The Language Business

More corruption at the British Council

Here are some choice quotes from the linked article:

“Investigators will dig out how the British Council officials, in alleged connivance with the British High Commission (BHC) officials, were sending applicants to the UK on fake visa letters”.

“Internal investigations are being conducted by the British Council officials against the accused officials,” said British Council Pakistan Director Communication Fasi Zaka. “Only Rafi was involved in human trafficking case,” he clarified. “The British Council officials who were involved in the scam have already been dismissed from service,” Zaka said.

Just re-read that “clarification” from the BC's local propaganda manager. Firstly he is trying to pin it on somebody called Rafi, but at the same time knowing he cannot limit the damage he explains that the other officials involved in the scam have been dismissed. The British Council "Chief Executive" Martin Davidson is also trying to peddle the "one rogue employee" line while the Pakistani press says in contrast that multiple employees are involved. The panicky statement goes a long way to explaining why British Council officials all over the world are effectively above the law: they know that because the British Council hates a scandal the worst that can happen to them if, as a result of an internal (for heaven’s sake) investigation, they are caught with their fingers in the till, is dismissal. When it comes to corruption – whether involving giving free classes to the mates of a despot, giving scholarships to the mates of the scholarships manager, IELTS results scams, human trafficking or just common or garden embezzlement – the BC employee knows he or she has a favourite’s chance of getting away with it.

And the BBC might like to note that the alleged "human trafficking" reported here has been managed under the banner and guise of the "Connecting Classrooms" programme which our state broadcaster has been advertising so persistently in recent months. You can't have missed it.

Just as the British Council have already failed to pin this incident on one man, so now the police and UKBA should be investigating how far the scam extends, and not just in Pakistan. The incompetent BC’s cosy relationship with government departments could well mean that the Karachi model is reproduced all over the world.

 

British Council and the EU

Birds of a feather, the bureaucrats of Brussels and of Spring Gardens have always been cosy. You have only to see, for example, how comfortable the Kinnocks have been in both environments. Both organisations are of doubtful value, extraordinarily expensive, over-privileged, and corrupt. The mutual attraction is of course because both organisations channel large amounts of public money, also known as our money, so where better than to each other? Trebles all round.

The blessed Gisela Stuart says that she doesn’t see why the British Council should use UK taxpayers’ money to promote Europe. We can no doubt all drink to that. The bizarre response of the anonymous British Council “spokesman” was that the money is being used to “research British culture”. Good heavens. Does this mean that at last, after more than 75 years posing as a “cultural relations organisation”, the British Council will perhaps discover what it is supposed to represent? Sadly no, there’s little or no chance of that. We know it paid for rentacrowd at the climate conference in Copenhagen, that it used its school in Tripoli to ingratiate itself with the Gaddafis, that it flies MPs around the world first class to keep Parliament onside, that it is the enemy of enterprise in the UK, and overseas. The British Council represents itself, and uses every means at its disposal to ensure maximum revenues from at least four government departments, obtains maximum comfort from the treasury, pays as little tax as possible at home (through charitable status) and abroad (through diplomatic status), and uses the resources paid for by the taxpayer to win maximum contracts for itself. And it owns a for profit company which pays no tax. Nice work if you can get it.

And as for the EU, how about this little gem? What this document shows (and you can Google for others in the same vein) is that the British Council couldn’t get further up its own posterior if it tried. Its role in Brussels is to win more business for the British Council. Which is pretty much its role everywhere else. What is guaranteed is that the British taxpayer is lumbered with paying for this disgraceful parasite, apparently in perpetuity.

 

You've got the video - but who's watching?

The cost of a video can be anything between almost nothing (if you have the equipment and the time) to many thousands of pounds – typically in this industry a four figure sum is payable anyway. I can think of an agenda for those who don’t have any video and a pretty powerful rationale for making a commitment, but let’s set all that aside and consider how best to exploit the video you have. I take it as axiomatic that an institution that invests in video will want people to watch it and so get clear and positive messages about the institution.  But when, as is often the case, you see that a given institution has posted a video on YouTube, and embedded it on their website, but that after one year it has been viewed only a few hundred times, you have to conclude that – perhaps because they think it’s marginal - someone is missing a trick.

Like most things in marketing it’s not so much a “trick” as applying the little grey cells and then doing something about it. We are begging quite a few questions here (Who was the video for? What, if any, is the call to action? Is it actually worth watching? etc.) but if we – generously perhaps – assume that those angles are covered, what’s next? Here are a few tips:

1. Google likes video. Google owns YouTube of course but that’s not all. If you Google the name of a given school, and if that school has a video that carries the name of the school in the title, you are very likely to find it prominent in the results. Google, for example, English Language Centre Bristol, Hampstead School of English, Cambridge Academy of English, TTI School of English and in all cases – and many more – the first page of results includes TWO records offering video links.
2. YouTube is also a search engine. In fact YouTube serves up 2 billion (sic) searches per day. So while uploading to YouTube is a good idea, it is also a good idea to make sure that, once done, what you have uploaded can be found there. Search on YouTube for, for example, “French language courses in Montpellier” and you’ll find a video I made for ILA Montpellier last year (embedded above). Now search for “French language courses in France”, and you’ll find it again. And that instance of the video has already been watched 28,000 times – no coincidence.
3. If you have a video (that’s worth watching) on your website, make sure it is signposted. And if it’s long, shorten it! And get your agents to embed it or at least link to it. There is no doubt, really none, that there are students and agents out there who prefer to research schools using available video to reading mainly English text on websites (and if you were researching an Arabic or Chinese language course venue you might do the same mutatis mutandis).  
4. Use sites such as our UKschoolvideos.com and our internationalschoolvideos.com. Why? Because students do. For example, a video we made year ago in Edinburgh for Global School has been watched 2400 times on our site alone, while the Abbey College Academic Courses video has been watched over 7000 times. And the King’s Bruton video over 10000 times likewise. Google “language school videos” and I am pleased to say that this company’s sites enjoy 4 slots in the top ten results – 5 if you count the record of the agent that uses our videos too. Marginal? I don’t think so.

If you’ve made the investment, exploit it to the max. If you haven’t, then take a fresh look.

British Council finds fault with British youth. Maybe.

The British Council has produced a report which warns that the UK risks losing global competitiveness, and reportedly concludes that the failure of its young people to adopt “a global outlook”, to have “wider horizons”, and develop "international awareness” means that many will be condemned to unemployment or low-paid jobs. Reading this news item on the BBC we ordinary folk might be tempted to conclude that the younger generation just doesn’t do foreign and in consequence will be stuck doing “mcjobs” for all eternity.

But soft! What light through yonder window breaks? The BBC report goes on to say:

Jo Beall, British Council director of education and society, said "This research shows that while British students are extremely keen to gain international experiences, there aren't enough of the right opportunities for them to gain the professional skills that British employers really value”.

which, with its clear implication that there is nothing at all wrong with young people’s attitudes, since they are “extremely keen to gain international experiences”, would appear to be a rather different conclusion. The British Council has apparently succeeded – in a way a bit like their much vaunted claims to increased efficiency - in producing a report which says one thing and proves another.

British Council soft pedal on IELTS fraud

The important thing is to be seen to be doing something. For a salary of £25K let’s face it, they are not going to get James Bond. In fact they are most unlikely to get anybody who can get to the root of fraud investigation when IELTS is so big, and fraud so entrenched.And given how much money IELTS is worth the appointment would seem to lack conviction. It's not just fraud either; plain managerial incompetence has resulted in any number of distortions and false results. What exactly is the job? The ad says:

We are currently looking for an Investigations Manager who would be responsible for managing and co-ordination the verification of IELTS test scores.

Try reading that twice. Yes, that’s right: the UK’s self-styled cultural relations organisation famed, they claim, for expertise in English language, can’t even get a sentence like that right. But sure, we can work out what they are trying to say, although it’s less clear what they are likely to get with required qualifications being only a degree and experience of IELTS operations.

Not seen before is the document entitled “British Council Behaviours” which our putative 007 is obliged to consult.  If there is any doubt about the seriousness of BC intentions in recruiting a head of the IELTS Fraud Squad, this nauseating document shows how the dreadful org actually takes the p*ss. Lord knows what consultancy was brought in or how much we taxpayers shelled out for its production. Some of the aspirations might be noble, but if you know the British Council, whether from the outside or the inside, you will recognise the contents of this document as cynical and vacant posturing, and the worst kind of hypocrisy. This is an organisation which is above all out for itself, which does not attempt to resolve conflict, which does not listen or respond to others’ overtures, which seizes contracts and money for itself even when totally ignorant of how to fulfil the designated requirements, which is scheming, secretive and whose arrogance is matched only by its incompetence.

If you plan to read it, ask Alice for the sickbag first.

British Council: management still in control

In January this year the “Chief Executive” of the British Council Martin Davidson announced that the British Council was advising other government departments about "outsourcing" (i.e. exporting jobs) to India. The British Council, Davidson crowed, had made itself “significantly more efficient”.  Downtrodden British taxpayers can only hope, albeit against the trend, that the DFID and FCO are not so stupid as to take their advice.

The Chief Financial Officer of the British Council, Bidesh Sarkar, has issued a circular to British Council staff in Manchester informing them that because the British Council senior management thought they would have to pay for only two floors of the building in Bridgwater House when the landlord actually requires them to pay for three, and because they have empty floors in Spring Gardens for which there is no tenant, they “are significantly behind our UK savings targets”. So while the Chief Executive says the British Council is “significantly more efficient”, his financial controller says they are “significantly behind”. Significant or what?

All this has come about because the British Council outsourced 75 finance and IT jobs to India, sent 240 staff away with expensive sweeteners to create “voluntary” redundancies, and have apparently made such a success of this attempt to become more efficient that now “we will have to consider new ways of working and the services we are able to retain in Bridgewater House, such as meeting rooms, the reception and canteen.”

Chillingly for British Council staff in Manchester, the Chief Financial Officer writes “we value the work you do”. Evidently he’s not sharp enough to realise that the “you” in that phrase betrays an intention by “us” to create distance, and make a rather clear distinction between London, where the British Council chiefs are (so no threat to the canteen there), and Manchester where they are evidently so valued that, thanks to the monumental incompetence of London and their failure to even understand their property contracts - much less actually manage them - employees will have to huddle together and find "new ways of working" as they do without their customary and, in London's view, superfluous facilities.

The full text of the letter follows:

o    Dear colleagues,

In July you were informed that the Executive Board (EB) had approved recommendations to retain two floors in Bridgewater House.

Since then, the landlord has required us to pay rent on three floors until September 2012, rather than just two floors, as we had expected. Added to that, the UK property slump has meant that it may take longer than anticipated to secure a subtenant in Spring Gardens. All this means that we will have to pay more for longer and are significantly behind our UK savings targets in this austere Comprehensive Spending Review period to 2015.

The EB have therefore taken the decision to consolidate Manchester operations onto one floor to make important savings.

These changes are due to take place in a years time, September 2012, but I wanted to let you know as soon as possible. I realise this is not the news you would have wanted to hear.

This decision means we will have to consider new ways of working and the services we are able to retain in Bridgewater House, such as meeting rooms, the reception and canteen. We will consult with you and Trade Union Side on our developing options.

Although were having to make these changes, Manchester continues to be an important operation for the Council. We value the work you do and we are renewing the Bridgewater House lease for the next 10 years with a standard option to review after three years.

Alex Chaplin (Director Global Business Services), Eddie Byers (Managing Director Programme and Projects) and Angela Gibbins (Deputy Director Global Estates) will be holding an open staff meeting in the Boardroom this Thursday 24 November at 1500, where you will be able hear more and ask any questions. More details on that to follow.

With kind regards,

Bidesh Sarkar

Chief Financial Officer

Are you feeling a bit QR?

You are probably aware of them. These things (“Quick Response” codes) are now on clothes, DIY products, and all manner of other things, and they are used by companies because they are much more powerful and versatile than barcodes. I’ve taken to adding the QR code above to my email “signature” and my business card as it has my name, plus company phone number, web and email address. When scanned by a mobile phone the data can be stored by that phone user without any rekeying.  Today every school record on the English in Britain site has a QR code. I would agree that in such a context QR codes may be marginal, but some will find them useful, they cost nothing, and their presence may be a spur to some new thinking.

In Berlin I noticed that QR codes were appearing on brochures, and I would expect that by this time next year the codes will be seen on most of them.  If you choke on that rate of growth, try this one:  US company Mobio reported in July that from Q2 2010 to Q2 2011 here was a growth in scanning QR codes of almost 10,000%. Growth by a factor of 100 in one year – pretty staggering.

Here’s a nice example of how they are being used by an enterprising Korean supermarket company: commuters on the subway can walk down the platform while the walls simulate supermarket shelves, and do their shopping. Neat.

It’s another spur to us all as we consider the rapid growth of mobile phone use. One year ago one visitor in 70 to my company’s web portals was using a mobile device, and today it’s one in 12. A year from now what, 1 in 4? Less? The times they are a-changin’. 

ICEF Workshop Berlin 2011

Let’s not mince words – the ICEF Workshop in Berlin is simply the best. Each year it goes on getting bigger, and it goes on getting better.
 
As a forum for meeting agents the ICEF Berlin Workshop is in its own league. More agent representatives (913) attended this year’s Berlin workshop than the total number of people in all categories at StudyWorld, for example. The agents, from 87 countries, were there to help build the businesses of more than 500 educational organisations. And there were 70 exhibitors lining the halls of the Intercontinental Hotel.

Marcom’s software was instrumental in arranging over 21,000 meetings in the course of just two days. It is a remarkable achievement to put on this key event for so many people, and keep them happy, focused on the job, as well as comfortable, fed and watered. The food and drink were excellent, and the organisers were unstinting in their hospitality. Size may not be everything, but when things are done as well as this it adds value geometrically as so much more gets done. And this year even the weather was good.

Select Statistics
Educator Top 5 Countries
UK             30%
USA            11%
Canada       10%
Spain            7%
Australia     7%
Other        35%

Agent Top 5 Countries
Spain        12%
Turkey        9%
Russia        7%
Germany    7%
Italy        5%
Other         60%

Education Institutions
Language Course Providers        63%
Universities and Vocational        19%
Secondary, Boarding, High Schools    16%
Multi-sector and additional services    2%

Three short planks

It’s not just May and Green, PM David Cameron would seem to be just as bad – or else he just has poor quality advisors. He claims that the government is “getting a grip on immigration”. Fine, we would all support that, as indeed would most immigrants. But as evidence of this he announces a ban of 474 colleges. Now I know a fair number of those on the list, and they take well-heeled juniors for a few weeks in the summer, and that’s it. They are no more going to take immigrants than fly to the moon, so banning them is like, I don’t know, banning sheep from possessing nuclear warheads. It is a complete irrelevance.

It’s bad enough that politicians do not understand the difference between international students and immigrants, which is a failure of analysis and intelligence that has our competitors in Canada, the USA, Australia, Ireland and New Zealand rubbing their hands with glee. It’s bad enough that they introduce a new half-arsed inspection system to provide “Educational Oversight”, and then come up with exhorbitant fees which have the sector gasping for cash in order to stay on the right side of a regulation the purpose of which they support but the execution of which fills them with dread as well as contempt. But now impeccably decent, respectable, conscientious course providers have to suffer the indignity of being “banned” simply because they have elected not to opt in to this fatheaded scheme and do what they were already doing, working with students who have no need of visas because they can come here anyway. Of course there are dodgy outfits – we’ve all been saying that for years to a deaf and inert administration. But now to produce an inflated list tarring them all with the same brush is an act which is at the cheapest end of politics, an ill-judged response which does the country no credit and which will continue to damage what is arguably Britain’s finest post-war growth industry.

Having just returned from what is surely the biggest international education event in the world, where seminar speaker Will Archer produced hard evidence of changing – and deteriorating - attitudes to Britain as an education destination, I am in no doubt that this government’s stupidity is damaging our standing in the world, damaging our educational institutions, and doing serious damage to the nation’s economy. And for what? We hear that the government has lost track of 124,000 or so asylum seekers and others who have outstayed their visa. As so often happens decent people, decent businesses are being used as cover and as scapegoats for monumental governmental incompetence. Short planks, thickos and losers.

Edit: Today's news is that UKBA haven't been checking passports properly anyway. Such a fiasco.

More cringe comes creeping out of the Libyan woodwork

The ghastly, creepy letters written to Gaddafi by both Blair and Prince Charles in June 2007 have been published in today’s Times.  Unfortunately we can’t link to The Times these days, but if you are able to get a copy, it’s all there. Just make sure you are not far from a suitable bowl when you read it.

Of course Prince Charles doesn’t do such things off his own bat, and bearing in mind that Gaddafi’s coup on September 1^st 1969 ousted the ruling Senoussi royal family, HRH can’t have expected the military dictator to have been too impressed by his rank. So Blair, whose own efforts are excruciating (“My wife Cherie was pleased to meet Dr Aisha”), put him up to it. But really.  Not only did this flirtation with the master butcher of Libya, the man responsible for the most brutal act of terrorism on British soil, not only did it mean setting aside that monumental evil, alienating the friends and family of Yvonne Fletcher, and watching Blair embrace and fawn around this man in order to get onside, but Blair also dragged in the royal family.

In his letter to His Excellency (Gaddafi), Charles says “I was delighted to see that the work of the British Council, of which I am Vice Patron, is making such an important and positive contribution to teaching in Libya’s universities in partnership with your higher education authorities.”

The contract for the British Council was of course a stitch-up, and presumably too good, too sweet for any other institution but the British Council; the British Council which a few months before had used taxpayers’ money to pay the fees of these “higher education authorities” in their own school in Tripoli, and who almost certainly provided one-to-one instruction for Gaddafi’s daughter Hana also at our expense.  Charles could do well to distance himself from this dreadful organisation, and give his support to genuine enterprise and to organisations, such as our universities, with real expertise.

What, for heaven’s sake, is there to recommend the British involvement in this sordid episode? We use public money to hold up a privileged institution so that it can win further contracts for itself while playing “spot the next dictator” and brown-nosing there with the support of the PM, the heir to the throne and all Establishment players.  And all this at the expense of the taxpayer, at the expense of any pretence of meritocracy, and at the expense of the feelings of the many who suffered in Libya and worldwide at the hands of this man, and at the expense of the principles which we expect our leaders to represent. Yuck.