In the tunnel: Executive expectations about the shape of the coronavirus crisis
An article by: McKinsey & Company
In this McKinsey survey, more than 2,000 executives around the world share their views on the likely impact of efforts to control the virus and support economic recovery.
Working from their homes, thousands of executives worldwide assessed McKinsey’s scenarios on recovery from the coronavirus pandemic.1 The nine scenarios were first presented in our article, “Safeguarding our lives and our livelihoods: The imperative of our time.” They estimate three likely paths for the spread of the virus and the public-health response, and three potential levels of effectiveness for governmental economic response.2
MOST POPULAR INSIGHTS
- COVID-19: Implications for business
- Beyond coronavirus: The path to the next normal
- Safeguarding our lives and our livelihoods: The imperative of our time
These results come against the backdrop of a dramatic humanitarian crisis evolving at a global scale, with nearly two million infected by the virus, tens of thousands of lives lost, and tens of millions of people now unemployed in the midst of the fastest and deepest recession in living memory.
Out of the nine scenarios describing the economic impact of the crisis and the recovery period, the clearest survey result was the respondent preference for the scenario defined by a (regional) recurrence of the virus after containment, a muted recovery, and slower long-term growth. This scenario is labeled A1 in the exhibit below, where alphanumeric labels (not seen by the respondents) are overlaid. The shaded scenarios, labeled A1 to A4, reflect those outcomes in which both the public-health and economic-policy responses are adequate or better. The B1 to B5 scenarios reflect outcomes in which the responses are ineffective in one or both domains (public health and economic policy).
