Category: People

Time for a Review

What’s more common in business could/ought to apply to us.

I was very pleased to call by and have a chat with a very good friend and his wife recently because they are facing financial difficulties.

Slightly unusual in that he is a qualified Doctor and has a share in the practice and his wife is a music teacher. Why should they have problems?

They bought their house three years ago and, like so many others, took out a large mortgage.  Probably not the best deal available at the time but it allowed them to secure the house they wanted. Since they purchased the property, house prices have fallen so they have fallen straight into negative equity!

The house needed some work and they also carried out a loft conversion. To make this possible they arranged another loan, not at a very good rate, but at least they are working on the property, and the bits they have done look great.

Working hours and the need to keep up to date with patient notes and write appraisals means that there is almost no time for relaxation; to fall into bed at night is a welcome relief! But what of the financial situation?

To keep the show on the road there has been no time to review the arrangement of ‘bricks’ on which the financial blocks are built.  Now they facing a large tax bill, so another large loan is being proposed, just to keep the tax man quiet and keep the show on the road.

How many of us find ourselves in a similar situation? Yet industry has a business practice that can help us. Analyse, diagnose, correct – sort of based on the mantra that ‘You can’t manage what you can’t measure‘.

  • Review our situation and diagnose the problems.
  • Look at our options.
  • Decide what to do.
  • Action our decision
  • And lastly REVIEW progress.

How often are we likely to review our situation like this at home or even make basic changes.  Well perhaps we need to review more often than we think. Make it a regular weekly practice.

Look at being tax efficient, and in the case I am describing this was the major problem, so the cycle of worry is now being broken, and a new firm financial arrangement of blocks being put in place rather than the little boxes, which were piled high, and about to fall down.

Yes it takes time. No we don’t want to face it, but hey its like banging your head against a wall.

It is great when it stops.

Try it!

Bob Derham

UK Iraq Enquiry Update

The UK Iraq enquiry produces some odd insights

I found this on the BBC website last Sunday:

“Gordon Brown was ‘marginalised’ by Tony Blair in the build-up to the Iraq war”, former International Development Secretary Clare Short has said.

“The then chancellor neither opposed nor supported the invasion but was ‘preoccupied’ by other concerns,” she told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show.

Frankly, it is surreally ludicrous. Is she really saying that while the country was preparing to go to war in extraordinarily-controversial circumstances, with hundreds of thousands marching in protest and all the rest, that

Clare Short

Brown had “other concerns”? And during the whole process these “other concerns” prevented him from AT ANY TIME having an input or indeed an opinion?

Is this some sort of attempt to disassociate him from responsibility? Whatever one thinks about the rights or wrongs of the invasion it was in the end a COLLECTIVE DECISION. Blair could NOT have done it without the support of the British Cabinet, especially Brown and Straw. If they had felt strongly enough about it, they could have resigned, or more likely have told Blair they WOULD resign if he pressed on, and thereby thwarted him.  Now, it isn’t easy to resign, or even threaten to – your bluff could always be called and your career go down the spout – but if you can’t do it when it is a matter of your country going to war when the hell CAN you do it?

Gordon Brown

As for “neither supported nor opposed” the invasion, what a PATHETIC verdict on someone who went on (without an election) to “lead” the country.

“Well, I’m neither supporting nor opposing it since that way I can take either position later depending on how it pans out.”

I can’t recall having seen a more pathetic, fumbling, cowardly shambles. You may love or – more likely – hate Tony Blair, but as with Margaret Thatcher, you certainly knew where he stood.

By Chris Snuggs

“FACE” and the Human Spirit

Putting on a face with deadly consequences!

I worked for 10 years at ISUGA, a school in Quimper, France dedicated to multi-cultural understanding and international co-operation in business. This was an extremely rich experience at a school where the majority of the foreign students were Chinese.

The campus at ISUGA, Quimper, France

It is also, incidentally, the place where I had to good fortune to meet Jon Lavin and Paul Handover, fellow authors on Learning from Dogs.

I like to think that I have always been sensitive to the cultural differences between different nationalities. Having lived abroad for long periods in both France and Germany, the idea of living in a sort of English enclave somewhere, jealously guarding such cultural practices as endless burgers and fish and chips, is totally anathema to me.

I am human first and English second and if I live in Germany, France or anywhere else I want to live like the natives as far as possible …

This also means making an effort to understand and accept their “culture”. Now this normally poses no problem, but with my Asian friends there is one aspect of their culture that I could not accept. And of course, if one DOES put one’s humanity first, then there is always the risk that the culture of one’s hosts – in some respect – may have to take second place. The “culture ” of Germany in the 1930s was fascist, and I certainly could not have lived with that.

No, what causes me problems with Asians (and particularly Chinese) is this question of “FACE”. One is supposed – and one learns this on “cultural-understanding” courses for businessmen (which of course I organised at my school!!) – to so arrange things that EVEN IF the Asian negotiating counterpart is a complete fool and/or makes the most idiotic errors one must ALWAYS find a way to avoid humiliating them in any way.

Well, “humiliating” is too strong a word in fact … one is supposed to arrange things that they never seem to be in an “inferior” position in any way.

My problem with this is that it is in fact the antithesis of everything this site stands for, which is integrity, truth and honesty. Now if a negotiating partner does in fact make some sort of mistake then to pretend otherwise just to preserve their “face” is dishonest, isn’t it?  And what are we in fact preserving? An IMAGE and not the reality.

Claudia S

It is, in fact, totally AGAINST the Human Spirit. We are all fallible. I know of no perfect men or women (though Claudia Schiffer comes close 😉 ). It is simply DISHONEST to deny this to preserve “FACE”.

The current British government could have done with learning this lesson. For YEARS there was never ANY acceptance that, yes – perhaps – they might have got some things wrong. Funnily enough, this is coming now in short bursts, but not enough to be convincing – shame!

“FACE” is of course a FACADE.  I no longer am interest in facades, but the truth. But the worse aspect of this Asian FACE thing is that it is so totally accepted by them (and by us, but that’s our fault) as being “normal” and acceptable. No, it is NOT acceptable.

The stimulus for this post came from the recent execution of a British drug-smuggler in China. Now it is quite clear from what has been revealed that this guy was A) not fully compos mentis and B) was set up as a mule by a handler. He was caught, tried, sentenced to death and executed by the Chinese. No, I have no sympathy for drug-smugglers, but Mr “Big” he was not.

What muddied the waters even more was that the British Prime Minister made a special plea for clemency, which might very well in normal cases have been granted. But these were not normal circumstances. Just before this incident the British had severely criticized the Chinese for their stance on Global Warming at the Copenhagen Conference. Now, ANY criticism of the CPP (Chinese Communist Party) is likely to be taken as a “loss of face”. One suspects – but there is no way to know – that the Chinese refusal to listen to Prime Minister Brown’s very strong plea for clemency was the CPP’s way of putting the British government in its place and restoring its “face”.

The point is, BEING WRONG is HUMAN. Pretending to be RIGHT all the time is NOT HUMAN. It is IMPOSSIBLE. We should accept this and learn humility. Sadly, the words “humility” and “Chinese Communist Party” are unlikely bedfellows.

By Chris Snuggs

[When Chris wrote this Post, he was unaware of one that I had written that was published on the 28th.  Interesting parallels! Ed.]

The secret life of the dog, Concluding Part

Concluding this fascinating insight into the extraordinary relationship between dogs and man.

If this is your first sight of this multi-part article about dogs then you will need to start at the beginning:

Part One is here.

Part Two is here.

Part Three is here.

Part Four is here.

Part Five is here.

By Paul Handover

Lucky sea dog!

Another wonderful story about a dog rescue

Having recently published a couple of posts about Los Angeles firemen rescuing a dog from a swollen river it was wonderful to catch a short story on the BBC about another dog rescue, this time a dog that had floated miles away from land on an ice floe!

Baltic the lucky dog

Anyway, the BBC have a nice video clip that will put a smile on your face.

By Paul Handover

The secret life of the dog, Part Five

Continuing this fascinating insight into the extraordinary relationship between dogs and man.

If this is your first sight of this multi-part article about dogs then you will need to start at the beginning:

Part One is here.

Part Two is here.

Part Three is here.

Part Four is here.

By Paul Handover

Great way to make friends

Maybe it’s me but there must be better ways to manage foreign relationships!

Ahmet Oguz Celikkol

Most people in their private and business lives find that a genuine interest in, and respect for, those that one engages with leads to better outcomes.  Surely that is just common sense.

So a recent report from Stratfor telling of an ‘incident’ between Israel and Turkey leaves me, frankly, speechless.  Here’s how the report reads:

Last week a small crisis with potentially serious implications blew up between Israel and Turkey. Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon summoned Turkish Ambassador to Israel Ahmet Oguz Celikkol to a meeting Jan. 11 to protest a Turkish soap opera that depicted Israeli agents kidnapping Palestinian children. When the ambassador arrived, he received a lower seat than Ayalon — and was photographed in that position, making it appear that Ayalon was speaking to an inferior. Ayalon wouldn’t shake hands with him during the televised parts of the meeting, and had an Israeli flag visible on the table. Topping it all off, Ayalon told an Israeli cameraman in Hebrew that the important thing was that people see Celikkol sitting down low “while we’re

Danny Ayalon

up high.”

Turks saw the images as a deliberate Israeli insult, though Ayalon argued that the episode was not meant as an insult but as a reminder that Israel does not take criticism lightly. While it is difficult to see the relative height of seats as an international incident, Ayalon clearly intended to send a significant statement to Turkey. The Turks took that statement to heart, so symbolism clearly matters. Israel’s intent is not so clear, however.

Continue reading “Great way to make friends” →

The secret life of the dog, Part Four

Continuing this fascinating insight into the extraordinary relationship between dogs and man.

If this is your first sight of this multi-part article about dogs then you will need to start at the beginning:

Part One is here.

Part Two is here.

Part Three is here.

By Paul Handover

Capitalism and the Daimler-Chrysler Saga: Part 3 of 3

In a new departure for Learning from Dogs, Sherry Jarrell publishes a three-part article on the Daimler-Chrysler merger.  Learning from Dogs is indebted to Professor Jarrell for both giving so freely of her time to the Blog and for sharing such erudite material.

Here is Part Three, the concluding part.  If you missed Part One then it is here and Part Two is here.

Where is DCX today?

The Daimler-Chrysler merger was troubled from the beginning.

Investors sued over whether the transaction was a ‘merger of equals’ or a Daimler-Benz takeover of Chrysler. A class action lawsuit was settled in August 2003 for $300 million. A lawsuit by activist investor Kirk Kerkorian was dismissed

Jürgen E. Schrempp

in April 2005, but claimed the job of the merger’s architect, Chairman Jürgen E. Schrempp, who resigned in response to the fall of the merged company’s share price. The merger was also the subject of a book Taken for a Ride: How Daimler-Benz Drove Off With Chrysler, (2000) by Bill Vlasic and Bradley A. Stertz.

It is questionable whether the merger ever delivered promised synergies or ever successfully integrated the two businesses. As late as 2002, Daimler-Chrysler appeared to run as two still-independent companies.  In 2006, Chrysler reported losses of $1.5 billion.  In 2007, it announced plans to lay off 13,000 employees, close a major assembly plant, and reduce production at other plants in order to try to restore profitability.

It was all for naught.  In May of 2007 Daimler-Chrysler announced that it would sell 80.1% of Chrysler to Cerberus Capital Management of New York, a private equity firm specializing in troubled companies. Daimler continued to hold a 19.9% stake. Daimler paid Cerberus $650 million to take Chrysler and associated liabilities off its hands, an amazing development given the $36 billion Daimler paid to acquire Chrysler in 1998. Of the $7.4 billion purchase price, Cerberus Capital Management invested $5 billion in Chrysler Holdings and $1.05 billion in Chrysler’s financial unit. The de-merged Daimler AG received $1.35 billion directly from Cerberus but invested $2 billion in Chrysler LLC itself.

On April 27, 2009, Daimler AG agreed to give up its remaining 19.9% stake in Chrysler LLC to Cerberus and pay as much as $600 million into the auto-maker’s pension fund.  On April 30, 2009, Chrysler LLC filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and announced a plan for a partnership with Italian automaker Fiat. On June 1, Chrysler LLC stated they were selling some assets and operations to the newly formed company Chrysler Group LLC, with Fiat retaining a 20% stake in the new company.

On June 10, 2009, the sale of most of Chrysler assets to “New Chrysler”, formally known as Chrysler Group LLC, was completed. The federal government financed the deal with $6.6 billion in financing, paid to the “Old Chrysler.” The transfer does not include eight manufacturing locations, nor many parcels of real estate, nor equipment leases. Contracts with the 789 U.S. auto dealerships who are being dropped were not transferred.

By Sherry Jarrell

The secret life of the dog, Part Three

Continuing this fascinating insight into the extraordinary relationship between dogs and man.

If this is your first sight of this multi-part article about dogs then you will need to start at the beginning:

Part One is here.

Part Two is here.

By Paul Handover