Head of the documentation unit: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
See also the [[Northern Ireland portfolio|Secretary of State for Northern Ireland]] in the nineteen seventies.
See also the [[Northern Ireland portfolio|Secretary of State for Northern Ireland]] in the nineteen seventies.


One of the accursed people in an [[investment bank]], the poor sod who is responsible for the performance of the documentation unit — those sainted men and women who make contractual flesh the aspirations of the [[credit]] department — is only in the role to atone for a sin (possibly one committed in a former life), or as act of spite, vengeance or perverse cruelty from someone else further up the organisation.
One of the accursed people in an [[investment bank]], the poor sod who is responsible for the performance of the documentation unit — those sainted men and women who make contractual flesh the aspirations of the [[credit]] department — is only in the role to atone for a sin (possibly committed in a former life), or as act of spite, vengeance or perverse cruelty from someone else further up the organisation.


Running the negotiators is a quite thankless role, which - because of the cost, heft, and inevitable negative impact on the franchise of the documentation unit, is irresistible fodder for [[change manager|change managers]], [[management consultant|management consultants]], the [[chief operating officer]]’s department to fiddle with.  
Running the negotiators is utterly thankless, not because of the negotiators — by and large perfectly pleasant, capable and long-suffering bunch — but, because of its cost, heft, and inevitably negative impact on the franchise, the docs team is an irresistible “cost centre” for [[change manager|change managers]], [[management consultant|management consultants]],and [[chief operating officer]]s to fiddle with.  


This means any well-meaning attempts the person in charge makes to fix things are bound to fail, in a way that is inextribably tied to that person. A dead man walking.
Therefore any efforts to fix things the person notionally in charge should make, however wise, are bound to fail. They will be co-opted, misinterpreted, forced into a business administration dogma and in a way that will be inextricably tied to the [[head of the documentation unit]]. He — or she — is generally regarded as a dead man walking.


Seen through the different prisms of the [[self-perpetuating autocracy]], this is what the doc unit means:
Seen through the different prisms of the [[self-perpetuating autocracy]], this is what the doumentation unit means:
*To [[sales]]: WHERE'S MY GODDAMN ISDA?
*[[Sales]]: WHERE'S MY GODDAMN ISDA?
*To the [[chief operating officer]]: Why does this department cost so much? Who the hell are these people?
*[[Chief Operating Officer]]: Why does this department cost so much? Where are the economies of scale? Who the hell are these people?
*To the [[general counsel]]: A royal pain in the arse.
*[[General counsel]]: It pains me that these people are what the management committee has in mind when it thinks of the legal department.
*To a [[change manager]]: an opportunity to right-shore to India, and credit for delayering the organisation
*[[Change manager]]: Here is an opportunity to right-shore and gain credit for [[delayering]] the organization!


In an [[investment bank]], being a place of universal grasping fixation on advancement, it isn't hard to find a stooge to take the role: all you have to do is present it as a [[stretch assignment]]; an opportunity for advancement: managing three hundred people, in six centres across seven time zones, with a chance to overhaul and rock the house on a franchise-critical operational function. Who would not leap at that?
In an [[investment bank]], being a place of universal grasping fixation on advancement, it isn't hard to find a stooge to take the role: all you have to do is present it as a [[stretch assignment]]; an opportunity for advancement: managing three hundred people, in six centres across seven time zones, with a chance to overhaul and rock the house on a franchise-critical operational function. Who would not leap at that?


A person with a cautious or reflective nature. That's who.
A person with a cautious or reflective nature. That’s who. When they come for you, ask yourself this:
*Why are they asking ''me'' to do this and not someone already in or with some understanding of  the documentation unit? ''These people know something you don’t. Do not fall for their lionisation of your people management skills. IT ISN'T ABOUT PEOPLE MANAGEMENT''.
*Is my present role really that bad?
 
 


{{dramatis personae}}
{{dramatis personae}}
{{c|egg}}
{{c|egg}}

Revision as of 17:38, 12 June 2017

See also the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland in the nineteen seventies.

One of the accursed people in an investment bank, the poor sod who is responsible for the performance of the documentation unit — those sainted men and women who make contractual flesh the aspirations of the credit department — is only in the role to atone for a sin (possibly committed in a former life), or as act of spite, vengeance or perverse cruelty from someone else further up the organisation.

Running the negotiators is utterly thankless, not because of the negotiators — by and large perfectly pleasant, capable and long-suffering bunch — but, because of its cost, heft, and inevitably negative impact on the franchise, the docs team is an irresistible “cost centre” for change managers, management consultants,and chief operating officers to fiddle with.

Therefore any efforts to fix things the person notionally in charge should make, however wise, are bound to fail. They will be co-opted, misinterpreted, forced into a business administration dogma and in a way that will be inextricably tied to the head of the documentation unit. He — or she — is generally regarded as a dead man walking.

Seen through the different prisms of the self-perpetuating autocracy, this is what the doumentation unit means:

  • Sales: WHERE'S MY GODDAMN ISDA?
  • Chief Operating Officer: Why does this department cost so much? Where are the economies of scale? Who the hell are these people?
  • General counsel: It pains me that these people are what the management committee has in mind when it thinks of the legal department.
  • Change manager: Here is an opportunity to right-shore and gain credit for delayering the organization!

In an investment bank, being a place of universal grasping fixation on advancement, it isn't hard to find a stooge to take the role: all you have to do is present it as a stretch assignment; an opportunity for advancement: managing three hundred people, in six centres across seven time zones, with a chance to overhaul and rock the house on a franchise-critical operational function. Who would not leap at that?

A person with a cautious or reflective nature. That’s who. When they come for you, ask yourself this:

  • Why are they asking me to do this and not someone already in or with some understanding of the documentation unit? These people know something you don’t. Do not fall for their lionisation of your people management skills. IT ISN'T ABOUT PEOPLE MANAGEMENT.
  • Is my present role really that bad?


Dramatis personae: CEO | CFO | Client | Employees: Divers · Excuse pre-loaders · Survivors · Contractors · The Muppet Show | Middle management: COO · Consultant · MBA | Controllers: Financial reporting | Risk | Credit | Operations | IT | Legal: GC · Inhouse counsel · Docs unit · Litigator · Tax lawyer · US attorney Lawyer | Front office: Trading | Structuring | Sales |

Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Head_of_the_documentation_unit&oldid=17646"