Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Changing the mindset of start-ups'

I've had some interesting meetings this week with BIS officials and Ministers, and other organisations, talking about late payment. No doubt you'll have seen David Cameron's announcement in October that a consultation was going to be launched looking at the issue, and I mentioned it in this blog column a few weeks ago.

One of the meetings was a round table involving a large number of organisations looking for practical steps that might help SMEs to manage their cashflow better. There's no doubt that the required change in culture that I often refer to is needed throughout the supply chain. Big businesses need to take a responsible approach in dealing with their suppliers, and smaller businesses need to apply basic good credit management principles.

Therein though lies the challenge. For many micro businesses, cashflow only becomes important when it runs short, and that's no surprise. If I'm trying to start a business, I'm bound to be more worried about finding customers and delivering my service or product than I am about such things as agreeing payment terms, invoicing accurately and promptly, and chasing unpaid amounts.

But this is what needs to change - we need to make the mindset of start-up businesses one that recognises the importance of cash from day one, that applies the basic principles that credit professionals understand so well. Unless that happens, too many businesses will never grow beyond the micro stage and too many businesses will fail. So what's the answer? I am not sure I know - I wish I did - but I'm glad to be engaged in the debate and to be working with others in looking for solutions.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Harnessing support for exports'

You might have seen that this is Export Week designed to draw attention to exporting and the need for businesses in the UK to do more of it. The government has set some ambitious targets for 2020: achieving exports totalling £1 trillion and having 25% of businesses exporting, the current level is 20%.

By coincidence, the guest speaker at the ICM's Credit Industry Think Tank on Tuesday was Robert Hurley from UK Trade & Investment who shared some interesting information and facts about particular export markets and the work of UKTI, interspersed with some personal anecdotes from his long experience in exporting before joining the government organisation.

UKTI works with UK-based businesses to ensure their success in international markets and provides support in four key areas: business planning, market research, market promotion & publicity, and market visits. Although I've had significant contact with the organisation over recent years, I hadn't realised the depth or breadth of the service and support they offer.

One particular service that caught my attention was the 'Business Opportunity Alerts'. A business can register on the website stating its sector and the markets it is interested in, and it will receive alerts of any relevant opportunities that arise. I don't know how many of the 4.8 million businesses in the UK have registered for the service, and I don't know how many businesses are even aware of the facility, but I'd hazard a guess that for both it's a pretty small proportion, and that's a shame.

Exporting is a really good way to grow our economy, and it's good for business generally, so services like this need a high profile. I've talked in previous blogs and elsewhere about the disappointing lack of awareness among the business community of various government schemes and this is another example.

A huge amount of good work is put into supporting businesses, especially the small and medium ones, and it's a pity when that effort goes to waste. More needs to be done to bring such things to the attention of business owners and government needs to get smarter. In the meantime, if you know a small business that's even thinking about selling into overseas markets then you could do worse than point them to www.ukti.gov.uk

 

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - Facing facts'

I've been following the recent furore about Tesco's trial of face-scanning technology in its 450 petrol stations with interest. Apparently, the technology allows the camera to identify the customer's gender and approximate age and then deliver an appropriately targeted advert.

The targeting of adverts on web sites based on previous surfing history is well documented, the monitoring of spending through loyalty cards allowing targeted promotions has been around for several years, and the offering of free Wi-FI to facilitate the capture of data and routes to market is becoming ubiquitous. For a long time we've been told that the average person is viewed on CCTV an estimated 70 times each day even if the awareness falls into our subconscious.

This somehow seems to be a step further but is surely no surprise in an age of ever increasing technological sophistication and complexity. Just this week, I realised I'd left home without putting my pen in my suit pocket. Did I panic? No, I realised that almost all my note-taking, planning and writing is on my iPad and I rarely use a pen these days. I'd never have believed that would be the case even a couple of years ago but I genuinely couldn't imagine anything different now.

And so it is with credit management. I was at the ICTF conference recently which brings together credit professionals from across Europe. One of the sessions there was a workshop looking at the use of technology and how to identify and source the best solutions. As I travel around talking to credit people I'm made aware of the advances in the software and tools being used and, equally importantly, of its integration into legacy systems, processes and procedures. In most cases, it's about more than being increasingly efficient or saving cost, it's about being more effective and adding more value to the business.

Whether we like it or not, the evolution will continue and - to some extent at least - we have to embrace it if we want to maintain our position as individuals and organisations. Do I care if Tesco is working out my age and gender so that it can show me an advert I'm more likely to be interested in? When I think about it rationally, not really!

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Banking on insurance'

There was an interesting piece in The Times on Monday talking about business lending by banks and a proposal for a Guaranteed Repayment Insurance Policy. Apparently the scheme would involve the issue of an insurance policy that could be purchased by a small business and offered to banks as security for a loan. The Government's new Business Bank is considering offering a subsidy to insurers under which it would underwrite 15 percent of the cost of any default.

The theory is that such an offering would remove one of the obstacles to business lending when the collateral demanded by the banks is so high that the taking out of a loan becomes prohibitive or too personally risky for the borrower. Small business owners would, it is thought, be more comfortable paying the premium than putting their home on the line as security.

BIS says it is only currently looking at the proposal and has made no commitment, and I agree it is right to be looking at new and innovative ways to increase the flow of money into a much needed part of the economy. I can see the attraction to a small business whose owner is fearful of losing his house if the enterprise fails but, given the paucity of cash available to businesses in their earliest days, finding additional money to pay for an insurance policy on top of all the other overheads will be a challenge.

As always the devil will be in the detail and I have no idea what the pricing model might be but I'm afraid I'm a bit sceptical. It already worries me that someone can start a limited company with no business knowledge, no awareness of their obligations and responsibilities as a director, and no capital. This scheme would, I fear, encourage the taking on of an additional expense in return for lower personal risk at a time when the business is least able to afford it. The consequence of that will be reduced profits - or increased losses - and a greater propensity for failure.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Better Late than Never'

There's been a late payment furore this week, in my world at least. I was interviewed on 5Live Investigates on Sunday and then on Monday the Prime Minister announced that BIS is going to launch a consultation on the subject.

In the midst of Cameron's announcement he repeated the suggestion made by Vince Cable in August that there might be penalties or fines for late payment. Quite apart from the debate about the practicalities of implementing such a step, the point missed is that the Late Payment legislation introduced in 1998 and strengthened by subsequent Statutory Instruments, most recently in March this year, allows for a fixed fee to be charged and supplemented by additional recovery costs for invoices paid late. The Institute's press release issued on Monday makes the point that the late payment charges are, by definition, a fine or levy for late payment.

Lord Digby Jones entered the fray stating that the Prompt Payment Code wasn't effective. He said it was merely a nice statement of intent. But that's exactly what it is: a voluntary commitment to treat suppliers fairly and pay them according to the terms agreed! If it had the teeth that he is demanding, it would cease to be a voluntary code. Now I'm not saying it couldn't be improved nor am I disagreeing with the sentiment for other or more stringent measures but I do get frustrated when people say something isn't working when it's doing what it says on the tin!

Some critics have suggested that I'm personally responsible for the Code and its defender-in-chief. I'm not, the ICM simply hosts and administers it for government but let's not dismiss the benefits out of hand: nearly 1,500 organisations have signed up, including 72 of the FTSE100; many have made fundamental changes to improve their internal systems and processes; and a dialogue has started where conversations didn't previously exist. If the Code didn't exist, by the way, the debate wouldn't be taking place and the issue wouldn't be getting airtime in the way it is. These are tangible benefits and should neither be ignored nor trivialised.

The fact is that the Prompt Payment Code was introduced as a measure to drive a change in culture complementing other measures such as the late payment legislation, naming and shaming by business organisations, and good credit management practice which - all too often - is missing from business relationships. This last point was driven home to me at an ICM Regional Roadshow in London yesterday when attendees heard about the breadth of influence credit management has, and the value it adds, across the entire business.

Credit management isn't just about collecting cash from recalcitrant customers. Good credit management starts before an order is even received by assessing the risk of a potential customer, establishing its identity and status, ensuring that it is good for the sums of credit likely to be incurred, submitting invoices correctly and promptly, understanding its invoice processing and approval systems so that they can be met, and taking swift action if payment isn't going to arrive when it's expected.

I'm capturing a huge amount of activity in a single sentence and not doing it justice but my point is this: we have to change the culture to one where treating suppliers fairly is part of the corporate responsibility agenda and we have to stamp out exploitation of small businesses by organisations that wilfully take advantage of their supplier base but that's not the whole story. We also have to help businesses to help themselves by getting the basics right. Unless we do that, we'll never see the improvement we all seek.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Why I am not Prime Minister'

This is going to be a shorter blog than I often write and it's more of a question based on my confusion than an exposition of my views! The ministerial reshuffle announced this week includes a move that leaves me perplexed, as did an earlier decision.

In September 2012, Michael Fallon was appointed Business and Enterprise Minister replacing Mark Prisk who'd held the role for a while before that, and was moving to a housing portfolio. So far so good, and Michael Fallon made a good early impression and has been instrumental in successfully driving the prompt payment debate. Then, inexplicably to me, in March 2013 the role of Minister of State for Energy was added to his portfolio meaning he was a minister in two departments: BIS (Department for Business Innovation & Skills) and DECC (Department for Energy & Climate Change). I couldn't work out then why a minister would be given a role across two separate departments given the workload and demands of one but that's probably why I'm not Prime Minister!

In this week's reshuffle, Michael Fallon has been made Industry & Energy Minister, I presume straddling the same two departments (BIS and DECC), and Matt Hancock has been appointed Minister for Skills & Enterprise working in BIS and the Department for Education. I understand such areas as late payment will be moving to Matt Hancock's remit. I've enjoyed working with Michael Fallon and his team. I think he's been effective, and I'm sure Matt Hancock will be similarly so but my question is this: why is attention to such an issue as late payment being potentially diluted through its responsibility being added to such a diverse portfolio? An issue which affects all businesses, particularly small ones, and impacts massively on the wider economy surely deserves better.

 

Weekly blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Sharing the golden nuggets!'

I spent a day this week at the ICM's Quality in Credit Management Best Practice Conference in London. The event was for organisations that have achieved, are on the journey towards achieving, or aspire to achieve the Quality in Credit Management accreditation award. What a great day.

 

I'm not going to bang on about the benefits of the Quality in Credit Management Award accreditation scheme (though clearly I could) but rather I'm keen to talk about the benefits of sharing best practice. When you get a group of people in a room who are at the top of their game - either personally or from an organisational perspective - it's amazing what comes out.

 

At the conference, we heard a series of speakers sharing their experiences and giving examples of best practice. Of course, what works for one organisation might not work for another, but hearing and filtering ideas is a great opportunity to improve, and helps meet one of the objectives of QICM, that of facilitating continuous improvement for people and organisations.

 

Some of the ideas were incredibly simple and others far more sophisticated. For example, we heard about the huge impact of introducing very simple and cheap 'music on hold' which made a great positive impression on both customers and the internal organisation.

 

More than one presenter talked about their plans to educate customers to improve their own credit management processes and procedures on the basis that, if they were more effective at collecting cash, they'd be better able to settle invoices promptly. A good example of sharing best practice with the wider business community and particularly with SMEs and micro-businesses who may lack relevant experience and expertise.

 

We saw some impressive dashboards and an explanation of how they can be used to best effect. Letting commercial people understand the value of overdue debt in terms of a number of new salesmen or replacement delivery vehicles, for example, is not a new idea but is very powerful.

 

Afternoon presentations addressed how to energise and motivate teams through periods of change and how to make step changes in performance. Some innovative and invigorating ideas on how to create a culture that is focused, cohesive and driven. The case studies came from large organisations but contained concepts that could be adopted in a variety of environments.

 

What's even more interesting about events like this is that people can contribute more than they realise. Participants turn up expecting to learn from the wisdom and experience of the presenters without realising how good they are themselves, and what nuggets they also have to share. Whether we call it networking or by some other grand name, sharing what we know, what we do, and what we've learnt is one of the most powerful business tools, and we should do more of it.

Weekly blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'The price of success'

I've written several blogs about the payday loan industry in recent months saying, in summary, that I don't believe the concept of short term loans is fundamentally wrong and that emotion sometimes over-rides objectivity. But that does not mean that poor practice is ever acceptable. In particular I've ranted about the absence of evidence that affordability tests were being carried out and said the OFT should, in its final year, focus on this particular element.

Wonga's announcement that its pre-tax profits were up by 35% and bad debts were up by 89% has brought the sector back into sharp focus and - reading reports and commentaries - two things have struck me.

The first is Ian King, the Times Business Editor, observing that Wonga is one of the good guys in an industry that has appalling practices; by way of example he cites that it will not allow its customers to "roll" their loans more than three times and observes that the interest rates they charge are, for example, far lower than those incurred by running up an unauthorised bank overdraft. In my view, being cheaper than someone else isn't necessarily justification but it's certainly true and mitigates against some of the more emotional headlines we see. Indeed, elsewhere in the paper it's reported that loans cannot be rolled over more than twice and that Wonga stops racking up interest after 60 days to prevent debts spiralling too far out of control.

More worrying though is the quote from Wonga's Chief Executive, Errol Damelin, who is reported as saying Wonga loans were too small to be a significant problem and "it's very unlikely that a £200 or a £400 loan is what gets people into a financial mess". Perhaps by itself such a loan value won't, but as part of a vulnerable financial situation it can play a key role especially if it's taken out in desperation and as a last resort. I'd like to think Wonga is an exemplar in carrying out adequate and effective affordability checks but come on, Mr Damelin, get real - £400 MIGHT NOT be a problem for you but it could well be for some of your customers and potential customers!

 

 

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Stepping out of the bath'

After the good personal news I shared in my blog last week, there's been some heartening news on the economy this week.

The CBI's latest quarterly poll shows that the services sector, which accounts for two thirds of the UK economy, is growing at its fastest rate for six years. Last week, the Office for National Statistics lifted its second-quarter estimate for GDP growth from 0.6 per cent to 0.7 per cent. The EEF, the manufacturers' organisation, said that for the first time more members were reporting that the cost of new borrowing lines was falling than those reporting it was rising. The Bank of England's Deputy Governor suggested the Bank was sending a 'clear signal' that interest rates would not be raised any time soon reiterating the commitment made early in his reign by the new Governor Mark Carney.

 

The editor of our own magazine, Credit Management, drew attention to a number of other positive indices in his column in the September issue which hit doormats at the end of last week so perhaps the CBI is right in interpreting their numbers as evidence of a further build-up of momentum. Certainly, the conversations I'm having with businesses and organisations suggest an underlying sense of confidence that was missing a few months ago.

 

Few people seem to be overly buoyant but they do at least seem to  be moving from A glass half-empty to glass half-full mentality. In the early days of this recession when the debate was raging as to whether it would be V or U shaped, I remember one economist saying it would be bath-tub shaped, with the economy bouncing along the bottom for a prolonged period. It was a description I shamelessly stole and has proved to be pretty accurate.

 

I don't think we're off the bottom yet but I think we're looking upwards now rather than constantly looking behind us, and it does feel like momentum is building. Knowing how important confidence is to achieving recovery, let's do our bit by talking ourselves out of the bath tub.

Weekly blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Firing the imagination'

I talked last week about the flurry of consultations being launched by government ahead of the summer holidays and, guess what, there have been even more since I wrote those words.  It feels like I have spent every waking hour of the last ten days ploughing through page after page of government documents and preparing questionnaires and summaries to share with our members so they can comment and offer their views.

The latest to hit my inbox was HMRC's consultation document: 'Sharing and publishing data for public benefit', a set of proposals that "form a significant development in HMRC's Open Data Strategy".  Judged by the title, you wouldn't imagine this has much to excite credit professionals but ­ as is so often the case ­ there are nuggets hidden away that are very interesting.  Indeed, I would go far as to say that this one has genuinely excited my imagination. Why is that?

In amongst the detail, the paper suggests the possibilities of releasing of basic non-financial VAT registration data as public data, and sharing more detailed VAT registration data on a more restricted and controlled basis for specific purposes, such as credit referencing.  It also considers whether VAT registration data could provide a foundation for private sector business registers.  It is this last point that lights my fire! I'm old enough to remember the Business Names Register (I think it was called) which allowed a supplier to identify a business.  It ceased to exist years ago and no doubt someone reading this will remember better than me the background as to why, and when.  Since its demise, the ability to identify a business that trades as a sole trader or partnership has been incredibly difficult, and the proportion of businesses on which the credit reference agencies are able to report is incredibly low because of the dearth of data available to them.  I know the VAT threshold is currently £79,000 so the smallest businesses wouldn't be picked up but it would still be a huge step forward.  According to HMRC, around 800,000 VAT registered businesses are not incorporated so making basic information available to credit reference agencies would at least enable a business's existence, location, legal status, and trade classification to be verified.

Of course we'd prefer to have financial information as well but let's keep our feet on the ground; that's not going to happen any time soon.  In the meantime, please let me know what you think (the ICM In-Brief newsletter published on 14 August will have a link to the document but it can also be found here so we can make HM Government aware of our views.

I'm off to Scotland for my summer break shortly and I'm grateful to Charles Mayhew, Sue Chapple, and Sue Kettle who've agreed to do me the honour of writing guest blogs while I'm away.  If you too are heading for some time of relaxation in the coming weeks then make the most of them.  This is the only time in the year when I genuinely turn off emails (despite what I may tell Mrs K at other times!).  I'll look forward to returning refreshed and re-charged.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Unearthing a hidden gem'

The government published its Information Economy Strategy last week (it can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/information-economy-strategy).  The 57 pages set out the vision for a "thriving UK information economy enhancing our national competitiveness with, among other things, a strong, innovative, information sector exporting UK excellence to the world; UK businesses......confidently using technology, able to trade online, seizing technological opportunities and increasing revenues in domestic and international markets".  The intent and programme are ambitious yet vital if we are going to stay at the forefront of technological change and make the most of the opportunities that change will present in the years ahead.  I count myself among those who remember computer printouts being introduced as working tools in the late 1970s and I'm still struggling to grasp the concept of 3D printing as a form of manufacture so, like you, I've experienced the huge change over the past few years.  Indeed, it's not so long ago that the idea of me writing these words on an iPad sat in a car would have seemed the stuff of science fiction!

Anyway, back to the government report which has a real gem hidden away on page 23. It says government wants to make it easier for suppliers by encouraging the use of electronic invoicing.  Its aim is for central government to use electronic invoicing for all transactions.  While not mandating suppliers at this stage, it will look at ways to spread best practice and will track progress.  It goes on to say that, to realise the full benefits of e-invoicing, it is important that systems are easy to install and use, and the pricing is flexible enough to suit the needs of diverse businesses.

The ICM is increasingly engaging with the UK National e-Invoicing Forum which pulls together a number of e-invoicing providers, business organisations, and others with an interest in promoting the use of e-invoicing.  One of the interesting outputs from the Prompt Payment Code (hosted and administered for BIS by the ICM) is that the majority of complaints against signatories end up identifying administrative issues in either the raising and submission of the invoice, or the authorisation process at the recipient's end. I regularly talk to SMEs, and particularly micro-businesses, who still appear to fail to see the importance of raising invoices promptly and in line with the requirements of the paying organisation.  It can be a pain to jump through hoops to meet exacting demands of a customer but that pain fades into insignificance when set against the pain of running out of cash!

Implementing e-invoicing systems may seem daunting but, once in place, the whole process can become seamless allowing payment to hit on the agreed and expected day without further intervention.  The report is right in identifying that systems must be easy to install and use, and it's encouraging that providers have committed to look at ways to improve interoperability and accessibility.  Anything that helps add to the certainty of payment is good for business and will help support economic growth through improved cashflow.  The Prompt Payment Code (www.promptpaymentcode.co.uk) drives better payment behaviour.  Good credit management practice is vital, and e-invoicing too can play its part.  I'm looking forward to working with the UKNEF and the e-invoicing providers in the months ahead as their products evolve and awareness is raised.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'A chorus of disapproval'

I was at the ICAEW Insolvency & Restructuring Group Annual Conference in London earlier this week and took part in a panel looking at 'Breaking down barriers between participants in the insolvency process'. It was a good debate, and the whole conference had some excellent speakers and content, not least a presentation by Justin Urquhart Stewart on the global economy that was both insightful and highly entertaining. The reason for writing about the conference here, though, is that I had an issue with three views expressed by different presenters, with which I personally disagreed.

The first view was that the low rate of corporate insolvencies is likely to continue and unlikely to rise even when the economy starts to recover. I've had a long-held belief that insolvencies will spike when things get better and that remains my view. The demand for cash in struggling businesses will inevitably put them under more pressure and a greater likelihood of failure, and it will be accompanied by an environment in which the banks and other creditors will take a less tolerant view of businesses in distress. We were told that this recession is likely to be different from previous ones and the cyclical rise is less likely to happen. I disagree.

The second, from a politician, was that one of the prime reasons for the zombie companies about which we read (and I've written) so much is the failure of the banks to lend. I questioned the linkage he'd suggested and he clarified his point which was that the original failure to lend had created the shortage of working capital that had created the 'zombie state'. I acknowledge there will be some cases where having more working capital would have made the business stronger and allowed it to perhaps expand and thrive but, more generally, the problem must be that the underlying business model is flawed such that either turnover or profitability is inadequate to sustain the operation. Yes, we want the banks to lend more (to businesses that will be able to repay) but not if it means they will become a bigger write-off in due course.

The third was from an eminent senior banker who said he had yet to see a 'zombie company'. Maybe his definition is different to mine but I see, and hear about, plenty of businesses that are living from day to day covering the interest element of their debt with difficulty and knowing they are in no position to reduce the capital borrowing. And that goes for individuals too who are borrowing from one source to cover the minimum repayment on another.

I guess the value of conferences like this is that we learn, we hear different views, and we get the chance to challenge - or reinforce - our own thinking. I'm often wrong, indeed it's one of my well-known strengths, but I'm not sure I am on these issues.
 

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'End of term report: could do better'

Last week Professor Russel Griggs, Independent Reviewer of the Banking Taskforce Appeals Process wrote a guest blog and I'm grateful to him for sharing his thoughts ahead of the publication of his second annual report. It was an interesting blog and has prompted me to return to a theme I've written about more than once before: the need for greater awareness of the appeals process.

 

Despite the assurances I hear from senior bankers at government forums and elsewhere that the independent appeals process is being drawn to the attention of businesses who are declined loans, I hear too many examples where that clearly isn't the case. Not so long ago, I listened to a presentation by a regional bank executive who seemed unaware of the process at all and, more recently, one of our own ICM members shared his experience with me. After a 37 year relationship with his High Street bank, he was told that his overdraft facility was being withdrawn because it had decided to discontinue its relationship with all customers in that particular sector. He approached alternative banks and raised the issue with the Financial Ombudsman Service, several MPs, the OFT, and government ministers. Neither his nor the other banks, nor one of these parties pointed him towards, or made him aware of, the independent appeals process.

 

I've always said that banks must be free to make their own lending decisions and I've resisted all the voices suggesting that banks must be 'forced' to lend. I stand by that view. The appeals process was intended to create an environment in which businesses could be assured that a loan declined had been declined fairly or provide an opportunity for such decisions to be reviewed and reversed when appropriate.

 

I expect Russel Griggs' report to show the process is working well when it is used and this should be applauded, but it can't work if people don't know about it. The banks, and government, aren't doing enough to bring it to the attention of customers and the wider business, financial and political community. They must do better.

 

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Going for growth'

Lord Young published his Growing Your Business - A report on Growing Micro Businesses on Monday and it's a good read with some insightful views. I've spent some time with Lord Young as part of my involvement on the board of the Start-Up Loans Company, and I never cease to be amazed at his enthusiasm and energy. I'd love to think I will be so sprightly when I am 81! 

 

The report can be found at the link above and three things strike me in particular. Firstly, the proposals regarding public sector procurement starting on page 19. Whatever government might say, or intend, the reality is that many small businesses find procuring for public sector contracts bureaucratic and daunting. Their perception is that large organisations will be favoured in the process and - whether they're right or wrong - we all know that perception is, for them, reality. The removal of the PQQ system for contracts below €200,000 makes very good sense, as does the 'single passport' proposal allowing pre-qualification data to be entered once and then - after approval by one authority - apply to all bids across multiple authorities.

 

Secondly, the recognition that "Few small firms understand the importance of cash flow particularly when applying for a first bank loan." I guess the fact that the ICM/BIS Managing Cashflow Guides have been downloaded more than 450,000 times since they were launched in 2008 and are seeing regular and substantial monthly increases reinforces this point.

 

Thirdly, the recommendation that the upper age restriction be removed from the Start-Up Loans scheme. Originally set at 18-24, then in January changed to 18-30, this latest suggestion would allow anyone to benefit from what has been a hugely successful initiative. Almost 4,000 businesses have been started, receiving loans totalling nearly £20m, and the creation of a private company to manage the scheme is a radical and

 

innovative alternative to previous government propositions. The businesses receiving funding, support and mentoring have the chance of a real kick-start towards their entrepreneurial vision and aspirations. At the start of 2012, micro businesses (0-9 employees) accounted for 32% of private sector employment and 20% of private sector turnover. Growing the contribution of such businesses can only be good news for the economy and add to the increased confidence that is starting to emerge.

 

The report's 54 pages contain much more, including the proposal for Growth Vouchers encouraging businesses to obtain support and advice, and just as I am proud to have been engaged on the Start-Up Loans Company Board since its inception, I am also proud that the ICM is listed as one of the organisations with which Lord Young engaged in the writing of the report.

 

Finally, it would be remiss of me not to mention the fact that the Institute of Credit Management won another PR award last week. The press release announcing the win can be found here and I'm delighted at the recognition of what we, together with our PR agency Gravity London, have achieved in raising the profile of professional credit managers and the vital role they play in supporting the economic recovery.

 

Next week, I'll be standing down from my blog-writing responsibility for a week and we'll be publishing a guest blog by Professor Russel Griggs OBE who is Lead reviewer of the banks appeals processes and Chair of the Scottish Government’s Regulatory Review Group ahead of the publication of his second annual report in June.

 

 

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Making a date with Destiny'

My Executive Assistant at ICM HQ, Tracy Carter, is also responsible for driving our social media strategy and activity. Last week she started a discussion on LinkedIn that has generated a riveting discussion. The question she posed was: "I had an interesting conversation with my 13 year old nephew about choosing a career, and he asked me if a career in credit management would be good and if it is important? How would you answer?"

There have been plenty of long-standing credit professionals like me saying what a brilliant career credit management is. They have highlighted positive aspects of the profession such as the variety it brings, the different skills it develops, the fact that it touches every part of the business, and delivers real value in many ways.

Some, including much younger contributors than me I'm pleased to say, have recognised that the role will become more strategic and less operational as technology continues to change the way we work. Others have stressed the need for personal and professional development as a way of building what is an interesting and satisfying job into a real career.

As with all discussion forums, the debate deviates from the original question and there is some disagreement, but the divergence of views adds to the vibrancy of the thread and I'm pleased to note that the underlying mood has remained positive. It should do so because many of the very senior people in credit I know could vouch for the career prospects as they have reached the top of their chosen profession and become key players within their own businesses.

As I write these words, I'm preparing for the latest quarterly meeting of the ICM Credit Industry Think Tank, the participants on which are all a testament to the opportunities afforded by credit management as a profession. Credit management is a dynamic and thriving profession and Tracy's nephew can be assured that it would be a good career choice. But let's not kid him. The reality is that it will be down to him to take hold of the opportunity with both hands and make the most of it. As one of the contributors to the LinkedIn discussion said: "....each individual is responsible for their own destiny."

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Whistling in the wind'

If you've read the latest (May) edition of the ICM's Credit Management magazine, you'll have seen mention of a survey finding that 42% of SME respondents had never heard of any of the current Government or bank-led initiatives to support small businesses. The recent news about funding through the Business Bank and the increase in length and breadth of the Funding for Lending Scheme is great news but only if businesses are aware of the help that might be available.

 

I was pleased that, of all the schemes, awareness was highest for Start-Up Loans. Regular readers of my blog will know that I'm privileged to sit on the board of Start-Up Loans and I know how much work has gone into raising public awareness, not least by James Caan (the Chair) who has used his personal profile and networks to such great advantage.

 

There have been numerous other initiatives supporting small business in recent times such as the National Loan Guarantee and Enterprise Finance Guarantee Schemes as well as the 17 introduced by the British Bankers' Association (BBA) Task Force in 2010. But none of these serve any purpose unless businesses, banks and others are aware of their existence.

 

One of the BBA initiatives was the creation of an independent appeals process for when loan applications were declined. Russel Griggs, who chairs this, has done good work and his reports show the effectiveness of the idea but I've seen recent examples demonstrating clearly that awareness is woefully inadequate.

 

I heard in the last few days from a business that had thrown in the towel after its current bank had withdrawn facilities despite a 37 year positive relationship, loan applications to other banks had been declined, and engagement with the Financial Ombudsman Service, MPs and numerous others had failed to have any impact. What astounds me is that at no point in this whole process was the business pointed towards the very appeals process that might have helped, or at least allowed it to understand the various banks' position.

 

Surely some of the parties involved would have heard of the appeals process and could have signposted to it? Not long ago I was at a presentation by a senior regional manager from one of the major banks and he was totally ignorant of it, so perhaps not!

 

In this age when we can communicate in so many different ways, and when instant communication is the norm, I find it sad and strange that getting important messages communicated and understood is so difficult. I guess it's incumbent on all of us to ensure we are well informed and up to date with what's going on in the business world and that we play our part in passing important messages on to those who might benefit from them.

 

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'The value of true leadership'

The Financial Times reported this week that "if the International Monetary Fund's latest forecasts are right, then meaningful growth looks set to elude Britain for another two years." So stagflation is here to stay.

 

I've been listening to Jim Collins' 2011 book 'Great by Choice' and the results of this research are fascinating. The sub-title is 'Uncertainty, chaos and luck – why some thrive despite them all' and, following his standard research approach, Jim (together with his colleague Morten Hansen) looks at truly successful businesses and compares and contrasts them with a direct competitor which they have out-performed by a factor of at least ten times over a defined period. I'm only half-way through the book but what is already apparent is that the successful examples are, to a great extent, the result of having a great or enlightened leader. He talks about three common elements: Fanatic Discipline, Empirical Creativity, and Productive Paranoia but comes back to an individual that led the business' approach and made a real difference.

 

The early part of the book is a captivating comparison of the attempts by Captain Scott and Roald Amundsen to reach the South Pole. He argues and demonstrates that they were both operating in similar environments but that the difference was their approach both before and during their expeditions. For Amundsen it was a race to victory and a safe return home while, for Captain Scott, it was a devastating and tragic defeat. Events that date back to 1911 have some strong and powerful lessons for today.

If we're in a prolonged period without growth then the approach we take to our roles and to our businesses will determine the outcome and – wherever we sit within an organisation – we can have an impact and have to choose whether it will be positive or negative. I know I'm currently looking closely at what I need to do differently in the months ahead.

 

When it comes to great leaders, there's been a huge amount written following the recent death of Margaret Thatcher. It's been interesting to listen to commentators and contemporaries, some of whom are great supporters and others vociferous detractors, all share one view. She was passionate in her beliefs, she was fiercely loyal to her country, and she has left a lasting legacy on British politics. In an era when bland sound-bytes and immediate short-term company results are too often the focus, real leaders are few and far between and we need more of them driving us back to growth.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Falling on deaf ears'

I was interested to see the ICAEW (Institute of Chartered Accountants in England & Wales) quoted by James Hurley in the Telegraph last weekend making the same point the ICM had made in its submission to a government consultation in March this year. The consultation related to the implementation of 'Simpler Financial Reporting for Micro-Entities'. The Telegraph article is here and the changes include a reduction in the amount of information filed with Companies House and the opportunity to mix two different types of accounting – the traditional ‘accruals’ approach and so-called ‘cash accounting’.

 

The government claims that the measures will reduce red tape for small businesses making it easier for them to do business. We believe, however, that it will reduce the availability of credit and stifle the economy rather than the claimed positive alternative. Our argument focuses on four key issues. Firstly, to abridge or abbreviate accounts – or indeed any document – you first need to have the full version to work from. Filing less information does not, therefore, reduce the preparation time, indeed if anything it will increase it. Secondly, the presentation of prepayments and accrued income, and accruals and deferred income is vital to understanding the true financial position of a business and to being certain that it is solvent.

 

Thirdly, the absence of reported information will encourage suppliers to simply refuse requests for trade credit rather than go to the trouble of seeking more detailed information from the potential customer, particularly when the amounts involved are small. It is these modest transactions that accumulate into real economic activity and potential growth. Our final argument is that by categorising a business that turns over £440,000 and employs ten people in the same way as a genuine micro-business that might trade solely on a cash basis is ludicrous. What is worse is that the turnover and net assets limits have been substantially increased since the original discussion paper was published in August 2011.

 

Another example of unintended consequences resulting from a failure to listen adequately to the voices of those who live in the real world, I fear.

 

 

Guest blog by Charles Wilson FICM, Managing Director of Lovetts plc - 'Setting Clear Expectations'

Driving to work yesterday after the Easter holiday yesterday, I was listening to the Today programme on Radio 4. The meaning of the new Archbishop of Canterbury’s first Easter message was being debated. In his address, Justin Welby appealed to everyone to adopt realistic expectations for what institutions, or individuals, could achieve. In the end, all humans are fallible, he said. (I suspect even the new Pope might agree, who knows!)

Afterwards, commentators differed in their views. Was he sensibly advising us to manage our own expectations, including our expectations of him? Or was he abrogating, as one suggested, his own responsibility to give us a clear lead from the outset?

If you read the text of his sermon in full, it is pretty clear. He was urging us to be realistic in what we can all achieve, in these terms “Complexity and humanity are ignored, and we end up unreasonably disappointed with every institution, group and policy, from politicians to NHS, education to environment”.

In a time of economic uncertainty, and business difficulty, it is easy to think that others should, or even that we ourselves can, deliver a solution that is “perfect”. Whether you are a Prime Minister, a credit professional, or a business manager, in the end you always have to rely on others. You have to delegate a lot of things. You have to choose what NOT to do. You have to trust others, knowing they may fail.

Some business leaders never take holidays. I commend Philip King for doing so and hope he enjoyed his decorating over Easter. He is not abrogating his responsibilities to the Credit Industry, he’s not given up on us, or on Government, he’s just having a well-earned break!

In fact, it is only as we ‘let go’ of trying to achieve perfection, and subject our plans to human fallibility by sharing them with others, that our world enlarges through them.

As a lawyer, I could tell you all about the Jackson reforms of the legal profession, effective this week. Like the increase of the Small Claims’ limit to £10,000. But any search engine will give you more than enough to read on that.

Most important of all is that we set realistic expectations of what can be achieved by credit departments or third parties on their behalf. As lawyers recovering debt, we try our utmost, but keep realistic. If we don’t, we’re set to disappoint. Despite Government cutbacks, changes and reforms in the Court Service, we must nevertheless all keep trying to influence and effect change for the better. As Justin Welby said, “Setting people or institutions up to heights where they cannot but fail is mere cruelty”. I agree.

Extracts from Archbishop Justin’s sermon by kind permission of Lambeth Palace – see www.archbishopofcanterbury.org