49% of the UK working population would take a pay cut to have a different manager

That was the damning statistic from an extensive survey of British employees found. I can also show you research that shows that the time of day when people are least happy is when they are with their managers. Most of us can relate to that and can remember when we were left frustrated or even had our health ruined by toxic relationships with managers.

I am going to propose a solution which, if implemented in every workplace, could reduce that % – who would take a pay cut to have a different manager – to zero.

I have had people come to me and say “I love my job. I love the people I work with. I’m even happy with what I’m being paid. But I can’t stand my manager.” You may have known that situation. You may even have been that person. We can try to mediate, to work it out but the normal outcome is straightforward: one of those people ends up leaving the company.

Hands up? How many people here have left a job to get away from their manager?

Research indicates this may be the most common reason people leave a company. They don’t leave for career reasons. They don’t leave because of their salary. They leave their manager.

At my company we have a simple solution, and it takes about 5 minutes to solve. We ask “Who would you like instead?”.

That’s right – we let people choose their managers.

Yes, the idea I’m proposing is that you should be able to choose who is your boss.

My personal journey to this point started 26 years ago. I was involved in setting up a new national tabloid newspaper. It was a serious venture and we raised no less than 6.5 million pounds. And then we lost the lot within 6 weeks of launch. The book about what happened is called, appropriately enough, Disaster.

I learnt a lot about how not to run a company. And especially about the importance of good management. Indeed one of the key reasons I set up my own company was to find out what made a company both effective and a great place to work in. I hoped to create a good example.

Over those years I’ve learnt a lot. My company has been rated the best in the UK for customer service (by Management Today) and one of the top 20 workplaces in the country for five successive years (by the Financial Times / Best Place to Work institute). At the core of that is our approach to management. [This bit was too self-promotional for Radio 4!]

I often say our most radical belief is that you should choose who manages people on the basis of … how good that are at managing people – or their potential for that.

What normally happens? People are promoted on the basis of core skill and length of service. Say Jo is a great computer programmer and they’ve been programming for ten years, whats going to happen to them? Jo will be promoted to Programming Manager. Because the fact that they are great at coding is sure to mean they are great at supporting and coaching people.  !?

That wouldn’t happen at Microsoft or Google. If somebody was a brilliant programmer they will reward them, give them lots of benefits and involve them in key decisions, but they won’t put them in charge of managing people unless its something they are good at.

And its not just coders. It is true of engineers, lawyers, finance workers, salespeople or indeed any job. Just because they are good at the core job does not mean they will be any use at all at managing other people to do that job.

Let’s start with recruitment. At a delivery company we worked with, they would regularly recruit managers for the teams of van drivers. The managers would be chosen by the two founders, who would then have some months of stress and uncertainty – always unsure whether this one would work out.

So we involved the van drivers in the decision, all of those who would have this manager. They looked for people they could work with and who would motivate them and the stress disappeared as everybody was bought into making it work. Everybody gained from involving staff in choosing which manager was recruited.

But I am talking of going beyond this and letting people change their manager at any point. One of the questions on our six monthly appraisal form is simply “would you like a different manager?”

At my company let me give the example of Natalie, who works in credit control at my company. Two years ago she was bored and looking around for alternative work. Now she is enthusiastic and motivated.

The key difference, she told me, is that she chose a new manager. Natalie explained that she knew this manager would be good at challenging here, keeping her on target and moving forward. “I used to do little more than answer the phones. Now I walk out the door feeling I’ve achieved something.”

She knew who could take her up a notch. It makes sense.

So let’s look at what objections there might be to the idea of letting people choose their manager?

Objection 1: People will choose a manager who will give them an easy time

Let’s go back to Douglas MacGregor who in 1960 published The Human Side of Enterprise and suggested two alternative approaches to management. Theory X poses that workers are lazy, dislike work and need to be closely supervised. Theory Y, on the other hand, proposes that people can enjoy work, are self-motivated and – in the right environment – will seek out opportunities and challenges.

If your company is still run on the basis of Theory X, a lack of trust of your people, then it makes sense to impose managers. However if you believe your people are always trying to do their best, then why not let them choose their managers.

Later research at Harvard by Shawn Achor found what he called the Pygmalian effect. You get what you expect, If you assume people need to be micromanaged, they respond by avoiding responsibility. If you treat them in a Theory Y way, with high levels of trust, they are likely to act in a way which deserves that trust.

Let me give the example of the company W L Gore. You probably won’t have heard of them, but you are likely to know one of their products – especially if you are a runner or a cyclist. They make Gore-tex.  Now it is said that when Bill Gore set up his company over 50 years ago, he set out to test whether you could build a company based on Theory Y, trusting your people.

At Gore you choose your manager. In fact they are more radical than we are. At my company you have to choose somebody who is a manager. At Gore, you can choose anybody to play that role. They have a saying “if you want to be a leader, you’d better find some followers” because nobody is going to allocate you any. WL Gore is now a hugely successful multinational, regularly tops the best workplace lists and was once rated the most innovative company in the US.

There are of course some individuals that are not engaged and not working at their best and might go for an easy ride. But I like to quote an approach I believe was laid down by Richard Branson, that you should set your rules according to the 97% trying to do their best every day, not the 2% who are alienated.

Objection 2: Managers will focus on making their people happy

Well, perhaps that’s not such a bad thing. Some years ago Nandos, the chicken restaurant chain, set out to work out what made some of their branches more successful than others. After extensive research they found one element that correlated most closely with sales growth and profits. That was simply how happy staff said they were in their annual staff survey. They even changed the bonus system for a while to get managers to make that their key target.

We have a simple belief, that “people work best when they feel good about themselves”. Put your hands up if you agree with that statement. That is (just about everybody). If you do believe that, then what is the most important role of management? If that statement is true, it is making your people feel good. Put up your hands here if the focus of management in your organisation is making your people feel good. That’s xxxx.

Yet three months ago I was sitting next to the Chairman of a British company employing 80,000 people who raised his hand to that question. That man was Charlie Mayfield and the company was John Lewis. At John Lewis it is bound into the constitution that the mission of the organisation is to maximise the happiness of the associates – as staff there are known. That approach has created one of the most successful and respected organisations in the country.

So I have no problem with an approach that gets managers to focus on making their people happy. A few more companies could do with focusing on that. Though we’ve found people are only really happy if they are productive and achieving.

Objection 3: What about the managers that don’t get chosen

It is always curious that people are more concerned about the feelings of a manager who isn’t chosen than those who have to work for years under managers that frustrate them and sometimes make their life hell.

But, yes, some managers don’t get chosen. They get to do something else.

One company we worked with had a Marketing Director who was brilliant at marketing but, even after lots of training and development, not so good at managing people. Each year half her team left. Most people can see the solution: We helped the company move her into a role where she spent all her time doing marketing. We got the team to choose who would be the best manager. The result was a much more motivated department but the person who was happiest of all was the Marketing Director. She got to spend all her time doing what she was best at.

I know managers who love managing people. Its what gets them out of bed in the morning and a huge part of their job satisfaction comes from knowing the way they have helped others to develop. But I also know some, like that Marketing Director, would dearly love to be able to drop that part of the job. In fact the survey I quoted at the beginning also found that two in five of managers don’t want the responsibility of managing people

At many companies you can only get promoted by getting to manage people. Which means people are often put in management positions despite managing people not being one of their strengths. It doesn’t have to be that way.

At companies like IBM, Microsoft and even BT it has long been possible to get promoted for your technical ability without having to manage anybody. A colleague at a traditional insurance business told me how they had introduced two tracks, one for People Managers and one for Technical Managers, who wanted to stay focused on their core skills. The one thing they insisted on was that they still be called managers, even though they would never manage anybody, because that was important to their self-esteem.

The result is that the people who become managers are those who actually want to manage people.

Objection 4: People won’t know what makes a good manager

What does make a good manager? Normally managers must first be good at strategy and decision-making. At the same time they must be good at coaching, challenging and supporting their people. Why? Why do they have to be good at both? One thing that makes it fairly easy for us to allow people to stay in the same job and choose their manager is that we have split those roles.

Some people get to do the strategy/decision-making stuff and others get to do the people stuff. So we have a Training Manager who gets involved in any strategic decisions around training (and we are a training business, so there are a few of those) but has no line management connection to most of the trainers.

If that sounds odd, think of any company which is project based. People will have a Project Manager, responsible for their day-to-day work but who is not their line manager. And it works. In fact such companies sometimes do enable people to choose their managers. One woman from a top 5 consultancy came up to me after a recent speech and said “I chose my manager”. They have a manager on each project they work on, but separately they have a manager responsible for their personal development and they can choose who that is.

But what makes a great manager? Google carried out one of the most thorough investigations of this question and, being Google, based it on the data. They analysed performance data, feedback surveys and interviews across thousands of their people and identified and ranked the 8 behaviours of great managers.

Now ask people what makes a great manager and the most common responses are “communication, vision and being good at the job”. Being technically capable did make the list, but at number 8. Vision was 7^th and communication came 5^th – with a strong emphasis on listening skills. 3^rd was showing interest in your people, and second was empowerment and trust. No 1, the single most important behaviour of management, was one that many managers don’t even see as their role. It was to be a good coach.

So will people know how to choose a manager? Well, if it was about judging strategic awareness, it might be tough. But if its about whether a manager shows interest, trusts and empowers you and is a good coach for you – then I’d say most people will be able to judge that, and that’s what we find in practice.

Conclusion

This is one of the best kept secrets out there. It is not common practice yet but there are some companies that let do people choose their managers. I would argue it is one of the cheapest ways out there to improve the motivation and productivity of your people. Imagine how your working life would have been different if, at key moments, you could have chosen your manager.

Let’s say you get into work and find a note saying your manager wants to see you at 2pm. Does that leave you in eager anticipation, looking forward to the one-to-one attention you are about to get? Because it should do.

So hands up those who would like to be able to choose their manager? Well, that is xxxx [was about two thirds]

We can change the way things are. We can create workplaces where people are happy and fulfilled and are able to choose the manager best able to support and challenge them. Please join me in working to change the way we work. [Check out the Happy Manifesto site and sign up to the commitment to be a happy workplace.]

Publishing the Happy Manifesto has led to a lot of organisations contacting Happy. Some call us in to help them improve their workplace and we love doing this. But there is an even bigger thrill when I get a letter from somebody we’ve not been involved with, who has taken the Manifesto and put the ideas into practice. So I’m delighted to copy the blog below, originally published on the Spiral Health site, about the work they are doing at an NHS site in Lancashire: 

For videos check out Annotag and the Happy Manifesto site.

Henry Stewart, author of Happy Manifesto

Henry opened the conference by asking people how their organisation would be different if the main focus on management was on making people feel good. All agreed it would be not just a better place to work, but more efficient and more productive.

This was backed up with research from Alex Edmans at Wharton Business School. He compared the results of investing each year (over 25 years) in the companies listed in the Best Workplace list with investing in the standard stock market. The best workplace investment would have earn 3.5% more per year. That means that if your pension had grown to £100,000 in the stock market, it would have reached £237,000 if invested only in the best workplaces.

Alex Kjerulf, Chief Happiness Officer

Alex is an international happiness guru, based in Denmark. His vision: “a world where happiness at work is the rule and not the exception”. He generated a lot of energy, encouraging people to engage with their colleagues, give high fives to celebrate success and take time to get to know people at work. “What really makes us happy is when we can make a difference for somebody else”

Danish toy maker Lego has set itself the target of being one of the top 3 workplaces in Europe by 2015. All meetings there now begin with Item 0, celebrating what is going well – to start in a positive mood.

The first step to making your people happy? “Stop doing the things that make them unhappy.”

Clive Hutchinson, Chief Executive, Cougar Software

Clive explained how “play to your strengths” (Manifesto principle 10) had transformed his software company. He gave the example of a poorly performing Project Manager. After working out what he was best at, he went back to being a programmer. He was happier and more productive and Cougar found somebody to manage projects for whom that was a strength.

“Don’t change people to fit the job. Change the jobs to fit the people

Marion Janner, Director, Star Wards

Marion has built a movement to transform mental health inpatient care in England and Wales. Despite her only experience being as a service user, over 80% of wards have signed up. Marion used her support dog Buddy in place of PowerPoint and we witnessed Buddy going through a series of rapid costume changes to emphasise her points.  A unique presentation.

Her key learning point from the manifesto: Don’t try to impose change from above. Instead give people the ideas and support and trust them to do the right thing. Check out the fabulous Wardipedia site.

Nigel Paine, Learning & Development Expert

Nigel gave a rapid fire summary of how to implement the ten points of the Manifesto. Key again is working to strengths: “Don’t focus on being better at what you’re not good at. Instead get better at what you are good at”

One key is not to wait for perfection. If you play darts you don’t give up if you don’t score 180. You have only to be good enough

“The difference between an ok organisation and an exceptional one is ‘discretionary effort’ (the extra that people do). You can only get that by really motivating your people.”

Mark Williamson, Director, Action for Happiness

Action for Happiness has almost 30,000 supporters across 142 countries, who have all pledged to try to increase the happiness of those around them. He opened with the intriguing fact that happy nuns live longer. A research study found that 80% were alive at 85 against 34% of unhappy nuns”.

Mark showed a very entertaining clip of comedian Bill Bailey. The point? Research found that, after watching a Bill Bailey clip, people become 12% more productive. “Making people happy works!”

The unhappiest time of the day, according to research, is the time people spend with their managers.

Vanessa King, Positive Psychologist, Action for Happiness

Vanessa explained how negative emotions were needed to survive danger. But positive emotions enable personal development. She quoted Matthew Ricard: “happiness is a skill that can be learnt”

“Our best ideas come in the spaces”. Great ideas don’t come when we are working hard but in the breaks, so you have to make sure you get good breaks.

Emma Rapoport, Google

Emma treated us as new Google managers and gave us the manager induction. This is based around Project Oxygen, which identified the 8 behaviours of great managers. What is the single most important behaviour of great managers? Click here to find out. Or the full list of the 8.

The other emphasis was on thinking big: “At Google we are always encouraged to go for the moon shot, but supported if we fall. We celebrate mistakes. Have stretch targets.” If you achieve 100% of your targets, they weren’t tough enough. 70% is seen as great.

Stretch people and trust them to get there: “My manager gives me big stretch goals and, even though they’ve done it before, they let me work it out”

Key philosophy at Google: “Don’t ask for permission. Ask for forgiveness later.”

Lunchtime Workshops

Other lunchtime workshops:

• Laughter Yoga: Sandar Saint & Simon Richardson, Golden Tree
• Randomly Joyful: Surprising & Delighting at Work, Cheryl Joy Adamson, Make Me Joyful @makemejoyful
• Create a harmonious passion for your job, Susanna Halonen, Happyologist

Dom Monkhouse, Chief Executive, Peer 1 Hosting

Dom has built two £30 million companies on the basis of creating great workplaces. “To create a profitable business, you don’t start there. You start with creating a happy workplace. Its simple. Happy staff lead to happy customers, which leads to more profit.”

“Get rid of stupid rules”. Dom regularly offers £10 for each stupid rule people can fine, so they can get rid of them. “You have to trust people. Nobody has a rule that says don’t come to work naked and yet nobody does.”

The core values at Peer 1: “Sense of fun and purpose”, “Anything is possible”, “Enable others to succeed”

Key to Dom’s philosophy is serving the customers. He asked “We celebrate employee anniversaries all the time. Do you celebrate a client’s 10th anniversary?”

Yvonne Agyei, Vice President (Benefits), Google

What makes a great workplace? “Its not about the free food and funkiness. The key is results and relationships”

The key is 1) Hire great people – are they googly?   2) Give them autonomy

Key tests of googlyness: Do you have passion? Do you have wide interests? Do your travel? Help in community?

As the filing statement for Google shares stated: “Google is not a conventional company. We do not intend to become one”

Key elements: “Think/act like owners. Have a healthy disregard for the impossible. Great is not good enough”

“Within Google we seek to create a sense of community, we want them to see Google as a family. The free food is to build community. People talk over food. We want people to sit down and talk together.”

“It starts at the top. You need to get your most senior people to act out the culture you want.”

Building a Movement for Happy Workplaces

The conference closed with discussions about how to build a movement for happy workplaces. A range of commitments were made and all those present wanted to help build the movement.

Stay in touch. Check out the Facebook page, join the LinkedIn group, come to the next happy workplace Meetup and visit and contribute to the Happy Manifesto web site.

Feedback

The feedback at the end of the day was uniformly positive. For example:

“A truly inspirational day, with real life people doing amazing things to implement happy change/movement. Hopefully I will be one of them now, too!” Emma MacKenzie, Leeds University

“My sales and profit have all increased since acting on the happy manifesto”, Simon Perriton, Just IT

“This idea is such common sense, it can’t help but be a success!” Sarah Metcalfe, Sureflap

“Brilliant interactive sessions, very uplifting!”, Gaye Andrews, Peer 1 Hosting

Overall verdict: Net Promoter Score: 76% (76% giving 9 or 10, 24% giving 7 or 8, no detractors) – or average of 9.1 out of 10.

Venue: Net Promoter Score: 92% (92% giving 9 or 10, 8% giving 8, no detractors) – or average of 9.2 out of 10.

Visual Minutes

Check out the artists’ view.

They started with the data on performance across thousands of managers, analysed what their most effective and least effective managers did, and came up with a set of eight common behaviors across the most effective managers. These 8 are now used in every new manager induction at Google, their courses are tagged according to which behaviour they help and the managers attend training in any in which they need development.

What The Data Tells Us

Wow. For me this is an example of what sets Google apart. First, most companies would have little idea of trends in Exit interviews. Second many companies would accept as inevitable that some people leave because of their managers. I’ve seen research suggesting that across all companies 1 in 2 people leave their job to get away from their manager. The analysis was pure Google – no value judgement, just find out what the data says. And finally they made sure what they had discovered was used across all manager development in the company.

Now a quick Google for Project Oxygen will reveal what those 8 attributes are. But what Emma revealed is that the 8 are ranked, so they know which are most important. Last night I tried an exercise with a group of senior managers at Cass Business School. I gave them the list of 8 characteristics and asked them to rank the top 2. Nobody identified what Google found to be the most important characteristic: Be a Good Coach.

Be a Good Coach

Even after it was revealed, most of those managers looked puzzled. So I asked how many had a coach. Most did. I asked what that coach did well:

“They make me believe in myself”

“They guide without telling”

“They ask questions to help me solve my problems”

Isn’t that what you would want of your manager? The penny started to drop. Or check out the graph below, suggesting a very strong and close link between the effectiveness of a manager as a coach and the satisfaction and commitment of employees. I don’t know the Canadian Clemmer Group, that this comes from, but the claim is that it is based on 250,000 feedback surveys:

Put This Into Action

Google is clear that all of the 8 attributes are important. But I focus on Be a Good Coach because they see it as the most important one and because so few managers see this as their key role.

How would you manage differently if your emphasis was on being a coach to your people? What do you need to do to develop your skills in this area?

I’ve written about it before. It is the simple suggestion that you should let people choose their managers. And the great thing is that when people do have the courage to try it, I almost always get positive feedback.

Here is the feedback from Stuart Jones (right), of Modern Housing Solutions (a division of one of the UK’s biggest companies):

“Selecting your manager’ is working out really well. We opened the option to all of our Helpdesk staff (circa 45 people) and everyone provided feedback. Only 4 people actually took up the option, and all for positive reasons relating to their own development.

“The most positive thing about the process was all of the positive comments we received from staff saying why they didn’t want to change managers, because of the relationship they had, the support they receive, the team spirit, etc. It was a really affirming experience for all of our Team Managers!”

Consider trying it in your organisation. I’d love to hear from you with any questions or any worries about what could get in the way.

henry@happy.co.uk

Find out more about this and other steps to a happy workplace at the Happy Manifesto conference at Google UK, London, on April 24th.

I thought this was a fabulous idea. That night happened to be the Governing Body of the school I chair. And, as we discussed how to clarify the Complaints Policy for parents, I passed on the suggestion. Let’s make it easy for parents to tell the school  when people have done well too. Our hard-working teachers and staff deserve that positive feedback.

I was reminded of this when I saw a tweet just now from Shawn Achor on people who phone up to give compliments for New York City taxi drivers.

So think about it. How easy is it for your customers to let you know when you’ve done well. What can you do to ensure your people get the praise they deserve?

Praise at Happy

As a training business, we get daily feedback. And we are careful to phrase the questions so we hear what we’ve done well as well as what we need to change. Here’s some of my favourites from recent weeks (all of which go directly to the trainer):

‘Who knew Excel training could actually be enjoyable!?’
Iona Bergius, NSPCC, Excel 2007/10 – Core Level 2

‘Wonderful experience, the time flew by as the Powerpoint course by Ed was so interesting… Thank you!’
Maureen Nichols, The National Council for Voluntary Youth Services, IT Apprenticeship: Powerpoint 2007

‘The course was great and when Meera realised I was competent in Visio she offered me tips on the rest of the Microsoft office programs! Excellent’
Sheri Skinner, Catch 22, MS Visio 2010 Essentials

‘The best catering i have ever had on a course!’
Caroline Knapp, London Deanery, Excel 2003 – Core Level 2

‘The best course I’ve been on in 20 years!’
Lisa  Waterman, Haig Homes, Excel 2003 – Core Level 1

‘My computer skills have improved dramatically since i started this course. Brilliant training centre.’
Frances Ditroia, Childcare Business Consultancy Services, IT Apprenticeship: Word 2007

‘Your approach to learning is the most innovative I have come across, the structure of their course kept my attention all day and the teaching was fantastic.’
Ellie Kent-Plummer, London Deanery, Excel 2003 – Core Level 3

The 51 “Most Democratic Workplaces” in the world were announced today in the 2013 Worldblu awards. These come from ten different countries, dozens of industries and vary in size from 5 employees to 50,000. This year twelve of those organisations are based in the UK. No less than five are based in Brighton.

We expect to live in democratic societies, where we have a voice in how we are governed. These companies believe active involvement can happen in the workplace too, even with the pressures every organisation faces. Indeed they argue that their democratic practice makes them better able to compete.

“Simply put, democracy just works better”, argues David Diggs, Executive Director of the Washington based charity Beyond Borders. “Empowering everyone on our staff to compete in the arena of ideas brings out the best in our organization by encouraging innovation, creativity and accountability.”

Democracy means different things at different organisations. At Colorado solar energy company Namaste and Malaysian media company Tef’eel Design it means all financial information, including salaries, is transparent and open to all. At London-based consulting firm Future Considerations all employees get to elect, once a year, the leadership team and even the Managing Director.

For others it is about innovative practice. At Brighton based internet company Propellernet everybody writes their dream on a ball. each month one ball is selected at random and that person gets to have their dream come true. At New York food company Sweetriot one of the three key pillars of development is “being a good person”. At Minneapolis media company Frank, employees are trusted to take as much or as little vacation as they want.

Even large multinationals can be democratic. Denver-based healthcare company DaVita has 50,000 staff and $12 billion in sales. Yet staff, known as “DaVita citizens”, are often called upon to vote on important issues. “And democracy rules”, explains CEO Kent Thiry (also known as Mayor of the company). “There have been numerous issues where I’ve disagreed with the outcome of a vote but the vote prevailed.”

At Brighton software company Brandwatch every other Friday is a “Funky Friday”, where the development teams get to choose what they work on. This has been so successful that twenty Funky Friday projects have made it into the Brandwatch platform in the last year.

Tony Hsieh, founder of the billion dollar online retailer Zappos, argues that democracy is crucial to their legendary customer service. “It drives the distribution of power, encourages innovation, and helps attract the best talent. Any employee has the ability to make changes that impact how the organization operates, develops, and grows. We want to see employees at all levels make decisions without having to get a manager or supervisor involved.”

My company, Happy Ltd is included in the list. We encourage staff to decide who their manager is and change them if they feel somebody else could better support them. This isn’t about abstract principles but about making the company more effective. It makes sure everybody gets to choose who is best able to support and challenge them.

Companies applying to be on the list are assessed against Worldblu’s 10 Principles of Organisational Democracy™. Founded in 1997, WorldBlu’s vision is to see one billion people working in freedom-centered workplaces.

Could democracy be the future of business?

So I was interested to see the results of the 2013 Learning Survey, carried out by Martin Belton for the Learning & Performance Institute. The result of responses from over 450 training buyers, it found:

• Classroom training is best for knowledge transfer
• Classroom training is best for skills development
• Classroom training is best for satisfaction & enjoyment
• Classroom training is best for likelihood of completion

However classroom came below both e-learning and live online learning for efficient use of time, flexibility and value for money. The full ratings were:

The survey also asked about which elements they expected to increase or decrease in their organisation in the coming year. And classroom training is set to decrease while the online options (including use of social media, not included in the above table) are set to increase. That is because people do need the flexibility and good use of their time nowadays, and all budgets are under pressure.

However I think this finding is worth dwelling on. If you contact Happy about something your people need to learn, we will discuss a range of options, including all of the above. But it is worth remembering that if you want to be sure people complete their learning and learn the skills they need in the job, then good old-fashioned classroom training could still be the best option.

Trustworthy?

George Osborne was today reported as stating that government procurement from SMEs (small or medium sized enterprises) will rise five-fold. It is a great aspiration. It would result in big cost savings and better service if government was prepared to look beyond the likes of G4S, Capita and Serco.

But the chances of this government actually delivering on this promise? Absolute zero.

A Track Record of Switching Procurement from Small to Big Business

The track record of this government is to buy less from SMEs and more from large business. Here’s two examples from the training industry:

• For apprenticeships, the government two years ago introduced a minimum contract value of £500,000. Any SME, many of whom had been supplying services direct to government for years, who wishes to provide apprenticeships can only do so through a large provider, paying at least 15% of the income to that provider.
• Last year the government decided to outsource all training, on any subject and for every central government department, to one company. Although there was a bid from an SME consortium, the tender was inevitably won by Capita. So instead of hundreds of small businesses delivering training, we have one large provider delivering it all. The previous suppliers face a drastic drop in income and, for some, a threat to their existence. And the feedback I hear is that the contract has already resulted in higher prices.

Happy Ltd has been a major provider of training services to government. The Department of Work and Pensions rated us as one of the top two, among their thousands of suppliers, for customer service. But great service counts for nothing in this new world. Every government department has been told they must go through Capita.

Procure Direct Please

If you are an SME, this may feel familiar

Large suppliers are being encouraged, after they win their government contracts, to sub-contract to SMEs. For the small business this is a bit like trying to deliver your normal service while being sat on by an elephant. The flexibility disappears as you work within the procedures of the large company. And the large company makes sure it gets its margin: the SME generally get less income, at the same time as government often ending up paying more.

The problem is that, for all it claims, the government listens to big business. It is big businesses that have a buddy and a hotline to ministers. Small firms are lucky to get any response at all when we try and make contact. (My email to Cameron on minimum contract values got an anodyne response after 9 months and my email to Francis Maude over the Capita contract has got no answer at all.)

Given that it spends its time talking to large corporations, it is not surprising that government ministers believe it is better and more efficient to use large companies. And part of the move to large suppliers comes from the focus on cutting government staff. The estimated it cost £3,000 a year to service each SME providers on the apprenticeship programme. The fact that instead it cost the small provider £40,000 or more to work through a “more efficient” large provider, didn’t matter as it wasn’t a direct cost.

George, we will judge you by your actions and not your somewhat wild claims. A five-fold increase in supply by SMEs? Not really very likely. I would be surprised if there was even a 10% increase. But I would be delighted to be proved wrong.

Handing the Happy Hero Medal to Marion Janner

Today, Wednesday 20th March, is the first UN International Day of Happiness. Take the pledge to bring more happiness to others at the World Happiness Day web-site, add your Happy Heroes and see what events you can attend on the day.

Yesterday Richard Layard, the inspirational author of the book Happiness, launched the Happy Heroes. A dozen people were given Heroes of Happiness medals and I was honoured to be one of them.

The really nice twist is that each of us have to pass the medal on to our own Happy Hero within 24 hours (and they then pass it on to their happy hero and so on). Now that is a great viral idea. My happy hero is Marion Janner, who through her Star Wards campaign has helped transform many aspects of acute mental health care in the UK. Read more about her remarkable work here.

Richard asked the question “How would a government behave if it’s primary aim was the happiness of its people?”. Its an interesting question and one that, under Richard’s influence, a government committee under Gus MacDonald is to research.

It is of course similar to the question I often ask of people: “How would your organisation be different if the primary focus of its managers was to make its people happy?” Most agree to would not only be a great place to work in, but also more effective and more productive. Recently I was lucky enough to speak alongside Charlie Mayfield, Chair of John Lewis, who pointed out that at his company that was the primary purpose with pretty impressive results.

A great example of what a different approach could look like was shown 10 days ago when BBC Radio Surrey and Sussex held a happiness day. The news was told from a positive angle. People were interviewed who were doing work to make society a better place. The presenters talked about what made them happy: “A stroll along the seafront”, “Cycling in the Surrey hills”, “Smell of the sea”, “The laughter of my children”, “Time with my friend and families at the seaside”. It was a joy to listen to and made me wonder how life would feel different if the media was like that every day.

Who Can You Make Happy Today?

All the research indicates that the best way to increase your own happiness is to help make others happy. So what can you do to make somebody happy today, on the International day of Happiness. Start with a smile and telling somebody what you appreciate about them. Be positive. Make a point of engaging people and thanking them. Avoid internal email and go and talk to people instead. If you are a manager, step out of approval and find a way to give more trust and freedom to your people. For more ideas, check out my 80 ideas for a happy workplace.

But also appreciate yourself and the contribution you make. And enjoy the Day of Happiness.