Tag: CEOs

“Passive-Aggressive” CFO


One of my former CEO’s contacted me after reading my post on Bill of Rights in Small Business Environment (who knew they would be looking?). He’s been in business for 27 years with many employees passing through. Listening to his opinion on the Freedom of Speech, I came to realize that his point of view might be typical for a lot of business owners and should be shared here.

According to him, employees, including his current CFO, choose not to voice their opinions as a manifestation of a passive-aggressive attitude. In reality, he says, he would not mind listening to what they have to say on variety of business issues.

My first impulse was to laugh. I used to work for this person and, to put it mildly, he is not the friendliest of bosses. My policy, nevertheless, was always to express my judgement on all professional issues. This, I must say, received mixed reaction, depending on whether my opinion was in agreement with his or not. It was fortunate that our commercial views were nearly identical and we rarely had disagreements. However, on those occasions when my opinion differed, what I got back was the cold silent stare that could have discouraged someone less straightforward.

But I didn’t laugh, because I wanted to know more about the reasons he has classified his new CFO as passive-aggressive. So, I asked more questions. Actually, this was not the first time I asked these questions. Over the years more than a few senior execs have used that term to describe some of their employees to me. It always puzzled me how these business people recognized a behavioral (i.e. psychological) trait.

Let me tell you, most of the time, including in case of the CFO in question, it amounts to “sulking.” Instead of speaking out, the employee shows a “bad temper”: he is morose, with disappointment and annoyance written all over his face. In other words, unreleased frustration (my favorite subject), jumps from inside onto his face. And yes, that can be classified as a passive expression of aggression.

Yet, at the same time the CFO still works hard, diligently performing all his duties and making sure that the business continues to survive and prosper. And that’s actually the opposite of passivity.

Sulking on its own is not a sufficient symptom to diagnose someone as passive-aggressive. There are far more significant and damaging, especially in business environment, manifestations: procrastination, obstructionism, chronic tardiness, tendency to blame others for one’s own failures, making excuses for non-performance, deliberate creation of chaotic situations.

If you keep catching your employee shuffling papers on his desk every time you walk by, or even if he appears to be busy but never delivers any results; when a deadline of a project gets pushed further and further back, then you may have a passive-aggressive person in front of you.

However, if the employee does his best, but looks upset, maybe you should just let him exercise his constitutional freedom to speak his mind.

CFO Folklore: The Home Front


Images-1 I touch on the gender inequality among financial execs once in a while – an obligatory topic for a female CFO/author/blogger.  I mean, everyone writes about it.  Entire institutions and organizations compile sociological studies dealing with these issues.  None of it seems to be creating any changing momentum, but hey, at least someone is willing to pay the researchers their salaries. 

The interesting thing, though, that most of the time these topics (including my earlier posts) deal with the social, rather than practical, aspects of the phenomenon.  People talk about advancement rates, compensation levels, female-to-male executives proportions, etc.  In a very scientific way, we say: all things being equal (education, achievements, intelligence, etc.), women still don't get a fair shake.   And nobody talks about the fact that, on a practical level, things are never equal between men and women, who strive for, or already achieved, top job positions.

First of all, women by nature are more conscientious and responsible than men.  That is why we have higher percentage of female straight "A" students both in high schools and colleges (yet, there are more male valedictorians!).  Secondly, women know only too well that they are at disadvantage due to the simple fact that they are not men.  That makes them work ten times harder than any man in their position would.  So, in truth they get rewarded at lower rates not for the equally good work, but for the job done much better.

But the biggest practical inequality occurs on the executive's home front.  I remember having a friendly airplane conversation with my CEO, on our way to a meeting in Germany.  At one point he said that I was the hardest working person he knew besides him – he honestly believed that he worked as hard as I did.  Of course, he was talking about the job itself.  Well, I thought that even at that I worked much harder (I did not take Friday's off during summers), but I chose to turn to more obvious facts of life.

I asked, " Who prepares your suit, shirt and tie for tomorrow every evening?"  "My wife," he said.  "We frequently work until 9 or 10 pm, is the dinner ready, when you come home?" "Yes."  "Who writes checks?  Who deals with repairmen?  Who talks to teachers?  Who buys groceries? Who takes kids to the doctors'?"  "The wife" was the answer to all the questions.  "Now, who do you think does all that in my home?"  

He knew the answer, of course.  So, every day I was working my executive job, let's say, just as hard as he did, plus his wife's job.  And that's true for most of female CFOs, whether married or single, with or without children. 

Look, how many unmarried male CFOs or Controllers you know?  I don't know any.  Even if their wives leave them, they get remarried very quickly – someone needs to take care of the home front.

On the other hand, a woman expected either to give up her personal life for the career, or hide it away, as if she does not have any.  It is especially true for those female executives who work in small and midsize companies – the salaries are not large enough to afford a Mr. Mom of a husband.  So, we are talking inequality cubed: the majority of women work harder, plus cover the home front (or give up life outside of the job), and still get paid and promoted on a much smaller scale. 

Here is the funny part.  At the end my boss asked, "How come you still read more than I do and go to the theater all the time?"  "Because I don't sleep," I answered.

Your Boss: Value and Madness of an Entrepreneur


Many of my correspondents (CFO's, Controllers, Financial Directors) tell me that the biggest source of their stress and anxiety is the Boss.  I am sure we will be addressing this topic many times in different stories.  President, CEO, Owner, or whatever title they have chosen for themselves, more frequently then not, these entrepreneurs are the main reasons for our frustration.

Some of them are courageous and brilliant who actually foster and lead, others are batty and lucky who succeed in spite of themselves, and the others are lazy and disinterested who ruin everything even with our best efforts in place.  Regardless, they have few things in common. 

First of all, we can never forget that they are the ones creating jobs.  That's a tremendous achievement.  They've got to be madly brave to go out in the world and implement their ideas, sometimes against all odds.  If they succeed, they build companies that not only create products and services, but also employ people and pay them salaries.  They take insane risks and end up with entities that can afford to hire CFOs, Controllers, Financial Directors, i.e. us.  And even if the Bosses are not the founders, but heirs and the business just fell into their lap, until they destroy it, they are the employers and our salaries are coming out of their pockets.

Of course, as financial execs we kill ourselves in order to either facilitate their success and prosperity or stop them from  killing the business.  And even though we are concerned with our own material well-being just like anybody else, at the end of the day all of our efforts in a private company end up to be about guarding the owners' private purses.  That kind of a responsibility to a person in the office few steps down from your own brings the level of pressure to a completely different level.  It is not the same when your "owners" are some unknown masses of mutual fund investors.

But the most prominent common denominator of all small and mid-size CEOs is that they are all afflicted by the same disease – something I call an entrepreneurial bug. The business development machines in their heads run forward ahead of everything else.  They want everything to be done yesterday, and those who cannot make it happen or voice their concerns are considered to be obstacles on their way to success. 

Because it is up to us, CFOs and Controllers,  to make sure that the back office, the financing, the structures, the control procedures, etc. are on the par with new developments, we frequently find ourselves at odds with our Bosses.  We are called negative, uncooperative, difficult, etc. etc.  Nevertheless, we must be strong and do our jobs right, because if we fail to cover their fast running asses, everyone will get hurt, including the Bosses.

Business Owners’ Favorite Style of Management


Some people are born with incredible natural aptitude for managing people.  Many years ago I observed a girl on a playground.  She was about 5 years old playing with a group of children the same age.  At one point some play rules, or another important issue, needed to be established, and I was amazed not only by the assertion of authority, but also by the uncanny logic exhibited by this extraordinary little person.  She started with a commanding, "Children, listen to me!" and continued laying out a proposal that nobody has any inclination to dispute.  I remember thinking to myself, "That's a naturally born leader!"

Unfortunately, people like that constitute a small percentage of general population and, strangely enough, they are even rarer among business owners.  Just because someone had a great idea and entrepreneurial drive to establish their own business doesn't mean that they also have sufficient managerial aptitude.  Only few of them had formal business management education and most of them never worked for anybody else long enough to gain on-the-job expertise.  

This pretty much leaves their leadership skills at intuitive level at best.  And if the sixth sense fails them… well, all kind of sad things occur: they cannot see the difference between a pompous phony with an impressive voice spewing well formulated lies and genuinely knowledgeable, but quiet workaholic; they have very little or no understanding of delegation of duties; frequently they cannot even figure out their own roles in the company.  

The most common executive management conundrum such Presidents/CEO's (especially first generation of business ownership) encounter after the enterprise reaches the "established" stage of development can be described as follows.  Their entrepreneurial talents draw their minds to further commercial improvements, to generation of new ideas that will help to expand and strengthen the business.  At the same time, the wonderful feeling of accomplishment plays dirty tricks on them: subconsciously they want to rest on their laurels – they feel that they deserve to work less, to take summers off, etc. etc.  Moreover, since the business is their child that they have born and reared applying their own talents and titanic efforts, they have incredible aversion to the idea of letting other people to completely take over vital tasks of the company's ongoing functionality and maintenance.   

(Side note: I am really tempted to state here that the majority of them are control freaks.  However, I don't have scientific evidence for that, just my own and my colleagues experience. More importantly, it does not make a difference, both obsessive and perfectly balanced CEO's display the same symptoms.) 

You have to agree that this position is absolutely psychotic.  What do they do?  They resort to their favorite style of management – what I personally coined several years ago as "Hands-Off Micromanagement."  

Let me show with this example how this control style may manifest itself. On one hand, the CEO can completely forget that you are working on establishing a $10 million credit line with a new bank, or that you have just upgraded your accounting system to a new version that basically made the entire budgeting function automatic.  But on the other hand, he keeps asking without a fail every month why the Federal Express bill is $2,000 – when he was starting the business it was never more than $100.

I am sure a lot of my fellow CFO's and Controllers have recognized the disease as they have to deal with it and the frustration it causes on daily basis.