This pioneering spirit served me well when I first entered into employment. It is now 1987 and a few weeks before a London Stock Exchange crash and a storm that wiped out most of Kent’s orchards: I am busy learning Lotus 1-2-3. It is my first experience of spreadsheets and they are amazing. I am teaching senior colleagues (including my father) all sorts of fascinating stuff – but my approach is the same as with the ZX Spectrum and BASIC. It is best to teach yourself how to do it, I convince myself.

I cannot remember first using MS Excel, but I do know that by then the world had changed. Spreadsheet risk was a definite blip on the landscape and urban myth had it that only rocket scientists produced good, clever spreadsheets. Horror stories of people working through the night to rescue a wrecked spreadsheet that someone else had put together flitted about the business corridors. I built a spreadsheet that I then reviewed after a six month gap and I had no idea what I was on about. At the same time, I was pursuing pretty full-on professional qualifications that, despite a huge focus on finance, never mentioned what a spreadsheet did and what its risks might be.

The argument for spreadsheets that follow a commonly understood set of design guidelines is to me a no-brainer. Architects expect to be able to follow other architects’ drawings; open source software is all about easy collaboration amongst many contributors. Both follow a set of commonly understood design principles. We don’t have this issue with business writing – somehow the pioneering spirit relating to words in business is ground out of us.

But just as when someone else sends me a Word document I expect to be able to read it quickly and easily, so I want to be able to do the same with their spreadsheet.

In the interview, Jeff highlights the importance of Emotional Intelligence in developing leadership skills – being aware of how you are perceived by others and recognising that your emotions directly affect the behaviour and performance of those around you.

The article, by Tony McDonough, was published in The Liverpool Post on Thursday 16th February 2012.

Click here to open the PDF: Liverpool Post, 16th February 2012

In February last year the CBI predicted 2011′s growth to be 1.8%, but it turned out to be only 0.9%.

It forecast growth of 1.0% in 2010, but even with a fourth-quarter fall, the economy achieved 2.1%, while 2009 was predicted at -3.3% but came in at -4.4%.

So for the last three years at least then, the CBI’s forecasts at the start of the year have been out by about one percentage point, alternating between being too positive and too negative.

More bad news comes from credit rating agency Moody’s, which has put Britain’s credit rating on a negative outlook. But the good news is that their forecasts – despite being part of a self-fulfilling prophecy, in theory at least – have also come under criticism for, well, just not being that useful.

Credit ratings agencies have been criticised in a new study by two academics, Jens Hilscher and Mungo Wilson, which reaches the conclusion that “the judgements of the credit rating agencies are significantly over-rated”. Worse, that “ratings are in fact a poor predictor of corporate failure”.

Naturally the credit ratings agencies disagree with the academics’ conclusions, but given how much influence the agencies have, it is a critique that is worth detailed consideration.

All this shows is that even economic experts aren’t great at predicting the future, any more than the assorted ex-professionals who sit on the Football Focus sofas can accurately forecast that afternoon’s results.

The media, who report these figures, are regularly blamed for being bearish, and therefore being part of the cause of the sluggish economy.

But that view overlooks one critical point – media organisations are businesses too. Newspaper groups and (most) television stations are reliant on advertising revenues and are answerable to shareholders.

In other words, if it was the case that collectively talking up the economy would result in an improvement, it is in their own commercial interests to do so.

Perhaps then, it’s not a case of good news and bad news. Instead it’s just news – and make of that what you will.

We got chatting about the current state of Further and Higher Education, about global events and the price of rail tickets when he started to enquire about my Kindle and what I was reading.

I was reading a novel – the latest Bernie Gunther mystery by Philip Kerr entitled “Prague Fatale”.

“Ha!” said my colleague, “What a luxury, I haven’t read a novel since I left university (over 30 years ago). I only read non-fiction. And mainly books on management.”

After a few more minutes of catching up he left to return to his seat in another carriage.

I do read a fair crop of books, journals and blogs on leadership & management issues, but I was left wondering whether my predilection for a well-written novel was indeed a luxury.

The more I thought about it, the more concerned I became, not so much about the novels I read but about my colleagues sole focus on so-called management books.

When I think about it, the leadership programmes I design and deliver and the developmental relationships I establish with others – be they coaching, mentoring or simply supporting – are inspired by a broad span of thought, feelings and activities. And, I suppose that as a divergent thinker, I’m a little distrustful of those who proclaim the certainty of specialist categories of knowledge.

Many of the subject boundaries we take for granted today, be they economics, politics, management, physics or whatever, are the result of a Victorian desire to create a hierarchy of knowledge and then stuffing each identified subject with what they thought ought to be in there. It’s a little like taxidermy, and once the thing is well-stuffed it sits on its shelf to be poked and prodded by (so called subject) experts.

If you’re not careful, the deeper you climb into the subject, the more it frames your perception and thinking, and the less responsive you become to possibilities that don’t fit snugly into it’s assumptions and approach.

By contrast, I believe that leadership must often be iconoclastic, it has to challenge assumptions, and develop new ideas that engage more meaningfully with the changing world around us.

But new ideas do not necessarily come from deep-mining our conventional pockets of knowledge. They are just as likely to arise from breaking down traditional barriers and boundaries between ideas and beliefs and our new approach will probably entail something that’s been locked up in another subject area for years.

At a personal level, my training and experience as a counsellor has provided as much if not more to my understanding of leadership as any text that had leadership or management in the title – the emotional domain, resonance, congruence, relationship building, empathy, letting go, dealing with my own stress are a few things that come immediately to mind.

And as I tucked deeper into the luxury of my novel, I plucked out another jewel that I’m sure to build into the training we provide in developing communication and trust:

“I like to talk. Talking is something you need to do if you’re ever going to encourage a man to talk back at you. And you need a man to talk a little if he’s ever going to say something of interest. Men don’t trust other men who don’t say much.”

Where do your inspiring thoughts come from?

As he marched his troops from Portugal towards Madrid in order to meet Napoleon’s forces, the Duke had become exasperated with the demands coming from London.

He complained that “each item and every farthing has been accounted for, with two regrettable exceptions” before explaining the discrepancies of one shilling and ninepence, and confusion over the number of jars of raspberry jam.

“This reprehensible carelessness,” he continued, “may be related to the pressure of circumstance, since we are at war with France, a fact which may come as a bit of a surprise to you gentlemen in Whitehall.”

The story came to mind when my colleague, Jeff, who runs our leadership training, was telling an anecdote about a company manager who, in a time of great cost pressure, took it upon himself to count every chair in every room in the building.

How leaders respond to pressure, and difficult circumstances, can be what makes the difference between successful and struggling companies.

Being able to develop, communicate, implement and adapt the response – the vision – is required to ensure challenging and changing circumstances are overcome.

Leadership is about being able to alter your tactics in line with how you appraise the battlefield. Just as there is no single way to lead troops, general business leadership is equally meaningless.

As Wellington understood, it is about direction and delegation – after all, he wouldn’t have got very far if he had tried to take on Napoleon’s forces all by himself.

But one fundamental that he understood was the importance of clarity – of thought and of action.

In his missive back to ministers, he pointedly asked what was expected of him, saying: “This brings me to my present purpose, which is to request elucidation of my instructions from His Majesty’s Government. I construe that perforce it must be one of two alternative duties, as given below. I shall pursue either one with the best of my ability, but I cannot do both:

“1. To train an army of uniformed British clerks in Spain for the benefit of the accountants and copy-boys in London or perchance,

“2. To see to it that the forces of Napoleon are driven out of Spain.”

No-one today remembers about the missing jam jars.

Also featured in the interview is Jack Stopforth, CEO of Liverpool Chamber of Commerce.

The interview was first broadcast on the BBC Radio Merseyside Drive programme with Simon Hoban, on Monday 30th January 2012.

You can listen to the full interview below:

The new division complements Ambitious Minds’ existing suite of financial education products and provides significant growth potential for the business.

Jeff, 55, joins the firm as Head of Leadership Development from Kaplan Hawksmere, where he delivered leadership development training for a wide range of clients, including Sky, Howdens Joinery, Marks & Spencer and Manchester City Council.

Jeff has assisted businesses with leadership development and organisational management for 15 years, following a career in HR.

He said: “Ambitious Minds is a progressive company that is serious about educating organisations in a way that delivers transformational change, to its people and ultimately to its revenues.

“Leadership development is a natural addition to its existing offer and I’m very much looking forward to playing a key role in growing the business.”

Ambitious Minds chief executive Sean McGuire said: “Jeff will bring a great deal of expertise to our company, and we are excited about what he can offer. He is very client-focused which is critical in leadership development, where the one-size-fits-all approach is redundant.

“We see the leadership development division as a significant addition to our business education offering, which will enable us to work with more organisations to meet their own targets.”

Ambitious Minds already delivers bespoke business education, with a focus on financial training. Mr McGuire and fellow director Andrew Berkley co-founded the Liverpool-based firm in 2009 after more than 25 years’ experience in professional business education.

The main topics discussed were the proposed mayoral election for Liverpool and the issue of Health & Safety in the workplace.

The interview was first broadcast on the BBC Radio Merseyside lunchtime programme with Roger Phillips, on Friday 27th January 2012.

You can listen to the full debate below:

Click here to open the PDF: Educate magazine, January 2012

Putting questions of writing style to one side, the phrase gave away the author’s opinion of his own self-importance, imagining that people would be talking about him in hushed tones as they went about their busy days.

Often such examples of narcissism are not quite as blatant, but it is a trap businesses can fall into. Just because their products and people – and, in fact, the company’s mere existence – are of great importance to themselves, they assume everyone else must have the same intense interest.

But then if everyone knew about your product and how great it was, and what first-class customer service you offer, they’d be knocking your door down. Right?

Taking a step back, and appreciating that in the maelstrom of everyone else’s busy lives your great news or significant developments aren’t necessarily what they would instantly appreciate as great or significant, is the first step to being able to grow your own business.

Not only does the message need to be spread, but the “why” needs to be explained as well. Seeing things from the point of view of the clients ensures that the message is not about product’s features but its benefits.

That shift requires effort to make – and even more to sustain – but is invaluable in developing a successful, and sustainable, sales pipeline.

The difference between grapevine and pipeline is the difference between talk and action. In the grapevine model of doing business, work is an endless round of meeting people for coffee, networking groups and more coffee before post-work drinks.

The pipeline approach may seem more formulaic but it is more focused and instantly more measurable.

Of course there is room for both, just as long as the grapevine approach doesn’t become the core business development tool.

So if you ever write a memo about yourself that includes the phrase “you may have already heard the news on the grapevine”, the balance is almost certainly out of kilter. Such news is “so what”, it needs to be “now what”.