Sputzele's · Enchanted · World

At first, when you add hot water to jelly and begin to stir, there is no discernible evidence of imminent solidification. It remains a pourable liquid without, unlike gravy for example, any additional viscosity. You have to leave it to set for a little while. If you didn't know what it was going to do, you might think there was no point in emptying it into a carefully chosen mould. Yet, you now need to make sure that you have a suitable container. The choices you make now, could supply shape and structure to you life for a long time to come.

Where, in your life, are there lines drawn in faint pencil which should really be marked out in thick, indelible ink? Where are the wishy-washy compromises, the fudged fixes and the questionable commitments? And, sorry to harp on, but what about the bendable rules and the elastic definitions? Wouldn't you like a little more solidity, certainty and strength? You could benefit greatly from such a change. So there is really no need to fear the imminent arrival of S. It is just what you need, just in time.

Effective Leader’s Checklist] How Do You Rate?
October 15, 2009

Kouzes

40 people – including me – who coach leaders and teams as I do, got to spend an evening with Jim Kouzes Tuesday night. It was food for the mind and food for the soul.

Kouzes, along with colleague Barry Posner, authored the award-winning and best-selling book, The Leadership Challenge, which has over 1.8 million copies in print. The duo has also been active in doing field-based research, utilizing a leadership inventory they developed, which now has a database of over 1M respondents.

Why is this important?

Their work has identified the key attributes that high effective leaders display / evidence as core to their leadership: people who lead effectively over a period of time display these quantifiable behaviors.

And Kouzes, by the way, believes “ Leadership is not the private reserve of a few charismatic men and women. It’s a set of skills and abilities learnable by anyone “ – and the only way to get better is to work at it and such methods as executive coaching, and consistent candid feedback from others.

Here’s what Jim offered – based on extensive field research to accompany a forthcoming update to The Leadership Challenge – in terms of the attributes that separate effective leaders from everyone else.

The big question if you are a leader – or aspiring leader – is how do you stack up?

The top 4 qualities that people identify in leaders they admire:

Honesty
Forward looking
Inspiring
Competent
Kouzes and Pozner’s research shows that that there are some basic findings – Kouzes calls them “truths” – about highly effective leaders and the attributes they evidence:

1. Credibility is the foundation of leadership: you either lead by example or you don’t lead at all.

2. Personal values drive commitment: the highest commitment levels comes from people who are clear about their personal values as well as clear about the values of the organization in which they work. Lowest level? Are clear about the organization’s values, but not so clear about their own personal values.

3. Vision trumps everything when it comers to leadership: alignment, the act of people linking or aligning their personal efforts with that of the organization, only happens when people can see themselves in the picture the leader promotes.

4. Challenge is the crucible of greatness: every great leader was able to reach that higher quality of leadership through a significant test or challenge. No one got great – to crib Kouzes line – by maintaining the status quo and not changing anything.

5. Leaders can’t do it alone: leaders can’t do it alone. The level of trust subordinates had in their leaders is determined the amount of leader influence subordinates accepted.

6. The best leaders are the best learners: the more engaged you are at learning to lead the more successful you are at leading. And you must practice by coaching and doing things such as consistently asking for feedback on how your behaviors as a leader affect others and course correcting as appropriate.

7. Caring is at the heart of leadership: The highest performing managers and leaders are the most open and caring. The best leaders display more affection toward others and want others to be more open with them.

Last word from Jim Kouzes: the balance between positive things you say about someone to “negative” to be optimally effective in driving better performance is something on the order of 3-7 (or average of around 5) positive comments to every one critical note.

'Smile, though your heart is aching, smile even though it's breaking...' So goes the old song. It was co-written by Charlie Chaplin, although surprisingly, the great comedian didn't write the words; he composed the tune. Does everything really get better as long as you wear the right facial expression? Yes and no. It is not the answer to everything, but it is still a good response - especially at times when you feel like gnashing your teeth. Smile where you can this weekend, and you will soon find more reasons to smile.

I am pissed all the same

People around me are astonishgly rather impolite.. I hate that.
It is freaking cold over here.

Chroniqueurs extérieurs
Les agences de notation

Par Charles Wyplosz, spécialiste de l'économie et professeur à l'institut de Hautes Etudes Internationales et du Développement

J'entend fréquemment vos bulletin/humeurs au Journal du matin de la RSR avec plaisirs d'ailleurs. Listen

Cependant, celui de ce matin m'a donné envie de réagir, dans la mesure où je ne suis pas d'accord avec votre description de l'interaction des banques des regulateurs et des agences de notation.
Je me permet de vous donner quelques précisions.

1. La bulle s'est formée alors que le régime Bale II n'était pas encore en place ( il a ete vraiment instauré en Europe au 31.12.2006)

2. La majeure partie des banques US n'est tjs pas sous le régime Balois...les grandes banques d'Investissement de WS sont sous un regime un peu hybride depuis meme avant Bâle II, et aux USA un leverage ratio ou un concept similaire était en place. déjà. cela n'as pas emp^ché Lehman.

3. Les banques qui suivent l' approche réglementaire la moins sophistiquée- ie l'approche standard- sont celles qui doivent faire l'utilisation la plus intensive des notes externes. Comme les regulateurs ne peuvent certifier les regimes de mesure du risque pour toutes les banques (principe de délégation) ces dernières doivent utiliser les notations externes pour leur besoins en capital réglementaire au titre du portefeuille de banque (Banking book).

Dans les fait cependant puisque ces banques font le plus souvent du retail ou du commercial corporate moyennes souvent non notées. De plus l'usage de notes externes est assez restrictif ( seniorité et equivalence). Ce qui fait qu'en pratique, elles font tres peu usage de ces notations.

Dans le cas où elles auraient des positions de titrisation, celles-ci sont obligatoirement capitalisée dans le cadre de l'approche du portefeuille de titrisation (securitization framework) avec des pondérations de risque déterminées par les régulateurs. Mis a part les banques allemandes qui ont connus de gros malheurs avec leurs stratégies d'achats de titrisés- les banques islandaises.. auxquelles les agences ont donnée trop de crédit (dans le too big too fail governement support) et les banques commerciales US a qui leur regulateurs avait dit: surtout delester vos Balance sheets et qui ont titrisé leurs risques à tire larigot..
il n'y a pas eu de problèmes majeurs dans ce secteur pour la majorité des banques

Certes il est connu que le "banks and financial institution est typiquement un secteur low defaults) donc comparativement les taux de defaut ont augmenté ( c'est quand meme une crise de credit..) mais une banque isalandaise compte pour 8 defauts, et lehman pour 16... alors en tout et pour tout cela reste que peu de contreparties ont vraiment fait defaut et en general cela n'est pas le resultat des notations... ou pas uniquement ( isalandaises excepté)


4. les banques sophistiquées en approche dite IRBA- font usage de notes internes en principes certifiées par le régulateur pour noter leur portefeuille de prêt bancaire qu'il soit wholesale (IB) ou retail (Commercial banking and mortgage banking. Ceci leur eprmet de reduire leurs besoin en capital dans la mesure où il s'agit d'une approche plus ajustée au risque mais surtout parce qu'elle peuvent noter tout ce qui a dans le portefeuille bancaire au contraire des banques en approche standard.

Les notes externes des agences n'entrent pas dans la détermination de ces reserves en capital réglementaire au titre du risque de credit sur portefeuille bancaire- elles entrent de manière indirecte par le biais de positions bookes en portefeuille de négoce... mais souvent

Dans le contexte de la titrisation, les banques sophistiquées comme celles moins sophistiquées doivent effectivement utiliser dans leur analyse les notes externes: soit dans le cadre de l'approche du portefeuille de titrisation soit eventuellement dans le contexte d'une approche VAR.

les pondération de risque calibrées par le comité de Bâle s'avérèrent trop optimistes. L'arbitrage entre le booking des positions en banking book et en trading book a fait que la majeure partie des positions s'est retrouvé dans le TB et a reçu une capitalisation encore plus légère ceci se conjugue avec bien sûr des notes négligentes et mal calibrées sur les titrisations.

La grande raison de la "sous capitalisation" est l'effet conjugué d'un arbitrage regulatoire entre TB et BB, d'une absence de differentiation entre pondérations de risques pour des positions de titrisation simple ou de retitrisation, et l'inadequation des ratio tier 1 a mesurer le leverage...c'est vrai que les notes externes sont utilisées dans le contexte du funding de la lquidité, mais il ne s'agit pas ici de prescription réglementaires.. plutôt des marchés. Et oui les notes des islandaises étaient crazy, cependant leurs spreads aussi et c'est bien sur sur ces derniers que la plupart des anticipations furent construites.. pour les pays développés ou les marchés de CDS sont liquides.. la dépendance aux notes externes est de plus en plus limitée.

Il n'y a pas de raison de se passer des agences externes, il est plus judicieux de se préoccuper un peu de ce qu'elle font ( ce que la SEC n'a pas vraiment fait..) et de recalibrer plus correctement le système, de fermer les portes aux possibiltés d'arbitrage en capital trop simples.. et bien des choses devraient se passer mieux. La diatribe contre les agences à mon avis occulte les problèmes intéressants; ceux ci sont ailleurs.

Something is starting to erode my confidence. I feel fine for a while and then I remember that a particular matter is upsetting me. Once you begin to dwell on that, you lose all sense of perspective. Yet how are you supposed to sort out this perplexing, exasperating, infuriating, depressing, debilitating business? It may well be that my best bet, for the time being at least, is to pay it less attention. There is little that I can do - but then is there little else tha I can and I NEED to do - other than to keep smiling and being nice to people ?

'That was then and this is now.' Just keep saying this to yourself, over and over now, each time that you feel inclined to regret a change that has recently taken place. Why pine for a past that had so little to offer you? All you are actually missing is a sense of frustration that you had allowed yourself to get used to. You really don't want to go back or to feel stuck again. You definitely do want the wonderful new chance that life is placing before you. Stop doubting yourself and seize it, as gratefully and enthusiastically as you can.

Moody’s, S&P May Face More Disclosure, Liability in SEC Rules

By Jesse Westbrook

Sept. 16 (Bloomberg) -- Moody’s Investors Service, Standard & Poor’s and Fitch Ratings may face more disclosure requirements and greater accountability for debt analyses after being faulted for misreading risks of investing in toxic mortgage securities.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission will propose that firms seeking to sell bonds disclose the grades they got while shopping among credit-rating companies, according to people familiar with the matter. Other changes scheduled for discussion tomorrow at a Washington meeting may make it easier for investors to sue credit raters and require the companies to disclose revenue from their biggest clients, the people said.

Congress will decide whether the steps go far enough to reform an industry whose wrong assessments on subprime-mortgage securities fueled the financial crisis by helping banks sell assets that went sour. House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank this week said he wants to cut references to credit ratings from U.S. rules because the provisions foster reliance on ratings and deter investors from doing research.

“What happens as a result of these rules is that investors have to buy securities that have particular ratings,” said Frank Partnoy, a University of San Diego law professor and former Morgan Stanley banker who has written research papers about credit-rating companies. “It creates this incredible dysfunctionality where the ratings agencies, instead of surviving based on their ability to generate good ratings, are basically selling licenses” to the capital markets.

The SEC will seek additional comment on a proposal, issued in June 2008, to drop requirements that the $3.5 trillion mutual-fund and money-market industry rely on assessments from ratings companies for purchase decisions, according to the people. The SEC plans include removing some references to ratings from its rules, the people said.

‘Strengthen Oversight’

“The commission will consider measures to strengthen oversight of credit-rating agencies and improve the quality of ratings through greater transparency and accountability,” SEC spokesman John Nester said yesterday.

S&P spokesman Chris Atkins, Fitch spokesman Kevin Duignan and Moody’s spokesman Michael declined to comment before the SEC issues specific proposals.

Regulators have debated the role that ratings companies play in financial markets since 2007 when S&P, Moody’s and Fitch drew criticism for assigning mortgage bonds their highest AAA rankings and maintaining those grades after the underlying loans began defaulting.

Lawmakers including Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd have said the three biggest companies have a conflict of interest because they get fees from banks seeking to sell bonds instead of investors who want to buy the securities.

Ranking Data

At the meeting, SEC commissioners will vote on whether to approve a rule that would force disclosure of the data that goes into rankings. The SEC says the change would encourage unsolicited ratings by allowing firms to grade securitized debt even if they received no compensation from underwriters.

The SEC will seek public comment on a requirement that Wall Street report ratings from firms they didn’t hire and that S&P, Moody’s and Fitch disclose the banks that account for the biggest share of their fees.

SEC commissioners will also vote on whether to force ratings-company employees to provide written statements that their opinions can be used as part of a securities sale. The change may subject ratings companies to lawsuits if investors can prove ratings were based on false information.

We all do things that we wish we had never done. We all have closets and those closets always contain skeletons. Skeletons are scary. If, though, we tie strings to them and make them dance like puppets and dress them in funny hats and costumes, we can at least become less intimidated by them. So what if you are not perfect? Better to acknowledge that something went wrong and now needs to be put right as best it can be, than to live in dread of some nameless fear or haunting shadow.

There is a legendary band called, Seize The Day, who sing songs of protest that call for social change. One of their best-loved songs has a chorus that goes, 'I am no one's slave, I am no one's master'. I wish you could hear it. It ought to be your theme today. Neither are you obliged to do what someone else seemingly demands of you, nor can you justifiably impose such expectations on anyone else. Step away from a source of pressure and drop your own desire to control the cosmos. Let things find their own level.

Some people don't just dream of ruling the world, they act as if the entire planet and all who live on it, are theirs to command. They hold a position of power within their office, their family or their social group and they shamelessly issue orders in the full expectation that these will be obeyed. Toddlers are often the worst offenders. Though there are matriarchs and patriarchs who are old enough to know much better yet still act with this imperious attitude. In what way might you now be taking orders. It is time to start planning a rebellion.

CAM is really misbehaving!

Business expressions I detest:

off the top of my head without quick recollection, without looking any further, not doing any research,

spot-on tochno
i.e.

Back-to-back-Finanzierung
aus Wikipedia, der freien Enzyklopädie
Wechseln zu: Navigation, Suche

Unter einer Back-to-back-Finanzierung werden Fallgestaltungen verstanden, bei denen ein Unternehmer bei einer Bank eine Einlage unterhält und die Bank in gleicher Höhe einen Kredit an den Unternehmer oder eine nahestehende Person vergibt, sofern die Bank aufgrund eines rechtlichen Anspruchs oder einer dinglichen Sicherheit auf die Einlage zurückgreifen kann.

Back-to-back-Finanzierungen erlangen insbesondere im Steuerrecht als Umgehungsgestaltungen Bedeutung, so zum Beispiel im Rahmen der Regelungen zur Gesellschafter-Fremdfinanzierung (§ 8a KStG) und bei Anwendung der ab 2009 geltenden Abgeltungssteuer (§ 32d Abs. 2 EStG n.F.).

If you have ever broken down by the side of a motorway, you will know that it is a most unpleasant place. All that noise, all those fumes, all that danger so worryingly close. But then, scenic adventures notwithstanding, we don't choose roads because we want to be on them, we accept them because we want to get to where they can lead us. Are you in danger of looking at something in the wrong way? A process of thought that seems far from desirable could yet have a very pleasing outcome.
Important : more sports.

Before big bridges, deep tunnels and the advent of health and safety regulations, there were many ways to cross rivers. They would use rowing boats, rickety rafts or in the absence of a vessel, swim or wade. Everyone knew what a stepping-stone was. They all understood that it was not something that you would want to stand on for any length of time. It was a means to an end, an important point and a route from A to B. If a situation in your life now, were permanent, you might have a problem. But it is temporary.

Airports and stations are not particularly pleasant places to be. If you don't travel very often, you can find them exciting and if you are particularly excited about where your journey is going to take you, you can look benignly upon those great soulless waiting halls. Still, though, such places matter not because of what they are like, but because of what they can offer. Your current situation may not seem especially inspiring or even comforting, but it has, nonetheless, the glorious potential to be a real departure point.