Key performance indicator: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "A means of explaining a complicated concept to a dull person with no background who has no hope of understanding it, so he can evaluate it. Middle management|Middle-manageme...")
 
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
A means of explaining a complicated concept to a dull person with no background who has no hope of understanding it, so he can evaluate it. [[Middle management|Middle-management]] bullshit. Something less edifying than an audio-description soundtrack on a movie but intended to have the same effect.
A means of explaining a complicated concept to a [[Middle manager|dullard]] with no background who has no hope of understanding it, so {{sex|he}} can ''quantify'' it.  


So, for an [[ISDA negotiator]] who is charged with carefully protecting the firm's exposure to creditworthiness and legal risk to trading counterparties, a [[key performance indicator]] is not the effectiveness of the termination events, the validity of the security package, the sensitivity of the [[NAV trigger|NAV triggers]] of the comprehensiveness and durability of the [[indemnity]], but how quickly she finished the [[negotiation]].
Something less edifying than a film’s audio-description soundtrack, but intended to have a same effect. A functional, if ungainly, transmission of basic ideas designed for someone who is physically incapable of consuming them in their native state.
 
Just one wouldn't usually send in the visually impaired to review movies, nor should one send in the clowns to evaluate a complex legal processes, but this doesn't stop it happening daily.
 
So, for a poor [[ISDA negotiator]], charged with navigating thousands of policies any the kaleidoscope of control functions to conclude an agreement which achieves the firm’s trading objectives while protecting its exposure to its counterparties, [[key performance indicator]]s will be not the quality of the agreed termination events nor the validity of the security package, much less the practicality of margining arrangements, the sensitivity of the [[NAV trigger|NAV triggers]] or the robustness of the [[indemnity]], but how quickly she finishes the [[negotiation]].


{{egg}}
{{egg}}
{{draft}}
{{draft}}

Revision as of 10:01, 12 June 2018

A means of explaining a complicated concept to a dullard with no background who has no hope of understanding it, so he can quantify it.

Something less edifying than a film’s audio-description soundtrack, but intended to have a same effect. A functional, if ungainly, transmission of basic ideas designed for someone who is physically incapable of consuming them in their native state.

Just one wouldn't usually send in the visually impaired to review movies, nor should one send in the clowns to evaluate a complex legal processes, but this doesn't stop it happening daily.

So, for a poor ISDA negotiator, charged with navigating thousands of policies any the kaleidoscope of control functions to conclude an agreement which achieves the firm’s trading objectives while protecting its exposure to its counterparties, key performance indicators will be not the quality of the agreed termination events nor the validity of the security package, much less the practicality of margining arrangements, the sensitivity of the NAV triggers or the robustness of the indemnity, but how quickly she finishes the negotiation.