Posts Tagged ‘business growth’

Profiting From Control

Tuesday, October 13th, 2015

Your clients need you but not in the way they think they do, or in the way you insist on telling them they do.

A prospective client stopped me in the middle of a conversation about his plans to integrate a newly acquired $750 million financial services business. “What I want is a spy, do you think you could play that role? My fear is the newly acquired executive team are feigning interest in their future within our firm beyond collecting their retention bonuses.”

When I responded by asking him why are you asking me, why now and why with the suggested role, he expressed surprise. The mere thought of “push back” from me stunned him (he was used to hiring acquiescent people) but it had the desired effect. We swiftly moved on from his random suggestion to examining our shared perspectives (business outcomes), our shared abilities to “control” the future (alternatives, risks and rewards) and his need for my help (ideal action).

Look at the transactional clients of advisory firms in the global financial services sectors. There are thousands of clients, shareholders and business partners daily wanting greater control in an increasingly ambiguous economy.

  1. A great many wealth managers, asset managers and brokers are so immersed in “selling” to the masses, they are disregarding their unique perspective to bring greater control to their ideal clients’ future (greater trust, higher margins, happier clients).
  2. A great many clients’ current perspectives are informed through an increasingly narrow prism (past experiences, market chatter and gut instinct). The “open-minded” clients (the more cerebral and secure) willingly let in and accept challenging points of view. The “close-minded” clients (often the more strident and insecure), put up the barricades and shut out views that deflect from their own viewpoint.
  3. I can make a powerful case in almost every sub-sector that a client’s actual “control” (or the lack of it) is directly correlated to their diversity of learning sources and their volition to apply the learning without fear of failure.

We have had the “sharing” economy, the future is about the “control” economy.

Transactional advisory firms have choices about what perspectives they share, when they do so, why and how to mutually-benefit from doing so (greater client control for a more profitable and rewarding client-adviser relationship).

If you do nothing else, ask yourself and your colleagues:

  1. What “unique” perspective (past experience, insight, contacts) can we bring to our ideal clients’ situation that will demonstrably enhance his or her immediate control (speed and quality of resolving a problem, making a decision, assembling a plan)?
  2. How do we best articulate it? (ideal manner, ideal time, ideal location, ideal conditions)
  3. How do we know if and when we are successful? (what should we listen out for or expect to see)
  4. Should we be minded to, how do we best transition from sharing the perspective to providing formal help? (ideal follow up response, ideal next step, ideal time/date/venue)

“CCAG”: As a catalyst for giving your clients greater “control”, you create greater client “confidence” to reinvest (repeat business), you create greater client “aptitude” to experiment (innovation) and you create greater probability of meeting or exceeding the firm’s “growth” expectations (increased profit, more referrals, stronger brand).

© James Berkeley 2015. All Rights Reserved.

Five M&A Flashing Lights

Thursday, September 17th, 2015

With global M&A passing the US$3 trillion mark, as reported by the Wall Street Journal last week, and low growth sectors such as insurance and gaming incurring an unprecedented level of recent activity, commentators try to out do each other to explain the rationale – “insipid organic growth”, the dreaded “FOMO” (fear of missing out), “optimum scale” and “diversity of earnings”. Yet, are we in danger of trying to tie the “dots” together in cases that are highly situational and ignoring the more insightful indicators?

After all every business has a unique “past”, and a preferred way of applying their people’s talented to transform their “unique” set of clients’ futures. To put it simply, no two companies provide exactly the same value to their clients or are valued the same by external investors. Hence trying to extrapolate one set or executives’ reasoning to pursue M&A over organic growth or a strategic alliance is fraught with generalisations and danger. Yet markets routinely “mark up” listed companies and “talk up” others in the distinct belief that their situations are exactly the same, different management teams will act like lemmings to keep their shareholders happy and investors will “go shopping” at the same time for the same target. There is very little hard evidence or strong anecdotal evidence to show that this is true. Indeed in cases, where you might argue I am wrong, there is a body of evidence to show many of those deals were value dilutive AOL-TimeWarner, MySpace-News Corp and RBS-ABN Amro.

I would suggest investors and commentators would be better served applying the following logic:

1. Quality of Management (QoM): is there a discernible change (positive or negative) in the capability of management to achieve its’ strategic goals (capital allocation, make good people decisions, embrace innovation and implement business strategy), where a merger, acquisition or divestiture would demonstrably create enhanced value for the firm’s shareholders?

2. Quality of Employees (QoE): is there a discernible change (positive or negative) in the capability of the firm’s employees to achieve its’ strategic goals, where a merger, acquisition or divestiture would demonstrably create enhanced value for the firm’s shareholders?

3. Level of Uncertainty (LoU): is there a discernible change (positive or negative) in the the level of uncertainty around management and its’ employees capability to accomplish its’ strategic goals, where a merger, acquisition or divestiture would demonstrably create enhanced value for the firm’s shareholders?

4. Competition (C): is there a discernible change (positive or negative) in the competitive threat level and the probable impact on management and its’ employees accomplishing its’ strategic goals, where a merger, acquisition or divestiture would demonstrably create enhanced value for the firm’s shareholders?

5. Future Confidence (FC): combined, do the discernible changes in the quality of the firm’s management (QoM) and employees (QoE) today relative to the level of uncertainty within the business (LoU) and the external competitive threat level (C), indicate a merger, acquisition or divestiture would demonstrably create a more impressive future and provide greater peace of mind for the firm’s shareholders?

If you cannot categorically say “YES” to the above, in all likelihood you will be rushing to a judgement that is ill-informed or a deal that is carrying excessive risk.

© James Berkeley 2015. All Rights Reserved.

Profitable Feedback

Wednesday, September 2nd, 2015

An email survey request lands this morning in my inbox from the UK’s Conservative Party Chairman, Andrew Feldman (I am not a member), titled “I want to hear what you think”. It asks a friendly and logical set of “screening” questions about my future intent to become more involved in supporting the Party. What the questions fail to  address are my emotional imperatives (the “why” questions) in getting involved.

It is a common shortcoming of so many feedback or consultative initiatives in businesses, large and small, who are encouraged to “get closer to their clients” or “better understand their client needs”. Face-to-face dialogue, focus groups, surveys and third party feedback that stops shorts of eliciting the really valuable responses due to weak questions or questioning techniques. The result is a low value process, which moves the questioner an inch, not a mile, closer to gaining the other person’s future commitment.

Do you want to know what your customers think or do you want to better understand what might motivate them to act upon anything you might suggest they do? The former gives you information, the latter gives you the expressway to cash or increased commitment. That’s a huge difference.

© James Berkeley 2015. All Rights Reserved.

 

 

 

3 Reasons Business Leaders Should Trek To Glastonbury

Friday, June 26th, 2015

Over 250,000 people will descend on a sleepy corner of Somerset, England for the Glastonbury Festival today. For some an annual rite of passage and others an introduction to an experience their Parents still rave about some 30 years after first making the trek.  There are acts of their Parents generation (The Who and Paul Weller) and their grandparents generation (Burt Bacharach) joining today’s megastars (Pharrell Williams and Kanye West). The event is a classic example of the three “R’s”: relevance, recognition and reinvention as its’ market’s needs and ideal buyers have changed. “Relevance” in the form of is the experience what our ideal buyers need (introduce hospitality chalets alongside the pitched tents). “Recognition” that the time is now for bold changes and adaption of our beliefs (infuse rappers and uptown funk with a rock heritage). Finally a constant commitment to “reinvention” (introducing new acts to regular attendees and old acts to new attendees).  It sounds simple and when you look at market-leading businesses it is universally a trait that keeps them at the forefront of their competitor set. Yet for a great many firms and indeed sectors (private banking, insurance, legal, accounting and audit firms) it is something that they struggle with hugely. It is first and foremost a leadership issue. Great leaders are willing to champion change. They lead from the front with their eyes focused on the stage, not the disheveled hipster swaying in front of them. They listen intently and consistently ask the right questions at the right time. They apply that knowledge rapidly to the critical organisational issues impacting their firm’s future and make wise decisions consistent with the strategic direction of the business. Are those the very same traits your leadership regularly exhibits and you hire for? If not, why as a client, employee or shareholder should I return each year to listen to your tired line up of fading musicians playing music that is boring and increasingly irrelevant to my future?

© James  Berkeley 2015. All Rights Reserved.

Maintaining High Growth Mindset

Monday, June 15th, 2015

When a trusted colleague refers a talented individual to you, is your default position to offer them a warm welcome or to immediately state copious reasons why you don’t have the need or money without listening to them? The former is a classic example of a high growth vs. a low growth mindset.

In industry sectors where convergent forces (new sources of capital, technology and distribution etc) are increasing the amount of uncertainty and competitive threats, Boards and executives would be wise to look out for these behavioural dispositions in their key people, understand the cause, take appropriate action and reinforce the desired behaviour.

If left unchecked, this low growth behaviour permeates throughout the business, future clients and employees are turned off and top line revenue growth stalls even faster.

Copyright James Berkeley 2015. All Rights Reserved.

An Interview with Me from Le Temps

Wednesday, May 6th, 2015

Isabelle Talbot, a reporter from Swiss news publication, Le Temps interviewed me on the fast developing trend for financial well-being programmes in the workplace. A product of the US and European fintech and edutech boom, innovative technology tools are enabling employers for the first time to provide highly personalised, mass financial education previously the preserve of the private banking world, at low cost.

The implications are profound for the lives of countless millions of workers and their families, who are being asked to take on greater financial burden and personal risk with the decline of defined benefit retirement plans.

Equally wealth managers, insurance carriers and financial advisers, faced with rising market demand, cost and regulatory pressures, have an unprecedented opportunity to collaborate, invest in or acquire entrepreneurial early and mid-stage businesses.

“Les entreprises américaines se portent au chevet de leurs salariés désargentés”

http://www.letemps.ch/Page/Uuid/b152f6fe-f287-11e4-bb1f-074820583190/Les_entreprises_am%C3%A9ricaines_se_portent_au_chevet_de_leurs_salari%C3%A9s_d%C3%A9sargent%C3%A9s

 

© James Berkeley 2015. All Rights Reserved.

Flourishing Business Networks

Tuesday, April 7th, 2015

Would you say that your personal and professional network is sufficiently diverse for the level of growth your firm anticipates in the next 12, 24, 36 months?

If YES, how can you best leverage your network to be even more valuable to your firm’s growth plans and your personal success?

If NO, where must you start to transform your network(s) to be more relevant and valuable to your colleagues, clients, shareholders and business partners?

My observation is that in the first third of our careers, we are largely growing and refining our networks. In the second third of our career, our networks atrophy into three groups.

(1) Some people we know well who remain highly relevant to our future.

(2) Some people we know well who could remain highly relevant but first, we must consciously and willingly adapt our relationship and how we interact.

(3) Some people we know well who are no longer relevant to our future (retired, past offerings, past expertise, past function).

A great many people will change their frequency of contact with people they know well by accident or circumstance. A minority actually make it a priority to do so. So that in the final third of their career, many people struggle to reinvent themselves and their value to others because their network is largely made up of people, who are no longer highly relevant to their firm’s future.

Rather like roses in the garden, if our future is to be appealing, the seeds of valuable present and future relationships need to planted and watered well (reciprocal help and value offered). Some relationships will bloom every year and others just once or twice before they die. Each Winter, the dead rose plants need to be removed, the flowerbeds weeded and the soil nurtured for the existing roses to bloom again next Summer. Further, there needs to be a commitment to reinvest in new roses each Spring such that every year we add greater variety, colour and freshness.

Is your garden (network) sufficiently seductive for those you wish to attract (ideal buyers, peers, shareholders, business partners) to convince them to spend time in your company (meet) and immerse themselves in your attractive offerings (buy your products, services and relationships)?

© James Berkeley 2015. All Rights Reserved.

Easter Treasure Hunt

Friday, April 3rd, 2015

One of the fun reminders of childhood is Easter treasure hunts around the garden for the hidden chocolate eggs. In the Spring sunshine, some of the eggs are easily spotted and others require rather more ingenuity. Yet young kids with a paucity of experience but a nose for the prize, move with unerring accuracy to collect their treasure.

It reminds me of a common failure many businesses make when contemplating entry into a new market and the fears that inhibit success. Convention states that we must know all the fine details of how to market, sell and deliver services to our target clients and we must have established an appropriate business model to do that efficiently and effectively.  So much thinking before we start doing that often we find the prizes have disappeared because a larger competitor has swept into the market or our assumptions are no longer valid due to other disruptive forces.

My observation  is that when you have sufficient knowledge of what you are looking for (the chocolate egg) and the wherewithal to work out the quickest path to your goal (wisdom), you are far better served getting started. You almost certainly will have to make one or more changes of direction along the way because even veterans make invalid assumptions or unforeseen obstacles conspire to scupper the best plans. If you are prepared for it that shouldn’t deter your ability to accomplish your goals. After all the eggs won’t stay hidden forever and worse, there is no  guarantee they won’t melt in the spring sunshine.

Happy Easter wherever you may be.

© James Berkeley 2014. All Rights Reserved.

Invited Speaker at Private Equity International’s 2015 Operating Partners Forum: Europe

Wednesday, April 1st, 2015

James Berkeley to Discuss Innovative Ways to Maximise the Value of Operating Partners

London, England— 1st April, 2015

James Berkeley, Managing Director of ELLICE CONSULTING LIMITED will be moderating a panel discussion on uncommon ways to apply Operating Partners wisdom to maximise value creation during the deal cycle. The panel session is scheduled for 16th April, 2015 and will be held at the Institute of Directors in London.  Private Equity International’s Operating Partners Forum is the pre-eminent peer-to-peer gathering for professionals in European private equity, who are focused on value creation at the portfolio company level, the operating partners.

“Private equity funds need impressive operating partners more today than at any point in the past decade”, notes Berkeley, an expert in the profitable growth and expansion of private equity-backed portfolio companies. “Amid a dearth of buyouts and a focus in Europe on operational improvement rather than a dependence on growth, operating partners’ expertise, knowledge and contacts are a key point of difference. Yet many private equity funds are self-limiting their Operating Partners impact on the future of portfolio companies for no obvious reason.”

James Berkeley offers dramatic growth opportunities to private equity portfolio companies. He has worked extensively with private equity owners and management internationally to boost top line growth and maximise margins and value through his distinctive approaches to marketing, leveraging relationships, branding and pricing.

Whether it is consulting top management on profitable growth issues, critiquing business acquisition, changing pricing structures or reconfiguring the entire business and delivery model, he has become well-known for his Profitable Growth Regime.

James’s counsel has been sort by senior executives at an array of private equity-owned businesses such as Hilton Worldwide, ASIMCO Technologies, Caesars Entertainment, CKE Restaurants and over 40 other market-leading organisations around the world.

For additional information, contact:

James Berkeley, Managing Director

Name of Company: Ellice Consulting Ltd

Phone: +44 (0)2034405072

Web Site: www.elliceconsulting.com

E-Mail: james@elliceconsulting.com

# # #

Are You Thinking What I Was Thinking V

Tuesday, March 24th, 2015
  • No one really knows when markets valuations are at a “peak”, most commentators and investors (Prem Watsa, Sir Michael Moritz and others) are merely applying “gut instinct” like the rest of us
  • After 7 years of “easy money” is it a surprise that we have record market prices (stocks, art and so on)
  • More people have lost money calling a market collapse than a market rise, be careful who you listen to
  • Well run businesses with strong “real” earnings and high quality management and employees will always outperform in the long-term those firms that lack those attributes
  • When retail and institutional investors have greater access to information and knowledge in real-time at less cost, why should tomorrow’s investment cycle follow yesterday’s cycle? We live in a different age.
  • With “real” unemployment and the growth of start ups in many G20 countries at near record levels, wouldn’t policymakers, politicians and media be better off talking more about our “future” prosperity than our “past” grievances
  • When I read polls suggesting  that electorates are more “disengaged” with politicians and their political parties than ever before doesn’t that tell us more about our own fears (education, self-improvement, reinvention)?
  • When you study empirical evidence, we are probably living in the most prosperous and safest decade in the past 100 years, why doesn’t it feel like that when I turn on the television news or pick up a newspaper
  • We are right to be concerned about the legacy we are leaving our children (underfunded entitlements, increasing complexity, wealth gaps) but we rarely reflect on how much wiser they will be than us (technology, health, education and other improvements)
  • We look too much at the rise of China, India and other high growth markets as a threat, when we should consider it as an opportunity
  • If you are well positioned (investor, business or employee) in healthcare, education, technology, travel and dare I say it in financial services, you are in sectors with 10 years of very strong growth
  • How many cases can you point to where great regulation has saved us from a downturn? Wouldn’t we better placed putting the onus on executives to show good judgement rather than leave it to our politicians and mandarins to tie them in knots?
  • We confuse largely “symbolic” action (an executive foregoing a bonus) all too often with “meaningful” improvements (smarter strategic decision-making, hiring better quality management and employees)
  • We “deify” celebrity leaders (Jack Welch, Sir Alex Ferguson, Sir Richard Branson) and often overstate the transfer value of their “unique” approaches. In other words their ideas were perfectly suited to the prevailing conditions in their environment but those same conditions rarely exist or in the same order in our own environment
  • Wouldn’t we better served by harnessing the power of “Big People” (an ability to apply knowledge more wisely) than “Big Data” (carving out granules of worthwhile data that must be formatted into meaningful information)?
  • In the hype around Uber, Lyft, Xiaomi and so on why are commentators, investors and analysts not asking more vociferously why so many multinationals failed to exploit these sources of innovation when they were in a far stronger position to do so? Is the boom in corporate venturing a recognition that management in many large multinationals have given up on finding hidden gems within their own business?
  • Twitter and other social media ads, why would they take precedence for a B2B business over boosting the number of peer referrals obtained from existing clients? Don’t get lost in the consumer hype.
  • When did your firm last buy from a cold caller? Wouldn’t those sending spam SMS, email and print flyers be better served attempting to forge a trusting relationship with real buyers? Perhaps they are not very bright.

 

© James Berkeley 2014. All Rights Reserved.