December 29, 2006

the “nobody cares” manifesto

11444661477.jpg
Thanks to Den­nis How­lett for this one:

The “Nobody Cares” Mani­festo For Accoun­tants
* It’s impor­tant to remem­ber debits are on the left and cre­dits on the right — nobody cares. Pro­bably because the sys­tem was inven­ted in 1494 and hasn’t chan­ged since.
* We work hard to earn let­ters behind our names — nobody cares. Impor­tance isn’t deri­ved from aca­de­mic achie­ve­ment but what you do for others.
* ROI is an impor­tant con­cept — nobody cares. ROI cal­cu­la­tions are something you do when you really don’t want to help your client but to demons­trate to him/her how impor­tant you are. For which read 2.
* It’s impor­tant to keep good records — nobody cares. Clients aren’t in busi­ness to be admi­nis­tra­tors. If you can’t figure out how to help clients then expect to be outsour­ced. Pro­bably the day after tomo­rrow.
* A tidy office implies a tidy mind — nobody cares. A tidy mind is often com­part­men­ta­li­sed to the point of tun­nel vision. You don’t see tidy at the edge of inno­va­tion. Which is where you should be when your clients come up with great ideas.
* Pro­fes­sio­nals should always wear top qua­lity suits — nobody cares. How you look may be impor­tant if your name’s Anina but it sure as heck doesn’t mat­ter when you’re traip­sing around a pig farm. You do that occa­sio­nally don’t you?
* Your pro­fes­sio­nal sta­tus among the com­mu­nity demons­tra­tes inte­grity — nobody belie­ves you. Pro­fes­sio­nal sta­tus is over-rated. Those sch­muks from KPMG in court on fraud char­ges sor­ted that one out once and for all.
* Adding value is the most impor­tant thing you have to do — nobody belie­ves you. Clients can read a 1,000 web­si­tes and see that same vacuuous sta­te­ment. Stuff your web­site with client sto­ries, pre­fe­rably writ­ten by clients and not some PR outfit. 

[gaping­void mani­festo sub­mis­sion gui­de­li­nes are here.][Mani­festo archive is here.]

9 Responses to “the “nobody cares” manifesto”

  1. nakedpastor says:

    awe­some car­toon! a friend of mine just the other day was com­plai­ning that nobody cares… unless their own world is affected.

  2. For some rea­son, reminds me of an old George Harri­son song. It’s about 25 years old I think. Nobody cared then. Nobody will care now.
    “Now we like to air con­di­tion — though the air has no ozone ring
    Still they’re chop­ping down the forest for McDo­nalds and the Bur­ger King
    Eating cows with such per­sis­tance — doesn’t offer much resis­tance
    To this Coc­ka­ma­mie Busi­ness
    Everybody’s after as many points as they can get
    As long as it’s not them that has to pay
    No one really minds the Debt
    5-Star actors, tax ins­pec­tors, film pro­du­cers and direc­tors
    With their Coc­ka­ma­mie Business”

  3. bastian contraria says:

    What does the Anina com­ment mean? Does it mean that looks are impor­tant only for women? I don’t get this.

  4. Firas says:

    I have to disa­gree with the ROI thing. If you can’t somehow show your value to your cus­to­mer, you’re dead (it doesn’t have to be a tech­ni­cal dollars-in vs. dollars-out ROI, but you have to show *something* they can feel, sense, etc.)

  5. Krzysztof Kurowski says:

    A wai­ter in a res­tau­rant can often deli­ver bet­ter ser­vice than my accoun­tant. It’s a mat­ter of how pas­sio­nate you are about your duties. Actions without love/philosophy mean nothing.
    act justly
    love ten­derly
    walk humbly
    And not, you’re not important.

  6. Hey guys — I am an accoun­tant by trade so throw the eggs this way.
    Bas­tian — how Anina looks is part of her job. How I look isn’t. I could equally have said Jean-Paul Gau­tier or Tom Jones, take your pick. I merely poin­ted to someone with whom I thought Hugh’s audience might iden­tify.
    Firas — Hugh will tell you that we spent many an enter­tai­ning time duking this one out over here back in autumn 2005. Brother, how I want to agree with you but I can­not. I was in the same place as you back then. ROI is NOT about value. It’s about an arbi­trary mone­tary return on a pre-defined level of capi­tal expen­di­ture. The two are very, very dif­fe­rent.
    If you want to get all eco­no­mic with folk then here’s one for you: “Robert Strass­mann belie­ves that 70% of the value of capi­tal valued on the public mar­kets is tied up in peo­ple. How much value might be relea­sed if you let these peo­ple speak? How much might you learn? How much might those same peo­ple eagerly add value without you asking them simply because you gave them per­mis­sion to speak? Now — what mea­su­res do you want to apply to that?”
    I know:- Stormhoek x2 sales in Hey guys — I am an accoun­tant by trade so throw the eggs this way.
    Bas­tian — how Anina looks is part of her job. How I look isn’t. I could equally have said Jean-Paul Gau­tier or Tom Jones, take your pick. I merely poin­ted to someone with whom I thought Hugh’s audience might iden­tify.
    Firas — Hugh will tell you that we spent many an enter­tai­ning time duking this one out over here back in autumn 2005. Brother, how I want to agree with you but I can­not. I was in the same place as you back then. ROI is NOT about value. It’s about an arbi­trary mone­tary return on a pre-defined level of capi­tal expen­di­ture. The two are very, very dif­fe­rent.
    If you want to get all eco­no­mic with folk then here’s one for you: “Robert Strass­mann belie­ves that 70% of the value of capi­tal valued on the public mar­kets is tied up in peo­ple. How much value might be relea­sed if you let these peo­ple speak? How much might you learn? How much might those same peo­ple eagerly add value without you asking them simply because you gave them per­mis­sion to speak? Now — what mea­su­res do you want to apply to that?”
    I know:- Stormhoek x2 sales in <1 year. How about the recent Threshers thing? Ever­yone was a win­ner there methinks.
    Bet­ter still, show them 2 sli­des:
    1. tra­di­tio­nal view of mana­ge­ment = trian­gle.
    2. rea­lity = inver­ted trian­gle
    Seek comments…then ask them about the value of pre­ser­ving repu­ta­tion when they’ve already let the bar­ba­rians inside. Duh?
    Now if mana­ge­ment can’t handle that then tough. It’s already hap­pe­ning — rot­ting towards the core from the edge. Remem­ber email 10 years ago? A per­cei­ved cor­po­rate night­mare. Today? Hey — his­tory repeats itself…
    Krzys­tof: trust me, as a for­mer part­ner I sym­pathise.
    Pro­fes­sio­nals are impor­tant. As ser­vants. The trou­ble is, ‘we’ don’t quite see it that way a lot of the time. Which is why I do what I do and chal­llenge those norms.
    I will say this: the pro­fes­sion has a very dodgy ethi­cal com­pass at this point in time. That abso­lu­tely has to end. I wrote this ‘mani­festo’ as a reac­tion (thanks for the car­toon Hugh — top class as usual) to what I see as the myo­pia with which the pro­fes­sion currently seems infec­ted as it stands idly by and watches its influence wither — un-necessarily IMO.

  7. Krzysztof Kurowski says:

    I agree. There’s one thing that should not get in the way of conversation/trade. It’s EGO. And very often being ser­ved by pro­fes­sio­nals I find myself in front of these three let­ters. Or is it just Edin­burgh? Wel­come to the city of self.
    And yeah, we should cha­llenge those norms. Add value, give more, be customer’s best friend, wha­te­ver… words can hardly desc­ribe pas­sion. I care because you do.
    Happy new year :)

  8. Gordon_da says:

    Ahn­youngha­saeyo!
    Check this out!
    *

  9. Alice_eb says:

    At last…
    *