Posts

Corruption remains one of the biggest challenges facing Kenya. Actually, East Africa. Wait a minute, all over the continent… oh, and far beyond. It undermines trust and hence stifles economic growth, and its effects are felt across all sectors. Companies often find themselves entangled in unethical practices such as bribery, fraud and mismanagement, as they navigate their way through an environment where transparency and accountability are hard to handle.

The private sector stands at a pivotal moment. As global attention increasingly turns toward ethical governance and corporate responsibility, businesses in Africa face a choice: perpetuate the status quo or embrace a transformative path of integrity, transparency and accountability.

Organisations like The Blue Company (where I am a member of its Membership and Ethics Committee) and the UN Global Compact are stepping in to lead the way. Rooted in the belief that ethical governance is the cornerstone of sustainable development, they work to embed integrity at the heart of corporate culture. Through certification, training and advocacy, such initiatives support businesses to rise above corrupt practices and champion ethical standards.

But the philosophy that underpins this approach is larger than any one initiative. At its core is the conviction that integrity is more than a compliance requirement – it is a driver of trust, innovation and long-term growth. Businesses committed to ethical practices gain reputational advantages, attract investment and foster environments conducive to sustainable development.

Change begins at the top, as leaders play a critical role in shaping corporate culture, setting the tone for ethical behaviour and ensuring accountability. For a culture of integrity to thrive, leaders must commit to transparent decision-making and zero-tolerance policies for corruption. When they embody such values and behaviours, they inspire trust within their organisations and beyond.

However, leadership alone is not enough. Businesses must invest in capacity building to ensure alignment across all levels. Comprehensive training programmes that focus on ethical decision-making, anti-bribery measures and practical approaches to transparency are crucial. These efforts equip employees with the tools they need to uphold integrity in their daily operations.

Corruption is not just a business issue – it is a societal one. Addressing it requires collective action from professional associations, civil society, governments and businesses. Advocacy plays a vital role in this effort, promoting policies that support ethical governance and creating systems that reward transparency.

Collaborative initiatives, like those championed by The Blue Company, amplify the impact of individual efforts. By working with stakeholders across sectors, these initiatives help establish integrity as a norm rather than an exception. Advocacy also influences legislation, ensuring that ethical practices are supported by robust legal frameworks.

Innovation is a powerful tool in the fight against corruption. Emerging technologies, such as blockchain for secure record-keeping and artificial intelligence for auditing processes, offer businesses new ways to enhance transparency and accountability. By adopting these

advancements, organisations can prevent fraud, streamline compliance, and stay ahead in the evolving business landscape.

Technology also empowers stakeholders by increasing access to information. Digital platforms that track supply chains, for example, make it easier to identify and address unethical practices. Such tools deter corruption and so build trust among consumers, investors and regulators.

While some progress has been made, much remains to be done. Corruption continues to be a significant barrier to economic growth. Expanding ethical business practices across industries and geographies is essential for transforming Africa’s private sector into a driver of integrity-driven development.

The road to ethical governance is not easy. For corruption provides shortcuts and immediate gains that can tempt businesses to compromise their values. But the long-term rewards of integrity far outweigh the risks of unethical behaviour.

In the face of such challenges, these initiatives offer a path forward, as we heard last week at the Africa Business Ethics Conference. By prioritising certification, capacity building and advocacy, they create a foundation for trust and sustainable growth. Yet their success depends on a collective commitment from the private sector to act responsibly and lead by example.

For Africa to unlock its full potential, businesses must embrace a vision of integrity as a guiding principle – not just for compliance, but as a cornerstone of competitive advantage. This shift will not only attract investment and foster innovation but also lay the groundwork for a thriving economy built on trust and merit.

In a region where corruption has long been a major obstacle to progress, the private sector has the opportunity to redefine success. By championing ethical governance, businesses can become catalysts for systemic change, paving the way for a future where there will be less resistance to transparency and accountability.

In August of this year I wrote an article based on an interview with me in 1990 I had unearthed about how I was managing the IT company of which I was then CEO, where I stated that some would have assumed I was speaking about leadership styles today given that what I was saying and doing at the time many imagine only emerged much more recently.

My column today is about another article from the last century, this one from 1978, which featured in KIM’s Management magazine under the headline “Eldon Marries Heart to Computer Science”. In it, Seth Musisi wrote about a talk I gave at a seminar on data processing (as IT was then called) at the University of Nairobi, on how I viewed relations with our customers – in those days of huge and hugely expensive mainframe machines.

In 1978 I was the General Manager of the Kenyan subsidiary of British computer multinational ICL, with nearly a hundred staff and looking after around thirty customers. At that time there were hardly any software applications, so each customer had their own teams of systems analysts and programmers, starting from scratch to create theirs – hard to imagine these days.

Musisi began the article with this quote from my talk: “The relationship between manufacturers and computer users is similar to marriage, where a couple is lawfully wedded, in sickness and in health, till death do them part.” And he went on to write about my expectation that there should not be conflict between supplier and user, but cooperation to mutual benefit – especially given the likelihood of a long-term relationship. Suppliers should be responsible partners rather than mere hard-selling revenue-chasers descending on innocent maidens, I suggested.

In this relationship the user seeks to maximise the return on their investment in the system, while the supplier’s goal is to maximise the investment. Yes, except that most of our business came from existing users and one could not expect to retain them in the long-run by overselling in the short-term. We also relied heavily on the satisfaction of the base in selling to new users.

We suppliers, with our international exposure, were expected to carry out training and to advise our users on how to generate the best benefit from their investment. This at all levels, from the computer department (the term for IT department then) to the users to senior management (hardly direct users in those days). For this to work well, I said, there had to be a spirit of give and take, giving credit and blame where they were due – rather than as happened too often, indulging in blame denial and displacement, and recrimination.

Does some of this sound familiar? Well here’s another topic I addressed that’s as alive today, to do with technology replacing jobs. In the 1970s many were still uncertain as to whether to bring computers into developing countries like Kenya. (A decade or so later the taxes on computers were raised on the grounds that they were “labour-saving devices”.) Here my response was that we should be keeping abreast of what was happening in the developed world and raising our productivity, for otherwise we would fall further behind and increase our dependency.

And while accepting that some jobs were indeed automated through the introduction of computers, other jobs were being created – like those among vendors and users, and those in the university’s Institute of Computer Science, the co-hosts of the event. I also pointed out that staff in the computerworld are forced to adopt a disciplined way of thinking, which influences others with whom they come into contact and is good for the country at large.

In those days there were many expatriates in the sector – as I still was then, having arrived here in 1977 – and this too gave rise to considerable push-back. It depends on need, I insisted, and assumes skills transfer by the external resources, also appreciating the training that was increasingly available locally.

So here we are today in Silicon Savannah, with smart phones in our pockets whose power exceeds that of those monsters in air-conditioned rooms I once dealt with. But what has not changed is the need for suppliers of capital goods to treat their customers responsibly, as it is this that will keep them loyal and encourage others to be attracted to you. What has only more recently become fashionable is to wrap all this up in language promoting “sustainability”… which is what was already being delivered by the good guys.

A few weeks months I wrote an article about how toxic cultures are often created by single individuals, and about how and why they behave as they do. Then, more recently, I was invited to be the external speaker at a half-day session hosted by Corporate Staffing Services on the theme “Surviving a Toxic CEO or Director”, and it led me to reflect further on the subject.

I also turned to Google to see what it had to tell me, and one of the first images I was shown informed me that “a Google search for ‘Toxic Boss’ generates almost 58 million hits”. Well whether that’s true or not, there’s plenty of very helpful material out there about this jarring subject.

Here’s what I found as definitions of toxic:

“Very harmful or unpleasant in a pervasive or insidious way”; “Toxic people manipulate those around them to get what they want”; “This can mean lying, bending the truth, exaggerating, or leaving out information so as to take a certain action or have a certain opinion of them; “They’ll do whatever it takes, even if it means hurting people”.

Then here’s from an image titled “10 signs of a toxic boss”: Lying, Gaslighting, Stealing credit, Always interrupting, Backbiting and gossiping, Never giving recognition, Insulting and name-calling, Saying one thing and doing another, Managing by fear and intimidation, Blaming the team vs taking responsibility.

Finally, I found “Signs to watch out for that can indicate you’re dealing with a toxic person”: You feel like you’re being manipulated; you’re constantly confused by the person’s behaviour; you feel like you deserve an apology that never comes; you always have to defend yourself to this person; you never feel fully comfortable around them; you feel bad about yourself in their presence.

Thanks, Google, for all these insights, which I complemented with reflections on my own experiences in my presentation. I listed what I have found to be root causes of such behaviour, many of which relate to low emotional intelligence, and perhaps most importantly – as I pointed out in my last article – lack of self-awareness and empathy. Toxic leaders – no, “bosses” fits better – neither trust others nor, deep down, trust themselves. They tend to be over-ambitious and impatient; and they fear failure. They are self-centred and entitled, indifferent to the feelings of others, and the word that sums up such characteristics is narcissism.

The issue of the day was how to survive in such an environment. Here I remembered when I was once with a toxic boss who expected me to be giving instructions and to be feared. I defied him to create a much healthier sub-culture around me. But quietly, without telling him about how I was operating my flatter pyramid: on tip-toe, whispering, so he wouldn’t be aware.

Here are other suggestions for managing relationships with toxic bosses. Flatter them, but genuinely, where they have earned the right to praise – which they also do. And use humour, to show you are at ease with them and to add a light touch that supports a friendlier way of working together.

Much is said about the need for sharing written evidence when dealing with such inconsistent and manipulative characters. So agree your goals and document what has been agreed, and then communicate your progress, again including in writing.

If above your CEO there exists a board of directors among whom there are at least some members who may lend a sympathetic ear and ease the situation, reach out to them – as I have done at times in my career. It can be risky, but escalation is a responsible way of behaving in such situations – and it can at least be theraeutic!

Some final thoughts from me. First, when at one time I was feeling demotivated thanks to a toxic boss, I reached out to volunteer in community activities like Rotary where I felt more aligned with those around me and more appreciated. Then, at the session where I was speaking several participants reached out to me seeking my advice as a mentor over toxic relationships they were facing in their workplaces. Indeed, finding a safe external adviser can definitely be helpful, including by assisting you in managing your stress.

So be like a rock and not a sponge. Don’t allow the toxicity to infect your system. And while you don’t want to leave such an environment too soon, if it looks like being the new normal start planning your exit.

Should leaders be the ones to eat last? The US Marines believe so, as it shows they care for their people and are prepared to sacrifice for them. It’s why Simon Sinek chose Leaders Eat Last as the title of his best-selling book, first published in 2014. We selected it as the topic for our Rotary Club’s recent Book Club meeting, where we also discussed how Sinek’s American context applies here. I certainly don’t need to comment on when most of our Kenyan leaders eat – definitely not last!

Central to the requirements for being the kind of leaders Sinek wishes to see is the generation of broad “Circles of Safety” in their organisations. Within these circles staff trust one another, are therefore open and collaborative and so perform well, not least in dealing with external threats. Such leaders promote integrity and have evolved an uplifting purpose for their people, which generates the stamina to defer gratification and reach for long-term sustainability.

There’s lots more in the book about good contemporary leadership, including examples of role models who defy the pressure to go for easier short-term results. By contrast, leaders who turn a blind eye to the benefits of circles of safety tend to reduce their consideration of people issues to mere numbers, making it much easier to slash staff levels in hard times without feeling any pain or empathy. It’s why one of us homed in on Sinek’s insistence on the development of a healthy culture being at the centre of positive leadership.

For me it was interesting that the book was published in 2014. As had Sinek been writing it today he would have explicitly placed Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) issues at the heart of everything, since much of what he complained about and sought is what ESG initiatives promote: ethical sustainability.

We all appreciated Sinek’s easy-to-follow description of the four hormones, the biological chemicals within us, two selfish and two selfless ones that get stimulated in our system. On the selfish front we have Endorphines and Dopamine, that drove our ancestors to be hunter-gatherers. Endorphines mask physical pain, as in “the runner’s high”, while Dopamine makes us feel good when we accomplish something.

Then Sinek describes the selfless chemicals, that make us feel valued when we are appreciated and trusted and keep the circle of safety intact. Serotonin makes us feel strong and confident, proud, while Oxytocin delivers the feeling of friendship and love when we are with close and trusted friends. It makes us social, and feeling that we belong.

We noted that our Rotary presidents tend to eat last, after they’ve done with managing our lunch meetings, but generally we felt that leaders should be eating with their people not after them. We all agreed though that leaders should be the last to speak, having first listened to the other voices.

Uhuru Kenyatta was one of those who recognised the organised discipline of military leaders, putting senior military officers in charge of Nairobi County, the Kenya Meat Commission and elsewhere. And just now William Ruto praised the leadership style of the late General Ogolla. “Are there lessons here for our politicians?” asked one of us, “Or are they beyond redemption?” My concern is that I don’t see them ever sitting together as we were at our Book Club, discussing the fundamental issues of leadership. It’s what should be happening more of at places like the Kenya School of Government.

On the positive side though, we heard praise for the progress made in Makueni County, thanks to its first Governor, Kivutha Kibwana, and now Mutula Kilonzo Jr. I could also have added the good example of the first Governor of Laikipia, Ndiritu Muriithi, another who showed how a leader can make a transformative difference.

Towards the end of the book Sinek writes extensively on why millennials are as they are and how to handle them constructively, and here two of our members talked about their challenges in dealing with such young ones in the medical field. Sinek helps us understand the importance of when and therefore how different generations were brought up, and I mentioned that I am too old to be a baby boomer, having been born before World War II was over. I have therefore been brought up with frugality, which I have held on to since… like squeezing the last bit out of toothpaste tubes. ‘Me too,’ echoed another Rotarian, much younger than me… and a dentist by profession!

In conclusion, reading the book stimulated us positively, so my fellow Rotarians and I recommend it to you.

Nearly six years ago I wrote a column here about what I called “the necessary evil of compliance”, the theme of a Leaders Circle I had just co-hosted. In it I quoted former Deputy US Attorney-General Paul McNulty, who rightly pointed out that “If you think compliance is expensive, try non-compliance”. And in our conversation we agreed that one must be neither too trusting nor insufficiently so.

These thoughts were on my mind while attending the first day of the recent Nielsonsmith conference on “Compliance, Anti-Corruption and Ethics in Africa” where I was representing the Blue Company, one of the sponsors. During the conference I saw quite how prominent this compliance issue has become, with more and more organisations appointing compliance managers dedicated exclusively to this function.

We first heard from Tomell Ceasra, the co-founder of MEACA, the Middle East and Africa Compliance Association, and then from Laban Omangi, the chairman of the Compliance Society of Kenya, who told us how the society was formed in 2020 to bring together the compliance community within the finance sector, and now how it is spreading more broadly.

They’ve been studying the way to bring various institutions together to assemble compliance guidelines, and to offer professional training and certification in their specialty. They work together with Business Member Organisations (BMOs) and with regulators. And they worry about dealing with the financing of terrorism and with money-laundering funds derived from the proceeds of crime.

On the subject of whistleblowers, we heard about the factors that inhibit such people, including fear of retaliation; no response and no action being taken following their input – perhaps due to “untouchables” being involved; and a general lack of trust. Rita Mwangi, the Chief Legal and People Officer of Simba Corporation, talked about international and local legislation and how to comply. She highlighted the low positioning on Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index of all but a very few African countries, with most either stuck where they are or regressing.

I was happy to hear her say we don’t lack legislation, either internationally or locally, rather what we need is improved enforcement – including through the increasing requirements of ESG reporting. As far as private sector self-regulation is concerned, because membership of many BMOs is voluntary the good guys join but the bad ones do not, thus evading the pressure to comply.

Peter Odedina, the Chief Compliance Officer of Airtel Africa next went into specifics on how to be compliant. He talked about the tone at the top being a key culture driver; appropriate incentives and penalties being important; the need for policies, codes of conduct; appropriate staff induction and ongoing communication with them; and the importance of enjoying an appropriate and aligned appetite for risk.

5% of the top line revenue of any company is lost due to fraud, he asserted. So what are the red flags? 43% are people seen to be living beyond their means, benefitting from a close association with vendors or customers; 23% face financial difficulties; and 21% are wheeler-dealers.

“Are compliance issues integrated into our organisation’s strategies and values, influencing the attitudes and behaviour of our people, thus forming an ethical culture?” we were asked.

The theme of the panel where I was a member read “Tone from the Top, Mood in the Middle, and Groove on the Ground”, where the role of middle managers was one of the issues discussed. There’s a whole spectrum at this level, from those who act as interpreters and mediators between the lower levels and their higher bosses, and those who are blockers and distracters. Much of course depends on that tone at the top. Are senior management keen to see the learning and growth of the next layers, so they rise up the organisation? Are they coaches? Do they provide a healthy performance management environment, with appropriate incentives? Do they inspire and motivate others to live their vision and values?

I was rather an exception in the room. Pretty much everyone else was deep in the compliance ecosystem, while I was viewing the topic from a much broader perspective. Those there were preaching to the already converted – which is fine, as it gave them the opportunity to interact, to learn and to reinforce each other. I hope they continue doing so beyond the conference, and that the event will have led to new alliances and collaborations that will raise the level of compliance… while not suffocating innovation and risk-taking.

Speech by Mike Eldon at the Strathmore University Business School Annual Executive Education Programmes Graduation on 1st December 2023

Click here to download the full speach (PDF, new window)

I was recently invited by professional advisory firm Ronalds East Africa to be one of the keynote speakers at their training event for Chief Finance Officers (CFOs) and other leaders of the finance function. My session was about advising the participants on how to interact effectively at the board level.

There was quite a spectrum in the room, from senior finance folk who regularly attended board and board committee meetings, to younger, more junior ones. Some of the CFOs were executive directors on their boards, with a regular seat at the top table, while others were only invited to contribute on specific items.

I asked them if they held responsibilities beyond financial management, and one lady told me she was the finance and administration manager – a not uncommon combination. (To me “administration” has always sounded rather old-fashioned and bureaucratic, and I suggested they think of a more contemporary term).

Elsewhere I have seen CFOs also oversee functions such as strategy and performance, risk and compliance, investments, mergers and acquisitions, and ICT. For obvious reasons, those whose portfolios are broadest are the ones most likely to climb further up the managerial ladder, I emphasised.

In my session I asked a series of questions, first about their alignment with the CEO. Did they work together as a close team, with mutual trust and respect? And then about management’s relationship with the board – individually and as a team. “Do you look forward to engaging with your directors, or do you dread the interactions?” I posed, before also asking if the directors looked forward to engaging with them.

Not very positive responses here, accompanied by several statements admitting that they only speak if asked to do so.

So, what holds them back? Why do so many CFOs underperform when they appear in the boardroom? My first point was that too many heads of departments, including CFOs, feel intimidated when in the presence of directors, and these feelings are reflected in their behaviour. It’s why they keep their contributions as short as possible, they don’t project their voice, and avoid eye-contact.

Others, however, are over-confident, perhaps being expert at spouting the numbers, despite lacking either the holistic organisational perspective or communication skills. They are inadequately prepared, not having translated their overcrowded spreadsheets into easy-to-absorb graphics; not having been coached in how to communicate for this level of engagement; and not having been through rehearsals to the meetings.

My next slide asked “Are you just Dr No?” Here I had them probe the extent to which the image they felt they should portray had them play too much of a stern-parent role, exception-reporting on the over-spenders and the under-deliverers… while remaining silent when the numbers looked good. Alongside this, many of their tribe enjoy being the most risk-averse in the room, displaying consistent worst-case pessimism and merely focusing on why any new initiative will not succeed, and in any case is unaffordable.

“Are you just book-balancers, number-crunchers, cost-minimisers?” I asked provocatively. “Or do you also see yourselves as advisers, consultants and coaches to your colleagues – including directors?” And how good were they at managing relationships, I inquired, whether internally with other functions, departments and locations, and between levels; or externally with investors, bankers, auditors and others?

To help them here I delved into my favourite topic of emotional intelligence, explaining how those with high EQ interact in ways that result in win-win outcomes, where everyone feels adequately satisfied and so owns the plans and commit to their implementation.

Whether in their technical financial skills or their non-technical skills of 360-degree relationship building, they need not only to be competent, I stated, but to match that with a healthy mix of confidence and humility, making others feel comfortable when interacting with them.

It is by expanding their comfort zone through developing new and broader skills that their circle of influence would expand. Their constructive, helpful voice will be listened to more, and those around them will see their potential for both higher cross-functional and boardroom responsibilities.

Around the world organisations are downsizing, whether because of the generally tough economic times or for other reasons. And as we observe how this is being handled we see a whole spectrum of employer behaviour, from the brutal to the caring.

Some have simply sent texts to staff, informing them that they are being laid off. How cruel that is! No wonder, as I wrote in an earlier article, leaders like Jack Welch felt one of the most important and challenging skills for managers to develop is holding difficult conversations, such as ones to do with downsizing inevitably are.

The task of those who must inform staff members that they have been laid off is incredibly difficult, admitted Welch.

They feel guilt and anxiety before, during and after. And he was surprised that he couldn’t identify any programmes that helped people develop the skills needed to conduct such meetings.

I decided to write this column as I was recently exposed to a manufacturing company that needed to downsize its staff and made the hard decision to do so.

Despite the difficult financial situation in which it found itself, the board and management were clear that they would provide those leaving with as soft a landing as possible.

Their approach was to offer voluntary early retirement to staff, with reasonable benefits beyond the payment of their notice period, in the hope that no one would have to be asked to leave against their wishes.

A considerable number applied, including a few senior staff who’d been with the company for many years – which gave an opportunity to younger employees to inherit their responsibilities.

Those leaving were offered training sessions that prepared them for seeking new opportunities, and as Welch recommended, they were encouraged to believe that there was a better life ahead of them, aligned with their interests and aptitudes.

As I wrote in another of my articles, about directors reaching the end of their terms, when people retire they go through a grieving process, with the usual steps of denial followed by acceptance, mourning and eventual healing.

I was referring to a different kind of situation, but my point there is valid here too, finding ways of helping the leavers to deal with their loss, while those remaining make their exit much smoother and more graceful than many turn out to be.

The advice I gave to the retiring directors was to accept that their positions were never meant to be for life, and that as one door closes others may open. Keep giving your utmost till the last day of your term, I insisted, and hand over on the due day with no regrets.

Your inner motivation and sense of commitment may have dimmed somewhat, but let this in no way affect how you perform your duties. Be proud of your legacy, and have others speak well of you.

As for those remaining, they should understand that their departing colleagues are likely to be indeed grieving, however stoic they may appear. Therefore, show generous appreciation for where and how they have made a difference.

We are all in need of empathy and appreciation, so say farewell nicely, and have them continue to speak well of the place they are about to leave.

Farewell lunch

The organisation that I witnessed going through downsizing hosted a farewell lunch for the retirees, giving them an honourable send-off. The CEO invited each of the newly promoted team members – also present – to say a few words, before asking those who were leaving to speak. Without exception, everyone was positive and appreciative of their time with the company, whether it had come to an end or not.

And the retirees were also exceptionlessly optimistic about the company’s future, saying they were leaving it in safe hands to deal with the present challenges.

Several of the leavers stated that they could always be called upon for support and one, with a light touch, suggested if their younger replacements came across a problem they could blame him!

Several directors were also present, and when they spoke some expressed how moved and encouraged they felt, saying they would miss those who were leaving.

The retirees were wished well in the next stage of their lives, and the “youngsters” who were taking over were assured that they had the full support of the board.

My strong sense was that here the grieving was much milder than usual. Indeed the whole spirit was an uplifting one. So if you are having to downsize, do also behave humanely with those who will be leaving.

I am sharing with you a conversation I had with three young women leaders, launched by one of them about a situation in which she found herself. “I am the only woman on this board, and one of the men asked me to get him a cup of tea,” she narrated and asked how I would have reacted.

Earlier I had shown myself to be a champion for women, so she was surprised and dismayed when I replied that I would have brought him the tea. I explained that otherwise I would have risked provoking resentment on his part, and hence quite likely jeopardised our relationship.

My suggestion was that she should be building her status as a board member by making high-quality contributions, leading people like him to perhaps think again about such requests.

However, I would not have left the matter there. I hoped her chairman — or another director — was someone she could have approached after the meeting, requesting him to speak to his fellow board member and suggest he find other ways of getting his tea.

She revealed that she had indeed refused to be the “tea-girl”, and quite assertively so, but it turned out that at the subsequent board meeting and consistently thereafter other staff provided the service.

She wasn’t aware of how this came about, but she was relieved that she no longer risked being placed in this awkward situation.

Others in our group now had their say, with one suggesting she would have just put the tea on the table without actually serving the man, and another saying she would have smiled as she responded, whether accepting or refusing his request.

I now had two of the women role-play the situation, with one acting the part of the man. How did he feel when his request was strongly rejected? Was he embarrassed and remorseful? Did he resent the snub? It’s good to put oneself in the other’s shoes.

As we continued, I decided to call my wife, who has over the years often been the only woman on a board. Had she ever been asked to be the tea-girl? And if so how did she handle the situation? No, she hadn’t, she told me, but if asked she would have done so – with a smile and a light touch.

I then brought the conversation to the subject of emotional intelligence, which I suggested is about negotiating win-win outcomes. The challenge here was how to deal with the tea request in a way that both parties ended up feeling OK about it all.

And for me that meant giving way at the outset, while finding gentle ways of preventing a recurrence. Not necessarily by engaging directly with the other person, but perhaps seeking the intervention of a third party, a mediator.

One aspect of emotional intelligence is that sometimes we need to find the strength to separate how we feel from how we behave.

For sure, the lady board member resented being asked to be the tea-girl. But my thought was for her to swallow her short-term pride to allow for an easier long-term resolution.

Here we were talking about a small matter, however demeaned the lady in question felt. But the pluses and minuses of the different approaches we discussed among us regarding the tea-serving apply much more broadly. And not just between men and women.

It can be between older and younger people, senior and junior ones, the more and the less educated, and other pairings where one side feels unduly entitled to favours.

A final word on women’s empowerment. Any time I hear about women “fighting” for their rights it worries me. For in fights there are winners and losers.

Where such aggressive women win their fight, one of their key measures is that men will lose. No, I say. I am an absolute supporter of women’s rights, but wherever possible to go after them in graceful, elegant ways that allow for win-win all round.

Going back to the days of the British suffragettes who struggled to obtain the right to vote for women in the early 20th century there were two groups: one that was confrontational and dramatic, and one that operated more quietly but at least as effectively. I would have been with the latter.

So to the women reading this I say, smile rather than frown as you advocate for your cause. And to the men, go get your own tea.

Writing minutes of meetings offer interesting challenges. They must be neither too long nor unduly brief, just capturing the objective essence of what happened.

We usually don’t need to know who said what, for they are not transcripts, but we must record who is to follow up on what and by when. Sounds quite straightforward, yes?

Not necessarily. For instance, when I am the chairman of a board or of a board committee I often find I need to offer guidance to the minute-taker.

They will be very formally trained legal people, with equally formal company secretarial qualifications… all absolutely necessary.

However, what I often see is that they have been taught to be so focused on being technically compliant with good governance, applying standard structures and styles, that they can miss out on the spirit of a meeting.

Sure, they record who was present and who gave their apologies, tell us we confirmed the minutes of the previous meeting, identify the decisions we took, show the date of the next meeting… all those obvious elements.

But what about when someone praises an individual or a group, for instance?

In my experience, too many stiff-upper-lip minute-takers feel that’s too frivolous, too human, to include.

Chances are they even switch off listening, convinced it’s not part of their job to record other than hard facts and figures, decisions and actions.

Forget the soft stuff, keep to the point. This is not story-telling, they would protest. We are not there to entertain or to educate, just to inform.

No smiling, no frowning, we are mere dispassionate observers seeking compliance with our professional best practice.

And yet, and yet…surely it’s OK where appropriate to switch from being a robotic technical recorder to becoming a more relaxed and informal reporter – or “rapporteur”, as recorders of other events such as conferences and workshops are called.

So particularly when I am chairman of a meeting I observe when the minute-taker is and is not writing or keying in what is being discussed.

If I feel they have not been doing so and in my view, they should, I will prompt them to ensure they do.

I also encourage them that when they are uncertain as to how to record something, they should feel free to seek guidance from the rest of us during the meeting.

And if I sense that what has just been handled is not so obvious as to how to write it up, I will ask them to share how they propose to, so they and we can feel relaxed that all is well.

It’s vital that minutes be written and circulated as soon after a meeting as possible, and not only so that those actioned with follow-ups can be reminded to get going with their obligations in good time, but so we still remember clearly enough what happened at the meeting and can confirm the accuracy of the minutes.

It’s good too to circulate a draft in advance, at least to the chairperson, who then can act as a quality controller.

I like it when minute-takers key straight into their laptops during meetings rather than write on paper and transcribe their notes later, as it’s then more likely their product can be shared promptly.

And here’s another thought: as some do, have two columns on the right-hand side of the page, one for the “By whom” and one for the “By when”.

Plus, if by the following meeting the action has not been fulfilled and should have been, add a revised “By when” date – identified as having been updated.

On one board where I presently sit there’s a good practice I’d like to share with you: just before the next board meeting the minutes of the previous meeting are again circulated, but now with one-liner updates under each of the actions agreed at that earlier meeting, shown in a different colour and telling us whether the intended action has or had not been fulfilled, or if is in progress. Very helpful.

In other than board, board committee meetings, AGMs and additional official events, ones that are less formal and do not require the legal/secretarial skills of a minute-taker I often suggest it should be a revolving function, giving more people the opportunity to develop this important skill and to become more sensitive to other minute-takers in future. (I also suggest the chairing could revolve, for similar reasons.)

So, there being no further business, I declare this article closed. Date of next column: a fortnight from now, on chairing meetings. Please confirm attendance.