Relate Cambridge
ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING
Thursday 23 rd September 2010
Talk given by Walter Herriot OBE
Awarded for his outstanding contribution to the local business community and Managing Director of St John’s Innovation Centre for
18 years.
Walter began by telling us that he was more worried about giving this talk than anything else he had ever done!
He had been charmed into agreeing to do it by Jenny Chapman
(Trustee of Relate Cambridge). What was he supposed to be talking about? Whether there was room for the type of services Relate provides in a business, rather than a private context? He had been advised that if he stuck to the topics of sex and violence that would probably be all right!
He told us that he was:
A Scouser
A soccer player
Had a sociology degree (in the 60’s)
STIC Director
Senile!
Although retired, Walter has other roles in ‘quite a busy’ life, being a non-executive director of several companies and working in an entrepreneurial capacity for various organisations.
So, to start with sex – Walter wondered if he was the appropriate person to talk about that. He offered us an anecdote. He visited
China in 2006 for the first time and applied for a visa. He got a note to call an Agent in MI5 as he was considered to be a security risk by the Government. An Agent was sent to see him. Walter asked why he was a security risk? He was told he may be prone to honey traps!
When he asked what they were, he was told that the Government was worried he may be inveigled by young ladies and blackmailed when visiting Beijing! He said this was nonsense – he knows nothing. A farse! He was given a red book – How to Avoid Honey Traps published by H.M. Stationers. Despite looking out for honey traps, it

just didn’t happen. His conclusion was that you can’t find sex in the workplace!
As for violence – Walter came across this when he met Lord Sugar as an enterprise tsar. Lord Sugar turned up in Cambridge to look round and report back to the Government. Walter’s experience was that
Lord Sugar was vicious and rude to a particular C.E.O. and wouldn’t listen. The C.E.O. walked out. It was very unpleasant.
Walter explained that you may get the impression from watching The
Apprentice and Dragons Den that business is about shouting and bullying but that is not correct. It is important to be constructive, and create an environment that allows people to reach their potential.
Walter believes there is a place for counselling both employees and employers. The business world is complex and difficulties are created when that is not the intention.
Walter proceeded to give us four vignettes of different kinds of employees. These give a flavour of some of the difficulties encountered by employers in the workplace. The four categories
Walter described are: The Youth, The Blogger, the Criminal and the
Scouser!
The Scouser: If you employ a scouser you may be in for trouble
Walter said. They may be workshy and will find ways ‘not to do it’.
Walter had an experience of going to a tribunal with this ‘type’ and lost his temper which was destructive, even though he tried not to do it. A claim had been made for constructive dismissal. The situation was infuriating. Walter felt he would have loved to talk to someone at the time and would have welcomed the opportunity to find out how to solve/overcome this problem.
The Criminal: Walter is not against employing ex-prisoners – in fact it can be useful to take them on as security guards. Walter took on someone who had been in prison for GBH who started at £7 per hour and ended up with a company with a £2,000,000 turnover. They got a fresh chance. The problem comes with the question: are they a criminal or not? Walter recruited someone into a maintenance dept who seemed like a nice bloke, but was being investigated for defrauding old ladies in an old people’s home. The rumour got out.
This was difficult to handle. The Board were furious and demanded dismissal though the allegations were not proved. What do we do?
Independent legal advice was sought and the conclusion was: do

nothing and let him carry on. The Board said no – get him out.
Eventually Walter rang a solicitor who said you will probably be sued anyway so do what you think is appropriate. The employee was talked through his rights and given 3 months money to which he agreed. He was eventually convicted anyway. The process took 2 months and drained Walter. He feels now he would really have benefitted from speaking to someone who could talk to him as a person and bounce off ideas with, so he could move forward in a fair way.
Blogger: Walter classes himself as a technophobe who can’t stand computers/emails and so on. The question is, how do you manage people working on the internet – do you know what they are actually doing? Everybody is looking at their screens. On one particular day he felt amazed and inspired to see this. A cheer went up and he realised they had been watching the cricket, Flintoff had taken a wicket! This can be difficult. People are naïve. A recent problem occurred for Walter. They were self certified sick but then photos were posted of the person at Alton Towers. It was claimed they were taken last year! It is easy for these situations to get out of control. You need a wise head. The ability to talk to someone at that time would have been very useful, to put things into context.
Youth: Imagine a Cambridge graduate of 27, with an MBA. He may have run 3 small business, all of which have failed. He is driven by technology. He has designed the world’s best mouse trap, using a laser and disposable bags. This costs £25,000, and when asked who will pay that much, responds with there is no competition! The challenge is managing someone who is focused on their own brilliance and their own projects. This can be draining. Walter had tried everything including leading by example, mini case studies and counselling. None had worked and the employee learnt nothing.
Finally, Walter lost his temper and lost the battle. At the time Walter felt he did not want legal input but that he had no one to talk to. It would have been really helpful to have had the chance of sitting down with someone to find out how best to manage the situation.
Walter went on to say that this just shows, even with a degree in sociology, that it is still possible to have problems. These can be unexpected and come from all directions. Working on your own is not as effective as being part of a team. Someone to talk to is useful.
On the positive side, it is worth considering what you are trying to create. An ideal environment, where you are not manipulating people or being a bully. An environment where you treat others as you want

to be treated. To have a positive, professional style, to be fair and to keep your temper. To keep staff informed. There is no substitute for common sense. Common sense is hard to define.
There are positive ways to create an environment which will stimulate positive relationships. There has to be a formal structure to do this and an external structure is helpful. Things can go wrong when you are on your own. If you have an HR dept it is easier. Lots of companies have no HR dept or legal understanding. It is extremely useful if you know how to relate to others who can understand and discuss problems in a positive way.
In summary, relationships in the workplace are complicated. There is no substitute for common sense. Treat people as you want to be treated. Alan Sugar demonstrated violence which was destructive.
That is not the way to run a business in the 21 st century.
To Relate – please contribute with ensuring there are mentors, advisors and guidance available. There is a desperate need to want to do the best for employees.
Anne Campbell (President of Relate Cambridge): Thank you, that was entertaining. It is important to note that informal legal advice can be useful as is the ACAS website.
A question and answer session followed.
Q: How might an EAP (Employee Assistance Programme) work out in terms of a counsellor’s time?
A: It may be somewhere for people to go when they have problems, like a GP. It is useful to know that there is someone you can call on.
A retainer could be paid. Sleepless nights can be spent worrying about those examples given. You have to know the law and follow procedures but in some situations you don’t want to involve lawyers.
Q: Some struggle with the stigma of counselling. What is the level of acceptance of being seen with a counsellor?
A: People like paying money for people to come and talk to them.
There is a market opportunity. Not for a ‘counsellor’ but maybe to be put across as a mentor/friend, not a consultant who maybe seen as trying to rip you off! Someone who is not too soft or mamby pamby!
Money has been put into schemes which have all collapsed. This needs to be more hard nosed and done locally from the bottom up. It is difficult to market and make it acceptable. Go with word of mouth,

through the Chamber of Commerce and by giving mini presentations to get the message across.
Q: In the healing professions counselling techniques are used with staff problems. If counsellors are being used in the workplace – how much do they need know about how things tick?
A: It’s not about giving advice. It is more having the chance to write up problems on a whiteboard and then come up with answers and having someone to listen. It can be hard to express ideas with complicated problems and talking will help. Those involved have to have credibility and have to feel good going into a new environment.
Common sense is a big factor. People have an inkling of the problems that come up from running a home which can be the same as running a business, for example with budgeting. It is important to have the confidence in an ability to manage. What matters, is the ability to listen and not pontificate, to show empathy and that you are interested.
Q: People who are awkward in the workplace may have a mental health problem – any comment:
A: The scouser did have one, and was not balanced. The criminal was balanced but his behaviour was not sociable or acceptable. How do you classify the arrogance of youth, this can become extreme. It would be helpful to have ‘counsellors’ who could say - you need to talk to a specialist.
Q: Problems at work often = problems at home. There are not enough facilities in the workplace for people to be helped in a work environment, with problems relating to their private lives. Is there a place for Relate to come in and help people solve their private problems? Is there scope for it?
A: There maybe someone who has problems at home and coping with bureaucracy. Walter would hope an employer would pay for help for this to be resolved. This is a good example of an employee in difficult circumstances where a third party would be helpful. The employer could leave with a clearer conscience. Not everything is black and white. It would help employers to feel more professional in their ways of managing difficulties – yes there is room for it.