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.

Philip King, CEO of Institute of Credit Management (ICM) - 'Judge or Jury'

I had the privilege of sitting on the judging panel last week for the SME category of the National Business Awards. It was the first time I've been a judge where the nominees have to present a 'pitch' and it was a fascinating experience. I've always wondered what it felt like to be a dragon in the den, and I guess this is the closest I'll ever get to finding out!

There were 12 entries and we spent a long day listening to a series of presentations from a range of very diverse businesses. It was inspirational hearing from people who have turned an idea into a business that is thriving and, in some cases, hugely successful in a very short space of time.

The common theme, certainly among the front runners, was unbridled energy and enthusiasm and a passion for a business that entrepreneurs saw as 'their baby'. If those qualities could be replicated and reproduced across business, it's hard to believe we'd still be struggling to see the recovery for which we all yearn. So often, the idea was simple and certainly not rocket science. As a judge, I was left thinking why somebody else hadn't thought of it before and wishing I had a more creative mind that could spot what seemed like obvious opportunities once somebody else has pointed them out!

The Start-Up Loans Company in which I'm involved has now started lending and, at the Board Meeting this week, we were hearing examples of young people who are determined to turn an idea into a successful business and - judging by their determination - will do so.

On the political front, we've heard Vince Cable's announcement about the new Government-funded bank to support SMEs. The devil, as always, will be in the detail but I certainly welcome the plan to bring together in one place Government finance support for small and mid-sized businesses. As I've said here recently, the multiplicity and complexity of schemes often results in them almost working against each other so if the new bank helps to simplify and de-clutter the landscape, it can only be a good thing.

It was good to meet Michael Fallon, the new Business Minister, this week and I'm at the Labour and Conservative conferences over the next two weeks. It will be interesting to hear what the parties have to say at this mid-way point of the current Government.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Reading between the lines?'

Last week Vince Cable announced that the Government was tabling the Statutory Instrument to implement the planned changes to accounting thresholds.  The accompanying BIS press release heralded the fact that allowing 36,000 more companies to choose not to have an audit "will help save UK companies millions every year and free them up to expand and grow their business, which ultimately benefits the entire British economy".

 

How frustrating it is to see the Government fail to grasp a fundamental principle of trade credit and business. Suppliers make credit decisions based on the information available to them; the more information, and the more reliable it is, the better will be the quality of the decision.  It follows that, where the information supports it, credit will be more readily available to the business requiring the goods or service.  Most likely, 36,000 companies will now follow the implicit steer from Government and leave potential suppliers struggling to justify the granting of credit.  Will that aid economic growth? I think not!

 

We should remind ourselves what audits do.  Formally, they ensure the accounts represent a true and fair view of the company's financial situation giving suppliers confidence in the status of the business they're being asked to support through the provision of goods or services on credit.  But they do much more besides.  Very often, they highlight errors in the business's accounting system, records or processes, they identify any gaps or omissions that could be attributable to inefficiency or, worse, fraud, and they provide an independent and objective view of the business.  A good auditor can be very useful to a business; I know the ICM's auditor takes a real interest in its business and our discussions go far beyond the accounts and the numbers.

 

Interestingly, only this week, I saw a draft article for a European magazine by a university academic referring to the positive impact of the changes in 2006 that obliged German companies, especially small and medium-sized ones, to disclose financial statements and the resulting increased transparency!

 

I understand the thinking behind the changes and I have no problem for micro-businesses with very low turnover where accounting is cash-based and simple, but we're talking here about businesses with turnover up to £6.5m and 50 employees.  When an error eventually comes to light and the company fails because it's too late to do anything about it, there will be impacts on the business, its suppliers, its employees and the economy.  The suggestion that something that can be so invaluable is an unnecessary regulatory burden is misguided, naive, and unhelpful.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Substance over form'

Am I alone in getting increasingly frustrated by politics taking precedence over substance? I've been listening in recent days to the spat between Adrian Beecroft and Vince Cable about the former's report on employment law, with Chuka Umunna's contribution adding plenty of fuel to the fire.  My frustration is that there has been very little talk about the detail of the report with most of the debate focused on whether or not Vince Cable should be called a socialist, and whether Adrian Beecroft's background (he has a career in private equity and is a substantial donor to the conservative party) makes him even the right person to write the report.

All very interesting and media worthy but what I'm more interested in is the content of the report, the recommendations it makes, and how they might – or might not – benefit the economy.  Sadly, the real detail and its potential impacts is conspicuous by its absence from most reporting.  I've downloaded the draft of 12 October 2011 and the published version of 24 October 2011 to my Kindle and will have a read through over the next couple of days.  I'll be able to draw my own conclusions then and filter out the noise of the politics and rhetoric.

On a separate note, I've had some really interesting meetings this week and will be able to share more details in my blog next week.  In essence, I've seen a really good example of the Government working with the wider business community to deliver growth through tangible and practical support.  Sometimes Government has to create an environment in which something can be created and delivered without its direct and ongoing involvement.  I believe I'm seeing an excellent example of that, but more next time…

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'A positive route to growth'

So the latest Project Merlin figures have been released and they show that, in the third quarter, new lending to business was £57.4bn, of which £18.8bn was to SME's. Let's remember that the full-year targets are £190bn and £76bn respectively with £157.7bn and £56.1bn being achieved so far. Simple arithmetic tells me, assuming nothing much changes, that the total lending target will be achieved and the SME target will probably fall a trifle short. Not surprisingly, the data has generated the usual and expected clamour for banks to be forced to lend more to small businesses.

Regular readers will not want me to reiterate my view with regards the fallacy of 'forcing' banks to lend, and they will have seen my blog last week talking about some basic errors made by start-up businesses. I believe my observations then support my contention that lending decisions should be based on rational - rather than political or emotional - criteria.

I was privileged to be a contributor to the BIS/UKTI-organised UK Growth and Finance Fitness event in London last Thursday, and the subject of SME growth and finance was a recurring theme in Lord Green and David Cameron's opening speeches. Vince Cable also took up the theme in his address, as did Doug Richard, and early Dragons Den guru and an angel investor, who expressed his views clearly and articulately.

The reality of course is that not all SMEs want or need to borrow; indeed a recent SME Finance Monitor report showed that 47 percent never use external funding ('never' defined as neither now nor in the past five years). What we need, therefore, is an environment in which SMEs want - and feel confident - to grow, and one way to achieve that would be through a growth in exporting.

Two statistics in David Cameron's speech struck me in particular: firstly, only one in five SMEs export but if that figure was increased to one in four, Britain's trade deficit would be wiped out; secondly, Britain exports more to Ireland than to Brazil, Russia, India and China combined; the BRIC countries therefore represent a huge potential market.

So why don't more SMEs export, and, perhaps connected, why don't more SMEs want to obtain external funding? I've said in a number of forums with government and others that the key to SME growth is less about obtaining funding, and more about building confidence. Increased confidence would deliver more willingness to introduce new products and services, more willingness to enter new markets either at home or overseas, and more willingness to take on additional staff.

I've also expressed my view that many SMEs don't consider exporting because they see it as a 'dark art' and are afraid of the unknown. I'm delighted ECGD announced at the event that it is changing its name from 'Export Credits Guarantee Department' to 'UK Export Finance' and is going to work much more closely with UKTI. I believe that even such a cosmetic change will make SME's less apprehensive or uncertain as regards what the former ECGD does - and the help it can provide.

A recurring theme also came from the panel of small businesses who are successfully exporting. They started exporting because they were in a desperate situation and it was their last hope of keeping the business alive...and it worked. What we need is more businesses embracing exporting as a positive route to growth rather than a last resort and act of desperation.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Wake up and smell the coffee'

When I stay in London, I often use a hotel near Swiss Cottage. It's on the Finchley Road, located in a typical suburb of the capital, its street lined with shops. Over the last few years, I've noticed something that was brought home to me on Monday.

Within about half a mile, there are a number of fast food establishments, some long established cafes and restaurants and a couple of Costa Coffee shops. There are also a couple of independent coffee shops with the usual comforts. One of these closed down a few months ago and was emptied; it has now been replaced by another one that - if you hadn't seen the empty shop in the interim - you could mistake for what was there before.

Further down towards Swiss Cottage Station, it happened again - a new shop replacing one that has closed down. Then more recently, I noticed that that too has now closed down, having been open for no more than a handful of weeks.

Now I know nothing about these businesses or their owners but, from using them, I get the impression there is an individual who has fulfilled a dream by opening the premises and is clearly intent on giving customers a good experience. They work hard and want their enterprise to succeed. But, in all but one case so far, they've failed.

The obvious question that occurs to me is why - when a coffee shop has failed on a particular site - you would think it a good idea to open another? It's not just about location, but also about the clientele, the volume of turnover that can be generated, and the business model of competing operations. And this is obviously not a problem unique to Finchley Road; how often do we see businesses opening where the owners clearly haven't given enough thought to whether they've chosen the right place for them?

I said at an event hosted by Vince Cable, Mark Prisk, and Francis Maude over a year ago that one of the issues arising from the rationalisation of the Civil Service (and, indeed the private sector) would be people receiving a large redundancy payment and using it to fulfil their lifetime dream of starting a business, only to see that dream turn into a nightmare. This is one of the reasons why I believe we have still to see the peak of insolvencies and why business education is so vital. Scenarios like this can be heart-wrenchingly sad and avoiding them would be good for all of us and for the economy.

We are pleased, therefore, to be actively engaged in the BIS Finance Fitness Event and Campaign being launched in London today with the aim of making new businesses and existing ones better equipped and able to survive. We will be continuing to provide advice through our Credit Management Helpline and Managing Cashflow Guides (www.creditmanagement.org.uk) and we're also launching an SME Collections Toolkit as part of ICM Online Services that will provide very practical advice and tools with templates, video role-plays and more.

Those of us supplying and talking to small and start-up businesses could do worse than point people to advice like this; after all, if they get paid, we're more likely to get paid too!

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Forced lending - no, no, no!'

So Britain's largest banks have finally signed up to a series of pay and lending reforms http://tiny.cc/sbhgo, and whilst I don't especially want to add to the exhaustive comments made before and since the announcement, I was rather captivated by the interview with Vince Cable on Radio 4's PM.

The interviewer, Eddie Mair, was making the point forcibly that the Government has no real power as a result of the agreement and still won't be able to 'force' the banks to lend to small businesses. We know ourselves that the banks' record at supporting businesses is not as good as it is claimed to be, and getting the top level thinking down to local management is similarly not as effective as it might be. We know also that SMEs are not as good at producing credible business plans to support requests for funding as they should be, nor as good at collecting cash due to their businesses as they need to be.

But more than this: we know that the Government doesn't deliver initiatives in a way that makes them easily understood by business, and its follow-through is usually poor; and there is a disconnect between the views of the small business organisations and the views of the banks about the reasons and causes of the funding availability issues.

And yet despite all this, please don't tell me that the banks should be forced to lend to small businesses.

Yes, encourage them to understand their small business customers better and provide them with best advice. Yes also be supportive and imaginative in the help they can provide. But force them to lend? NO, NO, NO

I have seen several examples where a bank's refusal to lend appears to lack logic, and they have made unreasonable and unacceptable demands of their customers. But I have also seen small businesses that are clearly in terminal decline, blaming the banks for their woes when it's obvious that lending more money would only have delayed the inevitable insolvency.

Please let's make sure we don't forget the basic principles of good credit management - you don't lend more than a customer can afford to repay and you drive profitable sales while protecting your business against unnecessary and avoidable risk.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Information leads to finance'

Although you might not believe it, there has been quite a bit going on this week, apart from the weather. Perhaps the biggest news is around the progress of Doing Business Together, an initiative in which the ICM played an important role as part of the steering group that drafted and agreed the Operating Principles prior to their launch at the CBI in October. An event tomorrow will add to the momentum already created http://bit.ly/eTz8lO.

The aim of the Doing Business Together group is to help SMEs manage their own businesses better and obtain the finance and credit they require for a successful trading relationship.

The operating principles (http://www.doingbusinesstogether.org/) are designed to ensure that the relationship between SMEs and their finance and trade credit providers, is one of profitable partnership through a shared commitment to the principles of honesty and transparency. Put simply, they are designed to help get Britain back on its feet.

Trade credit supplies more finance to business than bank loans and overdrafts, and credit professionals are therefore key to the recovery that we all so desperately want and the country needs. In order to make informed decisions, we need information that is timely, relevant and accurate.

Credit professionals have a major part to play in encouraging businesses to produce, use and share information that will support their business, keep supply channels open, and aid the provision of finance. Getting management accounts from our customers can no longer be the exception. If we are really going to know our customers as we should, and be able to manage the relationship and risk effectively, access to such critical material must become the rule.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Ignorance is damaging'

I was in illustrious company earlier in the week when I was invited as one of the leading business organisations to the Small Business Summit at the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) - http://bit.ly/9mG8bs.

Vince Cable, Mark Prisk, Lord Young, Francis Maude and Grant Shapps were all in attendance and lending their support to an initiative that has three key commitments to small business: to improve access to finance; to make it easier to do business with the public sector; and to allow social tenants to start up their business at home.

It is encouraging that the Government is working hard to support small businesses; they are clearly going to be key to the recovery. But such efforts are only going to work if businesses are aware of the initiatives in the first place, and know where they can go for help.

One of the long-standing criticisms of the EFG (Enterprise Finance Guarantee) Scheme, for example, is that small businesses, banks and business organisations have seldom known enough about the scheme, and its details, with the result that demand has been depressed. Similarly, banks have many products to help small business - not just the ubiquitous overdraft - but these businesses either don't understand them or have never been told what other products may be suitable.

That ignorance extends to understanding the basic principles of cashflow management. Business owners, and especially micro business owners, are too busy making sure their businesses survive to worry about getting - or even looking for - advice, even when that advice is the very stuff they need to stay in business!

There have now been more than 185,000 downloads of the ICM's Managing Cashflow Guides. These numbers are very encouraging, and we are rightfully proud of what we have achieved to date. But we have to balance this success with the fact that there are 4.8 million small and medium businesses in the UK that employ less than 250 people, and when we compare our downloads to the potential target audience, there is still much work to be done.

Government needs to make a concerted and focused effort - including working further with organisations like the ICM - to educate businesses and make them aware of the basics that will sustain them into the future.

http://www.creditmanagement.org.uk/bisguides.htm

http://www.icm.org.uk

http://twitter.com/philipkingicm