“A commitment to innovation, diversified portfolios, aggressive expansion, strong leadership, and a clear vision for the future—these are just some of the strategies employed by the best companies to get to the top of the World’s Best Companies/Global Top 40 list compiled for BusinessWeek by management consulting firm A.T. Kearney. Two groups stand out: technology and telecommunications companies that have tapped into continuing demand for mobile-phone service and new digital hardware and services, and heavy industry and engineering outfits benefiting from the uptick in infrastructure spending. Have a look at the numbers behind the companies on this list.
BusinessWeek’s Top Ten World’s Best Companies 2009:
1. Nintendo, Electronics, Japan
2. Google, Internet Services, U.S.
3. Apple, Electronics, U.S.
4. Doosan Heavy Industries, Construction Products & Services, Korea (South)
5. Hyundai Heavy Industries, Shipbuilding, Korea (South)
6. GDF Suez, Utilities, France
7. MTN, Telecommunications, South Africa
8. Monsanto, Chemicals, U.S.
9. Inditex, Apparel, Spain
10. BHP Billiton, Mining & Metals, Australia
The rest of the list of forty companies is here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “MacRadDoc” for the heads up.]
Sweet. O and first 😀
…I actually find it refreshing to see that M$ is not even in the top 40…
Microsoft is nowhere to be found on this list!
Electronics
M$ is dooooooooomed! =8o)
Wow, BHP is in there. China must be pissed off that both BHP and Apple make the business rules.
Nintendo is diversified?
Google has a clear vision for the future?
A total BS list and a waste of time. Subjectivity makes this list worthless.
Yeah RIGHT!!!
No Microsoft on the top spot? They talk about innovation ALL THE TIME. How could they not be included??
I thought it was weird that they brought up Korean ship building – after 2011 (when the contracts are finished) there is virtually no contracts for new boats. The ghost fleet of unused tanker and container ships in Singapore is getting bigger, not smaller.
What? No Palm?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
@ MS fan
Exactly as you say:
No Microsoft on the top spot? They _TALK_ about innovation all the time.
But it never gets any further than flying chairs…
I think is time to change my glass…, I’m looking for Microsoft and nothing coldn’t find. The big blue also, the number 1 in sales is not even in the top 40…
@Sumy Nona
Right on!
The sky is FALLING!
Why?
Apple was #2 last year.
So, the reason why companies like MS are not in the list is because they rate equity growth and sales growth over 5 years. MS has had zero equity growth in the last 5 years.
Give it a year or two and even A T Kearney and BusinessWeek will have to accept that the number one slot belongs to APPL.
They need time, poor fellows…
No MS on the list. I’m not suprised.
But Monsanto is pure evil.
@Yours Smugly
I agree, Monsanto is the most evil on the list. What is good for business is not necessarily good for humanity, and Monsanto takes this premiss to new highs.
@ all MS Fans
“The companies on the list also have above average (median) sales growth.”
Microsoft has had no sales growth in any market in years and years, so it makes no difference on how innovative Ballmer is a braking new office furniture or new types of office chairs the fact is MS is a stagnant pool of puss on the ass of a 800 pound gorilla.
Finally a list of “best companies” that doesn’t completely discredit itself by including Microsoft!
“What is good for business is not necessarily good for humanity, and Monsanto takes this premiss to new highs.” —Mac-nugget:
I would say that doing what it good for humanity is absolutely the last thing on the minds of America’s mega-corporations in general. They care about one thing only: More profits.
WTF?!? What the hell is Monsanto doing on a list of “World’s Best Companies”? Best at what? Destroying the entire farming industry under totalitarian rule? What a-hole included them on this list?
MDN word: wanted, as in an explanation
Monsanto, the company that want’s to genetically modify everything on the planet they can, to own it all out-right.
Yes, Monsanto is pure concentrated evil. And that’s some nasty stuff!
I call for Monsanto’s inclusion to the BW list be rescinded.
@iWill…..have you ever thought of reading up on the subject upon which you seem to be such an expert? (GreenPeace sites do not count unless you are completely intellectually lazy)
No?
Then STFU.
The article should be dismissed as magazine fluff.
Come on, folks, read the methodology that they used to make up a new ranking!!! This is just another list intended to sell magazines. Useless for all but the most risk-friendly investors, and useless for bragging rights.
First: AT Kearney just cherry-picked the high growth companies based on balance sheets and sales. Many of these were engineering and service companies — why ? Because these companies go gangbusters when they win a contract, and then they fire everyone when they complete the job. This is not sustained growth — this is wave surfing. If you invest based on this alone, then expect to be thrown off the wave eventually.
Next: AT Kearney intentionally throws out small- and midsize-firms. These are the true innovators who have high growth rates in value. This is because AT Kearney can’t accurately measure the values of firms with a high percentage of private investors. Nevertheless, the value of these smaller firms grows dramatically faster, and their worth is typically revealed when they get bought out by large firms. For example: MS really is a holding company that assembled itself by acquiring all the small software companies it could get its hands on. If you were an angel investor for these small firms in the glory days of the early 1990s, your return would be vastly greater than if you had bought MS stock in at the same time.
Third: Why does AT Kearney eliminate from the list companies that choose to operate primarily domestically? There must be hundreds of Chinese manufacturers that you and I have never heard of with dramatically greater growth rates. Just because they operate only in their home country doesn’t mean they aren’t a “better” company.
Finally: who says maximum growth is good? I’d sooner invest in a company that produces a solid return for the long run than to chase after this year’s fad. Fundamentally, growth should track population and not much more. Otherwise, expect market corrections to eat away your glorious short-term returns when you least suspect it.
(no mac content)
@ Buster:
So you buy into the rhetoric that growing food the way humans have for 25,000+ years will no longer sustain us, and that we must destroy self-reproducing seeds, genetically modify plants primarily so they cannot reseed themselves, and patent them so that every farmer must buy new seed every year? What’s more, we should prefer a seed that is not native to a particular region’s climate, insect, and soil conditions, we should have only a handful of proprietary seed types that are bred primarily for resistance to poisons that are sold with it as a package deal?
Monsanto has indeed destroyed sustainable agriculture on much of the planet. Whether or not Monsanto makes money in the short term, they are a primary culprit in pollution runoff, crop failures in third-world countries, and desertification as their ill-suited seeds are used in regions not appropriate to their products.