The Ultimate Purpose: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|devil|
{{a|devil|
[[File:42.png|frameless|center]]
[[File:42.png|450px|frameless|center]]
}}The notional reason — long buried by screeds of wishful [[yogababble]] — why everyone, in any role, in any time or place, shows up for work, with which, for a rare, sainted few [[HR]]’s putative [[yogababble]] will be magically congruent: to create value for the owner. Most likely, if you're in HR.
}}The real reason, long buried by screeds of [[HR]]’s wishful [[yogababble]], that everyone, in any role, in any time or place, ever is needed for work: ''to create value for the owner''. If we take it that the best concrete articulation of “abstract value” the species has yet invented is [[Money|folding green stuff]], you can boil [[The Ultimate Purpose]] down: start with ''some'' of your owner’s money and reliably make ''more'' of it.


Define “owner” broadly — there will be many: shareholders, the boss, your self, your family, society, our children’s future, Gaia, ''whatever'' — and their interests will certainly conflict — that conflict, by the way, being a large propellant of the utter nonsense that is modern corporate life — but if you think always in epochal, constant, unshifting terms you can’t go too far wrong. If you achieve some value for some boss at some point in your day — achieving self-actualisation through scabrous wiki posts perhaps — then your day hasn’t been entirely wasted, however grim the experience.
But, “owner”: ''there’s'' a loaded term. So, be inclusive and define it broadly, for in any situation there will be many owners: shareholders, the boss, yourself, your self-worth, your family, the broader society, our children’s future, common sense, Gaia, ''whatever'' — and their respective [[Conflict of interest|interests will certainly conflict]] — that conflict, by the way, being a major propellant of the hooey that is modern corporate life — but if you look beyond what your [[thought leader]]s ''say'' your purpose is to something epochal, constant and unshifting, where [[This time is different|this time it ''isn’t'' different]] — you can’t go too far wrong.  


Now your [[mission statement]] may well be immeasurable, aspirational, voguish, optional horsefeed — probably will be, if HR or corporate communications had anything to do with it — but even that you can energise by tacking The Ultimate Purpose on the front of it.  
For, however confidently McKinsey might declare it, your purpose is not “to champion every client’s goals with passion and integrity, as if they were our own”, not to “serve the world by making food people love”, not to “transform lives through learning and growth,” but ''to make as much money as you can for your shareholders''. ''How'' you go about doing that is a means to that end. If championing your clients’ goals with passion and integrity — shoot me, by the way — leads to you ''losing'' your owners’ money, or making a worse return on it than you could make doing something else, ''you shouldn’t do that''.


“''To create value for the owner by'' ... ” and here, fill in the blank with your marketing department’s chosen vacuity: “ ... connecting the world to bring harmony through the efficient allocation of capital” or something, I don't know — but this way you have a north star that makes some actionable sense.
Now your employer’s [[purpose statement]] may well be immeasurable, aspirational, voguish, optional horsefeed — probably will be, if Corporate Branding had anything to do with it; see above — but you can energise it, a bit, by tacking [[The Ultimate Purpose]] on the front of it and conjoining them with a “by”.  


If we take it as a given that the best concrete articulation of abstract value is folding green stuff, the Ultimate Purpose is, in any case, to start with ''some'' money and reliably make ''more'' of it.
“''To create value for the owner by'' ... ” and here, supply your marketing department’s chosen vacuity: “ ... bringing harmony to the world through the efficient allocation of derivative risk to those best positioned to bear it” or something fatuous like that. This way you have a “pole star” to follow that gives you some cogent grounds for making business decisions.
 
{{Quote|
Q: Will this bring harmony to the world? A: YES! <br>
Q: Does this efficiently allocate credit risk to those who can bear it? A: [after some hesitation] YES! <br>
Q: Will I make pots of reliable money for the shareholders doing this? A: [longer hesitation] ... um — depends on the assumptions underlying your [[value at risk]] model holding, which on 98% of all trading days they should do assuming gaussian ... STOP NOW.}}

Revision as of 19:09, 14 July 2021

42.png


In which the curmudgeonly old sod puts the world to rights.
Index — Click ᐅ to expand:
The Devil’s Advocate

Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you.
Sign up for our newsletter.

The real reason, long buried by screeds of HR’s wishful yogababble, that everyone, in any role, in any time or place, ever is needed for work: to create value for the owner. If we take it that the best concrete articulation of “abstract value” the species has yet invented is folding green stuff, you can boil The Ultimate Purpose down: start with some of your owner’s money and reliably make more of it.

But, “owner”: there’s a loaded term. So, be inclusive and define it broadly, for in any situation there will be many owners: shareholders, the boss, yourself, your self-worth, your family, the broader society, our children’s future, common sense, Gaia, whatever — and their respective interests will certainly conflict — that conflict, by the way, being a major propellant of the hooey that is modern corporate life — but if you look beyond what your thought leaders say your purpose is to something epochal, constant and unshifting, where this time it isn’t different — you can’t go too far wrong.

For, however confidently McKinsey might declare it, your purpose is not “to champion every client’s goals with passion and integrity, as if they were our own”, not to “serve the world by making food people love”, not to “transform lives through learning and growth,” but to make as much money as you can for your shareholders. How you go about doing that is a means to that end. If championing your clients’ goals with passion and integrity — shoot me, by the way — leads to you losing your owners’ money, or making a worse return on it than you could make doing something else, you shouldn’t do that.

Now your employer’s purpose statement may well be immeasurable, aspirational, voguish, optional horsefeed — probably will be, if Corporate Branding had anything to do with it; see above — but you can energise it, a bit, by tacking The Ultimate Purpose on the front of it and conjoining them with a “by”.

“To create value for the owner by ... ” and here, supply your marketing department’s chosen vacuity: “ ... bringing harmony to the world through the efficient allocation of derivative risk to those best positioned to bear it” or something fatuous like that. This way you have a “pole star” to follow that gives you some cogent grounds for making business decisions.

Q: Will this bring harmony to the world? A: YES!
Q: Does this efficiently allocate credit risk to those who can bear it? A: [after some hesitation] YES!
Q: Will I make pots of reliable money for the shareholders doing this? A: [longer hesitation] ... um — depends on the assumptions underlying your value at risk model holding, which on 98% of all trading days they should do assuming gaussian ... STOP NOW.

Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=The_Ultimate_Purpose&oldid=57871"