Circle of escalation: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
:“''This is okay with me, but you need to confirm with {{tag|Tax}},''” you say, happy that you have passed the tangled skein off your desk.  
:“''This is okay with me, but you need to confirm with {{tag|Tax}},''” you say, happy that you have passed the tangled skein off your desk.  


Of course, the tangled skein has not magically winked out of existence: it has simply landed on the desk of some poor, overworked attorney in Tax, who will have exactly the same aspiration as you, and to fulfill it she will take exactly the same approach:
Of course, the tangled skein has not magically winked out of existence: it has simply landed on the desk of some poor, overworked blighter in Tax whose aspiration will be exactly the same as yours, and whom, to fulfill it, will take exactly the same approach you did:


:“''There may be an increased risk of retrospective withholding which it is hard to quantify,''” she will say (one gets very adept at saying this sort of thing by rote) “''but if you are prepared to absorb that additional risk then this [[I have no objections]].''”
:“''There may be an increased risk of retrospective withholding which it is hard to quantify,''” she will say (when one gives tax advice for a living one gets adept at saying this sort of thing by rote) “''but as long as the desk is prepared to absorb that additional risk then [[I have no objections]] to this.''”


And lo, off the escalation goes to the business. [[Salespeople]], naturally, have but one goal — impregnating their [[client]]s — but not in a way that involves assuming any personal responsibility for a transaction which goes wrong. Up the chain it goes, to management.
And lo, off the escalation goes to the business. [[Salespeople]], naturally, have but one goal — impregnating their [[client]]s — but not in a way that involves assuming any personal responsibility for a transaction which goes wrong. Up the chain it goes, to trading management. Trading management won’t have any idea what absorbing additional tax risk even is, and so will pass it onto the [[chief operating officer]].
 
And so on.
 
Eventually it will get to the level of exaltation in the firm wherein personnel are identified by only the familiar versions of their Christian names. Chuck will say, “In principle I [[would be]] [[inclined]] to be ok with this [[at this stage]], but can you just run this by [[legal]] to make sure they have no issues.”
 
And so the cycle of life turns fully and returns whence it came.


{{limpcelery}}
{{limpcelery}}
{{c|Metaphor}}
{{c|Metaphor}}

Revision as of 18:18, 20 April 2017

A most excellent phenomenon that can occur in organisations of a certain size, and is guaranteed to happen in a big one, redolent of a 4x100 medley relay, only with contestants carrying a stick of limp celery rather than a stiff baton.

“This is okay with me, but you need to confirm with Tax,” you say, happy that you have passed the tangled skein off your desk.

Of course, the tangled skein has not magically winked out of existence: it has simply landed on the desk of some poor, overworked blighter in Tax whose aspiration will be exactly the same as yours, and whom, to fulfill it, will take exactly the same approach you did:

“There may be an increased risk of retrospective withholding which it is hard to quantify,” she will say (when one gives tax advice for a living one gets adept at saying this sort of thing by rote) “but as long as the desk is prepared to absorb that additional risk then I have no objections to this.”

And lo, off the escalation goes to the business. Salespeople, naturally, have but one goal — impregnating their clients — but not in a way that involves assuming any personal responsibility for a transaction which goes wrong. Up the chain it goes, to trading management. Trading management won’t have any idea what absorbing additional tax risk even is, and so will pass it onto the chief operating officer.

And so on.

Eventually it will get to the level of exaltation in the firm wherein personnel are identified by only the familiar versions of their Christian names. Chuck will say, “In principle I would be inclined to be ok with this at this stage, but can you just run this by legal to make sure they have no issues.”

And so the cycle of life turns fully and returns whence it came.

See also

Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Circle_of_escalation&oldid=16820"