You look at your watch and notice the time is 4:55 PM. That’s information. However, depending on how one looks at 4:55, it won’t always mean the same.

To two different persons the same information can reveal two very different meanings. Person A might look at 4:55 as almost 5, person B conversely can look at the same as not 5 yet.

This example illustrates the importance of framing missions, ideas, visions, challenges, problems, and solutions we face today. If the best variables or ingredients aren’t put into the picture, the outcome will be satisfactory at best. But satisfactory is mediocrity and mediocrity is not enough.

To siphon the best value of any information, it is often necessary to synergize the alternatives. Only until all the myriad of choices are presented can information analysis be optomized.

The next time you are faced with a pressing decision, look at the same information from different perspectives, and discuss the dis-information to arrive at its highest value.

A note to CEOs, FOUNDERS, and business owners about disloyal marketing managers and directors!

I became aware of the conflicts of interest that can exist in the sales and marketing industry in 2008 when I was hired to present a new product to one of the largest Mobile carrier in the Kingdom of Cambodia. I won’t mention names but this company changed their marketing themes every two months, ranging from “Freshy girls” to “Mtube” to running a series of television spots with people riding in tuk tuks screaming “WOW!” at what appeared to be nothing but WOW.

My objective was to demonstrate the costly mistakes the company had been making and the ineffectiveness of their marketing campaigns. The pitch was simple: I wanted to convey a message that the company had no consistent branding and some of their billboards weren’t lighting up at night. In the course of our 30 minute meeting, I was bemused by the Director of Marketing’s frequent exit of the meeting to answer calls, it was sufficient evidence that she had no time for positive criticism.

I was triggered and puzzled by the company’s spending of millions of dollars a year and yet somehow failed to notice they had billboards that hadn’t lit up for 2-3 months.

At last, the moment of truth came (when I least expected ) about a month later when I was introduced to the owner of a leading marketing agency in the country. I was told that in Cambodia, head of marketing units and departments frequently accept undisclosed kickbacks/bribes from advertising agencies. The fees could come in the form of a fixed percentage of say 10-15% of budget, or a profit mark up above and over the cost quoted to the manager, director, or department head. Thus, if a company or organization maintains a budget of $2 million, the marketing manager, head, or director could siphon off $200-$300,000 a year in commission.

It made perfect sense that many marketing managers were willing to take lower pay to stay in marketing.

I later was made aware of a second scheme involving sealed bids. Many organizations, namely non-profit and governmental ministries, frequently post announcements to invite bids for work contracts. While the steps and procedures of the process are followed, the marketing manager, director, committee chair, or unit head remains the final decision maker. IT IS AT THIS POINT that corruptions and conflicts of interest occur.

Case in point, a year later I was hired by a company to bid on a birth control marketing promotion project. All bidders were provided with details, instructions, and bid disclosure deadline. All bidders were invited to present a technical and pricing bid. Everything was smooth except the disclosure of the winning bid came a month after the deadline. When questioned, the typical response follows, “Oh we are very sorry for your inconvenience, but we had some internal problems that caused the delay.” Of course there are internal problems, they’re conflicts of interest. When sealed bids aren’t open at the time they are supposed to open, there’s gap for secrets to leak.

Needless to say, these are the cases involving the 1% oversight that can cost companies hundreds of thousands a year, millions of dollars over time, and overall market and branding deterioration.

According to a recent report by the Ministry of Post and Telecom, The above-mentioned mobile carrier had lost almost 200,000 customers in 2010. There’s a lack of evidence to conclude that such a loss was caused entirely by the claims I am making, namely, this post is made solely in the spirit of business development.

I can’t emphasize enough on the need for a checks and balance in decision making involve spending on branding and marketing. If losing 10-15% of a budget to bribery and under-the-table kickbacks isn’t enough, consider the loss in market share and branding equity when department heads, managers, and directors consistently choose bribes over organizational loyalty.