Weekly blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM -'An added perspective'

I wrote in my blog last week about the danger of imposing prescriptive maximum payment terms on UK businesses and mentioned, by way of example, the reported offering by Canon and Nokia of favourable credit terms in their bid to keep Jessops' shops open as a route to market. 

This weekend the press suggested that the music and entertainment industry is falling over itself to keep HMV outlets open with The Sunday Times carrying the headline: "Music giants rush to keep HMV alive". The report ran: "The world's biggest music labels and film studios are assembling a multi-million pound rescue package to prevent HMV from going out of business. Universal Music, Warner Music and Sony are set to cut the price of CDs and DVDs, and give the retailer generous credit terms……."

Thinking on this reminds me of the wider role that credit professionals play in their businesses beyond risk mitigation and cash collection. When I address 'credit' audiences, I frequently remind them of the value they add to their businesses by contributing to, and in many cases even driving, the sales effort and activity. I refer to examples in my own career when I used a variety of tools and tactics (perhaps archaic by today's standards!) available to me at the time ranging from a credit reference agency to identify and pre-approve business customers for a number of mobile phone connections as a way of driving sales, to creative financial packages to allow my employer (a computer manufacturer) to supply product. We had a network of dealers, few of whom were good – on a credit basis – for any supplies on open account terms at all. Escrow accounts, back-to-back deals, end-user guarantees and many more solutions enabled us to ship product that would otherwise have remained unsold in the warehouse.

And this is where credit management comes into its own; where we can demonstrate real value. It is why credit management is such a challenging and rewarding career. In my 34th year as a credit professional I still get a huge kick out of it and even greater pleasure from leading an organisation of which I'm so proud and which remains committed to delivering the vital support our members need to deliver the cash.

Weekly blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM -'Maintaining forward momentum'

 

I've received some criticism of my comment about payment terms quoted in the Telegraph last Sunday. Coverage of the Prompt Payment Code (PPC) included my assertion that the drive by many for a prescriptive maximum 30 days credit terms is misguided. 

I make no apology for my comments and stand by them; my position is clear. Payment terms are one aspect of a trading relationship and, as such, should be open to negotiation in the same way as other factors such as price, quality, service levels, delivery arrangements etc already are. If maximum payment terms are stipulated, then one differentiator is removed. 

I remember in a previous role as Credit Manager of a computer manufacturer using very long payment terms as a carrot to persuade retailers to take obsolete printers that would otherwise have been discarded and destroyed. Offering longer payment terms can be a way of gaining business or obtaining a better price, while shorter terms can help mitigate against higher risk or compensate where competitive pressure demands lower prices.

By way of example, the Sunday Times last weekend reported that Canon and Nikon had offered favourable credit terms to Jessops in their attempts to keep it in business and maintain their vital shop window into the British retail market. I concede that their efforts spectacularly failed but, if maximum payment terms were introduced, they would not even have been able to try.

The day payment terms can't be negotiated between a supplier and customer is the day that a nail is hammered into the coffin of free market trading. I'm not for a minute suggesting that it is acceptable for large customers to exploit their suppliers, and especially smaller ones, by imposing unreasonable payment terms. That is unacceptable, just as refusing to pay a reasonable price for the products being purchased would be unacceptable.

The Prompt Payment Code was intended to drive a change in culture where good practice and paying on time, and to the agreed terms, becomes the norm rather than the exception. It is intended to get us to the point where suppliers have certainty about when to expect payment. It's great to see the increased momentum and visibility, and the increasing number of organisations signing up to the Code, but let's make sure that the debate continues to move us forwards and not back.

To become a signatory visit http://promptpaymentcode.org.uk

To read previous blogs visit http://www.icm.org.uk/home/ceos-blog
 

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'A reason for good cheer'

As we enter the Christmas break, it's good to pause and reflect on the last 12 months.  Our Regional Roadshow programme, for example, has been really successful and it was great to end the year with a superb event at the premises of Schuco in Milton Keynes.  It was an excellent venue with great speakers, and proved to be a fantastic example of the ICM credit community at its best.

 

Looking at our wider activity, we've had some notable success too.  By the end of the 2012 there will have been 125,000 downloads in the year, over 50,000 more than in 2011, and almost 400,000 downloads in total of the Managing Cashflow Guides that were written and launched in 2008.  The Prompt Payment Code (PPC), which we host and administer for BIS, featured in a November House of Commons debate when the ICM received no less than eight mentions, and we've seen a surge in sign-ups in the last few weeks - particularly from large organisations - with signatories now standing at over 1,240.

 

Even more encouraging however is recent research by Experian showing that the PPC has had a positive effect on payment times.  It found that on average those who had signed up to the Code paid five days earlier than those who had not.  Furthermore, there has been a sizeable improvement over the period amongst PPC signatories who now pay 12 days quicker than in December 2008.

 

The Code was launched late on Christmas Eve, 2008 and, while I accept that there is much much more to be done, it's great to see independent evidence that it is has made some progress in changing the culture it was designed to achieve.

 

I'm looking forward to an exciting 2013.  In the meantime, may I wish you a very happy Christmas and a peaceful, prosperous and productive New Year.

 

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Doing the right thing'

I spent Monday afternoon as part of a panel of 'experts' on a Guardian Small Business Network online Q&A session addressing Effective Cashflow Management.

 

Much of the advice offered would have been no surprise to readers of this blog. Such basic tips as: know who your customer is; agree payment terms in advance and in writing; invoice promptly and accurately; and don't be afraid to ask for money that is owed to you and is rightfully yours. The usual reminders that cashflow is vital, and that payment terms should be discussed along with all elements of a deal and not as an afterthought, also prominently featured as good advice, as well as the reminder that credit should not be offered unless you are confident that the customer can repay the amount involved.

 

All of this leads me to Comet, where administrators were appointed after it became clear that the company couldn't pay for the stock it needed for Christmas after suppliers demanded payment in advance following the withdrawal of credit insurance cover. It's always disappointing when long-established high street names collapse, and the Comet situation is no exception, but I have to take issue with some of the media coverage over last weekend.

 

It incenses me when it's suggested that suppliers have caused the collapse of the business by unfairly refusing to supply goods on credit terms. Credit is not a right, it is a privilege and is one of the tools available to businesses in creating profitable sales through the provision of extended payment terms. As above, credit should only be granted when you're confident that the customer can repay the amount involved.

 

Several writers expressed concerns about Comet's survival when OpCapita bought the retailer in February. I'm not going to get into the debate about the financial engineering involved here but suffice to say unsecured creditors are likely to lose substantially more than the investor who was going to save the business, so if questions are going to be asked and brickbats thrown, let's aim them in the right direction. And there are certainly questions to be answered.

 

Credit professionals weren't the cause; they were dealing with the symptoms and, if they were reducing credit availability, they were doing the right thing for their own organisations.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Always read the label'

So David Cameron met with some of the country's largest companies this week and urged them to support their smaller company suppliers by engaging in Supply Chain Finance.  The scheme uses the creditworthiness of the big company customer to allow the smaller supplier to obtain funding at lower cost secured against invoices that have been approved for payment.  It's often called reverse factoring, and one of the biggest advantages is that - since the buyer has confirmed approval of the invoice - there is no recourse.

 

The downside is that there are significant IT and administrative costs and it will only work in circumstances where the customer/supplier relationship is ongoing with regular transactions.  Perhaps the bigger risk is that large customers will be able to dictate longer payment terms justified on the basis that they have an arrangement whereby the SME can be paid faster.  But that, of course, will cost the SME interest which flies in the face of the culture we want to see, where payment terms are set fairly, and adhered to, in a climate where paying on time is the norm rather than the exception.

 

I'm not as scathing as some commentators about the scheme - there are circumstances where it is a great solution and can work really well – but it certainly isn't a panacea, and nor a one-size-fits-all solution.  I'd like to think that, while our Prime Minister had these business leaders in the room, he also asked those who hadn't signed up to the Prompt Payment Code why they hadn't done so.  In a week when Sainsbury's is being lambasted for extending payment terms for non-food suppliers to 75 days, we need to be encouraging good practice that enables SMEs to have certainty about payment expectations.  Supply Chain Finance has its place but there's no substitute for agreeing fair payment terms and sticking to them.  We need more businesses to lead by example, and we need our leaders to put pressure on them to do so.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'The case of the pickled onion'

I belong to a Vistage Chief Executives Group which provides its members with the opportunity to hear expert speakers, to share issues with other Chief Execs from different unrelated sectors and industries, and coaching. I attended a session yesterday with a workshop on negotiation run by Malcolm Smith.  He was one of the best speakers I've heard and his style, passion and energy were very impressive.  A couple of things seem worthy of mention.

We hear a great deal about large retailers exploiting smaller suppliers by demanding long and extended payment terms, and one of the things I always say is that this behaviour isn't restricted to the issue of credit. Buying power will manifest itself across all areas including credit terms, margin, price, rebates, packaging and so much more.

Malcolm shared a story from earlier this decade about how a supplier in the US was put out of business by the behaviour of a large retailer.  I don't want to go into too much detail here but, in essence, a small supplier won a contract to supply the retailer with its pickled onions which would retail at their almost standard price.  Buoyed by the prospect of massively increased sales, the company expanded by setting up new processing plants and scaling up to meet the expected demand and everything went well.  Two years later, after a process involving merchandisers, auditors (who were on the supplier's site for eighteen months), and procurement experts, the selling price was reduced to less than half and the quantity for that price was increased from a small jar of a few grams to one the size of an aquarium that was too big to carry in one hand and was branded as a 'gallon jar of pickles for $2.97'.  Not surprisingly, we were told, the company went out of business and I guess it's a case of the classic ‘if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is’.

I understand how difficult it must be to resist the demands of a large customer when that customer might be the gateway to a brilliant future but, if the ultimate price is too great, what's the point?  I've been quoted frequently saying that businesses shouldn't just roll over.  First say no, then get back to the table and negotiate what can be obtained in return, before finally walking away if that's the only option.  Accepting business, however good it seems, at suicidal terms can only be a recipe for disaster.

One of the things Malcolm talked about yesterday was the need to have a list of ‘tradables’ that could be introduced to prevent the negotiation being only about price.  I was delighted that one of the key ‘tradables’ on his list was payment terms – "yes, I can reduce the price by x% if you guarantee to pay me within 14 days rather than your standard 30, 60, or 90 days".  The thing he clearly understands that so many businesses, politicians and others do not is that payment terms are as much a part of the overall business transaction as price, colour, delivery or anything else.  When payment terms are left to be discussed after everything else has been put to bed, the only loser is likely to be the supplier!

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Be careful what you wish for'

In a Financial Times survey of 83 economists (including 11 former members of the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee) earlier this week there was a consensus, by a majority of three to one, that the economic outlook in 2012 would deteriorate. It also showed that almost all of those expressing an opinion said the UK outlook would be much worse if the Euro collapsed. I can't say I'm surprised by the findings - I think we've all known for a while that this year is going to be tough and little better - if at all - than 2011.

I quoted Richard Tyler of the Telegraph in my blog on 1 December saying that we should all commit not to say Britain would have another recession on the basis that these things can become self-fulfilling. I'm not sure what impact our words have but I do know something of the positive impact credit professionals can have on their businesses and that is something we certainly should be talking about.

2012 is the year when we, as credit professionals, need to stand up and be counted. We need to make sure that our peers, colleagues, and Boards know and understand the contribution we can - and do - make. When a potential order is difficult to accept, we can engineer payment terms and security to make the unacceptable acceptable. When a coveted order is almost out of reach, payment terms used cleverly can make the unattainable attainable. When a situation with a debtor is looking like it could go horribly wrong, careful management and close contact can make the potentially irrecoverable recoverable.

Whatever sector and industry we work in, and whatever our role, we need to show our professionalism, be proud of our profession, and raise awareness of the significance of our contribution. Two practical steps we might take: firstly, calculate the cash-flow value of one day's sales to our businesses so we can talk about our contribution in terms of hard cash rather than the reduction of one day in DSO (the former is much more meaningful to the rest of the business). Secondly, we can show we are professionals and belong to an organisation representing our profession by wearing the new ICM badge. If you haven't got yours yet, simply send an email to members@icm.org.uk quoting your correct email address and saying how many people currently work in your credit department.

I'm not a great believer in New Year's resolutions but I do passionately believe in setting goals, and showing commitment to them by monitoring progress. For 2012, be proud of your professionalism, stand up and be counted, and don't be afraid to demonstrate your value.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Late Payment thinking that is back to front'

I spoke at a conference organised by the AFDCC (the French equivalent of the ICM) last Friday in Paris. It was a good event held in a very impressive venue and about 150 delegates assembled to hear about and debate, amongst other things, the new EU Directive on Late Payment. One of the keynote speakers was Barbara Weiler MEP, an architect and key driver of the new Directive. Her passion for the benefits on business of improving payment terms is not in doubt and her energy has clearly been instrumental in getting the Directive adopted.

The recent survey of ICM members conducted by Equifax showed that 65% of respondents believe the Government should do more to protect small businesses from the negative impact of late payments, and there can be no argument that the existing legislation has not worked in the way intended. Businesses, and particularly small ones, are either ignorant of the law, don't know how to use it, or are afraid to do so for fear of losing a customer. There are exceptions of course; I know credit professionals who use it very successfully and mitigate the cost of financing extended credit by so doing, and I know others who generate a late payment 'charges and interest' invoice to accompany the first collection letter very effectively.

Primarily, the real financial benefit comes when legal action is taken and the late payment charges and interest are added to the principal debt and can significantly increase the amount recovered. But that was never the point of legislation - it wasn't intended to make for better recovery at the end of the food chain; the idea was to improve payment behaviour from the start!

Unfortunately, politicians often seem to miss the point of what happens in the real business world and this is no exception. The Directive states that, if payment terms are not agreed in the contract, then the assumed terms shall be 30 days and - if payment terms are set out in the contract - they cannot be 'grossly unfair'. The definition of 'grossly unfair' is unclear but, in any event, how many small companies would be willing or able to take legal action to argue the case and get remedy? The inclusion of a clause allowing a supplier to recover reasonable actual debt recovery costs (in addition to interest) rather than just the current standard late payment charge is positive but is again a back-end benefit, not a front-end incentive to change payment behaviour.

For me, the most encouraging thing in the whole conference was Barbara Weiler saying that the Directive is as much about changing the culture of payment through soft issues as it is about introducing hard legislative measures. The UK has been lauded for its Prompt Payment Code (administered for BIS by the ICM of course) and educational activity like our Managing Cashflow Guides are also recognised as leading the field. As credit professionals we have more opportunity than most - and should use it - to influence that change of culture by adopting credit management best practice. We can and should be more powerful and effective than a Directive and if the Directive gets more attention and visibility for the importance of cash-flow management and the value we add to businesses, then - for that reason alone - I welcome it.

The Prompt Payment Code

Institute of Credit Management Press Releases