No matter how big or how well established, or whether start up or multi-national, if companies are to improve performance and productivity, they need to look very closely at the attitude of their employees.

So says David Fox, chairman & CEO at PP Business Improvement.

He is adamant that if you don’t remove the poor attitude problem first amongst your workforce, any other business initiatives are likely to fail, or will not sustain themselves for long enough to reap any rewards.

‘If a business wants to continuously improve its performance and productivity, it needs to start by recruiting the right people with the right attitude,’ he says. ‘This is not an easy process at all, because most companies already have a workforce when they realise they need to change things. However, it is crucial to the success of any business improvement initiative that any attitude problems are eliminated prior to the project.’

Companies should not waste time and money on training employees who have the wrong attitude.

Fox reminds us of the importance of attitude. Power Panels’ recruitment policy, which is now based on a strategy adopted by Jack Welch at General Electric in the early 1990s, is based on a system that classifies existing and potential employees into three categories: A, B and C.

A’s are people who are fully competent and committed to the business.

B’s are employees who are fully committed to your business but require further training to become competent employees.

C’s are the category that needs removing from the business. These people may be fully competent in terms of skills, but fight against change and typically have a very negative attitude towards change or new initiatives.

The simple policy employed at GE was to ensure that the business always recruited either A’s or B’s, never C’s.

Of your existing workforce, look for ways of removing the C’s from your business first and then try to turn the B’s into A’s through structured learning.

Unfortunately, there are no short cuts here, says Fox. ‘You can’t simply throw lots of money at improving business performance without first dealing with the people issues. In 1998, we implemented GE’s recruitment policy but it’s been a long, painful struggle. Almost 30% of our workforce at this time were C’s. We ended up wasting three years trying to turn these C’s into B’s and failed. We then introduced a new recruitment policy in which we only hired people who were deemed as being A’s or B’s. 100 per cent of our employees are now either an A or a B.’

‘Obviously, there’s a cost associated with any business improvement initiative. But the economics is simple. The more you train people, the better they will perform in their daily tasks and so the better the business will perform as a result. It’s a win-win situation for our business and our customers, because any improvements that come from an initiative are shared. In fact, Power Panels hasn’t lost a single customer in the last six or seven years, so we must be doing something right.’

Power Panels Electrical Systems won three BFA (Best Factory) Awards in 2005 and two Mx (Manufacturing Excellence) Awards in 2006, attaining the Investors in Excellence Standard. In 2008, the company went on to win four separate BFA awards, including Factory of the Year, Best Small Company, Best Electronics & Electrical Plant, and the Skills Development Award.

Apart from being considerably more productive, a Harvard study has shown that those who nap regularly are 37% less likely to die of heart disease than non -nappers. Here is the best way to get the most from your nap ….

• An afternoon nap works best if it is for no longer than 20 minutes – just short of entering deep sleep. Otherwise you’ll wake up feeling groggy and may risk insomnia at night. Only the very exhausted – parents of babies, athletes, or over worked people – will need and benefit from longer periods.
• Set an alarm for 15 to 20 minutes and don’t get too comfortable – home nappers should avoid duvets!
• Recline in a well ventilated room and turn off the phones.
• Power-napping is similar to meditation: focus on breathing, relax the body and allow thoughts to drift in and out. It may feel as though you haven’t slept, but it will be doing more good than you think.
• Caffeine takes about 20 minutes to hit, so if you get your head down after a coffee you should wake just as the caffeine kicks in and fell doubly refreshed.

Source: Sunday Times. Published in The Week magazine 23rd May.

According to Professor Govindarajan, here are the Top 11 Things Organizations Often Do With A Dead Horse:

11. Whip the horse a bit harder
10. Change the rider
9. Harness several dead horses together for increased speed
8. Emulate the best practices of other companies riding dead horses
7. Proclaim that it’s cheaper to feed a dead horse
6. Shorten the track
5. Affirm “This is the way we have always ridden this dead horse”
4. Declare that “This horse is not dead”.
3. Have the lawyers bring suit against the horse manufacturer
2. Engage a consultant to study the dead horse
1. Promote the dead horse to a senior management position

1. Enthusiasm
2. Disillusionment
3. Panic
4. Search for the guilty
5. Punishment of the innocent
6. Praise and honours for the non participants

Land mines, grenades, missiles and cluster bombs do not discriminate between soldiers or civilians, between men, women or children playing.  Every day millions of people live with this fear.

Based in Manchester, the Mines Advisory Group (MAG) is a global organisation with a compelling mission. They work every day to solve that problem and reduce that fear – and every day they do, fewer people die or suffer those horrific injuries. 

Phil Tapsel (MBA, 2006) is a founder member of MAG-NET and has written this article to raise awareness amongst the MBS alumni network of the work undertaken by MAG-NET.

THE PROBLEM.

Somewhere outside your front door there is a powerful explosive weapon waiting for you. It is hidden from view, avoiding it is a constant game of chance. There could be one or there could be one hundred. You don’t know and neither does anyone else.

How do you stop people going about their normal lives? How can you ask your children not to play: not to run and chase each other; not to kick a football?

You can’t. As a result dozens of people will die or suffer horrific injuries every day.

THE SOLUTION.

Based in Manchester, the Mines Advisory Group (MAG) is a global organisation with a compelling mission. They work every day to solve that problem and reduce that fear – and every day they do, fewer people die or suffer those horrific injuries.

This work is not simply a humanitarian mission. It is a fundamental prerequisite to the economic regeneration of any stricken area.

Whilst other charitable organisations can ameliorate the conditions associated with conflict in affected countries, sustainable post–conflict development is simply not possible until MAG have done their work.

Consequently, there is a clear correlation between the work undertaken by MAG and the ability of a region to become economically viable and to re-engage in commercial activity and wealth creation.

This is a powerful and compelling story and is why I decided to help this inspirational organisation.

Starting in Amiens, France on July 15^th I am cycling 312 km in 3 days to raise £2000 for MAG. We finish in Ypres on Saturday 17^th.

Lou McGrath OBE, Chief Exec and Founder of MAG will be cycling with me.

However, beyond immediate fundraising opportunities such as the cycling event, I have become involved in another venture which will have a more profound and longer term impact………MAG- Net.

MAG-NET

To drive the fundraising process faster we have established the MAG-NET business community.

www.maginternational.org/mag-net

MAG is the only major international charity founded and operating from a head office in the North West. It is the number one organization of its kind in the world and with brand credentials which include the award of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1997, well positioned to augment the brand of any partner organization.

The aim of the MAG-NET is simple – to create an environment where MAG and the North West business community are able to collaborate for mutual benefit.

MAG-NET achieves this by:

• Creating a prestige-networking environment to enable North West business leaders, entrepreneurs and other key influencers to come together to generate intra-region trade.
• Promoting the region generally via association with MAG. 
• Raising the profile of MAG within the North West business community and providing opportunities for enterprise within the region to help MAG raise funds. 

ABOUT PHIL TAPSELL

MBS MBA 2006; CEO and Founder of TechVenture Solutions Ltd. a strategy consultancy working with early stage technology enterprises and the VC’s and Angels that back them. Worked for seven years with BBC TV Dragon Richard Farleigh and is a founder member of MAG-NET.

First published on the Cleantech Investor website, June 2010. Copyright Cleantech Investor Ltd.

By Denis Gross

A panel with a wealth of experience in funding early stage cleantech companies discussed this topic on Thursday 27 May 2010. Green in the City Cleantech Economist is sponsored by the Carbon Trust. May’s event was host-sponsored by Taylor Wessing. Simon Walker of the Climate Change Group at Taylor Wessing opened the evening’s procedures. Robert Hokin, Chief Executive of ecoConnect CIC, was Master of Ceremonies, and the Moderator of the panel session was Anne McIvor, Editor of Cleantech Magazine.

The members of the panel were:

Rob Genieser – Partner, Environmental Technologies Fund (ETF)

Peter Linthwaite –  Managing Partner, Carbon Trust Investment Partners (CTIP)

Rob Wylie – Partner, WHEB Ventures

Ken Rumph – Director of Research, Nomura Code Securities

Cameron Davies – Consultant, Renewable Energy and Clean Technology

In their opening salvos, the panel members were in broad agreement over the attractive opportunities for investment at all stages in European cleantech, but were also in agreement that the sector remains short of capital. In terms of early stage investment in cleantech, Peter Linthwaite remarked on the need to cover policy risk as well as technical risk. He noted that, in offshore wind and marine energy, there had been a hope that the utilities might be first movers – but observed that, in the event, they are tending to adopt an aggregator role.  Cameron Davies felt that, although VCs can’t do it all, there is no doubt they play a valuable role in early stage funding. From his experience at Alkane (the company of which he was CEO and remains a non executive director – and which was initially financed  by venture capital before being listed on AIM), he found that the partners and advisors performed a very useful role for mentoring and that they generally gave good advice. Davies made a plea for the UK Government to be more focused on funding entrepreneurs.

The importance of the AIM market as an alternative to venture capital was highlighted by Ken Rumph, who pointed out that for many companies on AIM in 2006 and 2007 secondary raises were easier than venture capital rounds. The function of companies such as the IP Group, which plays an important role in early stage companies, were highlighted – and corporate venturing was mentioned as another option to traditional VCs, as were high net worth individuals and family offices.

Rob Wylie noted the current inclement environment for fund raising, pointing out that 2009 marked a ten-year low point in terms of VC funds raised. Wylie finds that both institutional investors and family offices have a limited appetite for risk and favour growth, late stage and infrastructure plays. He acknowledged that the preferences of the investors in the fund impact WHEB Venture’s investment decisions.  WHEB Ventures aims for a balanced portfolio, mostly late stage but with some early stage investments. However, early stage opportunities have to look very good to attract WHEB Venture’s money in this climate.

The need to cut the cloth to suit the investor base was hit on by Peter Linthwaite, who thought that the stage between concept and initial deployment was perhaps too early for most VCs. Linthwaite sees a significant role for government funding in the early stage support for new technologies, bridging the ‘Valley of Death’. As he pointed out, the question is where should grant funding stop and VCs come in? Overall, Peter sees that government help is needed at the venture end of the chain, and believes that it is necessary to harness both government and corporate support, and coordinate with Business Angels.

The importance of Business Angels was reiterated by Rob Genieser, who recalled his days in Silicon Valley when he observed that Angels were always busy in peaks and troughs. Genieser’s view is that, by and large, the consumer, government and industry are doing the right thing in Europe. He pointed out that, while in the past VCs funded companies to IPO, now they tend to fund them to cash flow.

Rob Wylie was concerned that the UK Government may act inadvisably over capital gains tax and damage Business Angel activity. Both Wylie and Peter Linthwaite noted the highly significant contribution made by Business Angels, and Wylie stressed their presence in 3rd and 4th rounds, their provision of emergency bridge rounds, and their ability to move quickly.

Meanwhile, there was a consensus opinion that VCs are currently focusing on maintaining their portfolios rather than new investments.

Members of the audience led the panel into discussing a number of alternative aspects of funding. These included the Green Investment Bank proposals, the multitude of uncertainties surrounding its purpose and structure, and how it might operate in the absence of money. Peter Linthwaite suggested that the role of such a bank could be as an enabler, which would mean that it wouldn’t require a capital base. The Government could act as the insurer for certain risks, for example overruns on offshore wind, or the establishment of marine projects.

Cameron Davies pointed out that, even for small profitable companies, debt is always a problem. There is a huge bureaucratic barrier to overcome to obtain grants, and often early stage companies can’t be awarded grants because the start-ups have no record! Anne McIvor cited a senior executive from an RDA at a recent Cleantech Investor event who said that they have almost 80 types of grants to award, but that the vast majority of these require matched funding.

Another hot topic of discussion was the dilemma of companies’ reliance on government subsidies and Feed-in Tariffs (FiTs). The dramatic response of Spain’s solar market when the FiT was cut back in 2009 was cited as an example of how such reliance on subsidies can backfire. Rob Genieser was adamant that he has never funded a company that relied on subsidies, not least because in his experience – in the US – you can quickly spend more money on paying government lobbyists rather than growing the underlying business. Rob Wylie recalled the issues with the continual reforms and amendments of the US Superfund, created in the 1980s to clean up abandoned hazardous waste sites, which resulted in many companies and investors losing money.

Ken Rumph pointed out that there is a big difference in how governments go about funding renewable energy. In Spain, he pointed out, the government itself was footing part of the bill for solar. A more sustainable approach, he suggested, is where governments oblige utilities to spread the cost of supporting renewables and energy efficiency measures across all customers, as is the case in the UK and Germany. 

Rob Wylie felt that governments could play a role in maintaining stability provided they adopt consistent policies that are not changed mid-course. Too often, he observed, there are too many schemes that are subscale and inefficient, and liable to change – a far from ideal situation. He also noted that it is important to distinguish between investments in projects and investments in technology companies, when contemplating the issues of subsidies and policy risks.

Anne McIvor remarked that there are significant differences between the cleantech sector and other industries because of the climate change mandate resulting in policies being put in place. However, entrepreneurs are not always able to assess where the policies are leading – underlining the importance of stability in terms of policy.

Bringing the formal session to a close, Robert Hokin asked each panellist what VCs look for. Rob Genieser would look for a business plan focusing on cash generation. Peter Linthwaite also thought cash break-even is vital, as is to ensure that an entrepreneur is not over-valuing the company. Cameron Davies also stressed the need for a good business plan with demonstrable growth built into it, while Ken Rumph suggested that companies need to “befriend rich people”. Rob Wylie thought it vital that the applicant thoroughly researches the VC fund and its approach, its investment criteria and all its “hot buttons”.

With a final musing by Robert Hokin on what is going to happen to the appetite for risk if a greater sense of conservatism is ushered in by the prevailing economic turbulence, the event moved into its enjoyable networking phase, with the spectacular views from Taylor Wessing’s terrace providing a backdrop to many interesting conversations.

The next Green in the City Cleantech Economist event takes place on 24 June 2010 and will be hosted again by Taylor Wessing. The topic will be:

‘Funding 2020 Renewable Energy Targets – Where will it come from?’

20% Thinking 80% Doing

 A comment that makes me cringe…. “I’ll try and implement some of that business development stuff once I have more time”.

First rule of decision making: More time does not create better decisions. In fact, it usually decreases the quality of the decision. More information may help. More time without more information just creates anxiety, not insight.

 Deciding now frees up your most valuable asset, time, so you can go work on something else. What happens if, starting today, you make every business development decision as soon as you have a reasonable amount of data?

 Some things you could do right now to boost your sales growth:

• Ask all your existing customers about future opportunities and really try to understand problems they face.
•  Ask all your existing customers for 3 improvements they would make immediately to your business if they were you.
•  Ask all your existing customers for 3 other contact names of people who may also want to buy from you and ask if you are OK using their name as a reference.
•  Write a short ideas paper focussing on the most current “stone in the shoe” issue your customer base has. Fill it with your best ideas and email out to prospective and existing customers. Follow up with a “problem seeking, problem solving” based phone call to win that all important meeting.

 The bad news is that time flies. The good news is you’re the pilot!

Unleash your secret sales force by obtaining great testimonials.

It’s a challenge that even the most accomplished sales professionals have to tackle regularly: how to attract more of the targeted customers who are best suited to help your business thrive. After all, it’s not enough to know who it is that you want to reach, or even to fine-tune your business habits to emulate the top sellers in organizations of all sizes. You also need to find ways to attract more of those ideal customers to fill your sales funnel.

Indeed, there’s plenty you can do on your own to fine-tune your sales approach, but the work doesn’t stop there.

Your customers can also play a huge role in sending your sales skyward, but only if you let them help you do that.

Testimonials aren’t about promises. They’re about proof.

This is where testimonials enter in play—simple, heartfelt, authentic statements of fact from people describing how they have benefitted from doing business with you.

Testimonials achieve what no amount of advertising or marketing can accomplish singlehandedly — they prove to others what you know to be true about your work and the products/services you sell.

Don’t get me wrong. Other methods of reaching out to potential customers are important in any sales arsenal, but testimonials need to be part of that push. To be blunt, prospects are going to believe your clients far more than they’re ever going to believe your marketing messages. Educated consumers are prone to look beyond promises that companies make about being the best in their field. They’re likely to think: “of course you’ll say you’re number one…you’re in sales and you’re paid to say that.”

However, when you back those pledges with solid, third-party proof, a different thinking pattern starts to emerge, especially when the testimonials come from people with whom prospects can identify with in terms of shared circumstance or profession. They see your claims about excellence and professionalism, and then they see those claims validated in a manner that isn’t couched in self promotion or sales rhetoric.

Your secret sales force, ready to serve.
The power of word-of-mouth from all of your customers combined creates what I like to refer to as your secret sales force. More than just being satisfied with doing business with you, those who provide you with testimonials are people who want to see you succeed. By collecting and sharing with others all the great things your customers have to say about their experiences dealing with you and your organization, you create a magnet that helps attract more of those ideal, targeted customers you want to work with. The pull of that magnet becomes more and more powerful with every testimonial that you obtain and share.

Another of the many great benefits of testimonials is that that encourage people in your list of targeted prospects to come to you already interested in you, your product or your services. That translates into fewer sales objections, meaning that you’ll spend less time struggling to land that prospect or negotiating on price, and more time listening to the needs of your new customer (plus responding to those needs).

Despite these compelling benefits, this highly potent sales force remains underused by businesses today. In fact, Bane & Company did a survey in 2007 and found that 87% of satisfied customers want to help sell others on the businesses worked with, and yet only 7% of those businesses took the time to ask for that help.

That means 93% did not / do not leverage the power of their existing customer base!!

Don’t become another statistic! Get testimonials working for you and unleash this massive group of people who are hungry to help you succeed and who resonate well with your clients.

Testimonials also serve as a way of recommending your services to others—and that’s absolutely vital. Consider the evidence: recommendations from peers was recently cited as the number-one decision making criteria according to Nielsen Research. Yahoo tells us that 87% of people believe the reviews that they see on websites. On the other hand, Saga Research suggests that as few as 10% of people believe what they read in conventional business-to-consumer marketing products. So it’s in your interest to find ways to go beyond the promises and to provide proof to support what you are saying about yourself and your work. When you’re successful at this, you build a bridge of trust with your customers—one that’s made to last for the long term.

Of course, testimonials is only one small part of your new and existing customer development plans……