Not a day goes by when we don’t have to deal with issues that are just not issues in the US. Between the tax guys, the water guys, the Internet guys, and the electric guys, you need a whole team of administrative folks just to spend time dealing with them.
Electricity is very erratic; blackouts and brownouts are common. We estimate our direct losses due to power surges at over $30,000. This is mostly computer equipment but also air conditioners that were damaged or destroyed after frequent power surges
In any case, it is not bad enough that we lose money to their power surges or from days of going without power or the cost of buying and maintaining a generator, the day-to-day service is even worse and the cost is excessive, not to say abusive.
Our average electric bill is roughly $1,200 a month. This is for about 4,000 kwh. Of that, about $245 is fixed. This means that if we use absolutely no power, we still have to pay for the meter rental (about $5 a month) and a “fixed premium” ($240 a month) which no one will explain to us. The bills are payable within 10 days. Cash or certified check. There is no late notice. They just disconnect your service. The problem is that the date on the bill is usually a week or more before you actually get the bill (they are hand delivered and not mailed) so in fact, you have a day or 2 to pay your bill before facing disconnection. And despite their inefficiencies in providing poor service all around, they are extremely effective is sending out teams of disconnection agents who go as far as removing the meter.
In March, we received a bill that was much higher than average. It was about $1700. It was dated on the 2nd but we received it on the 10th. On the 12th, we wrote to the electric company asking for an explanation for the excessive bill, an explanation for the so-called “fixed premium” and for additional time to pay. They refused to take the letter. Simply refused. After spending hour after hour, day after day at the neighborhood branch trying to meet with the branch manager or getting a letter delivered, we finally gave up and tried to pay the bill. We couldn’t. Our account had been cancelled. No reason. No explanation. A couple days later, technicians from the electric company came with a note from the branch manager requiring we prove that we had a legal connection. They wanted to remove the meter since we had “no account”. We gave them all the required documents and they eventually left.
Still unable to meet with the branch manager and unable to have any letter accepted by the receptionist, we took a bailiff with us to the branch. We were allowed in and were able to meet with the branch manager. After a long discussion that was going nowhere, we still did not know why or when they cancelled the account. The branch manager asked us to fill out an application for a new account and pay the required fee, almost $900 to get the same subscription load we have now.
So let me get this straight. You cancel my account for absolutely no reason and for me to get another account I have to REAPPLY and PAY AGAIN!!!! I was trying my best not to reach over his desk and slam his face into his PC. The colleague I was with stayed calm and the bailiff was just shaking his head in disbelief. Seeing our “reluctance” the branch manager went so far as to suggest we could hand write the application not to waste any time.
We asked that they give us a written explanation for the cancellation of our account as well as putting in writing that we needed to sign up for and pay for a new account.. We told them that we would have to justify to our “management” why we needed a new subscription when we had already paid for one in the past. He refused saying the receipt for the new connection fee would be the only thing we would have and that we could send that receipt to our management if they wanted. In the meantime, his agents were coming around to our office to remove our meter since we are using it illegally. Fortunately, we locked the main access to the building and have refused to let them in. They can disconnect us from the pole but it is more complicated and it will take them a few days.
After leaving the branch yesterday, we wrote a letter to the branch manager and had it delivered by our bailiff this morning. Our bailiff spent over and hour and a half listening to the branch manager’s explanations. He came back saying that the branch manager told him that he had received instructions from his head office to cancel our service and that since it was cancelled, the only solution was to reapply and pay again. He “generously” offered to give us some time to pay for the connection fee as long as we reapplied now. Of course, this was unacceptable to us. We managed to get the branch manager on the phone and we asked him for the contact at his head office we could get the explanation from. He completely changed his story and now claimed that the head office had nothing to do with it.
Since our last letter was delivered by bailiff, they will have to answer. In the meantime, we are illegally using electric power which we paid over $2,400 at the time to get installed and we could lose power at any moment.
This place is truly hell.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Changing Internet Providers
We decided to change internet providers. Our current provider does a pretty good job but at the US $ equivalent of almost $2,000 a month for a 256k connection, it was just too much for our budget. We found another provider (call them OW) that could provide a dedicated 128k connection at a little more than $400. Since the connection is dedicated, we should get roughly the same bandwidth with OW as with the 256k shared we got from the current provider.
We had contacted OW a few months ago and they had given us a quotation that was even higher than our current provider. When we decided last week to look for alternatives one of our interns told us his dad could get us a connection very fast. It turns out that his dad was merely an unofficial reseller for OW. But since our name was not mentioned by the Dad when OW gave him the quote, he was able to get a much better quote than we ever could (people just assume that we are incredibly rich and quotations here are often based on who is buying and not what is being sold).
OW was definitely a little disappointed to find out we were the client. They thought they could have gotten a much higher rate from us. Anyway, their claim to fame is to get you up and running the same day. We placed the order on a Thursday. No installation. They promised to do it on Friday. No installation. Then they promised to come on Saturday. No one showed up. Yesterday, we finally wrote a letter to them saying that if the installation was not complete by 3 PM, we would cancel and they would have to refund the entire installation fee and one month prepayment we had paid (installation cost was over $700 even after negotiations). Their manager agreed to have everything done by then. No one showed up until 2:30 PM. They started working on the roof to set up their equipment. Until 8 PM they were still on the roof. They promised to come this morning by 7 AM to continue. They did not arrive until 10.
A couple hours later, the technical manager comes to see us to explain that they would not be able to install the equipment after all. Their installation requires line of sight and there was a tall building between us and them (I guess they had never noticed it before now) and their equipment would not be tall enough to overcome that. So we have this gigantic beam on our roof that they now have to remove.
We had already cancelled service from our previous provider and we have no internet. Our second choice was with the state owned telecom. They are the exclusive provider of fiber optic service to the other ISPs and are themselves providers using ADSL. The paperwork to get a connection reads like a loan application. In addition to certified copies of this and that, they want photographs of the top manager as well as a copy of his national identity card. We have been customers forever since they have exclusivity over land lines but we don’t exist in their internet system and have to apply like everyone else. The application has to be accompanied with payment (cash or certified check) for the installation charge and one month of service. Then, they send the application to another city where their headquarters are for processing. The application then comes back and we wait until they have an “available port” to connect us to. They are suggesting two or three weeks. That is civil servant speak for “You will get connected in a few months if you are lucky but if you give me enough money I can move your file up and you will get your connection in a week.”
I am not sure what we will do. We might bite the bullet and go back to our previous provider. So frustrating. Such an essential element of development is incredibly expensive and difficult to obtain. There must be a better way.
Update: We went back to our original provider. Unfortunately, the new provider had sabotaged the original installation (removed the antenna, cut cables, disabled the radio) and after 2 weeks, our former provider is still working to fix the problem. So still no Internet.
We had contacted OW a few months ago and they had given us a quotation that was even higher than our current provider. When we decided last week to look for alternatives one of our interns told us his dad could get us a connection very fast. It turns out that his dad was merely an unofficial reseller for OW. But since our name was not mentioned by the Dad when OW gave him the quote, he was able to get a much better quote than we ever could (people just assume that we are incredibly rich and quotations here are often based on who is buying and not what is being sold).
OW was definitely a little disappointed to find out we were the client. They thought they could have gotten a much higher rate from us. Anyway, their claim to fame is to get you up and running the same day. We placed the order on a Thursday. No installation. They promised to do it on Friday. No installation. Then they promised to come on Saturday. No one showed up. Yesterday, we finally wrote a letter to them saying that if the installation was not complete by 3 PM, we would cancel and they would have to refund the entire installation fee and one month prepayment we had paid (installation cost was over $700 even after negotiations). Their manager agreed to have everything done by then. No one showed up until 2:30 PM. They started working on the roof to set up their equipment. Until 8 PM they were still on the roof. They promised to come this morning by 7 AM to continue. They did not arrive until 10.
A couple hours later, the technical manager comes to see us to explain that they would not be able to install the equipment after all. Their installation requires line of sight and there was a tall building between us and them (I guess they had never noticed it before now) and their equipment would not be tall enough to overcome that. So we have this gigantic beam on our roof that they now have to remove.
We had already cancelled service from our previous provider and we have no internet. Our second choice was with the state owned telecom. They are the exclusive provider of fiber optic service to the other ISPs and are themselves providers using ADSL. The paperwork to get a connection reads like a loan application. In addition to certified copies of this and that, they want photographs of the top manager as well as a copy of his national identity card. We have been customers forever since they have exclusivity over land lines but we don’t exist in their internet system and have to apply like everyone else. The application has to be accompanied with payment (cash or certified check) for the installation charge and one month of service. Then, they send the application to another city where their headquarters are for processing. The application then comes back and we wait until they have an “available port” to connect us to. They are suggesting two or three weeks. That is civil servant speak for “You will get connected in a few months if you are lucky but if you give me enough money I can move your file up and you will get your connection in a week.”
I am not sure what we will do. We might bite the bullet and go back to our previous provider. So frustrating. Such an essential element of development is incredibly expensive and difficult to obtain. There must be a better way.
Update: We went back to our original provider. Unfortunately, the new provider had sabotaged the original installation (removed the antenna, cut cables, disabled the radio) and after 2 weeks, our former provider is still working to fix the problem. So still no Internet.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Barack Obama and the US Continental African Community
Most African Diaspora discussion groups these days are more focused on the US elections than they are on Darfur or Kenya.
I expected, and most others too, that Continental Africans in the US would be an automatic constituency for Obama. I was wrong. Continental Africans followed the same process that African Americans did. At first, most expressed admiration for Obama but support for Clinton. In their estimation, it would be impossible for Obama to defeat Clinton and even less to defeat a Republican in the general election. It was not until White Americans began to consistently show support for Obama, that African Americans and eventually Continental Africans in the US began to openly support him.
A couple postings ago, I wrote about how Africans don’t trust Africans with technology. Actually, the Obama episode shows that Africans don’t believe in Africans period until the African is accepted by those who count – that would be the “White Man.” If we are acceptable to them that means we are acceptable in our own community.
I don’t expect all Continental Africans in the US to support Barack Obama simply because of our common ancestry. But I find truly appalling that most admired him and agreed with his positions and simply did not support him because they thought the White folks would not. This demonstrates a sense of insecurity and low self esteem that has kept the African American community back; and it is one of the main elements which distinguished it from the Continental African community in the US which has displayed a lot of confidence and has generally been very successful because of that.
Continental Africans are the highest educated immigrants in America. They come before Asians (including Indians). They are the wealthiest immigrant community as well. This success results from the confidence and can do attitude that is a characteristic of the community. Barack Obama, his message, his optimism, his strength of character, his ability to move between all sectors of society, are all traits that are common to Continental Africans.
When we “got off the boat,” no one told us that we were not equal to the White man. That we were less intelligent then they were; that they owed us a debt and that we needed to fight them; we did not know that we were supposed to feel inferior in any way. It was just not part of our thought process. Much of Obama’s success comes from the absence of bitterness and absence of baggage from which suffer generations of African Americans. It is not that he is beyond that, or has gotten over that, it is simply that he has never been there. The accusation from some that Obama is somehow not Black enough, originates, at least in part, by the absence of reverse racism in his message. He is cool with Whites and with Blacks. He recognizes racism and has probably suffered from it but, unlike many Black Americans, has never internalized it and it is not part of his persona.
When I moved to the US as a teenager, I was sent to public high school. The school was almost half African American. I remember being ostracized by Blacks in my school because “She gets good grades, she is just trying to be White.” Somehow, if you did not express the victimization of the color of your skin by proving the victimizer right, you were a traitor. Later when I got to college, I once met with the dean of my school. I was complaining about the lack of African or Black curriculum. You could study Catalan, Ancient Greek and the history of remote Latin American ethnicities. Yet, in a university with over 5,000 students, there was not a single course on Africa or African American anything. Nothing. I never saw a single Black faculty member and there were few Blacks on campus, mostly Continental Africans. In response to my concern, the dean said to me: “You know, you have to understand that you are different coming from Africa, most of the Black Americans here, we have to hold by the hand to get them to graduate.” Divide and conquer. I was so upset. I went into a long rant about how I hadn’t grown up in a society that told me that I couldn’t succeed because of the color of my skin. I had not known the expectation of failure. I am not sure the dean really got it but there historically has been real cultural distinction between African Americans and Continental Africans. However, the longer we stay in the US, the more it seems that we are developing the mentality of insecurity that has kept our African American brothers down for so long and the initial tepid support we showed for Barack Obama is a reflection of this paradigm shift.
I expected, and most others too, that Continental Africans in the US would be an automatic constituency for Obama. I was wrong. Continental Africans followed the same process that African Americans did. At first, most expressed admiration for Obama but support for Clinton. In their estimation, it would be impossible for Obama to defeat Clinton and even less to defeat a Republican in the general election. It was not until White Americans began to consistently show support for Obama, that African Americans and eventually Continental Africans in the US began to openly support him.
A couple postings ago, I wrote about how Africans don’t trust Africans with technology. Actually, the Obama episode shows that Africans don’t believe in Africans period until the African is accepted by those who count – that would be the “White Man.” If we are acceptable to them that means we are acceptable in our own community.
I don’t expect all Continental Africans in the US to support Barack Obama simply because of our common ancestry. But I find truly appalling that most admired him and agreed with his positions and simply did not support him because they thought the White folks would not. This demonstrates a sense of insecurity and low self esteem that has kept the African American community back; and it is one of the main elements which distinguished it from the Continental African community in the US which has displayed a lot of confidence and has generally been very successful because of that.
Continental Africans are the highest educated immigrants in America. They come before Asians (including Indians). They are the wealthiest immigrant community as well. This success results from the confidence and can do attitude that is a characteristic of the community. Barack Obama, his message, his optimism, his strength of character, his ability to move between all sectors of society, are all traits that are common to Continental Africans.
When we “got off the boat,” no one told us that we were not equal to the White man. That we were less intelligent then they were; that they owed us a debt and that we needed to fight them; we did not know that we were supposed to feel inferior in any way. It was just not part of our thought process. Much of Obama’s success comes from the absence of bitterness and absence of baggage from which suffer generations of African Americans. It is not that he is beyond that, or has gotten over that, it is simply that he has never been there. The accusation from some that Obama is somehow not Black enough, originates, at least in part, by the absence of reverse racism in his message. He is cool with Whites and with Blacks. He recognizes racism and has probably suffered from it but, unlike many Black Americans, has never internalized it and it is not part of his persona.
When I moved to the US as a teenager, I was sent to public high school. The school was almost half African American. I remember being ostracized by Blacks in my school because “She gets good grades, she is just trying to be White.” Somehow, if you did not express the victimization of the color of your skin by proving the victimizer right, you were a traitor. Later when I got to college, I once met with the dean of my school. I was complaining about the lack of African or Black curriculum. You could study Catalan, Ancient Greek and the history of remote Latin American ethnicities. Yet, in a university with over 5,000 students, there was not a single course on Africa or African American anything. Nothing. I never saw a single Black faculty member and there were few Blacks on campus, mostly Continental Africans. In response to my concern, the dean said to me: “You know, you have to understand that you are different coming from Africa, most of the Black Americans here, we have to hold by the hand to get them to graduate.” Divide and conquer. I was so upset. I went into a long rant about how I hadn’t grown up in a society that told me that I couldn’t succeed because of the color of my skin. I had not known the expectation of failure. I am not sure the dean really got it but there historically has been real cultural distinction between African Americans and Continental Africans. However, the longer we stay in the US, the more it seems that we are developing the mentality of insecurity that has kept our African American brothers down for so long and the initial tepid support we showed for Barack Obama is a reflection of this paradigm shift.
Fiscal Tyranny (Part 1)
Yesterday, our tax adviser stopped by for a meeting to discuss our monthly filings. A meeting that was intended to raise her concerns about hotel bills turned into a philosophical discussion about taxes in this country.
Our tax advisor’s specific concern was that we had paid hotel bills for some people but that our records did not reflect a contract for those people or any consulting payment to them. Our explanation to her was that these people were company staff in the US and Europe who had travelled to our country to provide sales and technical assistance just made it worse. That meant that we needed to pay a technical assistance tax of 15% for those individuals. We explained that they were employed by our US and European entities and therefore there was no fee to be paid by our local entity and 15% of 0 was 0.
She explained that this would never fly with the tax authorities. We needed to draft a technical assistance contract for their work with an estimation of the value of their services even though the services would not be paid for. She also warned that without those contracts, we would likely have to pay for payroll related taxes for those individuals even though they are not on our payroll. Of course, once a contract is established, it needs to be “registered” with the tax authorities and the “fee” is 2% of the value of the contract. If the contract was registered late, then there is a 100% penalty for the fee. There are also taxes on the fees which are about 50%. So really you are paying 3% or 6% if you register more than 30 days after the work is performed. If the amount is under the $US of $10,000 then the registration “fee” is actually 5% plus the taxes, all doubled if you are 30 days late.
So because we wanted to reinforce our local activities with resources who came in from overseas we now had to pay thousands of dollars in taxes for services which we never had to pay for out of our local coffers.
This was insane but very logical to this poor tax advisor who was just doing her job. She was so enmeshed in the tax code and the way of doing business in this country that she was oblivious to the madness of the tax code and surprised that we objected to it. She really believes that this is the way business is done all over the world and she said that we were the first to complain not just about the process (will blog about that another time) but about the tax structure itself.
And that is the real problem. It is impossible to make real progress when most stakeholders do not understand that business as usual in this country is detrimental to our development. Everyone focuses on enforcing the current system and or complaining about the heaving handed collection process. But what is needed is a complete change in mentality. Taxes, fees, duties are not elements of progress for business but elements of repression. This by itself is not unique to this country. Business people all over the world complain about taxation and regulation. The state of Maryland, where our business was started, has just instituted a sales tax on computer services amidst an uproar from the tech community. Where this becomes insidious in a developing country like the one I am in is that the complexity and multiple layers of taxation are taken as an opportunity for tax officials to personally enrich themselves. The more complicated the tax structure is, the more repressive it is, the more taxpayers will look for ways to cheat and tax officials are all too happy to assist them in that manner… for a personal fee.
Our tax advisor’s specific concern was that we had paid hotel bills for some people but that our records did not reflect a contract for those people or any consulting payment to them. Our explanation to her was that these people were company staff in the US and Europe who had travelled to our country to provide sales and technical assistance just made it worse. That meant that we needed to pay a technical assistance tax of 15% for those individuals. We explained that they were employed by our US and European entities and therefore there was no fee to be paid by our local entity and 15% of 0 was 0.
She explained that this would never fly with the tax authorities. We needed to draft a technical assistance contract for their work with an estimation of the value of their services even though the services would not be paid for. She also warned that without those contracts, we would likely have to pay for payroll related taxes for those individuals even though they are not on our payroll. Of course, once a contract is established, it needs to be “registered” with the tax authorities and the “fee” is 2% of the value of the contract. If the contract was registered late, then there is a 100% penalty for the fee. There are also taxes on the fees which are about 50%. So really you are paying 3% or 6% if you register more than 30 days after the work is performed. If the amount is under the $US of $10,000 then the registration “fee” is actually 5% plus the taxes, all doubled if you are 30 days late.
So because we wanted to reinforce our local activities with resources who came in from overseas we now had to pay thousands of dollars in taxes for services which we never had to pay for out of our local coffers.
This was insane but very logical to this poor tax advisor who was just doing her job. She was so enmeshed in the tax code and the way of doing business in this country that she was oblivious to the madness of the tax code and surprised that we objected to it. She really believes that this is the way business is done all over the world and she said that we were the first to complain not just about the process (will blog about that another time) but about the tax structure itself.
And that is the real problem. It is impossible to make real progress when most stakeholders do not understand that business as usual in this country is detrimental to our development. Everyone focuses on enforcing the current system and or complaining about the heaving handed collection process. But what is needed is a complete change in mentality. Taxes, fees, duties are not elements of progress for business but elements of repression. This by itself is not unique to this country. Business people all over the world complain about taxation and regulation. The state of Maryland, where our business was started, has just instituted a sales tax on computer services amidst an uproar from the tech community. Where this becomes insidious in a developing country like the one I am in is that the complexity and multiple layers of taxation are taken as an opportunity for tax officials to personally enrich themselves. The more complicated the tax structure is, the more repressive it is, the more taxpayers will look for ways to cheat and tax officials are all too happy to assist them in that manner… for a personal fee.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
OLPC's Fatal Flaw
I have a lot of admiration for Nicholas Negroponte and the OLPC (One Laptop Per Child) team. By in large, they got the technology right. They brought the right partners together and created an unbelievable product. The technological advances that are found in the $100 (OK, $300) laptop will certainly impact the way computers are built tomorrow.
OLPC has not had the expected success. There is nothing technically wrong with it. The pricing is reasonable. So why hasn't the laptop caught on in the developing world it was designed for?
The name says it all: ONE laptop PER child. The idea might be appealing to the western world but it is not a cultural fit for the developing world, or at least Africa where I am blogging from. Africans are very communal in nature. Outside of the wealthy elite that is not the target of the OLPC anyway, Africans don't individually own things, especially not children. Whoever has a radio or a television shares it with not just the immediate family, but the entire community. One never watches TV alone and one does not sit in a corner and read alone or get on a computer alone. People still do things together. Not because they are forced to but because that is the way they prefer it.
How do you reconcile this communal culture with the OLPC technology? Probably through a new approach. As well intended as the project sponsors are, I simply cannot imagine any African politician buying into the idea in any meaningful way. It is one of those things that are difficult to explain. Kind of like explaining to a white person what is it like to be black. You can't really put it into words.
Maybe they could rename it "laptops for all" and set them up for multiple users. Maybe they could change the target from children to families. It might not sound very politically correct but a business owner could leverage the technology a lot more and turn the laptop into increased revenue. By keeping track of inventory, accounting, communicating with customers and vendors electronically, the businessperson would use it in the day and his/her kids could use it in the evening. You could then have the government partially subsidize the computer and set up a loan through credit union or other micro-credit institution to finance the rest. Then you would have "One Laptop per Family" which is more in tune with our culture.... and, because it is contributing to economic growth, would be more sustaining long term.
OLPC has not had the expected success. There is nothing technically wrong with it. The pricing is reasonable. So why hasn't the laptop caught on in the developing world it was designed for?
The name says it all: ONE laptop PER child. The idea might be appealing to the western world but it is not a cultural fit for the developing world, or at least Africa where I am blogging from. Africans are very communal in nature. Outside of the wealthy elite that is not the target of the OLPC anyway, Africans don't individually own things, especially not children. Whoever has a radio or a television shares it with not just the immediate family, but the entire community. One never watches TV alone and one does not sit in a corner and read alone or get on a computer alone. People still do things together. Not because they are forced to but because that is the way they prefer it.
How do you reconcile this communal culture with the OLPC technology? Probably through a new approach. As well intended as the project sponsors are, I simply cannot imagine any African politician buying into the idea in any meaningful way. It is one of those things that are difficult to explain. Kind of like explaining to a white person what is it like to be black. You can't really put it into words.
Maybe they could rename it "laptops for all" and set them up for multiple users. Maybe they could change the target from children to families. It might not sound very politically correct but a business owner could leverage the technology a lot more and turn the laptop into increased revenue. By keeping track of inventory, accounting, communicating with customers and vendors electronically, the businessperson would use it in the day and his/her kids could use it in the evening. You could then have the government partially subsidize the computer and set up a loan through credit union or other micro-credit institution to finance the rest. Then you would have "One Laptop per Family" which is more in tune with our culture.... and, because it is contributing to economic growth, would be more sustaining long term.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Africans Don't Trust Africans with Technology
One would logically think that the most likely consumers of African technology would be Africans. Not so. Africans do not trust each other to provide quality technology.
Last year, we heard that a large company that is almost across the street from us wanted to implement a CRM (Customer Relationship Management) system. Since we are one of the few companies with experience in that area and given that we worked with several of this company's sister companies in various countries, including the US, we thought we had a good shot at getting the project. We approached them and offered to make a presentation. They explained to us that we were way too small for them and that they were going through an invitation only bidding process. Only European companies would be invited. Because there are few CRM implementations in this country, we thought that we would offer to assist them, at no cost, so that there would be a reference for a CRM project in the country. They refused. They were hiring consultants from Europe to provide project support. OK. Even free, our services are not worth it. Jeez.
A few months later, we received a call from a European company that was bidding on a CRM project in Africa. They did not have any experience and did not have any resources and they wanted to know if we would partner with them. You guessed it. Same client. Same project. We agreed.
We had to prepare the entire proposal and provide OUR references. Our partner company prettied up the proposal with their logo and made no reference to us. They redid the resumes so that our name would not appear anywhere. The proposal was shortlisted and the client requested a presentation. Oops. Our partner's sales folks flew in but, unable to answer any technical questions, had to include us. So we accompany them across the street for the presentation. Client did not hide their surprise. Our proposal turned out to be the best one. We (our partners) won. So here it was. We were not allowed to interact directly with the client so our partner sent a "project manager" to this country. Over a period of six months, we actually saw 4 different ones.
So here we were in this ridiculous process of having to send the project manager emails that he then copied and pasted into his emails to the client. The client would answer and he would forward the emails to us. Then, in the fine European tradition, our partner's project manager had to go on vacation so the project was at a standstill while he went on holiday. Then they sent someone new (after all, this is an African country, you send the people none of your European clients would accept). We lost 4 months on a project that should have lasted 3 as a result of the project management problems.
We would get sign off, send it to Europe, send them our bill. They would send their bill (our bill multiplied by 3) to the client. Client would wire the money to Europe and then, eventually (sometimes months later), partner wired money back to us. We eventually finished the project and the client was very pleased. Of course, our partner gets the reference and they profiled their success on their web site. As logical as it might seem for the client to contact us directly next time, they probably won't. They are too ashamed.
This was not the first time we faced the distrust of an African client. Before this subsidiary opened, we were contacted in the US by a large American software company for training on their technology in an African country. They knew that we had resources that could train in French (language of the client) and asked for some resumes. We sent the resume of our most qualified instructor. I got a phone call from the software company's African training manager. She asked if there was another resume I could send because our instructor's name sounded African. She said the African client complained that for the daily rate we were charging they "expected a White person." We did not do the training.
We do expect some push back from American and European clients when we, Africans, show up telling them we can provide them the best technology. Africans are poor starving people, not innovators or technology experts. We are prepared for that and have been succesful selling to large multinational clients or government entities outside of Africa.
To get this from our own African brothers and sisters is all the more frustrating. And we are no exception. Many other African entrepreneurs have shared similar stories with me. How can we progress if we so distrust our own people?
Last year, we heard that a large company that is almost across the street from us wanted to implement a CRM (Customer Relationship Management) system. Since we are one of the few companies with experience in that area and given that we worked with several of this company's sister companies in various countries, including the US, we thought we had a good shot at getting the project. We approached them and offered to make a presentation. They explained to us that we were way too small for them and that they were going through an invitation only bidding process. Only European companies would be invited. Because there are few CRM implementations in this country, we thought that we would offer to assist them, at no cost, so that there would be a reference for a CRM project in the country. They refused. They were hiring consultants from Europe to provide project support. OK. Even free, our services are not worth it. Jeez.
A few months later, we received a call from a European company that was bidding on a CRM project in Africa. They did not have any experience and did not have any resources and they wanted to know if we would partner with them. You guessed it. Same client. Same project. We agreed.
We had to prepare the entire proposal and provide OUR references. Our partner company prettied up the proposal with their logo and made no reference to us. They redid the resumes so that our name would not appear anywhere. The proposal was shortlisted and the client requested a presentation. Oops. Our partner's sales folks flew in but, unable to answer any technical questions, had to include us. So we accompany them across the street for the presentation. Client did not hide their surprise. Our proposal turned out to be the best one. We (our partners) won. So here it was. We were not allowed to interact directly with the client so our partner sent a "project manager" to this country. Over a period of six months, we actually saw 4 different ones.
So here we were in this ridiculous process of having to send the project manager emails that he then copied and pasted into his emails to the client. The client would answer and he would forward the emails to us. Then, in the fine European tradition, our partner's project manager had to go on vacation so the project was at a standstill while he went on holiday. Then they sent someone new (after all, this is an African country, you send the people none of your European clients would accept). We lost 4 months on a project that should have lasted 3 as a result of the project management problems.
We would get sign off, send it to Europe, send them our bill. They would send their bill (our bill multiplied by 3) to the client. Client would wire the money to Europe and then, eventually (sometimes months later), partner wired money back to us. We eventually finished the project and the client was very pleased. Of course, our partner gets the reference and they profiled their success on their web site. As logical as it might seem for the client to contact us directly next time, they probably won't. They are too ashamed.
This was not the first time we faced the distrust of an African client. Before this subsidiary opened, we were contacted in the US by a large American software company for training on their technology in an African country. They knew that we had resources that could train in French (language of the client) and asked for some resumes. We sent the resume of our most qualified instructor. I got a phone call from the software company's African training manager. She asked if there was another resume I could send because our instructor's name sounded African. She said the African client complained that for the daily rate we were charging they "expected a White person." We did not do the training.
We do expect some push back from American and European clients when we, Africans, show up telling them we can provide them the best technology. Africans are poor starving people, not innovators or technology experts. We are prepared for that and have been succesful selling to large multinational clients or government entities outside of Africa.
To get this from our own African brothers and sisters is all the more frustrating. And we are no exception. Many other African entrepreneurs have shared similar stories with me. How can we progress if we so distrust our own people?
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Yellow Journalism: African Style
You know when you have really made it when you get trashed in our local equivalent of the National Enquirer. I got two full pages in last week's edition. I just found out today because no one I know really reads that paper (or admits to reading it). Someone finally called one of my colleagues to tell him.
I haven't seen it myself but my name in block letters was in the headline. The story goes into detail about how I swindled my business partner and how he sued me in various places and won. Of course, I have never had a business partner and the person mentioned as my business partner was in fact an employee who did indeed win a labor case under dubious circumstances as described in an earlier post: Do me a favor: Don't do me any favors.
I am torn as to how to react to the article. My business side laughs it off and won’t waste time worrying about it. My human side is distraught not necessarily that I am a victim of this latest attack, but that this is what has become of our struggle for freedom of the press.
Years ago, as a student, I was very active in the struggle for democracy and human rights for
Our newspapers have been filled with sensational stories dragging everyone from business people to political authorities, from singers and to sports stars. There is a common expression in the Country today: “He is a Top
This trend is not just bad journalism meant to sell newspapers; it is much more insidious than that. Most of the newspapers that engage in the “decimation” business don’t sell any advertising. It is clear that the revenue from the sales of the paper does not cover the cost of printing, so why would journalists risk jail time (defamation is a criminal offense here) to print stories that completely invented? MONEY, of course.
In my case, the newspaper published a teaser a couple days before they printed the whole article. “Coming Soon.. the underside of [me].” This was meant to attract me to the publisher so that I could offer him a larger sum than what had been offered by the person who brought him the article. Unfortunately for them, I did not bite.
This goes the other way too. A few years ago while I was visiting the country, I made the cover of two newspapers the same day with pictures and information culled from various sources. They were extremely kind to me. One article focused on my personal wealth and stated that I was the richest woman from that Country. I remember one sentence that read that “She does not talk to you unless it is in Billions.” I thought it was very funny at the time (I am very far from being the wealthiest anything). When I got back to the
You pay for negative stories against your competitors or opponents, pay for positive stories about you or your business, pay to keep your name from being dragged through the mud.
We end up reading the government official newspaper to get information. How sad. Is this what we fought for so hard? What will happen when the next journalist gets arrested for what is really a violation of his rights? Who will stand and fight for him?
Friday, January 12, 2007
It's the About the Application of the Law Stupid!
The Managing Director of the IMF recently visited the country I am in. I read and re-read his concluding statement and it seemed very on-point:
A few years ago, our President, in his New Year's speech announced the passage of a law eliminating taxes and duties on all information technology products. I was still living in the States then. About a month after his declaration, I landed in this country with computers, printers and other equipment for our local subsidiary. The customs officers were quick to tell me that we had to pay an inordinate amount of customs duty. We reminded them that the Head of State had announced that there was no more customs duty. They said that they had heard the speech as well and the law had been passed but that the “texts of application” of the law had not yet been drafted so we still had to pay. Of course, they offered a "discount" to keep it off the books. I thought that the receipt would be a weapon to use in the struggle to improve the business environment so we paid up.
A month later, the “texts of application” were published. Before anyone had a chance to take advantage of the new law, they repealed it. Taxes and duties were back on. No speech, no announcement, just those nasty “texts of application” that cancelled the law. Imagine the consequences for a company that placed a large technology order from overseas that had not yet received its merchandise? Not a nice surprise, especially not when the taxes and duties are about 50% of the value of the technology.
Back to the recent IMF visit. Of course, high on the list of the discussions was the fight against corruption. As in the President’s New Year’s speech and in many other political speeches, the government reiterated its commitment against corruption. But that little problem of the “texts of application” of the law creeps up again. In their Letter of Intent following the visit of the IMF, the country stated:
"...Creating an environment conducive to private sector development is another priority area. In this context, strengthening governance, including a sound and predictable legal and regulatory framework, and an efficient judiciary is important."It sounded almost as pertinent as the New Year speeches our President makes every year. Just as the Director of the IMF, our President really does seem to understand what is wrong with the country. The problem with him is the same as the problem with the Director of the IMF, they are either powerless to do anything about it other than making speeches that give people like me a half an hour's worth of hope that things will change, or they want to look the other way.
A few years ago, our President, in his New Year's speech announced the passage of a law eliminating taxes and duties on all information technology products. I was still living in the States then. About a month after his declaration, I landed in this country with computers, printers and other equipment for our local subsidiary. The customs officers were quick to tell me that we had to pay an inordinate amount of customs duty. We reminded them that the Head of State had announced that there was no more customs duty. They said that they had heard the speech as well and the law had been passed but that the “texts of application” of the law had not yet been drafted so we still had to pay. Of course, they offered a "discount" to keep it off the books. I thought that the receipt would be a weapon to use in the struggle to improve the business environment so we paid up.
A month later, the “texts of application” were published. Before anyone had a chance to take advantage of the new law, they repealed it. Taxes and duties were back on. No speech, no announcement, just those nasty “texts of application” that cancelled the law. Imagine the consequences for a company that placed a large technology order from overseas that had not yet received its merchandise? Not a nice surprise, especially not when the taxes and duties are about 50% of the value of the technology.
Back to the recent IMF visit. Of course, high on the list of the discussions was the fight against corruption. As in the President’s New Year’s speech and in many other political speeches, the government reiterated its commitment against corruption. But that little problem of the “texts of application” of the law creeps up again. In their Letter of Intent following the visit of the IMF, the country stated:
In April 2006, the government enacted a law defining the modalities for application of [the law], which refers to the disclosure of assets by senior government officials. Nevertheless, the commission that was to have been set up under this law to receive the asset declarations has not yet been established because the legal texts governing the application of the law have not yet been prepared. Similarly, the National Commission to Fight Corruption, created in March 2006, is not yet operational as its members have not yet been named, given the considerable time needed to ascertain the integrity of potential members.Given that corruption is the government’s top priority, you start to understand why nothing changes here. And every time the World Bank, the IMF or US Government officials come in, our government will proudly display the laws on the books to fight corruption, to improve the environment for the private sector, to fight poverty, improve education, etc. And the World Bank and friends will have their conscience relieved that their admonitions were effective and that finally the Country is "behaving." The laws are well written and sound great. The problem is not just that they are not applied but that there is no consequence for not applying them. The judges can see the laws and chose to ignore them with no consequence, same with the police, the custom agents and all other public servants. Until the Country has to account for the non-application of its laws, it will not establish mechanisms to enforce them.
Sunday, January 07, 2007
New Technology Initiative in Africa
There is a really great story about another starry eyed entrepreneur who is wiring up Rwanda. http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,457000,00.html.
His optimism reminds me of mine, a few years ago. I want him to succeed because I want the me of a few years ago to be right about Africa's potential and our ability to come back from very far. I remember that when we were looking for a motto for our non-profit, we chose "beyond the digital divide." The point was that we should not try to catch up but to leap forward. This meant that we should not be accepting old PCs that could not utilize the latest in technology but try to acquire and develop cutting edge technology which would bring Africa to the forefront of the digital age.
To make this happen, we developed a project called the African Center for Technology Innovation and Ventures (ACTIV). This center was to be a sort of incubator for high-tech entrepreneurs and a place where all types technologies from Africa and elsewhere could be showcased. The ACTIV offices are open and wired up but the center is non-operational because our business was funding the project and we could no longer fund ourselves, let alone this project. It is a pity but the experiences we have had in the country on the business side will help us in better guiding the entrepreneurs once the project is able to launch again. The most important lesson we have learned is that the main impediments to the development of technology are not infrastructure and lack of skills, but corruption and government intervention.
I am still hoping that we will one day be able to make the project happen. The Rwandan example is one of an American entrepreneur contributing to development in Africa through technology. As much as we encourage the Gregs of the world and welcome their initiatives, we also want to empower Africans themselves to build technology businesses. Just wish our governments were not so against us.
"Africa offers many investment opportunities," says an enthusiastic Greg Wyler, a boyish-looking man in his mid-thirties. "We simply have to bring the Internet into each of these huts, and the rest will fall into place." Wyler, an American entrepreneur, hopes to launch an "African Renaissance" with his project.
His optimism reminds me of mine, a few years ago. I want him to succeed because I want the me of a few years ago to be right about Africa's potential and our ability to come back from very far. I remember that when we were looking for a motto for our non-profit, we chose "beyond the digital divide." The point was that we should not try to catch up but to leap forward. This meant that we should not be accepting old PCs that could not utilize the latest in technology but try to acquire and develop cutting edge technology which would bring Africa to the forefront of the digital age.
To make this happen, we developed a project called the African Center for Technology Innovation and Ventures (ACTIV). This center was to be a sort of incubator for high-tech entrepreneurs and a place where all types technologies from Africa and elsewhere could be showcased. The ACTIV offices are open and wired up but the center is non-operational because our business was funding the project and we could no longer fund ourselves, let alone this project. It is a pity but the experiences we have had in the country on the business side will help us in better guiding the entrepreneurs once the project is able to launch again. The most important lesson we have learned is that the main impediments to the development of technology are not infrastructure and lack of skills, but corruption and government intervention.
I am still hoping that we will one day be able to make the project happen. The Rwandan example is one of an American entrepreneur contributing to development in Africa through technology. As much as we encourage the Gregs of the world and welcome their initiatives, we also want to empower Africans themselves to build technology businesses. Just wish our governments were not so against us.
My Virtual White American Bosses
When the government agency called last week with the emergency order, they begged me to try to convince my hierarchy in the US to allow us to deliver. I told them I would see what I could do but that given all the problems we have had with collecting from clients in this country, it might be difficult. Of course, I have no hierarchy or let's say that I am the hierarchy. But as a Black African woman in the world of technology, I am often faced with similar situations. No matter what my business card says, I cannot possibly be the boss. I try to use it to my advantage as often as I can. In the case of the government agency, our bosses were putting "tremendous pressure" on us to get immediate payment, if not, they would cancel the order and there was nothing I could do. "You know how Americans are. They don't understand all these administrative hurdles." I even got one of my employees in the US to send an email threatening us for having accepted the order... It actually worked. Where payment generally takes 60-90 days, the payment order is ready and we will get paid next week. Never could I have accomplished this without my virtual White American bosses.
Saturday, December 30, 2006
It ain't over 'til its over..
I thought that 2006 was over; at least from a business perspective... This afternoon the last Saturday of the year, I get a call from a project manager with one of the government agencies. He is desperately trying to reach one of my colleagues who is busy at a wedding. He explains that the minister and the head of this government agency are in town and they want to sign the contract today.
Background:
For the last year or so, we have been trying to get in on a project financed by an international organization for this government agency. For about six months, we could not even get in to submit a quotation which was for a small part of the overall project (software licenses). Finally, we wrote to the international organization that was sponsoring the project, and a couple weeks later, we were called by the agency to submit a quote. Our very first quote, for the exact same products as our competitor, without any discounts on our part, was less than one third what our competitor's was. That got us a meeting. During this meeting, and a few working sessions after that, it became clear that the list of products that the client wanted and the quantity of each, was excessive. We actually had to convince them that they did not need everything they said they wanted. In our normal naïveté, we explained that as much as we wanted to sell, this was also an act of citizenship since we knew that this part of the project was paid out of the agency’s budget, thus out of the country’s own funds. Our final quote was for less than 10% of the quote from our main competitor.
For months, we never heard anything back. There were suggestions that we needed to “motivate” the decision-makers but we resisted and decided that we would prefer to lose, rather than to engage in any form of corruption. Then around the end of August, we get an urgent call from the agency saying that we need to bring them our administrative documents immediately, and that we should come “personally” to deliver them. This issue of administrative documents is one that I will definitely address in a future blog because it is a definite impediment to doing business, at least doing business ethically. In any case, one of our guys immediately took over the administrative documents. While there, the project manager begins asking him about whether or not we are sure that our quote is final and wants to know if it “includes everything.” Since the person responsible for that account had traveled out of the country, the guy that we sent called me urgently to come join him in the meeting.
I hate these types of meetings and I avoid them at all costs. But our guy was not familiar with the account so I had to go. As soon as I walk into the project manager’s office, I realize something is up. Our guy seems confused. The project manager meets me with a snake-like smile. I hate him already. Our account manager had told me about his very first encounter with him. During their meeting, the project manager had turned his computer screen towards him showing him the picture of a BMW X5, suggesting that it was the “gift” he expected. Our guy pretended not to understand. That is our general strategy, “act stupid.”
After niceties, the project manager tells us that of all the vendors, they chose us. He repeated that several times, mentioning the names of our competitors. He was uncomfortable. He was not getting to the point. I thanked him for the trust his team had placed in us. “But,” he says “are you sure that you included everything in this quote? Because, you know, we have an additional $30,000 (equivalent) in the budget.” I answered that everything was included. He insisted again. “You know, the government is not like the private sector, it might take time to get paid, did you add a provision to account for collecting your payment?” I understood full well what he was trying to do but I put on my naïve American hat and answered that the amount was before tax so that with tax, it would even exceed the $30,000. I offered to give a discount to get the amount under budget. “NO, NO, NO, don’t do that!” he answered. “You obviously do not have experience with government accounts; let me school you with government deals.” I continue to act stupid, and so does my colleague. I thank him for offering to “teach us.” He instructs us to go back and redo the quotation, adding the tax and a “little something extra.” We smiled, said ok, and left. The next day, we sent the new quote with tax, and nothing extra.
By then, our account manager had returned. The project manager called him for an urgent meeting. We knew what it was about, and decided that the three of us would go (the colleague that took the documents, the account manager, and me). We spent an hour in the project manager’s office and he never really said anything. He was beating around the bush. We played stupid. Finally, he said that this was a direct deal that would not go through a normal tender process and that HE would be the one that would draft the letter to explain why we should be selected. We offered to provide references. “NO, NO, NO, you don’t need that. I am the person that makes the decision.” We pretended not to get it. Eventually, there was no more small talk to be made and we left.
The following day, they called our account manager and insisted that he should come alone. It might be useful to know that the other colleague and I both spent many years abroad so the account manager was the only “local” guy which meant he would better understand "local" business practices, at least, in the eyes of the project manager. During that meeting, the client went straight to the point. How much would go to the project manager? Our account manager maneuvered his way through by saying that he would not want to insult someone of the project manager’s stature by offering him money. He flattered him and added that in these times (anti-corruption drive by government) it would be exposing the project manager and we wanted to protect him. The project manager thanked him profusely for wanting to “protect” him. Our account manager came back happy that he had convinced the project manager that a bribe would be against his interests.
Well, we did not hear back from that project manager until today, five months later. Our letters and phone calls during these months were left unanswered. About three weeks ago, they announced the launch of the project on television and in the press. The project would go live on January 1, 2007. They still did not have the software licenses. Last week, we finally called the minister himself to warn him that if they launched without acquiring the software licenses, they could face penalties. He said he would look into it. I guess he did.
The project manager was panicked as he spoke to me today. The minister did not want them to be in a situation of illegality and he absolutely wanted to sign today. Unfortunately, they could not prepare a purchase order and would not be able to make any advance payment. However, he asked that we prepare a letter that included the terms we wanted and the minister would sign it. So I pulled my colleague out of the wedding, we prepared a letter where the minister promised payment in full by Tuesday, January 2, 2007. In the midst of the reception for the launch of the project, the minister signed the letter without changing a comma. We delivered the software licenses. Of course, we know that we won’t get paid on Tuesday but hopefully we will get paid soon after that.
Today is a victory of sorts. This agency is known as one of the most corrupt ones in the country. We got a contract without any bribe. It is a miracle and no one will ever believe us, but we held our ground and we won. That’s one for the good guys… Now hope we get paid.
Background:
For the last year or so, we have been trying to get in on a project financed by an international organization for this government agency. For about six months, we could not even get in to submit a quotation which was for a small part of the overall project (software licenses). Finally, we wrote to the international organization that was sponsoring the project, and a couple weeks later, we were called by the agency to submit a quote. Our very first quote, for the exact same products as our competitor, without any discounts on our part, was less than one third what our competitor's was. That got us a meeting. During this meeting, and a few working sessions after that, it became clear that the list of products that the client wanted and the quantity of each, was excessive. We actually had to convince them that they did not need everything they said they wanted. In our normal naïveté, we explained that as much as we wanted to sell, this was also an act of citizenship since we knew that this part of the project was paid out of the agency’s budget, thus out of the country’s own funds. Our final quote was for less than 10% of the quote from our main competitor.
For months, we never heard anything back. There were suggestions that we needed to “motivate” the decision-makers but we resisted and decided that we would prefer to lose, rather than to engage in any form of corruption. Then around the end of August, we get an urgent call from the agency saying that we need to bring them our administrative documents immediately, and that we should come “personally” to deliver them. This issue of administrative documents is one that I will definitely address in a future blog because it is a definite impediment to doing business, at least doing business ethically. In any case, one of our guys immediately took over the administrative documents. While there, the project manager begins asking him about whether or not we are sure that our quote is final and wants to know if it “includes everything.” Since the person responsible for that account had traveled out of the country, the guy that we sent called me urgently to come join him in the meeting.
I hate these types of meetings and I avoid them at all costs. But our guy was not familiar with the account so I had to go. As soon as I walk into the project manager’s office, I realize something is up. Our guy seems confused. The project manager meets me with a snake-like smile. I hate him already. Our account manager had told me about his very first encounter with him. During their meeting, the project manager had turned his computer screen towards him showing him the picture of a BMW X5, suggesting that it was the “gift” he expected. Our guy pretended not to understand. That is our general strategy, “act stupid.”
After niceties, the project manager tells us that of all the vendors, they chose us. He repeated that several times, mentioning the names of our competitors. He was uncomfortable. He was not getting to the point. I thanked him for the trust his team had placed in us. “But,” he says “are you sure that you included everything in this quote? Because, you know, we have an additional $30,000 (equivalent) in the budget.” I answered that everything was included. He insisted again. “You know, the government is not like the private sector, it might take time to get paid, did you add a provision to account for collecting your payment?” I understood full well what he was trying to do but I put on my naïve American hat and answered that the amount was before tax so that with tax, it would even exceed the $30,000. I offered to give a discount to get the amount under budget. “NO, NO, NO, don’t do that!” he answered. “You obviously do not have experience with government accounts; let me school you with government deals.” I continue to act stupid, and so does my colleague. I thank him for offering to “teach us.” He instructs us to go back and redo the quotation, adding the tax and a “little something extra.” We smiled, said ok, and left. The next day, we sent the new quote with tax, and nothing extra.
By then, our account manager had returned. The project manager called him for an urgent meeting. We knew what it was about, and decided that the three of us would go (the colleague that took the documents, the account manager, and me). We spent an hour in the project manager’s office and he never really said anything. He was beating around the bush. We played stupid. Finally, he said that this was a direct deal that would not go through a normal tender process and that HE would be the one that would draft the letter to explain why we should be selected. We offered to provide references. “NO, NO, NO, you don’t need that. I am the person that makes the decision.” We pretended not to get it. Eventually, there was no more small talk to be made and we left.
The following day, they called our account manager and insisted that he should come alone. It might be useful to know that the other colleague and I both spent many years abroad so the account manager was the only “local” guy which meant he would better understand "local" business practices, at least, in the eyes of the project manager. During that meeting, the client went straight to the point. How much would go to the project manager? Our account manager maneuvered his way through by saying that he would not want to insult someone of the project manager’s stature by offering him money. He flattered him and added that in these times (anti-corruption drive by government) it would be exposing the project manager and we wanted to protect him. The project manager thanked him profusely for wanting to “protect” him. Our account manager came back happy that he had convinced the project manager that a bribe would be against his interests.
Well, we did not hear back from that project manager until today, five months later. Our letters and phone calls during these months were left unanswered. About three weeks ago, they announced the launch of the project on television and in the press. The project would go live on January 1, 2007. They still did not have the software licenses. Last week, we finally called the minister himself to warn him that if they launched without acquiring the software licenses, they could face penalties. He said he would look into it. I guess he did.
The project manager was panicked as he spoke to me today. The minister did not want them to be in a situation of illegality and he absolutely wanted to sign today. Unfortunately, they could not prepare a purchase order and would not be able to make any advance payment. However, he asked that we prepare a letter that included the terms we wanted and the minister would sign it. So I pulled my colleague out of the wedding, we prepared a letter where the minister promised payment in full by Tuesday, January 2, 2007. In the midst of the reception for the launch of the project, the minister signed the letter without changing a comma. We delivered the software licenses. Of course, we know that we won’t get paid on Tuesday but hopefully we will get paid soon after that.
Today is a victory of sorts. This agency is known as one of the most corrupt ones in the country. We got a contract without any bribe. It is a miracle and no one will ever believe us, but we held our ground and we won. That’s one for the good guys… Now hope we get paid.
Friday, December 29, 2006
Optimistic about 2007
I wonder if it's an entrepreneur's disease to always believe things will be better tomorrow than they are today. Every year I am convinced that the following year will be the best and this time is no different. I am really looking forward to 2007, and not just because 2006 was so difficult.
I don't think business will get any easier but I do believe that it will be easier to deal with. I am more mature; I better understand the environment and know better how to protect myself. I have also learned not to stress myself out as much.
In January 2004 I came to this country to handle an issue I thought would take two weeks and I am still here almost three years later. Now I understand that certain issues, no matter how simple they may seem, cannot be resolved in two weeks, or two years, or at all. I have learned to choose my battles and have not just accepted the daily struggles but have embraced them.
From a non philosophical sense too, I am more confident about 2007. The last couple of weeks I have actually spent most of my time on our core business. Working on proposals, meeting with clients... This is quite different from the rest of the year where 90% of my time was dealing with problems that had absolutely nothing to do with our core business which is technology.
So from now until Tuesday, I will set aside reality and dream about how fantastic 2007 will be...
I don't think business will get any easier but I do believe that it will be easier to deal with. I am more mature; I better understand the environment and know better how to protect myself. I have also learned not to stress myself out as much.
In January 2004 I came to this country to handle an issue I thought would take two weeks and I am still here almost three years later. Now I understand that certain issues, no matter how simple they may seem, cannot be resolved in two weeks, or two years, or at all. I have learned to choose my battles and have not just accepted the daily struggles but have embraced them.
From a non philosophical sense too, I am more confident about 2007. The last couple of weeks I have actually spent most of my time on our core business. Working on proposals, meeting with clients... This is quite different from the rest of the year where 90% of my time was dealing with problems that had absolutely nothing to do with our core business which is technology.
So from now until Tuesday, I will set aside reality and dream about how fantastic 2007 will be...
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Illegal Arrest
Our plumber is in jail right now. Last night around 10 PM, some gendarmes (police) picked up up from his house and locked him up. Motive: none. One of his neighbors with whom he has recurring disagreements saw a group of gendarmes patrolling the area, he gave them a little cash to have his neighbor put in jail.
This morning, we sent a bailiff to the jail to report on the plumber's presence there. There is no written record of the plumber being held. There is no police report. There is not a single document to attest that he was arrested, why he was arrested or that he is actually being held.
Upon seeing the bailiff and one of our employees who went to the jail, the gendarmes tried to explain that he they arrested him for being drunk and that they would release him as soon as he is sober. Hen? You arrest someone in his house, half dressed because you say he was inebriated? No complaint filed, no report?
We are doing what we can to have the plumber released and we will likely succeed. Unfortunately, this is a story we hear all too often. Police officers will arrest anyone with just a few dollars. There is a new criminal code that goes into effect in a few days that is supposed to prevent such arbitrary arrests. But like everything else in this country, the problem is not the law, it is the application of the laws. The current laws do not allow people to be arrested for no motive, yet our plumber has already spent one night in jail.
In a recent Transparency International report on corruption in this country, the police was held as the most corrupt institution, followed closely by the judiciary. If the two institutions that are there to uphold the law are the ones most responsible for breaking it, what good is the law? I have never heard that any police officer has ever been arrested for corruption. A couple judges were disciplined for being corrupt. They were placed on early retirement and for the most egregious case, without pension. Basically, total impunity.
Until police officers and judges are made to pay for their crimes, they will continue to disregard the law.
Our plumber is lucky. We are around to help him. What about the others who have no voice and no possibility to speak out?
This place is nuts... Or is it me?
This morning, we sent a bailiff to the jail to report on the plumber's presence there. There is no written record of the plumber being held. There is no police report. There is not a single document to attest that he was arrested, why he was arrested or that he is actually being held.
Upon seeing the bailiff and one of our employees who went to the jail, the gendarmes tried to explain that he they arrested him for being drunk and that they would release him as soon as he is sober. Hen? You arrest someone in his house, half dressed because you say he was inebriated? No complaint filed, no report?
We are doing what we can to have the plumber released and we will likely succeed. Unfortunately, this is a story we hear all too often. Police officers will arrest anyone with just a few dollars. There is a new criminal code that goes into effect in a few days that is supposed to prevent such arbitrary arrests. But like everything else in this country, the problem is not the law, it is the application of the laws. The current laws do not allow people to be arrested for no motive, yet our plumber has already spent one night in jail.
In a recent Transparency International report on corruption in this country, the police was held as the most corrupt institution, followed closely by the judiciary. If the two institutions that are there to uphold the law are the ones most responsible for breaking it, what good is the law? I have never heard that any police officer has ever been arrested for corruption. A couple judges were disciplined for being corrupt. They were placed on early retirement and for the most egregious case, without pension. Basically, total impunity.
Until police officers and judges are made to pay for their crimes, they will continue to disregard the law.
Our plumber is lucky. We are around to help him. What about the others who have no voice and no possibility to speak out?
This place is nuts... Or is it me?
Friday, December 22, 2006
Have a Merry Crocodile!
I live in a small apartment in a high-rise building that has no garden. My cleaning lady decided that since it was the holiday season, she would bring me a gift. The next day, I come home and there is a LIVE crocodile on my balcony.
I had never heard of anyone giving anyone else a live crocodile. What was I to do with it? If I gave it away, it would probably be eaten but I could not possibly keep it. She had tied the mouth so that it would not bite but that also meant that I could not feed it.
I kept it for a couple of days but it kept struggling all night long to get away and the noise was simply haunting. I finally took the easy way out and sent it to my Dad who has a yard. He also has dogs but I just don't want to know.
This place is nuts... Or is it me?
Do me a favor: Don't do me any favors
A couple weeks ago, a judge in a small town in this country, awarded the US$ equivalent of over $330,000 in a labor matter against us.
Beyond the obvious jurisdictional issues of a former "employee" who is based in Canada and had a contract with our parent company in the US; beyond the fact that we heard about the lawsuit by happenstance six months after it had been filed, that it was not filed in the city we are in; beyond the fact that this former employee was not eligible for any commission, the judge awarded him commission because "it was as a result of [employee]'s sister who worked for the [client]" that we got the contract.
In the judgment, the judge explains that if employee's sister had not given him inside information, we would not have had the contract and therefore, we need to pay him a commission.
I won't get into the fact that the commission was based on amounts that we never even received, or that it was an international tender that took us six months to respond to with a team of 8 full time employees working on the tender alone, or that the sister was a secretary who did not really provide information that was not widely available.
Back to the issue at hand. In the judge's mind, and in the minds of many people, if someone does you a "favor," it automatically generates a financial obligation towards that person that is a percentage of the benefits you might have received from that "favor."
A couple years ago, after we had won the first procedures in a big lawsuit, we started to be visited by all sorts of folks who claimed that it was thanks to them that we had won. We had never even met most of these people. And they all wanted money. One of them claimed to be the President's nephew. He said that he called someone at the Presidency and that official had called the judge. He said that the official had sent him to collect his due and that if we did not comply, we would be forever blacklisted. I told the nephew to tell that official that he should call back the judge and instruct him to do the opposite of what he had done, we would not pay.
Another young person introduced by a friend of mine did make a few calls for us. He said that he thought that what was happening to us was unfair and that he really wanted to help. Well, of course, story is now that we are ingrates because we never gave him any money after everything he had done for us.
About 5 years ago, while on a business trip here, I was asked to appear on a national television program. It was an hour long interview and it went well. A couple months ago, I met the father of the employee who had arranged the interview. He went on and on about how he (the father) had arranged the interview and how he had not even asked for any money. The suggestion was that we really owed him money but he was not forcing us to pay him.
And the amounts are not small. Once someone told us that he realized that we did not have much money but that $60,000 would be enough. Another offered his assistance if we gave him $400,000. One of our neighbors is a Certified Public Accountant. We needed someone to certify the arithmetic on an excel spreadsheet for the court. We offered to pay him at the time. He said no, it was nothing and in a few minutes, he certified the calculation. When we won the lawsuit, we received a bill for the equivalent of $175,000 for services rendered but as he stated, it was "negotiable."
There are many more similar stories. As a result, not only do we never ask for favors but even when offered, we refuse. It seems like such a sad way to operate but it is self preservation.
This place is nuts. Or is it me?
Beyond the obvious jurisdictional issues of a former "employee" who is based in Canada and had a contract with our parent company in the US; beyond the fact that we heard about the lawsuit by happenstance six months after it had been filed, that it was not filed in the city we are in; beyond the fact that this former employee was not eligible for any commission, the judge awarded him commission because "it was as a result of [employee]'s sister who worked for the [client]" that we got the contract.
In the judgment, the judge explains that if employee's sister had not given him inside information, we would not have had the contract and therefore, we need to pay him a commission.
I won't get into the fact that the commission was based on amounts that we never even received, or that it was an international tender that took us six months to respond to with a team of 8 full time employees working on the tender alone, or that the sister was a secretary who did not really provide information that was not widely available.
Back to the issue at hand. In the judge's mind, and in the minds of many people, if someone does you a "favor," it automatically generates a financial obligation towards that person that is a percentage of the benefits you might have received from that "favor."
A couple years ago, after we had won the first procedures in a big lawsuit, we started to be visited by all sorts of folks who claimed that it was thanks to them that we had won. We had never even met most of these people. And they all wanted money. One of them claimed to be the President's nephew. He said that he called someone at the Presidency and that official had called the judge. He said that the official had sent him to collect his due and that if we did not comply, we would be forever blacklisted. I told the nephew to tell that official that he should call back the judge and instruct him to do the opposite of what he had done, we would not pay.
Another young person introduced by a friend of mine did make a few calls for us. He said that he thought that what was happening to us was unfair and that he really wanted to help. Well, of course, story is now that we are ingrates because we never gave him any money after everything he had done for us.
About 5 years ago, while on a business trip here, I was asked to appear on a national television program. It was an hour long interview and it went well. A couple months ago, I met the father of the employee who had arranged the interview. He went on and on about how he (the father) had arranged the interview and how he had not even asked for any money. The suggestion was that we really owed him money but he was not forcing us to pay him.
And the amounts are not small. Once someone told us that he realized that we did not have much money but that $60,000 would be enough. Another offered his assistance if we gave him $400,000. One of our neighbors is a Certified Public Accountant. We needed someone to certify the arithmetic on an excel spreadsheet for the court. We offered to pay him at the time. He said no, it was nothing and in a few minutes, he certified the calculation. When we won the lawsuit, we received a bill for the equivalent of $175,000 for services rendered but as he stated, it was "negotiable."
There are many more similar stories. As a result, not only do we never ask for favors but even when offered, we refuse. It seems like such a sad way to operate but it is self preservation.
This place is nuts. Or is it me?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
