So much is being written it seems redundant to add more.

Seven years ago I watched a preview of a film that was top be paert of the bid. It inspired me then and inspires me still.

Enjoy the day and the Games

http://youtu.be/QcwiGIGMjSg

I’m drawn to watching the apprentice because the producers of the show seem to have brought together the usual group that will inevitably make good television!
Billed as the “cream of UK’s entrepreneurial management” one can only cringe at how some behave and the delusions that they have of themselves. The best line of the night was when one of the men described himself as “good looking too”.

Sympathy for the contestants
However, perhaps I have more sympathy with the contestants this time than in earlier contests. In the past the prize on offer was a job working for Alan, sorry Lord Sugar. Now the prize is £250,000 investment into a business partnership on a 50/50 basis. Thus ensuring Lord Sugar’s continual presence.

On the basis that one chooses ones business partner more carefully than one’s life partner the process seems very one sided when Lord Sugar does all the choosing and ends each edition with…”You’re fired!”

Will the last contestant be brave enough?
When the last contestant is revealed will they, having considered the tedious selection process, Sugar’s knit picking and criticisms and the defence of their own ineptitude in the boardroom week after week, be brave enough to say something like, “Over the past weeks I’ve seen you in action and on reflection I think I’ll find someone else to invest in me”

Now if that were on the cards wouldn’t that make watching the series more fun?

The UK’s proposals for change in welfare reforms and the Armed Forces is underway but business change hasn’t been too noticeable for many. However that is about to change. Large companies have begun to implement significant structural change and much more is on the way, starting with HSBC on 11th May.

HSBC to reduce size of branch network

HSBC is announcing changes to its retail operations in the UK in order to lower their cost to income ratio. According to reports the options being considered include:

1. Sale of a significant number of branches.
2. Relocation of the UK retail Head Office from Canary Wharf to a less expensive location in London
3. Removal of layers of middle management
4. The creation of a new ethos where all sections of the bank must contribute profits or be restructured or sold

It’s likely that the changes will follow a similar pattern adopted by other banks and particularly by Bob Diamond at Barclays Bank where each individual business must contribute to profitability or risk being shut down.

Research determined strategy

A great deal of research has been undertaken by banks to determine the strategy that will be most beneficial. Interestingly TSB telephoned me last week to survey my attitude to service levels within my local bank in St Albans.

Too much change can be destructive

It would seem that wholesale change is likely to be implemented by Stuart Gulliver at HSBC. However, in my experience, too much change all at once can cause unforeseen problems. These include:

1. Change instability. Where one part of the organisation is unable to perform properly because of the change happening further upstream or downstream of the product flow.
2. Change fatigue. where individual teams suffer so much change that it stalls whilst they take a breather to collect their shared breath.
3. Time differences. This is where the people that have designed the change are impatient to implement the change and therefore find themselves in a future time frame where they have a vision of the desired results whilst those affected by the change are still firmly set in the past and will cling onto what they know best. To overcome this time difference there needs time for teams to express concerns without being considered disruptive or anti-sponsors of the change strategy.

Complex and all embracing change warrents Directors and managers to be meeting with teams, regularly and consistently with a similar message and reassurance, even when bad news is being delivered.  

I listened with interest a feature on BBC Radio over the Easter holiday talking about how tourism should, be the UK’s main focus and make the UK the world’s leading holiday destination. The Royal Wedding, The Queen’s Jubilee and of course the London Olympics all expect to generate huge revenue from foreign and domestic tourism.

But it was not just events such as the Olympics that are highlighted as the main draws of tourist pounds. London, country houses and castles, the lakes and all parts of the UK were also mentioned in plans to make the UK a primary holiday destination.

UK tourist industry can’t relocate
One of the comments I particularly liked was, “The UK tourist industry can’t threaten to relocate their Head office abroad”. I chuckled at a vision of tourist boss’s taking over the top floor of One Canada Square to look over the jewel in the tourist crown (London) whilst displaced bankers roam the poorer parts on London with their posessions in a black bin liners looking for cheaper office space. 

Business focus changes
I wonder if this represents the discussion, in some quarters, that perhaps the UK could cope with a less influential finance sector and that like past changes in the UK’s business such as the woolen industry, coal, steel, shipping and so on that, like nature, business abhors a vacuum and something would replace it, and why not tourism!

On the other hand instead on focussing on an either or solution perhaps the Banks and the Tourist Boards could share the top floor of Canada Square?

As you can see from previous posts I’ve been investigating how people work on the internet.

The main surprise is just how sophisticated the medium is becoming in allowing people to trade and make money (or perhaps I’ve missed). The ability to have  a website designed in Thailand, upload one’s own or others products (by becoming an affiliate), take payment via Paypal or Clickbank and have a cheque for all that you sell sent to your bank and all within a few days has posed some interesting questions on the future of work.

Let’s first deal with the Hype! An awful lot of people are currently trading on the web and some of them are doing very well. Indeed at a seminar in London last month a parade of such people told an audience of over 800 how they were making anywhere between $2000 a month on Twitter to $20,000 in one week on Facebook. The audience were given titbits of information on “How it was done” and then offered to purchase whole programmes of products where they could do the same by following the speaker’s step-by-step fast cash formula!.

Now, before we go any further, let me say that I have the greatest regard for the organisers and what they are doing to inform people about the possibilities of making meoney on the web. I did, however, fiund the American way of selling through hype, the promise of easy riches and the buy NOW part of the sale because of product scarcity rather galling.

The problems for work and the individuals, as far as I see it, are these:

• I suspect, that it’s going to be a very few in his audience that actually succeed! This may bring depression, feelings of failure and loss of a lot of redundancy money. (More than a few in the audience were seeking to plough their redundancy money into web based sales)
• Trading on the internet is likely to become a “bubble”. Like any other bubble people are believing, being told, that having a product on-line is a path to instant and easy riches. The reality is that those who realise those riches will be the early adopters such as those on the stage at Mark’s seminar, whilst the majority will find the marketplace so saturated, with other traders as well as FREE items, that there are just cents rather than dollars to be earned.

• Another possibility is that Twitter, Facebook, Amazon and possibly governments will find a way of monetising the trade for themselves more effectively and thus reduce the potential for huge incomes.

I later attended another seminar on making money from the web where some in the audience had been selling products on the web for up to five years and barely scraped together a living wage. A few seemed depressed and disheartened and quite possibly were making themselves unemployable in the long run!

Perhaps working solely on the web should carry a health warning?