How Dee Hock Acted When the Owner Did not Keep his Word and Refused to Share Profit

Early 1950s

Loss of the job was a crushing experience. Perol (Hock’s wife - editor) and I were friendless in a massive city we hated, breathing air so polluted it seared the eye and blotted out everything beyond a few blocks - smog so thick we could see the bluish haze within our apart­ment. We had money for a month's groceries, no savings, consid­erable debt, two toddlers, and another baby about to be born. Pride prevented mentioning our plight to relatives, let alone seek­ing their help.

…I began a frantic search for work; any kind, anywhere, doing anything. Within the month, a miserable job at pitiful pay appeared. I grabbed it, giving us momentary breathing room. We were determined never again to be in such a vulnerable position. We swore that, with the possible exception of a home mortgage, we would never again have more debt than cash in the bank. Within a month, I took two more miserable jobs. None of the three required regular hours or confinement. The sprawling city was an advantage. I could work three jobs without any employer knowing of the others.

… With Herculean effort, we paid our debts in a year and a half and put a small sum in the bank. I abandoned two jobs to concen­trate on the best of the three, a tiny investment company in seri­ous trouble due to corrupt management, since departed. The sole owner, a wealthy, thin-lipped, dour man, refused much in the way of salary but gave solemn assurance of freedom to use unortho­dox methods and a substantial share of the profits if success fol­lowed. He kept the first promise.

Five years later, the lamb[i] sat down with the owner to divide a handsome profit from the sale of a successful company, only to come face-to-face with naked greed and an astonishing display of accounting and contractual legerdemain. Although worth mil­lions from a variety of businesses, he claimed that the profit he had promised to share must include years of losses that preceded my arrival. Therefore, there was no profit to share, even though the company fetched a huge premium when sold. He was adamant. If the lamb didn't like it, he could sue.

It was a severe dilemma. Throughout his years in the finan­cial services business, the lamb had strong aversion to litigation, taking great pride in never repossessing mortgaged property with­out the customer's consent and never suing a customer to collect a debt or enforce a contract. Everything had been accomplished by collaboration and persuasion. It was a defining moment.

It was no longer a lamb, but no less a bloodied sheep, that looked deeply into those dead, expressionless eyes, drew a deep breath, and with a tinge of pity and a mountain of contempt soft­ly said, "Keep the money. You apparently need it more than I do!" The dead eyes did not blink. The thin lips never moved. The expressionless face was frozen. The beast, avarice, had devoured him completely. The sheep turned and walked out the door. They never saw or heard from one another again.

Dee Hock, One from Many: Visa and the Rise of Chaordic Organization, 1999

Reprinted with permission of the publisher. From One From Many, copyright© 2005 by Dee Hock, Berett-Koehler Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA. All rights reserved. http://www.bkconnection.com/

_______________________________________________________________________

Editor: Catherine Zakomurnaya