The company refused to pay him for work done, said the budget had been used up for other matters. They then offered him one-third of what had been agreed for that single project to do similar things throughout the organization, maybe next year. My friend felt that the client had not only reneged on the contract but had insulted him as well. Should he wait to compose a professional response? Consult a lawyer? No. He lost his temper. In e-mail etiquette the practice is known as “flaming.”He wrote that he had never seen such unprofessional behavior, that the company and its departmental manager were unethical, that he had no intention of working for them next year or any year (why should he when they don’t honor their word, their contract?) and that he would take his case to the CEO or to the board if necessary.
Did the aspersions on their honor lead the company to see the error of their ways, to apologize and pay up? Of course not. The angry letter put them on the defensive. They in effect responded it’s too bad you didn’t make it clear earlier that we would be hiring two consultants, you and your high horse.
In this particular case, the manager in question had it in for the consultant, did not agree with the CEO’s recommendation to hire him and sabotaged the contract on purpose, figuring it would never get back to the chief executive. The woman manager’s secretary seemed more able to do the job of running the department, but even she bristled at the angry letter from the consultant. If the company does not promote on merit, getting emotional about slipshod management does not help.
Turkey has a complicated judicial system and it can take years to resolve a legal dispute, but even wiretapping the judges does not help you get any better understanding of how it works. Another friend suggested that this is a case of misaligned corporate dialogue, of a European forgetting the cultural differences between himself and Turks. I disagreed. I said Turks are no different from anyone else, that no one gets all soft and accommodating in the face of anger.
Roger Abravanel, a former consultant for McKinsey & Company, wrote a book last year on meritocracy in Italy, how the lack of it slows economic and social development. In an interview with The American, a magazine in Italy, he said, “Think about civil justice, which is essential. Italy ranks 74th internationally in economic freedom, at the same level as Namibia. Think about the Mondadori decision [the legal battle between businessman Carlo de Benedetti and Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi over the purchase of the Mondadori publishing group]. It took 15 years for a ruling. In terms of how long justice takes, Italy ranks below Gabon and New Guinea. It’s 156th.”
Can we say that Italians are fundamentally different from Turks? A journalist friend recently spoke to the international media relations director at one of Turkey’s blue chip companies, who insisted on rattling away in Turkish even though the person came to him as a foreigner writing for an English-language paper in the UK. Then the reporter talked to the man’s assistant, who spoke flawless English and was twice as helpful. If that company promoted on merit she would have the top job and the manager would be drinking tea in the park.
One thing is for sure, getting mad and speaking before thinking is no way to solve a problem. Buddha said, “Though one should conquer a thousand times a thousand men in battle, he who conquers his own self is the greatest of all conquerors.” Dwight Eisenhower, the American general and president, credited his mother with helping him overcome his bad temper as a boy when she told him that, “He who conquers his own soul is greater than he who conquers a city.”
Those old sayings are old for a reason, and discretion really is the better part of valor. Sometimes it’s best to act like a bank, and put a bad account in the non-performing portfolio…then quietly write it off.
