Book

You are currently browsing the archive for the Book category.

In my book, I write about the need to move beyond profit as the basic measure of success and the driver of economic development. I recently came across a statement that convinces me even more.

“In order for a business to perform a societal value it must make a profit.”

Unquestionably this appears to make sense; after all, isn’t it business profit that has underpinned the rise of the western economies and secured our aspirational standards of living?

Yet, I would be tempted to argue that the statement is actually disengenuous and misleading. Why? Because it inverts fundamental principles. Business exists to provide a service and it only makes profits when those services deliver, or are perceived to deliver, value.  No value, no profit!

This is a very important distinction, because it is the quest for greater profits that subverted the finance industry and led to the near-collapse of the financial system and the current economic climate in which we all find ourselves. With more emphasis on value and less on profit, this whole sorry situation might have been avoided. It is hardly surprising that there is now an outcry and mass indignation and anger about the greed of the banking fraternity.

However, the bankers are not alone in this. You don’t have to look too far to find parallels in other walks of life, not least in sports, where the best way to beat the competiton is increasingly seen to be to take performance enhancing substances. Of course this is unethical behaviour and – if you think about it – the ultimate in self-deception. Yet it is vindicated by the delusional statement that “the only person may be hurting is myself”, and justified by position “that everyone else is doing it and I won’t be successful unless I do too!”

The problem is it doesn’t just harm the individual, it hurts everyone; it creates a contagion that breaks down the fundamental trust that makes participation worthwhile and that is necessary for a society to function. The failure of the big banks is a salutary lesson as to just how pervasive these attitudes have become and the damage that such moral decay can cause. We need to make a stand. That is why it is necessary to challenge conventional ‘wisdom’ and re-examine the fundamentals behind statements that profits are essential for business to create societal value. Rather now is the time for values based business!

Clearing the barThe UK government is once again on the back foot. The latest crisis in confidence comes from reports last week about deteriorating social mobility and the extended middle class domination of the professions. This is not only contrary to stated government policy, but has happened despite all efforts to reverse the trend. So what has gone wrong?

Government concerns that jobs in the professions are increasingly held by the offspring of the more affluent simply because they are mainly the product of independent schools says it all. State schools are simply not teaching to a sufficiently high standard and as a result even those going on to university from there are either not interested in a professional career or not well-rounded enough to meet the requirements of employers. Failure to face up to this is to continue to look at the symptoms and not the causes of the problem, while attacking the independent schools for the problem would be politics of envy rather than aspiration and defeat the purpose entirely by eroding the quality of the professions.

Professionals, by very virtue of that designation, recognise the value of education and so make the commitment and sacrifices, and provide the support, to ensure that their children get the best education they possibly can. By contrast, those who don’t or who cannot, contribute to a trend of downward mobility that increasingly handicaps not only their own offspring but the wider economy.

Successive governments have contributed to this dichotomy by aiding and abetting lower standards. They have failed to understand that closing any gap between ‘the masses’ and ‘the elite’ is an extremely expensive business and requires a considerable investment. This is an investment that they have not really been willing or able to meet. Instead they have proclaimed the need to be economically competitive, and championed policies of increased graduate numbers, achieved by debasing standards to enable more people to go to university, and co-opting the universities into the scheme by creating more of them, who, in order to survive and compete, offer a broader and broader range of so-called degrees.

Now we have the evidence ,and can see the emperor in his true clothes and what a hollow sham it has all been. Awarding higher grade results and more degrees is the educational equivalent of printing money – it has not created more well-educated people but is rather an educational inflation that simply devalued what one already had. All that has been done is to create a type of educational ‘credit crunch’ that has inevitably resulted in an overall lowering of standards, which has had a recessionary effect in the job market and exacerbated the so-called ‘war for talent’.

There is, and always will be, a need for different talents and an education system should recognise and support this. In historical language, this entails distinguishing between ‘academic’ and ‘vocational’ abilities, and meeting the needs of both sectors. Any society looking to flourish in our increasingly competitive and inter-connected “global village” (and can any afford not to?) thus needs to:

  • Recognise the shifting skills requirements demanded by the workplace and provide an educational system – with the requisite balance – to meet that demand.
  • Invest in the educational platform to ensure that whatever route a student takes, he or she is properly equipped to meet the workplace demands, to the standard that the competitive market needs rather than to some arbitrary standard determined by the government and/or the educational institution.

Who is bold enough to recognise this and act accordingly? The problem is not unique to the UK.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Book Review If you are concerned with how society is changing then you should read this book. It contains some interesting insights into how society via government is being moulded, whether intentionally or not.

Bay lists some of the problem he sees with the way governments are governing and global challenges such as the current global recession. You may or may not agree with what he has written, however, it will make you think. Bay also provides solutions to the problems that he highlights.

This is a book that you may need to read twice to get the full benefit. I know I will be reading this again in twelve months time. I found this to be an interesting and worthwhile read.

Les Rees, Principle of Les Rees Ltd. Les is a Chartered Accountant specialising in S.M.E’s and start-ups, he has had nearly 20 years experience in assisting business owners to improve both their bottom line and lifestyle. His website is www.lesrees.co.nz
Book Review

If you are concerned with how society is changing then you should read this book. It contains some interesting insights into how society via government is being moulded, whether intentionally or not.

Bay lists some of the problem he sees with the way governments are governing and global challenges such as the current global recession. You may or may not agree with what he has written, however, it will make you think.

Bay also provides solutions to the problems that he highlights.
This is a book that you may need to read twice to get the full benefit. I know I will be reading this again in twelve months time.

I found this to be an interesting and worthwhile read.

Les Rees, Principle of Les Rees Ltd. Les is a Chartered Accountant specialising in S.M.E’s and start-ups, he has had nearly 20 years experience in assisting business owners to improve both their bottom line and lifestyle.

The Circle of Life!

Be Do Have Diagram (Original Alistair Lobo version)

Be Do Have Diagram (Original Alistair Lobo version)

As I explain in my introduction, this Be Do Have model is such an intuitive, natural concept that it helped me shape my life, even though I only formally learned about it in the past year.

Since publishing the book, however, I have realised that both this diagram and my supporting description are inadequate. Both make the elements appear sequential, with each step forming a precedent that determines the quality of the next. This is only partly true, because, as I have since realised, they are actually a behaviour continuum where each has an ongoing effect on the others. Therefore the concept can and should be more realistically portrayed as follows:

Be Do Have Diagram (Revised Bay Jordan Version)

Be Do Have Diagram (Revised Bay Jordan Version)

The distinction is important because it reinforces the progressive nature of life and helps illustrate why the outcomes we are currently experiencing are undermining our individual and collective sense of self-worth, and thus why we need to change. It is effectively a wider interpretation of Helen Douglas’ observation, “Character isn’t inherited. One builds it daily by the way one thinks and acts, thought by thought, action by action.” If we want a more stable, secure world, we have to go back to the highest concepts of who we are, in order to reverse the current outcomes that are moving us in the opposite direction and endangering the human race and the whole planet.

Tags: , , , , , ,

clearing-the-barIn their book “The Gorillas Want Bananas” Debbie Jenkins and Joe Gregory describe the once popular phenomenon of flea circuses and how, by putting a lid on the box so that they crashed into it whenever they jumped, fleas could be trained not to jump so high, until eventually they could be kept in the box with no lid at all. I had heard this before and forgotten it, but it also reminded me of a similar story about a glass sheet being put in a fish tank, preventing fish from using the whole tank. Eventually, when the glass is removed, the fish have become so used to the restricted space they make no attempt to swim beyond where the glass was.

As I reflected on both these examples of conditioned thinking, I realised that in “A Feeling of Worth” I am actually challenging the extent to which we, humankind, have allowed ourselves to be conditioned in the same way. To what extent is “tall poppy” syndrome – the tendency for the majority to try to cut down anybody who rises above the rest – inhibiting our ability to progress as a society?

Of course I don’t have any definitive answers, but I do sense that this is a major factor in modern western society, and that, in the name of equality, there is a tendency to lower standards to meet the average. My argument is not with the principle of equality, but simply that this should be equality of opportunity, and that once given the opportunity people should be judged on the use they make of that opportunity.

For example, compulsory universal education is a desirable standard and a principle to which we all happily subscribe. Modern technology even makes it easier to remove the inequities caused by varying standards of teaching (even if it does not eliminate them completely.) Effective use of these capabilities would minimise the historic ‘lottery’ associated with education that created the situation whereby the quality of education depends on social standing and residential location. Yet, even then, results will vary because abilities differ.

Unfortunately, educational effort seems to be focused more on equalising results than equalising opportunity. Consequently, while it is a worthy goal to make university education more accessible to all, this appears to be being achieved by promoting a general lowering of standards that:

  • Reduces the spread in results, and ensures that more students achieve the highest grades in their qualifying examinations.
  • Promotes university selection policies that are distorted by social considerations rather than pure academic achievements.
  • Reduces the calibre of the student intake which, inevitably, has to reduce the standard of the ultimate degree, and hence the graduate capability.
  • Proliferates a number of graduate qualifications that are not consistent with the standards normally associated with university degrees.

Some might argue that, precisely because abilities do vary, this ultimately is simply an alternative method of creating “a more level playing field” where more people have greater opportunities than they might otherwise have had. The problem is that it inhibits the capabilities of the more able, and thus, for the wider community, reduces the overall potential. In a world where we need to make better use of resources this is waste, and as such is unconscionable.

Tags: , , , ,

reform-blog1It’s a bit of a cliché to talk about the rapid pace of change, but we have certainly seen it lately. When I wrote “A Feeling of Worth” there was nothing (at least in my experience) to suggest there would be a crisis over MP’s expenses. Yet in the past few weeks we have seen an investigation into MP’s expense claims result in daily exposés that, amongst other things, have:

  • Forced a significant number to recognise that they have killed the goose that laid the golden egg and so stand down at the next election.
  • Resulted in many others being investigated by their own – suddenly scrupulous – party, with the threat that they might no longer be considered “worthy.”
  • Raised a very real possibility that a number will face criminal charges for excesses that actually amounted to fraud or embezzlement.

Yet, by far the biggest consequence is the sudden clamour for major political reform. There are government ministers now suddenly advocating proportional representation, something they never considered before there was a possibility that they might lose the next election. And David Cameron is suddenly calling for “sweeping reform” with power “redistributed from the political elite to the man and woman in the street.”

These comments should be enough to raise the alarm bells for any thinking person. How on earth do we get from what – apart from the obvious fraudulent cases of a minority of MPs – is simply a massive (and unethical) abuse of an incredibly weak, inadequately controlled, expense/allowance system, to wholesale constitutional reform and changing the whole way of governing? News reports today are talking about the ‘mob-rule’ mentality that is being galvanised, and there is no doubt that the electorate is entitled to feel disillusioned, but mob rule does not provide a good basis for balance or hence for constructive, effective change.

While it is massively encouraging to have some of the ideas in my book so suddenly and publicly endorsed, I am concerned about the motives for such radical changes, and even more by the haste with which they have been aired. Unless they have been on a hidden agenda for a long time and now is suddenly seen as an ideal time to test them out, they cannot have been properly thought through. And a hastily conceived solution and/or a rushed implementation of a solution may well create a worse problem than the one being remedied.

So, let’s just fix the MPs expense system and then have some proper debate about structural change, rather than have this sort of partisan point-scoring which is something the book condemns anyway.

You can buy my new book A Feeling Of Worth here:

Newer entries »