It's Reality Boss

[PopGun]

It's not exactly right. As it turns out the risk assessors who warned about the credit crunch were wrong. They couldn't see that the taxpayer was going to backstop their losses, neither did they take into account that they had a small window of opportunity to make A LOT of money. The situation is much more complex than you are suggesting.

Personally I often find that the person who provides the 'cold shower' is usually self-appointed and usually someone who started out slightly cautious then became a parody of themselves.

Well if enough people had listened to one of these loony self appointed doom sayers, the tax payer could of saved £1.2 trillion! :angry:

[frozen_out]

Well if enough people had listened to one of these loony self appointed doom sayers, the tax payer could of saved £1.2 trillion! :angry:

Everyone else was playing a different game.

[Lone_Twin]

Exactly right.

One only has to look at the treatment of those few risk assessors in the banks who tried to warn about the credit crunch to see the reality. Despite the fact that it was their job to highlight risk, they were treated as troublemakers and some were sacked for their trouble.

Which makes those badly run businesses, which, were it not for the deep pockets of the tax payer (and his grandchildren) would now be no more thus resolving the "problem".

The fact that many business survive long term (not indefinately mind you) suggests that some are well run and that a balanced opinion between bull and bear can prevail. This is the Ying and Yang of business, most grown ups in the work place know this.

Too bearish and you may miss the opportunities of the good times, too bullish and you risk over extending into almost inevitable collapse.

This is surely one of the pillars of the Austrian school that these competing outlooks allow business to make rational choices abou the environment they are operating in. It is state intervention in the shape of interest rate policy which skews the argument to the bull side and leads to a larger more damaging collapse.

Who would listen to some poxy risk assesors while the government is flooding the market with limitless "free" money, there for the taking?

[PopGun]

Everyone else was playing a different game.

Well yes there is that, as I've often thought this myself

[bogbrush]

So- I demonstrate an error in your thinking and you respond by locating the problem in me.

This is exactly the displacement behaviour I am talking about.

You have shifted from rational argument to personal disparagement- is the OP likely to fare any better when he presents his unwelcome input?

No, I was pointing out that you don't know a tenth of what I do about running business and as such your "point" about my mindset representing the problem the OP had was fatuous. That's not disparagement, it's just fact.

The OP should listen to the people on here who encourage him to be courageous, hold to his thoughts about what could be done positively in his business and be more than just a bean counter who tells people what they already know. Ultimately though he must decide wether he wants to step up or step back, that's more about what he's comfortable doing than anything else

Edited March 14, 2011 by bogbrush

[retz]

Write the report and put in the footnotes the actual facts about how dire the situation is.

I find most people either don't read, or know what footnotes are so I reckon you'll get away with it.

And if the boss ever comes after your scalp, just tell him the information was in the report you gave him at the bottom of the page.

Edited March 14, 2011 by retz

[frozen_out]

The OP should listen to the people on here who encourage him to be courageous, hold to his thoughts about what could be done positively in his business and be more than just a bean counter who tells people what they already know. Ultimately though he must decide wether he wants to step up or step back, that's more about what he's comfortable doing than anything else

He should be courageous if the time and situation calls for courage.

Currently I'm still struggling to understand why a senior financial analyst is scared his boss isn't going to listen to him, and feels he has to write a report rather than talk to him. It's baffling, and IMHO suggests the OP hasn't described the full situation.

[bogbrush]

He should be courageous if the time and situation calls for courage.

Currently I'm still struggling to understand why a senior financial analyst is scared his boss isn't going to listen to him, and feels he has to write a report rather than talk to him. It's baffling, and IMHO suggests the OP hasn't described the full situation.

Maye, sometimes discretion IS the better part of valour.

I kind of got the impression that the OP wasn't used to expressing opinion to senior management. I don't really know what a senior financial analyst is at his firm.

[South Lorne]

Exactly right.

One only has to look at the treatment of those few risk assessors in the banks who tried to warn about the credit crunch to see the reality. Despite the fact that it was their job to highlight risk, they were treated as troublemakers and some were sacked for their trouble.

...not picking you on my five a side team...you think like a loser....

[wonderpup]

No, I was pointing out that you don't know a tenth of what I do about running business and as such your "point" about my mindset representing the problem the OP had was fatuous. That's not disparagement, it's just fact.

The OP should listen to the people on here who encourage him to be courageous, hold to his thoughts about what could be done positively in his business and be more than just a bean counter who tells people what they already know. Ultimately though he must decide wether he wants to step up or step back, that's more about what he's comfortable doing than anything else

By using the word 'courageous' you implicitly accept the point I made- that the OP runs a risk if he presents negative feedback- a risk that he will labelled as 'negative'.

Courage is only required in the presence of risk.

So we are in agreement as to the risk- we only differ as to the wisest course.

[wonderpup]

...not picking you on my five a side team...you think like a loser....

So you would define those people who had the personal strength and integrity to do their job and warn their bosses about problems in their business were 'losers'?

I can only agree. Only a fool would act ethically in the current environment- I was such a fool once- so I guess that does make me a loser.

[bogbrush]

By using the word 'courageous' you implicitly accept the point I made- that the OP runs a risk if he presents negative feedback- a risk that he will labelled as 'negative'.

Courage is only required in the presence of risk.

So we are in agreement as to the risk- we only differ as to the wisest course.

No, courage is an appropriate word when it comes to doing something he is unused to. After all, he worries about being unable to explain his thoughts. It sounds from the next post that you had a bad experience but not everyone will come off as badly as that sounds.

Obviously if the business is in as big a mess as implied then the courageous thing is also the smartest.

[erranta]

Unfortunately, in my position, I do not have the luxury of keeping my head below the ramparts, management want to know my opinion, which, along with the rest of you hpcers, is that we are going to hell in a hand cart, which is why I came here.

I need to convey this, but also offer some upbeat 'happy clappy' solutions at the same time.

In that case for presentation:-

you could be 'the preacher' on a soapbox interspersed with a Gospel singer choir repeating the key points you made!

Bring the boardroom down!