Dear Most MTCians.. Heartiest Greets.. In contimuation of my previous post on the ' Exit of Vikram Pandit' of Citi Group, I update the following for those who have special interests in Corporate Governance and Compliance issues as part of Management Education, which is more intriguing than imagined or perceived on this murky and contentious matter sofar. Mr. Brookes White, a reknown accredited legal luminary from New York City and connected to me, who is the past Chairperson, Corporate Counsel Committee, TIPS Section of the American Bar Association, has, since, brought out more unsavoury insider information before the public domain (appended to this note). Brookes White, Esq. as the Principal of Brookes White Group, is engaged in legal matters covering Corporate financial service compliance, insurance and reinsurace coverage and claims; Veteran's disability Administration; Not-for-Profit and intellectual property legal advice and accredited FINRA & AIRROC Arbitrator. His guarded comments bear authenticity.
" I read the NYT article and if my memory of it is correct, Citi's (present) Chairman had competed for and lost out to Mr. Pandit for the CEO position. The implication of the article, if I again remember it correctly, was that the new CEO was in a unit of Citi that had some difficulties and that he reported to Mr. O'Neill at the time. If all of this is correct, why was Mr. O'Neill sitting on Citi's Board, let alone be its Chairman? Mr. Kelly's note about corporate politics is reality, but from a governance standpoint why breed it at the Board level. While Mr. O'Neill may not have a conflict as a legal matter, there could be inbred emotional conflict, where independent governance would seem to be in order. Mr. O'Neill's and the Board's decision may have been objective, but if my memory of the article is correct, it creates an appearance that belies this. It says something about Citi. "..........Brookes White, Esq. With Best Wishes and Love Prof.Subramanian (09845809857)
--- On Sun, 10/28/12, subbu sankara <apgsub@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: subbu sankara <apgsub@yahoo.com>
Subject: [MTC Global] Goodbye, Vikram: A Lesson To Learn- Citi Group Story re-visited..
To: "MTC Global. General.Mod.Dr.Bholanath MTC Global MTC Global. General" <join_mtc@googlegroups.com>
Cc: "Subramanian.sankaranarayanan Subramanian.sankaranarayanan Subramanian.sankaranarayanan" <apgsub@yahoo.com>
Date: Sunday, October 28, 2012, 12:43 AM
| Dear Most MTCians. Heartiest Greets.. As regards the exit or ouster of Vikram Pandit, I had hinted about the possibility of hidden truth and unexplainable swift with which Vikram andit was 'sent' out of CITI Group, although official version maintained a 'benign' departure route- resignation (immediate) for record sake. It is understood that SEC, the Regulator, is also looking into infirmities, if any behind such Corporate event. More of it, we may hear in the days to come. Incidentally, I append herewith an interesting article by my close friend, Jack Kelley of Compliance Group, New York City for your information. What are hid in the Corporates' Dark Holes, Heavens alone may know of..!! Corporate Governance, Disclosures and transparecy, etc are upto a point only. With Love and best wishes Prof.Subramanian (919845809857) Camp: Chennai As suspected, former Citigroup CEO Vikram Pandit was forced out of his role at the bank, despite official statements asserting a voluntary departure, the New York Times revealed today in an exclusive report. The report details a stealthy campaign waged against Pandit by Citi's chairman of the board, Michael O'Neill. O'Neill believed that Pandit was unqualified for the position and began turning the other board members against the CEO, meeting with each member individually. He started with those that already opposed Pandit. By the time he met with Pandit's supporters, he was able to tell them that the majority of the board wanted Pandit out. Following the earnings call on October 15, 2012, Pandit walked into O'Neill's office for what he believed was a routine meeting. Instead, O'Neill presented him with three press releases. One said Pandit had been fired without cause; one said he had offered his immediate resignation; and the other said he had offered his resignation effective at year end 2012. Pandit chose immediate resignation. According to the Times, Pandit was completely blindsided by the board's decision. Overall, views of his performance as CEO have been mixed. But there is one element, crucial to all corporate careers, that Pandit quite obviously neglected: politics. The Times reports that O'Neill began his campaign against Pandit when he became chairman in April of this year. One by one, he turned board members against the CEO, and a few weeks before Pandit's resignation, O'Neill called Michael Corbat and alerted him to prepare for a possible appointment to CEO and relocation from London to New York. How was Pandit totally unaware of the board's shift against him? One can surmise that Pandit ought to have spent more time hobknobbing with the board and getting to know them, so he would be able to sense when their attitudes toward him change. The fact that he knew nothing leads me to believe that Pandit took for granted the board's approval of his performance. Of course I don't have any personal knowledge of the situation, but if the entire board is turned against you one by one over a period of six months, you might be able to notice some change in their behavior, you would think. More importantly, though, Pandit made the mistake that many people make in their corporate careers, in that he focused solely on performance at the expense of internal relationships. No man is an island, and no one works in a vacuum. Every employee, no matter their level in an organization, works together with other human beings. Ignoring this reality can be devastating to an otherwise successful and bright career. For better or for worse, politics play a huge role in large and small companies. And no matter your performance, if for some reason you are not on good terms with those that write your paycheck, your job is on thin ice. So you must be politically savvy in negotiating your relationship with your boss and keeping influential individuals in your organization on your side, something that Pandit obviously failed to do. A good first step in playing the game of office politics is making sure that you do what others do. If everyone goes out for drinks after work, you ought to join in, even if you don't like to drink. If everyone watches sports games together on the weekends, you should too, even if you hate sports. This way, you keep yourself involved in the conversations that are happening, even those outside of the physical workplace. In today's competitive environment, as more people compete for fewer available promotions and bonuses, it's important to give yourself an edge–whether you are the head of one of America's largest banks or still climbing the corporate ladder. | -- MTC GLOBAL- Educate, Empower, Elevate
|
No comments:
Post a Comment