All Posts in Business Ethics

|In: Business Ethics|Last Updated:

When Cortez landed on the shores of became Mexico later on, he issued the famous order, “Burn the boats!” It’s testimony to either his leadership ability or his ruthlessness that his men didn’t shout back, “What are you, nuts?”

Through dumb luck (for the Spaniards that is) the Aztecs caught smallpox from Cortez’s crew and Montezuma despite his ongoing revenge, lost his empire. Cortez didn’t win because of his watercraft incineration but that hasn’t stopped it from becoming a symbol for total commitment to a result.

In business, burn-the-boats tactics are less useful than contingency plans. You can’t count on your competitors to fall apart all by themselves (they often do, but you can’t rely on it), and sailing back to Spain in an empty ship (that is, cutting your losses and trying the next idea) usually makes more sense than being either buried or eaten (filing for bankruptcy or being acquired at bargain-basement prices).

Many companies that have chosen to outsource IT burned their boats without realizing it. They signed a contract in which a change of heart is expensive, time-consuming, painful and risky — they can’t, in other words, go back. When negotiating an outsourcing deal, the business equivalent of a prenuptial agreement is essential. An outsourcing prenuptial agreement makes re-insourcing possible. Usually, it will include transition of both staff and intellectual property back to the client in case of contract termination. Otherwise the balance of power in the relationship belongs to the outsourcer, not the client.

That’s a very bad idea.

Imagine your CEO has decided to outsource IT and you’re part of the negotiating team. What do you need to know? Here’s one important fact: The outsourcer’s sales team is there because they love The Deal, not because they love running IT.

For the folks who sell big outsourcing contracts, closing a big deal is a rush. It’s a bit like a cocaine habit. When someone snorts cocaine, the user feels a rush of euphoria when the drug is inhaled (or so I’ve read). But when the drug wears off they sink into a funk, and to reach the same level of exhilaration they need an even bigger hit. The Deal has an equivalent impact on outsourcing companies: It provides a rush of euphoria as the deal closes, followed by something of a funk as the hard work of contract delivery starts … followed by the need for the rush of the next Deal.

These people don’t enjoy actually running IT. Running IT would interfere with pursuing the next Deal. If they’re smart, they’ll bring someone who loves running IT to their side of the table, but they might not be smart, because that individual … the future account manager … doesn’t love The Deal. The account manager has to deliver on the contract when it’s signed. That can interfere with The Deal.

That’s exactly why you’ll insist that the future account manager is part of the negotiating team. With this team composition, love of The Deal will keep the outsourcer at the table, unable to walk away, and the account manager’s need to run a successful account will prevent impossible-to-keep promises. (Don’t leave it to chance. When in doubt look the account manager in the eye and ask, “Can you deliver that?”)

There’s one other item to remember: You, not your employer, are your top priority. Look out for your own interests first.

Isn’t this immoral? Amoral?

No.

When your CEO decided to outsource IT he didn’t take your best interests into account. When the outsourcing company started the sales process, the process probably didn’t start in your office with your sponsorship. This is business, and altruism isn’t part of business. Nobody is going to look out for you except you.

So if you have any leverage at all, negotiate an arrangement that protects you. Have the CEO create a new executive position and promote you to it immediately. Or, become the outsourcing company’s account manager. Do what CEOs do and negotiate a golden parachute for yourself in exchange for your support during the transition.

While you’re at it, negotiate the best deal you can for the employees being outsourced. When they become employees of the outsourcing companies they’ll lose their seniority. It isn’t hard to insist on a contract provision that fixes this, but you need to ask for it — it won’t come automatically. If you become the account manager you’ll need their support. Even if you don’t, it costs you nothing.

And, it’s the right thing to do.

Comments

|In: Business Ethics|Last Updated:

Something is very wrong with the world.

Every so often I have to visit the post office. For the past several years, every single interaction with a postal employee has been pleasant, professional, service-oriented, and efficient.

When you can’t count on the USPS to give you something to gripe about, what can you count on?

Not the e-mail tax the USPS supposedly wants to impose. That’s one of those ridiculous Internet myths that refuses to die. If you haven’t heard the news yet, Nixon privatized the postal service — it isn’t part of the government, hasn’t been for nearly three decades, and has no taxing authority.

You can always count on me, though. I gave many of you something to gripe about with my recent column on religion in the workplace. Hundreds of you sent e-mails … all untaxed … divided almost exactly in half between those who thought I was way out of bounds and those who thanked me for my stance. Among the letters were a few points that call for a bit more coverage:

  • Several readers figured when I said you shouldn’t bring your beliefs into the workplace I meant you literally have to leave them at home. You can no more leave your beliefs behind than you can a beer belly or your left knee. What you can do is keep them in your head, to guide your decisions and help you cope with the inevitable frustrations of corporate life.
  • During social interactions with friends, which do happen at the office, respectful exchanges of views are just fine, too. It’s pretty easy, though, for an exchange of views (“Here’s how we look at an issue like this — how about you?”) to slip into dangerous territory. Presenting your beliefs is one thing. Attacking those of others is quite another.
  • Another distinction that doesn’t seem sufficiently well understood is the difference between beliefs and opinions. It’s a belief when you cite an authoritative text. It’s an opinion when you debate observable facts and dissectable logic. Debates of fact and logic are always acceptable. They’re rarely persuasive, but that’s a whole different subject.
  • Several readers missed a crucial point about the job applicant who said he was a Christian: He was interviewing for a management position. A qualified manager would know that religious affiliation, along with marital status, age, ethnicity, or any other completely irrelevant topic that could bias a hiring decision, has no place in a job interview. It was this lack of professionalism, and bad judgment which should have disqualified him, not his Christianity. And hiring the guy because of his religion was discriminatory toward all of the other applicants — a definite no-no.
  • Several Muslim readers corrected my use of “Islamic”. The religion is Islam; adherents are Muslims. “Islamic” means “pertaining to Islam.” My thanks to all who wrote.
  • Several readers told me of disparaging comments made toward fundamentalist Christians. That hasn’t been my experience … I’ve mostly experienced the reverse, or maybe I’m less attuned to this kind or remark. Regardless, it’s no more appropriate to disparage fundamentalist Christians than to be disparaged by them. This is how a society polarizes, and how Yugoslavia happens. Don’t feel any need to be the first on your block to exacerbate this trend.
  • And finally, if this wasn’t completely clear in the first column … I’m not presenting my personal system of beliefs, insisting that you accept my views over all others. While the details will vary, the law — not Bob Lewis — requires managers to protect workers from experience threatening and harassing work environments, and with few exceptions precludes discriminatory hiring.

If you aren’t clear on your obligations, what’s allowed and disallowed, what it means to embrace diversity in the workplace, and the difference between toleration of others and mutual respect … chances are your employees are equally confused or more so. That’s not good.

So as a stopgap, until you can schedule diversity training, here’s a simple rule that will keep you out of trouble: Never generalize about identifiable groups of people.

And why would you want to, anyway? Marketing professionals learned long ago that the most effective messages are personalized. You should too. Whether it’s an insult or a compliment, your message will always be more effective, and appropriate, when it’s personal.

Comments