HMRC’s plan gives electricians ‘opportunity’ to declare their outstanding tax. There is a deadline for declaring an ‘intention to disclose earnings’ of 15 May 2012, followed by a full disclosure deadline of 14 August to face penalties of 10-20% (rather than the statutory maximum 100%). Payment plans can be agreed at this time, and payment by installments will be possible.

This latest announcement follows similar ‘amnesties’ for plumbers, doctors and dentists, tutors teaching academic subjects, fitness and dance, musical instruments, art etc.

Head of HMRC Campaigns, Marian Wilson, commented “we are using a variety of intelligence sources to target electricians who have not declared their full income. This is the same method we used for the plumbers’ campaign, and that intelligence has led to 10 arrests and thousands of investigations, so we know it works. Using sophisticated software, this detailed information enables us to target those who should come forward and use the Electricians Tax Safe Plan.”

If you are an electrician, and you have not been declaring all your income, are you concerned? If not, you should be. The HMRC are getting smarter all the time.

Many electricians (unless they have switched career from accounting) may struggle with potentially complex tax declarations and any future tax returns. As ever, the advice must be to make contact with an independent accountant or tax advisor if you have any concerns – preferably before Big Brother finds you.

Participating ICAEW member firms offer initial meetings free of charge to SMEs and start-ups to discuss their business needs. After the no obligation initial meeting, it can then be decided whether a business association (short- or long-term) is valuable to the client. The service is being offered, to a certain degree, to replace the local Business Link services which are in the process of being withdrawn.

Only firms participating in the service are identified on www.icaewfirms.co.uk with the ’BAS’ symbol to allow users of the site to easily identify which firms are participating in the service.

Consult.Autus Ltd is pleased to confirm that it is a ‘founder member’ of the scheme, which has been endorsed by Lord Digby Jones, the Mayor of London and Minister of State for Business and Enterprise Mark Prisk, amongst others.

Rob Bell, managing director of consult.Autus Ltd, says “The service is an excellent new initiative from the ICAEW.  In these tough times, for any business to have the best business and financial support in place, allowing it to focus on its core offering, is critical to the point of being able to make the difference between strength and bare survival.”

If you are a new or growing business, and you need advice on a range of issues (setting up, business planning, cash flow management, budgeting, employment issues, management information, systems etc amongst many others) then please feel free to contact us for the initial free consultation. More information, and local searches, available from www.businessadviceservice.com.

HMRC’s Tax Catch-up Plan (TCP) gives tutors and coaches the ‘opportunity’ to declare their outstanding tax for the year to April 2010. There is a deadline for declaring an ‘intention to disclose earnings’ of 6 January 2012, followed by a payment deadline of 31 March. Based on the declarations, HMRC may impute up to six years’ worth of tax, and an option may be available to pay in installments.

HMRC state that those making a declaration by this deadline will receive ‘the best possible terms’ for paying the overdue tax, and any penalties are unlikely to be more than 20 per cent of the unpaid tax. HMRC confirmed that those who wait to be found out will face higher penalties or even criminal prosecutions.

Many tutors give private lessons to supplement their income from the ‘day job’, they are likely to be paid in cash and may not declare their earnings to the tax man; my opinion is that many may not even sit down and consider whether these earnings are taxable or not.

This latest announcement follows similar ‘amnesties’ for plumbers, doctors and dentists, and will target tutors teaching academic subjects, fitness and dance, musical instruments, art etc.

Head of HMRC Campaigns, Marian Wilson, commented “Our campaigns…ensure tax is paid so that the money is available to spend on public services used by everyone. We are making it as easy as possible for [tutors] to use this unique opportunity to put their tax affairs in order”.

And now for the Big Brother bit…she added “We are using various intelligence sources to identify and target those who do not take advantage of this opportunity to declare their full income. The message is clear: contact us before we contact you.”

Clearly, many tutors (unless they are tutoring in tax law) may struggle with potentially complex tax declarations and any future tax returns. As ever, the advice must be to make contact with an independent tax advisor if you have any concerns – preferably before Big Brother finds you.

Well, in a nutshell, many medium to large businesses go straight to their auditors when they need some financial or business consulting or interim work doing – why?

It’s easy.

But easy isn’t always best, and it certainly isn’t best value.

Although they may assume that their auditor knows their business, so that they can hit the ground running, my experience tells me that this is often not the case. And many of the ‘big four’ charge a small fortune for relatively inexperienced resource.

The good news (for independent consultants) is that Michel Barnier, the EU Internal Market Commissioner, is contemplating banning audit firms from offering consultancy services to companies whose books they also check. The statement (as part of a speech to a Federation of European Accountants conference in Brussels) is part of an ongoing review of auditor independence which has been questioned since the run-up to the financial crisis.

Barnier is planning to publish draft law by November to include curbs and perhaps even a ban on auditors offering consultancy services to the same companies they audit.

The draft law will be of great interest to the big audit firms, and consultants alike.

Consult.Autus, as a small financial and business consultant and ICAEW member firm, is looking forwards to the longer term improvement in competition…

So, following the recent ‘amnesty’ for plumbers, the HMRC have announced further ‘attacks’ to attempt to recover undeclared and unpaid taxes from certain groups where they believe tax evasion is particularly high:

• Tradesmen not covered by the plumbers amnesty;
• VAT defaulters;
• Private tutors and coaches, including academic and fitness instructors;
• E-marketplace traders, such as those who buy and sell on eBay consistently in a way which appears to be a trade.

Although time-limited schedules are expected in the near future, HMRC did not confirm when these campaigns will start, nor did they give any specific promise of an amnesty for those who come forward; however, as normal, voluntary disclosures would get better terms than those who get ‘found out’ later by HMRC.

Also, HMRC are believed to have invested heavily in powerful web crawlers which may be able to identify mismatches between the lifestyle/expenditure of individuals/businesses, and what income has been declared for tax purposes. This technology just would have not been possible several years ago. Big Brother appears to be on his way…

HMRC is clearly keen to stress that it will hit very hard anyone who does not take advantage voluntary disclosures – failure to do so will run the very serious risk of prosecution if (when?) they are discovered. Anyone thinking about coming forwards would, however, be well advised to take professional advice beforehand – this could prevent any unnecessary errors which could make any bad situation worse.

There is a fear that those who make genuine mistakes with their tax declarations may be caught up in these drives – these people also need help from properly-qualified tax advisers.

There may be mild panic amongst eBay traders, but those who buy and sell private items on an occasional basis need not worry at all – the ‘web-bots’ will be looking for a consistency of ongoing transactions which could be classified as trade and therefore subject to tax.

Various previous and ongoing campaigns (e.g. offshore account holders, medical professionals etc) have already resulted in tens of thousands coming forwards and hundreds of millions of unpaid taxes collected. It appears that the campaigns work, and as long as they are, you can be assured that they will continue.

So, are you at risk? If so, you need to think about how you are going to handle it…

E&Y revealed that companies reporting growth in excess of 5% had CFOs at the helm that had been ‘brought up through the ranks’. This did not apply to too many companies, indicating that, if they had internal finance talent development programmes in place, then their growth may well have been better.

A key growth strategy for international businesses is through acquisition and integration – this requires strong finance presence at the top of the organisation. Given the apparent strength of internally grown talent, then this may present problems down the line.

The study highlighted a number of areas that future CFOs need to develop, the main ones being:
• experience across different sectors and divisions;
• experience of shared service centre implementation; and
• international experience.

Les Clifford, chair of the Ernst & Young CFO programme in the UK and Ireland, said: “Since the 2008 financial crisis, the role of the finance function in guiding company growth and strategy has increased dramatically to meet challenges such as increasing volatility, regulatory change, globalisation and the rise of emerging markets. Organisations risk jeopardising their future growth prospects if the development of the CFO is left to chance”.

Too many large companies are leaving the acquisition of top finance people either to chance or to the expense and trouble of extensive recruitment or headhunting campaigns. Interestingly, the main single reason for this is that incumbents are too busy to coach and develop talent.

Consult.Autus can provide assistance either directly with training and coaching schemes, or indirectly through project work and/or ‘day job’ backfilling, to enable resource to be freed up.

A Deloitte’s survey (albeit US-based, but likely to be equally applicable locally) suggests that, despite some quite significant changes in the way companies will account for many leasing transactions, only a small proportion of them are ready for the proposed changes.

As usual for this sort of change, major alterations to data collection, back-office systems and statutory reporting are likely to be required. Over 80% of respondents expect a significant burden to be placed on financial reporting for lessors as well as lessees; perhaps more importantly, over 40% believe it may affect their ability to obtain financing. Practically, the requirements may actually affect lease terms, and many companies may have to invest heavily in new or improved systems. Obviously, the larger a company’s lease portfolio, the larger the potential impact.

The proposed standards, as previously stated, require all leases to be capitalised on the company’s balance sheet – operating leases may be no more!

So, perhaps there is an impending lesson for UK organisations (both private and public sector) with significant numbers of leases (whether lessor or lessee) – start planning for the changes well in advance, as it’s unlikely to be an easy ride…I would have to ask – do you need some help with that?

I talk to many business owners and senior staff, and I am often amazed (and a little concerned, if I am being honest) that their own accountants often miss a few tricks that should help them.

There are several so-called ‘VAT Schemes’ available to many (though not all) businesses, all of which are designed to make life a little simpler. There may be some restrictions/limits, but they can be a useful tool especially for smaller businesses who need most help. The HMRC website is now much easier to use than it used to be, so look for these so you can check out the rules in more detail.

The Annual Accounting Scheme allows you to complete one VAT return per year (instead of at least four for most business) and the timescales are longer. Although returns are less frequent, VAT is still paid in instalments, so the administrative burned is lightened and cashflow can be smoother. Either of the other schemes mentioned below can be used in conjunction.

The Cash Accounting Scheme allows you to declare output VAT only on cash received rather than when it is invoiced, and input VAT only on cash paid out. This scheme certainly helps from a cashflow perspective for any company whose customers do not pay immediately, and bad debt relief is automatic.

The Flat Rate Scheme is one of my favourites, and this allows you to calculate the VAT liability by applying a single percentage (depending on your business sector) to total VAT-inclusive turnover. It’s quick and simple, with no confusion caused by partial exemption or fuel scale charges. Also, don’t forget that in the first year, HMRC offer a 1% discount on the percentage used. This scheme is targeted at quite small businesses, so check the limits on the website. This scheme cannot be used with the cash accounting scheme, however.

Of course, firstly, businesses need to determine if they need to be registered for VAT at all. If most or all of your customers are also VAT registered it is almost always worthwhile (notwithstanding the administration); otherwise you probably don’t want to register unless you have to. There are other factors to consider such as the administration and record-keeping, the business status of being VAT registered, whether you could reclaim VAT on expenses etc but all of these points can’t be covered here.

The main thing is that once you know what schemes could be available to you, and where to look for more information, then you are in a position to strike up a conversation with your accountant or business advisor and ensure that what you are doing for your business is the best thing.

However, maybe those (partially blinkered?) days are numbered following Bank of England governor Mervyn King’s statements last week speaking during a Parliamentary Inquiry Lords committee which has already directed some of the blame at accounting. The Committee is investigating the contribution to the crisis of both accounting standards and the audit profession.

King told a Lords committee that it is ‘misguided’ to blame accounting rules [for banks’ behaviour]; instead, he highlighted the problem of poor management.

The accounting rules in question were various complex IFRS standards adopted by the UK from 2005 which may have inadvertently encouraged banks to load their balance sheets with overpriced assets. The standards effectively obliged banks and other companies to value their assets at market price – clearly this inflated balance sheets in the run up to the crisis; of course, as soon as liquidity issues started to strike, then the same methods sent valuations crashing. The complexity of the rules may have led to banks ‘forgetting’ that judgements of prudency may override any accounting rule.

In support, Tim Bush, a member of the Accounting Standards Board’s (ASB) Urgent Issues Task Force (UITF), pointed to other accounting rules on impairment, contingent liabilities and securitisation as others that may have contributed to the problem. He said that “I believe that these deficiencies were a major factor in the banks that failed in the UK and Ireland”.

Mervyn King stated that “no management should ever use accounts as an excuse for imprudent behaviour”.

Whilst the inquiry continues, perhaps people might start to see accountants as one partner in the overall business management process rather than keepers of ‘anything with a number in it’.

Of course, any finance professional worth their salt will always work as business advisor to the management, and not blindly follow the rules!

So, what are these magical experiences?

• Early work experience. It may have been good enough to lead to a lifelong obsession, or bad enough to force someone to seek better. My two months at a big six accounting firm while I was at University encouraged me to choose to qualify within industry.
• The influence of others. Someone (usually the boss) who may have been good enough to seek to emulate, or bad enough to seek to avoid emulating. My first manager (Stephen Burr, Delta plc) taught me everything I needed to know about balance sheet management – simple but effective.
• Short-term assignments. Anything from projects, covering a job, interim management – the key is to see what’s out there and get out of your comfort zone. The reason I ended up leaving my first job was that I was excited about the prospect of standing in for my boss while he went on a foreign assignment; he was stood down and so was I, but I had tasted the next level.
• A big break. May be a first promotion, a big bonus, a new job – something where, suddenly, things were bigger, more complex, more important or a big responsibility. When you’re an interim executive, everything is complex and important!
• Hardship. It may be personal or professional, but the lessons learned were crucial to understand how to manage in a crisis, and what’s important when the chips are down. When my second employer was in the process of being taken over, things were tough, and then made worse by a personal misfortune.
• Management development. It is, perhaps surprisingly, not a major factor – which is bad news for business schools and the like.

What’s interesting is that most of the main issues revolve squarely around experiential learning and having ‘been there’ rather than bookwork and technical knowledge. So, it would appear that if you wish to be a leader of tomorrow, then you might need to get out a bit more…

ABC can, subject to being able to identify cost groups and their behaviours, give a much more ‘accurate’ product costing. In fact, rather than simply applying the techniques to manufactured products, organisations are applying these methodologies more and more to service-based sectors – the NHS in particular are becoming heavy adopters of ABC.

Faced with the tangled web of ABC analysis, many people will run a mile – but, as I say for many complex issues, you only need to break them down into manageable portions and the complexity starts to float away (I admit, however, ABC is never going to be ‘easy’ – identifying the right activities and the appropriate level of detail to drill into can make or break the project).

So, how do you unravel Activity Based Costing into five easy steps?

1. Assign all direct costs (to products, customers etc). Simply put, if you can easily identify what a cost belongs to, then it’s a direct cost; if you can’t it isn’t.
2. Assign all remaining (indirect) costs to the ‘activities’ of the organisation such as engineering, customer support, development etc. Activities are key (hence the name ABC!) and all activities used in the generation of a product/service must be identified. They may need to be disaggregated if different significant costs behave in different ways (see below).
3. Determine the ‘cost drivers’ for each activity i.e. what makes the costs change – for instance, is it time (e.g. engineers working on a machine setup), quantity (e.g. packaging per unit), or sales value (e.g. 5% sales commissions) etc.
4. Determine, for each product/customer etc, how much of each activity is consumed – this must be in the same terms as the activities themselves; then you can assign the cost of each activity to each product/customer etc, based on the activity rates and consumption per unit.
5. Take the direct costs, and add on the indirect activity costs, and you have your total cost.

With a good set of ABC costings, you can then start to make value-adding decisions, within a framework of continuous improvement, on who are your best and worst customers, what are your best and worst products, how costs can be predicted, what drives good and poor performance, what costs may not be adding value (and therefore eliminate waste), and more…

I have carried several major ABC projects, successful in terms of improving the bottom line significantly; this would not have been the case if the companies concerned had continued with their previous strategies.

So, in these tough times where every day counts, what are you waiting for…?

The perfect FD evidentially displays the following characteristics:

• Delivers accurate and timely improvement-led results, as opposed to just working long hours for little real effect.
• An eagerness to drive out poor performance across the organisation, and is willing to ask the questions no-one else is brave enough to face.
• Loyalty to the CEO, but with enough bottle to challenge.
• Good communications skills, not just within but also outside the organisation.
• Has at least most of the answers to hand to answer questions asked.
• A clear sense of what drives revenues and profits within a business; commercial and strategic awareness.
• Technical competence is a given; advisers may be used but without over-reliance.
• The experience to have dealt with problems, and come out successfully of the other side.
• Takes appropriate, but managed, risks.

My personal experiences would echo many of these factors, but I won’t mention any specifics!

Does your own organisation have the luxury of ‘the perfect FD’?

The downside, for those who don’t fit the bill, is that in most cases the ‘problem’ is resolved by the FD leaving…as one of my previous CEOs would say: “If you’re ever worried about taking a difficult action, consider the consequences of not doing so!”

PwC reports that the number of firms becoming insolvent is falling once again (18% less than previous quarter, 20% less than last year) which has to be seen as positive across the economy.

There is still significant uncertainty among both small and larger business as to what the impacts of the Government’s spending review (20th October – not long to go now) will be, although the construction and service sectors are expected to be greatest hit.

Uncertainty at this stage is unavoidable; however, once we all know a little more about where we stand then decisions need to be made, and quickly. No doubt some organisations will suffer badly, but some will actually gain once the uncertainty is gone.

The fact is, whether an organisation is growing or shrinking, then strategy planning, financial analysis and execution of the plan must follow rapidly.

Change needs planning, and change needs managing. Muddling through these tough times is not a viable option for anybody wishing to avoid the insolvency statistics. There is one thing worse than making the wrong decision, and that’s making no decision at all…

There are many headlines around at the moments pointing to problems with both refunds and demands being made by HMRC.

Read more…

This issue of ‘water footprinting’ is likely to become as important as’ carbon footprinting’. Like any other scarce resource (Oil? Money? Time? Skilled workforce?), governments, organisations and society as a whole are becoming more aware of the issues. Although of course water is a fully renewable resource, its distribution and management is far from easy.

Risks may arise from excesses (flooding), shortfalls (in either water as a whole, or specifically clean water) and the security of supplies. Financial issues revolve around direct pricing (supply and demand, from an economic perspective) but also the indirect impact of any other issue, for instance lost production. As with almost any risk, there is a financial impact if it occurs, and it is this aspect alongside society issues, that businesses need to be concerned about.

What should business be doing?

Unlike many other materials, its supply is unpredictable but taken for granted by many. Its price may appear to far understate its value, although this is only evident when its supply is disrupted. Business should strive to become more aware of its water footprint – although the concept is relatively new, some companies already publish water footprint statistics.

Methodologies are available from Chapagain and Hoekstra, the WBCSD and The Water Footprint Network. There are not, as yet, any agreed standards for measurement and management.

Clearly, measurement is not enough if significant issues occur – the benefit of measurement is in being able to utilise it to manage a reduction in water usage, and therefore reliance, which in turn will reduce the risks that organisations are exposed to. This is not just an issue for agriculture and commodity production, but an issue globally. Developments will be interesting to follow.

Why? Because waste is evil! For those who know me, the thought that I may have run around a conference room screaming (yes, literally) such a declaration may be surprising. But that I did!

The elimination of waste in a manufacturing environment (my background) is an obvious route to better financial (and environmental) results. But why should waste reduction be the unique preserve of manufacturing industry? How can the principles be applied within an organisation that doesn’t make anything?

The key is to view waste in its broadest sense i.e. anything that is not useful.

• Wasted time – how many reports does an organisation produce that are not used, or only certain parts are used?
• Waiting time – how much time is lost waiting for other people to get things done before you can continue?
• Rework – how many things are reworked either because the first product was of poor quality, or the original requirement was not made clear?
• Added value – basically, anything that does not contribute directly to the vision of an organisation, or directly support others doing so, can be regarded as probable waste.

The identification and elimination of waste is one of the key deliverables of process mapping, often referred to as process re-engineering or process optimisation – one of my pet subjects.

If organisations in the current climate are to continue to firstly survive, then enable themselves to grow and respond quickly when the recovery is in full swing, then the efficient and effective utilisation of expensive resources (of which time is only one) is critical.

Perhaps now, when things are a little quieter, is the optimum time to consider business process optimisation.

The proposals, tentative at this stage following consultation, are intended to apply to all non-public sector entities. The framework proposes that ‘tiers’ are adopted, based on levels of public accountability:

• Tier 1, for entities with public accountability (application guidance on the definition will be provided), will report under EU-adopted IFRS.
• Tier 2, for entities with no public accountability, will report under IFRS for SMEs, replacing existing FRS and UITF Abstracts with the IFRS for SMEs with certain amendments.
• Tier 3, for small entities, will report under FRSSE.

As well as the above, the ASB proposed to reduce disclosure requirements for subsidiaries in tiers 1 or 2 (without public accountability) and whose parent produces publicly available financial statements.

The ASB’s will be developing a FRED for consultation. To this end, it has issued a request for responses to aid an impact assessment, to be received by 20 August.

No doubt once the final edicts are issued by the ASB, the incorporation of IFRS into UK Reporting will be clearer. We will see what the next steps are…

Confusion arises from the seemingly infinite number of options and nuances, and the differences in what they mean to the business. Also, proving that I am not a stick-in-the-mud numbers-only accountant, there are many softer issues to consider apart from the pure £s, such as how well the project fits the overall objectives of the organisation, project risk, compatibility with other projects, market image etc.

Forgetting the fact there may be variations, there are actually only four main types of investment appraisal methodology. All methods are cash-based, and all investments and profits are calculated on an incremental rather than a ‘fully absorbed’ basis to ensure that only the direct impacts of the project are considered. Of course, any calculation is only as good as the data which feeds into it. Sensitivity and risk analysis should always be done to understand variability.

• Payback – the time taken to recover your investment costs (investing £1m for an annual cash benefit £0.25m gives a payback of 4 years).
• Average Rate of Return (ARR) – average profits as % of investment (above example would be 25%).

The above are basic calculations which make them simple to calculate and understand; however, they make no attempt to consider the timing of cash flows, the time value of money, or the alternative uses to which the investment could be put. The following are technically better (because they consider the time value of money and alternative investment opportunities) but they are more complex.

• Net Present Value (NPV) – adjusts cash flows based on their timing and the alternative investments an organisation could make (the discount rate).
• Internal Rate of Return (IRR) – calculates the discount rate at which NPV=0, thereby allowing a comparison to other investment opportunities.

So, knowing the above basic options, what’s the answer to the question? I find in reality that one of two options suits depending on the circumstances.

Without cash constraints, where long term investment performance is key, then NPV (and/or NPV as a % of the investment) is used, and the project(s) with the best results, or all those over a benchmark, may be progressed.

If an organisation is cash constrained, then importance shifts to fast recovery of any investment – in this case Payback (or more commonly payback based on discounted cashflows) is used. The projects that are able to recover their outlay soonest may be progressed.

So, on with the project identification and data gathering…

The complications of lease accounting, and differing treatments of similar contracts, continues to cause problems for both preparers and users of accounts. The FASB and IASB are working to release an exposure draft (ED) later this year which may effectively remove the distinction between finance and operating leases and therefore their accounting treatments.

Currently, under UK GAAP (SSAP21), IFRS (IAS17) and the CIPFA Code (section 4.2), contracts transferring substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of an asset to the lessee are classified as finance leases. In summary, this involves measuring and reporting both an asset, and the obligations to pay for its use, on the balance sheet. The accounting for operating leases simply passes through the P&L.

The ED is likely to state more generally that a lessee obtains a general right to use an asset, and also incurs an obligation to pay rentals which meets the definition of a liability. On this basis, all leases would be accounted for as finance leases.

Lessee: asset and liability would initially be measured at the NPV of the lease payments, and subsequently amortised (as an amortisation rather than a rental expense). The liability would be subsequently amortised using the effective interest rate method. There are also likely to be additional requirements to assess issues such as the longest possible lease term, contingent rentals and residual value guarantees each year (more onerous than currently), and adjust the accounts accordingly.

Lessor: their leased asset would be treated as an economic resource on their balance sheet. The lessor recognises the right to receive rental payments, along with a corresponding performance obligation to permit the lessee to use the asset, measured similarly to the lessee’s obligation, and amortised using the effective interest method.

On a practical note, such a shake-up in lease accounting rules may well impact lease vs. buy decisions for various organisations. Certainly, both lessees and lessor with long term contracts may now wish to start assessing the implications of these changes on their financial measurement. This may be an extremely large and complex task in some cases, but the sooner these plans are made, the better.

Don’t you just love meetings? Regardless, there are times when they are unavoidable. No doubt the recent air travel problems caused by Mount Eyjafjallajökull caused a large number of business meetings to be cancelled, but we can only guess how much value was lost (or gained!).

Many are poor value, some are OK, but the best ones will consider the following principles – otherwise you’ve just got a bunch of people going round in circles and wasting time.

• Is there a need? Define the purpose and expected outputs – is it for sharing information only, is it for debate, is it for action and decision-making? Could it be done by conference/phone?
• Who is required? Only invite those who need to be there to actually disseminate or receive the information, or debate or make the decisions. Never invite anyone ‘just for interest’.
• What’s the cost? Be mindful of the resource being taken up. Assuming all attendees add some value to the organisation, the opportunity cost per person could be hundreds of pounds per hour.
• Location & timing. Meetings will take up the allocated time. Consider booking a very short slot; keep things moving; some suggest that keeping people standing also focuses the mind!
• Documentation. Ensure the agenda is actively managed, short minutes are taken focused on actions, and the meeting’s objective is considered throughout.

Hopefully, people will leave your meetings feeling that they have achieved something valuable and motivated to complete the actions they have been allocated.

Taking experience from my manufacturing background, my focus is: do what’s required well; don’t do what’s not required; eliminate waste. Apart from the obvious tips you can pick up anywhere, what do I do? Here are six tips.

• Manage expectations. I always try to ensure the complete requirement is agreed – that way, I can deliver ‘right first time’ without waste.
• Know your boss. I know who I need to keep happy, and I quickly learn what they want and how they want to see it.
• Stay on scope. Don’t waste time on things not required. That’s not to say be blinkered – I always raise off-scope issues that need attention.
• Report concisely. My client needs to know what I’ve done, how I’ve done it and what it means to them; I get to the point in documenting the facts, learning points, and recommendations.
• Transfer knowledge. I don’t want anyone thinking I’ve done a ‘dump and run’. Documenting things properly ensures the client does not have to waste their time reinventing the wheel after I’ve gone.
• Do the easy stuff first. This flies in the face of some approaches. It works for me, it allows me to see the wood for the trees, and I’ll keep doing it this way.

Is this right where financial and management reporting is concerned, or is it just an irrelevant saying with no basis in the business world?

Many people have the view that, surely, the content of [read here any of the following: financial report, business process, report, spreadsheet, graph, web page, letter etc...] something is more important than its pure presentation.

I disagree. And in a nutshell, here’s why…and it’s not necessarily just the way things look, it’s the perception they give that matters.

In the same way that when dealing with people personally, first impressions count, I believe that the first glance that a reader makes of your work immediately gives them an insight. This counts even more for a financial interim with limited opportunities to make an impression.

If your document is poorly laid out, crammed in and difficult to read, contains spelling or grammatical errors, random inserts etc then the reader will immediately assume the substance behind it is also poorly carried out – the worst result is that therefore the conclusions/recommendations/pitch is also bad. This may be correct or not.

Alternatively, if your reader immediately gathers a positive impression of your work, then you are already on the way to a positive and successful outcome.

With this in mind, I always leave some time after completing something, then go back to it cold with a reader’s hat on and try and assess what a quick glance may reveal. Alternatively, and even better, get someone else with no background to review it.

I have myself been guilty, in a previous life, of considering ‘temps’ for only a certain type of work that can be picked up quickly, controlled easily, and where not much can go wrong. This is OK where you are just short of a head or two, and need to make up the numbers to keep on top of volume tasks.

However, this outlook fails somewhat to appreciate the main purpose of career interim executives to provide wider business support, as opposed to temporary staff who are filling time between permanent jobs. A recent Sunday Times article (‘Temp at the Top’, 16 May) contained quotes from several industry leaders who agreed with me (!) that not only do good interims fill gaps and add value, but that utilisation of this flexible and specialist resource is growing for many reasons.

High quality interim staff can be used to fill short- or long-term vacancies, but extra value comes from taking advantage of vast experience and/or high-level speciality that may be missing internally. This is often something that a business cannot justify paying for indefinitely, since it may be required only on a one-off or occasional basis – for example the skills required for an ERP system implementation, IFRS transition, pension scheme review or ABC exercise.

The use of interim staff has been growing for some time in the public sector – I am not talking here about much-maligned management consultants (who appear about ready to be cut out of this particular equation in impending government cuts), but experienced qualified practitioners who have many years hands-on experience actually doing the job they are advising on. The latter will actually have a key role to play in ensuring the organisational changes required for the public sector to become leaner are embedded.

Another reason why organisations may struggle to match the benefit to the costs is that many travel the well-trodden path of calling (1) their auditor who will rub their hands as they transfer the call to their consulting arm, or (2) the nearest recruitment agency, who is likely to have just as much overhead to cover. Senior organisational staff must have a network they can call upon for independent and high value recommendations.

Is the private sector about to see equivalent growth in interims? Only time will tell, but as we come out of recession and start to grow again, all of the following are bound to happen: expert financial resource will become a scarce resource once more, businesses will continue be reluctant to make long-term staffing commitments, and most of all the needs of growing businesses will be very different from those who have had to tighten their belts over recent years.