There are many more men in senior positions in corporate world and public office, the subjects of previous articles, whilst there are far more women in part-time work. The profile of the work force still strongly favours the male. There was some debate regarding whether this was a reflection of society that was reflected in the business world or the business world imposing it’s own preferences onto society.

Society was held to account because of the way in which we structure it’s conditioning. The way that we teach and interact from a very early age boys differently than girls – the old train set versus dolly argument. Also, the apparent lack of inclination to sufficiently raise issues to our Government so that they can reflect our wishes in it’s new legislation – if we wanted more women in influential positions then we would ask more vociferously for it. And finally, that the current imbalance in Parliament means that these issues do not stand a chance of effective representation – a sort of self-fulfilling prophesy; turkey’s don’t vote for Christmas and the male majority will not vote to threaten it’s position of dominance. Business cannot be held responsible for the issues of the society as businesses is interested in profits and not social order. They operate within free market conditions and it is the market that provides it’s resources.

Big business was cited as the cause rather than suffering from the effects by virtue of it by imposing it’s requirements potential candidates in a way that perpetuates the status quo; back-filling it’s requirements through the education system. This would be particularly prevail ant when in difficult economic conditions where jobs are at a premium and risk taking is discouraged. The argument here is reinforced; businesses are self-promoting and will deploy as much or as little equality provided that the profits are secured; social issues can be addressed in times of boom it would seem!

So then is it a question for society to answer? Whilst we perpetuate stereotypes can we break the mould? I can only speak from personal experience here but I believe that not only can we, but we must. I am passionate about changing the way the world does business and I believe that women are the key. More yang less yin and the creation of a more ethical business “balance”. If I am to be any way successful in my venture it is essential that I have some considerable support from the women’s entrepreneurial community and as many in high office as possible. I am confident that I am making progress and so the question of women’s confidence is a particularly appropriate one. If women are to address the imbalance issue and secure far more senior roles, in fact more roles in general, then their own confidence and authenticity will need to be unquestioned.

I have worked around, for and over about as many women as men. Yes, I was lucky to work for an Equal Opportunities employer and I did work in an open office environment but the representation of men: women was around 60:40. Not perfect but not bad. Unfortunately all the senior roles were all men with a few notable exceptions. The attributes of the successful ones, and I mean they that achieved higher positions within the organisation and not on a personal level, were pretty mixed.

A quiet and phlegmatic head of accounts, a ‘work-hard-play -hard‘ sales manager and a ‘country girl comes good‘ account manager. There were no single attribute that all three of these successful women possessed to my knowledge bar one; commitment.

They saw what they wanted and believed that they could get it. They were not overtly extrovert. They were not workaholics, although they did adopt the Protestant ‘work till you drop‘ work ethic. They were not exceptionally intelligent academically. They were not simply the product of corporate politics. They believed that they could do more, did it and received the benefits. They faced and conquered the same obstacles as men. Job for job, salary for salary.

Clearly I cannot comment for all businesses but I do know that in my direct experience, gender was not an issue; the quality and quantity of women applicants was. It seemed that women did not put themselves forward for senior roles as much as their male counterparts. There were no internal barriers to entry, no politics or procedures, there was precedent and there was opportunity and as far as I am aware there still is.

The issue, it would seem, would be to ensure that women have the personal confidence and an authentic voice. It is possible that this will come from the top, as role models and high profile women lead the way but I think that it must be addressed at all levels. Pull from the top and push from the bottom and middle. Women must find ways to provide mutually beneficial resources; mentors and mentee’s would be a great example of this whereby currently successful women mentor and coach those embarking on career paths. Women must create their own voice; maximising professional exposure through networks and pressure groups. Women must continue to develop themselves personally.

There are undoubtedly variations in the way that we currently assess male/female career issues and these variations come from three areas; the individual woman, the business world and the society. By developing the first we can change the second. By changing the second we can change the third.

While building the community for the magazine, arranging interviews and discussing issues, something that I did not expect has become abundantly clear to me – it’s not about gender, it’s about attitude.

It is from this perspective that a great light has shone. Successful people are successful irrespective of gender. I accept that there may be personal, political and social issues that specifically effect women more than men but this is not my point. My point is that the same traits lead to popularity, success and achievement for both sexes as do those for misery, loneliness and an unfulfilling life.

What underpins these traits is attitude. Values, if you will.

I have heard it said that women have a greater propensity towards nurturing and sharing whereas men are more inclined to personal achievement and competition. I can only say that this may be generally true but is by no means universally true.

I have met women entrepreneurs that are equally self-motivated, if not more so, than many men. This underlying requirement for self promotion materialises in a myriad of ways; taking more than they give, claiming credit for ideas that belong to peers or employees, using group or collaborative projects for their own, specific ends. They display the traditional “male” traits of “pulling up the ladder” and of beating down the competition.

I have also worked with men that have a distinct and overt sensitivity and a generous, humble nature. They freely give their time, energy and ideas to teams and groups without any requirement for personal publicity or gain. They create products and projects that are specifically aimed at “the greater good” irrespective of class or gender. They introduce terms of contract or business that genuinely seek a “win-win” and are open and honest with their communications.

I think my point is made.

So if attitude is not gender-specific and we all have the same capacity to think and behave then it is a natural conclusion to assume that “bad” behaviour is just as gender non-specific as is “good” behaviour.

Values are both personal and universal and are irrespective of role and gender.

Behaviour is inextricably linked to our values and values indisputably influence our core thought processes and belief systems. Essentially our attitude is the result of our values and beliefs and our behaviour flows from these.

Do men and women, then, have distinctly different values or just distinctly different behaviour? Well I guess that’s a question that we can only answer on an individual basis but for the record my thoughts are as follows:

• Authenticity. If you are inauthentic then gender is irrelevant. Authenticity can be described as undisputed credibility, the state of being genuine and of being not false. Authenticity is the cornerstone of values because it is the perpetual display of how you “walk your talk” or not. Authenticity is an absolutely personal issue; you decide at every moment whether to be authentic or not. You do, not anyone else or any situation

• Trust. If you want to be trusted then you have to trust. You may make mistakes along the way but it is only your own fault if you choose not to learn from these experiences. Learn and move on. If you are known as not being trustworthy it is undoubtedly because you have acted in an untrustworthy manner in the past. This too you can change.

• Honesty. I am sure that this needs no explanation. In the end, if you are dis-honest you will be found out. It is only a matter of time and the only remaining issue is how you choose to deal with it and how you behave in the future. Your call.

There are more core values that influence attitudes but I hope that the above provides pertinent substance to my opinions.

Values are not gender-specific.
Attitude is not gender-specific.

There is, however, one area that I do feel that men and women differ, at least ostensibly, and that is in communication.

It is in this area that I do take the liberty of generalisation but in a general attitude of listening and sharing I have found that women tend to be more effective.

In my experience women, both within and without the business environment, display a greater propensity to talk about more things to more people, more deeply and, dare I say it, more often. This innate ability to communicate freely is a huge differentiator that unfortunately goes largely under-valued.

If we accept that we all “think, act, do” then the major difference in how others interface with us, and so our attitudes, is by our ability to and methods of communication.

In this respect I urge two things; that men learn how to do it better and that women teach us. Oh, and I do accept that learning requires listening and listening is a part of the art of communication (and it is an art although techniques and skills can most definitely be passed on) so this is the best place to start.

I have never learned anything new when I was the one talking.

Attitudes, to success, failure, learning, sharing and growing are not gender specific. They are, however, very specific and personal to every single individual and because of this they are completely within our compass to develop and display.

I personally have no time for a bad attitude and am particularly repelled by in-authentic individuals whatever their gender. I love to be inspired and what inspires me most are those people that have no hidden agenda, are clearly trying to the best for more than just themselves and who are passionate about giving.

These individuals are both men and women. It is their values and attitude that inspires me not their personal wealth or public profile.

What about you? What is your attitude?

Well, quite a wordy but nonetheless relatively complete definition of a “brand”.

A company’s brands, and the public’s awareness of them, are often used as a factor in evaluating a company. In fact companies frequently hire market research firms to study public recognition of brand names, as well as attitudes toward the respective brands. This information is generally accepted as the public’s opinion of the company as a whole.

Here is the famous advertising copywriter and ad agency founder David Ogilvy’s definition of a brand:

“The intangible sum of a product’s attributes: its name, packaging, and price, its history, its reputation, and the way it’s advertised”.

A brand is the essence or promise of what will be delivered or experienced, and so it can be understood how this is directly related to the image and public opinion of the company itself. Enough said, I think, on the construct and “technicality” of a brand. I would like to expand on certain qualities alluded to I the above.

A brand for a company is like a reputation for a person.

A brand has been described as the accumulation of memories, stories, expectations and relationships and in this context the power of the brand can be understood in more personal terms. I refer to the comment above but would remove any element of doubt. A brand IS the reputation. It is not a just a logo, a suave TV advertisement or a savvy marketing campaign. It is not even just the representation of the product, service and operations of the company (but clearly if these fundamental activities fail to live up to the standards promoted by the brand “image” then the market and consumers will soon enough relay this back to the organisation) it is reputation; a “perceived” concept as much as an experienced one.

An example? BP. They spent hundreds of thousands of pounds re-designing their “old” petro-chemical, 1960’s-styled logo into one that is more environmentally suggestive – a lovely, stylised daisy-type flower. Did this help them when they were trawled through the American courts and the World’s press for “destroying the American South-East coast, it’s towns, industries and economy.” I suggest not. It was they, the “British” oil company, that did this. An immense amount of time and money has and will continue to be spent in re-building this whole area but how much more will have to be invested into the good folk of the US to re-build the BP reputation?

Another example closer to home, maybe? Mr Blair and Cool Britannia. It all started very well it seems (or at least if you ignore the cheesy schmoozing of come of the coolest of Britain’s rock and music scene at Tony’s garden party’s), but, a few invasions, cabinet indiscretions and economic trials later and his reputation, I would suggest, is somewhat tarnished. Very few of the “good” that he may have inspired and delivered will be remembered before the fact that he took us into an illegal war and lied to various committees. Nixon, he may not be, but their reputations, I suggest, have parallels that cannot be ignored. So, your reputation is your brand and your brand only reflects and communicates your reputation. It is worth, then, understanding what a reputation is.

Reputation: The estimation in which one is held; character in public opinion; the character attributed to a person, thing, or action; repute.

and there it is. It is so much more than “brand” in so far as it reaches further. It precedes you, surrounds you and follows in your wake. In order to reinforce this point I would briefly refer you to the following recognised understanding of (face to face, and I would suggest even face to TV) communication interaction:

• 7% of message pertaining to feelings and attitudes is in the words that are spoken.

• 38% of message pertaining to feelings and attitudes is paralinguistic (the way that the words are said).

• 55% of message pertaining to feelings and attitudes is in facial expression.

Essentially what I am saying here is that people may recognise your logo and products, they may even remember some of the words that you say but no amount of suave communication techniques in styling, tonality, stance, body language etc will repair a dodgy reputation so it is important, even critical, to your own and your business success to view your brand as your reputation and work on that.

What is your reputation?

What do people “say” about you when you are not there?

How do they “relate” to your and your brand?

My advice is 3-fold.

Firstly, be authentic. Ensure that you and your message (product/service) is consistent and genuine. If you are recognised as trying to be all things to all people, of being something of a chameleon and/or appear to change your mind and image to suit the respective environment then you WILL trip yourself up at some point. Be you and be true. Be authentic to you and your “brand.” Be multi-facetted but not two-faced.

Secondly, integrate your values into your business. It is one thing being authentic (but so are Middle Eastern dictators !) but another to fully integrate your own values into your life and work. If you want to display enviro-friendly policies then don’t take unnecessary flights or use huge-engined cars. If you want to project trust then act accordingly and trust others. If you want to be recognised as a fantastic employer then have genuinely motivational engagement and employment policies. The first test may be defining actually what your personal values are and how strong they resonate with you, then you will never really have to worry about your reputation – you will be thinkig, doing and being it every day.

Thirdly, do not expect to change the World with a logo. Start local, build your business, brand, and maybe niche, by serving a small but dedicated group of clients and partners and staff. They will build and communicate you reputation. They will become your cheerleaders and fans. You cannot be in all places at all times but your fans can. If they are convinced in your authenticity and values and if you walk your talk and deliver these values with consistent, tangible, authentic action, then they will be your reputation promoters. They will not only deliver but they will defend, spread and enhance your brand.

By including your values into every aspect of your life you will find that your brand will reflect these values. There will always be the up’s and downs’s of business activity – relatively “good” times and “bad” – but your reputation sticks around. It is HOW you deal with your stakeholders that matters – staff, customers, shareholders, community, partners – and not just what you deliver to them. A reputation can be a life in the making and no amount of “branding” and marketing will totally cover over a damaged reputation. An authentic, values-based, ethical reputation will, I suggest, cost far less in the long term than a reputation for unfair, inequitable, self-agrandising, red-braces-based business. Your brand is you and you are your values and your values in action.

To build and protect your brand, build and protect your reputation.

*excepts taken from “An A – Z Introduction to Ethiconomics” by Philip A Birch

I constructed the presentation on the theme of “I See You” and supplemented with various topics from my A-Z Introduction to Ethiconomics. I selected 3 starting with the letter “I”, 4 with “C” and finished with a “U” (You). We discussed openly the topics and attempted to apply them to actual business situations; the underlying theme being that of ethical leadership. These students very much see themselves as the leaders of tomorrow.

I shall summarise briefly here as the attributes have unilateral relevance whether to students, entrepreneurs or corporate leaders. A leader, whilst being definitively unique, must display some, if not all, of these skills.

I started with a hot topic of mine, authenticity. OK, it is not an “I-C-U” but it is the bedrock of all sustainable business (and life) behaviour. I have written on this before in the3rdi but authenticity drives values and behaviour when applied daily to everything we do; if we walk our talk, then authenticity steers us on the path that we have chosen. I reinforced the point by instructing the students to look at themselves openly and honestly each time they look in the mirror; to “see” themselves and to evaluate with integrity how they are doing as a person not just as a worker or business person.

Then, we discussed these topics in more depth with respect to business and to leadership;

The 3 “I” s
Investment
a commitment, as of time or support
“Invest three percent of your income in yourself (self development) in order to guarantee your future.” Brian Tracy

Inspiration
Find the work you are inspired to do!

Innovation
something newly introduced; new method, custom, device, etc
creative use of a good, service, or idea that is already available.

So, invest in yourself; regularly and consistently. I personally think that 3% is arbitrary and that if you are doing work that inspires you, then investing your time, energy and money in yourself is a joy as well as a benefit. Innovation is not just about products; being innovative in marketing, order processing, customer service etc can be just as key in creating, and sustaining, a competitive advantage. Innovation is more likely when accompanied with inspiration and investment (training, personal development) but requires one key component above all others; imagination. All that has been made, all that we are, originated in thought. If you can think, you can imagine, if you can imagine, you can create.

The 4 “C” s

Change
“You must be the change you wish to see in the world.” Ghandi

Courage
“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” Winston Churchill

Comittment
“The only limit to your impact is your imagination and commitment.” Tony Robbins

Choice
Because you ALWAYS have one !

I am certain that the above need no great explanation as to why these are relevant to leaders. If there is one that stands out to me it is that of courage. Clearly we are not talking about the displays of courage that we hear about in one of the ever-present wars that there are these days but a quiet, internal, personal courage that drives a leader on.

Leadership is difficult and it can be lonely. Leadership is NOT just management and managers are NOT necessarily leaders. Clearly ther are elements of both in each but a leader is a different beast than a manger. Leaders require followers, managers require policies. For example, if you are the one to start a new movement, be that a business or the first on the dance floor, you stand alone. You take the risks and commit to the plan. Standing alone attracts attention. The masses stand back and watch to see what will happen. Others wait for signs of success or approval before investing themselves in the venture, or not. It takes courage to step out of the crowd. What any leader needs, however, more than anything else, is followers and the essential, critical component of successful leadership is the first follower, the first investor.Without followers the leader is a maverick, an eccentric, a loner. When the first breaks from the pack, the movement gains momentum because the movement appears to gain “credibility”. All leaders need the first follower first then the rest are far more likely to follow. It takes courage to break the mould and then courage to commit to the plan. Leadership needs courage.

The 1 “U”
The You – S – P (self esteem) – a person’s overall evaluation or appraisal of his or her own worth

And this is the final attribute – a leader needs self esteem. This is not to be confused with self confidence; self esteem is deeper and stronger. Self esteem comes from confidence in your self, your plans and your business reputation. And guess what, self esteem needs courage (amongst other things). You are your u-s-p (unique selling proposition) as much as any product or service that you offer. You have to truly believe in your work in order to communicate and project confidence and worth and it is your worth, your value, that will attract clients and generate income. If you don’t believe, nobody else is likely to.

I finished off the presentation by asking the students to get their “R”s out.

Respect the other persons view of the World – it’s theirs and does not have to be yours.
Responsibility – for your actions
Referral – self referral – remember the mirror? I See You !!!!

I started work in 1980 in an international engineering company as a commercial trainee; the white collar version of the burgeoning YTS schemes. I was one of those big haired, shoulder-padded “young guns” that Thatcher’s Britain spawned. And I loved it. I make no apologies for taking the opportunities available; I, like Frankie and the Wham duo, said “Yes”. I will elaborate a little to introduce some context: I did have a naïve, self-focus that tended my politics toward the right of Genghis Khan but I did draw the line at turning up the cuffs of my suit jacket – every man has his limits.

I am now in my, well let’s say, reflective years. I am social but not socialist. I do not have the ability to change my receding hair into the latest fashions (even if I wished to), I have fewer opportunities and inclination to wear a suit but I am still with Frankie; I still say “Yes”. But what am I saying “yes” to? The Big Society? Not quite yet; my personal jury is still out on this one.

There are, however, several parallels between the two epochs that I wish to draw upon. Thatcher took on a broke and broken society. Unions holding business to ransom. Social unrest within many of the cities. Unemployment rising along with inflation. Low price housing demand exceeding supply. Disaffected voters and our typically British “queue and moan” middle class middle England. Recognise any similarities? I think so with the clear and obvious exception of the Unions although recent actions of Unite may fill the void a little.

We have clearly come along way since then but there are still some facts within our current economy and society that re-affirm the circular, or perpetually fixed, nature of society. There is still a “top” percentage of society that is pretty much immune to the vagaries of economic policy – the landed gentry, civil list bunch whose personal fortunes and “status” protects them from the daily angst of actually working for a living. Not much change there since 1066 and feudal Britannia. There is still a “bottom” percent that any society has the responsibility to support and care for. So, allowing for some licence for the actual percentages, I will set each of the previous at a general 10% each, which places us in the middle. In the 80%. We, the social manifestation of Pareto’s Law, are facing similar challenges now that we did as shiny-faced, bombastic and ebullient “go-getters” (I speak of myself here) some 3 decades ago.

I have retained an unshakeable optimism in the vigour and valour of the entrepreneur. We have always, and I trust continue to, produced, developed and rewarded enterprise. There are, I am sure, as many budding Branson’s now as there were friends of Friedman then. The source material is still available and willing I suggest. This said then, what will encourage these creative and committed souls to rise to the challenge facing our economy today? The Big Society? I am not convinced. Our Government is responsible for preparing the ground; even for sowing the seeds of recovery. I cannot see how the Big Society is supposed to deliver this.

At this stage I will accept one fundamental difference between the two decades; Thatcher’s “enemy” was very much “at the gates”. The Unions, the main protagonists, were very much the opposition. They provided the main funding support for the opposition party even. Every campaign needs an enemy and Thatcher’s was visible, defined and very much mobilised. Cameron’s “enemy” is, however, “within”. In fact, so very much within that they are more the sponsoring ageing relative than the wayward naughty cousin. Cameron’s party is largely funded by the City. The same City that compounded, if not created, the current recession. Despite many promises, independent research committees and growing public resentment, he has been patently unable, and some would say unwilling, to take on the enemy. In fact, he has embraced and continues to covet them. Paying the same people as much or more money to get us out of the predicament that they created seems fundamentally flawed to me. Thatcher took on the Unions in full knowledge of the challenges and personal detriment; Cameron has kept his bed-fellows but insists from his lofty place that “we are all in it together”. Well, he is not; we are.

The Big Society seems to be a major pole up which he is flying his reform flag. But what is it? I have researched many media publications, online and offline, in an attempt to obtain a definition. I have even tried to find a general statement of intent. Nothing. Lots of rhetoric; generalisations and sound bite policy statements but nothing tangible. The vast majority of content available was very much of a similar persuasion; “cuts by any other name”. Passing responsibility for services into the local, public domain means that we are being required to do more (under the guise of controlling our local destiny) and receive less. More tax, less services. More work, less income.

There are already over 40,000 internationally trading NGO’s. There are approximately 170,000 charitable organisations in the UK. We just raised over £74M for Comic Relief. We are a society and culture that gives. We are a society that volunteers. Generally, we are a culture that cares, so do we need a Government initiative to cajole us into more? I suspect not. We may all, individually, be able to do or give a little more but that is an individual decision and not requiring Governmental instruction. So will the Big Society deliver economic growth? Well clearly time will tell but I am left wondering how? I am still left with a considerable bad taste from what little the Government has done to manage the bankers. Surely this is a section of society that could be “encouraged” to support us all just a little bit more? What are these honoured institutions contributing to the Big Society? If we are all in it together then I still seek evidence that they are part of the “we”.

I would like to clarify a couple of points. I am not a total Thatcher fan and I am not a Cameron basher. I am a social entrepreneur and I would love to think that the “vision” of the Big Society being pushed upon us will actually deliver true economic growth and social stability. I do believe that it will, as usual, be down to us to make this happen but we need actual encouragement; tangible and committed Governmental backing. Plans and programs that deliver funding and organisation to the entrepreneur. Will the Big Society deliver this? Time will, as usual, tell but in the mean time we (well most of us) are all in it together. It is still very much kneepads at the ready and begging bowl in hands. Supplicants to the vainglorious bankers. As entrepreneurs we will find a way to survive and prosper. We will deliver economic change despite, if not because of, Governmental policy. I look forward to the coming years with the enthusiasm and invention of the small business owner and will continue to support local services and community programs. I will continue to raise money for the charities and causes of my choice.

The Big Society is my society; it is our society. How “big” we can make it is down to us all. Let’s not just “queue and moan”, let’s get effective. Let us deliver the change we wish to see.

Excellent. Me too.

I would just present something to you before you embark upon your exciting and inspiring journey. First, three questions;

Are you sure that everything that you do will lead you to these ends?

How will you know when you achieve this success?

Are you absolutely sure of how you will be and feel when you get there?

There are 2 elements that are critical to answering the above questions positively and confidently. Firstly, you have to have absolute FAITH in your plan and secondly, you have to have a system to make the MOST of all your efforts. There are millions of self-help schemes available. There are thousands of business guru’s, books and websites offering solutions to business problems; from stroppy staff to social media strategy, from leadership to the law of attraction. There is doubtless value in many of these tools but that is what they are, tools and techniques. The problem with all of this information is that it is disparate. There is no overall system that ensures that all these tools support your plan. Value? Yes. Valuable? Maybe.

So, how to ensure that all your effort is focussed and effective?

You need a system. It is as simple as that. It is non-negotiable. It is critical. It is the first and most important investment of your time and energy because without it, all other activities, expenditure and effort could be wasted and you will be in the same place next December as you were in last. I have a system and it works. Guaranteed. I call it my MOST system.

It starts with your Mission. I do not care what your mission is, per se, but I do know that unless it is constructed in a way that incorporates your values, inspires you every day and is authentic to you and your unique proposition then it is pointless; just cosmetic window dressing for your business.

Next, your objectives. I am certain that you have already set goals and objectives. Good. Many of you may have adopted the SMART process and feel that this will be enough to keep you on track. It may well be. But exactly how do these objectives support your mission? How much do they consistently and genuinely move you towards your mission? How can/do you measure and review them. If your mission is the “end game”, your objectives should do nothing but help you to get there. Integrated, effective, measurable and mission-bound; they are the only objectives worth having.

Next, Strategy. This is where you choose how to deliver your objectives and where you can pick which personal and business tools and techniques best serve you. Your strategies are variable and unique but must be completely supportive of your objectives. There may be several per objective but not too many. Focus and integration are critical to success. Only when your mission inspires you and your objectives let you track progress can your particular strategies be MOST effective.

Finally, your tactics or tasks. These are your daily actions and without action, all your other efforts are wasted. Every single task needs to be part of your strategy. Every single thing that you do needs to take you towards your objectives. Every single tasks needs to inspire you to reach your end point; your mission. This may sound cold and even daunting but your tasks can, and should, include “down-time”. Periods of reconciliation and reflection. Essential to your tactics is “you” time.

So, now that you have a flavour of this system, what next? Well, you have to believe. You have to believe that it works. I can confirm that this system has and does work so the only thing missing is your belief in yourself. I have worked with some wonderful business and personal coaches and mentors. I have completed my NLP and EFT basic programs. I have read and learned extensively from some of the best around and one thing is consistently present in all of these individuals; they believe. This belief carries them through the “bad” times and lets them know that they deserve the “good” times. Do you truly believe?

I admit to my own periods of doubt. There have been times when the World seemed to conspire against me and I was ready to pack it all in. What got/gets me through? A simple word. FAITH.

In this context I do not mean some esoteric abstraction in the spiritual realm (this may well be something that you can turn to) but is a simple acronym that you can use to remind you of your path. It can be amended for your own application and you may even change the word altogether but I have found it particularly effective:

F = flexibility. Whatever your plans and schemes there will be curve-balls and opportunities, planned activities and spontaneous events. Be flexible but do not lose focus. It is your mission that is important and the road towards it may change. Check your Sat-Nav but be flexible on your route.

A = authenticity. This is why your mission is your own and why your objectives are yours for the measuring. It is so important that you can walk your talk in all aspects of your life and most particularly within the business world. Be your authentic self and people will notice.

I = Inspiration. If your work does not inspire you, change it. It’s that simple. Find what you love and do it. You will need inspiration to get up, apply yourself daily and to appreciate the rewards of your labour. If you are not inspired, think again.

T = Time. As much as we would wish to we cannot control time. What we can do is manage our time effectively (and for this we need a system!) but we have to accept that unless we are Dr Who, time is beyond our control. When we accept that not everyone will come back to us when we wish and that projects get delayed and that spontaneity is a good thing, time becomes our friend. Time and flexibility are very much inter-related.

H = Happiness. This may seem somewhat out of context but think about it. If you are not happy doing what it is that you do then why continue? If you are unable to find happiness in your work then how much more difficult is it to be happy outside of your job? You deserve to be happy and happiness is not simply a function of success or financial reward. Find happiness in as much as you can. People like happy people and we only ever do business with people so try it, you will definitely feel better about your own lot and will probably attract more positive opportunities along the way.

You can of course come up with your own words for your own FAITH. You may create an acronym of your own but take it from me, when you have faith in yourself and believe in your system, I guarantee that success will follow.

Have a fantastic, inspiring 2011, make the MOST of your business and believe. If you want help in making the MOST of 2011, please contact me. I guarantee that it will change you and your business.

Society was held to account because of the way in which we structure it’s conditioning. The way that we teach and interact from a very early age boys differently than girls – the old train set versus dolly argument. Also, the apparent lack of inclination to sufficiently raise issues to our Government so that they can reflect our wishes in it’s new legislation – if we wanted more women in influential positions then we would ask more vociferously for it. And finally, that the current imbalance in Parliament means that these issues do not stand a chance of effective representation – a sort of self-fulfilling prophesy; turkey’s don’t vote for Christmas and the male majority will not vote to threaten it’s position of dominance. Business cannot be

Held responsible for the issues of the society as businesses is interested in profits and not social order. They operate within free market conditions and it is the market that provides it’s resources.

Big business was cited as the cause rather than suffering from the effects by virtue of it by imposing it’s requirements potential candidates in a way that perpetuates the status quo; back-filling it’s requirements through the education system. This would be particularly prevailant when in difficult economic conditions where jobs are at a premium and risk taking is discouraged. The argument here is reinforced; businesses are self-promoting and will deploy as much or as little equality provided that the profits are secured; social issues can be addressed in times of boom it would seem!

So then is it a question for society to answer? Whilst we perpetuate stereotypes can we break the mould? I can only speak from personal experience here but I believe that not only can we, but we must. I am passionate about changing the way the world does business and I believe that women are the key. More yang less yin and the creation of a more ethical business “balance”. If I am to be any way successful in my venture it is essential that I have some considerable support from the women’s entrepreneurial community and as many in high office as possible. I am confident that I am making progress and so the question of women’s confidence is a particularly appropriate one. If women are to address the imbalance issue and secure far more senior roles, in fact more roles in general, then their own confidence and authenticity will need to be unquestioned.

I have worked around, for and over about as many women as men. Yes, I was lucky to work for an Equal Opportunities employer and I did work in an open office environment but the representation of men: women was around 60:40. Not perfect but not bad. Unfortunately all the senior roles were all men with a few notable exceptions. The attributes of the successful ones, and I mean they that achieved higher positions within the organisation and not on a personal level, were pretty mixed. A quiet and phlegmatic head of accounts, a “work-hard-play –hard sales manager and a “country girl comes good” account manager. There were no single attribute that all three of these successful women possessed to my knowledge bar one; commitment. They saw what they wanted and believed that they could get it. They were not overtly extrovert. They were not workaholics, although they did adopt the Protestant “work till you drop” work ethic. They were not exceptionally intelligent academically. They were not simply the product of corporate politics. They believed that they could do more, did it and received the benefits. They faced and conquered the same obstacles as men. Job for job, salary for salary.

Clearly I cannot comment for all businesses but I do know that in my direct experience, gender was not an issue; the quality and quantity of women applicants was. It seemed that women did not put themselves forward for senior roles as much as their male counterparts. There were no internal barriers to entry, no politics or procedures, there was precedent and there was opportunity and as far as I am aware there still is. The issue, it would seem, would be to ensure that women have the personal confidence and an authentic voice. It is possible that this will come from the top, as role models and high profile women lead the way but I think that it must be addressed at all levels. Pull from the top and push from the bottom and middle. Women must find ways to provide mutually beneficial resources; mentors and mentee’s would be a great example of this whereby currently successful women mentor and coach those embarking on career paths. Women must create their own voice; maximising professional exposure through networks and pressure groups. Women must continue to develop themselves personally.

There are undoubtedly variations in the way that we currently assess male/female career issues and these variations come from three areas; the individual woman, the business world and the society. By developing the first we can change the second. By changing the second we can change the third.

So I provide you with the following comments and statistics for consideration; these were taken predominantly from the Womens National Commission website and the Governments Equalities Office and I recognise and thank them for this information. I also give them absolute credit for the accuracy, or otherwise, of the statistics provided.

On May 12th 2010, the Prime Minister appointed The Rt. Hon. Theresa May MP as Minister for Women and Equalities. Following the General Election in May 2010, 143 women MPs were elected out of a total of 650 MPs (22%).

The 2008 Councillor Census found 30.8% of local councillors were women. In March 2009, 32.6% of public appointments were held by women.

In a recent program funded by the Government Equalities Office in conjunction with Operation Black Vote they created a national mentoring scheme aimed at demystifying the functions of local government. Under this scheme, a total of 60 women were selected nationally as mentors. In the recent 2010 local and national elections, 8 of these women stood as councillor candidates and 1 stood as a Prospective Parliamentary Candidate. 4 were successfully elected as local councillors (1 Conservative, 1 Labour and 2 Liberal Democrats). They state that it is “vitally important to encouraging women to see themselves as community champions is the promotion of positive role models” and continue with the statement that

“there are now more women working in Britain than in almost any time in our history, and women increasingly hold influential positions. However, our labour market is still failing to make the best use of people’s talents. In particular, pay levels for women while improving still do not reflect their qualification levels.” and

“It is difficult to quantify the resulting loss to the economy of this under-utilisation of women’s skills; however, in 2006 it was estimated that removing barriers to women working in occupations traditionally undertaken by men and increasing women’s participation in the labour market, could be worth between £15 and £23 billion pounds or 1.3 to 2.0 per cent of GDP.”

The work of the National Equality Panel, chaired, perhaps ironically, by Professor John Hills of the London School of Economics and Political Science intends to “analyse the factors that contribute to inequality, as well as the links between them, and will fill the gaps in our understanding of inequality in a changing world”

In 2009 just 32.6% of public appointments were women.

It would seem that creating equality is seen as an issue of some importance to Government, well, the previous one at least. The future of these bodies and their respective impact upon the appropriate representation of women in public office by the new coalition Government is yet to be quantified. For the time being, I present these statistics as provided by the Womens National Commission;

Women’s Representation in politics across the UK – an overview

 
• 19.7% House of Lords Peers
• 4% Ethnic Minority Women Members of Parliament
• 34% All Ministers
• 26% Cabinet Ministers
• 22% Members of Parliament
• 33% Members of Scottish Parliament
• 15% Northern Ireland Assembly
• 46.7% Welsh Assembly Members
• 26% Members of European Parliament
• 0.9% Ethnic Minority women councillors

 

Women’s Representation in Other Public Bodies

 
• 9.26% High Court Judges
• 8% University Vice-Chancellors
• 30% Police Authority board members

 

The WNC produce a “Women in Public Life Today” publication; a guide that outlines their vision mission, members and values. A Revised Guide has now been published and can be found via their website (indicated above). The following are extracts from this site. I strongly suggest a visit for more detailed information, events and contact details.

They state their values as:
In working towards our vision and aims, we will demonstrate the following values: Accessibility; Equality and Diversity; Respect; Empowerment.

Their Vision
A world where all women can express their needs and priorities and where Government listens and acts so that the needs of all women are at the heart of Government policy; and A world in which every human being is respected and is able to achieve their potential, living free from harm and discrimination.

Their Mission

 
• Support, advise and encourage the women’s sector to enable all women’s voices to be heard effectively;
• Act as a conduit for all those voices, in order to both advise and to hold Government to account;
• Promote women’s equality;
• Ensure the views and experiences of as many women as possible are represented to Government to promote women’s equality and change;
• Ensure that where possible, women’s opinions are communicated to Government so that they can be taken into account when laws are made and policies decided;
• As far as possible, seek the views of and empower, socially excluded and marginalised women; and
• Disseminate messages from Government across the women’s equality sector.

 

“Learned men pour scorn on all women but more so on women who would be learned themselves.”

I heard the above in a play by Christine de Pizan called The Book of The City of Ladies (original source unknown but I am guessing that it was a man!) so please no hate mail! I include it within my piece because I believe that many institutions, private and public, operate as if it were true.

I have heard more rhetoric on equality of rights, pay and conditions over the past few years to make me reel. I have heard speeches regarding imbalance in Government and public office and have yet to see the imbalances addressed. I cannot say for certain what the reasons for this are. Are they simply vote-catching sound bites? Is the glorious rhetoric for future autobiography sales? Is it because women themselves do not pursue these roles or because they are genuinely discriminated against so doing?

Tried and trusted
Traditionally, collaboration has been associated with the Arts, in particular with music and song writing but collaboration has roots and expression in far more prosaic areas such as early trade and modern day business. Trade originated with the start of communication in prehistoric times. Trading was the main “transfer” facility of prehistoric people, who bartered goods and expertise long before the development of money as a form of exchange.

Collaboration in business today has a multitude of forms from the simplicity of a partnership to the complexity of a multinational corporation.

Collaboration between team members allows for better communication within the organization and throughout the supply chains. It is a way of coordinating different ideas from numerous people to generate a wide variety of knowledge.

Due to the complexity of today’s business environment, collaboration in technology encompasses a broad range of tools that enable groups of people to work together and, broadly speaking, any technology that facilitates linking of two or more humans to work together can be considered a collaborative tool. Many large companies are developing enterprise collaboration strategies and standardizing on a collaboration platform to allow their employees, customers and partners to intelligently connect and interact. This can be from simple intranets to streamline internal communication and co-operation to huge business to business and business to client interfaces.

“Unity is strength… when there is teamwork and collaboration wonderful things can be achieved.”
Mattie Stepanek

I feel that I am able to speak upon this subject with some authority. I have established several collaborative ventures that have used the individual skills and attributes of disparate individuals in tandem with powerful internet tools to create something that is far greater than the sum of it’s parts. As with any business venture there are benefits and potential pitfalls.

Some of the potential benefits are:

* Increased creative input, we don’t have to have all the best ideas ourselves
* Increased purchasing power from the collective entity
* Potentially reduced fixed costs of buildings etc by utilising internet and web tools
* Productivity by being able to specialise on each members individual core skills

Some of the potential pitfalls are:

* Commitment to the common goal
* Equality of input and effort
* Sharing of returns and profits

In my experience it is vital to select the right partners and collaborators and to consistently manage their respective input in exchange for the benefits. Collaboration also requires leadership and there are always those individuals that operate with the maxim that “first among equals” has to be them! If you establish collaborative projects communication to and management of all parties is essential. Be clear, firm and consistent. Essentially, collaboration works but only if all parties want it to! And it is here that my own experience of collaboration has provided very differing results.

Key and common values
A greater man than I once said that the only way that to truly know if you can actually trust someone is to trust them.

Only in the results can our faith be justified – or not. In a recent project I collaborated with about a dozen individuals. Each collaborator was professional, independent and claimed a similar approach to business as me. The project was communicated in detail and the respective obligations and requirements explained to everyone. Everyone appeared to be enthusiastic, committed and motivated by the potential benefits to be gained from the alliance. The results, however, were remarkably disparate. Some parties embraced the concept and duly completed their activities and obligations. They “got it” so to speak. Others were less diligent but, with ongoing support, went through spurts of mutual activity. Others, despite friendly reminders and unceasing delivery of my part of the deal, extracted the urine. They never did more than the minimum, this being any part of the project that specifically benefitted them, and them alone.

Of course you will always get a variety of results just as you have a variety of knowledge and personalities but what I failed to consider was that some people just cannot be trusted. Some people will only take. Some people are only self focused. Some people never walk their talk. Clearly, others will go beyond the minimum; they will show initiative and creativity. They will work outside of their minimal input requirements and help to move the overall project forward for reasons beyond their own self/business needs. They will justify the trust.

I guess that there is no real way to differentiate at the commencement of the project but only ways to deal with the slackers and to focus on progress with the supporters. One can only hope that during the lifetime of the project that the good guys don’t get too naffed off with the bad guys or, even more disturbingly, allow the bad guys to jeopardize the integrity and success of the overall project. It can be a difficult process but if you are the “first among equals” then action must be taken. This is all part of leadership – thrashing out the wheat from the chaff.

There are other reasons why collaborative working can be the perfect solution for you and your business;

* collaboration builds contacts and networking opportunities without the need for long drawn out contract agreements and negotiations
* collaboration can be done on a ‘quid pro quo‘ basis
* collaboration allows for the strengthening of relationships by building trust
* collaboration creates synergy between else-wise remote products and service providers
* collaboration forms a group of businesses with like minds and values without formal structure and costs
* collaboration allows for flexibility and freedom of the individual to develop personally without out-growing the organization
* collaboration develops a kind of brains trust between members so reduces the need to outsource or conduct lengthy tender processes

Collaborative projects rely, even more than any other types of business arrangement, on trust, integrity and mutual benefit. All I would suggest is that you consider the partners carefully, specify the conditions precisely and remove the dead wood effectively and immediately. Collaboration is a wonderfully creative process and method of team-working so don’t let the selfish or the foolish undermine the spirit of the agreement. Remind, review and reward or release, whichever serves the greater good.

“In the long history of humankind (and animal kind, too) those who learned to collaborate and improvise most effectively have prevailed.”
Charles Darwin

Whether we watch The Apprentice, get scared by anyone wearing a hoodie, are concerned about the options available to our kids leaving school or simply confused and slightly cynical by the ever-improving exam results, youth culture is high on the list for media, and consequently our, attention.

I will not add to this constant stream of rhetoric. I want to spend a little time reminiscing or more specifically attempting to put some context onto today’s issues with those I faced when I was a youth.

On the face of it I do not see many differences:

* I did not like many subjects at school
* I had no career advice (other than “get you’re ‘A‘ levels or work in a shop”)
* I had no idea proper what work was let alone what ‘career‘ I wanted
* My role models were music stars and sports men
* I was insular and lacked the confidence to express myself in unfamiliar environments
* My communication skills were limited (to grunts and sighs usually!)
* Nobody knew what it was like to be me
* All teachers and parents were, by definition, out of touch with real life
* The opposite sex were mysterious, fascinating but unfathomable

In fact, looking back, I can totally appreciate the following quote from George Bernard Shaw; “Youth is wasted on the young.”

So how did I get to be where I am today, how did I start the ball rolling at the age of uncertainty that youth presented?

I stayed on and did my ‘A‘ levels, more from the absence of anything else more appealing than any great passion and drive to further my education. I selected 3 totally different subjects to those that I had previously studied, economics, politics and statistics. I went through the inevitable and unavoidable process of selecting a University and course that seemed appropriate and relevant (International Politics at Leeds University) and scrabbled through the next 2 years. I managed, much to the surprise (and I suspect chagrin – “you’ll never succeed with that attitude”) of my teachers, to secure the necessary grades and prepared to move to Leeds.

Nothing that much different here, I suspect, from many of today’s youth. It was what happened next that changed my life completely. By chance (or synchronicity?) I bumped into a friend’s mum who worked in the local Careers Advice Centre (sadly an institution that has gone the way of the dodo and Marathon bars) who advised me of an opportunity with a local company. The scheme was called the Commercial Training Scheme at Siemens. It was comprised of a 3 year in-house training program accompanied (on day release) by HNC and HND Business Studies at Stoke College. Hey, thought I, why not. I could get experience, qualifications and money all at the same time, not have to move and not have to be a student. Win/win/win/win/win!

She arranged an interview for the next day, Thursday. I borrowed my sister’s boyfriend’s suit – an appalling brown-checked number – and duly attended. My first ever interview for my first ever job (stacking shelves at Kwik Save excepted). I had no interview training or experience and no preparation so the 4 hours in a single room with 3 different managers in rotation was, I confess, somewhat daunting BUT, by some quirky combination of desperation and fate, I received a call the next day to return for my medical and subsequently started on the Monday along with 4 other trainees in Congleton and 5 more in Sunbury (Head Office). Coincidentally the same day that I was due to attend the Open Day at Leeds Uni.

The scheme was the making of me. Suddenly I was an adult. Earning my own money, meeting proper business people, working in an open office environment and ordering my own stationery! It was a superbly organised program that comprised of 2 years’ nomadically but enthusiastically visiting every department in the organisation; marketing, sales, personnel, manufacturing etc etc, even spending months on the shop floor. Over summer in the first 2 years we re-located for 10 weeks to the Head Office in Sunbury to spend time in those departments that were not located in Congleton (the additional expenses and ‘away from home base‘ allowances made these sojourns even more appealing – I gained 3 stones in beer-related weight!). We went to college once a week to pursue our HNC/HND’s and were given in-house training from actual business managers and staff. It was excellent. I completed my training, got my first Commercial Officer role and started my career on the corporate ladder.

So what is my point? Well I have several.

1. I was no different than many school leavers, then and now.
2. I had no idea about work let alone a career.
3. I was given the chance to earn and learn.
4. The company genuinely supported the program with in-house training.
5. I continued with my academic qualifications.
6. I was treated as an adult, not a youth nor a student.
7. The company ran the scheme for over decade and over 90% of the trainees that ‘passed‘ were retained within the organisation.
8. We were cheap but immensely enthusiastic and willing.
9. I developed my communication skills, learned German and entered a whole new social arena.
10. I understood and respected responsibility and accountability.

There are many more but I feel the point is made.

I have heard many, many interviews regarding students, school leavers, graduates etc recently all with an air of doom and gloom. “The exams are getting easier”, “Kids have no respect”, “They don’t want to work”, “There are not enough jobs for school leavers”, “Students are in debt”, “Graduates can’t even spell” and such like. Well enough say I. Every generation criticises the previous and fears the next. Do something about it or shut up.

Investigate “youth enterprise” schemes.
Talk to HR about taking on school leavers not just graduates.
Get involved in local youth projects.

And . . . Remember what YOU were like! Let’s give them all the chances possible. There are few of us that have had a single, well-planned, controlled career path and to steal a quotation, it’s usually more like crazy paving than a path! For goodness sake (and that of our pensions!!), let’s help them to help us to help them.

“Invention is the talent of youth, as judgment is of age.”
Jonathan Swift