I think I just pulled an all-nighter…cuz it’s now 9 o’clock and I am not tired at all. I should probably go lay down though cuz I know I’ll end up crashing before work and then will be grumpy that I have to get up and go to work.

So I bid you goodnight.

Nothing important happened at work the other day beside me being fed up with all of the attitude coming from internal sources. I get enough shit from the customers but to get it from management as well…it’s like wtf? You want me to be nice when we’re treated like second rate humans because of where we work but at the same time yall treat us like we’re some kind of burden or something…well how about this…do it yourself….yeah didn’t think so…..anywhos….should have gotten something done during this all nighter and then I’d have a reason to complain….

gonna go pass out now

goodnight

Gonna debate the password protection of that last entry….I want to put it out there but I also don’t want to kick up a bunch of drama….I was wanting to do something that was stupid but free tho…..hmmmm…….

How Allstate treats people…

“I left Allstate in 2000 when they fired us all.  I was with the company 23 1/2 years and was 53 years old.   I suspended my health coverage at that time.  Last year my wife’s company liquidated so we lost our health coverage.   Because we had preexisting medical problems, we had to go with Allstate under my suspended coverage.

This year they had us with United Healthcare for $870.50 per month.  Next year (1/1/2010) they are putting us with Blue Cross/ Blue Shield.  Out premium will be $957.00 per month.  That is a killer but what other choice do we have?”

I recently had a terrible experience at the Baltimore Tea House called “Teavolve”. The service staff is fine, the food is satisfactory, but the amount of disrespect I encountered after inquiring about the owner was astounding. The owner, Sunni Gilliam, is not approachable or able to be contacted. She will ignore you and sit on her computer in the corner of the establishment all day. I have personally overheard her tell her staff that she is not there when the phone rings.

There seems to be a revolving door of employees as well. This says something in support of the notion that Teavolve in Baltimore is one of the most poorly ran establishments in the city.

Government dependence breeds mediocrity.  Ford made the right choice by refusing the bailout, and instead chose to address the root cause of their problem by improving how their company was managed.  They aren’t perfect, and they still have a union problem, but they are turning a profit WITHOUT GOVERNMENT HELP.

Our country might have a chance of surviving if we can keep from adopting the ugly baby of democrat healthcare reform, prevent the destruction of our sovereignty with the signing, ratification, and adoption of the Copenhagen Treaty or any other cap-and-trade scheme, and if we can turn back what’s left of the first “stimulus” and prevent a second.

That’s just to prevent financial ruin.  Don’t forget about the right to keep and bear arms, and freedom of speech.  They are all under assault, and they all relate to one another.

If you pound your guns into plowshares, you will plow for those who didn’t.  And you will do it in silence or be shot.

Ford Had a Better Idea: No Bailout

As U.S. car manufacturer ’stuns’ Wall Street with 3Q profits, some media forget to report Ford didn’t take government cash.

By Julia A. Seymour
Business & Media Institute
11/4/2009 3:16:04 PM

Ford Motor Company took everyone by “surprise” Nov. 2, when it announced nearly a billion dollars in profit for the third quarter of 2009. The company also said it would be “solidly profitable” by 2011.

CNN repeated the announcement on Nov. 3 “American Morning,” saying, “Turning now to the Big Three in Detroit, Chrysler extends its buyout offer to more than 20,000 employees while General Motors is still trying to restructure spending billions of bailout dollars, but Ford – which didn’t take any cash from Uncle Sam – is back in the green again, posting a profit of nearly $1 billion for the third quarter.”

The announcement was big news, but what should have caught more journalists’ attention was the fact that Ford managed to turn things around without the help of a federal bailout – the very bailout reporters promoted in 2008 and 2009.

Yet, several shows including all three networks’ morning programs, CBS “Evening News,” CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360,” and MSNBC News Live all left out that crucial piece of information Nov. 2.  (Now there’s a surprise.  Do you really think the media formerly known as mainstream would ever eat crow admitting they were wrong, especially about something that cast shadows on their liberal agenda or that of Obama?  If you think they’re that honest and objective, you’re smoking crack.)

But that Nov. 2 report, the “Evening News” found room to include union complaints against Ford, quoting UAW’s Gary Walkowicz: “I think people are angry and fed up with concessions. We’ve dealt with concessions year after year for the last five years. I people – think people got to the point of saying, ‘Enough is enough that’s it.’”  (Again, liberal Obama agenda.  Ever since the Obama coronation there has been one union payoff after another.  Aside from poor management, the UAW is the single biggest reason that American auto manufacturers have lost their competitive edge.  They have bled the auto companies dry without adding a commensurate amount of value to the process.  It was very telling when Government Motors and Chrysler shut down production for an extra couple of weeks over Christmas.  It cost them more to produce the product they are in business to produce than it did to produce nothing at all.)

One year ago, the network news media avidly supported a federal bailout for the Big Three U.S. auto companies and ignored union responsibility for lack of competitiveness.

“GM may not make it without help, and others may have to merge,” declared “Nightly News” anchor Brian Williams in November 2008. “If just one of the Big Three were to fail, an estimated two and a half million jobs might be lost.”

ABC correspondent Chris Bury suggested on Nov. 11, 2008 that it was a matter of fairness, after all, the banks had already been bailed out: “After riding to Wall Street’s rescue can the government just say no to American automakers that are bleeding cash by the billions.”  (Yes they could have said “no,” and they should have said “no.”  They should not have bailed out the banks either.  By rewarding poor performance and bad behavior, you do not get better performance and good behavior.  You get government dependence and lack of competition.)

Between Nov. 1 and Nov. 18, 2008 the morning and evening shows of ABC, CBS and NBC aired 31 stories with a pro-bailout tone, which was almost three times as many positive stories as balanced stories – only 12. Only one story, on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” presented an overall anti-bailout tone.  (More proof of the liberal Obama media bias.)

According to Reuters, GM and Chrysler received “roughly $64 billion in direct aid” from the government. Since then both companies have struggled. Chrysler saw sales fall 30 percent in October 2009, while GM saw a slight “bump” in sales of 4.7 percent the same month.

The media promotion of an auto bailout did not reflect public opinion. Back then 49 percent of Americans were opposed to an auto industry bailout and 47 percent were in favor, according to Gallup.

But according to Rick Newman, chief business correspondent for U.S. News and World Report, anti-bailout sentiment might have been exactly what helped Ford rise to profitability.

“[T]hey’ve taken market share from GM and Chrysler. Clearly a lot of people who wanna buy a domestic car, but were disgusted by the auto bailouts went over to Ford,” Newman told CNN’s “American Morning” Nov. 3.

NBC “Nightly News” and “World News” also indicated Nov. 3 that Ford’s decision not to take the bailout improved the public’s perception of the company and “richly rewarded” them.

Cash for Clunkers gets credit, Mullaly rarely gets rebuttal

Nine network and cable mentions of Ford’s successful quarter all credited the government’s Cash for Clunkers (CARS) program, but 77 percent of those reports (seven of nine) didn’t include Ford’s rebuttal that the company would have seen third quarter profits even without the trade-in program.  (…more bias.)

CEO Alan Mullaly said that the company would “absolutely” have profited even without cash for clunkers. “It was a good stimulus,” Mulally told Automotive News after Ford announced a $997 million quarterly net profit. “But the real strength of the third quarter is based on the strength of our product line improving.”

Automotive News reported, “CFO Lewis Booth said the federal government’s clunkers rebate program didn’t lead to an increase in Ford’s third-quarter wholesale sales. Instead, Ford ran dealer stocks down.”

But broadcast and cable news gave credit to the CARS program anyway, keeping its theme of promoting the government giveaway.

In August 2009, all three broadcast networks lauded the program calling it “wildly popular,” “too successful” and a “victim of its own success.” The networks also cited proponents of CARS nearly three times as often as critics in stories citing experts.

The $1 billion trade-in scheme burned through its entire 14-week budget in one week’s time, prompting the Senate to allocate another $2 billion in taxpayer dollars. Still, networks heaped praise on the clunker program. CBS “Evening News” anchor Katie Couric teased on Aug. 3, “[S]ales reports out today show the Cash for Clunkers program gave U.S. automakers a much-needed jumpstart.”

Union Dues

One major problem facing all three domestic car companies is the auto unions and their legacy costs.

When the networks were busy promoting a bailout of the auto industry in 2008, reporters were also conveniently ignoring unions as one of the reasons the industry was in trouble. Union contracts have put U.S. manufacturers at a distinct disadvantage compared to foreign auto companies that build cars in the U.S. But out of 44 stories in November 2008, only 4 pointed out the union problem.

Instead of blaming the unions, reporters blamed the overall U.S. economy for slumping auto sales.  (The economy contributed, but like the airlines after 9/11, the auto-maker’s poor management is the primary reason they were not in a financial position to weather the economic storm.)

“With sales plunging 35 percent in October alone, the auto industry is reeling from the nation’s biggest financial crisis since the 1930s,” CNBC’s Trish Regan said on the Nov. 8 NBC “Nightly News.”

But Daniel Ikenson pointed out on the Cato Institute’s Web site that unions are probably more responsible for Detroit’s problems than the media’s scapegoat of a generally bad economy. Those foreign nameplate manufacturers that sell in the United States “face the same contracting demand for automobiles as does the Big Three,” Ikenson wrote. “The difference is that these [foreign] companies have a better track record of making products Americans want to consume and are not seeking federal assistance.” (And there lies the primary difference.  The disparity will only increase as Gov-ment Motors is forced to make the cars that Obama wants instead of what consumers want.  Communism.  Marxism.)

One of my friends and co-workers just got fired. For bullshit reasons, even. If I was guaranteed unemployment, I would leave – just on principle.

I keep saying this place sucks. I don’t lie.

Can a manager be a doer?
SHOULD a manager be a doer?

The 2 mins morning brain cramp:

At my old workplace, my managers were more doers then managers which I found to be uncomfortable because as a young engineer, I received no real direction of what the big picture was and where I fit in therefore not fully understanding the value that I should be contributing.

At my current workplace, most of the managers are delegators and spend the rest of their time (I think) being visible to their management, whether this be under fire or not. An interesting case that I am witnessing is that if you are an excellent doer, you tend to be necessary for your current role and it is unlikely that you will move anywhere. Where as if you are not an excellent doer, you seem to be pushed towards management… which makes me wonder, if you are aiming to be in management one day, what do you do?

Option 1: Excel at nothing but try everything (Jack of all trades). Shortfalls- when there’s a recession and the company needs to layoff people, you might be a target because you excel at nothing! On the otherhand, you might be a valuable asset since you can fill in different gaps and help the company to avoid having to expend extra overhead. If this is the position you wish to take, I’d say that you better work on relationship and reputation building with all coworkers. The shortfall of this seemingly positive advantage is that filling in gaps doesn’t always mean fun, meaningful work. It can mean mindless, crappy work that just needs to be done by someone.

Option 2: Excel at something but always seek to take on more high level responsibility. Shortfalls- I’d say that the only real shortfall is that you pose to be a threat to your manager or team lead … of course this would only be an issue if you had an insecure manager whose really deadwood but trying to hide the fact. This would also not be the most attractive option if you don’t really enjoy what you’re doing. But I’d say that it’d be the best compromise between building your skillset, integrity and reputation.

Interesting… now which strategy should I adopt… ?

I have been a project manager for many years.  I have even taught a guaranteed pass class for PM certification.  Still I have met many CEOs, CTOs, development and business managers that appear to have no idea what this role is and why it is there.  Yet they know they should have one for that project.

Whether the project is a small one or an international collaboration between multiple companies – the role of the PM is the same.  It is simply to keep the proposed project on track.  After making all the plans and knowing that everyone is in agreement – then the project moves forward.  This can appear to be a long drawn out process for many.

Once the project is going, the project manager has to control the work.  To do this they have three main tools: Resources, Time and Quality.  Thus if the resources are cut then the time scale or quality will also change.  The goal of the project manager is, as laid out in the PMBOK, to keep the project on course and not allow scope creep.

Why am I stating the obvious here?  Well managers seem to have forgotten why we have project managers.  They have rewritten the role and then wonder why the product or result fails in some way.

For example, we have the manager that has great ideas.  This is often the entrepuneur style manager.  They get a project funded and then as the project progresses they have great insights of how to improve the end result.  They tweak it here and there.  It goes back to the design team and they change the whole interface.  Before you know it the project is 1 year late, twice the cost and the car that was being built is now a spaceship.

We next have the development background manager that started coding before the project was approved because they couldn’t wait for all that planning stuff – just get in there and write it.  Sadly the lack of coordination results in a poorly integrated package where quality suffers.

Finally we have the starship captain– just get it done style of manager.  They cannot be bothered with all the paperwork and planning.  They want the project done and finished now – how hard can it be?  Sadly this style of project hits all the areas.  The result can be a money wasting time bomb.

Now I am not saying that these three examples of manager styles are wrong.  What I am saying is that these managers need a project manager that will stand up to them, say “no” and they must respect that.  Otherwise all they really want is a secretary to do the paperwork they can’t be bothered with and who will also take the blame when it all crashes around them due to their poor management style.

If you want a project manager to do their job then expect them to get all the paperwork done, costs agreed, resources allocated and the end result approved before the execution.

Expect them to initially say “No” to the great idea.  Their role is to keep the project on track, rejecting or better still managing any scope creep.

I know that project managers out there will point out that they do way more than this.  I know.  There is a reason why execution of a project starts about 2/3 the way through for the PMBOK.  Sadly we have senior managers out there that don’t know this.

A head of a software company told me earlier this year, yes I want you to be the project manager for this work, but I don’t need all this paperwork.  I use a single 10 page document that roughs out the idea and then we make it up as we go along.  I assume I was just supposed to make the reports match the work being done.  Sadly with management like this, it explains why this company will always be small.  A multi-million dollar international project would be a shambles with this style of “project” management.

I’m really looking forward to our new place, which we move into on August 13th. Currently I share a place with 4 other individuals, and it’s a little too hectic for my tastes, and too messy.
The promise of a new place has been a beacon of glory for Gabby and I since before December.

“Urban Place” the ever-creative name the new management of my current apartment complex has obtained, is on the northeast corner of the USF campus, and they’ve painted the place terrible blue and green. On top of that, they pick up garbage even less now, so it forces residents to add to the aforementioned pile.

Initially, the place was interesting, as it has a sweet spiral staircase and is laid out quite nicely. But with a mounting bug problem (that they fumigated about a month ago and took care of) and terrible management, it’s time to leave.

Apparently in their remodeling they took out one of the staircases and left it hanging out on the grass. Here I am walking down the stairs, sideways.

Ladies and gentlemen, I hope you didn’t blink. If you did, then you may have missed out on my extremely short KMart career. Alas, KMart is over. Due to inexcusably poor management and ridiculously low wages, I had to exit the scene. Please know that I did not exit because I got flashed repeatedly by an old lady OR because I worked in multiple departments OR because I never got my breaks OR because they wanted me to wear a red vest OR because my name is allegedly “Katie.” It just wasn’t enough dough per hour. Sorry dudes.

BUT, on a happy side, my other boss lady has let me pick up more hours!! So now I will be working about 30/hr a week for Lauren. Woohoo! That means more organizing, dish washing, dog walking, laundry folding, bin cleaning, yard sale preparing, floor washing, carpet scrubbing, etc. But it will be all good To replace the KMart Chronicles, I may just start Laughable Lauren moments. We shall see…

Have you ever had moments in your life where you find yourself looking up to the ceiling and all around you in search for the candid camera?? On average, I have this “moment” several times throughout one single shift at KMart. The place is hilarious. Thus, I shall start and on and off series of the KMart Chronicles: The Funny Happenings in the Land of the Blue Light Special.

Thus, we begin chronicalling. Yesterday I worked from 1:30 to 10:30. It’s a cruddy way to spend your sunny/80 degree Saturday, but alas, we need the dough. Let me also START by saying that I am NOT a rule breaker in the work place. I am ALWAYS the one that reminds people to wear the slip proof shoes, takes extra time to give people back the correct change, and I always do everything the managers ask me to do. NOT LAST NIGHT. I WAS A REBEL!

It was 9:45 and no one was in the store. A lady in another department (who is a real hoot) asked me to help her take down sale signs and I quickly agreed. So we are carrying on while roaming the store and then I look down the aisle and my manager is standing there like we are getting ready to have a shoot off in the Ol’ West. Let me just paint a brief image of my manager for you. He is late twenties, loosing his dark hair, and walks around like he has a broom for his back bone. About 7 out of a million employees like him and he was sent here to kick the store into shape. I actually respect those people that are sent to kick places into shape because I can some what identify with them. But there is no reason to be an ass while kicking. So, he says, “Did you not hear the message over the loud speaker?” I faced him and promptly said, “No sir,” and then he turned around and left. Left dazed and confused, I finished taking down the sale sign and started to head for my department. Seconds later, I hear, “Kathryn to Jewelry. Kathryn to Jewelry. It is 10:04 and you have not shut down/counted out your register yet. Because of you, we will all be here late.” Seems pretty serious for a 4 minute violation, eh? So I quickly pounce from Infants to Jewelry.

A few minutes later, he came by my register to get the money bag. To his surprise, I had it all checked/counted/wrapped. But then he told me that I did it wrong, so I asked him how. After checking it and recounting it, he quietly mumbled that, infact, I had done it correctly and he had misjudged it. This is also the manager who, only two days earlier, told me that I shouldn’t be working at KMart because I had a college degree. No shit, Sherlock. KMart wasn’t exactly in my big plans. He and the other manager also decided that I should work in Jewelry beacause I had ”skills.” (Yes, they did actually use the word skills in the conversation. No specific reference to responsibility, coolness under pressure, good people skills, etc. Just skills.) 

Ok. Back to the story. It was then my time to lock up/cover/turn out the lights on the jewelry display. I did them all in nine minutes and then straightened my area and clocked out. He came out to where the clocked out people were and asked me if I had done my duties and I simply said, “Yes.” And he said, “DO I NEED TO GO CHECK? YOU CAN”T DO THOSE THINGS IN THAT LITTLE AMOUNT OF TIME!” Well ladies and gentlemen, this is the part when you can go ahead and roll your eyes. I said, “Actually I did. Would you like to go back and check it like you did my money bag?” I was a smartass. I am NEVER a smart ass to my employers. NEVER. It is simply not professional. But now I cannot say that I was never a smart ass to an employer because I was. And I DON”T take it back. He simply unlocked the door and let us all go at 10:21. We weren’t suppose to leave until 10:30. Did I make us all stay late? NO.

By ALEXANDER LAWRIE

FOUL-MOUTHED telly chef Gordon Ramsay has been slammed by television watchdogs – for swearing too much.

The Scots chef has been censured for swearing an incredible 78 times in just 20 minutes during an episode of Ramsay’s Great British Nightmare.

The two-hour episode, which was screened on Channel 4 on January 30 this year, received 51 complaints from viewers objecting to the frequency and sustained nature of the f*** word.

Ofcom noted that the first two parts of the programme contained “115 instances of the most offensive language”.

And in one scene, a chef could be seen berating his boss by using the f*** word an unbelievable 30 times in under two minutes.

The watchdog said much of the offensive language was delivered in an extremely intense and at times aggressive manner and could be considered “gratuitous” and “unreal”.

But, the TV regulator did say in the case of programmes featuring Ramsay, the context was important given his “well-known reputation for using offensive language”.

Ofcom received 51 complaints which came mainly from regular viewers of the show.

Viewers had enough

One said: “I am a great fan of Gordon Ramsay, but there was far too much swearing in this programme. It was embarrassing and rude and I had to turn it off.”

While another viewer added: “For the first time ever, I find myself totally shocked and unable to actually watch the show due to the use of the words “F***”, “F***ing” and “S***”.

“There seems to be a swear word almost every other word. I am 45 minutes into the show and I’m afraid I’ve had enough.”

Channel 4 bosses have hit back at the reprimand by claiming Ramsay “upholds the interests of restaurant goers throughout the UK”.

They argued that “such a high volume of strong language is not exceptional and would not have been beyond the expectation of a returning audience”.

But Ofcom found the broadcaster and the chef had breached Rule 2.3 of the watchdog’s code which covers the accepted standards broadcasters have to adhere to.

Swearing not warranted

The regulator concluded “that it (the swearing) was not warranted since there was not sufficient editorial justification or context in this programme for the level and intensity of swearing in the first two parts of the programme”.

In the first 40 minutes of the show Ramsay used the word “f***” 115 times, with 78 of the expletives being aired during a 20 minute segment.

Based on Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares, the programme follows the celebrity chef as he takes on failing restaurants and attempts to turn them round.

In his own inimitable style, Ramsay tackles poor management, inferior cooking and unacceptable standards of hygiene from restaurants across the Britain.

ถึงแม้กรณีการทุจริตประมาณ 400 ล้านของ ธอส. ยังไม่คลี่คลาย เนื่องจากอยู่ระหว่างการรวบรวมข้อเท็จจริงของกระทรวงการคลัง และ ธนาคารแห่งประเทศไทย ผู้กำกับธนาคารของรัฐแห่งนี้ ผมจึงคิดว่า กรณีการทุจริตของธนาคาร Society Generale – SG กับการเปิดเผย รวมทั้งการให้ข้อสังเกตของหน่วยงานกำกับหลายแห่ง รวมถึง FSA ของประเทศอังกฤษในเรื่องนี้ ในเวลาต่อมานั้น น่าจะพิจารณาว่าเป็นประโยชน์อย่างยิ่งในวงการควบคุม กระบวนการบริหารความเสี่ยง และการตรวจสอบตามฐานความเสี่ยง รวมถึงการประเมินตนเองเพื่อการควบคุมและการบริหารความเสี่ยง ซึ่งเรียกย่อ ๆ ว่า CSA ในรูปแบบต่าง ๆ ที่ผมจะเผยแพร่ในโอกาสต่อ ๆ ไป

Fraud from Operational Risk & Poor Mgmt.

ข้อแนะนำของ FSA รวมทั้งข้อสังเกตที่มีประโยชน์อย่างยิ่งในทุกวงการ โดยเฉพาะสถาบันการเงินที่ไม่จำกัดอยู่เพียงความสูญเสียทางการค้าเงิน จากจุดอ่อนของกระบวนการบริหารและควบคุมภายในของ SG ยังได้รับความสนใจที่ค่อนข้างจำกัดอย่างน่าเสียดาย ผมจึงค่อนข้างจะเน้นและย้ำมากว่า หากองค์กรของท่านมุ่งมั่นที่จะบริหารความเสี่ยงอย่างเป็นเลิศ และเป็นกระบวนการที่ดีตามหลัก CG และ ITG รวมถึง GRC ซึ่งเป็น Statement ใหม่นั้น ขอให้ท่านผู้บริหารขององค์กรต่าง ๆ ได้โปรดสนใจที่จะประยุกต์ นำข้อสังเกตของ FSA มาใช้ในทางปฏิบัติให้ได้ผลอย่างจริงจัง

วันนี้ ผมจึงขอนำเสนอข้อสังเกตของ FSA ต่อ และจะตามมาด้วยการวิเคราะห์การบริหารความเสี่ยงของธนาคารของรัฐบางแห่งในโอกาสต่อไป

Off-market rates
9. สง. มีระบบควบคุมเพื่อดูแลการทำธุรกรรม Off market rates ของ Trader หรือไม่ และมีการนับแต้ม (Yellow flag) หรือติดตามผลของการกระทำดังกล่าวหรือไม่
9.1 การทำธุรกรรม Off market rate เป็นสิ่งที่สง.ควรให้ความสำคัญเนื่องจากเป็นช่องทางที่ Trader ใช้ในการตกแต่งกำไรขาดทุน และกลับกำไรขาดทุนเป็นทิศทางที่ตรงข้ามได้
9.2 สง. ควรมั่นใจว่ามีระบบการควบคุมเพื่อตรวจสอบธุรกรรมที่ทำ Off-market rate เพราะเป็นกลไกที่สำคัญมากในการป้องกันการทุจริตของ Trader

P&L attribution
10. สง. มั่นใจได้อย่างไรว่า มีความเข้าใจผลกำไรขาดทุนทั้งหมดของธนาคารว่ามาจากธุรกรรมใด รวมถึงกำไรขาดทุนที่เกิดจากธุรกรรมซับซ้อน
11. สง. เข้าใจหรือไม่ว่ากำไรขาดทุนจำนวนสูงที่เกิดขึ้นในวันแรกของการทำธุรกรรมมาจากไหนและสมเหตุสมผลหรือไม่
11.1 กำไรขาดทุนทำให้สง.เข้าใจความเสี่ยงในการทำธุรกรรมเพราะกำไรขาดทุนเป็นผลจากการรับความเสี่ยง ดังนั้นการทำความเข้าใจว่ากำไรขาดทุนมาจากส่วนใดเป็นสิ่งสำคัญสำหรับสง. โดยเฉพาะการทำธุรกรรมที่มีความซับซ้อนมากๆ
11.2 สง. ควรพิจารณา กำไรขาดทุนจำนวนสูงที่เกิดขึ้นในวันแรกของการทำธุรกรรม และ กำไรขาดทุนจำนวนสูง ที่เกิดจากการยกเลิกหรือแก้ไขธุรกรรมว่ามีเหตุผลเพียงพอควรทำการวิเคราะห์หาสาเหตุหรือไม่

Reconciliations
12. สง. มั่นใจได้อย่างไรว่ามีการวางระบบการกระทบยอดที่เหมาะสมและสามารถนำไปใช้งานได้อย่างมีประสิทธิภาพ
12.1 การกระทบยอดเป็นการควบคุมที่จำเป็นเพื่อให้มั่นใจได้ว่าฐานะด้าน ต่างๆ ถูกต้องตรงกันในทุกระบบของ สง. เช่น การกระทบยอดระหว่าง Front office , Back office และ Risk Management รวมถึงการยืนยันยอดกับ Custodians / Nostro account / ตลาดหลักทรัพย์ และ Broker สง. ควรมีการออกแบบกระบวนการในการสอบยันเพื่อป้องกันไม่ให้มีช่องว่างหรือจุดบกพร่องที่มีนัยสำคัญ และระบบที่ดีควรระบุถึงสาเหตุที่มีการกระทบยอดไม่ตรงกันว่ามาจากที่ใดเพื่อให้ทำการตรวจสอบและปรับปรุงแก้ไขให้ถูกต้อง
12.2 ควรกำหนดระยะเวลาที่ส่วนงานไม่สามารถหาสาเหตุของการกระทบยอดที่ไม่ตรงกันเป็นตัวชี้วัดผลการปฏิบัติงาน เพื่อส่งเสริมให้มีการควบคุมการกระทบยอดให้มีความถูกต้องรัดกุม

Confirmations
13. สง. มีการวางขั้นตอนระบบการยืนยันยอด (Confirmation) และระบบควบคุมเพื่อลดความเสี่ยงที่เกิดจากรายการที่ไม่มีการยืนยัน (Unconfirmed trade) อย่างไร
14. สง. มั่นใจได้อย่างไรว่าข้อมูลผู้บริหารมีรายละเอียดเพียงพอที่จะระบุถึงความเสี่ยงที่เกิดจาก Outstanding confirmation
14.1 การทำธุรกรรมระหว่าง สง. กับคู่ค้าควรมีการยืนยันเพื่อให้มั่นใจว่า Position ที่บันทึกในระบบของ สง. ถูกต้อง รวมถึงธุรกรรมระหว่างหน่วยงานภายในสง. ด้วย อย่างไรก็ดี สง.ควรมีระบบสืบค้น (Track) และวิเคราะห์รายการ Outstanding confirmation พร้อมทั้งกำหนดขั้นตอนการนำเสนอถึงผู้บริหารระดับสูงหากหน่วยงานที่เกี่ยวข้องไม่สามารถปฏิบัติได้ตาม Service level agreement
14.2 สง. ควรกำหนดให้มี Confirmation ระหว่าง Back office ของ สง. กับ Back office ของคู่ค้าโดยตรง (ไม่ควรผ่าน Front office)
14.3 หาก สง. อยู่ระหว่างขั้นตอนรอเอกสาร Confirmation ฉบับสมบูรณ์ อาจใช้ขั้นตอนการยืนยันเบื้องต้นด้วยวาจาซึ่งถือเป็นเครื่องมือที่มีประโยชน์เช่นกัน เช่นการยืนยันผ่านทางโทรศัพท์ระหว่างฝ่ายงานปฏิบัติการ
14.4 สง. ควรให้ความสนใจกับ Confirmation สำหรับธุรกรรม OTC ซึ่งที่มีลักษณะเฉพาะที่อาจจะก่อให้เกิดความเสี่ยงเพิ่มขึ้นกว่าธุรกรรมปกติ เช่น ธุรกรรมที่ไม่มีการกำหนดให้ส่งมอบหลักประกัน หรือเรียก Margin ระหว่างกันก่อนครบกำหนดสัญญา เป็นต้น

Margining collateralization and cash management
15. สง. มั่นใจได้อย่างไรว่าขั้นตอนการเรียกหรือวาง Margin นำมาใช้ปฏิบัติได้อย่างเหมาะสม และการเปลี่ยนแปลง Margin แต่ละครั้งมีการสอบยันกับฐานะที่เกี่ยวข้องในการบันทึกบัญชี
15.1 ธุรกรรมที่มียอดคงค้างจำนวนสูงจะมีการเรียกหรือวาง Margin หรือหลักประกันที่สูงขึ้นเช่นกัน ดังนั้น สง. ควรมีระบบการสอบยันการเรียกหรือวาง Margin หรือหลักประกันเพื่อให้มั่นใจได้ว่าการเรียกหรือวาง Margin และสัมพันธ์กับ Position ในบัญชี ถูกต้องตรงกัน
15.2 สง. ควรมีการวิเคราะห์ที่มาของ Gross และ Net cash-flow และเข้าใจว่ารายการดังกล่าวอยู่ในส่วนใดของข้อบังคับ ฐานะและ รายงานกำไรขาดทุน เช่น ถ้ามี Net cash- flow เกิดขึ้นต้องดูว่า Net cash-flow นั้นถูก Offset โดยรายการใด เช่น Unrealized gain/loss ที่เป็น Unmargined/Uncollaterized gain/loss จากรายการใด

Segregation of duties and IT security
16. สง. มั่นใจได้อย่างไรว่ามีระบบ Access control ที่เหมาะสม และมาตรการรักษาความปลอดภัยที่ดี
17. สง.มีการแยกอำนาจหน้าที่เพื่อไม่ให้ User ที่มีเจตนาทุจริตทำความเสียหายแก่ สง.หรือไม่
17.1 สง.ควรพิจารณาว่ามีการดำเนินการด้าน IT security และ Access control อย่างเหมาะสมหรือไม่ เพื่อให้ User สามารถเข้าระบบเฉพาะที่เกี่ยวข้องกับงานตนเอง เช่น การแบ่งหน้าที่ของผู้จัดทำและผู้สอบทาน (Maker-checker) หรือ สามารถเข้าระบบที่ทำธุรกรรมเฉพาะที่ตนได้รับมอบอำนาจเท่านั้น สง.ควรพิจารณาทบทวนสิทธิในการเข้าระบบงานของพนักงานเป็นระยะๆ นอกจากนี้ควรให้ความสนใจกับขั้นตอนที่อาจเกิดความเสี่ยงจากการโอนย้ายหน้าที่ของพนักงานใน 3 หน่วยงานคือ Front office, Middle office และ Back office
17.2 ประเด็นที่ควรระวังเบื้องต้นคือ การใช้ Password ร่วมกันในการเข้าระบบ การใช้ Password ที่ง่ายต่อการเดา การควบคุมที่ทำได้ง่ายคือการให้ User เปลี่ยน Password เป็นระยะๆ และการสั่งระบบให้ Lock การเข้าระบบหากมีการใส่ Password ผิดกี่ครั้ง นอกจากนี้ควรมีการตรวจสอบได้ว่ามีการเข้าระบบนั้นๆ โดยส่วนงานใด เช่น เครื่องคอมพิวเตอร์ของ Front office เข้าระบบงานของ Back office สง. ควรส่งเสริมวัฒนธรรมการเก็บรักษา Password ของตนเองโดยไม่ให้มีการใช้ Password ร่วมกัน

Good Corporate Governance & Internal Audit

ผมใคร่ขอเรียนย้ำต่อคณะกรรมการและท่านผู้บริหารของทุกองค์กร โดยเฉพาะอย่างยิ่งสถาบันการเงินอีกครั้งว่า ท่านทราบหรือยังครับว่า องค์กรของท่านมีจุดอ่อนในกระบวนการบริหาร การควบคุมความเสี่ยง และการตรวจสอบตามฐานความเสี่ยงที่ยังไม่ทำ Gap Analysis เพื่อการบริหารการจัดการที่ดี ตามหลัก COSO – ERM ระหว่างข้อสังเกตของ FSA ข้างต้น ในส่วนที่ประยุกต์ได้กับแนวทางการบริหารการจัดการขององค์กรของท่านที่เป็นอยู่ในปัจจุบัน หรือ ท่านแน่ใจอย่างสมเหตุสมผลอย่างไรว่า องค์กรของท่านมีกระบวนการควบคุมความเสี่ยงต่าง ๆ ตามนัยของข้อสังเกต FSA ซึ่งอยู่ในระดับที่ยอมรับได้แล้ว คือมีการกำหนด Risk Appetite และ Risk Tolerance โดยผ่านคณะกรรมการเรียบร้อยแล้ว และมีการปฏิบัติ และรายงานอย่างสม่ำเสมออยู่จริง

Pervasive.  All-encompassing.  Horrible, destructive apathy.

This is what my days have become.  My work, here at my job, has become a farce.  Back when I thought there was hope for this miserable little company and, thus, a future for myself, I could make fun of the glaring inefficiencies, canyon-wide faults and schisms, with a relative sense of humor and diplomatic aplomb.

“Because,” I thought, “there’s hope, to fix it, for a future here.”  But a very important thing happened in the last month – my review.

Now, there is none of that.  This pathetic waste of money is an evil, hateful enterprise that ruins good, smart people and their rising careers.

Oh, the anger, the fury, that blazed in my heart that day when I sat in my manager’s office, having a heated discussion that lasted an hour and a half.  I even managed to curse my boss out and, surprisingly, he took my f-bombs with a deft and obliging sort of ease.  He knew my anger wasn’t directed at him, but rather at our CEO, the detestable runt of a woman who decided to revise my entire review.  I won’t get into heavy detail, but instead use one word that sums it up in my mind:  Hypocrisy.  I went beyond my ascribed duties to try to make a name for this organization (involved video production) and was told that I couldn’t be graded/rewarded for those efforts because they didn’t fall into my job description.  Then, no more than a week later, was asked by the CEO to produce a video for her.

After the anger, the void left by the dying embers remained just that – a void.  I feel nothing now.  No motivation to do anything of value or quality, nothing…Managers, take heed, this is an invaluable lesson in human psychology.  Incent (aka Reward) good employees and they will continue to do good work.  Fail to do this, or, in my instance, do the exact opposite, and they will resent you, the company and the work for it.  They will turn into a cancer.

Now I know what you’re thinking:  “Malaise” implies a certain benign quality.  If I tended to remain silent in my little pocket of misery, I would agree.  But being the vocal sort, this actually works like an infectious disease…my thoughts, words and flotsam of discontent are strewn about this wasteland, waiting for some unsuspecting co-worker to happen upon them and, subsequently, get infected.

I’ve often thought the biggest problem with newspapers today is that they’re saddled with a management structure that could be transplanted to any other kind of business with little or no changes needed. Insurance, for example, or a sewerage plant.

In other words, they’re not running a newspaper, they’re running a company that happens to produce news, and they really have a very tenuous grasp of what makes a newspaper earn money.

Some of them seem to think they sell print editions to punters. This is not true. They sell eyeballs to advertisers. They lure the eyeballs in with good stories, excellent photos etc, but they’re the bait, not the product.

Jason Whittaker has blogged on this and clearly, he’s got a career death wish:

The recession is not killing Big Media in this country, as the sales department will tell you. Nor is the internet and digital media to blame, as the prevailing theory goes. Media companies in Australia are struggling to make a buck through a lack of imagination. Through short-sightedness. Through commercial timidity, certainly.

Ultimately, though sheer management incompetence.

I can’t find anything to contradict him on.

Last October I wrote about Towergate  insurance groups decision to pay huge bonuses to its directors irrespective of the companies poor financial performance.

“In 2006 the company made a net profit of £4 mill, and paid £14.2 mill to its executives as bonuses. In 2007 the company made a net loss of £12 mill and, guess what, paid £13 mill as executive bonuses!”

That decision was be perceived to be unethical by some (not all), but four months later it is clear that the greed of these directors (and I assume others like them in businesses across the country) is directly contributing to the current economic crisis.

The Guardian reporting  this week on the financial woes of Lloyd’s and HBOS  noted:

“Another firm, Towergate, an insurance group backed by HBOS and Lloyds, has breached covenants and is struggling to repay its debts.”

For those who still believe that ethically questionable decisions, taken in board rooms across the country, do not have a direct effect on them then this article in the Insurance Timesabout office closures and  job losses at Towergate may make you reconsider.

So while our unemployment figures are rising and we head deeper into recession, government money is being used to bail out the banks, who’ve loaned money to companies, who pay themselves bonuses rather than meet their financial obligations.

In order to streamline this process and cut out the middle man perhaps we could just send our tax contributions direct to those who are still sitting pretty.

who says crime doesn't pay?

Gosh, must have been close to a year ago, SMS and I went to Applebee’s (insert heavy sigh here).
On a side, I can NEVER understand why this place is SO busy.
Anyway, my “drink” had no liquor in it, our waitress ignored us, my salad had brown avocado (brown side down), no shrimp (despite being advertised as “Avocado Shrimp Salad”), dressing ALL OVER the edge of the plate (“hee hee, I didn’t remember if you said on the side or not…”).

One returned meal and adjusted bill later, I’m still ticked, so I write a couple of nasty letters to the corporate office.
Using such phrases as “disgusting”, “disrespectful”, “ignored”, “unprofessional”, “gross” and “will never go back”, I figured I got my point across.

Then there was the voicemail.
“Hi Stephanie, this is the General Manager at Applebee’s McKinley. Sorry to hear about your experience. I really wish you would have talked to a manager while on site so we could have corrected the issue without getting corporate involved. When you decide to join us for dinner, ask to speak to the manager as we have a $10 gift card on hold for you.”
1) I AM NEVER EATING THERE AGAIN
2) I DID speak to a manager and was told “I don’t even know why we have this on the menu, avocados are hard to keep.”
3) Did you just chastise me? I think you did.
4) Over priced drink $8, Overpriced fountain drink $3, Icky Salad $9, SMS’ thing $8. $28 pre-adjustment. And you want to give me $10.

Today, I check my email.
Low and behold, there’s an email from Applebee’s.
They got my email address from my complaint letters.

I DO NOT WANT YOUR STEAK.
Unsubscribe.

/diatribe.

It starts at the top!

If you want to know who to blame for bad customer service look no further than the top of the food chain. The owners and management are the ones responsible for what ever type of customer service a company provides.

Usually when a customer service training program is started though, the normal starting place is at the bottom. The general staff employees: the sales people, receptionists, front desk, technicians etc are the ones sent for the training. This bottom-up customer service training program is backwards! Actually the training should start at the top, not the bottom!

With some companies I really wonder what in the world are they thinking! Do they honestly care for the customer, or is the customer thought of as a farmer thinks of a cow, something to be milked for all it can provide. Actually that’s unfair to farmers. They are much more interested in the cow’s well-being than many companies are in their customers.

Advertising is a direct reflection of the attitude of management. So much advertising this day is really nothing more than a pack of lies. We see this all the time. Advertisements with the word FREE in them are inevitably full of lies. There is Free Credit report dot com. Definitely NOT free. Products are often advertised for free, and of course they are not. There is always more to it. Why can’t they just be honest? If the offer is two for the price of one, why not say it. Instead they say it’s free and then when you read the fine print, you see that the product is “free” only when you buy another product.

Advertising and marketing practices speak volumes about the company’s attitude toward the customers.

Of course EVERY business claims to REALLY CARE about their customers. This phony, false caring is seen through sales procedures, pricing and billing policies.

Some companies will sign you up for services you didn’t order, bill you for products or services you didn’t want and only correct things when the customer raises a stink. What kind of customer service is that? It seems that the bigger a company gets the more brazen it gets in its predatory and criminal practices.

Some recent examples I have seen are:

Recently many banks have been changing the due date on their credit card statements. The idea is that the customer gets used to paying on the 10th of each month. So the bank changes it to the 7th. The idea is to catch the customer napping and then the bank gets to hit the customer with a late payment fee of $35.00. Not to mention a negative credit report entry, or a higher interest rate.

I used Verizon for some of my business accounts in the past. In one year I had three separate instances where they billed us for services we didn’t want or use, lied to entice us to sign up for new services and then tried to delay our switching lines when we finally decided to go with another provider.

These examples of abuse are not customer service issues. Somewhere there is a management person who comes up with these “bright ideas” to make a few extra bucks by ripping off the customers. The company probably gave the “genius” a bonus, more stock options and a bigger office for devising these new scams.

How about some companies exchange or refund policies? Have you ever tried to change your airline ticket or cancel your ticket due to an illness or accident? The policy is a total penalty to the customer. I recently saw an ad for an online site for purchasing airline tickets. They were making light of a person who can’t complete the transaction to purchase airline tickets. Of course the person is nervous about the final purchase selection! If you make a mistake or change your mind, there goes half your money!!!!!

All of these examples are management decisions. These policies and actions are NOT decided by the customer service staff. They are the unlucky ones who have to enforce these polices and take the brunt of the pissed off customers who feel ripped off and abused by the managements decisions.

Employee loyalty is everything.

But when I say that management bears the responsibility of good or bad customer service, I am speaking about more than the above examples. Really good customer service starts with loyal employees. If the employees are not loyal to the company they are NOT going to do the extras that add up to great service. Management may THINK that the employees will do what is best for the company because “this is what they should do” or “this is what we pay them for”. Maybe managers go out and watch how employees treat customers directly and see good service and so assume that this is what happens when they are not watching.

But when they are NOT watching employees who are not loyal to the company I can tell you from being there that this is NOT the case. Any management person who thinks otherwise is delusional.

How many times have you seen an employee change the way they treat customers when there is not anyone supervising them? Ever go to a 7-11 late at night? Or anyplace really. I have seen this on airlines, at hotels, restaurants, stores, hair salons, dental offices, ad infinitum. ONLY loyal employees make loyal customers.

So, how does a company make loyal employees? Pay and benefits are part of it, but there is a lot more: acknowledging employees efforts; creating and maintaining a safe environment; continuing education; empowering people; involving employees in making decisions. These are what make an employee loyal. Honesty from management is also a key factor in what makes loyal employees! You wouldn’t think you had to point that one out, but have you ever seen any management that was less than honest with its employees?

Internal atmosphere

The overall atmosphere inside a business has EVERYTHING to do with its level of customer service. We already spoke about the relationship between management and employees, but what about the internal attitudes between departments and employees? I don’t think I have ever seen any large company where there was not loads of bickering and infighting between departments. Sales versus production. Shipping versus sales. Accounting versus everyone. Front office staff versus the back staff. The list goes on and on. 80% of all customer complaints are caused by dropped communication. The message did not get relayed, was lost, etc. Or it could be that the system is at fault, there were no correct channels for the communication to flow on. All of these problems are again management problems. If there are ANY communication problems, any bickering between departments, then right there you have management who are too unaware or lazy to be considered management. And there are the bulk of your complaints from customers.

Another version of this I have seen is where the employees are bluntly critical of the customers. The customers are ”stupid”, “idiots”, “morons”, etc. I was in a computer repair shop not too long ago and the staff were making deriding jokes about how stupid their customers were. What idiot would do this, or do that, ha ha. No wonder the moron’s computer broke. Then the managers walked in the room and went right into agreement with them! They started laughing and agreeing and telling their own stories about what idiots the customers were.

What an example to set! Those “stupid” customers are the only reason you have a job! When employees work in an environment where it is okay to make these sorts of comments, don’t you think this is going to come through when the employees deal with customers? Of course it will! Have you ever run into a smarmy or condescending computer repair tech? Where do you think they got it?!

Being a manager is a lot like being a good gardener: you have to be good at weeding! Employees who constantly gripe, gossip, criticize and complain about each other AND / OR about customers are the ones who need to get weeded out ASAP. They set a bad example and drive way your loyal employees who DO care. Of course if a company has management fitting into some of the categories you see above its very unlikely that they will do any weeding. Simply because they need to weed them selves out first! And that’s not very likely.

Where to start?

Good management sets policies and procedures for advertising, marketing, pricing, customer service, etc, that in themselves demonstrate a commitment to great caring customer service. They then hire, train, nurture and keep loyal employees. Good management sets an example for all employees. They set an example in how they treat all employees and their customers. Good management creates a safe productive environment by weeding out the people who don’t care and who just want to be miserable.

These are the basic points necessary to achieve to attain great customer service.

I always have a derisive laugh when I see a company with poor customer service try to fix it by sending a few of their lowest paid employees to some customer service classes. Because the ones who need the classes are the ones at the top, not the bottom!

So, the next time you go into or call any company and get steamed because they provide lousy customer service, now you will not only know who to blame, but you will also know where they need to start to make things right!!!

Click here to learn about our WelcomeTeam Training program.

I was excited all day today because I read on the Internet that today was get you pets’ picture taken with Santa day at the Galleria. I wanted to make sure the Internet was right so I called the Galleria’s Customer service about 1/2 hour before we left. The woman confirmed the event and I was thrilled. So I got Mugsy and Yoshi ready and McKay and Hayden got their “picture” clothes on and we all got in the car and went to the Galleria. Of course, McKay and Hayden were complaining that they had to be at the Galleria with dogs and commenting that no one brings dogs to the mall. People were stopping us and petting the dogs. They loved Yoshi! Yoshi, on the otherhand, didn’t like being there with all those people. She was really shaking. After a while she calmed down and relaxed. She had a while to relax too because we were in line for 50 mins. That was pretty crazy. There was a couple with their two pug dogs right in front of us so that was nice to be able to talk to them about their dogs. When the couple in front of us got up to the front of the line we were told that pet night ended the week before. The website said every Monday evening 6 to 9 p.m. Well, we were pretty mad and the fun began. They said they couldn’t take the pictures because it ended last week. We said, “What’s the big deal, just take the pictures.” And, it was advertised to be tonight as well as the customer service woman saying that it was in fact pet night. They said that if we waited to the end of the picture session then they would stay open and take the pictures. That was another 50 mins and we didn’t want the dogs to have to wait that long. It was already tramatic enough. When we got home I sent an email to the mall management, but I don’t think anything will come of it. So, it was a very disappointing evening, It would have been so cute to have the dogs in the santa picture. Maybe next year…

The New South Wales government is now considering some level of development in the national parks of New South Wales. Just what level of development that may be is yet to be made clear. It is understood that the development may include accommodation projects, various commercial enterprises and guided bush walks.

Tourism Minster Jodi McKay, a former news reader with NBN television, is waiting on a report from a government commissioned taskforce looking into ways that tourism can be increased in the state’s national parks.

The planned tourism development of national parks is a major step away from the ‘wilderness’ goals of recent times and represents a threat to the wilderness values of national parks and world heritage listed areas.

However, a certain level of development may be appropriate, given the serious deterioration of many of the amenities and signage within New South Wales national parks. Many access routes are also seriously degraded following years of poor management.

Perhaps a quality New South Wales national parks and reserves web site could be developed, with the current web site being quite dated and not particularly useful for visitors to the national parks of New South Wales. Quality information on the attractions and access to each national park would greatly improve the tourist potential of New South Wales national parks.

If quality visitor brochures/leaflets on such things as camping facilities, access routes, walking trails and park attractions could be developed and made available via PDF documents on the web site, potential visitors could plan their trips and this would certainly increase visitor numbers to the national parks.

Quality content and relevant up-to-date information on each national park, as well as well maintained access routes and facilities would encourage far more people to visit the national parks and give visitors a memorable experience.

BELOW: Footage of the Warrumbungle National Park in NSW.