Document

NORTH WEST DEVELOPMENT AGENCY

NORTH WEST BUSINESS SUPPORT SIMPLIFICATION EVENT, 1 AUGUST - GROUP

FEEDBACK

Final Report

August 2007

Regeneris Consulting Ltd

One Ashley Road

Altrincham, Cheshire

WA14 2DT

Tel: 0161 926 9214

Fax: 0161 926 8545

Web: www.regeneris.co.uk

North West Business Support Simplification Event, 1 August - Group Feedback

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. KEY MESSAGES 2

3. WORKSHOP FEEDBACK 5

A-00350


Ref: A-00350

Page 1

1. Introduction

1.1 This report provides detailed feedback from the North West Business Support Simplification

event which took place on 1st August at Manchester’s Lowry Centre. The aim of the exercise

was to provide a region wide opportunity for all organisations in the business support

landscape to contribute to the consolidated regional response to the DTI consultation

Simplifying Business Support. The consultation was launched in June 2007 and concludes in

September 2007. Delegates attended one of six workshop sessions, and were asked to

address a number of the 16 consultation questions posed by the DTI. These questions were

grouped into themes for the workshops.

Workshop Themes DTI Questions

1. National Offers & Local

Needs: Does the proposed national portfolio of 24

business support offers help partners in the North West

implement BSSP?

Q1 Do you think the business support outlined in Figure 2

and at Annex A adequately covers the key needs of business and helps achieve public policy aims outlined in this

document? Q5 Do the business support themes make it easier for you to

know what publicly-funded support is available to meet the

needs of your business? Are they the right themes? Q6 To what extent will reducing the amount of branded

business support make it easier to know what is available to meet the needs of your business?

2. Access Points: How can

Business Link be supported to become the primary

gateway of publicly funded

business support?

Q8 How can Business Link be further developed to meet

business and government needs consistent with this policy? Q9 How can business support services make best use of

Business Link as the primary access channel for business?

3. Efficiency & Effectiveness:

How can services be improved to increase

efficiency whilst continuing

to tackle business needs in the region and maintaining

impact on business performance?

Q2 Where do you see duplication in publicly-funded business

support? Q3 Where do you feel support is adequately provided by the

private sector, thereby reducing the need for public sector

support? Q4 What publicly-funded business support do you regard as

being of the highest priority? Q7 How can the delivery of business support be better

arranged to minimise customer confusion and achieve economies of scale?

4. Intelligence: How should

we gather and utilise information on impact and

performance?

Q12 If you have experience of using publicly-funded

business support, what were the costs to you of finding out what was available to meet your needs?

Q13 How much do you think our proposals could reduce your costs in looking for and understanding publicly-funded

business support?

Q14 How far do you agree with our initial estimates of the benefits and costs of simplifying publicly-funded business

support? Q15 Are there other benefits or costs to the proposals?

5. Co-ordination &

Oversight: At what level is decision-making about

business support provision best undertaken?

Q10 Do you agree with the proposed strategic oversight of

business support? Q11 Is there another option that you think we should

consider and how would you justify it? Q16 How far will our proposals make it simpler for business

to know what publicly-funded business support is available and how to access it?


Ref: A-00350

Page 2

2. Key Messages

2.1 A review of the feedback from the six workshop sessions drew out the following key

messages.

Theme 1: National Offers & Local Needs

2.2 The proposed business support framework was broadly welcomed. However, delegates

pointed to a need for more detail about what would be constituted by the individual business

support ‘offers’.

2.3 There were particularly strong views about the need for local flexibility to be maintained in

some form, along with the need to be able to tailor services to the needs of clients.

Delegates emphasised the continued need for a local presence. Substantial expertise is

already embedded in the system and this should be recognised. Examples of local

differences include:

• Specific needs of BME communities;

• Needs of deprived communities;

• Industrial areas and the contrast with the needs of rural areas.

2.4 Some concern was evident over the overlap between the different categories in the

framework (eg. start ups)

2.5 A number of potential gaps were highlighted, including:

• Sites and premises;

• Micro-business support;

• Marketing (see below);

• Enterprise in deprived communities;

• Support for sectors;

• HR and recruitment;

• Social enterprise;

• Inclusion agenda.

2.6 Several groups singled out the importance of marketing and ‘routes’ to market. Emphasis on

international marketing possibly overlooks the significance of companies’ operating in

domestic markets.

2.7 A number of delegates raised the questions of support with legal and regulatory obligations

and suggested that this should be incorporated.

2.8 There was some potential for businesses to remain confused. This particularly related to the

role of Business Link, with some uncertainty about where the service ‘started’ in the

framework, and the utility of a generalised service when many businesses required specialist

assistance from the outset.

Theme 2: Access Points

2.9 Business Link needs to ensure that its services are well publicised from the outset. One or

two concerns were expressed about the timetable for the simplification process and the need

to raise awareness quickly of the changes taking place and the new services on offer.

Broadly, the single branding concept was welcomed.


Ref: A-00350

Page 3

2.10 A related issue was the degree to which the marketing of Business Link should be tailored to

specific types of business/entrepreneur (eg. BME communities, women entrepreneurs).

2.11 Several groups raised the issue of confidence in Business Link, and there appeared to be

some uncertainty about whether the proposed changes would strengthen the reputation of

Business Link with businesses and providers. Its ability to establish its credibility at an early

stage would be a significant factor in the determining its success.

2.12 Some concerns were also expressed about whether Business Link would continue to offer a

service that was sufficiently flexible for locally specific requirements. This would need to be

balanced by the imperative to reduce duplication, although this was recognised by some

delegates as a difficult balance to strike.

2.13 Good quality information held and distributed by Business Link, along with the continued

availability of experts, would be important factors in the success of the IDB service. This

information needs to be accessible to businesses and providers, and web based tools could

play an important part in achieving this. Developing the supplier database was acknowledged

by some delegates as a difficult challenge.

2.14 Points were raised about the relationship between Business Link and providers. Would this

be sufficiently impartial, and would it enable businesses to access the appropriate specialist

support? One or two groups highlighted a particular need for sector specialists. There

should be stronger links with other organisations (eg. LSC), and several delegates saw

Business Link as potentially having a coordinating role.

2.15 One or two groups suggested that funding should be separate from the assessment of the

needs of the business.

Theme 3: Efficiency and Effectiveness

2.16 There were clear messages about the need to simplify and consolidate the target framework.

One group described the issue as a ‘low hanging fruit’ problem. It might be more appropriate

to focus on outcomes than outputs. Government could assist by taking a harder look at

evaluating the effectiveness of an intervention and simplify the target system. More external

verification of impact would be useful.

2.17 Strong quality assurance arrangements and clarity in the contracting process were seen as

key factors in reducing the potential for duplication and ensuring the credibility of services.

2.18 Issues about the accessibility and openness of Business Link were echoed under this theme.

This applied in equal measure to other public sector agencies and the private sector, and

would be a significant factor in creating an effective service.

2.19 A number of delegates suggested that a sectoral focus would be the most effective approach,

but there was no consensus on this issue. Others felt that particular communities and/or

geographical areas should be targeted.

2.20 Local and regional strategies and solutions need to be aligned (i.e. ERDF and Local Area

Agreements).

2.21 Several delegate suggested that emphasis on market failure should be balanced with a focus

on social equity. For example, start ups in deprived communities and worklessness need to

be addressed as a means to tackle social challenges.

2.22 Getting the Business Link service right would be important. Businesses would need good

quality advice from people with the right sort of knowledge. Business Link needs to


Ref: A-00350

Page 4

demonstrate the benefits of intervention and offer options for which the business itself can

take the final decision.

Theme 4: Intelligence

2.23 There was a broad array of suggestions about how intelligence might be improved. Issues

raised included:

• The possibility of a standardised information gathering approach and collection point.

• The importance of good quality feedback, perhaps through customer satisfaction

surveys.

• The need to draw on existing good practice and the expertise of local providers.

• The idea of a Regional Forum to interpret national and local data/impacts.

Theme 5: Coordination and Oversight

2.24 There was general support for the principle of co-ordination and oversight lying at the

regional level, but it will be vital that local differences in economic need and circumstance are

reflected in any decision-making. Responsibility should be devolved to the lowest possible

level. Greater understanding of how national and regional schemes are delivered within sub-

regional and local areas is needed, to avoid duplication of activity at the local level.

2.25 It was also argued that business must be represented on the key decision-making bodies (i.e.

tapping in to the opinion of real businesses). The co-ordination/oversight committee must

seek/utilise intelligence on the private sector business support market, as an input into its

decision-making process on which types of interventions require public support.

2.26 However, publicly funded provision should be about more than just filing a gap in the private

sector market. The co-ordinating/oversight committee must play a key role in identifying

opportunities for investment (i.e. where returns on investment are likely to be greatest),

rather than simply looking for private sector gaps to fill.

2.27 Accountability of those delivering publicly funded business support was felt to be an

important issue. The question was raised about whether local interventions should be

explictly expected to contribute towards Local Area Agreement (LAA) goals. Maximisation of

value for money should be a key objective of any co-ordination/oversight of business support.

2.28 Lastly, the co-ordination and oversight body must priovide clarity over the process of

implenting business support simplification in the region. Currently, there are too many

general statements, and it is the detailed arrangements that are most important.


Ref: A-00350

Page 5

3. Workshop Feedback

3.1 This section contains the responses from each of the six breakout groups. Each group was

asked to consider the questions relating to theme 1 (National Offers and Local Needs) and

theme 2 (Access Points) along with one of the remaining three themes. Rapporteurs were

asked to record key points from the discussions which were conducted in sub-groups. This

feedback is provided below.


Ref: A-00350

Page 6

Group 1 Responses

Workshop Theme TABLE 1

Broadly OK as a tool-kit; it is sufficiently broad and as long as it can

be adapted in future to respond to business needs/demand. But, this

does raise the question as to what the review process is. It is unclear whether regulatory assistance and incubation/managed workspace

(and indeed other forms of property provision) are included.

1. National Offers &

Local Needs: Does

the proposed national portfolio of

24 business support offers help partners

in the North West implement BSSP?

The framework does need to be tested against different stages of the business development from start-up, onwards and including micro-

businesses. Different marketing approaches as well as different

services may be required at each stage. It is unclear how hand-holding businesses through the process (including inward

investment) of developing their businesses is incorporated; this could be thought of as after-care.

Business Link, they need to be able to guide/hand hold businesses

through the process of accessing and implementing business support.

2. Access Points:

How can Business

Link be supported to become the primary

gateway of publicly funded business

support?

There is a need to embrace the knowledge platform, but this does need to adapt to local circumstances (e.g. in LEGI areas) through

local business communications strategies in order to build business

confidence.

Need to be clear about the quality assurance process for business

support deliverers, linked to an evolving product catalogue (using an

ebay type response). Perhaps in the second phase, Business Link should encourage professional standards of advice in the public and

private sector (this may even stimulate growth of the market too).

There is an on-going debate and the role of sub-regions and local areas and how Business Link can respond to local needs and fill

knowledge gaps.

3. Efficiency &

Effectiveness: How

can services be improved to increase

efficiency whilst continuing to tackle

business needs in the region and

maintaining impact

on business performance?


Ref: A-00350

Page 7


The framework does appear broad enough; however interest will be

in the detail which we cannot answer yet. Q6 depends on the strength of the brand and communication of it.


Local Needs: Does the proposed

national portfolio of 24 business support

offers help partners


Is there too much of an assumption that all business want to grow?

Support needs to include assistance for survival and support for

social benefit and for lifestyle businesses.

Regular contact with business support providers is needed in order to

understand what is available. Web content needs to improve to provide information on products.

2. Access Points:

How can Business Link be supported to

become the primary gateway of publicly

funded business support?

There is a need to be able refer businesses into Business Link as well

as out and for Business Link to better market themselves.

Simplification really requires a consolidation of targets and eligibility criteria from funding bodies.

3. Efficiency & Effectiveness: How


efficiency whilst

continuing to tackle business needs in the

region and maintaining impact


Need to “unshackle” advisors to be more biased about

recommendations (more like the private sector) and provide customer ratings to back this up.


Ref: A-00350

Page 8


Confused by the process and the lack of information to consult upon.

There appear to be gaps around micro-business support i.e. growth & continuation planning plus business expansion and survival. Need

to move away from the defined clusters and involve more small businesses.




offers help partners in the North West

implement BSSP?

The framework will help, but it is unclear what constraints will be in

place at the local level and who will police it.

There is benefit in having a strong Business Link brand, although it

needs to have contact details on every support programme. This will move away from local knowledge, support and involvement. Is one

access point the best way forward? Should consider sharing information of the progress of enquiries. Business Link needs to know

what is out there from local authorities, enterprise agencies etc. And need to be more than just a catalogue . Better understanding of the

gaps and better alignment between programmes will help.

2. Access Points:




There is a fundamental problem for businesses in knowing what

Business Link does offer. Need to link the service to those sources

which small businesses tend to go to for advice. Should also think about a service/price comparison type web service too.

Triage for business enquiries so they can be directed to right action.

Need to: • get the right staff doing the right job and investing in

their market knowledge

• follow-up on advice given

• sit down with a person who understands their needs

• provide a well-balanced and considered responses (not

an immediate one necessarily) • develop a relationship for the future.

3. Efficiency &

Effectiveness: How can services be

improved to increase efficiency whilst


region and

maintaining impact on business

performance?


Ref: A-00350

Page 9

Group 2 Responses

Workshop Theme

Generally, the broad picture was supported, although partners

requested clarity about what the term ‘offer’ meant. An offer could

still potentially contain many different projects/products, and

therefore a framework containing fewer offers will not neccesarily

simplify the business support network. Getting the right products is

arguably just as important as getting the right broad business suport

theme headings (i.e. the practicalities of product/project design and

delivery are the key challenge). Although partners felt that the

framework provided a pretty comprehensive coverage of key

business needs, some gaps were highlighted around sites/premises

and marketing (although the role of the private sector in these two

areas and the need for public intervention were not touched upon).

Spatial dimensions need to be brought out. For example, it is

currently unclear how enterprise within deprived communities woud

fit into the framework. It is imperative that the framework allows for

sufficient local flexibility to tackle key issues (whether around culture

of enterprise or how to boost business density).

Partners also suggested that job creation should be a key objective of

business support, and the framework did not offer a clear picture of

how this would be achieved.

The focus on environmental factors was welcomed, but it was argued

that issues would be tackeld more effectively with tailored local

services.

Perhaps the key message is that whatever overarching framework is

put in place, it must permit the flexibility to provide a customised

intervention to the business client, and we need to develop some

agreed measures of success in business support simplification. Some

prioritisation over the relative importance of each of the 24 offers to

the target business community would be welcomed.

1. National Offers & Local Needs: Does


24 business support


implement BSSP?

2. Access Points: How can Business

Link be supported to



If Business Link is to become the one-stop-shop for publicly funded

busines support, it faces a number of challenges. A key challenge is

one of credibility and reputation. There is currently a great deal of

scepticism about the quality of the Business Link offer (among

businesses and among those within the business support network),

not all of which is entirely fair. However, perceptions play a role in

influencing business decisions, and Business Link needs to take steps

to improve its reputation. Building credibility is vital if all partners are

to have trust in Business Link, and if its brand is to gain value.

Signposting is a key element of the Information, Diagnostics and


Ref: A-00350

Page 10

Brokerage (IBD) model. Business Link and partners across the region

(and at a different spatial levels) must work together to share

intelligence and databases, to promote better targeting of support to

businesses and information sharing within the business suport

network.

However, partners stressed that the initial point of contact at

Business Link must be an advisor with sufficient understanding of

both business needs and of the business support process, so that

businesses are given appropariate up-to-date information and/or

advice (i.e. Business Link must not become a call-centre type

operation). Knowing where to refer businesses following an initial

enquiry will be a vital part of the Business Link service.

Linked to the above, speed of response to business enquiries and

flexibility of response (i.e. extent to which response is tailored, rather

than generic) are very important in bolstering organisational

reputation.

5. Co-ordination & Oversight: At what

level is decision-making about

business support provision best

undertaken?

The general view was that this is a complex issue, with no easy

solution. Vested interests will always be lurking. Nevertheless, there

was general support for the principle of co-ordination and oversight

lying at the regional level, but it will be vital that local differences in

economic need and circumstance are reflected in any decision-

making. Greater understanding of how national and regional schemes

are delivered within sub-regional and local areas is needed, to avoid

duplication of activity at the local level. It was also argued that

business must be represented on the key decision-making bodies (i.e.

tapping into the opinions of real businesses). Transparency was seen

as crucial here.

The co-ordination/oversight committee must seek/utilise intelligence

on the private sector business support market, as an input into its

decision-making process on whcih types of interventions require

public support. However, publicly funded provision should be about

more than just filing a gap in the private sector market. The co-

ordinating/oversight committee must play a key role in identifying

opportunities for investment (i.e. where returns on investment are

likely to be greatest), rather than simply looking for private sector

gaps to fill. The committe must take a holistic approach and must

keep in mind that the ultimate aim of BSSP is to improve quality of

sevice to businesses.

Raising awareness among businesses over eligibilty (e.g. on

particular funding streams) also has an important role to play in

ensuring that businesses know precisely what Business Link can do

for them. The need to work together with private sector

representative groups (e.g. CBI, IoD, FSB and local Chambers) was

seen as important here.


Ref: A-00350

Page 11

Accountability of those delivering publicly funded business support

was felt to be an important issue. The question was raised about

whether local interventions should be explictly expected to contribute

towards Local Area Agreement (LAA) goals. Maximisation of value for

money should be a key objective of any co-ordination/oversight of

business support.

Lastly, the co-ordination and oversight body must priovide clarity

over the process of implenting business support simplification in the

region. Currently, there are too many general statements, and it is

the detailed arrangements that are most important.


Ref: A-00350

Page 12

Group 3 Responses

Workshop Themes TABLE 1


Local Needs: Does the

proposed national portfolio of 24

business support offers help partners


1. Overall fairly happy with the offers, sufficiently generic to work in

most locations – what matters is local delivery

2. Support package needs to be “sector sensitive” in additional to

geographical sensitivities (e.g. relating to Objective 1 status)

3. Some concern over the cross over between the categories as some processes are generic – e.g. start-up

2. Access Points: How

can Business Link be

supported to become the primary gateway

of publicly funded business support?

1. IDB is a logical approach but needs developing. The knowledge

platform is not comprehensive enough. There is a lack of hand holding client through the process, clients referred to product

catalogue with little guidance.

2. Would like to see the knowledge platform be a genuine portal with external links and search facilities (e.g. to sector specialist

information)

3. Concern that better knowledge of BL staff may lead them to

promote “favourites”

4. Lack of feedback and communication to provider network from

BL – they are operating in the dark; need two way communication and a better relationship.

5. Need to have sector specialists embedded in BL (beyond just the

NWDA target sectors) and better sector intelligence (Sector Skills

Councils facing a national challenge in ensuring consistent information for firms in all regions)

4. Intelligence: How

should we gather and utilise information on

impact and performance?

Did not cover in any depth


Ref: A-00350

Page 13




national portfolio of



1. Legal and regulation area is missing

2. National and local marketing missing (as opposed to

international)

3. Supply chain networks missing

4. HR and recruitment missing

5. Should be no boundaries for brokerage (whatever the business needs) [as opposed to what service public sector

then subsidises the deliver of]

6. Firms need to be able to source training nationally – not just from those on Products Directory

7. Need local presence to understand business needs and local discretion

8. Overall found framework unclear [especially in relation to

degree of flexibility]

2. Access Points:

How can Business



support?

1. Agreed with the principle of sharing information on business

needs

2. Could have other support service providers conducting

dialogue with BL on behalf of the company

3. Need to consider branding of LSC, Train to Gain and Export

support – competing brands with BL


should we gather and utilise

information on


1. Should include qualitative as well as quantitative measures

2. Should consider business excellence model

3. Should consider social accounting (triple bottom line measures etc)

4. Perhaps there should be Service Level Agreements on

penetration of IDB service


Ref: A-00350

Page 14


1. National Offers & Local Needs: Does the proposed national portfolio of 24 business support offers

help partners in the North West implement BSSP?

• "Sales and marketing development" - too international in

focus, many companies want advice on expanding sales

nationally

• Businesses in different geographic regions often have

different aspirations/ambitions i.e. higher number of

companies want to go international in say Manchester

compared with remote parts of Cumbria.

• Rural businesses need different product set - e.g. farmers

don't see business link as a service for them.

• Topics are very broad - nothing will be stopped/changed as

a result of this.

• Language used is not appropriate for business - what does

"support networks" mean to a business

• Top line of figure 2 is useful but companies will be put off

by list below - they need to be guided through this.

• How can we ensure that companies are cross referred

between products - i.e. they may ring up and ask about

international trade but then how does that company also

find out about say innovation advice (which might be highly appropriate for them)?

• Local needs can only be met by regional delivery - this

adds credibility, national offers/programmes may seem too remote.

• Need to be able to use "key words" to find relevant

products - businesses might use very different language.

• “Sales and marketing development" - too international in

focus, many companies want advice on expanding sales nationally.

• Businesses in different geographic regions often have

different aspirations/ambitions i.e. higher number of companies want to go international in say Manchester

compared with remote parts of Cumbria.

• Rural businesses need different product set - e.g. farmers

don't see business link as a service for them.

• Topics are very broad - nothing will be stopped/changed as

a result of this

• Language used is not appropriate for business - what does

• "support networks" mean to a business

• Top line of figure 2 is useful but companies will be put off

by list below - they need to be guided through this

• How can we ensure that companies are cross referred

between products - i.e. they may ring up and ask about

international trade but then how does that company also find out about say innovation advice (which might be

highly appropriate for them)?


Ref: A-00350

Page 15

• Local needs can only be met by regional delivery - this

adds credibility, national offers/programmes may seem too

remote.

• Need to be able to use "key words" to find relevant

products - businesses might use very different language.

• Need to get accountants and other multipliers to

recommend business link.

• Pushing the brand at the moment but need to ensure that

customers see value in the offer.

• Need to get the wider private sector to buy-in and promote

the business link concept.

• Need to get greater awareness of possibility of registering

on the business link systems - not all providers have registered.

• Business link perceived to focus on "micro" businesses

rather than on medium sized businesses.

• Fundamental issue is creating transparency with business

link – how do you know that the best available solution is

being brokered in for you?

2. Access Points: How can Business Link be

supported to become the primary gateway of

publicly funded business support?

• Feedback needs to be captured at the point of delivery.

• Takes too long to find feedback forms.

• Most companies access the web site at night - but then

there are no business advisers available to help them.

• Businesses need to be able to see what other businesses thought of the service - a "tripadvisor/amazon" review

system would be useful.

4. Intelligence: How should we gather and utilise information on



Ref: A-00350

Page 16

Workshop Themes POINTS FROM ALL TABLES




offers help partners


1. List generally OK, so long can be locally tailored in terms of

delivery

2. Missing “routes to market” as an area – framework includes international but not relevant to lots of firms. Many firms good at

producing a product but not selling it.

3. If only targeting market failure then pitching very low – system

needs to support success - focus on "beacon businesses".

4. If only market failure then often intervention is too late - resources required are greater - early intervention around opportunity could

yield greater results/prevent future market failures

occurring/coming into play.

5. Companies need help via all stages of their life.

6. Central schemes - lack credibility, not integrated with local

networks/economies, often supply chain is within local communities.

2. Access Points:


become the primary


support?

1. Big issues in getting knowledge platform up to data and with local

information – otherwise lacks credibility, but recognised an immense task to develop supplier base

2. A related issue is skills of brokers in understanding and then using the knowledge platform

3. Getting right people to work as brokers is key [long standing BL

issue]

4. Challenge of BL credibility with farmers/rural firms [compared to

Farming Advisory Service]

5. In some areas businesses fed up with constant change (e.g. Greater Manchester) and so not prepared to take new BL too

seriously

6. An issue how national level services (e.g. of a sectoral nature) get

played into knowledge portal across all regions

4. Intelligence: How should we gather

and utilise information on

impact and

performance?

Did not cover in any depth.


Ref: A-00350

Page 17

Group 4 Responses


- Start-up funding is very important.

- Need to do more consultation with local business – need to keep chasing businesses for their opinion on the paper.

- Legal Employment Queries – where do these fit in?

- Framework overall is fine, but felt that some of the offers had been included under the wrong themes.


Local Needs: Does




- How will the service be monitored?

- What will the feedback process be like?

- Need to work on a local level.

- Employers need to be thoroughly consulted.

- Wider engagement with universities is required

2. Access Points:

How can Business



support?

- Need more on the definition of ‘assisted’ as a means

by which to monitor performance.

- NWDA to monitor performance on a national/regional/local level.

- Felt that this question was pitched at the wrong audience – should be asking the private sector (was

referring to the DTI question).


and utilise

information on impact and

performance?


Ref: A-00350

Page 18


Yes and No – Yes insofar as it covers everything. No in that it

provides insufficient detail. What the group is very interested in is the flexibility within this.






- BL needs to work in close partnership with all partners and delivery organisations to make this happen.

- BL – should be less paper work, particularly at the diagnostic

stage.

- Need to develop and keep up to date a comprehensive

product database. Need one CRM System.



gateway of publicly


- Need to standardise information collection (both in terms of the info and the approach).

- Need to have one collection point – one resource which everyone feeds into.




performance?


Ref: A-00350

Page 19


- Framework is satisfactory but concern about how this will translate

on the ground. Could still be confusing for businesses. - Concerns that Business Link will still not provide the right

signposting for the companies. They need to have local knowledge. - Process driven by desire to reduce costs rather than improve

effectiveness. - Concerns about whether there will be several providers or one sole

provider delivering products.

- Concerns about loss of expertise in the delivery and provider base. Local providers know what works and we shouldn’t lose this

knowledge.





implement BSSP?

- Information is meaningless if the intelligence is not behind the data. - Shared knowledge platform is essential – it is difficult to support

companies and there is a danger that companies may be visited by several publicly funded bodies.

- Need to have continuous development of Business Link staff.

- Providers need to have a good understanding of IDB. - There is a credibility issue with Business Link. There is a need for

transparency in terms of how the decision over signposting to a particular provider is made.

- Need to know how Business Link has performed i.e. how many companies they have dealt with, in what sectors etc. over a certain

time period.

- Need to avoid information overload. - Need to be wary of Business Link handing enquiries to providers.

Some providers may not want to deal with particular clients.



gateway of publicly



and utilise


performance?

- Need to draw on good practice from previous experience and not just focus on how practices will develop in future.

- Danger is that rationalisation will create particular gaps in the

market. - Need to share expertise and benefit of local providers.

- Need to have a Regional Forum that interprets national and local data/impacts.

- Important to have feedback.


Ref: A-00350

Page 20


In reducing the offers are we trying to shoehorn to too small a number – will we lose the detail?

How do we pick up the need to be proactive in encouraging

companies to take up new opportunities, rather than just

encouraging them to use existing products?

We need to ensure that small businesses themselves can feed into

this process, not just representative bodies.

Business Link should use case studies to promote the services

offered.

What should be the rationale behind intervention? There needs to be

a consistent gateway in determining whether or not public sector business support should be offered.

The amount of funding is going down therefore we need to be more

selective over which companies receive it.

How can the portfolio of products reflect local needs and priorities for

intervention? How are local priorities set – a local economic development strategy? Local knowledge on the operation of

economies is vital.

1. National Offers & Local Needs: Does


24 business support


implement BSSP?

“Business Link is not a delivery mechanism, it is a gateway, it is a

web based business”.

In the portfolio we should have a fair payment scheme to encourage

companies to pay suppliers in a timely manner.

Business Link need to know what help is out there – they need to get

out more and communicate with localities and partners.

Businesses need to understand the new BL system and services –

marketing and communication by BL needed.

“Just Ask” campaign to start shortly.

Tailored marketing will be required to different industry sectors,

geographical groups and target communities (EM, Women, Benefit Claimants).

2. Access Points:

How can Business



support?


Ref: A-00350

Page 21

We need feedback from customer satisfaction surveys (independent).

We need to assess impact of intervention on business performance –

such as GVA/sales/jobs

On start up – survival rates would be a good indicator – we should

compare across regions too

We should be careful that what we manage is a direct consequence

of the intervention made.




performance?


Ref: A-00350

Page 22

Group 5 Responses



Local Needs: Does the proposed national

portfolio of 24 business support


implement BSSP?

4. At both regional and local level, there are specific needs which

reflect different issue in the area and the economy. The portfolio in the proposals may not address this.

5. The themes create some potential for some confusion as access

to funding should match needs which cut across multiple themes.

2. Access Points: How

can Business Link be supported to become

the primary gateway of publicly funded

business support?

6. The allocation of funding must be independent of the delivery of business support. The beneficiary should be free to choose their

preferred service provider.

7. To ensure high quality initial business diagnostic there needs to be a separation of the funding and the assessment of the needs

of the business. The latter requires independent experts in

business management.

3. Efficiency and

Effectiveness: How can services be

improved to increase


business needs in the region and

maintaining impact on business

performance?

1. Contract management of delivery needs absolute clarity of scope and terms for partners in order to minimise the duplication of

service delivery.

2. Openness and coordination of the Business Links is important.

The Business Links need to be more open and accessible to other agencies and the private sector, and engage them to deliver the

best possible support services.


Ref: A-00350

Page 23







9. Many differences across region, between local areas and

among different types of businesses. Examples include: - the particular needs of ethnic communities where

unemployment and deprivation levels may be high.

Businesses in these areas need to be targeted, and there should not just be a focus on university spin offs.

- The needs of the low skilled to assist them in starting businesses.

- Differences in access to funding can also make things difficult

in the North West. - Industrialised areas and rural areas have different needs.

Remote rural areas face particular challenges in obtaining support.

- Not all sectors are covered across the whole region.

10. A targeted approach to SMEs and BME communities should

be adopted.

11. The North West may be missing out because it is seen as too affluent and businesses are moving to areas where support is

more extensive.

2. Access Points:

How can Business



support?

4. There is a lack of awareness about what the Business Link

service will offer. It should be a generator of fresh, new

ideas in a new and fresh way. Business Link needs to appreciate and understand the business support that is

already available. It role needs to be clear, and customers need to know what this role is.

5. There should be clarity about how branding of products will fit with branding of Business Link.

6. One-to-one relationships are important to businesses. Are

the Business Links going to have the time to diagnose the

problem rather than just ‘throw’ products at businesses.

7. Risk of duplicated targets or organisations chasing own targets. This sways how Business Link works with other

organisations. There is a need to convey the totality of support from Government in a clear way.

8. Business Link needs to broaden its reach to work with the 3rd sector.

9. There should be stronger linkages with other publicly funded

organisations such as the LSC.

10. More information to businesses should be channelled through

specialist groups.

11. HEIs are already doing a substantial amount of work with businesses and Business Link shouldn’t reinvent the wheel.

12. Minority ethnic businesses are an untapped resource for


Ref: A-00350

Page 24

Business Link.

13. The new system needs to make it simpler for a business to

move from one organisation to another. Business Link needs to coordinate this.

14. Business Link needs a very high quality information bank.

15. How will Business Link work with the Chambers of Commerce and other organisations? For example, there have already

been some difficulties in relationships with cluster incubators.

16. There is a danger that provider organisations will start to

compete for funding without strong coordination.

17. Businesses need to know who to talk to and what to expect. They need to manage expectations and not over promise.

This will involve careful marketing of services and the

resources to be able to deliver.

18. Publicity about what Business Link offers needs to be issued now regardless of progress of simplification process.

Success stories to show how service has changed and improved are required to build confidence.

3. Efficiency and Effectiveness: How



business needs in the



5. There is a need to balance market failure emphasis with social equity and ensure that there is a level playing field.

Market failure may just mean a lack of awareness and understanding is present.

6. In the drive for high growth businesses in the North West,

intervention by specialist providers is needed before Business

Link becomes involved. In turn, Business Link needs to signpost towards more specialist services.

7. Business Link needs to demonstrate the benefits of

intervention. It needs to provide options for which the

business itself can take the final decision.

8. Business Link needs to offer services at a time and place to suit businesses. They need to be equitable across the whole

region.

9. There is some potential for overlaps in the number of SMEs

assisted. May be better to chase outcomes rather than simply outputs in form of number of SMEs. Everyone in the

delivery chain can count some intervention so it looks like 100 but is actually only 20.

10. Government needs to take a harder look at evaluating the effectiveness of an intervention and simplify the target

system. More external verification of impact would be useful.

11. May be a danger of oversimplifying the system, losing some

of its sophistication. Duplication is not always negative.


Ref: A-00350

Page 25

Different areas of the region may require very similar (but

not identical) service tailored to local need.

12. Government needs to get business support infrastructure in place first before launch at marketing at national level takes

place.

13. What will happen to continuity of relationships if the smaller,

diverse organisations start to lose contracts to deliver support as part of the simplification process?







7. Figure 2 is concise and comprehensive.

8. Some uncertainty about where Business Link service starts.

9. Need to understand the fit of social enterprise and the inclusion agenda as this is a potential gap.

10. Outreach and awareness raising doesn’t sit well in Business Link.

This is better achieved through local level intervention i.e. through

local authorities.

11. Concern that there will be duplication, especially when local funding is available. A reduction in the number of brands would

help, but there is a need to understand what specific businesses want.

12. Not clear whether the common Business Link brand across public sector organisations, with appropriate accreditation, will increase

employer confidence.

2. Access Points:

How can Business



support?

13. Business Link needs to be slick, straightforward and no-nonsense.

It needs to make use of local expertise, but as one branded offer

that can reduce duplication and bureaucracy.

14. Needs to be one brand regardless of organisation.

15. Impartiality is the Business Link’s USP, but should it be.

16. There is a need for quality assurance. This is vital for employer

and broker confidence. Brokers need to be supported to offer specialist knowledge.

3. Efficiency and Effectiveness: How


efficiency whilst



17. Sectors need to be the key factor, rather than the locality.

18. Need to build local capacity through appropriate sectoral focus which will benefit the economy.

19. Local and regional strategies and solutions need to be aligned (i.e. ERDF and Local Area Agreements).

20. Improving services could involve a provider database, stronger


Ref: A-00350

Page 26

on business

performance?

quality assurance, more advertising.

21. What is the role of the SSPA? Can they take the role of ‘stamping’

provision on a database?

22. The fewer options that are given to business, the better.

23. The target system needs to be changed. There is a ‘low hanging

fruit’ problem.

24. Need to take risks to ensure future productivity. Long term aims as well as short term objectives need to be adopted, and all

companies need to be encouraged to innovate.

25. There should be a mix of support across Figure 2.

26. Start ups in deprived communities and worklessness needs to be

addressed. There are socially important issues to be addressed.


Ref: A-00350

Page 27

Group 6 Responses

Workshop Themes ALL TABLES

From the outset there was lack of clarity on the themes, and

the group felt it was hard to discuss this without

understanding the programmes and schemes, which would fit under the themes. The focus of the discussion for one of

the groups was about what was missing from the list as opposed to evaluating what was in it, and there was a

request that the region be provided with a detailed written scope of the themes, to also include international aspects of

business support.

It was felt that the themes would be confusing to SMEs who, from the delegates’ experiences, “don’t know what they

want”. The feedback was that SMEs tend to seek out specialists if they require help, and would not used a

generalised service providing signposting assistance.

One group was concerned certain programmes would not be

covered under the existing themes and felt that more emphasis should be placed on Business Growth & Mentoring

as a separate theme. Questions were also asked about where more operational activities would be placed such as IP

Protection & legal support.

All of the groups expressed confusion about the “100

programmes” – i.e. where had the figure come from? Would a framework model be used to evaluate the continuation or

end to a particular programme? Would this mean that the

number of offerings would remain the same, but consortiums would need to be formed to deliver 3-4 programmes under

each theme? There were several comments that the timeframe of September was unrealistic for reaching an

agreement on the themes.

A major issue was where European programmes would fit

into the programme activity – in order to avoid proliferation, would regions have to seek consent from central government

to progress projects under Objective 1 funding, framework 7 etc.? No conclusion was reached here.

Every group agreed that reduced branding was a positive step and would be less confusing for businesses.


Local Needs: Does





Ref: A-00350

Page 28

The scepticism about BL’s ability to deliver the role expected

of it was a concurrent theme for all three groups. It was felt that on the whole, Northwest businesses have a highly

negative view of the regional BL and avoid using it, referring instead to go straight to the appropriate organisations for

specialist help. In the general feedback session delegates

wanted it reported back that from a customer perspective “it takes 40 years to build a reputation, and 3 minutes to

destroy it…Business Link have had their 3 minutes!”

It was felt that even if the BL was re-branded, unless the individuals in the organisation were appropriately educated,

and in many cases changed, they would not have the brokerage and diagnostic skills required to signpost clients

correctly.

Two of the groups shared the view that in the new organisation it would be vital for BL staff to be informed in a

clear concise way, what the delivery people could offer. There was concern that without an account management

system, clients could be given the wrong expectation of what

the programmes and services could offer, particularly if companies have to meet specific criteria to get support.

A major concern raised by all three groups was how the new

role of BL would be communicated to the marketplace. The

general consensus was that a simple campaign would be needed to establish quality and image, but this should not be

done until all retraining of staff had been undertaken, to avoid customer disillusionment.

Key emphasis was also placed on the need for Business Link

to reach out to more sectors and geographical areas.

2. Access Points:



funded business

support?

All 3 groups strongly believed that decision-making should stay firmly within the region – the point made by the plenary was how could an individual in central government know

more than local groups and authorities about the deprived

communities in Manchester? Responsibility should be devolved to the lowest possible level.

It was acknowledged that some areas may wish to be more localised than others.

The question was raised as to who would co-ordinate regional ERDF/ESF projects?

The overall view was that regional strategic thinking should defer to local decision making and delivery channels.

5. Co-ordination & Oversight: At what

level is decision-making about

business support

provision best undertaken?

North West Business Support Simplification Event, 1 August - Group

Feedback

Ref: A-00350

Page 29

Document

Documents

Transcript of Document