We would like to wish you all a very Happy Easter.

Our opening times over the holiday period are as follows:

We will close at 1800 Hrs on Thursday 5th April & re-open at 0800 Hrs on Tuesday 10th April.

For many people 2011 was a year to forget, rather than dwell on the past I thought we’d focus on the future. So no end of year “you’ve all done very well” nor even a “whoopee! It’s New Year!” blog post.  I thought I’d focus on the themes of back to business, building on our strengths, focusing on the future.

For anyone who does need an end of year reflection, this was done in part before the fireworks went up at Midnight on 31^st December, we were invited to contribute in the Summer to the XpertHR series on “My year in HR so far” (link) the blog focused on the impact of the significant rate of change in the Public Sector since the comprehensive spending review and it has to be said, the year continued from the Summer onward in the same vein,  fast, deep organisational change which was demonstrably having an impact on engagement, attitudes and behaviours as the year progressed. I am still of the view that this extensive organisational change will continue long into 2012.

All of us at Signal would like to wish you all a very Happy Christmas and prosperous and healthy 2012.

Below is our office opening times over the holiday period.

We will close at 1800 Hrs on Friday 23rd December and re-open at 0800 Hrs on Wednesday 28th December.

We will close again at 1800 Hrs on Friday 30th December and re-open at 0800 Hrs on Tuesday 3rd January 2012.

Below are our office opening hours for the Easter period:

Thursday 21st April: 0800 – 1800

Friday 22nd April: Closed

Monday 25th April: Closed

Tuesday 26th April: 0800 – 1800

Wednesday 27th April: 0800 – 1800

Thursday 28th April: 0800 – 1800

Friday 29th April: Closed

Monday 2nd May: Closed

We re-open as usual on Tuesday 3rd May.

We wish you all a very happy Easter.

I was really excited today to read about a new venture aimed at providing the British business blogging world with a one stop shop for all business blogs.

British Business Bloggers is the site and I’m thrilled to say that Signal has been accepted onto it as one of the bloggers. A quick look through the site leads me to think that this will be a very useful tool for finding all those interesting business blogs that you miss, because there just isn’t enough time in the day.

If you’re in business and you blog I strongly suggest you sign up.

Now, I just need to work out how to get the logo on the Signal website!

Happy blogging.

Generally I prefer to look forward, when not looking where I’m going I have a tendency to trip over. Although, given the date, in keeping with closing of the year it seems fitting to take a brief look back at what has been an exciting year.

The year opened similarly as now, in the grip of freezing weather, snow and facing down the barrel of the gun of an uncertain economic future. Public sector cuts, outrage at Bankers and more specifically their bonuses, discomfort at the adequacy of governance at the top of Banks and many other organisations have provided the backdrop to a turbulent year marked out most clearly by the arrival of the Coalition Government in May.

All of us at Signal would like to wish you all a very Happy Christmas and prosperous and healthy 2011.

Below is our office opening times over the holiday period.

We will close at 1400 Hrs on Friday 24th December and re-open at 0800 Hrs on Wednesday 29th December.

We will close again at 1400 Hrs on Friday 31st December and re-open at 0800 Hrs on Tuesday 4th January 2011.

Once again. A very happy Christmas to you all.

In a former life I worked in Prison for a while. It was a life changing experience for me in many ways. I do not propose to talk about that in any great detail here perhaps that is another article. No, the thing that prompted me to sit down and type today was two-fold.

I have mostly locked my prison experience away in a place inside, but every so often something will happen and out it pops, and I am there again, right in the thick of it. On other occasions, prompted by nothing at all, a vague thought or random memory will sneak up on me and once again I am in the high state of alert that seemed to be the normal way of working.

Both methods of reminder have happened to me over the past few days. First whilst driving through beautiful countryside the other day a specific thought came into my head “I tried so damn hard”, it is an ongoing source of frustration and regret that against the vast Victorian machine that is prison way of life (well in the one I worked in anyway) it was so incredibly tough to permanently effect change that it often felt like swimming in treacle.

Later during the same day, still with this thought lurking in the background I got to thinking about my line manager, Governor I should say, someone whom I held in very high esteem. I Googled him and found an article written by him during the time that I was there working with him. There were those words once again “We try very hard”.

Then yesterday morning the new Justice Secretary Ken Clarke was the headline item, prison needs to change he said, the population pressures are so great it means that nothing meaningful can take place inside prison to reduce re-offending rates. Prison doesn’t have the impact on offenders that it should, it doesn’t effect a change in behaviour that tax payers might expect, in fact it’s a revolving door, and the approach is positively “Victorian” he said.

My own view is that the Victorians designed a very effective “prison machine”, the buildings and the daily way of life complemented each other perfectly. It is a very simplistic machine, but it makes absolute sense from a Victorian perspective. It works very well in terms of control over time and people’s activities. Attempts to change it, modernise it often seemed like window dressing, the fundamentals sitting underneath all those positive things that we tried so hard at, Education, work, drug rehabilitation programmes, just didn’t change, which meant that all those important reducing re-offending activities were viewed as add ons, taking place in “out stations”.

The truth is that no matter how hard we tried, we were up against a very effective machine.

During my tenure there were many occasions when a requirement to make significant cuts arose, it was very painful and we did everything we could to preserve staffing, not directly affect the regime and therefore prisoners. It got to the stage where there was nothing left to cut, the next request would inevitably affect staff and prisoners directly. Since that time we have had the arrival of a new Government and the full (we hope) revelation of the yawning hole in the public finances.

My hope for prisons then is that when those cuts begin to take effect that in order to change prison the system has to change. If the way a system is designed drives the behaviour of the people who work and in prisons case, live in it, then work on the system. It is in my view not about choosing what to cut, how and when to cut, but how to build something that does what you want it to do in the first place. This means unpicking the knitting from within, changing the system, new ways of working, new organisational structures, a transformation that will mean everything else will flow from this, placing different priorities at the centre of everything that gets done, leading to different perspective on core values, ultimately effecting a cultural shift that outwardly demonstrates that this is a different place than it used to be. Those who don’t feel that they can align to this will either quietly grumble and grin and bear it, many others who feel that they don’t fit will leave.

My point here is made in very simplistic terms ,but it is long term and not at all easy, but I think it is the way to deliver meaningful savings and a prison system that is more effective in delivering the results that Mr Clarke said he is looking for.

Jane Pound MCIPD, MIIA

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the IBC.

What a fascinating week it has been in British politics. Regardless of party allegiance, I got a very real sense that the vast majority of the country were on the edge of their seats with the ‘ping pong’ post election dealing. The media and social media were certainly in a frenzy at each changing event.

Now, we have the first formed coalition government in 65 years. I wonder in the years to come whether this will be one of those moments where people ask “Do you remember where you were when you heard….?”

There is no doubt that the road ahead will be a tough one. Not just because we have two parties in power who are ideologically different, but because the scale of the task is so huge. I don’t think there is anyone in the country that isn’t aware that the next parliament is going to be making some very tough decisions, and that the feelings of a great many people will be ones of negativity. However, maybe this is where a coalition government shows its real strength. If we believe, as repeated often yesterday, that they have formed in the ‘National interest’ then the mix of values and beliefs will surely add value to what lies ahead. Companies are formed of directors who aren’t necessarily ideologically aligned, but they work together for the interest of the company.

In this way, I hold a hope that what comes next will be a refreshing change in the political landscape of the UK. It is still vitally important that the Labour party provide a strong opposition, to act as a counterbalance to the Government benches, and in this way they are far better placed than the Conservatives were in 1997 to do that.

The tests of the coalition will come thick and fast. A by election and the way to campaign during that contest is just around the corner. The Treasury, probably with a greater focus on that department than ever before, is being run by people with very different views. Conflict, if managed well, can be a very positive force though. My hope is that the close working of all these ideas and ideals will produce the best possible outcome for the country. The proof of the pudding, as always, will be in the eating, but let’s give these people the room to explore this path. I was disappointed today to hear on BBC Radio 4 a conversation about how it was the job of journalists to find and exploit the cracks in the coalition. Is this really in the national interest? Is this really a service the public require? I am sure that if the coalition does crack, there will not be a need to search too hard to find it. We are however going to have to look back at the words of David Cameron, just a day or so ago. It was, unfortunately, rather less well done than Kennedy managed it nearly 50 years ago, but the sentiment is still true:

“Where we don’t ask what are my entitlements, but what are my responsibilities?”

People all over the country, work together to the betterment of the organisation they serve. Is it so hard to believe that at long last we might have a government that could do just that?

Matthew Scott, Dip Management, Cert MCE.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the IBC.

Signal Business Consulting Ltd. do not endorse any political party.

Nigel Farage’s now rather famous rant at the EU President Herman Van Rompuy ended with a resounding “Who are you”?!

Whilst Mr Farage’s outburst was mildly amusing as a news clip, his challenge “Who are you?” does open into a wider debate about the nature and style of leadership in organisations.

Clearly Mr Van Rompuy did not measure up with Mr Farage’s expectations.

Let me explain. Mr Farage, fiercely anti- European, argues that the Euro administration is seeking largely by stealth to strip the various nation states of Europe of any power over their business to create a “United States of Europe “under a central administration run from Brussels.

The “bank clerk” didn’t match up to the perception of an all powerful “star”, perhaps Obama like cult of personality that Mr Farage might have expected of the post holder of such a powerful position. Equally though, neither did the quiet administrator (although Mr Farage was rather more brusque in his description).

In a leadership role, whether in a small business or national administration like Mr Van Rompuy, there are many examples of stars and administrators to be found. Experience has shown that usually leaders adopt these roles naturally, often replicating behaviour that has led to their success in the first place. That there is no conscious choice about what kind of leader they will be is not surprising, they just do what they know best about performing.

Maybe there should be a moment when a leader decides “who are you…. going to be in this role?” but more importantly, maybe Mr Farage’s question was wrong, not “who are you” but “how are you … going to make a success of this?” perhaps then some of the traits he so openly ridiculed might have been rather more palatable.

Being so firmly pigeonholed as a star or administrator has its problems for the person in the leadership role too. Both lead to an expectation of a decision making style that have direct implications for the way risk is managed and the business is controlled and the way the rest of the team behave.

Working with a star can be extremely high energy, motivating and focussed since there is no conflict or debate about what to do. We’re all doing only and exactly what the star leader wants done. In the way that they want it done, to their timescale. This can mean that when our team objectives get set they are jolly well achieved, because we are all working hard to please the star, which is great – hooray! We’re all achieving our objectives!

The cult of the star can mean that there is no room for new ideas, no innovation and for others to shine. What if the star isn’t so focussed? What if they are firing off in all directions about what they want and how they want it? The people working below to please that star can find themselves working hard on many wasted activities, stuck in quagmire while decisions get made and then unmade, direction is set and then changed, a very dissatisfying and confusing place to work.

Finally, what happens when the star leaves? A vacuum, where no one knows quite what to do, how to get the work done, no one responsible for anything, the only person who made any decisions about anything is now gone. This is extremely dangerous for risk management, no one responsible for anything, and no one really knowing how to achieve anything.

So what of the administrator? This is someone who likes rules, following procedures. Working for an administrator can be very reassuring, the systems and procedures are in place, everything as it should be. Decisions are made driven by the “way we work around here”, predictable, dependable. Others are consulted over decisions, the administrator has already checked what the rules are, reflected on what previous results have been achieved, but they just want to sound out their co senior colleagues before going ahead.

The Administrator lives where they belong, in their office. Which means that they trust and believe that everything is happening as it should be, but as we know, trust is not a control. We don’t know that the work is being done as it should. There is also the issue of visibility. Administration by its very nature is a continuously demanding thing. The administrator necessarily spends lots of time at their desk, which means that without a concerted effort, they don’t spend much time away from it, out on the floor, where the work of everyone else is being done. This can give the impression of being remote, detached and even a bit clueless about the reality of the business. No matter what the reality of the Administrators knowledge of the business and their ability to take the temperature, it’s rather uninspiring, so wedded to rules and procedures, innovation is stifled, effecting change is really tough. This is another place where it is difficult to shine. This approach is dangerous for risk management too, opportunities aren’t spotted, or if they are the business is too slow to respond. Developing the business is slow because innovation is stifled.

Maybe Mr Farage was too black and white in his expectations, perhaps instead he should have looked for shades of grey.

Mr Van Rumpoy kept his counsel during the rant and afterwards, perhaps he couldn’t think of an amusing quip in response. Or maybe what he wanted to say was something like “I am many things to many people during any one day, but never mind that let me tell you how….”

Jane Pound, MCIPD, MIIA.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the IBC.