional roles? Choose up to three.
(% respondents) (% respondents)

Finance
37
$250m to $500m 3
Strategy & business development
$500m to $1bn 22 32
$1bn to $5bn 33 General management
28
$5bn to $10bn 14
Marketing & sales
$10bn or more 28 16
Risk
12
IT
11
Operations & production
9
R&D
6
Supply-chain management
Which of the following best describes your title? 6
(% respondents) Customer service
6
Board member Procurement
3 5
CEO/President/Managing director Human resources
6 4
CFO/Treasurer/Comptroller Legal
20 3
CIO/Technology director Information & research
4 2
Other C-level executive Other
9 5
SVP/VP/Director
58

In which region are you personally based?
(% respondents)

North America 44

Western Europe 42

Latin America 14


Whilst every effort has been taken to verify the accuracy
of this information, neither The Economist Intelligence
Unit Ltd. nor the sponsors of this report can accept any
Cover: Shutterstock

responsibility or liability for reliance by any person on
this white paper or any of the information, opinions or
conclusions set out in the white paper.

LONDON
26 Red Lion Square
London
WC1R 4HQ
United Kingdom
Tel: (44.20) 7576 8000
Fax: (44.20) 7576 8476
E-mail: london@eiu.com

NEW YORK
750 Third Avenue
5th Floor
New York, NY 10017
United States
Tel: (1.212) 554 0600
Fax: (1.212) 586 0248
E-mail: newyork@eiu.com

HONG KONG
6001, Central Plaza
18 Harbour Road
Wanchai
Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 2585 3888
Fax: (852) 2802 7638
E-mail: hongkong@eiu.com

GENEVA
Boulevard des Tranchées 16
1206 Geneva
Switzerland
Tel: (41) 22 566 2470
Fax: (41) 22 346 93 47
E-mail: geneva@eiu.com

Leaders of change EIU report Jan_11

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Leaders of change EIU report Jan_11

More from The Economist Media Businesses

Recently uploaded

Leaders of change EIU report Jan_11