Governance - Dark Management Style

After working with Governance or Councils or Committees for the last 5 odd years. It dawned on me that perhaps there's a deeper meaning to the purpose of these proceedings:-

1) When any hanky panky needs to be done "officially"
2) To stop any other hanky panky that is not your own
3) To make decisions backed by articles prepared by preferably institutions that are based in US or UK (does not matter that the study is conducted on only American or British soil exclusively). As long as the recommendations are "backed" by those study, somehow responsibility for the decision making is absolved.
4) To ensure that all traceability of accountability does not stick to the governance body.
5) where possible, to deny any initiatives because its better to be safe than sorry.
6) To make decisions that are for the benefit of the Governance/Council/Committee members and hardly ever for the business
7) To pretend that they care only when there is a user representative.

It's also typically manned by folks that are over the hill; the type that just can't get promoted or transferred anywhere else cause nobody really wants them.

I know, its not a funny or sarcastic post... i'm just pissed.

The Rowing Team - Malaysian Version

A Japanese company and a Malaysian company decided to have a canoe race on the Rejang River.

On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile.

The Malaysians, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action. Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the Malaysian team had 4 governance personnel, a supervisor, a stamping officer, and an assistant offier which checks that the stamping officer has rightfully stamped the supervisor's decisions on how fast the single rower should row. Nobody really knows what the governance personnel do other than deliberating whether the rower is using the correct rowing technique from articles that they subscribe to from a rowing site. So the Malaysian management hired a consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion.

They also advised that there were too many people "not rowing" and while the processes and deliberations are important the number of people required can be reduced. The PM was sent the report and he immediately threw it aside.

He decided to let go of the 2 stamping officers, kept the supervisor and made the governance personnel dual role as stampers and governance. Which meant that now the governance people were referring to even more articles both on supervision and rowing. The PM increased the rowers to 3, placed his son and his 2 best friends in the team for exposure.

The next year, the Malaysian team won by two miles!

The 3 rowers were frat buddies with the Japanese rowing team and agreed that they would throw the race in exchange for a business deal. The 4 governance officers still debated only now each one of them felt that the other person was too stupid to understand where they're coming from. The supervisor on the other hand gave an emotional speech thanking everyone for their contributions and everyone got their bonuses. Especially the 3 rowers which immediately became senior managers and needed replacements for next year's race.

Happy and elated, they decided that the following year's team should be the same 4 governance personnel, a single rower, the stamping officer, the assistance stamping officer and the supervisor...

Because the lessons learned database would have enough information to beat the Japanese again

The Rowing Team - An Oldie but a Goldie

A Japanese company and an American company decided to have a canoe race on the Missouri River.

Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race.

On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile.

The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action. Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 8 people steering and 1 person rowing. So American management hired a consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion.

They advised that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing. To prevent another loss to the Japanese, the rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering superintendents and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager. They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 1 person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called the ' Rowing Team Quality First Program' , with meetings, dinners and free pens for the rower. There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices and bonuses.
♪

The next year the Japanese won by two miles.

Humiliated, the American management laid off the rower for poor performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles, and cancelled all capital investments for new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses and the next year's racing team was outsourced to India.

Psychometrics don't work well with Asians

Perhaps in this global economy and overwhelming exposure to MTV and American sitcoms and hopefully not British ones like Little Britain; we may all be westernized. I mean, there's a huge difference between race and culture. For example, you could be culturally American but Indian (the Asian kind) racially.

The problem with applying psychometric tests like Myers-Briggs, Cubik's PAPI personality tests and the sorts are that the statistical sampling of results are gathered from prepubescent Americans going through freshmen year; and besides making some money as personality test subjects; side income are also derived from donating sperm or ovarian cells. What's scary is that the "base psychological" profile is then used as a yardstick to measure other people. When applied to Asians you can get pretty warped results.

For example, if you ask an Asian whether he'd report his boss to the authorities for soliciting money from vendors. He'd probably answer no; because his boss is potentially his father and the vendor's his uncle.

Secondly, Asians are taught to be meek towards folks who are:-

• Older than they are
  
• Magically in bred among the Sultanates or of Kingly bloodline. In which case, that person is still a demi God
• Children and family members of major conglomorates. The new "aristocrats" of current times; if you may.
  

In which case; assessments on Assertiveness will not be accurate. Another example, if you're culturally Japanese maybe then tests on making decisions will not be clear cut. Being Chinese if there's a test for greed they'd probably score extremely high.

I hence posit that psychometrics should first start with determining your cultural orientation. With questions like:-

1. Which do you prefer; a Dirty Sanchez or getting stroodled?
2. What happens when you puff the dragon?
3. Do you think its way cool to exclaim "mother-Chot!"?
   
4. Do you "Tah Fei Kei" or paint the ceiling?
   
5. Are kelentits are delicacy in South East Asia; and why?

Good Management vs Dark Management

“Good management is the art of making problems so interesting and their solutions so constructive that everyone wants to get to work and deal with them.” - Paul Hawken

"Dark Management is the art of making problems so minuscule and their solutions so destructive that everyone does nothing and believe that they're better off not dealing with it." - Dr. Kervokian

___

“A good manager is a man who isn't worried about his own career but rather the careers of those who work for him.” - H. S. M. Burns

“A dark manager is a man/woman who isn't worried about his own career but rather curries it from those he work for.” - Dr. Kervokian

People who gripe about Nepocronysm

I've come to the realization that people who gripe about nepocronysm have one or more of the following symptoms:-

1. They don't have beer buddies
2. They tend to have lunch alone
3. Spend most of their time "meeting friends" online
4. Plays golf on the PC
5. Prefers to wank off compared to sex
6. Only meets with "real people" when they want something from you

As a Dark Manager and by reading this blog; you hereby swear that you WILL make time for your friends and families even if they have BO.

Getting Subordinates to do more than expected

Last week I was asked how on how I'd manage a situation where the manager has assigned an R&D duty to a staff that has never done that before.

First off, I inquired as to whether she accepted the task or not; and the answer was yes. Well, that means you have there is a person with good attitude who willingly accepts "challenges". However, I was enlightened to the fact that she does not even know where to start & the manager didn't bother to check on her leaving her to gripe to this friend of mine.

Which brings me to the conclusion that :-

1. She's an excellent Dark Management candidate for accepting "challenges" beyond her abilities.
   
2. The manager is fucked

Primarily "because" she has such "good" attitude, the subordinate will probably not tell the manager that the task can't be done until probably the final 2 hours. And secondly; the manager assumes that by divesting responsibility the problem lies with the staff.

As a dark manager I'd apply Principle 5 from "Your First Day as a Dark manager" where you load up your most capable staff to avoid the situation in the first place. Unfortunately; this manager is now forced to apply the methods in what to do when the shit hits the fan.