I just stumbled (and broke my leg) on this paragraph in an Ad Age story about a restructuring at Procter & Gamble:
"Under the plan, most of P&G's brands will be limited to 'zero overhead growth' (or ZOG), where employment won't rise regardless of sales growth. The highest-priority businesses, such as China, Central and Eastern Europe, along with beauty care, will be limited to 'half overhead growth' (HOG), where overhead costs can rise no more than half as fast as sales. The lowest-priority businesses, including an unspecified number of brands P&G will look to divest, will aim for 'negative overhead growth' (NOG), in which employment and other overhead costs decline as a share of sales."
Wow. I'm in a lot of pain.
Comments (13)
Will I work on ZOG?
Will I work on HOG?
I will not work on NOG!
I will not work on ZOG!
I will not work for Sam I am,
I will not eat green eggs and ham!
Posted by Eileen Burmeister | February 22, 2008 10:36 AM
Posted on February 22, 2008 10:36
If I were king of the communications universe, I'd forever outlaw the creation of new acronyms. "Zero overhead growth" is so self-explanatory that no stupid acronym is needed. Since it's established early in the paragraph that it's about overhead, "half-growth" would suffice for that stupid HOG thing and "reduction" for the stupid NOG thing. Other than that, I thought it was a pretty clear paragraph.
Will
Posted by Will Daniel | February 22, 2008 10:48 AM
Posted on February 22, 2008 10:48
But your way, it doesn't rhyme, Will.
Eileen, I laughed out loud.
Posted by David Murray | February 22, 2008 10:51 AM
Posted on February 22, 2008 10:51
David:
Isn't Obama promising to abolish all corporate acronyms?
Steve C.
Posted by Steve C. | February 22, 2008 11:16 AM
Posted on February 22, 2008 11:16
Yes, we C.A.N.
Posted by David Murray | February 22, 2008 11:17 AM
Posted on February 22, 2008 11:17
You're right about that rhyme thing, David. Nice job, Eileen.
Will
Posted by Will Daniel | February 22, 2008 11:29 AM
Posted on February 22, 2008 11:29
David, that wasn't a serious article, was it? You made all the ZOG NOG HOG stuff up to see just how gullible your audience is, right? Please please please tell me I'm right.
On the other hand, being the only real human in a sea of geeks here at my job, I confess that I've been making up a list of the acronyms and phrases I hear at staff meetings, with the goal of one day writing a short story composed entirely of geek-speak, and it's no less strange than your OGs. And then there's the telco stuff. One time I had both a DOG and a COW in my yard--dialtone on ground, referring to a line that was draped across the yard because it was winter and couldn't be buried; and a cell on wheels, a portable cellular tower the company was using to see where to locate a new antenna.
Never mind. I believe you. sigh...
Posted by Joan Hope | February 22, 2008 12:39 PM
Posted on February 22, 2008 12:39
Joan. There are some things communicators don't kid about. Initialisms and acronyms are two of them.
Posted by David Murray | February 22, 2008 12:48 PM
Posted on February 22, 2008 12:48
Once upon a time I worked for a P&G competitor and P&G was always viewed as the stellar example of what my then company wanted to be. It was considered a real coup to recruit someone away from P&G - it was the King of the Hill that no one ever wanted to leave.
If I'm reading all those acronyms accurately, it would appear that the mighty has fallen - at least in some areas of the business.
Posted by Colleen H | February 22, 2008 10:21 PM
Posted on February 22, 2008 22:21
Maybe it's because I'm only recently officially in communication, but I'm more curious (and potentially dismayed) about the implications of the statement than the acronyms.
Obviously, not being at P&G I don't know how realistic ZOG, NOG and HOG working is, but if I was an employee there, it rather sounds like being condemned to ever longer hours for no extra pay...
Posted by Indy | February 23, 2008 9:20 AM
Posted on February 23, 2008 09:20
Well, Indy, they were unveiling this regimen to investors and this is the sort of thing investors like to hear.
Posted by David Murray | February 23, 2008 10:28 AM
Posted on February 23, 2008 10:28
I recently took a class on Leadership (standard MBA fare) and was forced to read a book called Doing What Matters by famed Gillette CEO, James Kilts. You all know him, right? He’s the guy who saved the world with the Mach3 razor.
Anyway, he invented ZOG and brags about it in his book. He talks about employees walking up to him in the cafeteria and saying “We’re ZOGGING right now!”
Posted by k bosch | February 25, 2008 11:07 AM
Posted on February 25, 2008 11:07
Yes, and while P&Gers are still ZOGGING, Jim Kilts is now SLOGGING--in the $165 million dollars he personally received after engineering the Gillette's buyout, by Procter & Gamble.
ZOG ON, suckers!
Posted by David Murray | February 25, 2008 11:27 AM
Posted on February 25, 2008 11:27