Hiring Sir Alan
He's famous for saying, "you're fired".
But should he have been hired?
As you'll have seen elsewhere, . He's not going to be a minister. He says himself he's not going to be involved in devising policy. He sees his role as tub-thumper-in-chief for entrepreneurs, in the corridors of Whitehall.
Throughout his career, he's always been a man who excites strong views. But the opinions about him doing this job are especially tart.
I asked this question on this morning - is Sir Alan the right person to tell Government about enterprise?
, who you might remember from her own recent appearance on Working Lunch, says Sir Alan has "grass roots experience, fire in his belly and a gut instinct". He is, she says, "perfect for it".
(If there was a club for entrepreneurs with firm opinions on life and business, both Sylvia and Sir Alan would qualify for life membership.)
"Katiemoffat" wrote that it's easy to be "sniffy" about his credentials, but "he's done it and he lives and breathes enterprise."
And UKBI - a body which supports business incubation and innovation - tweeted me to say it was a step in the right direction. "We need more real business people advising on real measures to grow small and medium sized businesses."
But not everyone agrees that Sir Alan is a sweet appointment.
"Mikejulietbravo" called it a publicity stunt. "DavidWorsfold" wrote that Sir Alan is "just celebrity window dressing". "Simeonides" holds the opinion that Sir Alan "has nothing to teach business".
"MTFlanders" slammed it as a "cosmetic decision" and asked why the Government didn't hire a business icon like Sir Terry Leahy. (Sir Terry is a member of the Prime Minister's Business Council.)
There are many other views - you can see them all .
And of course you can add your own comments here.
As a 80s teenager, my lasting impression of Sir Alan is of a man who made technology an affordable tool of the general public. There's an Amstrad PCW somewhere in my parent's attic. Unfortunately, there's also one of his Emailer phones, little used and unloved - then again, innovation will always produce success alongside failure.
He's also walking, talking proof that anyone with enough talent and self-belief can try to make their fortune, whatever their background.
The popularity of The Apprentice TV programme has rammed that message home for a new generation.
But he faces criticism from two groups that he may want to win over when he's "Enterprise Tsar".
The first is the business community. Some there think his most successful days as an entrepreneur were a long time ago. They think he crossed the line from commercial business to show business years ago. They ask - does he really represent what we in business think?
The second is from those who campaign for employees' rights. Sir Alan has been noticeably chilly on workplace issues like childcare. There has also been criticism about his own managerial manner, which is seen by some as overly abrasive. They ask - how can someone with these views work within a Government that has passed laws to give new mothers and fathers time off, that has extended the rights of part-time workers and which criticises bullying in the workplace?
Perhaps Sir Alan needs some more time in the Apprentice café to think all that over?
Comment number 1.
At 8th Jun 2009, mesmerizing commenter wrote:Let me make this clear, I dont like Alan Sugar. But he is qualified and hes a good person for the job. I dont like his abrasive and bullying nature (and i dont watch the apprentice its painful), but I do like his straighforward "cut to the chase" attitude.
Not sure why everyone that helps the government has to be a lord or made a lord though...whats that about? A bribe? Do you need to be a lord to influence in certain circles?
Theres nothing worse that getting a bunch of highly paid and well positioned people in a room and watching them talk about high end flannel and coming to no concrete conclusions after. We do need people who will shout "why not, just go and do it". Perhaps Sugar will cut through that and bang some heads.
We have to get around this idea that someone has to be "connected" in the government to run important initiatives. Rather than making it essential for them to know government and putting their ability in a sector second, we should take the best person from industry/science etc, then if necessary provide them with a liason who will cut through the politics.
Though if I were presenting a new business I think I might rather present it to a banker than Alan Sugar, the latter is much more scary and likely to end in shouting.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 8th Jun 2009, mesmerizing commenter wrote:Regarding your pieces on innovation:
I think we always miss the important issue here. We do it everytime we call Mr. Baylis the inventor of the clock work radio when hes introduced. He is not, he is much more than that, he is someone who found a clever market for an idea that was not new. Thats what makes a business.
I made a clockwork radio as a child in the 70's, I connected a clock mechanism to a motor and the output of the motor to a transistor portable radio. I'm sure i wasnt the first. But I looked at it and thought how old fashioned and inconvenient it was compared to batteries.
The genious of Trevor Baylis was realising that batteries were hard to come by in poorer parts of Africa and finding a market and doing the real work in making a product and marketing it. He then managed to make it an icon, so rich people bought them aswell.
Dyson spent years and a huge amount of money turning the already successful industrial vortex idea into a vacumn cleaner. It was his tenacity and funky product design and marketing, that made his product.
Thats the art of sucessful invention, its being about to see how an idea can go to market. The world is full of people who had kinda the same idea, and what seperates them from the succesful ones is only occasionally a patent. Mostly its the way they were able to market their idea.
You dont have to be a marketer, just along with the vision for your invention, you need to have the vision for how it can be marketed. And perhaps huge tenacity.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)