For those of you expecting the CSR to bring some clarity to the future of business support, I am sorry, but hardly surprised, that you've been disappointed. In the same way that cabinet ministers have been scrambling over the last month or two to defend their departmental budgets, we shall now have a scramble within the departments as junior ministers and civil servants join the internal fray. Expect it to be Christmas before there is any break in the fog.
We do know some things however: EEDA are under sentence of death by March 2012 and are winding down their activities rapidly and will take the Business Link contract with them. We can expect a revised and more user friendly Business Link website and smart money is on the creation of a supporting call centre. There is talk of a network of growth hubs to provide more specialist support to growing businesses and exploit university research but the detail is glaring in its omission. The more traditional support so valued by start up and early stage businesses in the form of individual advice and business planning training looks in severe danger despite David Cameron calling for an age of entrepreneurship. I do not favour government support for established businesses as they should be in a position to pay for help but for those people that the country needs to set up their own business there looks as though there will be a vacuum which it is unlikely to be filled to any great degree. This is short sighted as encouraging enterprise is vital to our future – especially in areas such as Norfolk where we cannot rely on inward investment to any great degree and have a real need to “grow our own” entrepreneurs.
There has been some talk of mentoring and this is something that we value highly but it is not a panacea and it is not cost free. Volunteers need to be trained and managed, mentees need to be screened and matched. And that's a professional job. Which leads us on to the Enterprise Allowance – something for which I have been lobbying for the last four years, details are slow to emerge but it would be a disaster if this was merely an add-on to some multimillion welfare to work contract given to a multinational outsourcing organisation. If you want to make a difference, you have to get local organisations to engage with local people.
And talking of local, the LEP story is yet to unfold. We await the White Paper which will tell us more, I hope, about their role and responsibilities and whether the Regional Growth Fund can support enterprise activities. Not least if the East of England can expect to receive anything other than a token amount with the majority of funding going to the North East and North West. With funding for local authorities due to decrease substantially, the end of government funded streams such as LEGI which has had a major positive effect in Norwich and Great Yarmouth and the EEDA funded “Encouraging Economic Participation” finishing in March the immediate outlook is not good. With no county strategy for encouraging enterprise and start up businesses Norfolk needs to implement radical and far reaching policies in the short term if it is not to fall further behind its competitors.
The White Paper on Sub National Growth is due for publication on 28 October. It is required bedtime reading for local policy makers who need to elevate ambition and build on the latent potential evident in our Fine County
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Work experience - to be endured or enjoyed?
It is interesting to note a subtle debate which is bubbling under the radar relating to the subject of do people learn through experience or via specific interventions such as training courses etc. As with most debates of this nature I suggest that the answer lies somewhere in between the two extremes but I would like to focus on one element which is close to my heart - work experience.
I do tend to believe more in that behaviour is dictated by experience and thus work experience in my view is vital for young people. Unfortunately in too many cases work experience is treated in a "block" fashion with it being seen as a logistics exercise by schools, businesses and local authorities rather than a vital step in encouraging young people and explaining the world of work in a manner designed to inspire.
Of course there are numerous examples of good practice and work experience placements which have led to permanent jobs but for many young people work experience is an event to be endured rather than savoured.
If we think back in our own lives there will be some episodes which stand out as life changing in their impact and often these are based around an inspiring individual be it teacher, mentor or boss. If you ask successful leaders how they have learnt through their career they will often mention their first work experience. It could have been a school placement or indeed their own after school or holiday job but in most cases the experience sticks and acts as a powerful motivator either to be replicated or avoided!
I want to see every work placement tailored to a students needs and devised to inspire. At the time of work experience our young people are at an impressionable age and memories - good or bad - will stick for life. The influence of people at work will be remembered and it is important that businesses understand this and place young people with their most inspiring staff members - at whatever level in the company.
Work can come as a shock; the punctuality, dress, pressure and schedules will be totally different from what they are used to at school and so each young person should be adequately briefed by their teachers prior to starting and all experiences logged to help improve future placements. As I have mentioned this is not the norm due a wide variety of factors but we must never lose sight of why young people attend school - to prepare them for work.
We need to build a much stronger partnership between the world of work and academia, if we do that then our future will be in good hands.
I do tend to believe more in that behaviour is dictated by experience and thus work experience in my view is vital for young people. Unfortunately in too many cases work experience is treated in a "block" fashion with it being seen as a logistics exercise by schools, businesses and local authorities rather than a vital step in encouraging young people and explaining the world of work in a manner designed to inspire.
Of course there are numerous examples of good practice and work experience placements which have led to permanent jobs but for many young people work experience is an event to be endured rather than savoured.
If we think back in our own lives there will be some episodes which stand out as life changing in their impact and often these are based around an inspiring individual be it teacher, mentor or boss. If you ask successful leaders how they have learnt through their career they will often mention their first work experience. It could have been a school placement or indeed their own after school or holiday job but in most cases the experience sticks and acts as a powerful motivator either to be replicated or avoided!
I want to see every work placement tailored to a students needs and devised to inspire. At the time of work experience our young people are at an impressionable age and memories - good or bad - will stick for life. The influence of people at work will be remembered and it is important that businesses understand this and place young people with their most inspiring staff members - at whatever level in the company.
Work can come as a shock; the punctuality, dress, pressure and schedules will be totally different from what they are used to at school and so each young person should be adequately briefed by their teachers prior to starting and all experiences logged to help improve future placements. As I have mentioned this is not the norm due a wide variety of factors but we must never lose sight of why young people attend school - to prepare them for work.
We need to build a much stronger partnership between the world of work and academia, if we do that then our future will be in good hands.
Monday, October 11, 2010
Does the public sector really get Economic Development?
With the spending review close upon us and an overwhelming need for fresh thinking in the public sector plain to anyone not within it the unanswered question is do the various bodies know what it is that they are trying to achieve?
Having been in enterprise support for almost 14 years I think that I have seen most of the various strategies designed to help boost enterprise. Unfortunately I am not impressed with much that I see. Economic Development is approached in an academic way more akin to a Planning Department than one designed to stimulate enterprising activity in an area. Most published aims and objectives in the local authority arena are identikit and fail the "Tippex test" - white out the county/district name and put in any other.
If there is no differentiation in tactics then the results will be broadly similar and yet it is almost impossible to get the relevant people to understand this. There are some notable exceptions however who have attempted a different approach and been regarded with a better than average result but these forward thinking authorities are all too uncommon - Suffolk County Council take a bow.
To me an Economic Development department should be tasked to understand what it is that motivates enterprise in their patch, find out where there is a real strength, seek to isolate local weaknesses and produce, tender and contract for an appropriate solution to their bespoke needs. Not radical perhaps but rarely seen. What is second nature in the private sector is anathema to the public sector. The fear of being different and the knowledge that there is no sanction for failure leads to a spiral of waste both in monetary terms and of opportunity.
So what should happen? We hear much about the Big Society which in turn must lead to Smaller Government. This is to be applauded but for this to happen we need Council officers and members with vision and backbone to make real changes. I want to see local authorities move away from the "transactional" approach currently seen to a "relationship" approach whereby trusted partners in the private sector are fully engaged to make a long term aim become reality. This a a real "win, win" situation but not widespread practice.
What we currently see in this sector are unrelated tender opportunities not forming any part of a long term strategy but instead driven by budget availability which are often won my what I would term as the "mercenary" tendency who write good bids, move in on an area but deliver appalling results before hoodwinking the next gullible authority elsewhere in the country. The time is ripe for long term relationships to be made by local authorities with organisations who have a great track record and will be around for the duration of the journey. I know of so many examples of tenders being won by companies who have failed in previous contracts but "due diligence" is not a phrase that I see when councils award contracts!
Where we see good practice the results follow and these are the areas performing better than everywhere else. The converse is also true; perhaps the only way to change the results is to change the people and methods - same activity = same results.
At NWES our mantra is that we always deliver and that is exactly what we do 100% of the time and yet past delivery is rarely a high scoring aspect in any tender. Make economic officers responsible for economic growth and if they do not deliver change them - this is what happens in the private sector and until it happens in the public sector my hopes are not high for the very areas that need innovative intervention.
Having been in enterprise support for almost 14 years I think that I have seen most of the various strategies designed to help boost enterprise. Unfortunately I am not impressed with much that I see. Economic Development is approached in an academic way more akin to a Planning Department than one designed to stimulate enterprising activity in an area. Most published aims and objectives in the local authority arena are identikit and fail the "Tippex test" - white out the county/district name and put in any other.
If there is no differentiation in tactics then the results will be broadly similar and yet it is almost impossible to get the relevant people to understand this. There are some notable exceptions however who have attempted a different approach and been regarded with a better than average result but these forward thinking authorities are all too uncommon - Suffolk County Council take a bow.
To me an Economic Development department should be tasked to understand what it is that motivates enterprise in their patch, find out where there is a real strength, seek to isolate local weaknesses and produce, tender and contract for an appropriate solution to their bespoke needs. Not radical perhaps but rarely seen. What is second nature in the private sector is anathema to the public sector. The fear of being different and the knowledge that there is no sanction for failure leads to a spiral of waste both in monetary terms and of opportunity.
So what should happen? We hear much about the Big Society which in turn must lead to Smaller Government. This is to be applauded but for this to happen we need Council officers and members with vision and backbone to make real changes. I want to see local authorities move away from the "transactional" approach currently seen to a "relationship" approach whereby trusted partners in the private sector are fully engaged to make a long term aim become reality. This a a real "win, win" situation but not widespread practice.
What we currently see in this sector are unrelated tender opportunities not forming any part of a long term strategy but instead driven by budget availability which are often won my what I would term as the "mercenary" tendency who write good bids, move in on an area but deliver appalling results before hoodwinking the next gullible authority elsewhere in the country. The time is ripe for long term relationships to be made by local authorities with organisations who have a great track record and will be around for the duration of the journey. I know of so many examples of tenders being won by companies who have failed in previous contracts but "due diligence" is not a phrase that I see when councils award contracts!
Where we see good practice the results follow and these are the areas performing better than everywhere else. The converse is also true; perhaps the only way to change the results is to change the people and methods - same activity = same results.
At NWES our mantra is that we always deliver and that is exactly what we do 100% of the time and yet past delivery is rarely a high scoring aspect in any tender. Make economic officers responsible for economic growth and if they do not deliver change them - this is what happens in the private sector and until it happens in the public sector my hopes are not high for the very areas that need innovative intervention.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)