While undertaking a series of corporate trainings and consultancies, I began to take note of certain changes in the business community that has slowly become the rule rather than the exception. A number of these can be traced to rules and decisions put into practice by foreign companies and eventually adopted by local companies as well.
Some of the “influences” I picked up on were concerned with ethical conduct, business practice and adjustments on local practices. Some might think that foreign executives are “cheapskates” or stingy but in reality, they are bound by real rules that they follow or else get fired or recalled.
Unbeknownst to many Filipinos, foreign firms must and do abide by three different codes or laws pertaining to ethical conduct and corrupt practices depending on the region or continent they are based. There is one for the US, another for EU and another for Canada.
In the Philippines, we have an anti-corruption law, but it does not go down to the nitty gritty of what activities are allowed or disallowed, not specific on actual cost or prices on food for plate and requirements for reporting activities that may be in conflict with the law. The laws and rules on ethical conduct are, in fact, more of the exception rather than the rule.
In reality, some Filipino companies operate totally in contradiction to such ethical and legal restraints, while foreign competitors enter the business arena already “with their hands tied behind their back.” But fortunately, both legislators and local CEOs are learning the benefits of such rules.
One executive told me he had coffee with an undersecretary who was a genuine good friend and paid for the coffee with his own money. But once he got to the office he was required and instructed to report the matter to the corporate legal office as well as head office. While he found the requirement to be an inconvenience, it also documented his activity and protected him from any false claims or professional jealousy.
In a previous engagement, I was required to read a four-inch thick binder that contained the “US ANTI CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT.” In the course of my reading, I learned that US companies were not allowed to take part, sponsor or spend money on activities that were not directly related to the company’s nature of business.
Some of the rules stated that the company could not spend more than $20 per plate, excursions or junkets were totally prohibited, while related industry events were allowed within strict limits. Meetings and courtesy calls are strictly confined to the official address or office of a public servant or official.
In the next 30 days, I’m sure that people will start to take note of holiday or Christmas season practices that have been toned down or stopped altogether.
Recently, during a time out in one of my training programs, the company lawyer shared how in the past their local office would be the major prize sponsor for raffles, especially for the media. They practically looked like an appliance store giving away refrigerators, smart TVs, laptops, etc. But this Christmas, all that will be just a memory.
Nowadays, the biggest items on the floor would be Christmas food baskets, perhaps a limited amount of GCs, tumblers or bottles of table wine. In the past, multinational companies with offices in the Philippines would do the appliance package because “it was part of the culture” – or so they were told.
But as I go around the business districts, this Christmas might be the “season of slim pickings.” Most multinational companies now have an “ethical compliance officer” who needs to sign off on solicitations, raffle prizes, promos or non-business-related expenditures. Some are even so tough that they question the alignment or benefit of conducting a Christmas party for staff or outside stakeholders.
That seems to now hang in the minds of CEOs and finance officers as well as corporate legal who worry about the “morning after” or hangovers resulting from Christmas parties combined with alcohol and a year’s worth of pent-up frustration.
It was not so long ago when the phrase “Drink To Death” was a common phrase during Christmas parties in the Philippines. But it seems that corporate culture no longer encourages or tolerates “intoxication” in company-related events. This I believe can also be traced to foreign corporate influence.
Between deaths related to drunk driving and sexual misconduct or violence due to alcohol intoxication, many foreign firms have enough data if not actual experience to convince them to really tone things down. I have observed these problems particularly in toxic business environments where the job or nature of the business just brings out the worse. I also know of executives as well as diplomats being recalled for “misconduct.”
This year won’t necessarily be the end of the Super Raffle Month since there are thousands of politicians and aspirants willing to fund Christmas parties and raffles just to be recognized and gain popularity with the media or the public.
The politicians definitely need to make sure the Christmas parties are grand and impressive because they are in an election season and not just Christmas. But unlike corporate organizations, politicians often solicit or invite sponsors to provide the appliance package or give cash prizes for raffles.
With all the rules on ethical conduct and ongoing investigations about “intelligence funds,” you would think that sobriety and propriety would cause politicians to do away with the practice or tone it down. But since it costs them nothing, they won’t.
Raffle or no raffle, the times they are a-changing, said Bob Dylan, and let’s all learn how to do things better and safer by learning from others, both local and foreign. God bless.