From Crisis to Growth Business Recovery Insights in the USA and Canada

Brazil has made significant progress in the establishment of a solid foundation for long-term economic development over the past decade. Brazil has become an appealing destination for foreign direct investment as a result of recent enhancements in environmental compliance and business transparency. Opportunities for investment in Brazil are further underscored by a combination of factors, such as low inflation and favorable interest rates. Furthermore, businesses will be able to recruit and retain employees due to the anticipated high unemployment rate. These factors in Brazil are in stark contrast to developed markets, such as the United States, that were likely on the brink of a downturn prior to the pandemic.

The next positive cycle in Brazil is expected to be even more robust.

according to experts, due to the current market fundamentals. This is due to the fact that there will be more value to be obtained in the aftermath of the COVID-19 crisis. Although conservative strategies will be prioritized in the immediate future, it is imperative that these measures be implemented without compromising the potential for long-term growth. Cost-cutting measures and the preparation for future scaling up are compatible, which is a fortunate development. While reviewing their business planning to align with the pandemic response, companies should also consider the potential for future growth in Brazil.

How to Prepare for Future Growth

Multinational corporations with subsidiaries in Brazil should also prepare for future development as they navigate this downturn and anticipate the long-term economic shifts that will result from COVID-19. In light of the fact that Brazil continues to have the highest number of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) violations with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission/Department of Justice, they should take into account the following inquiries regarding changes in Brazil's business environment...

Leaders should keep in mind the lessons learned from previous downturns, such as 2009 and 2015, as they prepare to emerge stronger from the pandemic crisis. Companies that were able to plan for growth while simultaneously preserving cash, managing risk, and maintaining continuity were more successful than their competitors. This period can enable companies to ascertain which primary activities are indispensable for future expansion and which can be reduced without compromising future opportunities. Centralization, standardization, and automation are among the shared services strategies that can result in cost savings and the capacity to swiftly expand operations to accommodate future growth.

It is imperative that the actions taken during this period are deliberate, ensuring that the prospects for long-term development are further enhanced by short-term cuts or other measures. Companies should strive to implement employment and service models that optimize employee productivity and mitigate the risks associated with this evolving environment. Companies will be able to adjust to the present crisis and future business cycle fluctuations by concentrating on high-value activities and developing a sustainable, resilient delivery model.

Immigration does not serve as an economic panacea.

The focal point of the federal government's economic growth strategy is immigration, rather than productivity. Nevertheless, the academic literature consistently finds that immigration levels have a neutral or negligible overall impact on a country's living standards, as measured by labor productivity, real wages, the employment rate, the age structure of the population, or, most importantly, GDP per capita.

Reality assessment

Regrettably, the federal government's economic statements frequently emphasize GDP expansion. This metric is unproductive in the current context, as population growth has been turbocharged and labor productivity has declined.

Methodology

The integrative literature review was conducted in three stages to generate this synthesis paper. The first two phases concentrated on the literature on disasters, while the third stage integrated the findings with a review of COVID-19 pandemic studies. The initial step of the research team was to evaluate the theoretical and empirical knowledge on business recovery in the disasters literature. The goal was to identify critical themes or "lessons" regarding business recovery from disasters that could serve as a useful foundation for forming expectations regarding business recovery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The third stage involved an analysis of the five lessons

learned from the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of business recovery. In order to identify pertinent studies that were available as of December 2021, nearly two years after the pandemic began in the majority of the world, keyword searches of standard databases (particularly Web of Science and Google Scholar) were implemented. The pandemic studies were analyzed to ascertain the extent to which their findings were comparable to or dissimilar to the disaster experience for each of the five lessons, using the disaster taxonomy outlined above. A more generalized conceptual understanding of business recovery from all shocks and catastrophes was developed by the research team as a result of the insights gained from these comparisons, which are summarized.

Analyzing the lessons of disasters in the context of the pandemic

Most businesses recover, according to research conducted on business recovery from disasters in high-income countries. Dahlhamer and Tierney, for instance, discovered that 75% of businesses had recovered approximately 16 months following the 1994 Northridge (Los Angeles) earthquake. Two-thirds of businesses in the United States had either entirely recovered to pre-disaster business performance or grown, as Corey and Deitch observed approximately six to eight months after Hurricane Katrina. A substantial proportion of businesses that were performing worse were still in operation. Some 26 months after the catastrophe, Lam et al. reported that 12% of businesses were still closed. Stevenson et al. discovered that approximately 66% of organizations self-reported that they were about the same or better off following the earthquakes in the 2010-11 Canterbury earthquakes in New Zealand, and 61% considered themselves completely recovered.