RSS« Mutual Funds for Iraq.... | US Troop realginment »
August 18, 2004
Ecnomist: An Article Close to Home - "Doing Business in Dangerous Places"
I was amused, entertained and ... well displeased with an article in the Economist on me.
Well not me personally, I'd never cop to that even in the bizarre case it ever happened, but on the cover article, "Doing Business in Dangerous Places
Doing business in dangerous places
You don't have to be mad to work here
Aug 12th 2004 | BAGHDAD, JOHANNESBURG, MOSCOW AND LONDON
From The Economist print edition
http://economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=3089844
(public content, registration may be required, and if so, don't fucking whinge on about it)
I note this in particular:
Risk-taking wins markets. Peter Singer of the Brookings Institution has written a book on private military firms. “For firms that are second or third in a market, taking risks is a way to get ahead,” he argues.
Quite true that.
However, it's about taking risks intelligently.
Not being a cowboy (not literally of course).
I also liked this:
"Past experience is useful. Among the companies that fly UN staff and oil firms to countries such as Congo, Afghanistan and Sudan are two South African businesses, SAFAIR and National Airways Corporation (NAC), which even runs a commercial air service to Baghdad. It teams inexperienced crew members with experienced ones in dodgy areas. SAFAIR pays great attention to risk assessments and to logistics before flying into a new place. “Africa is not really for sissies,” says Neville Desselss, its manager, helpfully."
Nor is much of the Middle East, although of course Africa is far more challenging. I have hot water for example.
This observation is also useful and important in thinking about cutting edge markets:
He finds that people who like working in dangerous places tend to be independent and want to run things their way; that often clashes with an employer's need for tight control, in order to manage the risks to workers
I suppose this says quite alot about current personal issues.
However, more substantively, the following is important, after noting that hiring locals often is more useful and cost effective:
" On the other hand, it is sometimes easier to find an expat to do a difficult job than a local. Luc Jones, senior manager of Antal International, a recruiting firm, says that a decade ago his company would have been “crawling over broken glass” to find an expat finance manager with a smattering of Russian. Now there are ten such expats for every vacancy, and most firms prefer to recruit Russians. The country has become relatively safe and comfortable to work in. But, where jobs in remote regions such as Sakhalin or northern Siberia are concerned, “it is more difficult to get Muscovites to move out than expats,” he says."
I would observe of course to the foriegner, anywhere in the Russia Fed may be equally interesting / exotic relative to career goals and the like, as opposed to a local. A foreigner coming into the States is not going to look at a Chicago or a Utah assignment with the same sense as a New Yorker, or equally someone sent to Edinborough versus London (not to say that any of these comparisons are comparable to Siberia versus Moscow).
I would also highlight the importance of having at least an Expat core to any new operation, and especially a sophisticated expat core, so as to instill values. I think I have commented on this before. My old Fund never had that, and, well..... but not just the personal anectdote, I've seen it a lot, the branch office in the hands of pure locals goes "too" local in a region where "too local" means probably corrupt.
I note this also (and yes I see how it applies to me):
When should a firm pull out of a country? William Day, who has worked for several big aid groups, worries that people on the ground do not notice when things are getting worse. “Visitors arrive and say, ‘Why are you still here?' When the reply is, ‘Don't worry, the shooting always starts at three o'clock,' it may be time to leave. Adrenaline is a very attractive drug.”
Actually I would say that outsiders, however, frequently have a terribly exagerated view of the threat level. Everyone wanted me to fuck off during the War however my real threat level was okay. Of course, I blend well, I might have pissed off if I thought otherwise.
Posted by The Lounsbury at August 18, 2004 08:59 PM
Filed Under:
Aug-Dec 2004
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.aqoul.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/1302
