Hansel & Gretel, Revisited

Following the release of "Three Little Pigs, Revisited", I decided once again to devote a significant portion of my busy CEO schedule to educating youngsters out there. Education is of prime importance.

Hansel and Gretel were the poor children of an uneducated woodcutter who could not be hired as a billable IT worker. The father - who we now know has a very poor judgement - decided to increase his personal difficulties by marrying an evil 2nd wife.

The father tried to make ends meet but his lack of financial knowledge, lack of general education and lack of good taste in women pushed him against the wall. The evil step-mother, despite all her sins, knew how to work a balance sheet. She took a hard look at her husband quarterly earnings, general expenses, woodcutting tools amortization and child-specific expenses. She applied some technical analysis only to conclude that the children could not be afforded anymore.

Since children could not easily be traded for other goods in those days/markets, the step-mother convinced her mildly retarded husband to abandon the kids in the woods. By suppressing an important part of their family budget, they could feed themselves in the future, afford a more comfortable housing and hopefully purchase common stocks of an important Canadian IT firm on the profitable growth path (wink, wink).

Hansel, aware of the financial cutback plan, left a trail of pebbles back to the house so he and his sister find their way back home. The step-mother was angry and locked the two children up for the night with only a loaf of bread and water (more expenses).

The next night, the woodcutter attempts the same plan again; this time Hansel left s a trail of bread-crumbs but they got eaten by hungry birds and the two children got lost in the woods. Readers may know question Hansel's ability to achieve management position, when you succeed at something with basic tools (pebbles), why do you switch strategies by using perishable goods (crumbs).

After wandering around and constantly whining about their situation, Hansel and Gretel stumbled across a house made of gingerbread and other confectionery. Despite the fact that gingerbread is a very poor choice of material for housing and would not pass inspection by a City employee, Hansel and Gretel were very hungry and began to eat it.

The gingerbread house was owned by an evil old witch who was probably also mildly retarded. If your business plan involves kidnapping teutonic kids, why do you build a trap in the middle of the forest? I mean, it's not like school busses full of raucous kids go through there on a daily basis. Poor execution strategy, I say.

The witch trapped Hansel in a cage and forced Gretel to do the housework, continually sweeping the floor. Although the latter choice provides a good maintenance on assets (although perishable ones as we now know), it is unclear why Hansel was trapped into a cage. The witch could have sold Hansel to the slave market for one lump sum, or better yet lease the young fellow as a cleaning consultant to other houses in the forest. This way, the witch would have enjoyed a clean house (thanks to Gretel) and fixed income (thanks to Hansel).

The witch, unable to foresee a long term plan and sustainable revenues, fed Hansel lots of food with the intention of eating him. The idea that overfeeding Hansel costs more than the amount of food that he could provide as a meal did not cross her deranged mind at that point. Eventually the witch turned on the oven with the intention of roasting her only source of revenue. She was completely nuts, her financial decision made no sense. Gretel came up behind her and kicked her into it, shut the door firmly and padlocked it.

The witch died at 425 degrees Fahrenheit according to the autopsy.

Hansel and Gretel hang around in the house for a couple of days despite the screams and strong burning odor coming out of the oven, eating the sweets and paving their future as diabetics. They found some valuable gold coins, and some monthly statement from Investors' Group where the witch held a few bad mutual funds.

Once they were convinced that the witch was completely burned, they grabbed their hard-won assets (just the gold, not the mutual funds), packed some gingerbread for the road and successfully found their way home and were met by their ecstatic father. He tells them that his evil wife is dead (no word on how, leaving H&G very suspicious about their dad's mental state) and they were now rich because of the gold coins' value.

Hansel & Gretel decided to sue their father for child cruelty, the verdict came quickly and the poor bastard is sent to a Federal pound-me-in-the-ass facility. Next, the brother and sister successfully invested in selected Canadian IT companies that provide no dividend but have spectacular financial results (wink, wink) and make their capital grow by 20% each year. They convinced the judge that the witch property be given to them as a token of justice, and the judge happily gave it to them - tax free.

They all live happily ever after.

Members Column Day: More Facebook Rants

My post on Facebook brought some interesting e-mails, one of which deserves a spot here.

FakeMike, your recent post on Facebook is a bit harsh, maybe it's time that corporations such CGI embrace Twitter, Facebook, wikis and other modern communication tools. If we were living in 1960, you'd probably bitch about electric typewriters. Don't be such a stiff. Corporations need to update themselves with the latest technology in order to survive. Michel from Saguenay.

First, let me clarify my thoughts on what people call "social networks". It serves to real purpose as far as I can tell. Catching up with friends should be done by expressing more than 140 characters, unless you're a soldier ambushed in a muddy trench with a Panzer about to roll over you, in which case short messages are acceptable. Our media relation people have set up a Twitter account recently because journalists apparently requested this, I don't know the extent to which they use this, but judging from the popularity of the CGI Facebook page the Twitter wire must be very quiet. Jee, one more person joined our Facebook page since yesterday, this is heavy traffic.

I'm investigating cases where CGI employees posts irrelevant thoughts on Facebook during daytime, what they had for lunch, what sock color they picked they dressed, how many Q-tips they use on a weekly basis, but most often what is their boredom level. This is highly strange, life in IT should be as exciting as surfing a giant wave in Hawaii, I don't understand how people get bored. Complaining about your boredom won't take it away, you know, maybe boredom is just a signal that you should spot opportunities for the company and transform them into profitable growth.

Let me tell you a story. When I was a younger man, I was distributing newspapers door to door in my native Pembroke. Winters were colder than in Vladivostok, summers were muggy and fly-infested, and I used the same pair of shoes from age 12 to 18. Whenever there was a hole in them, I would patch them with tar and old newspapers. To help me in my run, I had a 1-speed bicycle whose paint was completely sunburned. I got bitten by dogs a few times, not the puddle kind mind you. When my run was done, I would borrow a copy of the Globe&Mail and I would scan the business section for stocks at attractive price. Simply put, I earned my money the hard way and never complained. Look at where I stand today.

Today, a young man distributing newspapers will take 2 dozen pictures on his cell phone during his morning run and post them to Facebook, only to complain about such and such. He'll wear brand new $240 sneakers and use the most expensive iPod available. His idea of investing is buying the latest Xbox 360 because it displays gory graphics much faster. He'll whine and whine and whine about his parents decision NOT to buy him a new car at age 16. Where do you think this lazy bum will be 25 years from now? If I had to take a bet, I'd say he'll be a unionized janitor addicted to Ritalin.

This is my issue with all this newer technology. It's not used to the right end. It's not used to make you smarter, it's actually being used to make use more dumb and irresponsible. If you don't have a Facebook page, create one and let your so-called friends find you. Watch their on-line bahavior. Try to figure out when they have time to do real work.

And try to look for a Facebook page promoting profitable growth. If you find one, let me know.

Case closed. Roach out.

CGI to go kinda social

I'm not a big fan of social networks. Let me rephrase that. I think Facebook is a deviance whose users suffer from social problems. You see, when I want to have a grand time with a friend, we have a drink at the Queen Elizabeth hotel and we end up at my place playing bridge or watching curling tournaments. This is social networking. It's fun. You actually see people faces, not just a JPEG file. It's multimedia too, when my friend talk I can actually hear the sound of his voice, spiffy eh?

I've been pushed by Serge to go social in a 21st century way, so we created the CGI page on Facebook.

As of tonight, 2 people like this. Bill & Terry. I told Serge this was to be a failure. Sigh.

The Benefit of Sameness

Nothing feels more exhilarating than hiring a guy/gal fresh out of college, their resume is free of useful experience and therefore their mind is a blank canvas ready to absorb whatever dogma you feed them.

When you were a very young person, you did what your parents told you to do When you were old enough to attend school, you did what your teacher told you to do in order to get good grades. You may have attended church where someone in a position of moral authority told you what to do. When school gets to an end, you want to have your own place and drive a nice car so the natural thing is to look for a job.

It's only logical for an employer to leverage from the submissive situation into which many people have been raised into. Our culture doesn't push people to think by themselves, start companies or revolutionize something. Our culture pushes people into conformity, the opposite would create societies that would be unmanageable. As a result, our culture rewards unproductive tasks where our brain is shut off most of the time, only to resurface during momentary lapse of reason to enter a state of quiet desperation. When you’re not thinking, it’s the society that benefits. Why do you think a TV show like "Deal or No Deal" is so popular?

All this grooming into sameness is deeply rooted in our subconscious, so for a employer implementing strict procedures that defy logic is not hard at all. Employees somehow expect to be treated like a number, even though they'll say the opposite Employees expect an org chart with a tiny box with their name on it (or better yet – no name at all), like a universe map with a arrow titled "You are here". Employees expect a performance review from their boss because they're so fucking stupid they can't make a self-assessment of what they're worth. Let me tell you something, people do not think by themselves, Oprah Winfrey was able to figure that out and built a billion dollar empire on that.

So this week's advice to manager is this: Think about something in your organization where there is weak control, something for which employees do not ask for permission. Or maybe it's a loose process that would benefit from a standardized form. Take that weak point and enforce a strict control around it and make sure 2 people need to authorize it, just one is insufficient and does not justify enough middle managers.

You’ll be amazed with how easy it is to enforce something.

At last!

Finally someone who understands what CGI is all about. It’s not easy to find someone outside the C-suite who understands this, but I found one on RateMyEmployer.ca who reached that level of wisdom by himself/herself. Maybe this person actually read our annual report and was hit by a powerful bolt of insight, who knows.

Like any company that is accountable to the shareholder, CGI's focus is on making money. Period. It's not on delivering quality management advice or automated systems. It's money.

YES! It’s so good and refreshing to hear this, some many people have this fear/disgust of money, like it’s a taboo or some shameful disease you’re not allowed to disclose. Yes, CGI is about making money. Period.



CGI is very good at exploiting it's position as an approved services provider for the Federal Government. In many cases, the govn't has no choice but to give work to CGI and they know it. Quality of work is barely above unsatisfactory - but that doesn't matter. CGI's culture is that of entitlement. They're entitled to make money hand over fist. Ooops, is our project late? Oh well, read your contract; it says that it's your fault and now you have to pay us more. Hahahaha! (p.s. not an exaggeration).

Doing business is sometimes about banging the client and explaining to him that it is for the greater good. I like those situations where the government has practically no choice but to give us the contract because our people have been on-site for a couple for years and they are the only who know who their shitty system works. Internal employees are just sitting there until retirement. What happens if we get out of this client? All hell breaks loose because their copier has more functions than the average employee. So the client extends us for another 5 years. This is great, I don’t see the issue here. Let’s continue.



I witnessed many unsavoury practises during my years working for the Ottawa branch. I've seen companies bought by CGI only to have each and every last employee fired once the clientèle was secured. I've seen coworkers with lots of experience replaced on projects by less experienced ones and then let go. I've seen our once generous benefits disappear entirely (not unique to CGI but it was sold to us as "temporary" and then never reinstated). I've seen people laid off and then given no severance (each employee had to fight for it).

When we buy a company, what we look for are the financial assets (i.e. money in the bank) and their customers. A consultant is just a consultant, it's like a screwdriver they are easily exchangeable. Don’t give me that crap about “lots of experience” replaced by “less experienced” because it’s a legitimate way to boost your earnings. Replacing a $80K consultant with another one that makes $60K means that you pocket $20K at the end of year. The end result will be the same. 20 years from now it won’t make a single difference if John or Mike or Susan or that Chinese guy whose name cannot be pronounced did the job. What will matter is a strong balance sheet.

I’m currently reviewing the salaries at Stanley, I can tell you right away that at least 40% of them are overpaid and will have to sacrifice themselves in the name of profitable growth. They probably drive BMWs, so by switching to a used Chevy they should be able to keep their job and be proud of it.



All in all, this is to be expected when you work to make someone else rich.

Here the wisdom ends on a sour note, as this employee figured out that wealth does not exist in the employment universe unless you screw clients at an investment bank. What can I say? People are groomed to be obedient and docile and sometimes their behaviour change over time, when they realized that their CEO is making 50 times more money than they do.

My thoughts on cloud computing

Seems like every dropout asshole who was lucky enough to land a CEO job these days is talking about "the future" and where this wonderful cloudy technology will take us forward and make things magically work. Even Ballmer is banging clouds these days, which is kind of scary when you think about it. He messed up with Vista, so you can bet your pants the Microsoft cloud will be more like a smelly swamp than a clear blue sky.

Anyway, I wanted to share with you my thoughts on whatever is called cloud computing and how it may affect our customers who trust us with their most precious data and business processes.

The short version: cloud computing sucks.

The slightly longer version: this reminds me of the RISC / CISC debate many years ago where people would debate the pros and cons of processors using a reduced set of instructions. For one thing, most of them never opened their computer and try to actually spot where the main CPU was on the motherboard. Most of them never wrote a program in assembler language. Most of them could not even fully describe what a microprocessor did. But all of them could paint a bright future where RISC processors would allow us to be more efficient and do more things - whatever those "things" were - and it would be so great and so and so.

Cloud computing is simply the latest snake oil flavor for "luminaries" and sales people with mild mental disorder. It's the most up-to-date line of BS to sell you the same hardware and software that they've been shoving down the throat for the past 20 years. You can apply a fresh coat of paint on a clunker, it is still a clunker. It is just that.

Do you really think our customers want their proprietary data to float somewhere between Pakistan and China? What would be the impact of having your proprietary data into the hands of a 20 years old hacker trading sensitive information for a living?

Your PC is crashing all the time thanks to the sustained effort of those dweebs in Redmond, and those same geniuses want to catapult your sensitive data in hyperspace without a GPS.

Everyone who ever had a real job in IT can testify that sloppiness is almost a virtue, like things are all messed up and it is considered "normal". Passwords are never reset, access privileges are never audited, and expensive servers are always idle while others are always saturated. It's IT business as usual. And IT mirrors the human condition when you think about it. Cloud computing is just a positive imaging technique to cover all the crap and mishaps going on, really.

So will a fuzzy cloudy technology based on loosely-based relations will be able to address human sloppiness and carelessness? Ask your vendor.

More unprofitable and strange activities

Everyone wants to have their 15 seconds of fame, in this case a few minutes of Internet time. Some employees in Quebec City had some fun during the day, I'm making sure with the local business unit that such carnival was not done during regular business hours.

I'm also getting an e-mail from a lawyer in Belfast who says he represents Bono and they want to sue us for unauthorized use of their song. $1.2 million he says. I replied, fuck off you retard, you think I'm a 419 target or something? And then he faxed me a subpoena. Oops.

Can't people just work and bill and stop doing this kind of circus?