Drugs, football – and succession management

The US sprinter Antonio Pettigrew was in court in San Francisco last week, in the trial of athletics coach Trevor Graham, who has presently denied charges of lying to US federal authorities. The court heard Pettigrew testifying that Graham encouraged him to inject human growth hormone and EPO, both banned substances, from 1997. Pettigrew testified he soon began buying the drugs from Angel Heredia, an admitted steroids dealer, and his performance showed a remarkable improvement as a result:

I was running incredible times as I was preparing for track meets," Pettigrew said during 30 minutes of testimony. I was able to recover faster.

So, from Pettigrew’s statement we have further confirmation that drugs are in sport, and that they enhance performance. And what does Pettigrew do now for a living – he’s a coach at the University of North Carolina.

I have always been a believer in the trickle-down theory of education and management: that staff will learn from their managers, and act/react in the same way as those above them. In psychology, this is called “soldiering.”

In football last week, Sir Alex Ferguson won his second European Cup, what is presently known as the Champion’s League. But although that now means he is just one win away from Bob Paisley’s record, could Ferguson’s long term legacy be even greater?

Shankly raised Paisley to be a better manager than himself; Paisley in turn raised Ronnie Moran (best forgotten), but also taught Kevin Keegan, Graeme Souness, Phil Neal and Emlyn Hughes, who all went on to be managers – none though with much success.

Ferguson has so far taught Carlos Queros, who in his single season at Real Madrid failed miserably by their high standards – he’s now back as Ferguson’s side, and most likely to succeed his boss. But more remarkably, of Ferguson’s playing side Mark Hughes, Steve Bruce and Roy Keane are presently Premier League managers, while Steve Coppell was until two weeks ago. Paul Ince – who played for both Ferguson’s United and Roy Evan’s Liverpool – is presently the most sought after manager in the lower English leagues.

So, what will Antonia Pettigrew’s legacy be to his own athletics students – could it be “take drugs, run faster – cause that’s how I did it;” or will it be “don’t take drugs, or like me you’ll end up in court and have to probably give your medals back.”
Often, companies when they recruit miss two things – what they are recruiting (not just a set of skills, but an investment in their own future. Look for skills plus potential coach/managers); and the most obvious – why are they recruiting? Vodafone today took one of the bravest leaps, by announcing the promotion of Vittorio Colao to succeed Arun Sarin as CEO - a job he was passed over for when Sarin originally took the job, and was then rehired after two years away from the company. If your company needs a skills leap or change, then external candidates make sense – but just another piece of muscle for the sales team or the board room really sounds like there’s a poor coach at the centre of the team: and then you really ought to be looking to hire there first, not elsewhere to cover up that person’s failing as a coach for the next generation, and the companies future.

PDA's banned - so you can concentrate on your children

In light of a project which I have been working on for some years, the story that the UK's largest theme park Alton Towers have decided to ban PDA's so that parents have to concentrate on their children was - a relief! The company will enforce the ban with wardens, who if they find a PDA user will confiscate the item for return when you and your children leave the park.

I actually think - despite all the "reaction to a survey" publicity details - that personally this has more to do with Alton Tower's insurance liability, than the headline of making parents concentrate on their children - but it just seems like a very good and family orientated reason.

Five reasons why you don't need a recruiter…..

Many employers, particularly in these days of the well connected internet and Monster, Jobsite, etc; wonder why they need to employ a recruitment company? The answer is - you don't. It's a free market, and you just don't need to - its really your choice. So here are five reasons why employers and candidates don't need to go via a recruitment company

Employers:

1. All the CV's are on the market via the internet - true, that's the theory by about 2012. But even if that were true, only about 1/3 of the target audience who could fit your requirements will actually be on the internet advertising themselves. One third will be happily employed because they are good at what they do (but could leave if the right offer came along - problem is, they work for your competitor); and one third will be looking but not shouting about it from the internet because of the reaction from their presently happy employer

2. Everyone knows about and respects my company - your customers must do: they pay you money. Your employee's are a far more fickle bunch, and if the wage cheque didn't turn up next month, would happily join the third with their CV's on the internet! Also, do you tell your competitors everything about what you are doing? Thought not - so how do you expect to attract people to your wonderful new project that requires new skills?

3. I pay great wages - probably true, particularly if you take note of one or more of the many surveys that are regularly posted by various employment or industry organisations. But, does the size of the wage packet wholly sum up your organisation? And when you pay a better basic and have nicer offices, a better car package and include health care - over your nearest competitor - is that taken into account in those surveys?

4. I know what people fit into my organisation - yes, you wholly do: you and you alone can make that decision - it's the most important decision to be made around your business and its ability to survive. And we all know that beneath that gruff and hard business like exterior you are a really nice person. But - now, rather than selling your business to your customers, you need to sell you and your businesses future to your potential employee's - that a different sell, and a far softer one of getting to know people over a period of time. Where as, you need someone next month who will perform from day1

5. Recruiters charge huge fee's - yes, so always choose one if you must use one who specialises in your sector, is REC registered, and who's fee's are NOT wholly payable before the new employee starts, and are fully refundable if the employee leaves within a reasonable period. Mind you, if you do decide to DIY and make the wrong decision, then chances are you will have trebled the chances of the new employee leaving, and hence incurring total costs equivalent to around three times their basic wage costs.

Here are the same five concerns from the candidates position:

1. I don't want to put my CV on the internet because I don't want to upset my current and very reasonable employer

2. I don't know about that company whose advert I saw in the Sunday Newspapers/on the internet

3. The package looks reasonable, but I need to know if they cover other issues like healthcare - plus I have a holiday coming up

4. I have heard some bad things about them in the past, so not sure I will fit in there. Plus, where are they going at present?

5. Recruiters charge huge fee's and just leave you once their fee's are paid - a REC registered recruiter should negotiate for you, and check you are making the agreed targets. Hence, a reasonable question to ask any recruiter when they approach you is "And if I take the job, how will you get paid?"

Want that job? Don't rely on your lucky but unwashed pants.....

This survey from employment law specialists Peninsula came across my desk this morning - oh, what a laugh!

Of the 3024 workers interviewed, the survey found that......84% of respondents wear what they believe is, something lucky to get them through a job interview with 6 in 10 of these wearing lucky underwear. Additionally 73% of respondents admit to checking their horoscope immediately before an interview believing it will be an indicator of whether they get the job or not.

The top 10 lucky charms candidates take with them to a job interview were.......

Lucky Underwear (sometimes unwashed!)

Lucky Jewellery

Brooch

Lucky shoes (polished, one hopes...)

An object from Childhood, i.e. blanket/teddy

4 leaf clover

Key ring

Lucky stone

Lucky Pen/Pencil

Lucky photograph of someone i.e. boyfriend/relative

So, if you don't want to rely on lucky (but unwashed - Yuck) pants, here are some thoughts on how to get that job......

1. Luck doesn't start with your pants on the day of the interview. Employment starts with reading adverts, which results in (perceived) luck!

2. Pick jobs in which you meet the basic skills requirements, which is more true for Government posts over commercial work. NEVER LIE from this point forward in an application, to your potential future employer or yourself - NOTE: 70% of applicants do: wonder if that's the same 70% wearing unwashed "lucky" pants???

3. Read their website, and make some notes on where the company is going/what it has acheived

4. If there is a telephone number to ask questions before applying - call it! Do some preparation first, and make sure to have three questions which can't be answered by reading the advert or their website alone

5. Now, specifically adjust your CV to bring out the skills you have for that job, ie - pull certain points forward which the job asks for; if it asks for Xyears experience of Y, show you have X+ of Y+

6. Write a cover letter which shows you have those skills. Pull them out specifically as bullet points if necessary (max of three core skills)

7. Two days before your interview, prepare by re-reading the job advert, their website and your CV/Resume. Prepare five questions for them. Check your travel plans and timings - including scheduled road works - and allow an extra 30mins

8. The day before the interview, make sure your clothes are prepared and clean - Ladies: no overt cleavage showing; Gents - clean shirt and tie, and polish those shoes. Re-check those travel plans

9. On the day of the interview - shower thoroughly! Read the advert, your website notes and your CV on the way there

10. After the interview, what ever the result, ask for feedback - it makes you more prepared for the next interview, or know what they like/expect of you in post

Security - if its online, its out!

When I was a young telephone engineer in Gloucestershire, one of my colleagues found a few electronic extras in a telephone he had accidentally dropped on a Cotswold stone floor. We were so well trained, no one had thought to de-train us should they require such devices placed in the phones we were about to fit. In light of the incident, we were all told to turn up at a meeting with the area manager in a weeks time - being high summer, it was fairly obvious the man in the dark trench coat, hat and seasonally thick sunglasses wasn't from our "head office." We were told many things during that meeting, but one thing as to why were we were not told before was that we didn't need to know - until then.

In college, when time on any computer was limited to half hour slots in those days, as electronic engineers we tried cracking the entry system on both the Polytechnic's and the Universities computer systems. We weren't as good as the software engineers who supposedly cracked one level below the exam system - the only thing we got through was the Polytechnic's medical security system, the password for which was the senior nurses marriage date!

After leaving college, I joined back with my employer/sponsor, and began working on big bids. I had a very good mentor, who taught me a few things and got me early onto a legal course normally only run for what were termed internally commercial managers, what the rest of us externally would call legally aware managers who hadn't qualified as solicitors. Much as though the law stuff was useful, probably the most useful thing they taught us was information dissemination - in other words, assume that when you tell someone else, that's it - it's out and running, and before long some kid on a beach in Brazil will also know: its just a matter of time. So, all documents from that point were tracked whether they needed to be or not, and you didn't talk about business specific issues in public. One of my guys was caught chatting about football on a train one day in works time, and a senior manager told him off for not discussing work issues - on ringing me, he got the briefing I gave all my people on joining the team, and asked for a copy so he could advise his people. Football was allowed in public, specific customer talk was not.

In my corporate career, I choose not to work again on Government work post the mid-90's - commercial stuff was quicker in decision, and didn't depend on politics. But information dissemination was more immediately important task, as many of the later projects were what was termed "share price affecting" - where by we couldn't buy or sell shares in our employer of the customers company, and information leaking was commercially dangerous for both parties

So, why do I write this?

Yesterday, Adrian asked about indemnity clauses and coverage, and today a group of MySpace spammers were ordered to pay $230million dollars to the company for sending out innocent friend messages, which in actual fact linked the reader directly on opening to porn and gambling sites. Lawyers you soon realise are a depressing bunch, whose job it is to spot all scenario's and resultant problems before they occur. Hence, some legal clauses don't make a lot of sence cold, they just do when information has been disseminated and a scenario unfolded

Thanks to Caroline Flint carelessly walking along with a document in her hand, the economists who now have inside track on the Governments thoughts are rebriefing their clients on both the length of the credit crunch in the UK and the price of real estate. Share price effecting - RBoS are presently down 2%, HSBC down .5% on a presently rising market

In this online world, information dissemination IS the driver - its the way to attract people, to turn them into customers, and make money.

But...... that's not always a good thing for all information. Many social networking platforms have what are termed "private" clubs or messaging systems. The amount of privacy is defined by a combination of the contract T&C's you agree to, and - little else. In reality its in the public domain, just in a defined group at best.

Always think about information dissemination, for either maximising gain or minimising possible pain - what ever you decide to write, and where ever you write it!

Unprofessional sledgehammer to crack a nut......

As an engineer, its a great time - lots of things which couldn't be, now can be.

But, as a business person and as a consumer/buyer, there are some things which just prove that often, even when something is possible, it really shouldn't be taken to market - hence, the sledgehammer to crack a nut principle!

In example - peoplecompare.co.uk It is so "cool," and launches in July 2008, claiming to be: the UK's first ever recruitment comparison tool of its kind in which employers are provided with a fast and effective way to compare people for employment from a number of recruitment companies in a quick one-step easy process. Further...... For a small annual fee recruitment companies enjoy cost-effective genuine enquiries from employers on a regular basis throughout the year. Many have been quick to get onboard and take advantage of the site's introductory offer of just £150 (+vat) which covers one year's subscription to the site and includes account creation, Logo upload, and an initial amount of credits to get started.

Wow, that is so wonderful for both sides, its amazing that no one ever thought about creating that before......

Woops, they did - its called the Recruitment and Employment Confederation Directory of Members. It's free for anyone to use, but for recruiters to join and be listed they have to be members of professional body REC - so it ensures quality (less than half of recruiters in the UK are REC qualified and registered). The cost of joining REC - one course of about £1,000, and an annualised membership fee of around £150 plus some refresher courses - which provides your clients with industry level insurance and a mediation option.

Does peoplecompare.co.uk offer similar? No, just £150 annualised fee to recruiters, and nothing to employers except a Yell.com listing and a set of prices comparisons which don't mean a lot.......

The nice thing about being a capitalist is that, the machine quickly removes the un-thought-through chaff: anyone for a bet on how long peoplecompare.co.uk will last - single digits only, bets in days or months?

Teenage tantrums, bad bosses and dishonest colleagues = Orwellian unemployment?

What's the toughest thing about finding your next job?

The toughest thing about finding a job is finding the right job - well, yes, but those who have planned their careers never find this difficult. And those who haven't just have to accept a bit of regression occasionally

OK, well the toughest thing about getting the right job is getting past the paper sift process - no, most managed careers know where their next job is; or have the right CV, which 99% of the time get you to interview

So the toughest part of getting the job is the interview - no, that's just prepartion, and if you only did one thing then it would be to read the companies annual report, re-read the advert, and prepare at least five questions (OK, well that's three things….)

Still confused? How about the toughest thing about getting your next job, could be that you fell out with your boss when a difficult teenager; or were suspected of theft after a colleague got away with it; or after a situation in which you did nothing wrong, but after a disciplinary hearing, you concluded to resign?

Seem's a bit far fetched in these ambulance-chasing/rights for all days - but could it actually happen?

In May 2008, the National Staff Dismissal Register (NSDR) is expected to go live, an initiave by national employers organisation Action Against Business Crime. Initially launched in the retail sector as it was founded as a way of tracking staff suspected of acts of unproven "seepage" - other wise known as theft. Initial companies signing up include Harrods, Selfridges and recruiter Reed Managed Services.

The NSDR will allow subscriber companies to check whether candidates for jobs or existing employees have faced allegations of stealing, forgery, fraud, damaging company property or causing a loss to their employers and suppliers. Workers dismissed or those who have resigned before action was taken over these offences by subscribing companies, or whose details have been added as a result of public record; will be included on the register, regardless of whether police had enough evidence to convict them or not.

To many, this seems at minimum Orwelian in nature, and probably illegal - it's a database of shared staff records, with no separating walls, sharing non-convicted issues: legally, most of the database at best will technically be allegations.

TUC policy officer Hannah Reed says that while criminal activity in the workplace can never be condoned, she fears such a system is open to abuse: "The TUC is seriously concerned that this register can only lead to people being shut out from the job market by an employer who falsely accuses them of misconduct or sacks them because they bear them a grudge. Individuals would be treated as criminals, even though the police have never been contacted. The Criminal Records Bureau was set up to assist employers to make safe appointments when recruiting staff to work with vulnerable groups. The CRB already provides appropriate and properly regulated protection for employers. Under the new register, an employee may not be aware they have been blacklisted or have any right to appeal."

James Welch, the legal director of human rights group Liberty, says that he is concerned that the register does not offer sufficient redress to the falsely accused: "This scheme appears to bypass existing laws which protect employees by limiting the circumstances when information about possible criminal activity can be shared with potential employers."

How does the NSDR affect you?

As an employer: it could be all good news, but - how do you know what is written about an employee is factually correct, and could you not be sued for using information about an applicant from a previous employer they have listed on their CV but not used as a reference: oh yes, you could!

As an employee: it could be all bad news - the fact you didn't see eye to eye with an old boss could now come back and count against you. So, go and check the NSDR list of employers when it is launched, and write to administrator HiCom Business Solutions (of Red House,
Brookwood, Surrey. GU24 0BL), and ask them should any of your ex-employers are listed as users, for a copy of your personal records - under UK Data Protection, you are allowed free access to this information. Once you have your printout, or they have confirmed they have no record of you, simply address each issue - I would recommend if you find anything, take legal advice

My bet is that on launch, one of the large unions such as the shop workers union USDAW or an employee rights organization such as Liberty will go after NSDR with a large iron fist, and NSDR will be but as short lived an initiative as it is short sighted. But in the mean time, its worth checking

Gordon Brown's free lesson to executives in 2008 - know what you are good at

The 2008 UK Local Election results are only part way in, but its clear that the Labour party has suffered a severe drubbing at the poll station. The question now has to be - why?

After nearly 12years of Labour government, there was bound to be a bit of voter apathy, and feeling the need for a change - there always is. But to come third behind the Liberal Democrats is astounding - something went badly wrong.

Of the key points, the 10p tax issue has been complained about by all Labour councillors who have lost their seats. In fact, reading the local press, it would be a fair conclusion that Labour central office wrote a press-release briefing on it, so similar are the words being used by now redundant Labour councillors. But they didn't - it's the words coming from the councillors, having knocked on so many doors, and heard the same words from the voters nationally.

Secondly, the economy is hurting - and so are the voters. Fuel and energy costs, and the need to remortgage to a higher fixed rate, if it can be secured.

But the key to both issues is that the originator of these decisions, and the creator of these crisises is one man: Gordon Brown. But can he have really failed that quickly?

Simply, yes - and its in the third issue being concluded by the academic election analysers and commentators. What the statistics are showing is that the Conservative voting suburbs, who Tony Blair so effectively communicated to and held, are returning enmass to their Tory homeland. Personally I am sure that further detailed and focus group analysis will be written in the media in the next month that, along with a series of economic and policy issues, they returned due to Brown looking wooden and more Michael Foot than Blair like in political application - all the right words, just not communicated or executed well enough.

So where next? When the details start to emerge of the why, those in Westminster sat in now vunerable to the Tory's Labour seats will want change - and the question will be: can Brown deliver that change? I think its a fair conclusion that's a no in the minds of the voters. Brown will argue that when the economy turns round, all will be OK; but it won't be. The UK economists are suggesting a sticky 2008 and flat 2009; and by 2009 I am pretty sure Barrack Obama will be sitting in the White House looking more Kennedy/Blair like than high thinking but wooden acting Brown. Plus the Conservatives will have gained further on their 22point momentum, and momentum/perception in politics is as key as strategy.

In conclusion, its now a question of how Gordon Brown leaves Number 10 in the next two years, not when. If the polls dip further in the summer, and the recession cuts deeper in September (and we have a wet summer), he could be gone by Christmas 2009 thank to his own backbenchers - if the economy turns up in October 2008, then he could run until Spring 2009's local elections, on which results his further residence will wholly depended.

The question for business executives is - why did such a good hearted, high thinking man, get it so wrong: what could we learn? Simply - timing, communication, and work focus. Blair won the battle to lead Labour, making Brown his number2 - it was the best decision to get Labour elected, but not for Brown's singular childhood ambition. Secondly, by the time he got to Number10, he should have learnt how to communicate effectively having stood in Blair's shadow for so long - clearly, he didn't, but I also think that in politics that's a skill that can not be learnt: its natural gift, or not. Thirdly, much as though Brown works harder than Blair, according to those on the inside its one thing at a time, rather than Blair's manic ability too do much (poorly) at once - Blair was reliant on a team to support a system to make him effective (as the team broke down, so did Blair's capability); Brown looks wooden and slow by choosing the wrong things and taking too long about them.

The question therefore is - was Brown made for the job? It is often said that Franklin D Roosevelt would not have been elected, had it not been for the co-operation of the press in not letting the public know he was disabled: JFK often said FDR would not have been elected in the television era, as was shown in his own case when Nixon sweated in their TV debate. If Brown was competing against Ted Heath in the 1970's, then he could have won - but politics has moved on, and having chosen the right man to get the party elected against an equally less adapt John Major and fatally wounded government, he should have recognised the shifted movement of the ground when Blair finally agreed to step aside.

Some times, and more often in these fast changing times - although you can see a strategy and a resultantly achievable goal, you also need to question in which team you play, and what role you are best adapted too. Visionary planner and great thinker doesn't always communicate into Leader - and if does, it could be blindingly obvious the wrong answer, to which you will only be allowed to contemplate in retirement.