The Fall of Crispin Odey: Women React to his Removal from his Namesake Firm
Crispin Odey, the wealthy financier, is facing accusations of abuse; women who claim to have been harmed by him across two and a half decades criticised his namesake company, Odey Asset Management, for attempting to distance themselves from him. Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Exane, and Schroders are among the financial institutions that have acted swiftly and dissociated themselves from Hedge funds since a Financial Times investigation documented Odey’s decades of violence against female employees and acquaintances. According to Odey’s namesake firm, they formally removed him from the business due to the allegations after similar publicly exposed abuses. However, some of the women on whom Odey employed abuse accuse the company’s handlers of holding him to account too slowly.
The women said that they were harassed by Odey in various iterations over a quarter of a century. The timing shows that Odey’s actions were not isolated incidents but were rather normalised throughout the organisation. Investigators from the Financial Times said that the process of normalisation resulted in an organisation whose leaders had turned a blind eye to the abuse inflicted by Odey upon women working in or dealing with his company. They expressed disappointment that the separation of Odey from the firm and the change of its name provided only slight comfort after years of enduring trauma, abuse, and harassment.
Women Share Their Stories of Abuse by Crispin Odey
One of the 13 women who was harassed by Odey revealed that the partners’ efforts to hold Odey to account had come too late. She opined that it is disheartening that people in positions of power only do the right thing when public exposure and opinion impinge on cash flows. Another woman who worked as a marketing assistant for Odey’s company in the early 2010s suggested that Odey’s abusive behaviour was normalised as part of the firm’s culture and management. She recounted that Martin, who was her superior then, had explicitly informed her not to go on any shopping trips with Odey.
Overall, the women were not pleased with the actions taken by Odey Asset Management’s senior management because they believe that the higher-ups did not follow through with integrity or intent for two decades. They suggested that while Odey is guilty of abusive behaviour, the organisation is also complicit in facilitating and normalising the unacceptable behaviour. According to one of the former female employees who participated in the investigation, the company was being disingenuous when they claimed that their “robust policies and procedures had been complied with at all times.”
Lack of Trust in Leadership
A broader issue discussed in the case of Odey is the lack of trust that people repose in organisational leaders. Many believed that Odey’s behaviour was allowed to continue unchecked because the company’s leaders were complicit in enabling him to maintain his work in the company. The action of partners at Odey Asset Management was just another example of an organisation dissociating from a former leader’s wrongdoing only when it became a public scandal.
Odey’s dismissal comes in the wake of several women, across a variety of fields, coming forward to publicly report what psychologists call instances of “microaggressions”- aggressions endured by an individual or group in a position of vulnerability by a person in a position of power. Microaggressions can range from being purposefully left out to being sexually assaulted; they are a subtle form of discrimination.
Leaders Staying On Despite Accusations of Wrongdoing
Many leaders have had accusations of harassment and assault levied against them yet remain in their positions. Since leaving Oxford, Boris Johnson has had countless ethical missteps. Despite the resulting public backlash, he was still permitted to advance as a politician and now serves as UK Prime Minister. Winnie Byanyima, head of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), had a complaint of abuse lodged against her by a subordinate, for which she was granted immunity under the diplomatic shield and escaped accusations of abuse.
The Benefits of Taking Prompt Action Against Harassment and Abuse
Leaders who take a principled stand against harassment and discrimination, on the other hand, can profit from their actions. However, doing so necessitates a multi-faceted approach that requires changes to organisations, policies, processes, and teaching. Companies are increasingly putting pressure on their leaders to adopt more ethical and moral methods. This will result in a cultural shift, adding to the diversity of plans available to employees who are traditionally unable to speak up about abuse and harassment within their organisations.
Leaders who correctly tackle the issue of harassment and abuse will benefit from more productive employees, a competitive reputation, and lower risks of litigation, among other benefits. When managers ignore the problem, the result is a poisoned work atmosphere, a high employee turnover, increased litigation risks, and lost profits. Long-term disadvantageous effects that cannot be measured also exist.
Leaders must create an ethical and safe work environment. Abusers must be held accountable for actions taken against victims, rather than being protected by the organisation. If organisations suffer from PR nightmares due to abuse scandals, leaders must genuinely tackle the issue. Otherwise, they risk being left behind or, worse, out of business.
Summary:
Odey Asset Management dismisses founder Crispin Odey following a Financial Times investigation into his decades of harassment towards female employees and acquaintances. Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Exane, and Schroders had previously cut ties with hedge funds amid similar claims. However, women on whom Odey inflicted abuse for over two decades claimed that senior executives at Odey Asset Management held the perpetrator accountable too slowly and believe that the company was complicit and enabled the abuse, citing an atmosphere where such behaviour was normalised. A broader issue discussed in the case of Odey is the lack of trust people place in organisational leaders. The case has drawn attention to the merits of taking direct and prompt action against abusive behaviour and harassment, which can benefit leaders by creating a more profitable and healthy working atmosphere.
Growing scrutiny of leader’s allegations of harassment and assault
The case of Crispin Odey is just one of many involving political, business, or non-profit leaders entangled in allegations of harassment or assault who remain in their positions. The public perceives dissociating or removing associating with a leader only after accusations have surfaced as a shallow attempt to quell public opinion while ignoring the extent of harm caused. Yet, despite the reputational and monetary risks that come as a result of abuse scandals, many leaders still neglect to tackle this issue.
For instance, Winnie Byanyima, the head of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), had to have a complaint of abuse lodged against her, for which she was shielded from prosecution’s accusations, in what has been criticised as a miscarriage of justice. Boris Johnson, the UK Prime Minister, has had countless ethical mishaps since University, but he was still promoted rather than being sidelined.
So, what efforts can organisations and their leaders pursue to reduce incidents of harassment and abuse? The solution to reducing incidents of harassment and abuse in organisations does not have a universal answer. However, a multi-pronged approach that requires changes to policies, organisational structures, and education initiatives will be necessary. To close the gap between abused and abuser, leaders must create ethical workplace cultures and create avenues for diversity and equity for vulnerable employees who are hesitant to speak out.
The benefits for organisations for taking ethical action to confront abusive behaviours far outweigh the costs. Cultivating responsible ethical workplace environments decreases litigation risks, boosts employee engagement and morale and positively influences behaviour. Leaders who appropriately confront harassment and abuse also report better profits and lower expenses from lost productivity, employee turnover, and litigation costs. A failure to confront abusive behaviour leads to a poisoned work atmosphere, high employee churn, and greater risk of litigation.
Look to the Future
Abuse cases bother people precisely because leaders have the capacity to shape history and the lives of subordinates in significant ways irrespective of how formal they are. That also means they have tremendous power to shape how we deal with and approach future cases of harassment and abuse. Although the process of addressing abuse and harassment will be complex, the lasting effects of proactive measures far outweigh the costs.
It is an opportune time for leaders to assess workplace cultures, policies, and procedures and consider enacting reforms as they come to terms with the changing demands of their stakeholders and society. Hopefully, through our efforts, we can build upon past lessons and create safer, healthier, and more ethical environments for employees to thrive in.
—————————————————-
| Article | Link |
|---|---|
| UK Artful Impressions | Premiere Etsy Store |
| Sponsored Content | View |
| 90’s Rock Band Review | View |
| Ted Lasso’s MacBook Guide | View |
| Nature’s Secret to More Energy | View |
| Ancient Recipe for Weight Loss | View |
| MacBook Air i3 vs i5 | View |
| You Need a VPN in 2023 – Liberty Shield | View |
Women who have said they were attacked or harassed by Crispin Odey in multiple incidents over 25 years have denounced efforts by his firm’s partners to distance themselves from the scandal-hit financier.
In the wake of a Financial Times investigation detailing decades of abuse Odey inflicted on female staff and acquaintances, partners at his namesake firm Odey Asset Management said on Saturday they had removed him from business.
This followed a series of financial institutions acting quickly cut ties with hedge funds, including Morgan Stanley, Exane, Goldman Sachs and Schroders.
Peter Martin, chief executive officer of Odey Asset Management, and Michael Ede, chief operating officer and chief financial officer, said in a statement on Saturday that Odey would be leaving the partnership and that from that moment he “will no longer have any economic or personal involvement”.
The name of the company, which has about $4.4 billion in assets under management, will also change, according to a person familiar with the situation.
Some of the 13 women who came forward for the FT investigation said efforts by partners to hold Odey to account had come too late.
One of the women, who said she was attacked by Odey at her London home after a business meeting in 2013, said: ‘When will people in power do the right thing when the time is right?
“The right time is not after significant public exposure and opinion is affecting cash flows. It’s frighteningly transparent that her abuse was only relevant when the bottom line was relevant.
He added: “It’s good that there are repercussions, but there has been complicit consent when management hasn’t acted with integrity and intent for nearly 20 years. Odey’s senior management should be held accountable and feel some of the shame I have felt over the past 10 years.”
It is unclear what mechanism the company’s executive committee used to remove Odey, who holds a majority stake. Hate suggested the FT could dispute the move but did not comment further.
As part of the FTs investigationseveral women have suggested that Odey’s behavior was “normalized” at the company.
One, who worked there as a marketing assistant in the early 2010s, said Martin, then her boss and now CEO, explicitly told her not to take any shopping trips with Odey. “You were just told to avoid that situation,” she previously told the FT.
In reaction to news of Odey’s ouster, a woman who said she was violently attacked by him at his Gloucestershire mansion, Eastbach Court, in late 2021, said: “[Senior figures at the firm] they are still guilty of covering up his behavior and are complicit. They may have got rid of the shameful head, but they are still guilty.
A former receptionist, who was physically harassed by Odey, agreed: “It’s not enough. Associates continued to function over the years knowing what she was doing to female employees and other women in general. In my opinion they are also accomplices ”.
Echoing comments made on Saturday in a statement announcing Odey’s departure, Odey Asset Management said: “We can only reiterate that the Executive Board takes all allegations of misconduct extremely seriously and its robust policies and procedures have been followed consistently. every moment”.
Another former female employee who came forward as part of the FT investigation disputed the company’s claim that it has “robust policies and procedures that have been followed at all times”.
“Then again, maybe rugged is the word [because] they covered him up and allowed him to continue abusing women for so long,” she said.
A law firm representing Odey previously told the FT the allegations against him had been “strenuously contested”. Odey said last week that “none of the allegations have been sustained in a courtroom or in an investigation.”
https://www.ft.com/content/302cfc83-905a-4643-9bde-b0474a2b0982
—————————————————-