What does the UK stand for?

It’s time to re-examine our values as a society

Since the EU referendum, there has been a noticeable absence of discussion of what the UK stands for as a country. What does Britain mean to the world? Where is the articulation of what makes us a nation of people with strong principles that we believe in, that we will fight to protect, such as freedom, respect for every individual, personal and collective responsibility for each other, and a deep compassion for people of every race as we seek to create a better world?

Speaking at Tuesday’s Brexit debate in parliament, veteran Tory MP Ken Clarke questioned where populism and extremism will take the UK next. We need to explain what we stand for and articulate our role in the world, so that the space we want to inhabit is clear. We need a vision for how we live, how we work with each other and with people from other countries. What can others rely on the British for? Should they, for example, be confident that we will always stand up against bullies and tyrants? Should they believe we will protect the rights of people to be free, to think and speak independently, and to live in safety from oppression and harm? Should they assume we believe in scientific progress for the benefit of humankind?

The alternative, if we cannot explain what we stand for, is for others to see us as confused - torn between the ‘glories’ of the past and possible riches through realpolitik. Will the UK be marginalised as a nation locked in the past, a country without principles, open to the highest bidder in order to maintain a certain level of prosperity?

The Queen, who maintains a neutral stance on politics, recently highlighted the importance of “coming together to seek out the common ground”. Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May have finally met in private for what has been described as a ‘serious and engaged’ discussion. It’s not too late for our political leaders to steer us away from confusion and towards compassion and collective responsibility.

What is the UK’s future vision?

A lack of leadership is resulting in a lack of purpose

MPs are gathering in the UK parliament today to debate and vote on Brexit Plan B. As we watch the lack of leadership in the UK parliament play out in practice, it’s difficult to see the sense of vision or purpose in this ongoing debate.

Where is the sense of why we are a great country, what we are most proud of, how we can play our part in the world in the most effective and responsible way? Where is the vision for a nation that contributes to the 21^st century world by being a hotbed for innovation, improving life for people across the globe?

Reporting from Davos in The Times, Callum Jones wrote that, ‘Angela Merkel has urged world leaders to defy populism and save the established order, calling in nations to “hold together” and halt the fragmentation of the multilateral system’. Merkel added: “A global architecture will only be successful if we’re open to compromise.”

If our political leaders spent time working to understand and articulate the side of the British spirit of which we can be most proud, we could perhaps unite around a vision which others would respect and want to be associated with. Our sense of why we exist as a nation could be based on a new purpose in the world, as we move on from our history of empire, domination and cruelty. We could reinvent ourselves as a nation that other nations want to work with, a nation of collaboration and mutual respect – one that focuses energy and resources on creating better solutions to problems like energy, food, water, and peace.

We need visionary political leadership right now. Leadership that can recreate our sense of purpose in the world. Leadership that builds connections, not partitions.

Connected negotiations would help Brexit progress

Theresa May and EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker have agreed to ‘accelerate’ Brexit negotiations - but there is still no sign of a breakthrough.

Like most people in business, I have been involved in my fair share of negotiations over the years, some lasting just a few weeks and some an entire year. Some have gone very well, some quite well, and occasionally there has been a poor outcome for both sides.  The priority in negotiation, in my humble view, is recognising what is important to all parties (as there are often more than two parties involved), and working out how to ensure they all get what is really important to them.  I have not been involved in a significant negotiation where these have been utterly incompatible, and normally they can be aligned, once they are understood.  But this requires a mindset of seeking a shared outcome that is good for all parties, what has famously been called a ‘win/win outcome’.

Brexit negotiators are currently deadlocked on issues relating to the UK’s ‘divorce bill’ and with serious issues remaining over the Irish border and citizens’ rights.  We see turmoil around the UK government cabinet table, with Home Secretary Amber Rudd describing the prospect of Brexit happeningwithout a deal being reached between the UK and the EU as ‘unthinkable’ while Brexit Secretary David Davis is committed to keeping the ‘no deal’ option open. It is a slow-moving and uncooperative approach to negotiations from the UK team.  I am a little embarrassed to be British right now, as I watch our politicians seek to ‘win’ the negotiations with Europe, to play a clever game where the UK gets what it wants at the expense of the European Union. 

I believe that if the UK government took a more win/win approach, seeking to work with their European counterparts to explore how to achieve what each side needs, we would see accelerated progress.  The Prime Minister’s speech in Florence last week set a more conciliatory tone, but it lacked substance about such matters as the scale of the ‘divorce bill’ that the UK would find acceptable, and a deep recognition of the concerns of the European Union nations.  As the UK continues with this disconnected approach I fear that progress will continue to be slow and that the outcome will in the end be a lose/lose, with neither party getting a really satisfying outcome.  The pragmatist in me thinks that we will get over it, and that economic interests will eventually cause reasonable trading and migration policies to be adopted, but it feels like a sub-optimal approach and one that does not reflect well on the UK government or the UK nation. 

What do you think? Please tweet @SimonJHayward and let me know.

Brexit reality check: Why leaders need to be able to admit mistakes

Some of the most difficult decisions I have had to make, both at work and personally, are when I've had to reverse a decision to which I was committed. Whether it's stopping a pet project in marketing, or acknowledging that a new product investment was flawed, it's not easy to say, 'I was wrong, we should stop now'. 

However, this is just what we in the UK need to do now, in my opinion, given the way we are advancing towards an economic disaster as we exit the European Union. As talks resume this week in Brussels, we see only exasperation on both sides. The prospect of any breakthrough is unlikely. 

It's never easy to admit that we were wrong, or that circumstances have now changed and our decision won't work. But one of the lessons I've learned through bitter experience is that it can be worse to persist, doggedly trying to make an erroneous decision work, holding onto the original vision that led to the decision in the first place, even if it was wrong.

In the boom years of the early noughties I remember an elearning project we were working on which I believed would become massive.  It was in line with the analysts’ predictions, and it had some great early adopters involved.  I was determined, but I was not tuned in strongly enough to our wider customer base and the market place as a whole - I wanted to believe the hype and was not sufficiently close to what was going on around us. I was too stubborn, and we would have been much better off to have adapted our approach to be more in line with what clients were actually seeking at that time.  In the end, it was a partial success. However, we wasted a lot of time and effort with an enormous opportunity cost. 

I suspect the politicians who are locked onto a Brexit timetable will look back with the same sense of regret that they didn't listen to what was happening around them. The UK government, even after the abortive snap election earlier this year, is acting as though it has only a forward gear. Like James Dean's opponent in Rebel Without a Cause’s famous ‘chickie run’ scene, it is driving quickly towards the cliff, unable to escape the inevitable crash below.

Back in 2001 I needed to have had more humility, more willingness to listen to the advice of others and to acknowledge when my decision was, at least in part, wrong. I needed to slow down, to talk to customers, and to adapt to changing market demand. I wish I had been more connected to our customers and my colleagues, and able to put my hands up and accept that my initial decision was not right.  

Learning to lead through uncertainty: Business needs cohesion to deal with Brexit

In recent years, much has been written about our VUCA world, characterised by volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity. ‘Agility’ has become a buzzword as leaders learn to deal with unexpected situations as swiftly and successfully as possible.

Despite uncertainty becoming the norm in recent years, the UK’s vote to leave the European Union has presented many leaders with one of the most unexpected situations they have ever faced. Research conducted last month by Jelf Employee Benefits found that 63%of employers had not even considered the impact Brexit might have, and further research last week found that 83% had no formal plan in place to deal with it. Even amongst those who had planned for a ‘leave’ vote, many have been surprised by its impact.

The government has yet to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, Britain’s formal notice to leave the EU, which would give the UK two years to negotiate withdrawal. Uncertainty over how soon this might happen has led to a degree of nervousness among UK-based businesses. Nearly two thirds of Institute of Directors members think Brexit will be bad for business and director general Simon Walker suggested that leaders “will be busy working out how they are going to adapt and succeed after the referendum result.”

CBI director general Carolyn Fairbairn said we need “rapid clarity on who is making the decisions” and suggested the UK needs to get “calm and decisive leadership in place as soon as possible.” More calls for calm came from business secretary Sajid Javid, who warned companies not to panic.

Messages from prominent European leaders have been mixed. While German chancellor Angela Merkel said she would not push for an immediate withdrawal, International Monetary Fund chief Christine Lagarde has called for the UK and the EU to quell uncertainty over the implications of Britain’s vote by acting quickly and cohesively. Back home, Boris Johnson has asked Brexit voters to “build bridges” with Remain supporters who feel “loss and confusion”.

So, from confusion and uncertainty is emerging a desire for cohesion, connectedness – and clear leadership. What can business leaders do to engage and motivate employees with a future which, for many, is uncertain?   

I mentioned agility earlier. We often think of agility as important in responding to immediate, short-term challenges. However, it’s even more important to embed the long-term capability to identify and respond quickly to emerging threats and challenges in a world with high levels of complexity and uncertainty.

Even out of the EU, most organisations will continue to operate in the context of globalisation and international interdependency, either directly or through their customers.  More than ever, this highlights the need to be nimble.

Being nimble and agile is not compatible with a tightly-controlled command and control style of leadership. When faced with a difficult challenge, it’s tempting to take control back to a small group at the centre of the organisation. However, more sustainable success will come by developing a more ‘connected’, shared model of leadership across the business.  

The greater the complexity outside your business, the simpler it needs to be inside. The temptation is often to introduce a plethora of new systems and processes to deal with change. However, many successful organisations are choosing to simplify their ways of working as a way to increase agility and their ability to adapt to changing circumstances. Ruthless prioritisation is a good way to start this process of simplification.  It creates clarity for yourself and others on what to focus on and, perhaps more importantly, what not to focus on, in order to enable action in times of complexity and uncertainty. Set clear priorities for the business and for your leadership team, so that everyone can then focus on doing fewer things better.  As more clarity emerges over the weeks and months ahead, increased cohesion and connectedness can help us to reach a successful outcome.