Tag: boss

CFO Folklore: Watch Out for Sudden Meetings Behind Closed Doors


Proximity%20hotel%20-%20acoustical%20harmony%20wallcoveringIf you are an executive employee (i.e. hired help, not an owner) in a small business,  you know what I'm talking about. 

Everything used to be pretty transparent: The owner(s) dropped by your office and discussed strategic issues sitting in front of your desk.  They ran their ideas by you, stealing yours in the process, which you didn't mind, because you've learned to think of it as a sign of their appreciation.  You were a mandatory participant in tactical meetings with various third-parties and considered a welcomed member of the Board of Directors.  You were copied on all email exchanges, etc.

Then, BLAM! All of a sudden everything is hush-hush.  And it's not like you did anything wrong or have been slacking.  No, you are still your highly professional and ingenious self.  Yet, when the owners meet (without you now), they close the doors.  You know that there are meetings going on without you.  You know that there are important matters that your general business acumen could've helped to resolve, but the owners don't seek your opinion anymore.  From what you can see (and if you are a CFO, you see more than anyone else)  they need your help, but they don't want it.  You are excluded from anything outside of your direct professional responsibilities. 

And this is unpleasant, to say the least, because, let's face it:

(a) It's a negative change – it would be better not to be included in the first place, then experience rejection for some unknown reason; one minute you were special, an equal, and another (this is how you feel) you are not different from the receptionist, and

(b) The whole damn thing forces you into a guessing mode, which is a direct way to anxiety and depression.

While this situation is definitely common, I will allow that reasons behind it could vary from business to business, and from one owner's personality to another.  Yet, I bet that the following four scenarios, crystallized from years of close observation of various business owners, are applicable to the majority of cases:

1.  The owner(s) feel intimidated by you. This happens very frequently.  Many businessmen have superiority complex and think that they are the smartest people in any room.  And then you enter the picture.  At some point the owner realizes that you know more, catch faster, and handle things better than him. 

Most hired execs (including yours truly) think it's unfair that We, the brilliant and the laudable, are forced to work for "some schmucks," but the person on the other side is hurting too.  No, no, no, I'm not going to feel sorry for the poor millionaire boss, but just think for a second – he is caught between the understanding how important you are for the company and his desire to stop feeling like an idiot in your presence. 

This sounds like a difficult situation, but rationally speaking this is the best case scenario.  IF the boss is a logical person, who cares for his company's (and his own) well being - he will come around; the doors will be opened again.  Of course, if he is a self-centered asshole on an ego trip and nothing else matters… see Scenario 4b. 

2.  The owners fucked something they are responsible for and the business is not doing well (you, the CFO, may not even know it, because the commercial errors didn't translate themselves into fiscal events  yet, but it's coming).  The last thing they need at this point is you judging them with your I-told-you-so eyes.  They feel so awkward that they'd rather hide away than use your help.

3.  The troubles are even worth – to the degree that makes them loose sleep and keeps them in a state of perpetual panic.  The problem may not even be caused by the business that employs you.  For example, one of the owners just got an audit notice from IRS; he knows that some shit could be found in his other businesses that will destroy everything.  Or an owner got busted with large quantities of cocaine on him.  Stuff like that.  Well, you should consider yourself lucky that you are not invited inside those conference rooms with closed doors - you are better off not knowing anything about it for the sake of plausible deniability.

4.  The worst case scenario - the meetings are specifically about getting rid of you, while minimizing the impact on the company. We can further subdivide this one according to the underlying causes:

(a)  You are too expensive and the owners, while knowing very well that you worth every penny they pay you, don't think the business can afford you anymore, not even with a 30% base reduction.

(b)  That owner in the first scenario simply cannot deal with your superiority any longer.  He doesn't care how good you are, you've got to go, so that he can forget about you (and he will) and start feeling good about himself again.  I have to say, this one is your own fault – if you needed that job, you should've curbed your attitude.  (Oh boy, don't I know how incredibly difficult that is!)       

Oh yeah, I almost forgot!  There is a possibility of a fifth scenario (also straight from my experience with rampant business owners): If the boss starts having frequent (and kind of longish) meetings behind closed doors not with other execs or third-party relations, but with his secretary, you probably need to read my post When Your Boss's Secretary Becomes His Girlfriend, written 2.5 years ago.  It is, by the way, one of The Frustrated CFO's Top 5 most popular posts to date.  So, I know that this particular scenario is very common. 

While the reasons for the closed doors vary, your course of action is limited two just two options: (a) suck it up and continue doing your job for the sake of your paycheck, or (b) look for another job and, if you get lucky (real tough for CFOs nowadays),  get out.  Take my advice: don't lower yourself to passive-aggressive stance, or seek an open confrontation with the owners, or attempt to "ask around."  You will not achieve anything this away and it will only make you feel worse.  

CFO Folklore: Mortal Kombat – CEO vs. Outlook, FIGHT!


MK 3I am the biggest advocate of an entrepreneurial CEO's freedom from any administrative, technological, and infrastructural minutiae.  They must not busy themselves with making their own reports or calculations in Excel, devising organizational routines, catering to bankers' demands, nurturing relationships with customers, etc.  They have functional executives and senior management for that – CFOs, COOs, CIOs, Controllers, Sales VPs, etc. 

An effectual CEO should be focused almost exclusively on the strategic development of the business and the tactical decisions pertaining to the company's survival and prosperity.  Therefore, he may be, but  doesn't need to be an Excel pro, an IT geek (unless, of course, that's the business), a bullshitting ace, or a financing maverick.  He must be a visionary – that's all.  I stated my position on this issue multiple times and dedicated an entire post to the defense of CEO's limited scope of responsibilities.  I even wrote about it in CFO Techniques.      

I have to say, though, when it comes to technology, for most CEOs outside of the high-tech industry, it's not even the result of division of labor -there's some sort of a pervasive impairment.  Most business owners I know personally or have heard about from other people are not very technologically advanced, to put it mildly. 

There are CEOs who call for help every time they need to insert a column in a table; are incapable of  logging onto a network; and wouldn't touch scanners even if they stand right on their desks.  And that's Ok.  As I said, they don't have to trouble their valuable heads with these things as long as they attend to their primary job and manage to be brilliant at it. 

However, we do live in the second decade of the 21st century and some level of sophistication in the ways of contemporary communication is simply required.  It has nothing to do with being a small business owner, a big-time CEO, or The President.  This is one area of technological advancement, where everyone at a certain point had to overcome their innate resistance to novelties and get on with the program.  Radio, telegraph, telephone, video transmission, cellular connection, etc. – they have simply become mundane tools of every-day existence.   

Nowadays, using electronics as a means of organizing your life and exchanging information is as elementary as turning the pages of an old-fashioned desktop calendar.  And if you don't know how to do it, it makes you look silly and inadequate; it's simply unbecoming for a business leader. 

I currently have a client who comes to the office on Saturdays and Sundays because he cannot follow instructions on how to access his business emails remotely or push them through his iPhone.  His partners, employees, and commercial associates laugh about it behind his back.  It's likely that these inadequacies have an impact on their overall attitudes towards this business owner.

But I am particularly annoyed with those CEOs who are not able to utilize Outlook beyond the most primitive actions of receiving and sending emails.  I mean, for businesses operating in the PC environment, the program has become one of the most vital cross-functional tools since 1997!

I am currently exposed to one of these.  At this point I've already resigned myself to the sad fact that she will never learn how to accept or reject meeting invitations.  I wouldn't even dream of her creating one herself.  She will never get rid of her humongous appointment book, which, due to its instrumental limitations, is incapable of reminding her of important events or tasks at hand.  However, emails are her life, she lives and breathes them.  Wouldn't she treat them with proper care?  Guess again.

The other day she comes over to my office and asks if I still have "that email about…" (the subject matter is irrelevant).  Of course, I do.  She is standing right next to me looking at my screen, prepared to read the email with me when I find it.  I switch to Outlook, which is opened, as always, on the Inbox.  There are maybe 10 emails there, which arrived in the last 30 minutes.  "Where are all the emails?!" she is utterly surprised, "I keep all important emails.  I've got hundreds of them."  "So do I," I reply, "But not in the Inbox, of course."  I slide to my Navigation Pane, go straight to one of my 30 subject folders.

She is not stupid and she is a pretty good CEO.  She understands the importance of time-saving tools.  But she is too proud.  She will not ask me or any of her employees how to do it.  And so, she continues searching through hundreds of messages in her Inbox.             

What to Expect from a Boss with a Peter Pan Syndrome


Oh, Peter Pan, the “boy who wouldn’t grow up,” he is so endearing in his never-ending boyishness.  He doesn’t care about the adult world problems.  His disregard for the laws of physical and emotional gravity allows him to fly without wings and fight pirates with an uncommon valor; but it also propels him out of the windows of the heart-broken girls: Wendy, and her mother Mary Darling before her, and who knows how many more.  Really, he belongs in his Neverland.

Yet, Peter Pans live among us.  You meet them every day: in your office, on your business trips, in stores and public transportation; you pass them on the street; they may be related to you and you see them across the dinner table.  They don’t soar in the air or prance with swords (well, maybe some of them do).  Nevertheless, their true nature is that of unabashedly cocky young boys ready for adventures.  

Permit me to clarify.  We are not talking about physical appearance here.  People who look 10-15 years yonger than their age, whether because of their genetic make up or because they treat their bodies right, can be very grown up.  I am not talking about those who take part in what society perceives to be “young” activities either.  I actually think that people who never stop going to rock concerts and enjoy parasailing in their eighties are on a higher plane of sophistication.  No, the subject matter here is the psychological immaturity; the inability to accept the reality of the adult world.       

The Peter Pan Syndrome is not officially recognized by the Diagnostic Manual of Mental Disorders.  It’s considered to be a “pop-psychology” term.  In other words, it’s okay to use it in cultural and social context, but no doctor will get reimbursement by insurance for treating this affliction – there is no code for it.  I frequently wonder whether it is a ploy of the closeted Peter Pans of psychology.

Peter Pan of J.M. Barrie‘s story can be recognized right away.  The book illustrators even gave him pointy ears, hinting that he is not quite a regular human.  But in every-day life they are hidden inside people who appear to be all grown up.  Yet, there are certain telltale signs one can pick up right away.   It could be a sports car too small for the owner’s body, or a tan in the middle of winter, or a jacket a size too small for a middle-aged banker, a hipster watch on a wrist of a 60-year-old lawyer, a second wife 25 years younger, a newborn child at 57.  I’m sure you know what I am talking about.  

However, at the end of the day, it’s the personality traits that betray the Peter Pan’s tendencies – the propensity for undisciplined, uncontrolled, irrational, irresponsible, disorderly, intoxicated behavior.  But, like with all archetypes, the negative trends coexist with positive potential that manifests itself as a free spirit, unbound instinct, potential for growth, hope for the future, untamed forward drive.

It’s one thing to handle Peter Pans socially and even privately.  It’s a completely different matter when you are confronted with men-boys in the work place, especially if one of them is your boss.  You have to be very careful: bosses like that think that they are invincible; they believe that they will come out on top in any situation.  They take big risks and trust they can get away with anything.  If they are lucky, their endeavors may lead the company to brilliant successes.  But many of them get smacked against the cruel wall of reality, crash and burn.

One of the most prominent symptoms of the Peter Pan complex is absolute inability to take No for an answer.  Many private-business CFOs deal with the childish behavior of their bosses and can fill in the blanks in this conversation:

CEO:    I want to…

CFO:    We cannot do this…

CEO:    Why not? (like a 10-year-old)

CFO:    We don’t have…  And it’s against…  We will jeopardize…

CEO:    I want to do it anyway… (like a 5-year-old)

It’s very difficult to find the right way of dealing with an intelligent and talented person, who looks like an adult, but frequently falls into the pits of the child-like stubbornness.  The only thing you can do is to be constantly aware of the reality of the syndrome.  Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.

Let me leave you with this popular culture example.  Mark
Zuckerberg, a student at Harvard University, threw a tantrum like a
3-year-old boy in a sandbox, when his girlfriend dumped him – he called
her mean names and told her secrets to the entire nursery school.  Then he ran out and slammed the door behind him as hard as he could. 
The result of it was the creation of a network that pervaded the lives of
hundreds of millions of people all around the world and made him the
youngest billionaire.  Now, he will never grow up – he never got a
chance to face the real world.  He went from childhood into a fantasy
land.  He boasts that he wears the same thing every day.  So, does Peter
Pan – the protective uniform of a boy who will never grow up.

In Defense of Business Owners: Scope of Responsibility


Many of my fellow small business CFOs and Controllers mistake my singling out a BOSS as one of the main frustration triggers for an ardent enmity towards business owners.  The truth is quite opposite.  As the matter of fact, most of the time I find myself on the same side as my boss; shoulder to shoulder, fighting the daily war of commercial survival. 

Yes, it’s tough to deal with their complex of unlimited powers.  At the same time, I always say that business owners create our jobs and that alone merits respect.  I also never imply that all CFOs and Controllers are made equal.  I’ve met plenty of inadequate, limited, lazy and dangerously indifferent financial execs who damaged the companies they were supposed to guard.  In due time I’ll write about them as well.

But we interact with out bosses more than anybody else and that’s why they are prominently featured in my posts.  Being a CFO or a Controller makes it inevitable that everything a CEO does or doesn’t do becomes a concern and frequently a touchy subject. 

And one of the touchiest subjects is the Scope of Responsibility.  I cannot even count how many CFOs and Controllers have complained to me over the years about perceived imbalance between their scope of responsibility and that of their bosses.  

This disconcert derives from two sources.  First of all, it’s the much-discussed here overwhelming multitasking of the senior financial management.
Secondly, it’s the confusion about what exactly the Scope of Responsibility is.  Even though the position’s breadth of influence on the business is important, it is not just the number of tasks and duties you perform.   The key factor is the depth of the impact executive decisions make on the company’s future.  

The way I always looked at it is as follows.  If you are fortunate to work for a brilliant entrepreneur who, given sufficient time and support, is capable of generating ideas that will ensure your company’s prosperity and growth, that should be his ONLY task.  I consider it my job then to take away from him all functions I can handle myself in order to free him for what he does best.  I don’t let bankers or vendors bother him; I don’t allow him to fiddle with numbers; I don’t ask him to learn the operational system.  As the matter of fact, I prefer them not even know Excel.  All I want them to do is to create business strategies, network, establish new commercial relationships.

Let me leave you with this simile of sorts.  Radiohead’s frontman Thom Yorke cannot read sheet music (neither does Sir Paul McCartney, by the way).  His musically educated multi-instrumentalist  band-mate Johnny Greenwood have been deliberately resisting for 25 years now to teach Thom any musical grammar out of fear that it may diminish Yorke’s creativity.  That’s a great executive support strategy.

And let me tell you: I’ve been to multiple Radiohead concerts through the years and I wouldn’t change anything about Thom Yorke. Nothing at all.


 
  

 

 

 

   

CFO Folklore: You Can’t Teach an “Old” Boss New Tricks


Sleeping-old-dog-thumb6130250It has nothing to do with age. Notice, I adorned OLD with quotation marks. It's rather related to obstinateness, which frequently becomes a distinct mark of business ownership.  Many CEOs deliberately focus themselves on certain  commanding tasks and stunt the expansion of their knowledge in any other areas.  For example, your CEO could be a 30-year-old venture capital hot shot, or a 55-year-old veteran entrepreneur; most likely both possess mere basic computer skills.

Of course, they love electronic chotchkies, especially those that bring their huge mailboxes wherever they go. Then again, it's mostly just reading and writing emails, but not necessarily organizing. Most of them can use Word and Excel. Some can even create their own documents, but formatting, formulas, data manipulation, graphs and somesuch fancies are usually beyond them. Leave alone PowerPoint, Visio, Publisher and so on. God forbid they need to look up a customer's contact information in your ERP system – brace yourself for barrage of slander against "your choice" of software.

Obviously, the founders of high-tech startups don't count – everything "computer" comes natural to them. But I had a CEO only a few years ago who called his secretary into the office every time he needed to insert a column in a chart.  And the funniest thing happens to these people every time you send them a spreadsheet set for printing on a legal-size paper. It's like a fucking stumbling block – they will spend at least 30 minutes trying to reset the printing area to fit the letter size before crying out for help.

For those employees who don't deal with execs on a regular basis this is somewhat perplexing, considering that most of entrepreneurs are quite capable, and sometimes even brilliant, people. But for those of us who daily interact with these semi-savants, the situation is absolutely clear. The limitations have nothing to do with their natural abilities. Their responsibilities lie in developing the business and creating jobs to fill them with people, who can produce pretty reports and fancy presentations. They don't need to occupy themselves with learning new tricks.

And that's absolutely fine. In fact, if I have to choose I'd prefer them perpetuating the business than learning how to create a pivot table. Yet, some situations are simply maddening.

I've been working on a fairly complicated customer-commitment program with one of my client's owner. Now, all steps developed and all kinks worked out, the project is supposed to culminate in an Agreement document.  I drafted the first version and sent it out in the Word format for the boss's review.  

An email comes back – no attachment.  Instead, in the body of the message, there are multiple paragraphs of my document copied and pasted in black followed by his version of the same paragraphs in blue.  The crazy thing is that on the first glance they look exactly the same, but somewhere in the middle there are several words altered.  And it's like a half of the document is there.  Basically, I have to visually compare both versions of each paragraph line by line to find the damn changes.

I was like, "What the fuck?!" and picked up the phone, "Adam, what are you doing?  It seems like you've adjusted only a handful of minor points, but it will take hours to fish them out.  Why didn't you make those adjustments directly in the document?"  He is perplexed (probably thinks that I've gone momentarily stupid),"How would you know what I've changed then?  You would have to comb through the entire document."  The truth dawned on me, "You've never used Track Changes or Compare Documents functions before?"  "I've never even heard of them."

Maybe I should've been ready for this after so many years of dealing with these people.  I was somewhat stunned, nevertheless, and, in stupor, offered a training session free of charge.  "Great," he said, "I am very excited.  I will let you know when."  

I am still waiting.