Over the last couple of weeks I asked a question from the
representatives of Balfour Beatty and Jardines that had the gist of:
If a CEO of one of their companies fails to act according
to all points of the published values of his company, does that automatically
make the company’s integrity tarnished?
The representatives of both of these companies supposedly
in full knowledge of the events (that I claim make Gammon look bad), parents in
equal shares of Gammon have expressed to me their continuous and solid support
of Gammon and as such confirmed the company’s integrity as ‘intact’.
I found this cause of action by the parent companies
unsatisfactory and had set out to test my theory that ‘the action of one must
impact on many others’ with the various associates of Gammon, starting with a
half a dozen of their claimed long-term clients.
I will be approaching these company’s representatives
through ways available to me (email, professional and social media) since so
far no official media had been prepared to engage in direct conversation on
this and related topics.
I will be visiting the completed buildings and building sites
that these companies have in common with Gammon and will look into the history
and the nature of their relationship.
What a waste of time and energy, one might think! What
good can come out of this exercise?
As I often do, I’ll start with a personal story that will
hopefully show clearly how the actions of the CEO and his underlings
(previously mentioned) potentially tarnished the integrity of many other ‘innocent’
people.
To be blunt, because one person chose to save someone
else’s butt, many others can potentially lose their face for no fault of their
own.
I still admit to be very new to Hong Kong and the Chinese
culture all together.
But I believe that fundamentally every society has a
basic rule, where one’s ‘word’ has a certain weight and its trust worthiness is
closely linked with ones standing amongst others.
Closely associating with those that violate this rule tends
to be universally recognised and dealt with by internal cleansing processes
(i.e. exclusion from the society);
So, the simple question to all those that associate with
Gammon is:
If what Gammon is
doing is ‘wrong’ can an associate of Gammon claim to be ‘squeaky clean’ still?
Because this little project is going to likely be of a
protracted and tedious nature and attract only a very limited and highly
localised audience, I have created another blog where the happenings will be
reported on:
In case the story grows with time and the question of
overall ‘ethical consumerism of the AEC industry’ gets explored in relation to
other subjects relevant to this (debunkthebim) blog, I’ll revert back to here.
In the meantime, I’ll free up this, well-read channel for
more technical (BIM-ish) topics, next one will be an overview of the current
BIM activities in HK, as I see them, of course;
Here is the story in an illustrated format:
thanks for this beautiful information
ReplyDeleteBIM Implementation
BIM Implementation in USA
very nice information thank you for posting so good post for more information click here BIM documentation in USA
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing BIM Implementation in UK
ReplyDeleteTHANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION
ReplyDeletePLEASE VISIT US
auto cad drawing in UK
Good content keep it up BIM Implementation
ReplyDeletethanks for sharing information.....
ReplyDeleteConstruction Documentation in USA
Construction Documentation in India