I’m on on of my rants again I’m afraid.

OK so the euro zone is in chaos, the economy isn’t great and it looks as though we will have a few tough years before things get better.  But do you know what?  That’s life. In the good times, every person, every company and every country spent too much. Fact. So now we all have to take a bit of a hit and pay it back.

And while we’re about it I have to say that not every market is in the doldrums.  There are pockets of really positive activity out there. Several of our clients are trying to seed some good news into the media  - and do you know what – by and large  they aren’t interested. Why? Because they just want to dish out their daily diet of doom , gloom and more gloom, Well I’m  fed up of it.

And if you take us as an example – we have grown every year since 2007.  It’s not been easy,  In fact it’s been bloody hard work but we are growing, we are making money and we are taking people on.

So please – let’s just get on with it  - and bloody cheer up. Have a Fab Christmas – and a PROSPEROUS New Year

It goes without saying that everyone can become very busy at times. It’s not always possible to return emails or phone calls straight away, I’m sure we’ve all been guilty of neglecting the odd response, but it makes a world of difference to your professional reputation if you do reply swiftly.

Here’s an example: if I email a supplier asking about their services, and I’m met with a wall of silence, I certainly won’t chase them up on the request. I’ll ask around some more and find someone else in the same space who seems more responsive and on the ball. If it’s a choice between a supplier whose website and services look great, but who never answered my enquiry and one who might not market themselves well but is quick to respond and helpful, it’s a no brainer. I’ll go with the person who values my business enough to pick up the phone or write an email.

Replying to an email or a phone call quickly connotes professionalism far more than any expensive website or marketing strategy. These simple acts of good communication give you a chance to demonstrate your ability to build a good relationship and to show off your expertise.

It’s even more important to continue to respond quickly to your clients and associates throughout the working relationship. Word of mouth is a powerful thing and you will quickly become known as someone who’s reliable and knows what they’re doing.

Even if you don’t have an immediate answer to a question, acknowledging that it was asked is more important than spending a long time sourcing an answer only to reply a week later. Notify the sender that you’ve received their email and are looking into their query – and establish a reasonable time frame for when you might get back to them. This may not be the immediate answer they need, but it gives them confidence in your ability to help them.

With more channels of communication than I can count on two hands, it isn’t difficult to quickly get back to somebody, even if just to say you’re very busy and will respond at a later date. If you’re easy to get hold of and to deal with, people will want to work with you again. And all it takes is an email!

*Cue dramatic Apprentice music

This is the part where the four finalists are called into separate interviews with business type folk and ripped to shreds for our entertainment. Margaret Mountford is among them. First to fall at her hands is Helen. When her success in the tasks so far is mentioned, she stupidly, and modestly answers “I’ve been very lucky.” Now really is the time to blow your own horn, Helen.

Meanwhile, Jim’s business plan / novel of buzzwords and clichés is under the microscope. He’s asked if he has a problem expressing himself succinctly. Hoho Jim does not like to be challenged. I can see the murderous revenge plot forming in his steely blue eyes.

In Susan’s interview, she’s asked to deliver an elevator pitch. Business 101 – an elevator pitch is supposed to be short. Susan goes on. And on. And on. “I see no end to this business,” she enthuses. I see no end to her elevator pitch. Better put the kettle on.

It’s Margaret’s turn to grill Cliché Jim: “I’m no show pony, or a one trick pony, or a wild stallion that needs to be tamed, or even a stubborn mule. I believe I can become the champion thoroughbred that this process requires,” his business proposal boasts.

“Are you a bit of an ass?” Margaret asks.

“A jackass.” Jim agrees, dolefully.

Margaret gives him one more chance: “Try to tell me about you without clichés.”

“I’m exactly what it says on the tin,” he responds.

Tom’s business plan to sell chairs that eliminate back pain doesn’t make any sense. Mainly because not one number adds up – and there’s no mention of margins. Tom is told “you don’t know anything” – about time someone told at least one of the contestants that they know nothing. It would have saved a lot of time to do it on the first day, but never mind.

Helen is proposing some concierge service. I don’t get it. That doesn’t seem to matter though as nobody else really gets it either. The judges try to establish that Helen is NOT a fembot by getting her to tell a joke. “Can I come back to that one a bit later?”

Susan has some gems this episodes. Not only does she proudly insist she’s going to make one million in profit in her first year by expanding her one-woman show weekend market skincare business (bye bye Susan) but she also admits on national television that she pays her staff in cash, no tax or national insurance!

The Jim cliché show continues. He’s apparently had a “meteoric rise from zero to hero” which is almost believable until the judge brings up his salary – Jim looks like he’s just been castrated.

That’s it – the interviews are over. “We’re finished” – says Susan. You certainly are, Susan.

Back in the boardroom, it’s Lord Sugar’s turn to reduce the contestants to wobbly lipped toddlers. Helen has no entrepreneurial flair. She’s good at doing what she’s told and very organised but her business plan really has no legs in it.

Jim is a terrific sales person but slippery when it comes to details. There’s also no money in his e-learning for schools business plan, it’s just one long seduction letter to Lord Sugar. That’s slightly disturbing.

Tom’s apparently the one who would most benefit from Sugar’s involvement as he’s all ideas and no commercial edge. I wonder who wins, then.

Jim first to get fired to a backdrop of dramatic music. Susan is fired next – she sadly takes her Barbie wheelie suitcase, packs up her toys and leaves.

With just Helen and Tom left in the running, Helen makes one desperate last-minute attempt with a rabbit out the hat second business plan. Bit late for that.

Tom, however, wows Lord Sugar with the story of how he got his product (a curved nail file) into Walmart by conning the buyer into seeing him. Lord Sugar didn’t know he had it in him. Neither did we, seeing as he left it to the last five seconds of the show to reveal he has any commercial acumen.

Tom is hired. Hooray for the underdog, or something. Helen almost looks emotional for a moment, before she short circuits.
So that’s the end of that. It’s been a fun journey, thanks for reading! Did the right person win? Leave us your comments and let us know what you thought of the Apprentice this year.

However, I have heard a lot of people talking about how we should celebrate the fact that  ’people power’ and public opinion closed a newspaper.  In fact on Friday’s edition of Newsnight, the founder of Mumsnet said; ” we saw what social media can do…when individual people decide to take direct action…ordinary people on Facebook, on Twitter, on Mumsnet have made a difference.

Errr…I don’t think so

Come on now folks,  lets’ not kid ourselves that it was ‘people power’ that closed this newspaper. As Will Self said on Newsnight it was ‘the people’ that bought the paper year in year out because of their ”ubiquitous appetite for what the gutter press have peddled.” 

It was, in my opinion,  a carefully orchestrated move by the Murdoch empire to try and ensure that the Government had no grounds to refer NewsCorp’s bid for BSkyB to the OFT.  In fact in an article in the Guardian back on 30th June: News International facing job losses , it was reported that Rebekah Brooks had sent an e-mail to staff saying: ”Let me be absolutely clear: there are tough decisions coming. Costs will need to be cut and savings made in overheads and personnel… and that “a seven-day operation will be a reality in some common areas.” Additionally, the article stated  that earlier that week: “News International announced there would be a single managing editor for the Times and Sunday Times, and another for the Sun and News of the World, in an indication that the daily and Sunday titles are preparing to pool some editorial resources in a move to a seven day operation in some areas. Previously each of the four titles had a dedicated managing editor.”

Then there was the regsitration of the sunonsunday.co.uk on 5th July – which News International have taken ownership of today.

And while the bid has indeed now been referred – how long before Newscorp no longer owns News International? We shall see.

A celebration of people power? Don’t make me laugh.  A lot of ordinary people lost their jobs last week because of a few bad apples. Rebekah Brooks still has hers. Not much to celebrate there.

I was listening, as usual, to the Radio4 Today programme the other day as I was getting ready for work.  I had risen with a feeling of positive anticipation for the business year ahead.  We’d had to work harder than ever in 2010 but our turnover and profit were up on 09 and our work pipeline was looking good with a number of new retained contracts being signed.  And then on comes the grim reaper himself  Robert Peston ( who I am convinced really works for the CIPD).  There then  ensued a diatribe of  depressing predictions – pay squeezes, pay freezes, job losses, VAT rises, unemployment increases. Then I came into work and read the cheery  CIPD Annual Barometer Forecast and wondered if we should all just go home. I am so bloody bored of it all.

And do you know what? This sort of endless  banging on and on about the negative just breeds a what’s the point attitude.  I know personally of at least three graduates with good degrees who think it’s pointless looking for a job because they feel there arent any.  Makes my blood boil!

Yes it’s tough out there but what are we supposed to do – just go back to bed and put our heads under the covers?  

And then a little ray of sunshine  poured into my black day – another prediction and this time positive – and from a group of people who hopefully do really have their  fingers on the pulse – and the evidence at their fingertips –  the holders of the purse strings – Finance Directors. 

I was having lunch with an employment journalist recently and we were discussing recent press releases put out by the CIPD. She had just received the release outlining the results of the CIPD/KPMG Labour Market Outlook.  The opening lines of the release state that the report - and I quote : “.. indicates that private sector job creation will more than offset public sector job cuts in the final quarter of 2010.”  It also talks about a net positive balance of  +11 (the figure which measures the difference between the proportion of employers intending to increase staffing levels – and those intending to decrease staffing levels) Apparently, this is the third quarter in a row to record a positive balance rising from +2 in the summer survey.  And Dr Philpott, economic guru at the CIPD says that “signs of not only a sustained but also an increasing buoyancy in private sector job prospects is encouraging.”   All good stuff then?

Err apparently not because only two weeks previously there had been a grand old hoo hah about their press release which stated that cuts in public spending would result in the loss of almost £1.6 million jobs across the UK economy with the private sector hit harder than the public sector. These predictions, say the release, are based on ‘soundings from public sector managers  (whatever that means) and the CIPD were forced to swiftly defend their stance in a statement following criticism from the IOD.  The predictions, say the CIPD, were based on the analysis and detailed predictions of our 135,000 members – and on data from  the labour market outlook ( yes that really positive one I mentioned first).  So not public sector managers then?   As I said in my comments to a blog posted by Mervyn Dinnen on this subject, if it is based on 135,000 members then that probably ignores a large proportion of the SME community – who don’t have CIPD members on their staff – mine included. There was also an interesting blog on the subject from Andy Headworth which is worth a read.

But apart from all this, my point here really is about communication.  Going back to the journalist and our lunch, the main point she made was that she felt she had no real understanding of what the actual message was – there were so many conflicting statements, so many ifs  buts and maybes that the message – whatever it was trying to convey – was just lost.

I’ll leave you with their latest snappy headline:

“Private sector in pre-festive season jobs surge but more than 4 in 10 public sector organisations already making redundancies says CIPD/KPMG quarterly jobs survey”…….draws breath!

Come on CIPD – get on message!

I may not look it, but I am in fact 25 (I’d be in the ‘oldies’ section on X-Factor therefore I don’t class myself as that young any more!) Being youthful and energetic should be beneficial in the business world, right? Well, I’m not so sure. I have always looked young – in fact only a couple of years ago I got asked for ID buying party poppers – but I’ve got by, and I guess I thought that in the world of work it wouldn’t be an issue. But it’s one that has cropped up a few times.

In just the last week a prospective client has referred to me as “ten” and a prospective candidate asked me how old I was. And if I had a pound for every person who asked “well, will you be running my account?” or “what’s your background?” with an inquisitive look, I’d be stacking up the money ready to buy my beach house. And don’t get me started on all the ‘gen Y are lazy’ business. Now I usually take this with a pinch of salt, but it is sometimes wearing to think that people perhaps don’t take you quite as seriously because you look young. Is working hard and being good at your job not enough? Perhaps I’ll send someone double my age with half the experience next time? I’m not in any way implying that at 25 I’m the most qualified person out there, but I wouldn’t be let loose, so to speak, if I didn’t know what I was doing.

Of course it’s perfectly possible that I misread some of these situations and there are plenty of people this doesn’t apply to. It’s just some food for thought! And before you say it, yes I’m sure I will be grateful when I’m older – I’m aiming for that Kylie youthfulness (without the botox).

A new week, a new rant. (Except it’s my turn this time!) Times columnist Sathnam Sanghera has written another piece which will undoubtedly attract the attention of many businesses and tweeters. It was only a few weeks ago that the HR community was up in arms over his article entitled “Human resources departments – what’s the point?” and I expect that he’ll create controversy once again with a piece that (in a nutshell) says that Twitter is a waste of time for businesses.

Let’s look at his 5 main reasons why businesses shouldn’t bother with Twitter:

• Twitter relies on people having realtime conversations and companies are incapable of doing anything on a realtime basis. Corporate Twitter accounts read like a stream of press releases: There’s nothing like a great sweeping generalisation is there?! Yes, these points may apply to some, but those organisations that are using Twitter successfully are having conversations with their followers, they are sharing relevant information and they are doing it on a regular and ongoing basis.
• Large organisations are institutionally incapable of getting to the point: Again, another lovely generalisation. Plus, when did “businesses” = “large organisations”?  
• Corporations are not open: OK, so businesses aren’t going to share their financial projections with you via Twitter, but why would they? That’s not what Twitter is about. It’s all about sharing interesting information, not company secrets.
• The tone of Twitter is altruistic and reciprocal, whereas businesses are not – their essential mission in life being to flog stuff.  At its best, Twitter is about sharing interesting and amusing ideas and helping people. And I’m not sure how businesses can fit into this: Organisations would not be on Twitter if it didn’t help their business – that much is true. But those companies whose tweets are all shameless self promotion aren’t going to get very far. Why can’t businesses share interesting ideas? Doesn’t seem that impossible a feat. Share ideas, news and advice, position the business as a thought leader and boost your brand and business – everyone’s a winner.
• The best Twitter-users are those with distinct voices and personalities, and corporations don’t have distinct voices or personalities. And this is the thing about the handful of corporate Twitter accounts that are engaging, such as @zappos, and Ford’s @ScottMonty. They’re not really company Twitter accounts. They are accounts belonging to individuals who happen to run or work for a company: This last line has to be my favourite. Twitter accounts are run by people who work for the company? No way! If its employees can’t act on behalf of the company, who can?

Despite my thoughts above, I do understand the basis of what he is saying; because some corporations do have it wrong. Tweeting has to be engaging and it has to be interesting, which is something that some corporate accounts are not. It can be hard to keep a corporate identity, reputation and message whilst still trying to come across as a human, interacting with other users. And it is something that requires a lot of attention, which some businesses do not have the time and resources for. But at the same time these things can be managed, and they are no reason to dismiss what has become a great tool for businesses to communicate and market themselves. And there are plenty of success stories to prove it.

Any thoughts to add, readers? Or has my Monday morning rant covered it all?! As for Sathnam, that’s  HR and Twitter crossed off his list – I wonder what we can do without next? After my recent PC nightmare, I predict: “Computers are too much trouble – let’s revert to carrier pigeons and typewriters.” OK, maybe not, but you never know. Let’s wait and see…