Bad apple: Difference between revisions

Bad apple (view source)

Revision as of 15:22, 20 January 2023

1,258 bytes added , 20 January 2023

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

83,307

edits

@@ Line 40: / Line 40: @@
 |+ The [[JC]]’s famous “[[guess the bad apple]]”{{tm}} game
 |-
-!Incident!! colspan="2" |Before!! colspan="2" |After
+! rowspan="2" |Incident!! colspan="2" |Before!! colspan="2" |After
 |-
-! ||Hero||Bad Apple||Hero||Bad Apple
+! |Hero||Bad Apple||Hero||Bad Apple
 {{aligntop}}
 | [[Enron]] ||Jeff Skilling<br>Ken Lay<br>Andrew Fastow || Fortune Journalist Bethany MacLean<br>Short-seller Jim Chanos || _______ || _______
@@ Line 50: / Line 50: @@
 | [[Barings Bank|Barings]]|| Nick Leeson<br>Peter “not terribly difficult” Baring || Er... || _______ || _______
 {{aligntop}}
-| [[Archegos]] || Bill Huang <br>Co-heads of [[PB]], everywhere || Junior credit officer || _______ || _______
+| [[Archegos]] || Bill Huang <br>Co-heads of [[PB]], everywhere || Junior credit officer, [[Credit Suisse]] || _______ || _______
 {{aligntop}}
-| [[FTX]] || [[Sam Bankman-Fried]]<br>Caroline Ellison || Matt “So, it’s a ponzi scheme?” Levine || _______ || _______
+| [[FTX]] || [[Sam Bankman-Fried]]<br>Caroline Ellison || Matt “So, it’s a ponzi scheme?” Levine<br>Terry Duffy (CME CEO) || _______ || _______
 {{aligntop}}
 | [[WireCard]]||  Markus Braun<br>Jan Marsalek<br>[[BaFin]]|| FT Journalist Dan McCrum<br>Internal lawyer Pav Gill<br>Short-seller Matthew Earl  || _______ || _______
@@ Line 60: / Line 60: @@
 === What to do ===
-All of this hindsight-coloured hand-wringing is good sport, but what to do about it? Regular readers might not be surprised to hear the JC say that deprogramming the steampunk machine and asking people to use their experience, judgment and intuition to ask unusual questions.
+Now hindsight-coloured hand-wringing is all good sport, but what to do about it? Regular readers might not be surprised to hear the JC say that ''deprogramming the steampunk machine'' and asking people to use their experience, judgment and intuition might be part of it. ''Ask searching questions''.
-It isn’t hard to imagine the scene: a weekly operational risk meeting with a standing agenda, designed systemically and mechanically to canvas and manage risks to the business.
+Asking searching questions is not how modernist organisations like to work.
-At this meeting senior “stakeholders” will discuss cash breaks, outstanding undocumented confirms, position concentrations across the book. They will take it in turns to talk to their slide. If the steerco chair got out of the wrong side of bed, he may snap at some poor bastard from operations whose CASS attestation seems anaemic.
+====Enter the [[opco]]====
-His questions will by not ''where is your risk'', but why are you suffering risk, as if risk is not an immutable function of commercial life.
+It isn’t hard to imagine the scene: a monthly risk [[operating committee]] meeting with a standing agenda designed systemically and mechanically to identify minimise and manage risks to the business. Some COO functionary will spend a fortnight leading up to the meeting issuing progressively warnings badgering “[[Stakeholder|stakeholders]]”  providing their bit of the 300-page [[deck]] that will serve as materials for the meeting, to be circulated 48 hours in advance.
-Such grumpiness is outdated in these kind and [[empathetic]] times. It has a chilling effect on on unguarded expression of concern.
+Not a soul will have ''read'' these materials before the meeting, and nor would one be any wiser if one had. These barley-concealed threats are just the weft and warp of the financial services dominance display. It is all very [[performative]].
-Under kinder stewardship the steerco will Things like that. The inevitable procedural glitches of life in a complicated modern financial services business. All kinds of metrics will be presented and analysed, laid out in graphs, charts and data tables. A dashboard of “high risk” clients, derived from these operational metrics, may be presented, but the [[RAG]] array will read uniform green — perhaps studded with the odd amber — an easily-addressed talking point included “for good order” but, we are assured, no materially elevated risk of loss.
+At the meeting, each risk function’s delegates — essentially votive lambs, offered up to take a beating, if needed, without making it worse for anyone higher up —  take it in turns to “talk to their slide”. If the [[opco]] chair got out of the wrong side of bed, she may snap at the poor bastard from operations whose [[CASS]] attestation was a bit anaemic. But there are three hundred pages to get though, so for most delegates, attendance is a 2-hour-long game of Russian Roulette where there are only a handful of bullets in what is quite a large chamber.
+In any case, should the opco chair come for you, her questions will not be, “''where'' is your risk”, but the far stupider question “''why'' are you displaying a risk”, as if “risk” is not an immutable function of commercial life.
+Such grumpiness is outdated in these kind and [[empathetic]] times. It may pass into history, and everyone will instead be kind and passive-agressive instead. Who knows? In any case, it has a chilling effect on on unguarded expression of concern.
+The steerco will methodically plough through each risk function’s slides, which will tell the same story: inevitable, manageable procedural glitches of life in a complicated modern financial services business. All kinds of metrics will be presented, analysed, and set out in impressively voluminous graphs, charts and data tables. A dashboard of “high risk” clients, derived from these operational metrics, may be presented, but the [[RAG]] array will read uniform green — perhaps studded with the odd amber — an easily-addressed talking point included “for good order” but, we are assured, no materially elevated risk of loss.
 It will be like this because we are acculturated to be in control, for systems to be operating, in good standing, and all engines ticking along without significant strain. We have been acclimatized to believe that the greatest sin is to disrespect ''process''.