Sunday, 9 November 2008

The wretched banks

Well , you have to hand it to the Banks . Their public relations has just about hit rock bottom and they are now a classic case study in how not to win friends and influence .

So we read today that at the meeting with the Chancellor they told him they would not be passing on further interest rate cuts becuase , as reported in the Sunday Times , they are " not charities " . This insulting and patronising remark is deeply offensive to the 1.5 million staff who work in chariteis and the many millions who volunteer each year . It is yet another example of how business people look down on charities and assume we are not business like . i would really like to know the name of the wretched Bank Chief executive who made this remark so I can hold him up to public vilification. Or the scoundrel in the media department who thought this was amusing.

An acevo moleskine as a reward for indormation leading to the exposure of this outrage . Fat lot of good banks running corporate social responsibilty programmes if this sort of attitude is prevalent amongst the CEOs of banks.

4 comments:

progmanager said...

I guess the banker really meant 'We have to generate a profit on what we do as, unlike charities, we are not usually gifted money to support our business. The drop in interest rates provides us with a chance to restore profit margins and reduce the risk of bankruptcy - or the need for ongoing gifts - that, if we were a charity we could learn to rely on.'

Although in these strange times...

Banks are not necessarily bad organisations full of bad people.

Nor are charities necessarily good organisations full of good people.

Nick said...

The bank bailout was worth 50 times the total value of government funding for public services delivered each year by charities. The Government may expect the banks to generate a fraction of charities' social benefits in return.

Next year, the banks may find themselves taking taxpayers' money with one hand, and their houses with the other. At that point their operational independence from Government will be tested.

Rob Greenland said...

I think the interesting point here concerns the phrase "business-like". Given the way many businesses, like the banks, are run, the last thing we want to be is more like them. I re-read a bit of Jim Collins' monograph Good to Great and the Social Sectors on Thursday - this excerpt is relevant here:

"We must reject the idea.. well-intentioned, but dead wrong.. that the primary path to greatness in the social sectors is to become "more like a business." Most businesses.. like most of anything else in life.. fall somewhere between mediocre and good."

So by all means be like the best businesses - but let's challenge the simple assumption that being business-like is necessarily "a good thing".

Anonymous said...

The 'wretched' banks are nothing on the scale of wretchedness, wickedness or evil compared to the welfare reforms.

"Banks are not necessarily bad organisations full of bad people.

Nor are charities necessarily good organisations full of good people."

I would find it hard to call the 'people' pushing the welfare reforms 'people', as would I find it hard to think highly of any man or woman who wishes to use them for profit and gain.

While you are deciding who gets what honour, or travelling between your homes, spare a thought for those whose lives will be devasted by the reforms, you like so dearly.

Look hard into your conscience, if you have one.... The very people who many of the charities your group represents are going to be the ones that suffer.

If you really believe the rubbish the government is spinning, then you sadly are gullible and easily led by people more power hungry than yourself.

Never mind though, you wont be on the receiving end of any of it will you, so you dont have to worry, its someone else's problem isnt it?