So what did the Budget do for enterprise?

Rarely have I approached a budget less optimistic that anything would be done to stimulate enterprise - the good news is that I was not disappointed! Once you look behind the political "crowd pleasers" there is nothing to cheer anyone in business or indeed considering starting one.

We all appreciate that the public finances are in an unprecedented mess but real action to address this would in itself be good news for business. What companies need is:

- faith in a governments ability to accurately forecast growth (or decline) which the Treasury seems spectacularly unable to do. They have stretched the bounds of credibility too far this time and it begs the question of the Treasury - are they political "spinners" or public employees providing unbiased opinion based upon fact?

- a clear medium and long term strategy to eradicate the record levels of debt which we currently see. This was no-where to be seen. History will treat very harshly those who play politics with the future of millions of people. In the last 18 months the government has mortgaged the future of the next generation for the next 18 years.

- incentives to reduce unemployment by taking on extra staff. Unfortunately the tax on employment for businesses is so high that to increase your work force at the moment is actively discouraged. A holiday on employer NI for all new employees taken from the unemployment register would be enough to sway some business towards employing new staff, thus saving unemployment benefit and increasing the tax take.

- belief in the fairness of the system. Small businesses cannot afford high powered tax advisors and so in general pay full tax on profits earned. Big business pays a fraction as they employ tax avoidance advice to minimise their contribution. If you analysed profits announced by FTSE100 companies and then the corporation tax paid there would not be a high correlation! Tesco announced £3billion in profits recently - what is the size of the cheque that they will be writing to the Treasury?

Simple measures to encourage enterprise could radically improve our economy, revitalise industry and capture the innovation that exists in this great country. But we see nothing. Some nods to the lobbying by big business which will do little for the economy. Does anyone truly believe that offering a £2000 part exchange on a 10 year old car which you must have owned for at least 12 months will make people rush out to buy a brand new car?! If you ride around in an old banger the chances are that you do not want or cannot afford a new car.

The debt fuelled boom has ended with the biggest bust ever seen. The future is based upon saving and investment (not the euphemism used by government in lieu of spending), reducing and eliminating debt so that future generations can benefit. Delaying this strategy by even a few months condemns us to years of misery - this is no time to play party politics.

Can The Apprentice teach us anything?

So we are in the throes of another series of "The Apprentice" and I am still undecided - is it a good thing for encouraging enterprise or not? Without doubt it is compellingly entertaining and "good television" but is it giving prospective entrepreneurs the wrong impression of what it takes to start up in business?

In favour:

- There are good lessons to be learned from the exercises and "one liners" from Alan Sugar
- It highlights personal characteristics and the importance of teamwork
- It forms an excellent training aid on how NOT to do things!
- It raises the profile of business

Against:

- The participants are selected to represent the most divisive in society to engineer conflict
- Without exception the candidates are self deluded as to their skills and abilities
- Sir Alan is not looking for an "Apprentice" but a competent manager
- The programme is unclear as to its purpose - is it seeking a leader, apprentice, manager or entrepreneur?

I believe that the viewing public are generally astute and can see from an early stage those who are out for a "media career"; Z list wanabees; nasty personalities and hopeless inadequates. Once these are eliminated there are few if any credible candidates left to assume the mantle of a true business person.

The tasks are appropriate to determine any potential leadership qualities but as each candidate is solely out to destroy their competitors the result is usually determined by who can wriggle their way out of any blame the best. Perhaps if Sir Alan was to fire people who portrayed an obvious aversion to teamwork, truth, hard work and intelligence we would see someone win who was worthy of the title.

Think back - how many of the candidates would you want to employ or work for? None probably!

So The Apprentice is probably best watched for purely entertainment purposes and as an example of how NOT to behave in business. Then it may play a useful role.

You've got to be in it to win it

I was talking to one of our tenants last week about the effort involved in entering business competitions and if it is worth it. They are a successful business and indeed won three awards last year but were questioning the point of entering more at a time when maximum effort is being put into growing the company.

Applications to the various competitions advertised can be time consuming and it is easy to overlook or ignore them in favour of more pressing items; however I believe that this is a mistake. The issue at hand is not about time available but one of strategy. Why are you entering the competitions? If it is solely for personal vanity then perhaps it is a low priority but if it forms an integral part of your marketing and business strategy then there is a compelling argument to pursue these opportunities with gusto.

At NWES we have always considered the entering of appropriate competitions as an important activity and on analysis I would categorise the following as sound reasons for incorporating this into your plans:

1. It amounts to low cost marketing and advertising. In a time when every penny counts it is vital to account for every penny of your marketing spend. Competition entries take up time but not money (usually) and assuming that you make it to the final short list can provide valuable publicity on a wide scale. A good example is the Barclays "Trading Places" awards which are currently looking for entries. Here previous winners are featured on national publicity, there are articles in heavyweight papers and trade magazines and all for free! This level of exposure would be beyond all of the winners and can only accelerate the growth in their businesses.

2. It improves staff morale, retention and recruitment. A little thought through by product of winning competitions is the effect that it has on staff members. Everyone likes to be associated with success and feel pride in working for their company. At NWES we focused on a particular category for three years which was the EDP "Staff Care" award sponsored by the Learning and Skills Council.. After being in the final three for two years we won it on the third attempt in 2008. In essence this was won for being the company in the region which does the most for staff through induction, support, training and reward. We have always felt that we care about every member of staff who works for us but winning this award demonstrated this to the outside world. In the current climate staff loyalty is key and by winning this we have shown that NWES is an excellent company to work for - it makes retention and recruitment much easier.

3. The "feelgood factor". Winning is addictive! Without doubt it engenders a lift within a company and an added "spring in the step" when going about daily duties. At a time when all around seems doom laden this is a quick and easy way to lift spirits. This should never be underestimated. I am a great believer in that the general tone of a workplace is reflected in the work produced. A demotivated or unhappy workforce are not productive and can spell the end for many companies. Happy people work better!

4. It leads to more business. Everyone likes to be associated with success and the same is evident within the business community. At a time when supply chains are crucial, businesses will wish to ally themselves with "award winning" companies. The publicity from my first point and the added prominence within your sector can lead to new business. We use our award winning status in bidding for new contracts to establish our credentials and demonstrate our ethos. I cannot say for certain that it leads to new business but I would like to think that it plays its part.

5. Awards ceremonies are fun! Do not underestimate the restorative powers of a good night out - especially when someone else is paying! Enjoy it you have worked hard enough for it.

In summary a carefully planned awards entry strategy can have many benefits to your company. Next time you see an appropriate competition enter it because "you have to be in it to win it"

Do we really have "Solutions for Businesses"?

The government has recently launched its "Solutions for Businesses" product portfolio which is the result of much consultation under the Business Support Simplification Programme. On reading the proposals it is difficult to see much to argue with; the product range is rationalised, it hits the main elements of support that a new, growing and maturing business will need and it is simple to understand. So why is it that I still retain some element of doubt that we will see real change?

Perhaps it is because the path of history of successive governments is littered with good intentions. So often we see attempts to improve the way that things are done in many areas but unless you alter the mindset of those charged with administering the delivery then little will change for the end user other than the "spin".

In "Solutions for Business" we have a good framework from which to start really building a business support arena worthy of the ambition to make the UK a leading place to start and grow a business. The big test is can different government departments resist the urge to add pet projects, create new streams and smother with bureaucracy? Already the initial portfolio has had an addition with the advent of a "Support for the Automotive Industry" product. Why this funding could not have been added to an existing strand such as the excellent Manufacturing Advice Service (MAS) I do not understand. The desire to create a headline with something "new" overrides the common sense approach every time. Hence my concern and doubts.

To make this work we need real leadership at the top in government with a firm pledge that no new products will be launched for a given period at which time the portfolio will be reviewed to assess the impact and need for change. Of course there will be times when it is right to support a sector or industry undergoing change but this can be done within the existing framework. An announcement of extra funding into an existing product may not gain the attention as much as a "new" launch but it is what business needs and wants and if government is to retain any scrap of credibility it is a change in the mindset of policy makers that is required.

Solutions for Business needs to be seen as the government vehicle for all help and not just a BERR initiative. Perhaps the Treasury could "fine" any department/authority that announces an initiative which does not fit any funding stream into the existing portfolio and that creates a new "brand". A fine equivalent to the amount pledged should concentrate the mind! As we have finally got to the stage where there is a credible support package it would be madness not to give it wholehearted backing for a given period to determine its impact.

Full adherence to the scheme is envisaged from 2010 onwards but I would hope that all delivery programmes are matched as soon as possible. We do not have the luxury of time in the current climate - what is needed now is immediate action.

That's the way to do it!

Last week I encountered the two extremes of customer service - exemplary to diabolical. It was interesting that three examples of service to the highest level were from private companies and that of the lowest level was from a monopoly.

How to get it right - Lesson 1: I stayed in London at the Chesterfield Hotel which is part of a small chain (Red Carnation). I was first alerted to them via the Tripadvisor website which I have used for many years in deciding where to stay in the world (millions of reviewers cannot be wrong) and have never been disappointed. The hotel is a model of how to treat its customers well and ensure loyalty and recommendation. It is the little things such as a pre-stay questionnaire to determine your needs and preferences which will make your stay more enjoyable e.g. duvet or sheets. The hotel exuded service at every juncture. From the chambermaids who always had a cheery smile and the highest of standards to the front desk who remembered your name, from the restaurant who would accommodate any request ( I overheard an American family order their breakfast and apart from being amazed at what they wanted I was impressed as the hotel delivered without raising an eyebrow!) to the slick service at the bar. Congratulations to a group who deserve to thrive.

How to get it right - Lesson 2: Have afternoon tea at The Lanesborough. Perfection. Enough said!

How to get it right - Lesson 3: For a special occasion we had dinner at Le Gavroche. As you would expect the food was of the highest order and presented with elan. Once again though that was probably to be expected at a 2 star Michelin restaurant but the service stands out. The waiting staff are trained to the highest standards but performed with a smile and refreshing mixture of professionalism and friendliness which sets them apart from the often stuffy and detached service seen in other top restaurants. A team at the top of their game led by Michel Roux who was there on the night and took time to visit every table.

How to get it wrong - National Express East Anglia step forward as a company who do not care about their paying passengers. I could go on for pages with a diatribe of their shortcomings but to mention a few; Filthy train, overcrowded (just how safe is it for trains to be packed with standing customers?), no catering, no conductor, no policing of some passenger behaviour which was appalling and whilst not the fault of National Express, if they had a conductor going down the train it may have helped curb some excess. I have always found the service on this line to be bad ever since Anglia Railways lost the franchise. I know that National Express will take no notice of mere fare paying customers as they could not care less about us or they would change the way that they do business. It just goes to show that competition (especially in a recession) raises standards and monopolies lower them.

Good luck to Red Carnation, The Lanesborough and Le Gavroche - you deserve to succeed. National Express I hope that when the day of reckoning comes that you are held to account for your greed and failings.

Where history can help the future

Can we learn from history? That we are in difficult times is obvious to all but apart from policies designed to meet day to day problems as they occur has anyone given much thought to how we will extract ourselves from this recession? We are entering a new world - one far removed from Whitehall and I believe that the ruling classes have misunderstood the prevailing mood "on the street". Even today, from very senior personnel, I have heard predictions that we will all be back "to normal" in 18 months time. But exactly what is normal? Certainly not the unrestricted consumer borrowing and spending of the last 10 years. That was an artificially created boom built on sand and which will take far more than 10 years to correct.

Patterns of behaviour are changing as jobs are lost and more importantly the fear of losing your job increases. This caution and desire to restrict and repay borrowing will - hopefully - lead us back to a more sustainable way of living within our means. But who is it that will lead the comeback; be the driving force for future growth and job creation? Not, in my opinion, the large multi national firms. Many of these resemble the last days of the dinosaurs - large, unwieldy creatures unable or unwilling to adapt to the quickly changing climate. Real growth will occur from the small business sector, new start ups and enterprising individuals with the ideas, passion, belief and knowledge to exploit the rapidly changing market.

So what are we doing to encourage these future "white knights" to ride to our rescue? Not a lot as far as I can see. Central government still fails to understand the significance of this sector of the business community and caves in to sophisticated lobbying by "big business" with handouts remarkable in their size. As usual politicians want an immediate headline, an easy solution and fail to show the leadership and vision necessary to safeguard our future.

History can teach us lessons and help us in determining our future. So let us look back 30 years to the recession of the early 1980's. Then an innocuous, low cost and unheralded scheme had perhaps the largest influence on providing 20 years of prosperity. The Enterprise Allowance Scheme. Much derided, it acted as the catalyst for literally tens of thousands of new businesses to be created, hundreds of thousands of new jobs and lifting millions out of disadvantage.

A simple scheme it offered a meagre allowance of £40pw to unemployed individuals to start up in business. Combined with training and support it spawned an increase in entrepreneurial culture at a rate not seen before or since. Of course some people played the system just to get an increase in benefits but these were a minority and due to the amount of work required to start up in business were soon identified. But it gave just enough support to encourage those who would otherwise have not taken the plunge and started their own business, it allowed the family to survive in those first few crucial months as the business was created and more importantly than ANY other benefit it gave the prospect of helping others with no cost at all as employees were taken on by these fledgling businesses.

The time is right for a new Enterprise Allowance Scheme to combat what may become the worst downturn in living memory. Taking into account inflation since 1980 offer say £100pw to anyone who is unemployed undergoing training to start in business. Guarantee this for 12m and watch the number of starts rocket and revenues increase. Without putting exact figures on the benefit to the UK it can be seen that this is a true "win-win" situation. Jobs are going to be harder to come by and so people will sit on unemployment benefit for longer without this positive action. Whilst the allowance would be c£5k pa extra the number of people coming off benefits will increase as they start up in business, making a positive contribution by paying taxes and creating more jobs via their growth.

The benefit to society would be immense and I would estimate that the cost to the public purse would be negligible. What is there to lose? If no-one starts in business then there is no cost to the exchequer, for every business that does start there is a £5k pa cost but savings on benefits as they come off these quicker than would otherwise be the case and the added benefit of new jobs being created. This is the kind of solution that we need in these troubled times, but who has the vision to make it happen?

One for all and all for one.

For many years I have been a part of a small peer review group that meets up a few times each year to assist each other on a variety of different subjects. I rate the importance of these meetings extremely highly and they have proved to be of immense worth to each of the participants.

So how do they work? I would venture that for a successful group to operate there needs to be a few clear ground rules:

1. Each of the participants is from a seperate region to bring differing viewpoints to the debate and ensure that there is no competition issues.

2. The participants need to be of a similar mindset to enable appropriate open discussion.

3. You need to be prepared to be entirely open about all aspects of the business - from finances to people, systems to service.

4. You agree to rotate meetings with the host dictating the agenda as relates to their company and any specific problems they are facing.

5. You meet 3 or 4 times a year.

Our group has consisted of 4 or 5 agencies with a core of three ever present members. As you would expect there are some changes which occur as people move on but the guiding principles remain unchanged - a desire to learn, assist and support without passing judgement. It is no co-incidence that the members of this group are amongst the very best agencies in the country and have grown at a rate far in excess of the average. Where others have declined and failed we have prospered due in no part to the advice and support that we can call upon from each other to make the most of opportunities that are presented to us.

A visit typically lasts two days - starting at lunchtime, working right through dinner and finishing in the early afternoon the next day. At our early meetings we learnt about the general position of each agency and the issues which they were facing; this is vital background information which assists as we have moved on to helping solve specific problems identified by the host.

The range of topics discussed over the last 5 years is wide and varied and includes staffing; financial control; service offering; diversification plans; strategic direction and succession planning. In visiting an agency I get as much as I would as host. I learn someting new, get a chance to compare important issues and potential solutions, understand the thinking behind decisions and perhaps most importantly come back keen to implement what I have learned.

Our review group is a source of expert consultancy advice, available free as and when needed and perhaps most importantly it is objective, based on experience and cuts straight to the point! No allowances for ego's or sensitivities made!

Our experience has inspired other such groups to set up, from gender specific to role specific, and it has provided a ready source of help for our staff on any specific issues that they may face. A most useful network to tap into and a real example of collaborative working with no hidden motive.

I would exhort others to follow this example if you are serious about improving yourself and your business. The model can work in any industry and at any level. The most important thing is trust - do you still have the capacity to trust and be trusted?