Working Incidents

 Many of the incidents listed below are hearsay and if you ask me from where i got them, I have no idea. Some may even call it Gossip.

CAVEAT :The below are not specific to any company, but culled over several years in Middle East and are of general nature. I do not have any specific incident that happened to me or the names and could have got from hearsay or observation. These are put as is and no guarantee is provided if it is real or made up. Read for pleasure and if a message is arrived at by the reader, can be used at his discretion. The usual disclosure of these incidents may or may not bear any relation to any person living or dead. 

 

 Incident 1.

 Heard of an owner who had given a max of 10% discount authority to the Sales manager. A friend of the owner wanted  a higher discount and approached him. The owner called the sales manager to his office and started shouting at him how he was giving 10% discount and how he was misusing his authority of giving 5% discount only and he would give only 5% discount even as an owner. The friend sensing his discount of 10% would fall to 5% quickly told the owner that he will go and discuss with the Sales manager and finally left with a 10% discount. Later the owner called the Sales Manager and apologized for the drama as he did not want to give a higher discount than what is there. This is called Skin in the game as the owner is responsible to the shareholders and not running a charity organization.

 Incident 2. 

 An owner working in a 25th floor office called his accountant and told him  to invest 100,000 USD in a company. The accountant said that company was a dud company and not to invest in it. The owner asked him whose money it was and upon being told it was the owners, was told to invest the money.

Six months later, the invested company went bankrupt and so did the 100,000 USD invested. The owner again called the accountant and said, See what has happened, why did you not advise me not to invest. The accountant replied, he had told the owner not to invest, but owner insisted on investing without heeding to his advice and the accountant followed the owners instruction. The owner then said, if i ask you to jump from the 25th floor will you do or you will hesitate and convince me that it cannot be done.You should have done that.

This is the risk of being an accountant- either way you are doomed. 

 Incident 3.

 The owner of a company took some money for his personal use from the cashier, gave some extra discounts, took a car etc.

End of the month the accountant brought him a statement which showed the money he took, the extra discount he gave, price of the car he took etc. giving him a bill of say, 50,000 USD. The owner vetted the statement and immediately took out his personal cheque book and gave the 50,000 USD settling the bill. This raises two important thing - a) he remembered all the events on what he spent and checked it it rather than getting it after a year or two and questioning the accountant - the whys of the spend- b) he is just the MD owner and cannot consider it as his company as there are other shareholders. This distinguishes between running the company and running it as a personal company. The real profitability of the business gets known and not confused with personal drawings. Tomorrow, the other shareholders should not say, you have taken out so much money for personal use and thus the company did not do well. 

Incident 4. 

 The owner because of some personal work done by a laborer, feels he should be rewarded. Instead of giving him some money, he gives him a position in his company. What this does is demotivates a qualified person already in the job. As he does not know the job, he keeps on asking the person how to do and since he is appointed by owner none can refuse. At least if he is good at the job it is fine, but unreasonable demands and benefits obtained from owner because of his closeness could cause the function to be not performed well.

Thus grading, right qualification and education for the jobs are essential to recruit and not just based on some personal work done for the owner. Owner can keep him under his payroll, but not jeopardize the company business.

 Incident 5.

 The company should be run in a professional manner and not be thought of as a honey pot to draw cash. When company makes money, dividends can be given to owners and be used for their personal purchases. Using Company money for personal hobbies can jeopardize the operations of the company and not know the true value of company or their profitability.

 Incident 6.

To ensure the Company business and personal business separate as well as to ensure future distribution does not cause litigation and bad blood, Companies should have a family office which controls what each of the family member takes. A certain profit from the profitable companies can be paid into the Family business for family members to take. This puts the correct perspective on segregating between personal expenses and corporate expense.

 Incident 7

Trust is an important commodity for working in Middle East. If the owners trust you, you can gain a lot and if you lose the trust, it could likely end up in hell. Another thing noticeable is people's ability to escape responsibility by saying or blaming someone else and it is here language helps. If you are a westerner, there could be an added advantage as London, Europe, US are places visited by people in Middle East for their vacation.

 Incident 8

When one person joined a Company in M.E., he was asked what designation he should take. His boss told him you can take any designation, but in this company you have do work from Mudhir Aam (General Manager) to Mandoup (Representative). My english version is you have to do the work from General Manager to Janitor.

Incident 9

One of the oft repeated remarks you hear is Ana Kallam (I have spoken). Thus, there is no official record of the Kallam (spoken). I always insist that they use Kalam (Pen to write/email) than Kallam (spoken). This way even after many years there is a record of what was agreed than being just a verbal assurance (at that time) and then later could be retracted.