Author: Marina Zosya

Objectivism, Part 2: Lynn Tilton – the Matriarch of Patriarch


Jessica Pressler provided the second mentioning of Ayn Rand, in her long-titled article What Does it Take For a Female Tycoon to Get Noticed Around Here? , which she contributed to New York magazine's issue on the post-crash Wall Street.  It profiles Patriarch Partners' CEO Lynn Tilton and, according to the author, this is how the powerhouse of private equity investment sees herself: as "an Ayn Rand heroine in six-inch heels."

Rightfully so.  This woman is not simply concerned with the state of American capitalism and the future that awaits us ("…I believe that there will… be violence in the streets in America," she says.  "And I think the only thing we can do to stop it is by creating employment."), but she is actually doing something about it – working very hard on trying to rebuild American manufacturing.  Moreover, she is doing that without any regard for the conventions of the phony propriety that has saturated our existence. 

Lynn Tilton destroys the stereotype of a "powerful man" as a world-savior.  A true standard-buster,  just like Ayn Rand wanted women to be, she does not make herself look like the androgynous creatures in buttoned-down suits who are allowed to enter "little boys" clubs from time to time.  She does not let herself to fit into the designated for business tycoons box either.  She refuses to hide her wealth into over-priced art rubbish other billionaires stash in their unseen drawing rooms.  Her conspicuous consumption is honest, because that should not define her.  It has nothing to do with her achievements.  

It is incredibly important to me that Ms. Tilton's  business focus lies in the same field as mine does: the proverbial backbone of the US economy – small and midsize companies.  And it makes the refusal of others to look beyond the outfits, the hair, the jewelry, the mannerism, far more painful.   Once again I am exposed to the violation of my personal absolute truth – MERIT.

Why can't people break out of their constricted mentalities? 

At art fund raising minglings, when I dissect a movie or a play, impressed people, who are paid to be in the know of those things, inevitably ask what I do for living.  I just love seeing their faces when I say, "Accounting and finance."  You see, number-crunchers are not expected to understand the high art.  It does not matter that I know more about it than they do.  On the other hand, when I was entering Economics PhD program, my wild jewfro was diminishing my scientific credibility, even though I came with 50% of my research and modeling already completed. 

Always those fucking labels, those stupid boxes.

I can easily visualize Lynn Tilton going to Harry Winston or Van Cleef & Arpels for some fabulous $250,000 necklace and people in attendance there thinking that she is some mogul's wife.  She must relish the opportunity to tell them, "I am the mogul, bitches!"

It's too bad that Ms. Tilton deals only in private equity acquisitions of distressed businesses and does not diversify into venture capital start-up investments.  I am developing a product right now that has a great potential of contributing into survival of smaller companies and complementing her quest for preserving the true capitalism.  I think we would get along handsomely.  We both know that it's what's inside your head that counts.  She is having trouble getting the respect she deserves, because we lost our meritocracy to "club membership" long time ago.    

Quote of the Day


"Many a man owes his success to his first wife and his second wife to his success."    

                                                                                                                Jim Backus

Objectivism, Part 1: Maureen Dowd on Ayn Rand


It does not happen very frequently that you encounter mentioning of Ayn Rand and objectivism twice during your weekend reading of periodicals.  Even though the ideas and ideals of the diminutive woman, who produced such monumental works as Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged seem to be getting renewed attention in the last six years or so, they usually call for multi-page discussions.

Ah, but the first reference came from the master of economic writing – The New York Times Op-Ed columnist Maureen Dowd in her Atlas Without Angelina piece.

I am a big fan of Maureen Dowd's journalism.  Her subtle sarcasm and amused curiosity mixed with political seriousness and broad intellectualism appeal to me in such a way that, when I read her column, it seems that I chat to a like-minded friend. As someone who has been in pursuit of knowledge in diverse areas of life, I appreciate Ms. Dowd's multi-faceted erudition.  Those who read this blog know that I use every chance to connect cultural and professional themes in my posts.    

In the April 16th column, timed with the release of Atlas Shrugged Part I, Maureen Dowd used her ability to get right down to the core of issues and, in a few beautifully brief stabs gave their due to the Tea Party's confusion, to the perversity of government bailouts and to the degenerative state of our current economic system:    

"capitalism evolved into a vampire casino where you could bet against investments you sold to your clients, and make money off something you didn’t own or that existed only on paper"

Ms. Rand would be utterly terrified by all this.  As someone, who witnessed her farther, a hard-working pharmacist, being stripped of his possessions so that they could be distributed to "those in need," Alisa Rosenbaum (Rand's birth name) had a very personal relationship with ideas of unearned rewards. 

I always found Ms. Rand's philosophy intellectually liberating.  Unlike her faithful acolytes, I don't believe in blind literal acceptance and treat her teachings as a scientific methodology to be sensibly applied – like her notion of Ethical Egoism as a pursuit of self-interest without infringement of others' freedom.

As Tea Party's mis-interpretations show, this is one of the most misunderstood philosophical concepts.  Many people interpret it as refusing to do anything for others. That is not right.  As long as there is a self-interest embedded in the act, it's great to do things that benefit others. 

In my post Why Do I Work So Hard? , I explained that first and foremost I do it because it satisfies my personal work standards – that's my self-interest.  Of course, I have to get paid adequately for my work, but my pay doesn't affect the quality of my work.  And nobody should benefit from my efforts without giving something back to me. 

Real artists create because they cannot live any other way, whether they do or don't sell their work.  But they definitely don't do it for the sake of public.  And it would be most unfair to just take it away from them without any reward and give it to other people, because they arbitrary "need it."  It's as simple as that.  

The idea of absolute truths independent of human perception is a bit more contrived.  It is hard to find a concept that would not mean different thing for different people under different circumstances.  I think about it more in terms of freedom to select moral truths by an individual.  Ayn Rand herself named only one – REASON.   I have three:  LIBERTY  (both personal and economic), LOGIC and MERIT.  And that brings us to the second reference and Part 2.     

Language Barrier


I don't know why, people still single out the US as a country of immigrants.  Just because before Columbus "found" the "New" World, this land was vastly unpopulated, and after that Europeans started moving in?  Well, people,  all over the world, migrated from one place to another through the history of humanity.  And I can assure you that Americans who can trace their origins to Mayflower and beyond, don't consider themselves immigrants.    

Of course, we have an inflow of new immigrants, and we  do lead in absolute numbers, but per capita, Australia's and Canada's immigration rates are currently three times higher than America's.  Also, there is a question of concentration.  What we should be called is a country of uneven immigration. 

There are places where people have never seen an immigrant.  I have a Turkish friend who once stopped with his half-Swedish-half-French wife in a small Midwestern town for gas and the shop-keeper called a sheriff.  100% true story. Homogeneous regions and countries scare me – they are too easy to manipulate.

I enjoy the blessed places, where you can see different faces and hear different tongues every step you take.  And it is with a great reluctance, I have to recognize the fact that the language barrier problem sometimes affects the work environment.  Well, it's rather accent barrier.   

I myself have no such problem.  Over the years I worked with people from more than 20 countries.  I pay attention and my ears got accustomed to all sorts of accents and grammatical deviations.  Unfortunately, that cannot be said about everybody.  Many times I have encountered situations of stark misunderstanding between employees of different origin.  It results in  frustration, waste of time and even errors. 

Few years ago I had two employees in my analytics group – one was a woman from Ukraine and another was a man from China.  While I had no problem communicating with them, they could not understand each other.  The woman was very cautious about filling the gaps in information with her own assumptions and guesses.  Instead, she would drag him into my office, asking me to explain.  CFO, the Interpreter! 

Something needed to be done.  I thought of replacing one of them, but that's not my way of doing things.  Instead, I asked them to communicate in writing – every time they needed to say something to each other, they used IM.  Some people may think that it took away more time – not true.  They spent so much time trying to understand one another and getting me involved, my solution was actually a time-saver.  Actually, seeing the words has improved their verbal communication as well.    

I think problems like that are rooted in the lack of effort.  The two kept asking me why I didn't have problems understanding either of them.  I'd said,  "Just pay attention to expressions and emotions and it will be easier to understand."

Like in this video.  The great comedian speaks a cartoon language he invented himself.  Yet, people all over the world understand him.

 

    

    


   

CFO Folklore: My Personal Mantra


In my earlier post Why Do I Work So Hard? I talked extensively about conscientious attitude towards my CFO responsibilities.  However, time and again I find myself worrying about matters, which are not really under my direct control: lazy marketing people, self-serving sales force, inept operations, and (again and again) bosses who constantly jeopardize their own business.

And it’s not just me.  There are a lot of people in my network, who display the same level of care.  We frequently become each others’ sounding boards when the angst gets too overwhelming.

So, here we are at lunch.  My friend JM ranting about VP of Ops fighting with his girlfriend on the phone for three hours, while the production manager was waiting for him.  I am sharing the pains of trying to catch the President to release a $1M wire transfer and his dodging me because “he had enough for the day.”

And it’s not like we don’t have anything else to discuss.  Most of my business acquaintances are entertaining individuals.  JM, for example, has an incredible sense of humor.  I am a theater and foreign cinema fanatic.  Somehow, my banking relations are all classical music buffs.  We all read Jonathan Franzen and Michael Cunningham.

And yet, we talk about problems at work every chance we get.  Most people, when they stop for a second and think about it, get very angry and frustrated with themselves.  Frequently at the end of these conversations I hear, ” I don’t own this business.  It is not my fuck up.  Am I supposed to butt in on other people’s responsibilities? Why do I even care?“

Me? I don’t get frustrated about my caring so much.  And I tell my concerned peers that they shouldn’t get upset with themselves either.  You see, years ago I figured out that the conscientious working attitude, the ambition to succeed, the striving for merit-based rewards and the care for the entire business – they all go together.  They are inseparable qualities and indifference doesn’t fit into the picture.  If this is who you are, you will always care.  

Moreover, in small business environment, this very combination of qualities is what brought you to where you are.  This is what separates you from others.  This is what got you into the CFO or Controller chair with the correspondent salary and perks attached, which, in their turn, define your living standards. 

So, I’ve created myself a mantra: I CAN’T SURVIVE ON “I DON’T CARE.”  

There is a compensation threshold, which, when crossed, brings you into the stage of your professional life, where hardworking people care about the well-being of their employers.  I’d say right now it’s somewhere around $70K a year.   At $200K a year, you either care a whole lot, or you are a fraud, or you are working for a big-size mastodon.  So, ask yourself, “Can I survive on a $70K salary?”  And if you can, go for it – not caring is a bliss.