Standard debate

A recent debate on the IOD Linkedin Forum asked whether Investors in People
and ISO 9000 et al were a total waste of time and effort. Good question! Ever
since the ‘Standards’ were formulated practitioners and clients have been
wrestling with this problem. I cannot speak about ISO as I was never a
practitioner, but I was an IiP Adviser for seven years, and during that time
must have been into over a hundred businesses and organizations, Thus, I
developed strong views on the subject.

 Someone said that these
things CAN be a waste of time but are not ALWAYS. I agree: clearly having a
framework was for some businesses and organisations immensely useful, as was
being able to draw down funding and expertise. I would add that I don't think
that working in the field for 7 years was a waste of my time; on the contrary,
I believe I achieved some outstanding results for my clients – sometimes
through IiP, sometimes despite it.

 But finally I came to the
conclusion that by and large IiP had become a waste of time – and quit the
process. What I found irksome was the application of the philosophy of
'continuous improvement' to the Standard itself. What this meant in practice
for IiP was that about every three years every consultant had to be re-trained,
re-accredited on the new, improved Standard that frankly was no better than the
one before – there was simply an increase in management jargon. And it wasn't
difficult to work out why this was happening: it was a cash machine for the
custodians of the Standard. The cynicism at the top that engendered such a
process was a value-contradiction to all we were supposed to be doing.

 As belief wanes, the Standard
becomes a gravy train for consultants, a job for bureaucrats, and a political
rallying cry for Governments who can claim they are doing something. We need a
different approach and a different set of tools; and one thing we need to
grasp, but probably won't, is the issue of people being 'different' and so
requiring 'different' approaches. Put another way, people can be truly amazing
and outstanding; connect them to Standards and mediocrity creeps in.

 And so far as IiP went I
guess 'things' decay and the right systems, right leadership was not in place
to enable the product to renew itself in a way that would be relevant for the C21st.
Given that SMEs are the only possible engines for real growth in our economy,
and certainly for employment take-up, the urgent question still remains as to
how the Government is going to support SMEs and enable them to reach their full
potential. This question is also not demarcated entirely from our education
system and what it does and doesn't do for young people who will become the
workforce or the entrepreneurs. I note with interest the changes in Scottish
education underway – implying what? That the model of the last 20 years is
completely flawed! A contentious point, but somewhere along the line England needs
to get its act together.