Eldon-Online

Great City - Shame About the Morals

The Hong Kong public has been regaled recently with some pretty lurid tales concerning people in high places, of alleged business skullduggery, infidelity, and naughty pictures. Tales, particularly from the entertainment industry that sadly, have become rather commonplace elsewhere in the world with the high profile troubles of the likes of Amy Winehouse, Britney Spears and Pete Doherty. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, I guess, so I do confess to being just a little puzzled by some pretty strange utterances from people who, perhaps, should not be taking the first steps, but there we are.

I am not about to add to those comments. "So", you may ask, "why write anything at all?" It's because all the comments I have read so far have focused on Hong Kong. They tell the tale, understandably, in relation to what is happening in our own backyard. And they have focused more on the dirty pictures than the other issues - because they sell more papers. But my concerns are more business related, as I wonder whether there are any implications for Hong Kong in a broader sense?

In the run up to 1997, and the change of sovereignty, outsiders and even insiders expressed concerns about the continued integrity of Hong Kong under Chinese rule. What would happen, was the question, to the rule of law and the many other positive characteristics of which Hong Kong had good reason to be proud? Sure, Hong Kong had suffered ignominy in the past over incidents that, for example, had led to the establishment of the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC).

But Hong Kong entered July 1997 with its head held high and a business reputation that was intact. As fears about China's influence over or possible interference in Hong Kong's business community receded in the light of experience, I believe that many people and enterprises around the world looked at the Hong Kong model as one that would support their comfort-levels as they entered the opening, but largely unknown, China market.

For example, a review of the figures from Transparency International in their global Corruption Perception Index of 1998 had China in 52nd place, (tied with Zambia), while Hong Kong occupied the 16th slot. In the latest index for 2007, China has slipped to 72nd place (admittedly from a very much larger survey; Zambia is 123rd) but Hong Kong has improved to 14th place. Clearly, to have improved upon our position is a feather in our cap, but all of these recent, widely reported, incidents have not only sent shock waves through Hong Kong, but have appeared in a multitude of periodicals and other media overseas.

What we should not do, therefore, is believe that what we have here is reporting on a purely domestic lowering of standards. A situation that will last until the next scandal comes along, and life can just go on as if nothing had happened. We are very well aware that reputations are not built and delivered overnight, but we are equally well aware that they can be destroyed in a nanosecond. We need to be very clear, in the face of growing competition not only from cities in China but elsewhere in the region and around the globe, that our reputation as a place to do business is admired and that transgressions, especially where trust is concerned, are not tolerated.

River Deep, Mountain High - The "Service" Puzzle

What is it about companies that name themselves after huge natural geographic features like Amazon and Everest? Even the about to be nationalised Northern Rock might fall into the same category. Large organisations that build a decent reputation and then let it fade. A victim of success, perhaps, followed by a period of masterfully executed "hand sitting" on past glories. Or is it just a continuing acceptance of lower standards.

I regaled readers of this blog on 17 September with a string of "mishaps" and lack of communication by Amazon in "Up the Amazon (.com) Without a Paddle". To their credit, in January this year after a direct appeal to Chairman Jeff Bezos and another letter to the legal department, I received a reasonably terse note stating that they had removed the reviews to which I was objecting. It was as if they were saying, "If we say sorry, he might take us to court and sue us because we have admitted to identity theft". Despite my notes in writing that this was not what I wanted to do. Such is the level of concern today over litigation. The point is, it took over 6 months and much time-wasting to get a resolution to something that, I consider, would take rational, empowered people a month to decide upon. Anyway thank you, Amazon.com. Enough. Matter closed.

But no sooner have we navigated the Amazon, when up ahead of us looms Everest.

I honestly am not the complaining type, as a rule, but the parallels between Amazon and Everest incidents are scary. Forget the preamble about how we got into a contract with this "home improver". We did, based on a perception of product quality - and ignoring the advice of others. And that was when the trouble started. Letters from the company, resulting in emails by me to the author of the letters - totally ignored. In desperation, a letter to the Managing Director, which, unlike Amazon was actually responded to by a "Customer Relations Co-ordinator". Dates for commencement of the contract agreed; 9 days to complete the work. The workers didn't seem to turn up on nice days, and on bad weather days said it was too wet to work outside. Complaints telephoned in were - "noted". Scaffolding outside the house - creating an open invitation for aspiring burglars. More complaints, more excuses and, joy, an on-site meeting - some 20 days after the commencement of the contract. Promises that a couple of more days work would complete the project - but by now the house was going to be empty - and the scaffolding was still up - even more incentive for sharp-eyed burglars (as if they needed any!). After a further 16 days - during which time no workers came, the scaffolding still up, - and the burglars decided they were free and clear. They used the thoughtfully provided scaffolding, presumably disguised as workers if necessary, forced a window and then had enough leisure time to dismantle the alarm system and place it neatly on the floor. They then opened another window from inside the house, to provide another getaway.

Can you imagine what Everest has done since by way of response? If you said nothing, you are pretty close to the mark. The promised telephone call back? - not yet received. The faxed letter to the Managing Director? unanswered - not even by the Customer Relations Co-ordinator, who wrote somewhat hopefully in September 2007 "...we take our commitment to customer care very seriously". (And by the way, a copy of the letter is on its way by registered post so someone will have to sign for it!)

Oh well, they said that the Chinese Year of the Rat was not good for Roosters or Horses! And if the burglars happen to discover this blog, why the heck couldn't you have taken the ancient Volvo?

The rant? It all comes back to service standards and certainly to company leadership. We should be more serious about who we put in charge of companies, any company - and if there is a service provider out there named after another fabulous natural geographical phenomenon - you're not getting any business from me! It's too risky.

A Little Compassion - A Big Lesson

Some readers have been telling me that my Blog has been conspicuous by its absence lately; it’s nice to know it is missed. But given all the bad news in the markets, the poor weather, and the incessant reports on the US Primaries it was probably a good idea to stay away from adding to the negative comment. So, after accompanying Hong Kong’s Chief Executive on a trip to various Middle Eastern cities, I thought that prior to this year getting under way properly for me, at least from a working sense, (in other words after Chinese New Year), I would take the opportunity to do something I had not done before.
It was an important and intensely personal item on my agenda. A visit to my Father’s grave in Mombasa.
Kenya, of course is suffering from internal strife at present, although there was precious little sign of it in Mombasa, or indeed in Nairobi as we passed through, but that is not to say that problems do not exist elsewhere in the country, However, it was in Mombasa that I came across a young man whose attitude to life, and particularly to religion – which seems to be behind many of today’s more troublesome issues - was so refreshingly uncomplicated, it got me thinking.
His name is Sulaiman, and if you deduce from the name that Sulaiman is a Muslim you would be absolutely correct. But, if you took the train of thought to its logical conclusion that Sulaiman came from a Muslin family you would only be 50% correct. You see, Sulaiman’s Father was a Muslim, but his Mother was a Christian and the parents took a rather unique view of the upbringing of their children. The first-born was brought up a Christian, the second-born a Muslim – and so on – through all 13 children. One Father and one Mother.
Sulaiman is a fully practicing Muslim. He prays five times a day, he fasts during Ramadhan, he does not touch alcohol – but he also goes to Church on Sundays, only partly I suspect because he admitted to really enjoying singing the hymns. The thing is, Sulaiman sees nothing really contradictory in any of this. He explains that, at the end of the day, if there is one God it doesn’t actually matter what name you give Him.
It might help the world in general if there were more “Sulaimans” around. People for whom existence is a matter of living life properly, humanely and generously – even if they have very little to give except their compassion. Even if, though desperately poor financially, they can “give the world a smile and a kind word” as Sulaiman said.
His first thoughts and words in Mombasa, as I left the War Graves Cemetery, were words of comfort. Thank you Sulaiman. I wish there were more like you.