________________
them with 10%, would be very difficult, but for people who are coming from the same background, that is a lot easier. Again, I do not blame them, because they have no real knowledge of the problem, and so I do not feel negative towards them. If they do not have real knowledge, how can I explain so they understand? But I did manage to somehow get them understand, and they did not argue, they all accepted to cut their salary, the higher levels more than the lower ones, so that the rest could stay. In many companies, you know, the 60-40 or 80-20 rule applies, that is that about 80% of the salary is for about 20% of the people. You can use that to your advantage, because it is clear that a reasonable cut at the top can leave many at the bottom intact. So, knowing this helps, but you are right, I could not have done it in every society. We do hire in various cultures. Only in Antwerp we have 10 to 12 different nationalities. So, I could never have done it to all of them, because not all of them are educated”.
“Would you dare to say", the fourth interlocutor added that because employees sense that you hire them carefully, that is because they can mean something to the real clients, and not because you want to augment yourself, eventually in competition with other CEO's, so that you already think in advance what to do if there are problems in the business, that your employees are also more client-oriented, simply because they sense they are protected by you on substantive grounds?”
"See", R replied “we try to run a family kind of corporation. Now, we seriously believe that we do not see that family character at the top, among the real partners, but that it also boils down to the entire company level. We have 57 people working here in Antwerp. I know virtually all of those people personally. I know exactly what job they do. I keep track of that, whether they are doing their job properly or not. Sure, they may have a bad day, in which they cannot do better because they have some problems, at home or elsewhere, that may happen. But if I have a job that requires say, 3 people, I would take 2.5, so that they are fully occupied, and the rest I would put in automation. Many companies do the opposite, if they have a job that requires 3 people, to hire 3.5, to cover for absence or illness. We do exactly the opposite
“But that does not lead to burn-out”, the fourth interlocutor replied “because there is a supportive climate"
“Yes”, R replied “they know that a lot depends on their actions. We are a trading business, so they have to be very active all the time. You might think it is like on the floor on the stock exchange, where people are extremely busy, and are totally exhausted at night. Their careers are like that of athletes or footballers, ten or twelve years and it is over. In our company, it is not like that. But we are not a big company either, in which if you do not do things today properly, it will not affect the whole. Yes, it does. We are in between, so people do what they are supposed to do in their own time, that sense they all have, and it's not like in America, as you see in movies, that if you do not do it properly instantly, that you are fired. In our company, it is not like that. So they are also grateful”.
369
