The Frustrated CFO

"I Built This Prison" Memoir Excerpt: "Ozark" Wendy Byrde Negotiates Her Compensation

"I Built This Prison",  Part I - Etiology of Crime, Chapter 3 - Delusions of Entitlement and Misconfusion of Rewards:

"In the episode 1.6 of Netflix’s original ‘Ozark’, desperate for money Wendy Byrde charges at her boss with an attempt of hostile earnings renegotiation (she is a pushy bird that Wendy Byrde, so it goes with the character). She notes that the sales are up 43% compare to the same month the previous year, while the only business change that took place was her hiring. Hence, she deserves a bonus that would correlate her compensation with her value(‼). Specifically, 50% of the income increase. They haggle and at the end the boss agrees to the bonus that together with Wendy’s salary amounts to one-third of the additional profits.

Fiction, of course. But, if the employers were actually inclined to evaluate and compensate their employees based on their tangible contribution into their businesses, the negotiations like that would be a common place. And maybe they are… somewhere. But I’ve never really witnessed anything like that. Well, something of the kind - once, fifteen years ago. But that was it.  

Of course, these are not exactly “negotiations” either. Wendy gives her boss an ultimatum because she has an upper hand - there is no comparable supply of labor in that God forsaken bumblefuck locale. There is like literally no one to do the same job – not on a half-ass, or quarter-ass, or even one-hundredth of an ass level. And so, her boss is not rewarding her for her contribution, he yields under the pressure of unfavorable market conditions.

An unimaginable situation for NYC (and I’m sure the same goes for all industrial centers), no matter what your field of expertise is! Here, an employer – even the one that is afraid out of his mind to lose you – deep inside knows that if you walk, he can find at least Somebody to fill the void. You, on the other hand, may drown in the competition searching for another place."

                                                                                                                          p.40

Quote of the Week: The Crux of the Matter Behind "I Built This Prison" Memoir

G.K. Chesterton - English Author & Christian Apologist

Preface:

It must be disclosed that I don't really find G.K. Chesterton's Father Brown Stories all that great. (Why is it that I so frequently write about things, people, and situations I truly dislike? I wonder what a trained psychiatrist would say about it?) As far as the mystery writing goes, I find them... unnatural, too artificially constructed, almost illogical... For everyone, of course, but the author and his deducing reverend. But naturally, they don't count, because they are cheats, holding all the cards and the red herrings up their sleeves.

Moreover, I consider G.K. Chesterton a racist, which makes him absolutely unacceptable to me as an individual. Some of his descriptions and the choices of words simply appalled me back when I read him.

(If you feel tempted to verify yourselves that my accusations can actually be substantiated, read God of Gongs. That's why I'm sharing the link to The Complete Father Brown Stories below. [And no, I'm not an Amazon Associate - it's purely for your convenience.])

It is hard for me to imagine that any truly unprejudiced and open-minded thinker would be using such language, regardless of his/her native historical period and commonly accepted jargon of the correspondent time. And no, he is not just putting those offensive words into his characters' mouths for the sake of the conversational authenticity. He uses them as his own narrative descriptives. It's despicable and utterly inexcusable as far as I'm concerned.

But! One can find a grain of wisdom even in a truckload of manure. And this one goes straight to the heart of the main conflict suffered daily specifically by the American workers in employment of the entrepreneurial business owners - the same antagonism that cemented the foundation of my own madness ("I Built This Prison"):

"[He] made himself big by his own considerable abilities: and there's no doubt that many of those on whom he has shown his abilities would like to show theirs on him with a shotgun. [He] might easily get dropped by some man he'd never even heard of; some labourer he'd locked out, or the clerk in a business he'd busted... In this country the relations of employers and employed are considerably strained." 

G.K. Chesterton, The Wisdom of Father Brown, The Mistake of the Machine 

Off the Cutting Room Floor of "I Built This Prison" Memoir: Clip #2: Tears of Admiration vs. Desperate Crying

 

"My, as I call it, 'crying in awe' goes a little bit further than the conventional lacrimation with the divinity of the (oh, so appropriately named!) Requiem's installment -  Lacrimosa. It’s hard not to cry together with 35-year-old Mozart over the heart-breaking truth of him being within hours from the grave and  all his life's struggles as well as our own sins and fears of the unknown punishments yet to come. Everyone with a soul, no matter how shrunken, weeps listening to that.

I, on the other hand, is known to commence the waterworks even when watching a 'comedic' act - if it's brilliance manages to impact my aesthetic receptors. Like the first time I watched Bo Burnham's 'Make Happy' on Netflix: twenty minutes in, the tears just started pouring out of my eyes in recognition of the boy's astonishing talent. Stuff like that - in the movies, at plays, in the museums, over books...

And don't even get me started on J.Ivy's poetic contribution into Kanye West's 'Never Let Me Down' - it's profound beauty invariably triggers my tear ducts, every time I listen to the song... 

Unfortunately, that's not the bulk of my tears production. Genius is rare, desperation abound...

♦♦♦

...Even though they were the biggest contributors into all that wetness, it wouldn’t be fair to place the entire blame for it on my most prevalent pain bringers – my parents first and my employers later. Even in my personal safe heavens of academic institutions – the places where my abilities and efforts have always been singled out, appreciated, rewarded, and even lauded – once in a while, there would be somebody to trigger the tear ducts. This primarily goes back to my Soviet youth – the time when I was powerless to do anything about, for instance, a Philosophy Department Chair openly expressing his surprise about what he perceived as an incongruity between my wild Jewish hair and my deep knowledge of classical marxism. (Dude! I had straight A's in everything - that's just how I was.)  And that's the truth of it - sometimes random strangers can be as harmful as people who already know your soft spots. It’s funny how this type of small stuff sometimes ends up to be so devastating. It's so difficult to shake off such pointless rudeness. Its emotional violence feels as if a metal-studded cat-o’-nine-tails landed between your shoulder blades. And then, your breath catches, and you lose control of your ducts...

And what else can you possibly do but go and let it all pour out? In secret, of course... What other quick and ready means you have for mitigating the impulses to throw punches and yell, for disarming the triggers that have a potential of sending you into scandalous fits. Effectively, it helps you to dissociate: Regardless of what was happening inside my mind and at the center of my soul, I still went to work every day and performed all my duties, attended meetings and functions; kept the bosses’ businesses and my own household running smoothly, without a single visible glitch. Never a fucking mess in public. With all the pain hidden so deeply that other people, affected by the same terribly hostile environments, would frequently marvel, "How the hell do you manage to stay so composed? How do you bear this? How do you keep yourself so calm?” And I would just smile in response, while letting the nuclear devastation scorching away my sanity... Years of control-building and the aforementioned secret crying - that's how...

Yet, the bile's buildup had to manifest itself on the surface in some ways..."

                                                                 Deleted from Chapter 4 - Bucket of Tears... and Blood  

 

  

 

Three Business Owners and Five Sales Directors Walk into a Bar...

We used to complain about our country being divided into two colors, red and blue.  Boy, I miss those clear-cut times when we had a few personal liberties to fight about!  Now we are a fucking Pollock's painting!  Social, monetary, ideological, intellectual, and cultural (some even say micro-cultural) differences create a broad variety of political blends and affiliations.  At this point, we have pretty much slid off the two-party platform; we are now swimming (or drowning) in a multi-faction cesspool.  

It definitely looks to me like the 2016 primaries are far more divisive and tumultuous than the presidential election will be in November.  Each candidate, on both sides of the partisan divide, represents a very distinct combination of views and positions that categorically separate him/her from others.  Accordingly, the supporters are broken up into a multitude of tiny puddles, not two oceans.    

This made Politics into a more dangerous and touchy subject than it has ever been. I always tried to uphold the propriety rules and stay clear of the political discussions in public, particularly with co-workers, business relations, perfunctory acquaintances, etc.  But nowadays, I am literally left with only one place where I can express my opinions openly - my own home.  Even in this blog I keep myself in check.  

But there are people who will talk politics anywhere.  They are usually either (i) very brave and willing to take a stand; (ii) too powerful or confident to care; or (iii) absolutely tactless and have no idea that they make others uncomfortable.  The combination of (ii) and (iii) is also very typical.  And, of course, I happened to work with one of those.  It seems that this business owner believes the impossible - that everyone in the room shares his opinions on... everything.

When I end up in one of the awkward situations he creates (usually during business dinners), my choice of actions is simple: ignore (just get myself busy with food or something) or deflect (hopefully there are people with little kids at the table - trumps all other topics).  Sometimes I find a reason to avoid going to an event with this dude altogether; which is what I did the other week during the company's Annual Sales Summit.  

And dammit!  He actually managed to instigate a rare political exposé: he asked everyone around the table (two other business owners and five sales directors) to declare their choices of Presidential Candidates!  I cannot tell you at what level of intoxication these people agreed to basically reveal their political stands  ("No judgement!" was guaranteed, by the way); nor can I warranty the truthfulness of the disclosures.  However, I can testify to the fact that everyone was surprised and/or traumatized by their own unusual candor: one by one, all eight participants came to my office the next day to confide their bewilderment and share the results of this bizarre poll.  And now I am sharing them with you, my readers (in the order they came through my door):

1. Business Owner (the instigator himself), 60:  A liberal Upper West Side exterior, rotten chauvinist interior (just imagine late Nora Ephron writing a really obnoxious character); born and raised in Westchester County, he'd spent 30 years of his life running his own business in Pacific Asia before returning to Central Park West -  Hillary Clinton;
2. Business Owner, 46:  The company's founder and CEO; a remarkable woman who remade herself from a basic Chinese wife into an extremely independent and self-reliant woman - Michael Bloomberg;
3. Sales Director, 48 : A Midwestern gentlemen with deep roots in 250 years of family traditions; a trained chemical engineer, he spent most of his life in business development and sales; an avid hunter and a boater - Jeb Bush;
4. Sales Director, 41: A Texan of Korean descent; another engineer who actually has spent most of his career in chemical manufacturing; someone capable of setting up a production line from A to Z; a tech savvy guy with unbearably weak handshake and darting eyes - Jeb Bush;
5. Sales Director, 45: A third-generation raw-materials distribution professional; born, raised, and still residing near the New Jersey Shore; recently divorced with one daughter whom he loves more than anything; after three beers will bust out pretty credible vocal quotes from Notorious B.I.G. and 2Pac (beats 'n all), if you ask nicely - Donald Trump;
6. Sales Director, 33: An ambitious Korean boy born in Southern California; trained within LG system for the Latin American markets, he possesses the valuable assets of fluent Korean and Spanish; while making a low 6-figure annual income, he still lives with his mom so that he can support her - No one; he stated that no candidate represents his political, economic, or life concerns;
7. Business Owner, 49: A descendant of an old aristocratic Shanghainese family persecuted by the Mao regime, whose parents forced him into piano playing and lounge singing as possible means of self-support; yet, after coming to America at age 16, he chose engineering and business as his areas of interest; he was making a remarkable progress climbing a career ladder of one of the largest plastics producers in the US, when the company's founder (see above) offered him the partnership - Ted Cruz;
8. Sales Director, 65: An old-school career salesman, he was originally responsible for building the core of the company's distribution structure, bringing with him dozens of his customers; a Vietnam War veteran with the combat experience and hot-blooded Italian ancestry, he is known for smashing desk phones against the walls; yet his wife, with whom he lives in Upstate New York, has been able to calm him down for nearly 40 years - Bernie Sanders.

So, here you go, ladies and gentlemen!  By most statistical parameters this group is not even all that diverse!  Yet, the results are all over the place; with some totally surprising picks (Ted Cruz? Really?!).  I mean, some respondents have named people who are not running at all or are out of the running already.  Moreover, the leading Republic and Democratic candidates only got one vote each.  It's remarkable how uncertain and confused our political landscape is!

But I have to say: that last one actually broke my heart a little.  It is unfathomable to me that someone who fought North Vietnamese commies in hand-to-hand combat; who saw with his own eyes the devastation and poverty of the people under socialist regime; who enjoyed the benefits of booming American capitalism during some of our country's most prosperous periods would vote for a socialist.  What veteran would support a senatorial failure that is Bernie Sanders?  And why?  If I had to guess, it's because his daughter and son-in-law are not doing all that great financially up there in Vermont, but they had two kids nevertheless.  The man is afraid that he will be the one paying for his granddaughters' college tuition.

And isn't this typical?  A demagogue promises people something free (without even laying down the actual plan of actions) and everyone's principles go out of the window.  History repeats itself.     

10 HR Lessons From Summer-Binging on "The Good Wife" Plus Some Other Stuff

In the TV business, summer traditionally has been considered an off-season.  Primarily because the broadcast networks' prime series go on a 4-month hiatus after completing their 20+ episode seasons.  Nowadays, of course, it's not all that relevant for TV viewers, because...  Well, for multiple reasons, really, but to name a few:  

First of all, if you prefer edgier premium cable series, your TV viewing patterns are driven by  2-3 month seasons scheduled at different times throughout the year: Shameless airs January through March, Game of Thrones and Silicon Valley - April -June, Masters of Sex - July-September, Homeland -  October-December, etc.  Even if you are into blending your TV cocktail out of cable and broadcast ingredients, you most likely use on-demand and DVR options to accommodate your personal schedules and to fill the airing gaps.  Plus, some broadcast networks now have "summer shows" - short-seasoned and "limited" series aired specifically to cover the off-season void: Hannibal, Wayward Pines, Under the Dome, Aquarius, etc.

The most important factor, however, is that we've stopped being restricted by conventional TV ever since Netflix came along.  First, they made the idea of going to video stores and looking for something to watch unnecessary.  We were so grateful for digital searching, online ordering, and USPS drop-ins and drop-offs.  But then even walking to the mailbox became unnecessary, because they made a tremendous volume of content available for IP streaming, including rare and obscure movies, shows, documentaries, anime, etc. from all over the world! 

They didn't stop there either - they got into creating their own original programming.  And then Amazon followed suit!  As a result, we got access to gems that make me feel as if I am living through some sort of an indie renaissance via the Internet: House of Cards, Orange Is the New Black, Peaky Blinders, Grace and Frankie, Sense8 (Netflix originals), Transparent and Mozart in the Jungle (Amazon's originals).  It's fucking incredible!

Moreover, not only that streaming content is available everywhere you can go online, it's available in whole seasons.  There is no waiting for weeks at a time until the next episode; no mid-season separation anxiety; no loss of vital details from previous weeks.  Technically you can watch a 12-episode season in one day.  It is my understanding that some people actually do that. 

Netflix had at their hands the best market-testing sample imaginable - their entire subscription base.  They must've noticed early on that a large percentage of the viewing population doesn't restrict itself to one episode at a time.  They even installed a special probe at the start of the third consecutively watched episode to test whether you are actually binging or have simply fallen asleep on your couch.  Brilliant! 

Yes, binging - as in excessive indulgence, as in manifestation of addictive personality traits.  Not a new thing, really.  TV networks (USA especially) have been scheduling rebroadcasting marathons since the 80s.  By offering this opportunity to audiences with pretty much any kind of preferences, Netflix forever altered the cultural lives of millions of people. 

The phenomenon itself became a marketing tool for Netflix's competitors, who want you to know that you can replicate this experience with them as well:  This summer, Amazon actually used the phrase "binge on your favorite shows for free" in its promotional messages for Premium subscriptions.  HBO, still holding onto their highbrow status, softens it by offering you to "feast" on your past and present favorite shows on HBO GO.

Poor David Foster Wallace warned, way before streaming had become a household concept, that Television is the one and only true American addiction.  He predicted that catering to user demand for content of their choice whenever and wherever they wanted it (remember the "direct dissemination"?) may irrevocably alter us and potentially result in the crumbling of human will.

But who am I to judge?  Yes, my life is too busy for hardcore binging and I refuse to watch an episode of anything on my goddamned iPhone, but I've been taking advantage of on-demand entertainment ever since it was first introduced by American cable providers 15 years ago.  Then came iTunes 6.0 (2005).  Today - Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu Plus, HBO Go, Showtime Anytime - I've got them all, including a Fire Stick to carry them with me wherever I go. 

But that was not the topic of this post, was it? (Too bad you cannot hear me laughing at myself.)  This was meant to be a brief introduction to the shocking fact that, even with all that variety of quality entertainment on hand, at some point in July I found myself with my personal TV time-slot empty.  And let me tell you, that made it hard to ignore the binging and feasting callings of the content pushers.

I browsed the variety of offerings and ended up with The Good Wife on Amazon Prime.  It used to be one of the shows I watched during its active seasons - all the way through the middle of Season 4.  But then, 2013 announced its arrival to Netflix with their first two major originals, plus Top of the Lake, plus The Fall, the first season of Broadchurch, etc., etc.  I'm a busy woman - something had to go.  Now I picked up where I left off.  

I have to admit, assuming you manage not to paralyze your life or degrade your mental and motoric agility, watching multi-season, multi-episode shows without gaps measured in weeks and months has its undeniable benefits.  Complex and intricate storytelling loses some of its power when it's broken up into weekly installments and then gets shelved away for 4 or more months.  Reducing these gaps not only allows for a more detail-oriented viewing, it also gives you an opportunity to assess the show's merits and values in a more coherent way. 

Aside from the most obvious and well acknowledged attributes of The Good Wife - strive for realism; acute attention to the impact of technology on our lives; honest depiction of shifting morality; head-on tackling of race, class, gender, sex, and all other divides - what I like the most about the show is its refusal to label itself as a single genre.  We can definitely identify it as a Drama, but the range of applicable modifiers is quite long - family, political, crime, legal, courtroom.

But what I realized while watching seasons 4 through 6 now, was that in it's wardrobe full of genres, The Good Wife's favorite outfit was the Workplace Drama.  One law firm, another law firm, State's Attorney's office, governor's office, clients' businesses (including a drug-distribution organization), you name it - all of them are depicted as places of employment.  And the human relationships inside these businesses play essential roles in the show's storytelling.  The office politics, alliances, squabbles, hiring, firing, promotion, compensation, peers' competition, subordination, fraternizing, partnerships, resignations, harassment, even telecommuting -  all of them have been used as plot points.

Once I started noticing, I've found so many typical and easily recognizable Human Resources issues,  it was hard to pick the following ten:

1. Any employee, no matter how highly positioned and compensated, is always a disgruntled employee.  It's remarkable how much pent-up gall towards Lockhart & Gardner started spilling out of Alicia and Cary as soon as they left to set up their own firm.  They were never that rude to any other opponents as they were to their former bosses.  What was it that Cary said to Will and Diane? That watching them squirm gives him an immense pleasure?  It's the nature of a subservient position - no matter what, we don't like it.
2. Why don't we like it?  Because there is no such a thing as a fair boss. Every boss believes that you belong to him, yet he doesn't really need you and will do just fine without you.  That's why bosses never bother acknowledging, even to themselves, your full contribution and think that you should be grateful for what you've got.  Aside from always high-in-demand Kalinda, all other major and minor characters have experienced that.
   
3. Recruitment is the most depressing of all managerial responsibilities.  Will and Diane need to hire more attorneys.  They sit down with their headhunter to look at the resumes she already preselected for them.  Barely glancing at them, Will goes, "No, no, no..."  And let me tell you, whether you are an asshole or a saint, this is what you do.  And I know that not everyone sees a life story behind every resume, still it's an incredibly unpleasant exercise for all.
4. An easy interview is rarely a successful one.  Will is interviewed by Geneva Pine and her colleagues in his bid for an outsourcing contract with the State Attorney's office.  It goes great - quick and short; no follow-up questions, no drilling into specifics.  Why? Because it's just a formality - Lockhart & Gardner were never even seriously considered. Whether you are pitching yourself for employment or your company's services for a contract, the interviewing principles are exactly the same.  A short, formal, and overly polite interview means that you are not getting the job.
5. Only full-time employment comes with benefits coverage.  This one is important because many people are still confused.  Kalinda, who has been working for Will for years, is appalled that newly hired Robin has medical coverage.  Except Kalinda cannot possibly qualify for benefits because she is a 1099 contractor with other billable businesses.  This allows her not only to delay paying social security taxes, but also makes a lot of her expenses tax deductible.  In order to receive company benefits one must be a full-time payroll employee with a minimum of a 30-hour workweek.  You cannot have it both ways.
6. All computing and communication devices provided by employers belong to the said employers.  I know that many viewers may feel dismayed when they hear various bosses on the show proposing to hack into their employees' emails.  The truth is, however, that the employers are absolutely within their rights.  All devices paid for by the employer and everything inside of them are the company's property.  Not only is it implicit, but it is explicitly outlined in every single Employee's Handbook.  Yet, so many people treat the company's equipment as their own.  Hillary's personal email debacle is one recent memorable example.  People, don't be cheap and lazy, buy yourself a personal phone, external hard drives, and whatever else you need to keep your private contacts, communications, and files separately.
7. The impervious pregnancy shield.  Governor Florrick's Ethics Czar Marilyn Garbanza is pregnant and the father is 76-year-old!  Can you trust a person like that with any type of government responsibility, let alone the one that requires clarity of reasoning?  Yet,  nobody reassigns her (of course, she cannot be fired - that's a lawsuit right there), because her condition blocks everyone's common sense.  In fact, her looks merited more suitability discussions than the fact that she made a decision to have a child with a septuagenarian.
8. Workplace honesty is a relevant thing.  There is an information leak from Florrick/Agos.  Three key people (two lawyers and one investigator) privy to the information are being questioned.  All three deny any involvement.  Alicia says, "These are the most honest people I know."  Mind you, at different points in time we've seen these characters mislead their clients, lie to their opposition, trap witnesses, steal information and evidence, even betray one another!  Yet, that was all done in the "normal course of business;" to get the job done, i.e. to perform your professional duties.  Nowadays, nobody considers dishonesty on behalf of one's employer amoral.  I've done it and you've done it; everyone does it.  Are we absolved and untainted because we presume there is no direct personal gain?  That's the question.
9. How do you know when someone in the office is sleeping with the boss? Look for the telling signs.  People cannot help themselves - they get emboldened by the perceived closeness to "power."  The person in question will stand too close, laugh too loud, dress inappropriately, pick fights with peers, become insufferable for subordinates and less diligent with their duties.
   
10. One should always be aware of the temporary and unstable nature of any HR structure.  People die, get arrested on obscure charges, move on for higher salaries, or decide to be homemakers.  Companies go through mergers, buy-outs, and hostile takeovers.  And nobody, literally nobody, has a good life - everyone is fucked up and thoroughly unhappy, no matter how hard they try to hide it.  So, there is always a good chance that they may check out - out of job or out of life.  Or do something completely insane, like trying to shift from Law into politics.

But the most valuable life lesson one should take away from The Good Wife is that you should never ever burn all the bridges and cut all the ties, because you never know with whom you may need to partner next.  

CFO Folklore: Delusional Self-Involvement of Business Owners

As my readers know, years ago I've made a career choice of avoiding large corporations and their tall organizational structures.  I prefer small and mid-size companies allowing opportunities of direct interactions with business owners - the very people responsible for recognizing one's efforts and allotting rewards.  It's not for sissies, of course, because in this environment you cannot hide your incompetence or laziness in a mass of indistinguishable drones - you and your work are on the spot and in full view all the time. 

Even for a highly skilled professional with a strong work ethic it's not easy to be constantly exposed to this very special breed of people - the entrepreneurial bosses, who, God bless them, unwittingly provide me with endless writing material.  I guess it will be several years into my retirement (assuming I will live that long) before the urges to highlight this or that aspect of their psychology and behavior will ceise.

It's uncanny how many common characteristics are shared by private business owners.  For example, all of them operate under the same delusion that employees care (or should care) about their companies just as much and exactly in the same way as they themselves do.  It's especially amazing to me because most of them are pretty levelheaded and highly functional people, yet they insist on this deranged assumption that doesn't fit into any rational frame of thought.

For a business owner his company is his life's endeavor, his singular purpose, his channel of expression and fulfillment, his source of pride and wealth, his outlet of personal freedom.  The owner/CEO's opinion overrides everybody else's; he is the only one with a full authority to direct the company's development in any direction (to a success or to a downfall); ultimately he holds all employment strings in his hands; he can say or do whatever he wants (within the limits of the law, of course); nobody watches his time, assesses his performance, addresses his shortcomings.

On the other hand, for an employee, no matter how dedicated, loyal, hard-working, conscientious, and highly positioned, a job is just a job - a line on a resume.  It cannot possibly be anything else, because there is no such a thing as a job security anymore, no matter where you work.  If the current employment ends, there most likely will be another one after.  Nowadays, probably shifting down, but maybe shifting up - who knows?  There must be something, or there will be oblivion.  For many of us, a job is just a source of sustenance, not the means of self-satisfaction.  And when it comes to personal freedom... I already wrote about it four years ago (Bill of Rights in Small-Business Environment ).

Clearly owners and their employees are conditioned to look at the business from different platforms.  It is preposterous to assume equal attitudes from unequal parties.  Yet, the faulty presumption persists and is manifested by various business owners quite frequently.  I'm sure many of you have experienced it first-hand. 

On the rare occasions, when opportunities to be frank present themselves, I try to explain to CEOs that their employees have their own individual life agendas: what's good for you, your business, and your pocket, Mr. Boss, is not necessarily all that important to them.  Sometimes I even draw Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs:  you see, I say, you cannot expect them to be proud of working in your wonderful growing company if they cannot make ends meet and feel overworked. 

Agh, it's no use!  Just the other week I was discussing (via email) with one of my clients, whose company made the 2013 Inc. 5000 list of the fastest growing companies in the nation, whether I should enter them into consideration this year as well.  It's my assessment that the negative outcome (everyone was complaining about the endless solicitation calls from various service companies) outweighed the pleasurable, yet hard to measure, positive impact of the resulted publicity.  He had no rebuttal to that particular argument.  Instead, he replied to me with the following:

"The ranking is something about which we can all be proud, and which thereby directly affects the morale of our staff, who both see results of their hard work translated into an accolade and have the pleasure of working for a company that has been honored.  I know I bathed in the warm glow of the company's recognition."

Of course he did!  It's his company.  He is rightfully entitled to tell about it every single person he meets.  But can you believe the gall?  They "have the pleasure..."!  Seriously?  Even the ones with $40K salaries and one-week-a-year vacations?  Uh-uh, Mr. Boss, the pleasure is all yours. 

Quote of the Week: A Business Owner's Reaction to a Typical Banker

From an actual email:

"Frankly, I left our meeting here on Monday with the conviction that you attended under duress but would otherwise rather have been doing pretty much anything else.  PNC is a month behind every other bank, and we used up considerable goodwill with these entities to secure you and Alberto a seat at the table.  No other bank has been treated so deferentially, which PNC earned by being our lender in the past three years.  However, watching you play with your phone in your lap during our meeting and appearing otherwise bored suggested to me that there was a huge disconnect between what we have been attempting to do for PNC and how it is being perceived."

                                                                                                    Business Owner

CFO Folklore: Don't Let the Boss Argue Your Case for You

In a small business with a flat organizational structure, where every exec performs 10-15 jobs, there is always a possibility of timeline conflicts.  It's like cooking ten dishes on a four-ring range: eventually you run into a point when the same burner is needed for two pots.  Which one to put on?  There is really no such a thing as a right decision at times like that - you must simply follow your instincts.

Let's say your are in the final stages of negotiating a Credit Agreement renewal with your main institutional lender.  It's Thursday, 03/13.  You have scheduled a meeting with the bankers, their attorneys, and your own esteemed corporate lawyers for tomorrow afternoon to press on with a few remaining crucial changes before the deal is released for the approval by the bank's Credit Committee on Monday, 03/17. 

At 5 pm your phone rings:  It's your tax attorney hesitantly letting you know that his team must meet with you urgently tomorrow, because they just figured out that the company may have tax exposures in Illinois and Wisconsin; the extensions are due on Monday, 03/17 (somewhat hysterically); and, he is very sorry to tell you, but he is not quite sure about this and that's why they need to seat down and read you into the details of the Code, so that you can express your opinion, because nobody understands the business better than you do.  No, it cannot be in the morning, because it's tax season and everybody's schedule is full as is; only the afternoon is workable for everyone who needs to be there (except you, of course, but who cares).

By the time you hung up, it's too late to reschedule the bank - most bankers leave at 5 pm, just like the government.  Now, you've got a dilemma.  Bank or taxes?  Of course, you can tell the tax lawyers to suck it up and do their well-compensated jobs without getting you involved.  Yet, you cannot - that's not how you do.  But the bank is incredibly important: the last stages of negotiations are the hardest, because nobody wants to give up the last frontiers.  On the other hand, you are literally the only person in the company who can express taxation opinions.  At least the owner has been in a tandem with you on the contest of wills with the bank.  However, he is easily mauled by financial predators if he is left on his own.                  

But what are you going to do?  It's the balancing act - you have to optimize.  You cannot be in two places at the same time.  So you decide that the tax meeting is the one you must attend and send your boss to the other one alone.  And, of course, you prep him on Friday morning.  You go over all important points of the agenda with him and outline your position on every issue (in writing, for better retention).  Then you silently pray to Hermes/Mercury, the patron god of all CFOs, and go on to your appointment.

You don't disturb him during the weekend, but as soon as he shows up at work on Monday (around 1 pm) you pull him into your office.  "Well, tell me," you inquire.  He beams at you: "Oh, it went very well.  They practically accepted all the conditions on the list you gave me.  You should have the amended Term Sheet by tomorrow morning."  You are cautious: "Practically?"  And he clarifies, "There is one item.  They said they couldn't do anything about migrating from weekly reporting to monthly.  But I figured that was okay, right?  Just this one thing?  And what?  It's like a nine-line report, or something?  Probably a few buttons on your system, right?"         

Well, it's actually a 52-line statement with 5 supplemental schedules. It takes two of your staff accountants several hours to update all raw data and 2.5 hours of your valuable time every Friday to compile the reports. This was one of the top 10 most important items you've introduced into the negotiations right from the start.  Of all items that's what he decided to let go?  And what is it with bosses?  Why do they always assume that everything you do is effortless - fast and easy?  Just because you are toiling away without making any fuss?! 

You feel like Zorg from The Fifth Element.  "I am very disappointed!!!" growls Gary Oldman inside you.  If you want something done correctly, you'd better do it yourself!  Unfortunately, you don't have his powerful ZF-1 under your desk.  So, instead of simultaneously throwing flames and blasting freeze-rays, you grab your phone like a weapon and calmly explain, "These weekly reports end up costing you a lot of salaried hours that can be used more productively otherwise.  So, let me call and talk to them about it again."      

Funny Thing Happened On the Way to Ohio, or That Picture of Your Boss You Posted on facebook

I've said it before and I'll say it again: all entrepreneurial bosses are the same.  Of course, I don't mean it literally - they are not stamped figurines.  Yes, they are the same in their principal qualities (aggressiveness, single-mindedness, drive, vision, impatience, arrogance, callousness, etc.), but they are also different people with their own psychological makeups,  individual quirks, and human peculiarities.  Some can be informal and approachable, others are aloof and snobbish.  Some can be intellectuals, while others are simple and limited.  Some of them are religious conservatives, others are broad-minded libertarians.  Some are healthy and others suffer from an array of ailments.  Some like spicy food and others cannot stand a hint of curry or garlic in the air.

There is one universally common denominator that definitely unites all business owners, though - they are employers.  And as I wrote in CFO Techniques, one should never cross the line with one's employer, if for no other reason than in appreciation for creating one's job.

So, here is a little anecdote that involves a sociable female business owner, her all-male sales staff, and some spicy food. 

First, let me clarify one thing.  This woman, tough as nails and brutal in her nature, nevertheless strives to present a friendly and cheerful demeanor to the outside world.  Experienced people can see through that veneer and know to watch their steps around her.  However, when you get together eight men, even though subordinate, and one woman, even though a boss, the dynamic gets a little muddled.  I mean, when they are in a gaggle, it's especially difficult for men to suppress the testosterone.  It clouds their judgement and they forget for a hot second what's behind that charming smile. 

Oh, yes, and about the food: she really does like it hot.  You'd be in a restaurant with her, she orders a dish and then asks the waiter, "Is it spicy?"  The waiter smirks, probably thinking, "That skinny bitch will be asking now to make it mild," and answers, "Yes, ma'am, it's very spicy."  And she goes, "Could you, please, ask the chef to make it spicier." (Sometimes I actually consider of giving her a present of Pure Capsaicin Crystals, but I know she's going to try them and I don't want to be responsible for the consequences.)

Back in December, she held a three-day sales summit in the company's NYC headquarters - all salesmen came over from their different locations.  This usually means breakfasts, lunches, and dinners together.  Thankfully, in NYC that's not a problem.  The team enjoyed French-Asian fusion, classic American steakhouse, Korean...  An Italian restaurant is always a must, since the sales person with the most seniority comes from a Bolognese family. 

Unfortunately for the boss-lady, Italian food doesn't offer too many possibilities for extra-spicy.  She orders Shrimp Fra Diavolo over linguine, but it's not doing the job.  Red pepper flakes are asked for and happily received.  She starts shaking the plastic thing over her plate and orangy-red bits sparingly drip out (there is a reason the container is designed this way - one must use the hot stuff with a caution).  That's not enough for her - she starts shaking harder and harder...  until the top flies off and most of the pepper from the bottle ends up in the sauce.  All the men at the table are laughing their heads off - the boss slipped up!  Maitre d' sees it (how can you not, with all that violent shaking?) and immediately runs over, offering to replace the dish.  The lady refuses and laughs lightheartedly with her "boys" about her clumsiness.  She removes some of the pepper excess onto her bread plate and proceeds to eat what, I imagine, is an unbelievably spicy pasta without breaking a sweat.

Six weeks later, the same group of people is on the road visiting their Rust Belt customers.  They started in Pennsylvania and are now on their way to Ohio.  I'm sure my readers understand that the food scene in the industrial towns of Western PA is not quite the same as it is in NYC.  Here you go for Italian because it's probably your best choice.  So, there they are again with dishes that vaguely correspond to the Italian names on the menu.  This time around the owner's sauce is not spicy at all, but the generic plastic bottle with red pepper flakes is already on the table.  She reaches for it and the shaking ensues.  The memory of the NYC debacle is too fresh for the boys not to bring it up: "Be careful, don't shake the top off," a few of them warn.

Let me step aside for a second: Just as the bosses' human qualities differ, so are the ones of the subordinates.  A couple of them are of the self-conscious type - they simply don't want to be inside a public spectacle again.  Others are genuinely concerned about her not spoiling her food.  Yet, there are always those resentful, passive-aggressive employees, who secretly cherish the idea of a boss making a fool of him/herself.  One of those had his iPhone at the ready.

Well, as you probably guessed, the container's top comes flying again and a half of the red pepper flakes ends up on the pasta.  Oh, the childish hilarity!  Everybody laughs - some wholeheartedly, some to cover up the awkwardness.  The prepared dude snaps the picture and immediately posts it on facebook.

A young salesman who told me about the repeat performance of the pepper flakes show was visibly hesitant and uncomfortable with the whole facebook posting part.  I was simply appalled at the disrespect.  And what about the owner/CEO herself?  Did she fire that rude fucker?  Of course not.  The emotions should not interfere with business - it's impossible to replace a high-caliber sales exec overnight.  But I know this woman very well.  She's never going to let it go.  You can see it in her unsmiling eyes when she laughs about the whole thing.  She is on the lookout: as soon as she finds someone else, the insolent fool will be gone.  She will not even flinch; just like she doesn't flinch from the spiciness of her food.

Executive Gender Equality: The Perversity of Admiration

Ever since this company made into a couple of 2013 national lists of the fastest growing entities, we have been accosted by a slew of various business services offering their assistance and support: insurance brokers, real estate brokers, HR management providers, marketing consultants, etc., and most notably for me - bankers. 

The troubles that befell the banking industry a few years back resulted in its consolidation.  The competition among the diminished number of the key players in the field of institutional finance has stiffened.  They are fighting for clients with proven records of steady profitability, growing equity, and assets with high market liquidity, which, of course, are not that easy to find in our "recovering" economy.  Hence, they are after our business.

All the better for us: We are approaching the expiration date of the credit agreement with our current lender and are looking for a relationship that would be a more suitable match to the fast-growing company.  So, I'm doing what I've done quite a few times throughout my career: I'm meeting with a lot of bankers - explaining the business, answering their drilling questions, providing them with extensive data, spinning the info in the most thrilling way. 

While all this is going on, I cannot help but notice the increased percentage of women in the banking mix.  Well, that shouldn't be surprising, actually: according to many statistical reviews, more than 50% of the corporate middle management in this country are presently females.  I hear from our own sales staff that purchase managers of our customers' (industrial sector, by the way) are predominately highly technical women in their 30s.

Of course, as we climb further up the ladder, the numbers diminish: men dominate upper management to the extend of 70-80%, and only 10% of the C-level executives are women.  Still, I used to be the only "skirt" in a room full of male execs and financiers.  Now, there is a female contingent on the opposite side of the table in 3 out of 4 meetings.  Hell, the founder/CEO of this company is a woman.  Hence, our board of directors is 50% female (her and I) - we are the tough side of the directorship.   

So, here I am in our conference room listening to two representatives from one of the 10 largest banks in the world, who are making a presentation of their proposal (aka a Term Sheet in business dealings).  One of them is a diminutive woman of Korean origin in her late 50s - she is the boss, the North-East Regional Director, a big gun brought on to get the deal closer to the finish line.  With her is one of her many subordinates - a young and ambitious man in his early 30s.  If I end up choosing this bank, I will get him as my Relationship Manager (RM).

The menagerie is balanced by a man at my side - COO/owner/our CEO's whity husband.  He has his full charm on: he cannot help it - he has a soft spot for Pacific-Asian women.  Now he admiringly "complements" the banker-lady for being deceptively tough, i.e. looking pretty and soft, while being steely behind her eyes.  I tense up: here goes seclusive male chauvinism, and you never know how a woman will react to it. 

She handles it beautifully, though:  "Well, you know how it is - brain and beauty combined are lethal."  She turns to me: "Right?"  Well, I wouldn't know - never got a chance to rely on no beauty, just my brain.  But I don't say that.  I just smile. 

I wish my COO would do the same, but he somehow takes it as an invitation for further "admiring."  "Yes, you are absolutely right.  I couldn't put it better myself," and he embarks on telling the bankers how his wife, our CEO, is especially successful in sales because she is a woman who can speak "sweetly on the phone."  He actually uses those words.  "It used to take me," he says, "four phone calls before Dow Chemical would call me back.  But she  sweetly leaves a voice mail and they return her call within 5 minutes!"

He is absolutely overjoyed with pride.  The Korean lady's mouth gets very thin and she looks at me again -we both know: this is how it is.  The men will always find the way to treat us as if we were inferior, whether through insults or with "compliments."

I am disgusted, but I'm willing to dismiss this on the principle "forgive them, for they know not what they do."  And right then he turns his head to me, looks straight into my eyes, and says, "You cannot repeat it outside of this room.  L. always gets very upset when I say this, even though I mean it as a good thing."

Seriously, dude?  You've been warned about it before?  By your wife, who is also your boss?  And what?  You cannot help yourself?  Of course, you cannot, because it's written into your genetic code, like a primal instinct.  And you are too insecure to consciously fight it off!  If it was me...  But she is not me, in many ways she is very different.  And that's why he'd financed this business for her.