Scenes from a Business Lunch, or the Obnoxious Rudeness of Business Owners


Restaurant-TableSpeaking of lunches (and I swear this is my last holiday post of the year)…

Because there are so many corporate holiday events in December, many business people from all over the country and overseas come to New York City during the month.  Customers, suppliers, vendors, associates, partners, and other relations visit their customers, clients, etc.  So, on top of the parties, you've got lunches with out-of-towners. This is a perfect opportunity to observe the business-owners' behavior in a "casual" group setting (as opposed to conference rooms and other natural habitats).

For many visitors this is also a good occasion for combining business and pleasure (after all, NYC is still #6 most favored tourist city in the world and #1 nation-wide) and quite a few bring their spouses along.  Some are actually in business with their spouses.

At the most recent lunch outing of this kind my guests were a manufacturing business owner by himself, another business owner with a wife, an alpha-female head of a consulting group, and a husband and wife attorneys sharing a corporate legal practice. Fun bunch!  Don't worry kids, it's only going to get worse!

The manufacturer asked for a coke and downed it really fast; then had it refilled several times throughout the meal.  This, naturally, resulted in a fast accumulation of a lot of gas in his stomach, which he unceremoniously belched out every 10 minutes, or so.  It was obviously a habitual occurrence, because he did not even bother to apologize.  It's amazing, how we learned to hide our emotions in "business" situations – everyone pretended not to notice it, even though once in a while one could catch a hint of a smirk or disgust (depending on the personality) playing on the lips of other guests.

[Side note: This reminds me of another experience in my arsenal of wonderful memories.  Early in my career I worked for a company, whose owner, in my mind, will forever carry a title of The Farting Boss.  He was middle-aged, but had a younger second wife and wanted to loose weight by drinking glass after glass of Slim Fast.  This made him very gassy.  The man mastered the skill of silent farting, but the smell was literally unbearable.  Imagine my situation – we sat in the same room.  Good times!]

The lady consultant first tried her sales pitch on every guest around the table, but quickly lost her enthusiasm, when she realized that nobody is interested in her services, except for me.  Since my company already had a contract with her, she did not see a reason to waste anymore time on us and turned her attention to the Blackberry, answering emails between bites and white-wine sips.

The married businessman first attacked his wife in a very loud whisper (it could be heard even at the neighboring tables) for wearing shoes with heels.  This apparently slowed down his purposefully brisk gait that went well, I am sure, with his aggressive mannerisms.  After the woman's eyes welled up with tears he abandoned her to fight it back on her own and observed the rest of the battlefield in front of him.  Dismissing the burping guy and all females as inferior creatures, he concentrated his self-affirmation efforts on the attorney sitting across the table from him.

They went at each other like two roosters in a Filipino cockpit.  "Have you read this?"  "Do you know that guy?"  "I bought Apple at $25 and just sold it at $375." "I am keeping mine – it will be $500 a share in a year."  "I closed that famous private equity deal this year." "I brought this much venture capital to my business."  "I am opening new factory in China."  "We have a law office in Hong Kong!"

God!  I contemplated the scene thinking, "The things we must tolerate to earn a living!"    

Apple’s iAd Division Celebrates Christmas


Get-attachmentDecember is still with us and so are the corporate X-mas parties. The holiday cheer is inescapable for the dogged blogger like me.

Did you know that large public corporations, with their in-house event planners working schedules way in advance, always manage to have their parties as close to Christmas Day as possible? I guess it signifies how "family-like" those organizations are.

Apple's latest branching out child, the iAd division, held its party just six days before Christmas – on Monday, December 19th. Constructed out of the body parts of a mobile advertising start-up Quattro Wireless, acquired by the maker of iPhones and iPads in 2010, iAd was not moved to Apple Campus in Cupertino, CA. Instead, it stayed in the advertising capital of the world – New York City, albeit swapping the original small office in SoHo for a 45,000 square-foot expanse on Fifth Avenue at Union Square.

Everything needs to project an intended image! And so, they celebrated the traditional combination of year-end holidays in a semi-trendy restaurant in Chelsey, which is themed to alleviate nostalgic pangs of transplants from more humble regions of the US, while entertaining other patrons with a taste of Americana not found on the streets of Manhattan.

The spirit-lifting intent, customarily reserved for such parties, acquired a somewhat militant hue as iAd's execs came to the microphone, each with his own discourse on the same topic: "They all want to see us fail! But we will show them! We'll distroy them all!" Underneath all that bravado, however, there were unmistakable notes of fear. It's understandable, of course. iAd is locked in severe competition with Google for the $630 million market of ads streaming through smart phones directly into the sensory system of general public, incapable of ungluing itself from the beloved devices. The things are not going too well, though.

Apple first lost the edge when it couldn't outbid Google in acquisition of AdMob and had to settle for Quattro Wireless as a less desirable second choice. Advertisers have already rejected the original requirement of $1 million minimum commitment, which now has been slashed by more than 50%. And October departure of Quattro Wireless's founder Andy Miller, who originally accepted an Apple's VP position to lead the iAd team, only intensified the apprehension. This is public-company world – everything is about perception. The execs know their plight: today you are a big shot, but if you don't perform, you are out.

Booze and abusive behavior are traditional fear-drowning remedies for insecure males. The former was thoughtfully accommodated by the party organizers via the open-bar arrangement. Most attendees took advantage of the limitless supply; some with an enthusiasm of newborn calves, who need to be taken away from the udder lest they drink themselves to death. There was this one high-echelon specimen (let's call him The Boss's Boss) who was especially determined to stupefy himself, knocking down one gin after another. As he reached a certain condition, the desire to abuse could not be contained.

One of the waitresses serving the party was a remarkably attractive young woman (let's call her The Striking Girl). She had that star quality about her that causes double takes; something Nora Ephron once described as magnetism that makes a man across the room go, "Get me that!" An obvious target for a drunken bully.

He started by shoving a decorative tree onto her as she was passing. "I am pushing bush on bush," he sneered to other men around him. The Striking Girl didn't say anything – he was a customer. She remained poised and diligently went about her job.

You see, the thing about the hospitality industry in New York City is that a significant portion of waiting, bar-tending, catering, etc. staff consists of struggling writers, artists, actors, musicians – the creative hopefuls. Service jobs are usually divided into shifts and one can combine them into a flexible schedule that leaves time to attend to the true calling. The Striking Girl, as it turned out, happened to be an aspiring writer and a filmmaker, with her first short recently accepted to one of the New York's indie festivals. It explained her composure: she prepares herself to dealing with Hollywood and getting her ego bruised on daily basis.

So, she continued being friendly and pleasant to other attendees. When someone spoke with a Russian accent, she mentioned that she was born in St. Petersburg and was brought to New York as a baby by her political-refugee parents. The Boss's Boss, now never far away from her, heard that. "I have a friend," he said, "he just loves banging Russian pussy."

Next time he caught her in the tiny space of the service station. "Did you come to apologize?" she asked calmly. He thrust his drunken mug into her fragile cheek and responded with,"There is no need for apologies. It's that St. Petersburg love, baby."

Hey, I am a middle-aged broad. I know only too well that chivalry is dead, buried, its corpse rotted into dust long time ago. Still, it's shocking that not a single so-called "man" felt an urge to speak up on behalf of the young lady.

Is this the type of culture Apple Inc. cultivates? Of abusively unrestrained bosses and silent yes-men?

I wonder, how the parents of the Striking Girl felt, when they learned of this incident? Is this the type of democracy and liberty we offer here, in the United States of America, now? Any corporate honcho is free to behave like a dirty animal, while everyone else acts as if their mouths taped shut?

By the way, did you know that corporate execs in public companies get stocks as part of their bonuses? Well, I've sold my Apple stock after that party. The thought that my holding on to them may contribute to the further rise of share prices and one day make the Boss's Boss richer made me sick.

Is Rupert Murdoch Really Responsible?


ImagesI get CNN's Breaking News emails.  I got one last week during Rupert Murdoch's questioning by the British Parliament's committee regarding the phone-hacking scandal that stems from News of the World and threatens to overtake the entire News Corp.  The email was dedicated specifically to his statement that he did not consider himself "ultimately responsible for the fiasco," and that these were misdeeds of the people he trusted.  In other words, he is blameless because he did not give direct orders and it was all his employees' fault.

Indeed, unlike Bernie Madoff he did not personally masterminded to rip off thousands of people; he did not instruct anyone to tap private phones and  bribe police officials.  For all we know he had no clue who poor Milly Dowler was until inquiries began.  News Corporation holdings include over 100 newspapers, magazines and TV stations.  He cannot possibly keep track of every single report they publish. 

He could not recognize (or so he says) most of the names of people working for him.  Also not surprising – News Corporation employs over 51,000 people worldwide.  We cannot expect him to know every single one of them.  I myself always argue that the Boss should deal only with the uppermost echelon of management

Yet, he does know Rebekah Brooks very well.  She's been making his scandalous rags Sun and News of the World profitable for nearly half of her life, climbing up the ranks with his personal support.  She knew how to deliver what was needed and he liked it.  In 1994, at 26, she hired techies to secretly wire the entire hotel suite for the interview with Princess Diana's beau.  And that was just a start.  Everything she did was ruthless, unsavory and amoral and Rupert Murdoch was promoting her for it. 

I wonder what kind of conversations this boss and this top exec had? 

RM: "Great job, great job, just watch yourself, don't get caught." 

RB: "I do what I can to please you, sir.  And don't worry – everything is under control, I hold them all by their balls."

RM: "That's my girl! Here's £3.5 million bonus.  Just don't tell anyone."

And that's makes him personally responsible.  He knowingly hand-picked this woman to be one of his top executives.  Journalism has seized to be an honorable profession long time ago, but Ms. Brooks' tactics go beyond levels of immorality we've learned to accept.  What kind of organizational environment he expected her to cultivate?  He knew exactly what he was doing, and I hope the British law enforcement will see it that way as well.

The reason this case is a good topic of discussion here is that business owners frequently display deliberate negligence in their executive staffing and still don't feel responsible for their employees actions. 

I know a national law firm specializing in consumer debt collections.  Most of the cases come in a wholesale form: debt-owners, such as credit card issuers and mortgage companies, outsource collection of delinquent balances to such attorneys.  This is very different from the regular law work when a counselor is face-to-face with his client.  This is bulk work – individual attorneys never meet the plaintiffs.  And that gives the principal partner the freedom to save on the quality of attorneys he hires.  He gets them straight out of fourth-tier law schools for salaries of office workers, he does not train them, he throws them into regional offices and lets them "swim or sink."  Meanwhile, thousands of cases get no attention and pass the statute of limitation.

There is no question in my mind that this is a violation of fiduciary duty to the firm's clients.  So, did Rupert Murdoch violated his fiduciary duties to the public by keeping Rebekah Brooks and letting her to do "her thing"?


CFO Folklore: When Your Boss’s Secretary Becomes His Girlfriend


Here is a sensitive and complex topic – it involves people's personal lives and therefore should not be anybody else's business.  Yet it affects our work environment and impacts employees morale.  Always!  There are no exceptions.  

It is not a rare occurrence either.  In the past I had a boss who was seduced by his secretary and ended up leaving his family.  In another company I had to fire a general manger to avoid a possibility of sexual harassment law suit, while the company's owner was on his second marriage to a woman who was his former secretary.  And the list of stories I've heard from my colleagues, associates, subordinates and just friends is endless.

The nature of the boss/secretary professional relationship by itself has a somewhat intimate connotation.   They are near each other in the office space.  All day long the secretary attends to the boss's needs, frequently takes care of his personal matters, stays by his side when he works late.  Add to that the fact that most secretaries nowadays are younger women, as the class of "career personal assistant" is disappearing.   Plus, there is the appeal of power and a possibility of material benefits.  All this together creates an undeniably fruitful environment for trysts.  Hell, we have wonderful independent movies about it.



      

Unfortunately, it is not as much fun when you actually have to work with this in your face.

I frequently repeat in these posts that private businesses are absolute monarchies.  Historically, every single Royal figure had his or hers favorite,  i.e. an "intimate companion of a ruler," or, as OED defines it "one who stands unduly high in the favour of a prince."  The contemporary "rulers" are just upholding this "fine" historical tradition.

The key here is the unduly power bestowed on the favorite.  Again, I don't care about people's personal lives.  I really don't!  Moreover, if favorites were working ten times harder and their attitudes were twenty times nicer, I would consider that an improvement. 

However, that is not what usually happens.  In reality boss's secretarial lover stops working altogether.  I witnessed a hiring of an "assistant to personal assistant" to patch the hole in the workflow.  They become arrogant and acquire nasty disposition towards other people in the office.  Frequently they get promoted to managerial jobs they are not qualified to perform with salaries they didn't deserve.

In a small business, even with 500 employees, that's hard to hide.  Well, as a CFO or a Controller, you have your own powers and you don't really need to bother yourself with this unless she starts infringing on your scope of command (sadly, that happens too).  And yet your position exposes you to the unfairness of the situation in the most explicit way: you are the one who has to sign off her 50% raise; you are the one who has to approve her 12 weeks a year vacation time; those are your direct reports that get mistreated by her.  

Talking about terrible frustration!   

CFO Folklore: “The Servant of Two Masters”


440940251img1_mediumTwo-headed bosses are common when people work for businesses founded by relatives, which, I am sure, can be a source of fascinating undercurrents and rivalries.  I invite my readers to share relevant stories.

I, on the other hand, worked (more than once) for equal partners who were not related.  Each of the duos consisted of individuals so different, it was a miracle they stayed in business together.  As a CFO, forced into the middle of the co-owners dynamics, I was able to observe common behavioral tendencies in the bosses themselves and people around them.

Business partners' alliances are usually symbiotic.  One is an idea generator, the other is an implementer.  One is brains, the other is money.  One can close a deal in seconds, the other makes sure the company performs.  They always complement each other, or they wouldn't be in the trenches together. 

Either will squeeze all juices out of you, and yet their personalities differ just as much as their abilities.  One is usually more diplomatic, better with people, logical, frugal.  The other is brash, careless, erratic, a lavish spender.  They don't see eye to eye about the majority of business issues and frequently talk to their CFO or Controller separately, presenting contradictory positions.

260 years ago, in "The Servant of Two Masters," Carlo Goldoni depicted the delirium of working for two employers who try to find each other without knowing they live in the same hotel.  Sounds familiar?  Poor Truffaldino is so anxious, he develops a stutter.  Imagine the hilarity!  Well, at least he got double wages.  When your single-salary job depends on maneuvering two conflicting bosses, you don't feel like laughing. 

Most people end up aligning themselves with one of them.  Sometimes, it works out in a natural way: if one owner oversees Production, while another spearheads Sales and Marketing, it is obvious where VP of Ops and VP of Sales allegiances will lie.  

Even when it's not clear-cut, people have a tendency to navigate with their issues toward the boss who is perceived to be "nicer," regardless of his preparedness to make relevant decisions.  As the result, you may end up with a wrong solution, or the issue is brought to the other owner's attention anyway; only now he knows that you tried to bypass him.   Either way, you are screwed.

CFOs and Controllers should not form any alliances when they work for two partners.  When monetary matters are concerned, both must be kept in the loop.  In super-important cases, get them into the same room, whether they like it or not.  I am known for bringing bosses into the office from their summer residencies in the middle of July, when I had to.

Of course, you have to earn your right to do so with hard work and authoritative success.  You also need to be very diplomatic with both of them – either must think you prefer deal with him and inform the other out of courtesy.  It takes Machiavellian skills to boss the bosses.  Otherwise, you will end up stuttering, like poor Truffaldino.