News
'Traditional magazine model is broken', ad giant claims
Magazine publishers and their print suppliers were confronted with some "uncomfortable truths" about the future for print media at this week's FIPP World Magazine Congress in London.
Maurice Lèvy, chairman and chief executive at global advertising giant Publicis Groupe, described the financial crisis as "a cruel and brutal accelerator and amplifier of long-term trends".
"Let’s face it, the traditional model is broken," he added.
Lèvy spoke of despair, doom and demise among publishers, yet still predicted a bright future for some print titles – but only for some. "I beg you to refuse to call your magazines ‘traditional’ media," he said, preferring instead the term "analogue".
At the same time he questioned whether the younger generation of so-called "digital natives" would go back to using print.
Research from Publicis-owned ZenithOptimedia predicts that newspapers and magazines will continue to lose adspend share into 2011. "You have not seen anything yet in the digital revolution. It’s clear the shift of ad dollars to digital media will go on in the coming years." Lèvy added.
Earlier at the opening session of the conference, printed magazines were praised for their "wonderful features and ability to connect with the target reader" by William Kerr, chairman at US media group Meredith, who quipped: "We’ll be destroying trees for a long time."
Guardian Media Group chief executive Carolyn McCall said: "There will always be an audience that wants print. Magazines give you private space and the web doesn’t substitute the experience of reading a magazine."
FIPP 2009: World Magazine Congress
Comments
colin gillman - 06 May 2009
Maurice Lèvy speaks the truth. However, I think that Carolyn McCall is a little like King Canute in so much as you cannot stop the power of the Internet. The Internet will never stop developing while people have access to computers and other hand held gadgets such as iPhones, iPods, iReaders and uncle Tom Cobbley and all. I write this in front of an HD wide screen monitor and I can't wait until the consumer magazines that I buy begin to get their act together online. Nearly all of which offer a rubbish online experience. I can't think why? The Internet is but a child today. My two children, who are ten and nine, already have PC's in their bedroom and are incredibly net savvy. They are already reading books on their Nintendo jobbies. As a kid I thought that it was height of cool to be handed down the old mono radiogram when stereos start coming in. You can't stop progress. There might always be an audiance that wants print, but I think it will be much smaller than Carolyn McCall imagines.
The Voice of Reason - 06 May 2009
One of my daughters uses Facebook and Heat magazine in equal measure.
Edna Bag - 06 May 2009
My kids like mags and prefer to keep games and friends on the net and a magazine for wherever they want to read it.
All it will take is for government or a scientist to decide that screens are damaging eye sight and the situation could change. The power of the internet may not be in question but the users wanting to keep using it might.
Its a game of 2 halves depends which is preferred, or from the sound of it what's going to be available.
Print Republic - 06 May 2009
Traditional print magazines have a lot to learn about online. Some have already shut down and are making sole use of the internet, Maxim from Dennis Publishing springs to mind. This magazine has been around for years but it is not financially viable to keep printing it when a web version will be equally effective. I do however believe there will always be space for printed magazines however only the best will survive.
Mick Hart - 07 May 2009
People will always clamour around new technology, nothing wrong with that, and the use of the internet as a publishing tool is still very new. It is early days, and too early to see how it's use might settle down and truly become a part of everyday life. There are many questions to be asked, such as who pays for it? Does on-line advertising work, is it sustainable in the long run? How will publishers generate sales - ie will it need to become a 'pay for view' service like digital TV? Will HMGov introduce a licence fee? Will ISP's charge us much more as we become more dependant upon their services? Will the cranks who try to spoil everything with spam, viruses and other abuse win their twisted war against on-line society? Will the environmental issues around internet use be a cause for concern by users? How will the internet be monitored, policed, and censored?
I don't think most people will put all their eggs in one basket just yet and adopt the internet to do everything. If they do, and the other communications industries all fail (not just print don't forget) we could all regret it in the future. By then though someone will have come up with the next life-changing technological gismo, and the internet itself will be defunct. That is unlikely to be my problem though, lets just leave it to the kids to sort out like we do with everything else nowadays.
Harry Hill - 08 May 2009
Interesting point about re-branding print to 'analogue' rather than 'traditional' media. Perception is a powerfull tool particularly when trying to reach the young, and I can't remember when tradition was cool. Another side to the coin is the perceived value to users and advertisers alike - the internet is stomping ahead primarily because it is generally free to use apart from ISP costs. An interetsing article in the Guardian reported on the losses that You Tube makes due to power consumption \(nearly as much a BGP) this begs the question how many can make it work before they need to start charging for the services, or ad costs are driven upwards to compensate for this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/may/03/internet-carbon-footprint
We might find in a few years that the value of print will better the internet - that is of course if the paper industry doesn't out price the format from existence....
Jon Fennell - 08 May 2009
Not sure if I like the 'analogue' tag sounds worse than traditional, will be interesting to see what happens if they do start charging on a channel basis. This would make print a pay as you equivalent, online will grow while it remains free. They have to convince users that bank info is secure, but as security improves so do the hackers.
Time will tell I guess and don't see the future as just a one horse town. I've been a net user for 10 years and as much as broadband has opened up new horizons it seems to be harder to find what you want and there's less to chosse from than a couple of years ago. Maybe thats because Google has got where it is and removed the choice, if we can't be asked to look for search engines what chance anything else. From a buying point if I was in WH Smith and was attracted to a headline of quote on the front of a mag I may have bought it. I have browsed Maxim now and again but not as a regular now its on line doubt I would even think about.
Don't think I'm alone in this thought and it makes you think how narrow and blinkered life will become, at what point does target (you could argue Maxim has a target audience), cease to grow with no passive readership or impulsive triggers.
Marketing has to be careful not to fall in love with any one channel it could be one clever or targeted step to far. Internet is a great way to interact but not all require that, doubtless it works well on a retail level (until someone decides they want fresh air and shops the 'analogue' way), but it brings a new restriction 'needs thought'. How do you get people to remember or think to search for the unthinkable?
Mick Hart - 08 May 2009
CB Radio was a free, very popular and expanding media, until it's commercial capabilities were fully realised - it's technology lives on, in mobile phones, PMR466 radio, and broadband itself, but as a communications media in its own right has all but disappeared. I don't think the internet (in its current form) will disappear any time soon, but once the commercial aspect of it is fully realised and utilised, and we have to pay for all the services it offers, the playing field will level again. What no one needs is for commercial hype to in the meantime close down the alternatives to the internet (ie print, postal services, conventional TV broadcasting, music sales, advertising etc) as that would lead to ISP's (and the taxman/licencing authorities) having a real stranglehold upon the way we live in the future. Industries tend not to re-appear once closed down.
Most of the arguments advocating the doom of traditional industry seem, to me, to be made by those who are positioning themselves to gain the most from the lack of choice that will result from the failure of traditional communications industries. Marketing, broadcasting, and publishing industries have a vested interest in making sure this does not happen.
Jon Fennell - 08 May 2009
Mick
10/4 good buddy, all the good numbers to you.
It was good being a pirate, rebellious and slightly underground and then they legalised it!!
Print needs to hold its own and re invent its perceptions, while it sits at the back of the class the upstart Internet will be teachers pet. Analogue what a crap word. Not dead yet
Mick Hart - 08 May 2009
Jon
Analogue isn't a crap word - it stands for pure/real original quality. Digital is nothing more than a row of 1's and 0's and cannot possibly improve on the quality of analogue (real music officianado's will know this). Digital watches are as popular as swine-flu (though not as trendy). Remember, Sinclair's C5 was once the trendy way forward - the internet and digital technology could still go the same way, all it needs is for someone to invest properly in analogue computing and vdu technology. In fact, if I were a betting man (and a
bitlot younger) that is where my money would go. Analogue put man on the moon (allegedly).Mick Hart - 08 May 2009
The really ironic thing is that print inadvertantly triggered off the digital revolution in media. As a method of sharing printed works and information over the web for the academic world, but originally with the development of desk top publishing and photo-typesetting in the 1970's - all way before the internet came about. So our fault completely - can't even blame Webmart for that!
Jon Fennell - 08 May 2009
Where would the Mac be without print, we relied on Betamax instead of VHS. Maybe print just likes the under dogHarry Hill - 08 May 2009
I agree - Apple should champion the industry which has indirectly made it what it is.
On an industrial re-branding front - how about Tangible media - you can't swat a fly with Facebook.
Jon Fennell - 08 May 2009
Tangible Media I like, sounds solid and dependable and yes it swats flys and survives unlike a laptop.
Damn this new fangled technology, Mick how do you fancy helping to re invent Letterpress that had a future once. Proper print and typography, just a little unhealthy the black dust never killed anyone (officially anyway). As least it didn't send you blind!!
TMW as much as you probably feel tempted to make a comment about going blind, resist, not forgotten your other sordid comments yet.
Mick Hart - 08 May 2009
Bring back heavy metal!
The Mighty Wind - 08 May 2009
[quote user="Jon Fennell"]
Tangible Media I like, sounds solid and dependable and yes it swats flys and survives unlike a laptop.
Damn this new fangled technology, Mick how do you fancy helping to re invent Letterpress that had a future once. Proper print and typography, just a little unhealthy the black dust never killed anyone (officially anyway). As least it didn't send you blind!!
TMW as much as you probably feel tempted to make a comment about going blind, resist, not forgotten your other sordid comments yet.
[/quote]
Erm, i would like to point out that no sordid comments were made by myself, re-read the thread in chronological order and hopefully it will all drop into place.
charles litton - 11 May 2009
.............in the current climate I should think that anything that is said by giants should be taken seriously........after all if they had no idea what they were on about they wouldn't be so big and nobody would know that they even existed. Boy am I glad that giants take the time to share their knowledge and predictions with us tiny folk....next time you see a giant don't be afraid...it might be trying to tell you something interesting and worthwhile!
charles litton - 11 May 2009
sorry...............I actually forget what I wanted to say here....................oh yes, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Mick Hart - 12 May 2009
When giants fall, tiny folk get crushed. Giants don't always plan thoroughly for the future (look what happened to them in Harry Potter)
Fidel Churchill - 12 May 2009
From a relative old timer, I despair at progress for the sake of it 'syndrome'.
The latest I-PHONE ad is a classic example. An APP for where you parked your car.
If you can't remember that, then you are clearly a troglodyte who does not deserve such technology in the first place
Reading books on a Nintendo DS, for christ sake how bad is that ,on so many levels!!!!!
Meeting people face to face\(god how people must miss that!), reading real things in real papery form, with a tactile aspect and the smell of ink thrown in.
Taking it to an extreme if we read everything on screen all day everyday, or more to the point, our children do. Our childrens children will at best all have 2" thick glasses made by Pilkington or at worst wander around randomly bumping into trees and walking in front of cars, probably driven by somebody who can't see either!! Oh what a joyous impaired vision!
As you may have gleaned, I genuinely love the smell of fresh ink!
Mick Hart - 12 May 2009
Problem is, the people who drive demand today are the young highly paid troglodytes who you refer to Fidel, even my kids (8 and 9 years) love reading real books, and writing on paper - they are increasingly being taught otherwise at school though by the above. They don't even teach touch typing (basic skill in a computer age surely?), confident that in years to come we will be communicating solely with our thumbs.
Jon Fennell - 12 May 2009
It will be interesting to watch what happens with Maxim on pay to view or on subscription, perhaps this is the advent of niche market mags which have only become niche because of the switch to web.
We live in gizmo times but the fascination only lasts so long, as much as we accept print will not return to old levels its future may have a few more twists to come. Perhaps the Giants have over guessed at users willingness to pay online. The world has gone ''in vogue'' mad, but how many things stand the test of time. Horses for courses, buying and selling online makes sense (Autotrader is a good example, but leisure items may not work so well.
Nick Sadler - 12 May 2009
Jon obviously a quiet day at AMS!!!!
DSTi is very busy today.......
Jon Fennell - 12 May 2009
[quote user="Nick Sadler"]
Jon obviously a quiet day at AMS!!!! DSTi is very busy today.......
[/quote]Things not bad at the moment, holding there own. See Cheshires are going through the JB experience.Saris - 12 May 2009
I like books. I'm old school when it comes to reading, love a newspaper but also like to keep an eye on a newsite when I'm online. When I have a screen on a TV or pc, I like the interactive element of lots of things to skim in seconds, but that's nothing less than what I do with a paper or magazine. For work purposes, I like anything that enables me to do several jobs at once speedily, so technology - great. However, I like making my comments on paper notes for meetings or in journals I purchase for any of my leasure activities. I'd never use my phone for any of the games, yet I'm happy to use it to browse the internet, and I prefer crosswords/sudoku etc to while away the time. I think a daily paper is still one of the best value things we can purchase, be it tabloid or broadsheet.
I get that traditional print may not be everyone's ideal (passionate as I am about this myself, and would be were I outside of the industry), however, I really can't see kids never reading or receiving books for gifts. I can see that the glut of titles all competing for similar dimishing (if we are to believe the research as frameworked for us) audience being rationalised at some point, but that's down to product not evolving as the audience do, surely? Maxim was a niche, new product when it reached our shelves, but competed with other good material. Is that not just plain commerce, rather than the demise of an industry type?
Good for you, Mick, that your kids still use paper. Children in my circle of family and friends all do the same, and reading, getting books gifted, passed on (how many of us kept annuals etc?) etc, and I think there's a completely different social case to be made on education, and the evolution of simple skill sets like reading and writing. My other half is a school governor, and the school has better AV equipment than some companies I've worked for. Yet there's still requirment for reading and writing.
Nah. I may be naive, but as a small child, there's nothing better than making choices with pocket mone for magazines, books etc. And growing up, there comes a point where little replaces not being able to do anything when in a poor service area for getting a signal for downloading/being online than getting out something to read.
Jon Fennell - 12 May 2009
Welcome home Saris, your wisdom has been missed. (so's Dougs who has gone undercover somewhere).
My youngest and her mates seem to have a more traditional outlook which is coming through from the school. She's 9 as well.
She likes dolls, drawing and reading and is 'old school' in the fact she would rather play than sit in front of a screen. As Saris says both her and her sister will by a magazine or comic and seem to enjoy browsing the shelves. Thats not to say they are not pc users but they don't have the same urge to sit and rot in front of it. My eldest (25) who grew up through the techno development age (computer with no sound, modem, increase in speed, broadband) he works and lives on them and for him online is probably the way. What I am trying to say is that maybe the users in the 25 age group are not the same as the 'taken the granted' age groups that are following, they seem to have a place and time for PC use rather than its the answer to everyting.
Its interesting to read that Micks kids and Saris's relatives are similar.
Mick Hart - 12 May 2009
Interesting to think that the technology and software kids are learning at school (and home, mine both use Photoshop, Corel Draw and Quark Xpress) will be completely outdated in 9 or so years time when they leave school, so I can't understand why they aren't taught the basics, touch typing, simple programming, and spreadsheet/data handling whilst they are at the peak of their learning ability/capacity - I suspect that there are severe skills shortages in the age groups which make up most teachers nowadays (20 to 35 years). People my (our?) age learned current computer technology over the last 10 years, from a 'zero' base, and I guess our kids will have to do similar later on when it becomes relevant, so I do think it would be better to teach the basics (the 'analogue' way - Jon's favourite word!) at school while ever they are still interested.
'Not A Doctor' (NDCT) - 12 May 2009
Right - time to liven things up a bit around here!
Here's an extract from an email received by a company I know earlier today. It's from a purchasing manager at a northern university:
Does that nail the lie that it was a 'trade only' service?
Edna Bag - 12 May 2009
That's nice you try and give the guy the benefit of the doubt and then you read this. SB have you the answer to this? You deserve to lose suppliers over this, you would sell your own grandmother from the look of it. More margin errosion. Perhaps you and iPPSA are one of the same.
Time for an independant association for trade only, with its own 'tools', its clear trust is lacking!!!
Edna Bag - 12 May 2009
''Webmart has relaunched its free self-service print management portal, freeprintmanagement.com, as a 'trade-only' site in a move that it claims will help give printers "the print management profits of the future".''
The key is in the last line which should read ''Webmarts profits of the future''
Mick Hart - 13 May 2009
If I were a 'key printer' here (I'm not) I would be checking my framework agreement Contract as said University is clearly looking to buy outside that agreement. Having said that, what a web of deceit has been spun here, even cows know not to c**p on both sides of the fence! If Webmart are selling outside the trade, this fact needs publicising loudly and clearly so that printers are not encouraged to cut their own throats by supporting them. If true this is gross misrepresentation, mis-advertising, and frankly fraudulent abuse of our industry. I'm sure however there is a perfectly rational explanation, and I look forward to hearing it.
Nirav Morvan - 13 May 2009
back to topic... i like to buy vinyl records, they sound warm and fuzzy. a bit like print when it comes out of a photocopier. mmm warm smelly inky copy.
Saris - 13 May 2009
Thanks Lesley, for your encouraging response - much appreciated. Hope you had a good holiday?
Out of interest, does anyone know what the closest is that we may have within the industry to monitor on general business conduct and protocol? That's outside of Terms of Agreement/KPIs/SLAs/Contracts/Order Acknowledgments etc. I smile sadly wryly as I write the latter, as we've all seen these used too much as loophole providers rather than practice perfection..
Mick Hart - 14 May 2009
Hi Saris
I wonder if the deafening silence answers your question? Even IPPSA, BPIF, IPIA et al dont appear to be clamouring to make a claim - seems to me that only the tax-man has any real say as to how businesses are run! Surely our stalwart accreditation industry must have something to say, and where are all the 'consultants' with their answers? Excellent question Saris I'll stick with my first instinct, which was a joke really, and say 'The Inland Revenue'.
Saris - 14 May 2009
I get what you mean Mick, thanks for the response.
OK, so hypothetically, what's a good way to get a response on this? EG - who decides that there needs to be such a thing as FSC? Can there be no way of invoking a generic code of conduct? Is it really too tricky to look at a clean sheet of paper and proffer what hurdles would need to be overcome to get something to cover good practice? There's things like the Queen Elizabeth Investors in People award, but whilst so very worthy, it is not an industry embodiment, so I fear that it's not given the profile it could.
Who can respond please to educate me in what incentives are available within the industry to encourage apprentices, for example? Are there any? And code of practice? It's not unreasonable to have standard rules of government that are practical to try to maintain without impacting on contractual restrictions - I'd like to have a good discussion with anyone who tries to tell me otherwise. Outside of something like CIPS (or similar) on the purchasing side, or accreditation such as Prince or Six Sigma for Project Management, which lets face it, is what buyers do as much as vendors, what, after all the years of tradition and history does our industry have to self govern and protect, and what credible and acheivable steps would need to be frameworked for one to exist? Matt??
Jon Fennell - 14 May 2009
Could be said BPIF should be driving this with UNITE. Good question though. If you go back in time there were associations that laid down standards for apprenticeships and routes to recognised qulaifications City and Guilds being one of them. Training of apprenticeships was monitored and assessed and records kept on and off site, this was part of the indenture process before becoming a Journeyman.
This seemed to become watered down with the introduction of NVQ and companies cutting back on the ammount of apprenticeships offered, certainly this was the case in the last recession. NCDT may remember more on this but I think companies were expected to offer X number of apprenticeships per head count on the business.
It has from a standard point of view slipped in places one of the most notable was lack of training for Mac operators, most of whom are self taught and all build pages differently, I would say the best of them live in print but that is only because they sort out other peoples messes and see different issues. If you go back to hot metal, comps would have been taught type case layout and page build the same way which meant they could work anywhere and to the same standards. Keyboard ops were much the same the only thing separting them was speed and accuracy.
Typography was rigourously taught and clients would have 'House' style which controlled page layout and typo, this was seen as the bible and lines could not be crossed or changed. Early type setters and DTP changed a lot of this and standards dropped, mainly because the controls that existed in letterpress could not be replicated, say within equations where characters could be handset to match ascending or descending requirement.
It seems that the 80's maybe had more to do with the lacking in areas of any standards that used to exist, colour mangement and dot control along with press technology has increased colour standards and yet done nothing for employee standards. So in a nut shell I not sure who does what anymore, from memory it was laid down by BPIF/Union.
Mick Hart - 14 May 2009
Unfortunately, if you can't make money out of it, no one is interested - and that is a sad reflection of our society.
Jon Fennell - 14 May 2009
Mick now who's the defeatest, the new trade association makes more sense all the time how many things could it do good for.Saris - 14 May 2009
Why Jon - you look....different...
Thanks for the response Jon (and Mick). I do remember there were apprentices, and completely see your logic for saying the better ones are in a print environment. OK, so there's a bit of a route to market already in precedence that might be formatted to see how to engage young people back on the print side. Data protection sort of leads on how to account manage in DM (remembering that horrible business term, quick and dirty) - there's some solutions already mapped really.
Now for the biggy. Outside of Gentlemanly conduct (iso not peeing on other's cornflakes - excuse the venacular - long day..) how do we entice business integrity to be seen as having commercial value and therefore status? Let's all live in LaLa land for a moment, and assume anything might be possible?
Jon Fennell - 14 May 2009
Corporate offering a working partnership would be a start, makes a relationship more stable and open.
Supplier loyalty overall together with mutual respect and honesty for starters
Saris - 14 May 2009
Agreed Jon - good points. What do we think could be a way to get meat on the bones of that? The relationship needs to fit in both directions and still leave room for healthy competition. Not 100% of any party will ever agree, but how is the best way to set parameters. Do we have a statute that industry acknowledged bodies like the DMA would need to sign up to? Advise their members? We are, after all, talking about best practice throughout the business.
Further, we mentioned apprentices, but also, in an earlier part of this thread, great points were made about people of a certain age picking up skillsets (predominantly IT?) 'on the job'. The most successful businesses I worked for cross trained, and not to just the degree of working in an area for 12 months and moving on, which I know happens in some corporates. Looks great on paper, but continuity etc isn't always managed to best effect.
Would it be an independent body that would also need to be an adjudicater with very aggresive SLAs in terms of dispute? Would this need to be supported by volunteers/mentors in the industry, to manage costs?
Jon Fennell - 14 May 2009
For any of this to work it would need a independant body who create the criteria and monitor and and assess, much the same way engineering is assessed for training. Ideally such bodies should be government/industry funded this gives ownership. Sliding scale should be used to allow all to use such a scheme and maximise buy in. This then sets an industry standard, with no exclusion. Current schemes (although I know little on these seem to favour larger companies).
The standards are carried nationally by recognised training schemes, maybe apprentcies should be trained at one plant or recognised teaching plants (much the same as NHS) on block periods, 6 in 6 out, this would hopefully encourage best practice as the apprentice would pass on new ways. Rotation during apprenticeship was the norma at one point with the trainee working in each department for a month, this helped them to understand postion in business as well as how his actions affected the process. Gave a good balance.
Employee/employer would be the next angle, I feel employees should have representation at board level for works related business (not all), where management and employees can talk freely and share points, this then creates some understanding at both levels and balances out discord. With introduction of standard practice and good communication across the business integrity will start to follow as all have a vested interest and adopt best practice. I guess you could say integrity starts at home.
Saris - 14 May 2009
OK - again, good points well made Jon.
That covers much of the people related areas, though I still wonder on how to manage situations like the Webmart highlighted. Working through your points, question: should a buyer flag the approach to their business, and then make recommendations to the stakeholders? What if the vendor approaches at board level, offering savings - how is this managed? My handling would be to let my business know of the contact, but stating that this was outside the parameters of an understanding with incumbents. I actually wrote 'agreement', then changed it to 'understanding' . I think we all must have experienced having to go off roster for some reason, for where rosters exist.
What level of circumstances would initiate a vendor/buyer being able to go to arbitration? What's the criteria? Remember, we're talking about situations not necessarily covered by SLA/KPI/Contract etc, though I guess it could be where this has plainly been broken - however, we're talking the philosophy of integrity. Would this include a company looking at board level at outsourcing their print management? If not, what drives the distinction? If it does, would it the Official Body be there to arbitrate that fair play is done to incumbent vendors, assuming any staff issues are dealt with in a timely and professional manner by the HR dept of the business seeking this service?
'Not A Doctor' (NDCT) - 14 May 2009
Jon - I don't go back that far so can't say how things were with numbers of apprentices required proportionate to the workforce.
But I do think you are well out of touch with the current situation. The situation has been corrupted by government money, and what a total waste it has been too.
The current apprenticeship 'framework' is reasonably OK, but the big failing is the quality of teaching, as you'd expect from a system that looks like social services monitoring a child on an 'at risk' register. You get an occasional visit from someone you hardly know, some forms get filled out, and when they think they have no further reason to visit, they sign off and that's it.
Someone here needs to take the initiative and call a meeting for interested companies to meet up and chat.
Jon Fennell - 14 May 2009
NCDT your right its years since I've seen an apprentice, let alone been involved with training, thats quite a sad statement for 5 companies
Saris - 15 May 2009
NCDT - nice to hear from you. Jon, you've changed - again!! I can't keep up..
I'd be interested in putting some time in to see what needs to be done, though would like a bit of a steer to what already may be out there. It might be worth setting up another thread, as maybe there could be some worthy contributors who aren't looking at this. I'm going to drop a note to Matt to see what he suggests. If we're serious, and I am, though spurred by much of the dialogue I've had with you chaps on The Rules, then I'd like to see where this can go. I'd even be prepared to drop my anonononononimity if the cause were worthy enough...
Saris - 15 May 2009
Just to confirm, have dropped an email to Matt on the above. I am aware that we can at any time as community members start a new thread, but wanted his input (and memory!) to see what's been done prior, is there anything he/additional brains at Printweek, could shed light on in terms of what is/has been around, and the best way to pitch it with a wider audience, dependent upon how much/little Printweek would want to get behind this. Maybe driving the editorial, that type of thing? However, any other suggestions? Did I miss anything?
Jon Fennell - 15 May 2009
[quote user="Saris"]
OK - again, good points well made Jon.
Webmart highlighted. Working through your points, question: should a buyer flag the approach to their business, and then make recommendations to the stakeholders? What if the vendor approaches at board level, offering savings - how is this managed? My handling would be to let my business know of the contact, but stating that this was outside the parameters of an understanding with incumbents. I actually wrote 'agreement', then changed it to 'understanding' . I think we all must have experienced having to go off roster for some reason, for where rosters exist.
What level of circumstances would initiate a vendor/buyer being able to go to arbitration? What's the criteria? Remember, we're talking about situations not necessarily covered by SLA/KPI/Contract etc, though I guess it could be where this has plainly been broken - however, we're talking the philosophy of integrity. Would this include a company looking at board level at outsourcing their print management? If not, what drives the distinction? If it does, would it the Official Body be there to arbitrate that fair play is done to incumbent vendors, assuming any staff issues are dealt with in a timely and professional manner by the HR dept of the business seeking this service?
[/quote]Saris, I'm wondering who's integrity we are discussing or rather a conundrum, are we talking buyer protection or having ones cake and eating it?
It seems you are trying to say I can save a company money with the info I have but a) have some loyalty to a supply chain on rosta but will buy off rosta if price suits b) My own position may be threatened if I release this information.
Integrity is a two way street, you get what you deserve and contracts can always be broken. If a business (such as in the Webmart case) feels its can save and trys to be 'straight' by inviting existing suppliers to use Webmarts tool, (best of both) it depends on whether those suppliers are exclusive to that system OR put in a position where they have to reduce costs to compete with the sharks.
The other question is would the suppliers on the said rosta talk and jointly challenge the contract given the legal cost that could be involved, maybe this would be course worth pursuing if it was proved loss of profit through breach of contract. Not heard of many clients 'buying there way out' and contracts are normally weighted against supplier.
From this viewpoint supplier integrity is not the problem but the clients is. Its difficult to see a client agreeing to arbitration in an instance where they are the instigator or could be. The boots on the wrong foot and supplier needs client more than client needing supplier.
Saris - 15 May 2009
Why having one's cake and eating it?
To your point, I wasn't suggesting going off roster when it suits - if that's how my comment came over, then that was wrong. If a service isn't available, for timing issues on anything from supplies or machine space, then that's a valid reason for going off rota, not an excuse to duck a commitment.
And again, yes, with earlier quoted examples of my own experience, the worst situations I was ever put in was once at the start of my career on the purchasing side, and one within last 5 years, and both times, it was a tricky thing to do, but that's business. I would have felt better had there been something I could use to quote in terms of statute rather than having to rely on just myself. It's not something that's everyone would be comfortable doing, but surely that's the point of what we were discussing? Buyers are put in awful positions sometimes (I trust that we're discounting those that just like the buzz of getting money off from a vendor, and yep, they're plentiful too), and that's down to the Company they work for. Equally, there are some vendors who love the 'wheel and deal' rather than what some of would say the bigger picture of it being the wrong way street.
My question was, is there anything that could be done, per se, on a broader level, to legislate where it's bad practice that's at work, whichever direction it's coming from. If this was a potential, would it not contribute towards derisking the requirement for arbitration, and consequentialy, from client automatically having such a loaded position?
Jon Fennell - 15 May 2009
I having ones cake and eating offended apologies but have seen off rosta to many times.
If such legistlation was in force, it could be argued that through contract/KPI/SLA or one off instruction which is accepted by either party its has been agreed to waiver any other ruling and stepped outside of generally accepted terms. This puts you back in the same place. If you read some T&C's the issuer can technically accept the other parties terms and kill their own by simply placing an order. If bad practice is proven and outside of agreement, terms or legistlation, I would hope IF commercially practical the breach is pursued. If suppliers had access to free solicitors no doubt this would be far more prevailent especially on a no win no fee basis. If a business to looking to use legistlative power it would seem arbitration has failed or will not force the issue as they can't afford the legal bill.
What sort of protection are you thinking about it seems you have a specific situation, or maybe I'm just being thick which is more than possible..
Matt Whipp - 15 May 2009
Gosh, that's a horribly nebulous knot to unravel here. So you want an industry-wide standard that those that adopt it would agree to certain levels of honourable conduct, something that would recognised outside the industry (ie upstream with print buyers and presumably would apply to them in some way in terms of the conduct you expect in return - prompt payment etc), but also applies to how they engage with staff, apprentices, training and so on, as well as some kind of recourse to address any issues of non-compliance?
I think it's really interesting to explore this. It sounds like you need to nail what the biggest problem you want to address is, move forward on that by getting in some core key support and expand it to include the nice-to-haves once you've proved the model.
Mick Hart - 15 May 2009
Hi Saris
Re
'Webmart highlighted. Working through your points, question: should a buyer flag the approach to their business, and then make recommendations to the stakeholders? What if the vendor approaches at board level, offering savings - how is this managed? My handling would be to let my business know of the contact, but stating that this was outside the parameters of an understanding with incumbents. I actually wrote 'agreement', then changed it to 'understanding' . I think we all must have experienced having to go off roster for some reason, for where rosters exist.'
I only suggested that said University might possibly be involved in a Framework Agreement, as this is usually (sadly) the case nowadays. Such an agreement is usually worded to exclude non-participants, and is legally binding. It would therefore be prudent of the buyer to both make the 'approacher' aware of the contractual situation, and offer to provide a PQQ to that vendor when the contract(s) becomes due for review, and inform the incumbent suppliers about the approach, and the means taken in dealing with that approach. If such a contract does not exist, the suppliers would be well within their right to object strongly anyway in the Webmart case (in my opinion) as the approach does not seem to concur with the advertised ethics or policies of that company - and there would be nothing to lose by doing so in any case. Unfortunately there seems to be little (or no) protection in law against anything which is not obviously criminal, and if you haven't a contract to protect you, you might as well resort to free-for-all tactics being used by your adversaries/competitors, depending on the situation, and the amount of collateral damage your business might incur. As for going 'off roster', in my experience it is normal to allow incumbent suppliers to outsource work in the first instance, and if that fails due to the nature of the service required, inform them of the proposed outsourcing, thus keeping them on-side.
Framework agreements in general, as I understand it, exclude the involvement of a 'middleman' (in this case Webmart) as the contract is between the buyer and each supplier individually, and always expressly excludes collusion with outside parties. This of course would depend upon the agreement (but would almost certainly exclude Webmart in this scenario)
Your idea for setting industry standards to control these dubious practices is a good one, but would be extremely hard to enforce in practice, as it would involve literally everyone agreeing to and adopting them. Legislation might be a possible way forward, but the argument against would be that of loss of free trade, and would be unacceptable to many. I believe there are many legal weapons already in place - the main problem being that we do not have a national body (and I include HM Gov in this generalisation) to publicise or enforce them, and mere scruples and pride seem to have disappeared completely.
Mick
Saris - 15 May 2009
Jon - you didn't offend. I note that some of my contributions are wordy, and so try to mange my edit - I questioned you in case by doing this, I'd not been clear enough, that's all. And I definately wouldn't question your wisdom, either.
I think if we proceed with this even as an exercise, we should all appreciate that we've all seen and experienced, maybe even been made to action, bad practice. I think it's good to maintain an amount of cynacism as a leveller, but not be put off by hurdles too early in the proceedings.
To your points Matt, and thanks for jumping on, yes, it's an ambitious task - even if it ends up being only an exercise. My initial fatigue prompting me to write initially was in response to the bad things happening all around us. Wondering what could be done to learn from what the industry is going through, and how to avoid, or at least, is it possiblt to manage, some of the fall out.
Again, using FSC as an example (as it's an accreditation, not a legality) there's clear lines on what you can and can't do. If you do anything outside of their guidelines, you lose their accreditation. People may stop buying from you because you lost it, but you broke it in the first place and that's the consequence (I've yet to hear of anyone losing it through a genuine mistake).
I'd like to explore this further. In terms of nailing what the issues are, I personally think that top line integrity to commerce is the leading umbrella under which training, payments and everything else potentially would fall. A Corporate Commercial Concience policy can be multi faceted. The nice-to-haves should bubble thorugh if the core elements are in place. I say this without trying to be naive, as I know it won't be without issues.
So, to initiate a Corporate Commercial Concience policy for our industry, top line, what would be the key things we'd want to see addressed if we had a clean sheet of paper?
Here's some of mine, not necessarily in order of merit:
- Training. More recognition of apprenticeships, the companies actively investing in these schemes (not just processing them) and good practice in terms of getting the rest of the business in shape with cross training.
- Relationship Management. Training in, and corporate recognition of, service providers, but rules in place for the service providers too, eg, if a traunch of mailing is missed and goes out late to deadline, don't let it be client that tells you because their seeds have not been received.
- Payment. EG if a payment is late, could notification go to senior management at the corporation owing the funds (to my prevoius point, yep, I know there's places that this wouldn't make a difference)? Can the terms of late payment be as visible as a standard credit check?
- Code of Conduct. There's much of me that thinks that these should be generic, what you would and wouldn't do to someone else's cornflakes.
Have I missed something blindingly obvious that wouldn't fall into the above. Oh, and I prefer odd to even numbers on something like this so we do need one more to satisfy my mild flirtation with OCD...
Saris - 15 May 2009
Mick - I've just seen your response come up on my email. I'm sorry to have used the Webmart reference as readily and consequentially, flippently as I did.
I can see you're not cross with me about it, but the fact that you've taken effort to explain further your sharing of the note shows me that I've ill quoted it as an example, so my apologies. Let me know if I've got to go further to repair anything - no drama if I do and I'll give it immediate attention.
In terms of enforcement of any policy, maybe, like any project, once we've got listed what needs to be addressed, we can then risk score them. Any creeping over a certain category, we can elevate to something that becomes an issue of proposed legislation, any below that can still be given a rating. Not concentrating on the negative alone, anything that is great, we can rate and reward. Anything that can be seen as being trying to be great, we can maybe refer to corporate mentors on improvement in an effort to succeed.
A good mixture of carrot and stick?
Mick Hart - 15 May 2009
Saris - stop apologising! I agree with your view completely, and this highlights just how many facets there are to the overall problem, how many different angles have to be dealt with by any all encompassing policy. A starting point, as you say, would be to list what needs to be addressed - might need a big piece of paper, but could get the ball roling with a simple questionnaire. Sure thing is that the more people are involved from the start, the more eventual support is likely
Mick
Saris - 15 May 2009
Ah Mick - you're not used to me yet. Can't expect back what I'm not prepared to do, and understood why you wanted clarity on your original point. It's not beyond the realms that it might have been taken badly by someone which wouldn't have been your fault, hence me dealing with it quickly. Still, get you're saying, though under other circumstances, be aware I may not have been so greasy, hombre...
OK, big big piece of paper it is. And there's still only four points on my earlier email. AND I've just looked up OCD for clarity - my, was I hard on myself! Maybe I've just got a tidy mind..
I'm happy to initiate another forum, though Matt - has there been anything earlier in the forum history that's close to this that I need to avoid/make reference to?
Jon Fennell - 15 May 2009
You havn't just listed 4 points each point is only a header for a category.
Are you suggesting (may be a dense question) that individual company policy and procedure becomes legistlated. Asking this because of your earlier response to missing seeds, which would apply procedurally and change for each part of process.
To build this parameters need to be set as to controllable and not, local policy or national and what allowance or diviation is allowed. For instance would an SME have to fit under the same guidelines as Groups and if not what levels and breaks are set?. This is relevant to each of the 4 headings.
Is the same CCD applicable to client at one point I thought it was but now fuddled, is industry based or applies to all. Can the stick be applied to client?
Matt Whipp - 15 May 2009
I think Jon has a good point there. To get this kind of thing up and running you're probably most likely to want to pilot it through the bigger names in the industry in order to give it the gravitas it deserves, but you'll need to make it both applicable to SMEs and something that's easy to implement (I'm sure the last thing you want is for any such accreditation to become a them and us, where only those with the resources have the ability to gain the accreditation).
Saris - 15 May 2009
Jon/Matt - I agree to your points.
Jon, I think if there's to be any sort of model, it needs to be something that is suitable for all, as it's supposed to help all. It'll take a combination of contributers to set the frameworks, hence me asking questions. I do use some points literally, like the one you noted re the missing mail, but it was under the same heading as Relationship management so I was trying to highlight fairplay to and for all.
To address your query on my use of the term legislation. My feeling is that certain things are illegal if a contract is broken. Since we're talking about suggested code of practice, which would have to be concentrated upon outside of general print contracts etc, for clarity, I'll only use the term legislation if it's for something that is deemed of needing to be lobbied on to become law. Certain Phoenix companies would be a good topic (target?) for that! Broken payment promises that result in smaller companies going under may be another - deeming a chain of responsibility maybe from a larger company not playing by the rules, extending payment terms without discussion etc, no matter how unintentional it's been. These are two suggestions/examples I can think of immediately.
Matt, I do take your point in piloting through bigger names, and an easy implementation.
Finally, Jon - my view is that the stick should be applied to anyone. I can't see what the point of having this is if it gives a particular relationship partner an added advantage, ie, you need me to buy my service so... Not to contradict myself, to ensure that this is workable, maybe prior to floating anything, part of the research process is that we can get a sanity check from companies, client or vendor, to see how close to any of the criteria they hit, and why they have the responses they do. Are we asking things in the correct way etc.
Jon Fennell - 15 May 2009
Hi again Saris
The reason I mentioned you missing mail comment was because it opens a whole can of worms beyong Client Relationship and calls into the offing production procedure, in order to handle expectation, systems have to be able to report and highlight failings that caused the problem and then be fixed. In order to create standardisation of practice across all partys, contributors would have to come from broad spectrum on business, parts of system used by corporate or large company would not always apply. It may also be the case that SME's could make an observation relevant to all.
Matt Whipp - 18 May 2009
Are you guys aware of the institute of business ethics? Something I heard on BBC breakfast the other day that I filed away for this...
http://www.ibe.org.uk/
Saris - 19 May 2009
Hi Matt - thanks, I saw this and have also booked some of my freebie entitlement at the IoD to find out a bit more. Won't be there until next week, but will have a look around the site you listed.To post comments please log in here