C level need to focus on realignment and Opportunities post Brexit in Tech & Business, not tacti
- Mark Skilton
- Jul 7, 2016
- 4 min read
Examining the Office of National Statistics data on How important is the European Union to UK trade and investment? from June 2015 highlights interesting issues.
It is clear that from an macro economic perspective that the current UK structures are 40 to 50% connected with the main land continent, but several out side performance growth figures points to faster markets outside the EU.
It is also noticeable the amount and type of analysts commentary in the media from consultancies and industry reactions that seem to range from small micro project management issues of "maintaining digital skills and customer service" to broader statements of trade deficits and difficult times ahead. Perhaps we are still in what ever the opposite of honeymoon period we are in.
What happens next for the Executive Decision makers?
What happens in the coming months and years will be beyond business transformation but need to include economic transformation for structure market reform in the UK interests. Companies will also need to define how their business operating model needs to be modified to defend against losses but also importantly to take advantage of new opportunities for local and global scaling.
Executive development of strategy will I suspect be rapidly evolving to refocus on non-EU opportunities. There may well also I predict government action in "special tax and skills worker" rules introduced rapidly to encourage Business as usual. I suspect also that in my own sector of technology, the refocus on non-EU initiatives and markets that are growing faster could in the medium term open up a bigger market than the EU without the EU "overheads". The ONS report mentioned points to growth rates faster outside in Non-EU than EU. Economically and operationally how these are growing and how UK predisposition into these is key.
There will be long hours and services fees "burnt" in establishing new strategies but care needs to be taken in establishing leadership and investment with those who are seeking the medium and longer term picture and not seeking to just "keep the wheels on" in the short term. Disruptive strategies require just that, in terms of responsible thinking and leadership
A negative view
For sure the fall out of economic separation from the trade block will result in massive shifts in pricing and cost of goods if the 2/3rd of goods from EU sourcing will result in changes if resourcing moves out of the EU to other countries. Its difficult to foresee the multi-nationals movement and jobs impact and the City financial sector performance which will result in movements to mainland HQs and. But does this then suggest a change in tactics for the UK on trade that may need a fresh approach. The 27 country block negotiations presents a formidable market.
Historically as shown in my recent analysis of cyber security regulation and the DSM Digital Single Market, the EU has struggled and continues to struggle as a cohesive block The use of technology and business advisory to run Brussels legislation and stamp subsidiary control on common policies and platforms seems a long distance from a realization to implementation. Research and innovation funding will clearly have sourcing issues if from the EU yet the dynamic role and critically of this base will not be gone over night but will be modified to meet national and international programs. How will the squeeze in funds in industry and academia follow or how new sources of equity and investment will move to alternative rises countries? Expertise and good ideas will still remain a premium wherever they are but will be increasingly collaborative anyway as the nature of ever more advanced and complex systems and society moves forward. This paradox is a key issue that participation and the benefits going to the owner of the funds , be it EU or non-EU of national will need to be considered.
A positivism view
The basis of the EU formation has not gone away, the post World Wars and the creation of a European state was and still has a key rationale that whether looking to keeping check on the eastern issues of NATO and nationalism; to the market driven ideology of the larger common market community; these things in the bigger picture of global and local economy, climate change and regulation will survive as they are imperatives. Migration and resource issues will remain tough issues to resolve but against a back cloth of rising China , BRICK and regional issues will reshape the first half of the 21st Century. The second half beyond my lifetime but will clearly impact my children and children's children as availability to resources and global issues will become the leading pressing issue then. What we do now does still matter to that time.
How these develop will result from innovative leadership, societal change as well as distributed business legal and legislative transformation . Wishing to un-invent social media or to put the clock back to the "good old days" will not be an option. A new generation of people may need to evolve to take on this challenge, but what is for certain is to change the current approach to local and global planning to be able to build sustainable and robust business and society. A construct view will help in this shift that will involve new kinds of international , national and local strategies and solutions.
Comments