We seem content growing guppies to feed sharks
David Crane
The announcement by
In a way, there's nothing
unusual about this. Big corporations innovate and grow by buying smaller
companies that have developed new ideas or technologies with growth potential
and which the bigger companies, with their production and distributions
systems, can grow much faster.
So the purchase of these 25
Canadian high-tech companies by
But this does raise another
issue, one that should be of concern. Once acquired, the technology
entrepreneur cedes control over the business to the new owner and forgoes
independent commercialization of his technology and growth of his enterprise as
a potential multinational of his own. He becomes part of someone else's
multinational strategy.
Could Cognos
have become a much bigger international player? Quite
possibly. In September, for example, it announced plans to acquire a
This is an important issue in
the ongoing debate over foreign takeovers because it suggests that, for
whatever reason, we are providing seed corn for international business –
growing guppies to feed to the sharks – instead of building more strong
international businesses of our own.
This past week, Statistics
Canada published an interesting report on multinationals in
Moreover, it said, fears over
"hollowing out" and loss of head offices were misplaced and that foreign
multinationals tend to add head-office jobs. What the StatsCan
numbers don't show, though, is what kind of head office jobs exist after the
takeover. Are they mainly in sales, human resources or routine operations
management or do they include high-level activities such as strategic
direction, treasury management, product development and export market strategy?
In some takeovers, Canadian CEOs just manage employee and government relations
and day-to-day operations.
So the concern over
"hollowing out" isn't over the number of head office jobs but the
kinds of head office jobs. If top strategic and other decision-making functions
disappear from
There's also a concern with
the transfer of strategic functions to the parent company after a takeover,
that high-value service suppliers could be affected as well.
If key decision-making is
transferred out of the head office, the Canadian subsidiary will still need
accounting, legal and other services, but these may be supplied for more
routine functions, leaving the highest value services to be supplied by the
same firms serving the parent company. The impact of takeovers on head offices
deserves much more study.
Yet there is an important
policy implication in the StatsCan report:
Canadian-owned multinationals perform just as well as foreign-controlled
competitors, it says. They are more likely to be innovative and productive.
So Canadian
policy should focus on ensuring that more of our promising high-tech companies
have alternatives to being acquired by foreign multinationals and on how to
grow more of them into Canadian-headquartered multinationals like
David Crane's column appears Sundays. Email him at
crane@interlog.com