Electric Trainer

Why LinkedIn endorsements are driving me nuts

Anyone with a LinkedIn account will have noticed a new feature where you are encouraged to endorse the skills of your connections.

You can read all about endorsements on the LinkedIn blog here.

The prompt comes when you view someone's profile. A list of some of their skills appears right in your face at the top of the page. When you click on the skill it sends a note to the person saying 'David has endorsed you for the following skills and expertise:...'.

In theory this is great, as there is nothing stronger than an unsolicited pat on the back.

So why am I being driven nuts by this?

Because being a conscientious LinkedIn user I have made sure all my skills are listed on my profile. You are allowed up to 50 skills and I have listed 27. But LinkedIn is only asking people to endorse some of them, and they are not the most relevant.

Not only that. My profile now lists my skills in order of endorsements not relevance, which simply perpetuates the problem.

I know this sounds churlish, and I'm really grateful to those of you who have endorsed my broadcasting skills. The problem is that I now run a training business.

Here's a screengrab from my profile that illustrates the issue:

  

The fact that I have a media and broadcasting hinterland is very important to me, and I do some training in broadcasting skills. But my training business focusses mostly on networking, communications and basic business skills, which is not the same thing.

Bizarrely, people who only know me from my training work are being prompted to endorse me in broadcasting skills. I'm delighted if they've enjoyed one of our workshops, but for all they know I might be a rubbish broadcaster.

This rather devalues the whole process.

So here's a plea to the clever people at LinkedIn. Please let me prioritise the skills that are most current. Then if anyone wants to endorse me, they will be prompted with those first.

Now that I've got that off my chest, I'm off to do some proper (training) work.

Proposed changes to late payment legislation

I've banged on quite a bit over the years about how useful the UK's late payment legislation can be to small businesses and freelances. Getting paid on time increases income and general happiness!

There are some interesting developments as the EU prepares to introduce minimum standards across all member states next year.

For late payment anoraks like me I'd recommend all the links relating to this at payontime.co.uk. They have a discussion forum on the site too.

It's great that the EU is addressing the problem of payments, and nice to see them catching up with the UK on this.

I've just submitted two areas of concern as part of the consultation process which the Department for Business Innovation and Skills is holding. (Deadline alert: 19 October 2012)

Here's my submission in full:

As a trainer who works with freelances and small business owners on organisational skills, I have championed the UK’s late payment legislation for more than 7 years now.

While I welcome the adoption of legislation across Europe, there are some worrying details in the proposed changes.

Although it’s true that the late payment legislation is not a solution to the problem, for very small businesses (sole traders, partnerships, micro companies) it does more than just “create an environment for driving payment on time” (as stated in the BIS consultation document).

For these small businesses it provides a benchmark and allows them to point to an example of a minimum standard of professionalism they expect from their clients.

There are two areas which need addressing in the proposals:

1/ The replacement of the tiered statutory admin fee from £40, £70 or £100 to a flat €40 (approx £31)

This may seem a small change, but for very small businesses every penny counts. The message this sends is that the disruption and inconvenience has no real value. It looks like a token gesture.

In reality it’s more than just a token for very small businesses.

It is not good enough that suppliers may be able to argue for more realistic compensation under the proposals (“reasonable additional costs incurred”). Many small suppliers are at the end of their tether by the time they invoke the legislation. They will not all have the time or resources (or courage) to try to extract more from a bad payer.

We propose that if a single flat fee has to be introduced it is set at a minimum of €100 (not €40), with allowance made for other “reasonable additional costs” as proposed.

 

2/ The maximum 60 day payment terms for business to business contracts

The legislation attempts to make allowances for different types of contract (business to business, public sector). However the effect is to reduce the clarity of the message to tardy payers.

The default payment term (where not otherwise agreed) is to remain as 30 days. This is right and proper.

The proposals allow for payment terms of up to 60 days, unless agreed otherwise by both parties. So why state 60 days as the default in this section and not 30 days?

For small businesses an extra month without payment can be very painful, and sometimes terminal. The spirit of the legislation should be that there is no excuse for not paying suppliers once they have delivered, and that 30 days is considered the normal maximum in all cases. 

We therefore propose that the default payment terms are set clearly at 30 days for business to business contracts, with the option of negotiating longer (or shorter) terms in advance of the supplier undertaking the work.

David Thomas Media 
11 Oct 2012

 

Free support for new businesses

When I started my business (8 years ago) I benefitted hugely from free face-to-face advice provided by Business Link, the government agency designed to help small businesses set up and grow.

Business Link still exists, but now it's a website (albeit a good one) and much of the training and free individual business guidance has disappeared.

I had presumed this sort of thing had disappeared from the whole country, but I see that's not the case.

The parts of the UK that are not England have their own business support agencies and they are still providing training courses and business advisors to a greater or lesser degree.

• Wales has Business Wales
• Scotland has Business Gateway
• Northern Ireland has InvestNI and nibusinessinfo.co.uk

I just heard from Catriona Forrest, a former trainee of mine who I met when she was leaving the BBC to set up on her own. One year on and she writes to say:

I can't quite believe how much has happened in this last year, but it was far less daunting for having been on your course and for all the support I've had from the Business Gateway and the Glasgow Regeneration Agency, along with an amazing amount of backup from my business peers in Scotland. 

Not living in Glasgow, I'd not come across the Regeneration Agency. Catriona goes on to say one of the most beneficial things she received was access to a business mentor (take a bow David Hughes) who helped her apply for a small start-up grant.

She also found the Scottish Business Gateway courses very useful. They formed a kind of transition from being employed to setting up her own limited company. They were good for networking too.

The lesson here is: ask for help if you're starting out, and don't assume help will be expensive. It might even be free - especially if you live in Glasgow!