Giving evidence at Westminster to the All Party Parliamentary Small Business Group inquiry into flexible working Dr Colin Coulson-Thomas called for regulatory barriers to innovation and diversity to be reduced in order for Europe to compete in international markets and to prevent the marginalisation of older citizens.  

_________________________________

As a general principle people should be able to work at whatever time and place enables them to best harness their potential and be effective at whatever tasks they are undertaking. The right way of working for one role or activity might not be appropriate for another. In some cases ‘being there’ might be important while other work could be ‘location independent’.

The experience of pioneers

Flexible working is not new. Over two decades ago IBM, ICL and Rank Xerox operated telecommuting networks. Among the key lessons learned is that a new way of working such as teleworking needs to be right for the role, the organisation and the individuals concerned. Flexible working suited particular individuals undertaking certain tasks. Effective operation required new practices and support arrangements.

Those who wished to become teleworkers (as the author did) under the Rank Xerox ‘networking’ programme were required to undertake a number of tests and be interviewed by an independent third party to assess whether they had the potential to operate successfully in a new way of working (i.e. they were ‘self-motivated’, ‘inwardly directed’, etc.). Typically a half of the volunteers were rejected.

While the European Commission and ‘telecoms’ companies like BT and Cable and Wireless introduced various initiatives to promote more flexible patterns of work such as teleworking, their adoption has been much slower than champions and early enthusiasts predicted in view of the practical problems encountered. While corporate structures have undergone significant change traditional ways of working persist.

Key lessons for legislators

If it is not to be a burden for companies and a disservice to individuals who might not be cut out to work flexibly and/or independently, and for whose roles it might not be appropriate, legislation to grant rights to flexible working should reflect the reality that a particular way of working will not suit all individuals, in all roles and in all circumstances, or all of those with whom they will be required to collaborate.

The experiences of early pioneers is that flexible working is most likely to succeed where the arrangements are voluntary, the work concerned is appropriate, the individuals concerned are likely to be suited to what is proposed, and the individuals, the organisation, and those with whom the individuals will be working are all agreed and make the necessary changes in ways of communicating and working (e.g. assessment on outputs) for the new way of working to succeed.

Early experience also suggests that in view of the need for assessment, and the contractual, management, communication and other issues to be addressed, the cost of setting up a successful flexible working arrangement can be significant. This could represent a considerable burden for a smaller organisation and where relatively small numbers of people are likely to be involved. 

Despite the set up costs and the changes of behaviour and practice that may be required, flexible working can be beneficial when it is voluntary and appropriate in the circumstances. Yet, too often organisations are re-structured and processes are simplified or re-engineered without fundamentally changing how, where, when or with whom particular tasks are undertaken. A pan-European project team led by the author developed ‘The Responsive Organisation’* framework and methodology for introducing new ways of working during organisational change and/or process improvement activities. Doing both can massively increase the success rate of business restructuring and yield significant benefits for both people and organisations.

Flexible working and entrepreneurial companies

Flexible operation is the key to the success of many entrepreneurial companies. Hazell Carr found it could offer the services of professional actuaries who work from home. Training services were provided to freelance knowledge workers, and checks put in place to monitor the quality of calculations resulting from the company’s virtual model of operation. Working at night enabled RS Communication Services staff to install phone lines in City Offices while their users were asleep or clubbing.

Virgin and easyJet have based their business strategies upon doing things differently. Small companies sometimes give a lead when it comes to adopting alternative ways of working. Although operating in a traditional sector, Swift Construction allows its people to work flexible hours and job-share.

Cisco Systems grew rapidly by providing products that allowed others to use the Internet and embrace ebusiness. New ways of working also create business opportunities for those who help to make it happen. Telework Systems products include software for tracking, monitoring and managing mobile and remote workers.

Too often the workplace is a constraint, overhead cost, cause of sick building syndrome and spreader of swine flue rather than an enabler of creativity and flexibility. Offices should be designed to support a variety of relationships, behaviours and patterns of interaction. To encourage imaginative thinking there should be quiet spaces for personal reflection, and activity areas for brainstorming and other group sessions. People could switch locations and times according to tasks.

What do winners – the more successful companies - do differently in relation to new ways of working?  To answer this question the author has examined the corporate experience of over 2,000 companies. The results are summarized in: ‘Winning Companies; Winning People (Policy Publications, 2007)’*.

Unsuccessful approaches

Losers tend to stick with a particular and hierarchical model of operation. The structure is set out in organisation charts. There are probably job descriptions for most positions, and how the organisation operates is set out in a physical or electronic manual. Preparing these and understanding them takes time. Hence people are reluctant to make changes that might involve altering diagrams, updating files and reprinting documents.

Some people become complacent. They believe they have discovered or created a formula for continuing business success. They also swear by particular approaches and enshrine them in standard processes and procedures. The framework solidifies.  

Many losers have a weakness for single solutions, panaceas and fads. They believe that this management approach, that technology or a particular consultant’s methodology will provide an answer or solve their problems. While struggling to make a chosen course of action work they fail to consider alternative options. They lock themselves in. Inappropriate legislation could have the same effect.

Employees who can be trusted to operate in approved ways and observe standard practice are promoted. After some time corporate structures, processes, systems and mind-sets become rigid and inflexible. Subject them to increasing stress and they first creak and groan and then snap. 

Increase workloads and transaction flows and people in ‘loser’ organisations struggle to cope. Rather than operate in new ways or change processes they endeavour to work harder, faster and for longer hours. They quickly become overloaded and break down. Work-life balance is an issue in these companies because people suffer additional pressures without enjoying any of the compensating benefits.

Successful approaches

There are often alternative ways of achieving the same objective. Winning corporate cultures are more tolerant of uncertainty and diversity. Their people think in terms of flows rather than structures. They reflect. They are willing to question, review and consider alternatives. Fluid roles, flexible systems and adaptable processes enable these organisations to move in new directions as situations and circumstances change. 

Winners avoid blind alleys and dead ends. They do not take continuing success for granted and are always open to alternative ways of operating. They are less wedded to precedent and more likely to treat each case on its own merits. They are also willing to re-invent themselves and to learn and work in new ways as the occasion demands. Innovative responses and novel approaches are recognised and rewarded.

Bespoke products and services are offered. Processes and their supporting systems exist to support developing relationships with customers. Learning is built into them.  They are updated as required, and individual tasks are handled in whatever ways are thought to be most appropriate. People endeavour to improve and build upon what has gone before rather than merely replicate previous responses.

On the whole, winners are pragmatic, catholic and wary of ‘single solutions’. They assemble creative and practical combinations of whatever ways of working and learning and change elements they feel will enable them to achieve their purposes. They are always alert to the possibility of better alternatives and vary the factors selected to improve outcomes and cope with changing circumstances.

Attitudes, processes, systems and ways of working and learning are relatively robust and resistant to stress. Because they flex to accommodate changing conditions and circumstances they do not fall over when the going gets tough. Winners handle new challenges and opportunities by prioritising, adapting and securing flexible access to whatever additional resources are required.

Conclusion and summary

A new way of working must be appropriate for the tasks to be performed and the people concerned. Tasks should be defined in terms of delivering a specified ‘output’ with fixed parameters of cost and time. Ideal flexible workers are those who are inner directed and able to apply their knowledge and skill independent of any particular physical location.

People likely to be involved in a new way of working - and those who work with them - need to be involved and prepared. Clear objectives and targets should be set and health, safety and security issues addressed. Voluntary programmes are far more likely to succeed than those that are imposed. Regular communications with those who are working flexibly are also highly conducive of success.

_____________________________

*Further Information

‘Winning Companies; Winning People, making it easy for average performers to adopt winning behaviours’ by Colin Coulson-Thomas is published Policy Publications (2007). It contains additional findings, various checklists and guidance on how to enable ordinary performers to emulate the approaches of high achievers. The new handbook can be ordered from http://www.policypublications.com

A framework and methodology exists for introducing new ways of working while restructuring [‘The Responsive Organisation’] and re-engineering supply chains using the enabling technologies of electronic commerce [‘The Competitive Network’]. Both methodologies can be obtained from http://www.policypublications.com

Details of support tools that can support flexible, mobile and other forms of working and take account of the author’s findings can be found on http://www.cotoco.com

Author

Prof. Colin Coulson-Thomas, an experienced chairman of award winning companies, author of ‘Winning Companies; Winning People’ (Policy Publications, 2007) and ‘Transforming the Company, Manage Change, Compete and Win’ (Kogan Page, 2002/4), and principal author of ‘The Responsive Organisation’ methodology leads the ‘leading performance improvement and corporate transformation’ research and best practice programme. After leading the EU’s COBRA re-engineering and teleworking project, he became the world’s first Professor of Corporate Transformation and more recently the Process Vision Holder of major transformation projects. Colin has worked with over 100 boards to improve board effectiveness and/or corporate performance, and has spoken at over 200 national and international conferences in over 40 countries. He can be contacted by telephone: +44 (0) 1733 361 149, E-mail: colinct@tiscali.co.uk or via www.coulson-thomas.com

The recently-published FCC-commissioned review of next generation connectivity policies from around the world provides significant support for the concept of Open Access local networks.

It shows that where, in the early days of DSL-based broadband, market regulators forced (onto incumbent Telco's) a determined policy of unbundling, and where those regulators also maintained and strengthened those policies in the subsequent era of fibre capabilities for delivering multiple concurrent services from multiple service providers, the impact on broadband penetration and choice of services can now be seen in the readiness of those fortunate economies for massive gains in productivity, social-cohesion and economic growth through rapid on-line service expansion.

The achievement is simply summarised as Open Access inducing Service Competition across network platforms rather than vertically-integrated competition between platforms.  In contrast to the UK’s regulatory position of seeking competition at the lowest possible levels of infrastructure, the winners have, in effect, encouraged collaborative advantage at the highest possible levels of infrastructure.  Countries such as Sweden lead in Europe whereas laggards such as the UK have not maintained the thrust of unbundling to its logical and increasingly local conclusions.  Even banks are now beginning to contemplate a proper separation of utility operations from their investment services arms.

In the US-context, for which this report was prepared, the conclusions will no doubt trigger another round of incumbent resistance.  Whether the news (that such breathtakingly radical common sense can now be discussed in the USA) will be heard loudly enough in the UK to influence or legitimise the next government’s policy approach is still very uncertain.  Caught in the headlights of recession and no matter how many brave souls (Martha Lane-Fox included) urge action for 'both moral and economic' reasons, the great weight of tradition and incumbent comfort (and inability or unwillingness to understand economic ‘complementaries’) will not vaporise overnight.

But maybe we have not reckoned with the new-found people-power so recently evident in twitter-led responses to politics and the media.  It is not just in passionate places like Paris or Prague that the people can take to the on-line streets in numbers that dwarf last generation demo’s.

Government departments and regulators may choose to block their ears to the shrill whistles of the twitterati and take comfort from the obviously undemocratic nature of such protests from a population that is mostly off-line and mostly switched off from much of that which, in their darkness, they do not yet understand.  But this centre cannot hold – it can only hold us back.

____________________

Report published 13^th October 2009

http://www.fcc.gov/stage/pdf/Berkman_Center_Broadband_Study_13Oct09.pdf  

I first encountered Erik Brynjolfsson’s research in the early 1990’s when looking for support for the concept of ‘Collaborative Advantage’ as an antidote to the previous decade’s business (and political) culture of extreme competitiveness and independence which seemed to many at that time as somewhat lacking in recognition of the complexities of ecosystems and interdependencies.

At the same time I was battling to understand the accountancy approaches to IT investment which seemed incapable of recognising anything other than narrowly-defined costs and quite unable (despite the empirical evidence) to countenance the notion of providing one’s suppliers or customers with the facilities for improving transactional flows.

So it was joy to discover that buried deep in the intellectual hot-house of MIT/Sloan was a researcher with an extraordinary facility for shining a light on the mysteries of IT investment.

‘Wired for Innovation’ is a slim volume but, like a fine-dining experience, it is packed full of intense flavour.  Perhaps a better analogy would be a very upmarket travel guide because it essentially provides business leaders and students with navigation through the complexities of IT’s contribution to economic growth, the business practices that enhance productivity and the need for new ways of measuring value.

Each chapter includes pointers to further reading and, as you would expect of rigorous researchers, the bibliography will leave diligent students with few excuses for not getting to grips with the subject – even to the point of identifying ‘frontier’ research opportunities for those who want take the work forward.

Two key concepts, ‘Organizational Capital’ and ‘Consumer Surplus’ are well-covered and the entire work is readable, thought-provoking and likely to be found hugely encouraging for those battling for innovation against incumbent mindsets.

This book is not however a manifesto for technological purists but argues for braver, bolder and more-imaginative application.  The authors conclude that, ‘… the most important limits we face will not be technological.  Instead, the bottleneck will be our ability to understand how to use the technology, and thus the highest returns will go to those who are best able to widen that bottleneck.’ 

________________________

'Wired For Innovation' – Brynjolfsson & Saunders MIT - ISBN 0-262-01366-5 - published  16th October 2009.  More details.

Researching mobile phone developments ahead of a conference in London later this month I was intrigued to find that David Robson’s latest telephonic triumph is a mobile that isn’t.

As a co-founder of the European Connected Health Campus I’ve been invited to speak at the ‘mobile phones for the senior market’ conference in London on 26^th October.  I have in mind dusting off my previous work on the ‘doubly disconnected’ – that 10% of the population who are both digitally and societally disconnected.

It’s not a very cheery topic.  The glass half-empty experts come complete with indices of multiple deprivation and the latest ethnographic social research report is focused on families in the ‘Just Coping’ category.

It is an arena in which, surely, there can be few easy answers and yet, since I’m speaking at the end of the day, the delegates will need to leave with a sense of hope, with the determination to find solutions and with imaginations that have been sufficiently stretched to inhibit reversion to normality.

So, thanks to David Robson’s inventiveness, the day will not simply be populated with mobile phones with bigger buttons and large-print instructions but will now feature mobile phones that are not intended to be mobile and, this gets better, not intended to be answered.

We are all, or should be, familiar with the challenge of demographic trends.  More than half of those born this year can reasonably expect to live beyond 100 years.  One of the few encouraging trends in the budget battles ahead is the prospect that ‘Connected Health’ technologies will ease the load of the living – and ease the tax burden on those few still working to pay for the galaxy of health and social care services that we all assume will be available for our comfortable retirements.

Keeping elderly folk happy is not always easy.  The various deprivations of receding health, the upheaval of moving home, family tensions, hospitalisations (in places not always hospitable) the confusions and discomforts, do not induce levels of happiness and confidence sufficient to inspire those for whom we care to take on new ideas.

In many ways it is a comfort that the familiar chunky old phone can be detached from its umbilical cord and behave just like a mobile phone even if it is not intending to travel – or, by the way, be answered.  Since the speed dial facility already knows those who might be called it can also recognise those same people when they are calling, obviating the need to get up and answer the darn thing.  It simply switches straight into loudspeaker mode and allows conversation to commence.  Is it any surprise that David Robson calls it the Easy Answer phone ?

I’m sure that at the conference on the 26^th October there will be many dimensions to explore on behalf of those who are less than mobile.  A non-mobile mobile phone will certainly be one of them.

________________________________

David Brunnen is a director of the European Connected Health Campus - www.echcampus.com

See also recent editorial 'Living Beyond our Means'. and the 2007 CMA editorial 'It's no joke being doubly disconnected'.

Further details for the Burnside Easy Answer phone can be downloaded (PDF) from:  http://www.burnsidetelecom.com/docs/362082.pdf 

We live in what could be termed the age of corporate governance. Corporate governance codes of practice and consultants abound. There must be at least one expert on corporate governance for every Fortune 500 company.

Yet before any of us had heard of the term “corporate governance” directors who were modestly paid by today’s standards managed to build profitable companies with a global reach. As a researcher at the Institute of Directors I interviewed thoughtful and competent directors. When I undertook my early surveys I encountered effective boards.

Over the last couple of years in this age of corporate governance we have experienced a catastrophic failure of governance in the banking sector. The World Council for Corporate Governance is needed today as never before. There is much for this International Corporate Governance Conference to do.

The theme of this panel discussion is STARR – the selection, training, appraisal, remuneration and retirement of directors. I would like to focus on selection. Recent events have called into question the value added by many boards, particularly those of financial institutions that have been bailed out or whose assets have been written down.

The banks rescued by Governments are not obscure companies run by inexperienced directors. They include household names, whose board members have included the ‘great and the good’ of the City establishment.

Despite their directorial pedigrees, clear duties and responsibilities and regular attendances at meetings, many directors seem to have neither noticed nor questioned dangerous practices. Executive directors have not been held to account. Boards have presided over bank cultures and practices that suggest a short-term focus, self-interest and greed among those for whom they have been responsible.

Is there an alternative to ‘safe directors’ who ‘look the part’ with their smart suits and ‘track records’ of service on plc boards, and who can be relied upon not to question, challenge or probe? We need to look beyond the ‘normal suspects’ for people of integrity who would be willing to ask difficult questions and who would welcome an opportunity to ‘make a contribution.’

Given the evident deficiencies of the current narrow gene pool from which directors are selected and the lack of value some of them appear to add it ought to be possible to do better. A new generation of directors are required, selected from people of integrity who have their feet on the ground, are alert to risks and the reality of what is happening around them, and who think for themselves. Where should we look?

Charities have a big impact on the lives of many people. The work of some medical charities affects the quality of life of millions of people with specific conditions. Yet those who serve as charity trustees are often unpaid. They have significant legal duties. They attend and contribute to board meetings, and discharge their responsibilities without any hope of personal financial gain. Their motivation derives from the vision, purpose and work of the organisation and their reward comes from the satisfaction of contributing to its success.

The major professions, many of which are self regulating, can also have a significant impact upon the lives of most citizens. Despite their responsibilities and what is at stake, committee and council members generally give their time for free. Like charity trustees, all they normally draw is out of pocket expenses, such as the cost of travel to committee meetings. Why do they do this? They are there because they want to make a difference.

Many directors of large corporations like to stress the complexities of the issues they face. Yet, understanding that economic bubbles bust, or that people may default on their mortgage statements in a recession, seems to have been too complex for some boards.

Some areas of the public sector such as the NHS are inherently complex.  A large Primary Care Trust (PCT) can spend over £1 billion locally on health care. The one that I sit on as Chair of the Audit and Governance Committee is also responsible for social care. There are various committee and sub-committee meetings to attend. There is the added challenge of holding executives to account when main meetings are held in public. Many members devote much time to preparing for meetings and often engage in rigorous questioning that would be unusual in some private company boardrooms.

In any sector some directors and boards will be more effective than others. However, there is much that private sector boards can learn from the voluntary, public and professional sectors. Directors do not need to be mercenaries whose first thought may be to arrange alibis and disclaimers and maximise their remuneration. It is possible to find people of integrity with directorial qualities and experience outside of the relatively narrow ranks of the City establishment and those who already have plc director experience.

Outside of the rarefied atmosphere of plc boardrooms, and in other walks of life, motivated citizens are giving considerable time, much of it unremunerated, to service upon boards that have a significant impact upon their fellow citizens. Many of them are displaying directorial qualities that would put some high profile directors of large corporations to shame. Few of them fit the caricature of the ‘nodding donkey’ or the ‘cardboard cut out’.

Directors in these other arenas are very committed and highly motivated to provide effective governance. Within the parallel dimensions in which they operate – whether charities, the professions or the public sector – significant effort may be devoted to ensuring directorial knowledge and skills are kept up to date. Nomination committees should broaden their investigations to embrace candidates from the voluntary, public and professional sectors.

I do not expect sudden or large scale change. Directors have onerous duties and responsibilities. Because of what is at stake selectors need to exercise a degree of caution. A core boardroom team of competent and experienced directors with more conventional backgrounds may first need to be put in place before existing directors feel confident enough to consider additional appointments from beyond the traditional gene pool that might bring greater diversity and fresh thinking into the boardroom.

Widening the gene pool will not be easy. There are people with directorial qualities and potential out there. To use a quotation: - “Seek and ye shall find”.

__________________________

Prof. Colin Coulson-Thomas is an experienced chairman of corporate boards and Chair of the Audit and Governance Committee of Peterborough PCT. He has served on public, voluntary and professional committees and boards, including as a Chairman and/or President and helped over 100 boards improve director, board and corporate performance. He is the author of ‘Developing Directors’, has spoken at over 200 conferences in 40 countries, and sits on the board of examiners of the Institute of Directors and the Governance and Risk Management Committee of ACCA.

One of the claimed benefits for Cloud Computing is the notion that it heralds a new era of enterprise flexibility.  No longer, say cloud campaigners, will project lead times be constrained by the logistics of hardware provision, rack-space or the need for more air-conditioning.

Well, we can all dream – but the CIO is, despite rumours circulating in the Finance Department, merely human and, like the rest of us, must battle against the normal nightmares of under-resourced over-expectations. 

Where previously CIO’s and their development teams adjusted their facilities and systems to take advantage of distributed computing and vanishingly small storage costs, now they can rethink the larger issue of enterprise flexibility or agility – tailoring resources to match fluctuating demand. 

These new freedoms run counter to years of effort spent trying to stabilise demand and iron out fluctuations.  Where aggregation of computing resources was just too difficult to manage, distributed computing made life more modular.  But now, it seems, Cloud Computing offers both the economic efficiency of aggregation and the granularity needed by fast changing enterprises.

In the public sector there’s an even stronger reason to congregate in the Cloud when, for example, the system requirements in the neighbouring parish are almost exactly identical – so why build it twice ?

In the popular imagination agility and government IT might seem unlikely to be found on the same page but, according to the UK Government’s new deputy CIO, perceived gaps between private enterprise performance and public sector services for the electorate should be consigned to history.

“The Citizen-Consumer expects”, says Bill McCluggage, “services in the public sector to be as good and as responsive to changing needs as they experience elsewhere – and the reality is that quite often our large government systems are actually out-performing private enterprise.  One of the government’s key reasons for adopting Cloud Computing is to serve the very large fluctuations in public service demand.”

The flexibility of Cloud Computing - dealing with load fluctuations and zapping lead times for hardware provision - prompts questions about planning priorities; which systems should stay grounded in-house and which should be floated in the Cloud ?

There is an argument that Cloud Computing is best used for mundane low-value tasks that would otherwise clog the superior servers of your IT department’s finest fellows.  The ‘clear away the dregs’ approach is fuelled by the nature of some fairly sketchy cloud computing services with limited platform options, network linkage constraints and the distances that data must travel to and fro.   So the CIO’s project planning view of candidates for the Cloud is very much dependent on just exactly what sort of Cloud he has in mind.

Enthusiasm (and wishful thinking) is endemic in the IT industry.  How quickly we forget why now we have distributed desktop computing - and how easily, in our supposedly broadband world, we overlook the glaring inconsistencies; the patchy coverage/quality of access infrastructures that are, for example, supposed to sustain ‘working from home’.

It has taken a few decades to overcome the simplistic and low-value automation of paper processes.  In the migration to Cloud Computing there is surely little point in simply replicating the constrained (or unimaginative) legacy. For corporate Cloud Computing the acid test of any new ability to respond to changing business needs can be tested by looking at the impact on enterprise strategies – not relegated to the marginal re-jigging of business as normal.   

CIO’s contemplating ‘what might go and what might stay?’ might do well to start out by considering the real roadblocks to systems and operational development – not just the convenient accounting shifts from Capex to Opex but the potential for delivering significantly higher value to their enterprise.  

Careful analysis might well show that something as precious and closely held as complex systems development might well deliver faster results if conducted in the Cloud – whilst the systems set up to handle lower level tasks are already optimised and certainly not broken enough to need fixing by further upheaval.

This focuses attention on just exactly what sort of Cloud Computing capability  is actually required.   For Clouds to be taken seriously they (and their connectivity) need to offer a richer resource appropriately scaled.  Only then can they be considered as a ‘heavy lifting’ resource to add real strength to the CIO’s ability to respond to enterprise needs.

The CIO’s responsibility is not to knock the optimists but to understand that the Cloud Computing claims of ‘response-ability’ need to be tested and proven in the context of future requirements.

_____________________________

This is the second of three editorials looking at Cloud Computing from the CIO's viewpoint.

COLT Managed Services have provided further commentary on editorials in this series as part of their Thought Leadership programme.

If proof of the persuasive power of simple headlines was ever needed then this morning’s health news on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme would stand as a classic example.

The message that life expectancy has doubled over the last 100 years was hardly newsworthy but the headline caught the media’s imagination -  more than half of all those people born this year might reasonably expect to live beyond 100 years.  More birthday telegrams from the Queen – although, logically, that might rather suppose an extraordinary life expectancy in our royal family !

The message was given positive treatment - and in large part attributed to progress in the positive treatment of all manner of ailments.  Experts were called to testify to the enduring trend and observe that further life-enhancing progress would be focused on the healthcare management of older people because ‘we have pretty much dealt with’ the problems of infant mortality.

It was, on yet another routine day of dismay and despair, a ‘good news’ story – and there is no doubt that the level of public awareness of lifetime expectations needs to be raised. 

Getting this simple point across the breakfast table and into the half-listening minds of the populace is an essential first step if we are ever to have a proper debate about how the nation will cope with more than half its citizens expecting comfortable retirement, well-funded pensions and ever-better healthcare for their increasingly aged bodies.

This challenge, the future affordability of healthcare, is what keeps health professionals (and politicians) awake at night trying to run up the down escalators of nightmares - diminishing tax revenues from a dwindling productive population needing to support an ever larger army of people needing more (and more expensive) care.

If we are to believe the logic of the maths then at some point we end up with every school leaver having to work in healthcare – unless, of course, we change the way we do things.   And that is the point of Connected Health.

Part of the healthcare challenge can be alleviated by reducing demand – adopting lifestyles and fitness regimes in a shift towards wellness.  The smoking ban and sensible eating are classic examples.   Part of the challenge may be answered by better treatments – new drugs, new surgical methods, new interventions.  But that still leaves the bulk of the challenge to be answered – and it is here that we need to work out how health and social care can be managed much more efficiently whilst still improving the quality of delivery.

This may only gradually be dawning on the general public but healthcare professionals have been worrying about it for years – and they think they may have some of the answers.   Much, however, depends on the successful outcomes of current research and political will.

In truth our health and well-being is a journey along a path that stretches from occasional medical interventions to self-care – with many opportunities along the way to help ourselves. 

Connected Health is the general name for the tools, techniques and systems on this pathway that can make life easier for ourselves, our families, our doctors, and our carers. 

Everyone’s needs are different.  Some may need a simple fall monitor or a panic button.  Others may need to monitor their heart-rate or blood pressure or blood sugar level.  But for effective healthcare delivery, that information needs somehow to be shared with others and not be overlooked.   There is no shortage of clever technology – the big question is how and when to deploy it.       

The UK’s ‘whole system demonstrators’ – a name surely devised by experts to obscure meaning – is one of the world’s largest investigations into the effectiveness and costs of Connected Health.   In three parts of the UK, Cornwall, Kent and the London Borough of Newham, trials are underway in a tightly controlled experiment to find out what works and how the information can best be managed.

If you have a ‘continuum’ where health and social care are on the same path then the first challenge in this sort of project is to deal with the awkward legacy of different budgets, different managements and different political masters  Even when you’ve achieved that commonality of purpose you still have to allow for different public perceptions.  

If you get a letter from your doctor asking if you will join a trial for some new healthcare treatment – and it will involve sharing your medical information with others – you may be more than likely to agree.  If, on the other hand, you get a letter from the Department of Work and Pensions along the same lines the chances are that you will assume that your ‘benefits’ and care are being reviewed (and most likely cut) and their invitation will end up in the bin.

So it was not surprising that to get 6,000 trial participants (of whom only half actually get the new services whilst the others act as a control group) it was necessary to invite 30,000 of those who were selected from our country’s 15 million chronically ill adults and those in need of care.

The results of this study will not be available until the early part of 2011 – and will have involved tens of millions of pounds spent not just on the remote monitoring equipment and services but on a fairly intensive study of all the outcomes. 

Managing changes in the way we do things is always a complex and uncertain business.  To cope with the massive transformation of Health & Social care needed to meet our future expectations it will be necessary for everyone to understand the need for change.  Doctors will need to be convinced of the efficacy of new delivery systems – and citizens (and their families) everywhere will need to understand the need to adopt healthier lifestyles.

If today’s Today feature on older age has the effect of getting more people to start thinking about where we are heading then it really will turn out to have been a good news story.

______________________

The author is a founder and director of The European Connected Health Campus.  www.echcampus.com 

 An abstract of the original research published in The Lancet can be found at:  http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(09)61460-4/abstract 

Smart companies can price for recovery and growth says Prof. Colin Coulson-Thomas. Speaking at the Leicester Tigers Stadium the author of “Pricing for Profit” showed finance leaders how to use pricing to attract and retain customers.

According to Prof. Colin Coulson-Thomas pricing leaders and laggards adopt very different pricing strategies in a recession: “While laggards think short-term and try to buy business with discounts, leaders adopt a longer term perspective. By taking a ‘lifetime view’ and building more intimate and strategic relationships, they enable customers to achieve their purchasing objectives while sharing the benefits of lower sales and buying costs.”

Coulson-Thomas’ report “Pricing for Profit” examines how some companies are able to charge more than their competitors for essentially the same product and command premium prices for their offerings. He finds: “Pricing leaders adopt very different approaches from pricing laggards. For example, while laggards cut costs and standardize, leaders differentiate, bespoke, offer additional services and deliver more value.”

The Professor feels pricing deserves greater attention: “Pricing decisions impact directly upon sales revenues and profitability. Charge too much and orders are lost, while charging too little erodes margins and may give the impression that offerings are of low quality. Obtaining and sustaining higher prices ought to be a top priority. Yet often boards agonize over selecting, developing and perfecting what is sold and then take quick pricing decisions based on guesswork, a mark up on costs, or inflation adjustment.”

So how should businesses set prices? Coulson-Thomas has some answers. He has persuaded 73 companies to reveal their pricing strategies, tactics and practices. The firms surveyed provided data on 127 factors that could affect pricing decisions. The findings set out in his report ‘Pricing for Profit’ suggest more effective pricing could boost the profitability of many companies.

Comparing the companies that are most successful at using pricing to achieve business objectives such as growing market share or improving profitability (the leaders) with the least successful (the laggards) revealed a stark contrast between the two groups. For example, leaders make more use of all nine tools and techniques examined.

Coulson-Thomas finds: “Leaders understand the strategic importance of pricing and are more attuned to factors such as perceived value that affect price sensitivity. They involve a wider range of departments in pricing decisions and members of the sales team play a more significant role. The most successful companies also rely upon evidence rather than hunch.”

The Professor warns “Marketing and sales should contribute to pricing as they ought to be close to customers. But left to themselves they may be tempted to ‘buy’ orders. Offering discounts may be regarded as a softer option than differentiating, tailoring and delivering extra value to justify a higher price. However, excessive discounting to ‘get the sale’ can reduce profitability.”

Coulson-Thomas reveals that: “Leaders attempt to sell on value as opposed to price. They are more likely to segment a market-place and take a long-term view, for example using ‘penetration pricing’ to enter a new market. When laggards look ahead it is often for defensive reasons, for example cutting price to hold onto market share.”

The cost drivers of leaders and laggards are very different. According to Coulson-Thomas, “Leaders are five times more likely to increase volume to achieve economies of scale. They are also more realistic when allocating costs and more likely to understand the direct and indirect costs attributable to a particular product or service.”

Overall, according to Coulson-Thomas: “Leaders adopt a more proactive and customer-focused approach to building their businesses. Increasing quality and delivering improved customer service allows them to build sales volume, reduce unit costs and become more competitive.”

The Professor points out that: “Leaders keep their pricing structures simple and transparent. Increasing an offering’s economic value and the extent to which it is unique or special enables them to price for value. Differentiated, tailored and exclusive offerings attract a premium. Leaders strive to add value to their core offering, develop a reputation for service and use pricing to build closer relationships with key customers.”

There are many ways of differentiating other than by product or service according to Coulson-Thomas: “Companies can differentiate by their purpose, image, values, reputation, people, processes, pricing, relationships, approaches and methodologies. Support tools can be helpful in enabling people to both understand and articulate differentiators. People need to be able to explain what is special, unique or different.”

Coulson-Thomas concludes: “Overall, leaders put greater effort into pricing. They use a wider range of sources of price information. They keep their finger on the pulse of customer, user and industry opinion, and review their approaches, strategies and tactics as situations and circumstances change.”

_____________________________________

‘Pricing for Profit... the Critical Success Factors’ by Colin Coulson-Thomas can be obtained from Policy Publications via http://www.policypublications.com

Prof. Colin Coulson-Thomas, an active consultant and author of ‘Pricing for Profit’ has reviewed the processes and practices for winning business of over 100 companies, helped over 100 boards to improve board and/or corporate performance, and spoken at over 200 national, international and corporate conferences in some 40 countries. He can be contacted via http://www.adaptation.ltd.uk or http://www.coulson-thomas.com

Coulson-Thomas was speaking on “Pricing: How to do it well” at an ACCA members event held at the Stadium of the UK’s Leicester Tigers, the 2009 Guinness Premier Championship winners. The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA) is the world’s largest and fastest-growing global professional accountancy body, with 296.000 trainees and 115,000 qualified members in 180 countries. ACCA helps the world’s employers attract, develop and retain the finance leaders of the future in all business sectors through nearly 80 bases worldwide.

More than 15 years ago Erik Brynjolfsson set about nailing what had seemed an interminable accounting battle over how to justify IT investments.

It is entirely fair to attribute to Prof. Erik Brynjolfsson the significant step of shifting IT accounting minds away from cost and towards value justifications.  But more than that he legitimised prioritisation of IT investments at the very edges of enterprise boundaries and often, counter-intuitively, just beyond.  As an antidote to the 1980’s disregard of interdependencies, collaborative advantage was the new competitive advantage.

Now, with the dawning of Cloud Computing reality (in contrast to a decade of premature hype), we are significantly better equipped to reconsider and redefine the physical and virtual boundaries of our businesses.

Cloud Computing has, according to Gartner, now reached the peak of the ‘Hype Cycle’ – so it’s reassuring to know that the good professor has not yet retired and, better still, is keeping up the good work.

If you believe the Gartner analysis, Cloud Computing is about to plunge into the valley of despond.  Prof. Brynjolfsson’s latest book, ‘Wired for Innovation’ is not specifically about Cloud Computing but his well-researched messages will not be lost on CIO’s attempting to make sense of their new networked options.

In mapping the outer reaches of a business we might use the analogy of a haphazard patchwork quilt to describe the fabric of the economy in which our globally interdependent enterprises must operate.  Measuring, delimiting, the boundaries of businesses – accounting for them – remains important but, in a globally competitive world emerging unevenly from a deep recession, no enterprise can afford to allow conventional walls to get in the way of innovation.

Even so, the most open-minded of CIO’s must still have regard for the protection of their enterprise – so it is hardly surprising that, before the hype has cooled, not all CIO’s would rush to embrace Computing Clouds with open arms. 

Clouds, of course, come in all shapes and sizes.  Some enterprises may be willing (and legally permitted) to consign their own and clients’ data beyond the distant horizon but the CIO will not be thanked if latency leads to losses in the closing milliseconds of big transactions.  Nor will customers be impressed by pregnant pauses while call centre operators wait for vital account clues to pop up.

The benefits of Cloud Computing are undeniably impressive.  Power savings alone can trump umpteen other reasons to shift computing power outside of your own physical domain.  But without the assurances of peak load performance, access security, data protection conformance, capacity flexibility and interoperability, (and a network environment that’s fit for purpose), a Cloud proposition might begin to look…… well…cloudy?

So although we all know that Cloud Computing can make eminent sense, can free an enterprise to redefine its boundaries, can release brilliant people to spend their time on higher-order tasks (rather than upgrading operating systems or arguing with the CFO on capital expenditure budgets), the real benefits may only shine through if the CIO is prepared to plan for business operating scenarios that are distinctly different to prevailing practice.

What would be the impact if we enabled easier growth by acquisition?  We all have horror stories of fine strategic plans wrecked by the costs and delays of trying to merge incompatible systems - and their people. 

What if the challenge was to efficiently manage a decline in a line of business ? 

What if the strategic gains from transforming a supplier into a partner can only be realised by sharing data that has always been closely held?  How do we do that securely when we know that our partner is also supplying a competitor ?

How can public sector IT plans for lowering costs and improving quality be squared with a schizophrenic media attitude that inverts each localised success into ‘a postcode lottery’ or efficient joined-up government into ‘an information exchange outrage’ ?

There is no doubt that most major IT and systems management companies are convinced that Cloud Computing is about to hit the big time.  In the blogosphere you’ll find endless discussion of the technological concepts.  Those who studied anthropology can marvel at the human anguish unleashed by the prospects of changing the way we do business.  The end of the (IT) world is nigh - they cry – but, in a sector whose raison d’être is to enable change, such complaints seem only to illustrate the need for fresh thinking.

So where now will the CIO turn for solid advice on design, on security, on systems, on performance management and the unbearable lightness of being out-sourced ?  

Oddly the best advice is likely to come not from purveyors of power systems, retailers of racks or shifters of boxes, but from the movers of megabits.

Think about it.  Processing happens.  Where it happens can impact on its cost and safety and adaptability – but all those options can only be effective if the network linkages are fit for purpose.  If cost is of no concern, you can always play safe with massive over-provision.  But if flexibility is valued then network design is a critical factor.

The guys under real pressure- the guys who will, if anyone, make this stuff work – the guys who really understand the dynamics - are the chaps in the middle who must marry their network capabilities to fluctuating performance loads, bandwidth on demand and rapid responses to changing requirements.

Cloud Computing may well bring new business freedoms and flexible boundaries but Gartner’s ‘Trough of Disillusionment’ awaits those who fail to recognise that the underlying network infrastructure represents the ultimate test of good design.

If Cloud Computing makes CIO’s think again, then Professor Erik Brynjolfsson will eventually be able to retire a very happy man.

_____________________________________

'Wired For Innovation' – Brynjolfsson & Saunders MIT - ISBN 0-262-01366-5 - was published in October 2009.  More details at http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=11848 

This ediitorial is the first in a short series focussed on Cloud Computing services and related business management strategies.  COLT Managed Services have provided a further commentary on this editorial as part of their 'Thought Leadership' programme.

Helping customers combat climate change through more responsible purchasing:

Many buyers are not fully aware of the impacts of their purchase decisions upon the environment, according to Prof. Colin Coulson-Thomas, or the extent to which the consequences of their actions are contributing to climate change.

Speaking at the Global Convention on Climate Security (Palampur, India) the author of ‘Winning Companies; Winning People’ suggested “Some might behave differently if they appreciated certain connections and were more aware of the implications of their actions. An understanding of the outcomes of different options might enable them to select a way forward that minimised harmful effects.”

Coulson-Thomas’ investigations have revealed: “Many corporate boards would like to contribute to combating environmental challenges and climate change, but they have yet to identify practical and cost effective ways of turning their noble aspirations into concrete outcomes that will help to save the planet. At the same time many consumers do not fully understand the differing environmental impacts of alternative options.”

According to Coulson-Thomas: “Pioneering companies are using a new generation of support tools that can help people to make more responsible purchasing decisions by enabling them to select offerings and courses of action that will have the least harmful consequences. The same tools can lead to more business from concerned citizens, as well as: boosting the performance of key workgroups such as front line sales, account management and support staff; speeding up responses; reducing cost, risk and stress; and improving quality and compliance.”

The Professor has found that “It is possible to increase sales while at the same time helping customers to select more environmentally friendly options when they buy. The outcome is a win for the supplying company, a win for customers, and a win for the planet, our children and future generations.”

In relation to climate change, environmental and other impacts, Coulson-Thomas raises certain questions: “Should the governing bodies of organisations accept responsibility for making customers and users of various corporate offerings more aware of the consequences of their buying decisions?  Should directors take steps to encourage and enable more responsible and less harmful purchasing?”

Coulson-Thomas believes: “Too often social responsibility and other policies remain as words on paper and there is a wide and growing gap between boardroom aspiration and the reality of conduct on the corporate front line. Many boards need cost effective ways of implementing policies for confronting and handling climate change and other issues if their good intentions are to result in desired outcomes.”

The challenge for many suppliers is to find ways of helping customers to understand the implications of different options and make more responsible choices. Coulson-Thomas finds: “Many companies view environmental impacts and climate change as a challenge rather than as an opportunity. Understanding impacts and consequences, especially negative ones, is a first step towards reviewing and developing one’s portfolio of offerings, and being more transparent. Working with customers and prospects in this process can help to build more mutually beneficial and longer lasting relationships with them.”

In essence, “the approach is to make it much easier: for staff and customers to understand complex options, inter-actions and implications; for people dealing with customers such as contact centre teams, sales staff and account managers to do difficult jobs ; and for customers to make responsible choices. Ideally customers can be helped to help themselves.”

Coulson-Thomas’ investigation suggests “The emphasis must shift from selling to enabling customers to determine the least harmful or most beneficial option from the point of view of the environment and climate change, and making it easy for them to buy a solution that addresses their individual needs, priorities and concerns.” He demonstrated that it is possible to do this in a way that also frees people from dependency upon particular locations and supports mobile activities, relocation, outsourcing and different ways of working and learning.

The approach advocated in the Professor’s speech and book has been adopted by pioneering users and can and does boost performance and speed up and enable bespoke responses, as well as reducing stress, avoiding risks and cutting compliance costs. He reveals: “Such favourable outcomes have been achieved within a year, achieving returns on investment of 20, 30 or 70 times on just one outcome measure and a quick payback at a time of adversity when funds are scarce.”

_______________________________

The Global Convention on Climate Security and Eco-Investors Forum was held at the S M Convention Centre, Palampur, India. Politicians, business leaders and academics spoke on Governance for Climate Security, Business Innovation, Social Change and National Security.

The support tool for enabling more responsible purchasing that was used as an example at the convention was developed by Cotoco and information on other tools for supporting the relationship between buyer and seller can be found on www.cotoco.com.

Further information on what high performers do differently in areas that are vital for corporate success, such as sales, pricing and purchasing, and how support tools can make it easier for ordinary people to do difficult jobs, can be found in Colin Coulson-Thomas’ book ‘Winning Companies; Winning People’ which can be obtained from www.policypublications.com. Details of reports setting out critical success factors for purchasing and other activities can also be found on the Policy Publications website.

Dr Colin Coulson-Thomas, author of “Winning Companies; Winning People” is an experienced company chairman and an advisor to corporate clients worldwide. He is the author of over 40 books and reports and has helped over 100 boards to improve director, board and corporate performance; reviewed the processes and practices for winning business and building customer relationships of over 100 companies; and spoken at over 200 national or international conferences in some 40 countries.  He can be contacted via www.coulson-thomas.com