Through much of the 1990s, corporations realized extraordinary growth in revenues and earnings. As this trend unfolded, senior executives began to experience significant pressure from financial analysts, shareholders, and others for continued growth as measured by quarterly reports of performance against forecasts. In the aftermath of the technology bubble, and as the accounting and financial scandals of 2001 and 2002 surfaced, it was apparent that a portion of the earlier reported growth was the product of a mix of widespread earnings management and financial engineering, serial acquisitions, and the utilization of accounting and tax manipulations to create specific financial results. The vitality and substance of those results are now being questioned in various regulatory, legal, and legislative forums. In other cases, firms may have developed innovative strategies or products that led to high growth, but as the firm matured or approached market saturation, growth slowed. For a range of reasons, then, many firms have “hit the wall,” experiencing flat revenues after an extended period of high growth.

As a result, executives in many companies now struggle with an increased emphasis on internally generated, or organic, growth, which is qualitatively different in the substance and character of the key tasks central to success, from growth via acquisition. As Rita McGrath notes in Chapter 9, with a sample of over 900 large companies she examined, approximately 6% of all companies who were growing at even a modest rate overall could be accurately described as growing organically.