94

Yesterday, 94 people visited this site.  One has to ask “Why?”.

I would be deluding myself to think that they were returning for some sort of enhanced literacy experience;  or because of any sympathy or affinity to the writer, over a year and a half since he was ceremoniously booted out of the Emirates Group.  No, they were doing it because they have a stake in the success of Emirates Group IT, either as a member of staff or as a customer and are very concerned about the current situation.  The popularity of my blog is simply a reflection of the appalling way EG-IT is currently being managed.  Why on earth is this fact not recognised by those responsible?

Although 94 is above the usual daily average, it is not unusual.  In fact, as I write, today’s figure already stands at 88 and it is not yet bedtime.  The article on Nigel Hopkins attracted 200 visits in one 24 hour period and the overall total is now a couple of hundred short of 20,000.  Looking at the sources I can see that they all result from people either using the url itself, or making specific searches.  It is a long time since I have seen anyone stumbling across the site by accident - the last one was somebody trying to update a TomTom sat nav! 

Recent communications to me have followed the familiar theme and I note that the frustrations continue to increase.  Everyone now seems to accept that Patrick Naef’s vindictive management style, coupled with an acute lack of the necessary skills to lead EG-IT, is never going to change.  So the focus is now much more on Patrick’s managers and bewilderment about their unquestioning support of his continually failing actions.  Phrases such as “lost the plot completely”, “total shambles”, “disaster”, “absolutely mad”, “complete mess”, “evil”, “behaviours that have shocked me” and “nothing will improve until things change at the top” have all been used, plus many more.

The specific topic which has received most attention recently has been the acquisition of tikAERO which has become Mercator Asia.  The question on the lips of many is along the lines of ‘why on earth did this purchase take place?’ and some understandably would like to know who has actually benefited from the initiative.  I cannot answer any of those questions.  But I can paste in what I wrote about the issue over a year ago . . .

Looking back, there was a clear signal that Patrick no longer wanted my view.  At the time I thought it was a one off, but now it seems not.  It concerned the acquisition of the company tikAERO when I was not included in any of the evaluation work.  I had big concerns about the impact such an acquisition would have on our ongoing operation  (in particular on our internal customers) and I told Patrick so.  My status on the project was then moved from ‘not included’ to ‘excluded’!  This really frustrated me as I knew I had a lot to offer.  I am not saying I am more clever than anyone else, but I do have a lot of experience with mergers and acquisitions.  I worked on many in my previous company and I learnt a lot, particularly from people who were much more experienced than I was.  I learnt two major things:  Firstly, just like used cars, companies are never quite as good as they first seem to be.  The longer you look at them and the more loyal experts you involve to look at them, the more faults you will find.  Secondly, a company’s IT department (especially its Data Centre) is normally a fair reflection of the company itself.  Find a safe, secure and risk managed Data Centre with robust contingency plans and you will find a safe, secure and robust company. 

Only time will tell as to whether this acquisition was good for the Group or not but, as an experienced Data Centre manager, I am convinced that, had I been involved, far fewer nasty surprises will subsequently emerge.

Time does tell, doesn’t it?

The requests to me to ‘do something’ keep coming in but, as I have always said, there is little I can do from the outside.  At the end of last year, a couple of individuals asked me to write to the Chairman so I thought I should do something a bit more proactive than just updating this blog.  Even though Gary Chapman did not respond to a previous communication, I thought it would be fairer to write to him first.  After all, I cannot be sure how extensive Patrick Naef’s censorship activities are.  So I did write to Gary Chapman.  This was months ago but, again, I have not received a response.  I assume that the President of a large organisation would, as a matter of basic courtesy, respond to such a communication so I can only deduce that it has not been received.  Therefore, so that I can be sure that the communication does reach its intended audience, I will post the letter on this blog.  I will do so at the end of this month.