Wells Fargo will stop setting the sales goals that bank employees say led to pressure to open millions of fake customer accounts.
But, but, but...
How will we shepherd our flock if we don't use a leash or iron collar on our flock?
Don't look at me!
Wrong insect. I'm a grasshopper, remember?
Yes, I'm a critic of Peter Drucker's Management by Objectives.
OK, I'll concede that if I'm a land owner, I'll be all ears if someone sells me a better way to manage my shepherds, and make them respond better to my carrot and stick. And MBO is one interesting "koyok" (snake oil) being peddled.
But I for one fails to understand why anyone else (that means you if you not land owner class) would be willing to put on leashes and iron collars on themselves?
Perhaps an example will make it easier to comprehend:
A manager relies on goals and planning.
A leader illuminates his vision.
Winners will set goals & do tracking but losers will stop goals setting & stop tracking outcome.
ReplyDeleteIt will happen quite naturally. Who wants to set goals and track disappointing outcome and knowing they can't achieve no matter how
CW,
DeleteAnd so it starts... Name calling - losers and winners ;)
Or 4 legs good; 2 legs bad (Animal Farm).
You win liao lor!
(You mean those 80% who made less than 2.5% using CPIS never set goals and do tracking? Then the solution is easy! Must tell Tharman!)
The essence of this post is to show the reality of "crash got sound".
It was probably goal settings and Management by Objectives that earned Wells Fargo where it is today.
The moment eggs landed on face, its dropped immediately like a bad habit.
Talk about conviction... And loyalty to those who helped got you where you are...
The one how headed all the "recalcitrant" employees gets to walk away with a $125m parting gift? Talk about moral hazard!
Maybe the Hong Kongers were right. We only laugh at poverty; not at whoring...
But you have a valid point. I wonder how many retail investors/traders who swear by a strategy or setup will have the conviction to follow through when they get punched in the face :(
Its not any better with some of the snake oil peddlers out there.
This year its all about selling options for passive income; next year its trading stock indices?
One year preach DIY value investing; the next year sings the merits of passive indexing?
Like this, they really win liao!
Easy to preach to others than DIY yourself to prove the point as likely nobody will challenge them for an audited statement.
DeleteCW,
DeleteWhen it comes to money, rely less on the good intentions of others.
Just like your CPIS post. OK, the real purpose was to release funds to grow our fledging fund management industry to compete with Hong Kong's.
I'm sure there's a KPI somewhere to make Singapore an even bigger financial centre ;)
But I guess they didn't expect 80% to be worse off than if they have left their CPF untouched...
And even worse, the 45% that lost money!
They last thing they want is to have more CPF members that can't meet the revised minimum sum (calling it by another name will only do so much).
Well, so much for good intentions...
SMOL too young to know?
ReplyDeletetemperament and CW,
ReplyDeleteOf course can disagree! I welcome a good debate :)
I think you both were talking about the introduction of the 1986 Asset Investment Scheme - and that I must defer to you both as I was serving my first year in NS then.
However, I suspect either your memories were "selective" or you trying to smoke me:
https://www.cpf.gov.sg/Assets/common/Documents/InterestRate.pdf
CPF ordinary account interest rate in 1986 never went below 5% leh...
I am referring to the introduction of CPIS of 1997 (merging of BIS and EIS).
In that year, in accordance with big daddy's government-led economic policy, MAS targeted the development of the fund management industry as a key element of the financial sector.
Numerous incentives were provided to encourage international fund managers to operate in Singapore.
At that time, a large part of the fund management sector can be said to be controlled by big daddy in the sense that much of the funds under management were managed directly by the Central Provident
Fund (CPF).
I remember it well as I happened to be in HK during 1997 and the press there were lambasting Singapore for trying to steal the fund management industry from them after the 1997 Asian Financial Crises.
The Cantonese headline was: 趁你病，拿你命。
:)
temperament,
ReplyDeleteLife has a way to make fools of us all.
Think you can do better than CPF? Well, that didn't turned out too well for the 80%...
Now the pendulum swings to the other side...
Those seeking refuge in CPF's Special Account or Singapore Savings Bonds now may look sheepish if interest rates roars back with vengeance!
Who knew in 1980 that was the start of the super bull run in US treasuries?
Collect double digit yield and see capital gains year after year?
Now that's what I call income investing!!!
Properties and bonds ;)