“Here is blatant hypocrisy, deception and carnal corruption. Have business ethics every been so raw and rancid as in this true scenario?

Having seen such a beautiful picture of a young pure powerful Church of Jesus Christ, suddenly the pendulum swings, and this is something we see often in The Bible. It is something we experience in everyday life too. Have you ever noticed that? Everything appears to be going so well and quite suddenly surprise confronts us.

The scene changes, in Acts Chapter 5, in the New Testament, where we read of another aspect of church life which is just as real.

We read of a husband and wife – Ananias and Sapphira. They sold a piece of property. Let’s say, just to get the feel of what was happening, that they got £200,000 for it. They talked it over, and deciding to bring £150,000 and present it to the leadership in The Church, but giving the impression they were offering the entire amount.

Have you ever been tempted to allow people to think you are giving and donating more than you really are? It may present a good impression for a brief moment, but you are kidding no-one.

One of the leaders, Peter, challenges Ananias when he comes with what might be regarded as a substantial offering, “”Why are you lying to the Holy Spirit? Why?

“”You were free to handle the money, weren’t you? Why have you behaved in this way? Whatever made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men – but to God.”"

Ananias dropped down dead. A great reverential fear came upon all who heard what had happened.
Sometimes it can be good to get a real fright. Sometimes it is good to be filled with a healthy fear.

Might this article make you give serious thought to your giving and donating – or perhaps to some other area in your business life?

About three hours later, his wife came into the Jerusalem Fellowship, not knowing what had happened. Peter asks Sapphira some questions. “”Tell me, is this the price you got for the property you sold? Was it £150,000?”" “”YES, that’s right. That’s what we got.”"

Is Peter giving her the opportunity to confess her sins, repent, sort things out and put right what was very wrong? There is no sense of Repentance or Confession, and she too dies.

If there was one thing, God was not going to permit in the Church at this time it was hypocrisy. If this had gone unchecked, it could have wrecked and ruined that young Church.

Hypocrisy wrecks The Church of Jesus Christ quickly, and where money is involved hypocrisy and deception can become dangerous.

Many years ago when I was travelling through Germany on a train a very wise man told me, as we discussed spiritual matters and money – “”Never touch the gold or the glory.”"

If God gives you money give away the surplus. If God uses you in any way, pass all the praise and glory on to Him – never bathe in any of it yourself. What precious advice.

I had been ministering at four Conferences and Preaching Engagements, and each group had given me travelling expenses and gifts of money – and to me, as a youngish preacher and teacher, all this had become a very real question and conundrum. I am so glad it did not become a problem. This wise man provided me with a wise answer, and I am glad I had the guts to put it into practice.

Their sin was that they wanted to be thought of as being as generous as Barnabas, who had given in a generous substantial manner, without paying the cost. There is a COST in PENTECOST.

Jesus Christ was so tender with adulteresses, but blasted hypocrites.

The signs and wonders continued in that young church, but the crowds of people joining evaporated and disappeared. People still came to faith in Jesus Christ, but it was a slightly different situation now.

There are ethical and moral principles here from which every business man could learn. These lessons could rescue a man from years of heartache and pain.

Sandy Shaw

Sandy Shaw is Pastor of Nairn Christian Fellowship, Chaplain at Inverness Prison, and Nairn Academy, and serves on The Children’s Panel in Scotland, and has travelled extensively over these past years teaching, speaking, in America, Canada, South Africa, Australia, making 12 visits to Israel conducting Tours and Pilgrimages, and most recently in Uganda and Kenya, ministering at Pastors and Leaders Seminars, in the poor areas surrounding Kampala, Nairobi, Mombasa and Kisumu.

He broadcasts regularly on WSHO radio out of New Orleans, and writes a weekly commentary at this site entitled “”Word from Scotland”" on various biblical themes, as well as a weekly newspaper column.

His M.A. and B.D. degrees are from The University of Edinburgh, and he continues to run and exercise regularly to maintain a level of physical fitness.

Article Source

Tags: individual, ethics, code, issues, business

I firmly believe that if you’re told that a meeting is scheduled to begin at 8:00am, then you should arrive at least 10 minutes early so as to be in your seat and ready for a timely start.

I am tired of arriving on time for a meeting and, along with the other attendees, must sit and wait for those one or two stragglers who don’t have any respect for us and then just wander in without even an, “I’m sorry”, or a “Thank you for waiting”. The meeting facilitator feels the need to draw out the start of the program so the late comers don’t miss anything. WHY?

These late comers have not given any thought to the feelings of others. They are disrespectful of the rest of the group and only care about themselves. These people are attention getters. They look for attention in any way, shape or form. Arriving late puts the spotlight on them and this makes them feel “special’. Special? Not in my book. These latecomers have no sense of time, no respect for others, no organizations skills, and they don’t even care how their tardiness affects others. They are downright RUDE!

Some simple planning would ensure a timely arrival. But, no, that would involve organization, thinking ahead and thinking of others. That wouldn’t get them the undeserved attention and they wouldn’t get the satisfaction that they had enough control and power to hold up a meeting and flout the feelings of others.

People who are consistently late are attention getters. The meeting room is filled with annoyed people who had the decency to arrive on time… some having gone through great lengths to ensure their on-time arrival…and for what? To wait for these rude, “It’s all about me” types who merely want to make their grand entrance in front of a captive audience. Waiting for latecomers only enables these tardy attendees to believe that it is okay to be late and make everyone wait for them. It tells them that they don’t have to think of others, they don’t have to learn to manage their time better, they don’t have to be considerate, and they don’t have to go out of their way.
And how does it make me feel?

Angry, of course!!! I set my alarm, get up early, shower, do my hair & makeup, make my coffee, and have my breakfast. The night before I make sure I have gas in my truck. I leave the house early enough to fight any traffic I might run into and in case I’ve not been to this particular venue before I leave some time for “getting lost”, and parking. I thought, planned and organized.

Oh, and then there are the times when you and your spouse are attending the same event. Your partner is a bit sluggish and you urge them along so you won’t be one of “those” people! “Hurry, hurry, get moving”. Then, BOOM…. You arrive on time and end up having to wait! So, on top of having to deal with the rude and disrespectful latecomer, now you have to listen to the whining of your spouse complaining that you made him/her rush for no reason.

Why are people late?

For some, it’s an expression of power. They make you wait because they think they can and when a meeting is held up because of the latecomer, their behavior is validated.

Many people are “drama queens”. They allow the littlest thing get out of hand…in their own heads. A broken nail turns into major surgery! These diversions to the schedule keeps the drama queen distracted and they lose track of time…therefore late for the meeting you’ve gotten to on time.
Another reason why people are late is their inability to live in reality. Some people believe that they can drive across town in 20 minutes. Never once do they think about traffic, lights, parking and other variables. These individuals cut time too close and they don’t leave time for the unexpected. They lack time management and organizational skills.

Whatever the reason….I still believe that being late is rude and disrespectful. No matter what personality type you are… being late shouldn’t be tolerated when it affects others. I also believe that meetings shouldn’t be held up until the drama queen shows up. Their inappropriate behavior should not be rewarded.

If you can’t be early… at least be on time. It’s not much to ask, it’s common courtesy and respect.

Eydie Stumpf,
Virtual Assistant,
President and Owner,
Eydie’s Office

Eydie is a small business owner in Southern California. She is an active member of the Corona Chamber of Commerce and recent recipient of their Rookie of the Quarter Award. Eydie’s clients range from non-profit organizations to business coaches, and authors.

Article Source

Tags: individual, ethics, code, issues, business

Owning a twelve room house is very expensive, my cleaning lady and her sister who is my cook cost me fifteen hundred dollars a week for six days work. Health insurance is provided by me. Both are is well worth what I pay them. I like my clothes and linens washed daily by hand and my two cars washed and waxed. The washing machines destroy the quality of material so they are not used except by them. Both have been with me for over five years. we are all lovers but never on working hours.

My cook is three years younger than her sister, she is forty three years old. She once worked as a stripper but gave it up to work for me. The food shopping and kitchen cleanup is done by her. Breakfast is served at eight but lunch and dinner can be served at any time. I always like a late night snack and a dry martini. The sisters live with me and have their own rooms. I cannot sleep well with any one in my bed. When we make love it is in the large bedroom that my deceased parents used to share.

Sunday is my employees day off so we all go mall shopping followed by dinner and dancing. We never return home until the wee hours of the morning. Both sisters are usually dead drunk. I am the driver so I keep my self down to a martini or two. We are all up at eight A.M. to start the working day of with a hot breakfast. Life is good to us all and we are one happy bunch.

On a Sunday night when we were dinning and dancing I asked the sisters if they would like to retire and live with me in a residential hotel. The staff of the hotel would provide all the services needed including cooking and cleaning. They were delighted to hear such a kind offer but were frightened at the thought of losing their salaries. I explained that the salaries would continue and so would our relationship as friends and lovers. They agreed and I sold my house. We then all moved into a luxurious three bedroom suite.

My parents were business people and employed over one hundred workers. Before they died in an automobile accident they explained to me the importance of being fair to your employees. I never forgot their teachings. The sisters that live with me were my employees and if my parents were alive they would be proud of me.

Article Source

Tags: business, code, ethics, individual, issues

Although, from a consumer’s point of view, the internet marketplace is much like a super-mall – a place where you can get just about anything if you browse or search long enough – the businesses behind these store fronts have their own stories to tell. While they enjoy satisfying each customer’s needs and making sales, these businesses also share the usual customer issues and have a few challenges unique to online business.

One of the hallmarks of online marketing is the novelty that any customer anywhere can make a purchase at any time of day. But the average customer doesn’t always understand, and may not always be patient or understanding, regarding the safeguards and concessions businesses must make to balance quick-and-easy checkout with fraud-prevention. Some of these issues include: different billing and shipping addresses, wrongly entered data, security code errors, address verification mismatches – and biggest of all, remote card entry with no signature verification.

And, for real accountability, the merchant would ideally require the signature of the card holder upon receipt of merchandise, a difficult standard to achieve. Not only do UPS and FedEx charge extra now for a required signature, but there is also no guarantee that the specified recipient will be the actual signatory. And, in case you haven’t heard, claims made by businesses against some carriers, for damage, loss, or non-delivery, are more difficult than ever to get, not to mention time consuming. Unfortunately, many customers could care less about the logistics – “Where’s my damned order; are you guys a real business or what?!”

All About the Bottom Line

In the end, each business is constantly juggling and weighing all of the different facets of internet sales to strike a profitable balance. Profitable? Indeed, with costs of goods and transportation increasing dramatically, customers are likely to consider purchasing online even more favorably … yet they, too, will have to weigh the increasing prices that internet businesses will have to charge to stay in business as wholesale costs shift and adjust.

But what about this ‘bottom line’ mentality that seems to be the endless mantra of the wealthy and successful businessmen and women? Clearly, a business does have to be realistic about maintaining profitability; yet, the business dynamics behind that can be as different as night and day. To be profitable doesn’t mean that one has to run a business as if the CEO were Attila the Hun himself, though we do seem to have a few who might fit that category these days….

Other Ways

Naturally, there are probably as many opinions about this situation and its merits and de-merits as there are people who would write or talk about it. Nevertheless, one interesting word that sums up the true responsibility of every organizer in society – from businessmen and politicians to the ever-important workforce – and includes multiple factors at once, is sustainability.

Sustainable (business) practices involve a whole different set of logistics aimed at maintaining sustainability on every level of individual, social and ecological life, while yet running a profitable business. And, if you think it is a big challenge to become a multi-millionaire or billionaire CEO, or to carry some other prominent title, try running a truly sustainable operation. Of course, you aren’t likely to get the same 6 or 7-figure income or stock options, but are we humans still so shallow and naïve that we still think that as long as we have as much money as possible, the rest of the world can sink or swim as it will?

What pathetic and immature thinking that would be; yet, it would seem that some of these people would be just as happy to move to another continent if the US economy were to fail, as would a parasite whose host no longer satisfies its hunger. Indeed, people need to stop pretending to be the authoritative experts about money, business and everything else, and start thinking about the earth we live on, the ecosystem we live within, and the well-being of future generations of mankind and all life on the planet.

And the irony of the situation, which has also faced the greatest of past civilizations, is that all of this is based upon one essential thing: individual choice; what each individual, and particularly the most influential individuals, chooses for himself and others. Perhaps underrated here is the contribution of: family values, educational perspectives, social programming, religious training, personal experience, and ambition, upon a person’s vision of possibilities and means of realizing whatever goals he or she sets out to accomplish.

So, we can individually and collectively claim that the world is ‘going to hell in a hand basket’ and behave that way; or we can choose to open our mental horizons, suspend the intellect trained to doubt anything not ‘approved’ by our personal and social authorities, and instead work together to create a brighter and more hopeful and healthy future for mankind. And, since the future will be lived by our own descendants, indeed we should not be in a hurry to abdicate such critical choices and then whine about it all.

Brian Haring has been with Absolute Comfort on Sale for over five years, and has successfully brought natural and organic bedding products into the store to complement the extensive line of memory foam products which have been the company’s hallmark. Our store is here and a summary of green products is available at Absolute Comfort on Sale: Go Green. Our fabulous Organic Wool Topper is also available here Organic Wool Mattress Topper.

Article Source

Tags: ethics, individual, business, personal, internet

It’s gotten mighty hard to nail down just exactly what people mean these days when they speak of corporate social responsibility.

Does it mean extracting sea turtles out of fishing nets or not eating monoculture salmon? Does it mean not out-sourcing jobs to cheaper foreign lands even if it raises the standard of living in those places? What if the outsourced jobs go to foreign union members? Is it better to build a new LEED certified building or to make due with the old building that’s sturdy if not entirely energy efficient? Is it more socially responsible for a company to donate to an AIDS orphan cause in Africa than to a ballet company in Africa? What if the ballet company employs AIDS victims?

I’m not an ethicist and some of these questions are ethical questions. But for the rest of us how are we supposed to navigate the thicket of sometimes competing and oftentimes perplexing conundrums framed as issues of corporate social responsibility?

This was all so much easier when “the business of America [was still] business,” to paraphrase the famously-taciturn former U.S. President Calvin Coolidge.

I am, however, a marketer. And in marketing one way to know where you stand with stakeholders who are important to you is to ask them. It won’t necessarily yield perfect moral clarity, but it can suggest pathways.

Fleishman-Hillard, a public relations firm and division of Omnicom, in conjunction with the National Consumers League has now conducted three studies on the subject of corporate social responsibility; in 2005, 2006 and 2007.

I read the executive summary for the 2007 study and if you can get past the laughably inaccurate renderings of the bar charts and the occasional editorializing in the summary… which has been no small hurdle for me… there may be something here for cause marketers.

What does “corporate social responsibility” mean? Fleishman-Hillard asked consumers just that as an open-ended, unprompted question. A truncated list of responses from the 2007 survey released in May included the following:

Commitment to communities—23 percent
Commitment to employees—17 percent
Responsibility to the environment—11 percent
Provide quality products—10 percent
More charitable donations—1 percent
Don’t know—9 percent

What contributions do consumers expect from companies? Again, the truncated list included:

Non-financial contributions—29 percent
No expectations—13 percent
Treating employees well—11 percent
Fixing problems created by company—11 percent
Doing a good job—11 percent
Environmentally-friendly practices—10 percent
Financial contributions—10 percent

What to make of these low numbers when it comes to corporate charitable donations? The authors of the study’s executive summary surmise that:

“…the consistent findings across both the 2006 and 2007 CSR surveys, when it comes to defining the meaning and expectations surrounding CSR, suggest that companies’ charitable and philanthropic giving is no longer enough to impress consumers. Perhaps it is now viewed as a standard expectation that consumers have — a bare minimum requirement — to even be considered as a socially responsible company.”

They’re suggesting that there’s a kind of market price for corporate social responsibility and that consumers have already factored into that price corporate generosity to charity.

According to the Fleishman-Hillard study, what is likely to move the needle for consumers when it comes to corporate social responsibility? As it turns out, it’s self interest.

When asked what is most important to consumers with regard to corporate social responsibility the top vote getter with 29 percent was ‘treats/pays employee well.’ If England is a nation of shopkeepers then the U.S. is a nation of employees. And the survey’s respondees are internalizing the question and answering it as employees.

And yet, unemployment is 4.5 percent right now in the United States… quite low… which has driven real wages up. So while the newspaper headlines here are filled with stories of jobs being exported to India and China, the fact is that the American worker is in pretty good shape overall; the glass is half-full. But the perception is that the American worker is endangered… that the glass is half-empty. The Fleishman-Hillard study bears that out.

Changing that perception is in no small way a public relations challenge.

Call Fleishman-Hillard. I’m sure they’d be glad to help

Paul Jones is the principal of Alden Keene & Associates, a consultancy specializing in integrating marketing and communications, market research, and internal and external communications. One of Alden Keene’s especialidads de la casa is cause-related marketing. That is, helping businesses and nonprofits come together in ways that profit both. Check his blog at http://causerelatedmarketing.blogspot.com . Copyright 2007 Alden Keene & Associates.

Article source

Tags: individual, ethics, code, issues, business

First, I’m hardly old enough to be in the “crochety” class. And secondly, I’ve been feeling this way for about 30 years.

My complaint? Delivering the goods. Or the lack thereof.

Growing up, one of the things stressed in my family had to do with keeping your word. When you said you would do something, promised to make good on something, you did it. Or made every good effort to do so. Mostly, you delivered the goods. You showed up on time. Made the return phone call. Produced what you’d promised. Kept your word.

Occasionally, circumstances simply worked totally against you and it turned out that what you’d promised wasn’t possible. Still, you did all you could to bring about the pledged result.

And if you didn’t?

FEELING BADLY AND YOUR PERSONAL
INTEGRITY

You felt badly, really badly. Not keeping your word was a very serious thing. Not because others thought so, but because it was the essence of your own personal integrity.

And what is integrity? It means “wholeness,” something complete in itself. And having it and living by it means that you become trusted by others. They can count on you. They know you’ll deliver the goods.

So when you truly were not able to do so, despite every effort you made to keep your word, you were personally wounded. It wasn’t so much that you’d let others down; you’d let yourself down. You felt badly, sometimes for a long while in serious cases. You didn’t just forget it and prate on about your self esteem or how tough things were. You knew you’d screwed up.

DIFFERENT FISH

And today?

Today is a very different kettle of fish, I’m sad to say. Nowadays, delivering the goods all too often deals with written contracts and getting away with only what is written down…if that. It seems to be about cutting corners, avoiding any commitment, personal or otherwise, finding ways to deliver less than what was promised, fooling the other guy. And laughing when you get away with it.

NOT GIVING A DAMN

Does any of this sound familiar? Met too many folks like this lately? Been screwed in some deals? Didn’t get what you paid for? Discovered there had been some surprises in the small print?

CHANGE IS COMING

Probably won’t make you feel a whole lot better, but the times they are ‘achangin. We’re beginning to see the return of that older version of ethics and integrity.

Why?

The internet.

“How come?” you might ask.

Because of both distance and anonymity. What we’re seeing in the way of business on the internet today is an unbelievably tiny increment of what is to come. Eventually, Trillions (yep, with a big “T”) of business will be done this way. Already you’re dealing with people whom you’ve never – and will never – see, with whom you don’t actually speak, in many instances. They may be in other cities, other territories and, often, in other countries. Those who will prosper will be those who deliver the goods, keep their word, make good on their promises. The others will quickly lose their lustre. The internet is quick to let you know when a phony is running around, when quality is poor, when the “deal” isn’t being kept.

Sometimes. Apparently, some good relationships are being created, marriages taking place, perhaps families being raised. Too soon to tell how this may work.

The civilized world is held together with concepts. These are expressed by words and deeds. As one writer, living in a small town in France, said, “Most of life is governed, not by laws written by legislatures, but by invisible rules of order. They are written down nowhere, but respected almost universally.”

If your words and deeds don’t deliver the goods, you will eventually be shunned. No matter the wealth or station in life you attain, you’ll be known by whether you deliver the goods.

Mr. Eric Barnes is President & General Manager of Capital Funds Group Ltd., a Canadian based consulting firm specializing in Putting Companies and Money Together. They also work with non-US companies to take them public rapidly and inexpensively, then getting them funded. Visit our website

What you are about to read is a true story. Names and job titles have been changed.

This is one of those times when I feel it will be useful to let others in on some of the “not-too-pretty” stuff that goes on out here in the business world of my country.

I know that some of my readers may not live/work out here, and may probably not have experienced this first hand. Yet, I was glad to discover that a certain US based self-made millionaire entrepreneur publisher of a widely read newsletter IS aware that this problem exists on his side of the business world – as evidenced in his treatment of that subject in a recent issue.

Here’s the true story:

Over a recent three month period, Oyat Edabgalos – a Lagos based software developer – worked on three different custom software development projects that earned him what he considered “profitable” income. All three clients had expressed satisfaction with the work he did for them (In fact one of them referred him to the other, his aunt, who is a full-blooded Ghanaian).

Now, during this three month period, Oyat was also involved in a protracted discussion/negotiation with the GM – Sule Kasali – of a certain service company that is over 15 years old.

Instead of purchasing a customisable product Oyat had built for a similar organisation in March this year, Sule had asked that he (Oyat) explore making the software do a variety of other things.

When Oyat confirmed that what Sule wanted was possible, BUT that the price would be higher, this interesting gentleman told him he had actually been looking forward to having Oyat LOWER his fees beyond what he had initially offered the software when it was WITHOUT the added features requested!

When Oyat told him THAT would not be possible (he did this with a BIG smile on his face), Sule then told him his Uncle was the GM of another nearby company, and he (the Uncle) would also buy the finished software. He even told Oyat re-assuringly “I guarantee you he will buy”. Oyat told him he could not accept a guarantee being made on behalf of another person, as it would not be binding on that person, but Sule insisted he was sure the other GM would agree.

Drawing from past experience, Oyat told him it would be better if both companies shared the now higher fee payment so they could get a joint discount – and pay 70% in advance. Sule agreed, and proceeded to have the accountant write me his own advance payment check. But just before they wrote the cheque, he asked that Oyat let him pay the advance as one round figure which amounted to 65%, so he could pay the rest on project completion.

Oyat agreed and started work that same morning. By the end of the 2nd day, he had delivered one of the intended four modules of the software and coached the accountant on how to use it. But he had not cashed his cheque. This was to later turn out to be fortunate for him.

Here’s why: Towards the end of the 2nd day, Oyat found himself AGAIN reminding Sule to ask his Uncle (the other company’s GM) when he would pay his own “GUARANTEED” 70% advance. Sule replied that for some reason he had suddenly been unable to reach his Uncle on phone, saying “maybe he’s out of town”. Next thing Oyat knew, Sule had hurried off into the car to go home, promising to have his Uncle call him, while at the same time urging him to continue work.

At this point ALL the red lights in Oyat’s head were ON and flashing madly. Incidentally he had started work for the other three clients mentioned at the start of this article – who were relatively younger/smaller businesses – on trust without insisting on immediate advance payment(but getting it at the most, the very next day after he started) and had gotten good results.

He realised that the project for Sule’s company was not going to be the same as those ones.

So, he packed up his stuff, and left their premises that day AFTER returning the advance payment cheque to the accountant – without, of course, trying to cash it or anything of the sort. He had learnt from Awiyum Narideda, five years before, that there are some projects/clients that you must simply WALK AWAY FROM when it looks like the relationship is going to one-sided, with YOU being the loser.

Next day, he did an email to Sule, advising that he would not continue work UNTIL the agreed full advance payment from both companies had been received. He went further to print/send a paper version just to be sure Sule got it. 24 hours later Sule called him to say his Uncle (the same one he had “GUARANTEED” would pay) had BLUNTLY refused to agree to pay any advance UNTIL Oyat finished the job for Sule’s company and he (the Uncle) confirmed it was functioning properly.

Oyat made a point of not saying “I told you so” to Sule.

(But he could not help wondering to himself if there had actually been any “Uncle” in the first place. What if, he thought, it had just been a ploy to him me to agree to the discounted fee, so that on completing the job, they would have simply told him the other person had pulled out, and he would have been forced to accept just the balance 30% from them? He of course had no means of verifying this.)

Having broken the “bad news” to him, Sule asked Oyat, “So what do we do now?”. Oyat said he would come into Sule’s office the next morning to discuss it.

But alas, the next morning he found myself having another protracted discussion on an already over flogged issue. Despite the fact that he had agreed to leave the fee at the discounted rate, and the fact that he had already delivered – without asking payment – a software module (worth 25% of the total fee) that was already installed for use, Sule kept him in his office for over an hour pressuring him to lower the fee AND accept a 50% advance instead of his standard 70% advance.

All of this – to Sule – was obviously not asking too much EVEN after he had bluntly refused to leave out any of the additional features he had requested Oyat incorporate into the software, so the price could come down.

In other words, he wanted all the bells and whistles, but did not feel they were worth paying more for. Or to put it more accurately: “The Chairman would never agree to that”. He would often say this to virtually anything one said which he did not want to give in to. That way, you would be made to accept that you did not have a choice but to accept anything he offered you.

Unfortunately for Sule, Oyat – in a previous life – had quit his job as a manager in a blue chip corporate multinational, to start his own business over seven years before, because (apart from the fact that he had always wanted to run his own business) he did not like anyone telling him he did not have a choice.

Oyat is a person who believes he SHOULD always have a choice. He believes he MUST always be able to decide WHAT he does, and for WHOM he does it and WHERE…and HOW! Anyone who tries to tell him otherwise, will have to be content with the sight of him WALKING AWAY never to return.

The next day Oyat sent Sule an email asking him to confirm his decision after consulting with his boss. Sule replied that he had not yet asked him (amazing!) and would get back to Oyat on it. He never did – and twenty four hours later, after leaving message after message for Sule to call him so he could decide on making commitments to other clients, Oyat emailed him advising that he was taking his non-response to mean “NO”.

That was before 12 noon.

Now, THIS is the best part: At 5.30pm that same day, Oyat gets a phone call from the accountant at Sule’s company and he (i.e the accountant, whose direct boss is the hitherto incommunicado Sule) asks Oyat to remind him of the password to login to the software module he had installed on his PC and taught him to use!!

Oyat found myself gasping for breath, in disbelief, for a few seconds, before managing to politely inform the accountant that since his company had not paid for the software (“for heaven’s sake”, Oyat thought, “this is the same person I gave the cheque back to!”), it would be wrong/improper – indeed ILLEGAL (“does ANYONE need to be told this kind of thing?” he wondered) – for him or anyone else in the company to even TRY making use of it.

But the accountant was not done. He then asked : “So what are you going to do now so I can use the software…?”. It is probably safe to assume you can imagine the rest of the very “polite” responses Oyat gave him…

Points To Take Away

1. Some people – especially when they are big and (they think) you are smaller – believe they must always WIN while every other person they relate with loses. Typically, they feel YOU need them more than they need you. Their actions reflect this belief. It is usually advisable to stay away from people who think/act this way – and they are quite often not difficult to identify.

2. If during those three months, Oyat had not “broken off” contact/discussions with Sule (whenever he felt things were moving too slowly) to speak to other prospects who went on to engage him profitably, he would have ended up badly. In other words, it pays to MEASURE the “readiness” of the prospective client, and focus your attention/decision making accordingly.

3. Oyat has the habit of measuring his “Cost Of Customer Acquisition (COCA)”, and has over the years found it ranges from as low as N500 to as much as N5,000($0.5 to $50) approx. In the case of Sule’s company, he estimated that the process of “trying to win” this project cost him over $100 and he still ended up with nothing to show for it.

Summary

This story is representative of what happens to many self-employed persons out here. Some have the means/ability to SURVIVE these attempts to exploit them. Others do not.

It is a practice that is widespread, and many prospective clients will happily EXPLOIT you, no matter how religious they claim to be, if you give the slightest indication that you are NAIVE enough to make yourself open to such.

The following quote is one that I believe accurately captures how people should aim to relate with one another in ANY society:

“I have found no greater satisfaction than achieving success through honest dealing and strict adherence to the view that, for you to gain, those you deal with should gain as well.” – Alan Greenspan

I hope those of you who have read this can learn something useful from it, and act accordingly in the future.

A little book titled “Science Of Getting Rich” describes this need to think/act in this manner even better. Google that string and download/read the book, then apply what you learn.

Self-Development/Performance Enhancement Specialist – Tayo Solagbade – works as a Multipreneur, helping individuals/businesses develop and implement tools/strategies to achieve their goals, faster and more profitably.

For more tips, information and news to help you LEARN how you can equip yourself to do what you do better, click here to subscribe to Tayo’s Self-Development Digest newsletter.

Article Source

Tags: individual, ethics, code, issues, business

Charismatic leaders lead with ‘concern for people’ and don’t ‘concern over production’. They are concerned with the needs of their subordinates and accept inputs from them. They are determined to create a comfortable, friendly organization and believe such environment will lead to efficient work and results.

Examples of such charismatic leaders are Adolph Hitler, Winston Churchill, Bill Clinton, Mother Teresa and Cult leaders. They all lead by reaching out to human emotion and grasping their trust, gaining their respect and loyalty, maybe even encouraging them to do whatever the leaders tell them to. Charismatic leaders are confident that such leadership methods will work.

They keep the vision of the company’s future on-par with employee satisfaction towards their jobs. They are dedicated and willing to take on unconventional methods, sacrifice financial safety, raise risks, employee and personal time to reach their goal. They participate in actions that will create or impress subordinates.

For charismatic leadership are not always needed to achieve high work performance from employees. They are mainly required when launching a new product, bringing company through a crisis. As they may bring the company better employee esteem but not improve company profits permanently.

Charismatic Leader is not always desirable. Firstly, such leader might not always be needed to achieve high levels of employee performance. They are most appropriate when the followers. Charismatic leader may not handle the entire production process for production industrial company. It may only handle the major crisis issued.

For more information please click on following link.

Article Source

Tags: individual, ethics, code, issues, business