Power, thuggery and bad manners

A few days ago, I picked up on the FT’s account of life in the Number Ten bunker, and in particular on Gordon Brown’s brutish way with his subordinates. This post was picked up by Wilks in a post entitled “The Arrogance of Power” which, in turn, pointed to an excellent blog post by Willem Buiter, a leading economist who is a former member of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee. Professor Buiter has a more general theme, namely the fact that the UK Treasury (which nurtured Brown during the ten years that he lurked there, lusting after the premiership) is a bad case of instutionalised arrogance, rudeness and casual brutality. As a department, he writes, the Treasury

is institutionally nasty. It ever was thus. The Treasury is ruthless, and at times unprincipled and unscrupulous in the pursuit of what it wants. Its indifference to the collateral damage this may cause to people’s reputations, self-esteem and feelings is legendary and well-documented. Recent examples include letting former Governor of the Bank of England, Eddie George and current Governor Mervyn King twist slowly in the wind – unnecessarily dragging out the decision on their reappointment when they were up for reappointment at the end of their first terms as Governor. Apart from being rude and kak-handed, it also did nothing to promote financial stability, especially in the case of Mervyn King’s reappointment, which came at the high of the North Atlantic area financial crisis.

He goes on to expound on another case-study of this kind of behaviour — the treatment of the Bank of England’s Deputy Governor.

A particularly distasteful example of unscrupulous and gratuitously nasty behaviour by the Treasury was the manner in which it orchestrated the leaking of the announcement of Sir John Gieve’s departure from the Bank of England. That departure itself, whatever the legal niceties, amounted in substance to the constructive dismissal of the Deputy Governor. The job description of Deputy Governor for Financial Stability was being redefined and enhanced. The new job would go into effect in the Spring of 2009. His existing job would expire at that point. He would therefore not be able to serve out the remaining two years of his five year term. He would not be appointed automatically to the new enhanced Deputy Governor for Financial Stability position, but would have to apply for the job like any other candidate. In the future, all MPC positions, including the executive positions, will be advertised – a distinct improvement over the current grab-bag approach.

Having been found surplus to requirements by the Treasury, it was agreed that Sir John’s departure in the Spring was to be announced on June 19, 2008, the day following the Mansion House dinner with the traditional speeches by the Governor and the Chancellor. His leaving was to be announced as part of a longer message containing details of sweeping changes to the Bank’s financial stability structure. The substance of that message is contained in the Chancellor’s letter of June 19 2008 to the Chairman of the Treasury Committee, John McFall. Instead, the forces of darkness in the Treasury leaked the news of Sir John’s resignation during or just before the Mansion House dinner on June 18 – a dinner attended by Sir John. He was texted or e-mailed the news of the leak and spent most of the rest of the meal working away on his BlackBerry to put together a press statement. It was undignified, embarrassing and pointless. The leak was planned, intentional and deliberate.

This crass behaviour reflects a basic lack of class and manners.

It does indeed. It’s par for the course for New Labour — as anyone who crossed Alastair Campbell when he was Tony Blair’s spinmeister will testify. Buiter makes the point that the New Labour crowd have a visceral hatred of toffs like John Gieve, who just happened to have been educated at Winchester and New College, Oxford.

But it’s not just confined to HM Treasury. Appalling behaviour is regularly tolerated in companies too — and indeed celebrated by the mass media. Witness the celebrity status now enjoyed by Sir Alan Sugar, a barrow-boy-turned-entrepreneur who has become the star of a popular TV show, The Apprentice. Or the gibbering rages of Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, who reportedly once threw an office chair at a Microsoft subordinate who had the temerity to announce that he was leaving to join Google. Bill Gates is likewise celebrated in the media for his inexcusable rudeness. His stock line “That’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard!” is endlessly (and admiringly) reported. The gibbering rages of Oracle boss, Larry Ellison, (whose curious habit of collecting F16 fighter bombers also appeals to reporters seeking a bit of colour) are also the stuff of admiring legend. And as for Steve Jobs…

It’s time we stopped worshipping these vulgar, undisciplined, ego-maniacal brutes. Apart from anything else, their companies tend to become corporate extensions of their founder’s infantile personalities. And that can lead to them becoming major public nuisances — as in the case of Microsoft. Verbal abuse of subordinates who cannot answer back is no different from thuggish bullying in school playgrounds. And should be treated accordingly.

Listen&Type

If, like me, you sometimes find yourself transcribing interviews and switching between an audio player and your word-processing software, then a neat shareware program called Listen&Type may be just what you want. It ‘floats’ above your WP program, avoiding the need to switch. There’s a 20-day free trial, after which it’s $20. Get it from here.

Back to the drawing board

Well, well. After months of heated speculation, it turns out that Cambridgeshire County Council is shelving its plans for congestion charging in the city.

Cambridgeshire CC has shelved plans for congestion charging following a lack of local support

The council had said it wanted to cut traffic levels in the city by 10% and submitted a bid for £500m of the government’s Transport Innovation Fund (TIF). Its bid included proposals for peak period congestion charging in and around Cambridge, along with subsidising bus fares, a new railway station, park and ride facilities and an extensive network of cycle paths.

Cambridgeshire has now withdrawn its plans and gone “back to the drawing board”, despite a growing problem of congestion in and around the city of Cambridge.

Councillor Jill Tuck, the new Conservative leader of the council, said: “We have listened carefully over the last few months and it is clear that the Transport Innovation Fund scheme we put forward for consultation last autumn does not have sufficient support either from other key organisations or the public and needs, at the very least, refinement.”

A new transport commission, made up of key public and private sector organisations, will be created to come up with recommendations for a new transport strategy for the Cambridge area…

Customer service the PayPal way

Forgive me, but I thought this account in The INQUIRER from a frustrated PayPal user was worth quoting extensively.

1. Paypal account used happily for 3 years.
2. January: Sold a laptop computer on Ebay. Buyer paid with fraudulently accessed Paypal account. Paypal charges the cost of laptop back to my account, leaving it -£700 (and me out of pocket, despite being the victim of internet fraud enabled by Paypal).
3. Crime therefore reported to London Metropolitan Police. (Crime ref xxxxxx/2008). Officer investigating asks me to hold off paying account balance until crime investigation resolved or ended as account details may be needed as evidence.
4. Paypal requests balance of account payment for £700.
5. I contact Paypal, give crime reference number, mention advice of Met officer. Expect this to be the end of the matter until crime investigation resolved.
6. Receive frequent Paypal emails asking me to restore balance. Do not, as against advice of police investigating.
7. My parents (?) receive call from debt collector instructed by Paypal at their house asking for payment. Obviously distressing to them as elderly.
8. Call debt collector, give crime reference number and explain situation. They promise not to call again given police advice.
9. Call Paypal, where customer service rep explains that there is no way to prevent debt collection proceeding despite police advice. Despite advising that interfering with a police investigation is a criminal offence, simply restates that Paypal requires payment and will be proceeding with debt collection and regular calls to my mother’s house.
10. Receive call from debt collection agency regarding outstanding balance. Explain situation, restate crime reference number already on their file, they promise not to call again (again).
11. Receive call from debt collection agency two days later. Am unable to return call.
12. Finally cave and attempt to pay off account balance against advice of London Metropolitan Police in a bid to prevent further calls to the house of my elderly parents by debt collection agency acting on behalf of Paypal.
13. Paypal rejects payment attempt through website, stating that I am not allowed to add the requisite amount of funds in one go – and that this is a measure taken in order to prevent fraud.
14. Proceed to pay half the total in a bid to pay the second half when Paypal ‘allows’ me.
15. Paypal closes account, preventing me from paying off balance, and requests that I contact ‘appeals@paypal.com’. Presumably now sending hit men around to collect payment that system itself refuses to take.

And so here I am, emailing the address requested. Unable to pay off a Paypal balance that the London Metropolitan Police advises me not to pay, yet receiving calls from my parents who are being harassed by debt collection agencies who are distressed by the situation.

At this stage I would simply like to be allowed to pay off the balance, close my Paypal account and be content never to use the service ever again. Would you be able to call me on 44 (0)xxx xxxxxx so that we can please arrange this?

Yours in hope,

W.H.
Beleagured Paypal customer.

What comes next? You guessed it:

We apologize but we are unable to respond to inquiries sent to this e-mail address. Your e-mail was routed to an unmonitored mailbox and as such will not be reviewed.

Virtualisation and wattage

From The INQUIRER

AMD ONCE HAD 135 servers crunching data for its Austin Texas HQ. Now, having virtualised the lot using VMware’s virtualisation software it has cut that number to just seven. The move resulted in 79 per cent power savings, Margaret Lewis, AMD director of commercial solutions* and software strategy told the INQ this week.

What Google does right — and wrong

Here’s an interesting phenomenon — a guy who has left Google to work for Microsoft. In his blog he explains why. First the good news:

There are many things that Google does really well, and I plan to advocate that some of these things be adopted at Microsoft.

Among them is the peer-based review model where one’s performance is determined largely based on peer comments, and much less so based on the observations of the manager. The idea that a manager is far easier to fool than the co-workers are is sound and largely works. A very important side-effect that this model produces is an increased amount of cooperation between the people, and generally better relationships within the team.

The wide employee participation in corporate governance through a concept called “Intergrouplets” is a good one and merits emulation. Unlike most other companies where internal life is regulated largely by management, a lot of aspects of Google are ruled by committees of employees who are passionate about an issue, and are willing to allocate some of their time to have this issue resolved. Many things, such as quality of code base, testing practices, internal engineering documentation, and even food service are decided by intergrouplets. Of course, this is where 20% time (a practice where any Googler can spend one day a week working on whatever he or she wants) plugs in well, for without available time there would have been nothing to allocate.

Doing many things by committee. Hiring, resource allocations at Google are done by consensus of many players. If you are to achieve anything at Google, you must learn how to build this consensus, or at least how to not obstruct it. This skill comes in very handy for every other aspect of work.

Free food. More than just a benefit, it is a tool for increasing communications within the team, because it’s so much easier to have team lunches. I don’t think making Redmond cafeterias suddenly free would work (maybe I am wrong), but giving out free lunch coupons for teams of more than 3 people from more than one discipline to have lunch together – and at the same time have an opportunity to communicate – I think, has a fair chance of success.

There are other things that I would want at Microsoft, but which will probably not happen simply because there is far too much legacy. I will miss the things like one code base with uniform style guides and coding standards – there’s too much existing code at Microsoft to try and turn this ship around.

So why did he leave?

Several reasons. Firstly it seems that he prefers writing software for users who are willing to pay real money for it.

Secondly, he doesn’t like the way Google approaches software engineering. Its orientation towards cool, but not necessarily useful or essential software, he writes,

really affects the way the software engineering is done. Everything is pretty much run by the engineering – PMs and testers are conspicuously absent from the process. While they do exist in theory, there are too few of them to matter.

[…]

On the other hand, I was using Google software – a lot of it – in the last year, and slick as it is, there’s just too much of it that is regularly broken. It seems like every week 10% of all the features are broken in one or the other browser. And it’s a different 10% every week – the old bugs are getting fixed, the new ones introduced. This across Blogger, Gmail, Google Docs, Maps, and more.

This is probably fine for free software, but I always laugh when people tell me that Google Docs is viable competition to Microsoft Office. If it is, that is only true for the occasional users who would not buy Office anyway. Google as an organization is not geared – culturally – to delivering enterprise class reliability to its user applications.

As I say, it’s an interesting perspective. And he’s probably done himself no harm with his new bosses at Redmond by writing about it. Or is that too cynical a view?