![]()
BRITAIN'S
FOREIGN BOSSES
Society
Today, Vol. 1,
No.3, Summer 2006
With
a new world order where money is placed above all else, British corporations
are increasingly looking beyond the Great Isle – to the international
market of talented executives – in order to recruit the best person to
drive up share prices and maximise profits: the candidate's professional competence
and business acumen is judged to be far more important than whether or not he
or she is native-born, a British citizen. A quarter of the FTSE 100 companies
have foreigners at the helm, from an Indian American at Vodafone, to an Italian
at Cable & Wireless, to a Canadian at Barclays.
And yet such companies would argue, perhaps quite justifiably, that they have little choice
but to follow such a recruitment strategy if they are to survive and compete
in the global economy. If they cannot find a Brit who is up to the task, then
they must look for a foreigner who is. And should they not be commended for
judging potential executives not according to their nationality but rather their
track record? Patricia Peter, corporate governance executive at the Institute
of Directors, certainly thinks so. According to her this 'reflects an openness
in the UK that isn't there in other parts of the world. We are not hidebound.
There are things we can learn from other people.' This would certainly explain
the appointment of Arun Sarin, who succeeded the very British, cricket-loving
Sir Christopher Gent as chief executive of Vodafone. Born in Madhya Pradesh
in Central India, Sarin graduated from the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
with a BS in Engineering in 1975, then emigrated to the US where he obtained
a MS in Engineering, then MBA from the University of California. He rose rapidly
up the corporate ladder and by 1997 was president and chief operating officer
of US telecom company AirTouch, before heading up Vodafone's US and Asia Pacific
region.
It would also be fair to say that this growing preference for the gifted outsider is
not simply about money and competition but about bringing a different cultural
perspective and understanding to the board table, a fresh insight and wisdom.
Gone are the days where the British corporation did not even attempt to consider
and to respect the ideas and values of other cultures and merely imposed its
colonial, authoritarian will on all and sundry: let us not forget that the East
India Company ruled almost an entire country – it even had its own army
– from the late 1700s to the mid 1800s. With the spread of modern democracy
throughout much of the world, the rules of the game have changed. It is all
about cross cultural cooperation and understanding now, not imperial dominance
and ignorance.
And yet it is not only in the business world that foreigners are in demand. Their skills
are now also required in the public sector. In September 2003 the Boston supercop
Paul Evans was brought in to run the Home Office's police standards unit. Why
on earth import an American to police British streets? Well, because the government
was hoping to call on his 'experience and knowledge of global improvements in
policing methods'. And then there is the endorsement of Reba Danastorg, executive
director of the Ten Point Coalition (the collaboration between the police and
an alliance of churches conceived by Evans to tackle Boston's epidemic of youth
gun crime), who described him as the architect of a law and order miracle, who
had 'the ability and the vision not just to keep policing within a department
but to bring it to the people. He believes in shared glory, and you don't find
too many people who want to do that. I don't want to keep saying it, but y'all
got a great guy going over there.' Based on this assessment of the man, we would
have been foolish not to want him to help us with our own policing.
The other notable import into British public life who we cannot fail to mention is of
course the national football manager Sven Goran Eriksson. Australian-born media
tycoon Rupert Murdoch's The Sun newspaper might be determined to get rid of
him on the grounds that he is a 'foreigner'– underneath all the politically
correct Modern Britain rhetoric Rebekah Wade and her right-wing cabal will never
be able to shake off their inherent xenophobia – and yet the cool, indefatigable
Swede has done a better job than his British predecessor Kevin Keegan, winning
58% of games compared with Keegan's 39%.
And so it would seem that we Brits just can't hack it anymore. A recent survey by the
Economist magazine found that eight of Britain's top 20 companies were run by
non-nationals, compared with four in France and just two in Germany and the
United States. We cannot simply explain away this abundance of foreigners as
an inevitable consequence of Thatcher's free market meritocracy – May
the best man win! – not least because such meritocracy more often celebrates
an individual’s ruthlessness rather than moral worth. Perhaps we must
concede that we no longer have the energy, the drive, the vision, the focus
to run our own companies and institutions? We would rather leave this to others
now.
Thus, maybe we are suffering from post-colonial fatigue? Raping and pillaging other countries
has finally taken its toll on us. We just can't be bothered anymore. Better
that someone else do the work. We're still one of the world's richest countries,
well … just about, with a national GDP of $1.782 trillion, the sixth largest
behind the US, China, Japan, India and Germany. Not bad considering we are nothing
more a tiny blip on the world's surface area, though we continue to coerce cartographers
into making our island look significantly bigger than it actually is. Or perhaps
this is less fatigue than surrender, the uncomfortable admission that we must
play second fiddle now?
The comments of Roger Parry, CEO of Clear Channel in the UK, the country's leading outdoor
advertising company, would seem to confirm this assessment. In a recent interview
with The Guardian newspaper, he said, 'As a generalisation, Americans are more
energetic. They take business more seriously. They regard it as a contact sport,
whereas some Brits regard business as an interesting amateur athletic event.'
And yet perhaps this simply points to a difference in style and belief rather
than ability and determination. Philip Augar, author of The Death of Gentlemanly
Capitalism, would certainly argue this. According to him, British companies
are increasingly adopting the American belief that 'business should [primarily]
be run for shareholders and on the basis of shareholder value.' And it is perhaps
this aspect of the modern economy – now defined by the will of international
corporations – more than any other that explains the growing apathy and
complacency of the British in their own land.
And yet not
all foreign chief executives have done a great job. We need only look at Ernest
Mario of Glaxo whose culture of excess alarmed the board and shareholders so
much that he was gone within three years. The company subsequently turned to
Richard Sykes, the cerebral Yorkshire scientist, who pushed through the merger
with SmithKline to create the world's second largest drug company. Lord Hanson,
who built up a huge industrial empire mainly via large-scale predatory takeovers,
was also not wholly convinced by the merits of foreign recruitment and the need
for broader vision and reach in the globalized world. In an interview with The
Guardian before his death, he said, 'For the most part, you are better off with
Americans for American companies and Brits for British companies.'
However,
despite this, it still seems that the people that lead the way in the formation
of a modern industrialized economy would now rather be elsewhere: the British
are governed more by corporate interest than national interest. And it certainly
helps that English, for the time being at least, is the international language
of choice. And though The Daily Mail, this bastion of old Britain – I
stress the world 'old' – might bemoan this exodus, it was inevitable once
Britain ceased to colonize and began to respect more the individual destinies
of other nations and peoples. Nationalism is no doubt being eroded by globalization,
and yet surely this is a good thing if it results in fewer wars and greater
peace.
The face and character of Britain is changing rapidly as different people, many
of whom were subject to British rule, now fill its streets and participate in
its companies and institutions. And yet this influx of people from the former
Empire regions of the Caribbean, India, Pakistan, Africa and the Far East should
be embraced rather than rejected: it has brought the country such richness,
diversity and success. We need only look at the achievements of the Indian Gulam
Noon, who arriving in London in 1978 went on to build a £100m business,
Noon Products, which currently produces around 200,000 ready-made meals every
day. And yet it is not only Noon who has contributed so much to British society.
There is also the Kenyan hotelier Jasminder Singh, the Taiwanese property developer
Victor Hwang, the Hong Kong Chinese entrepreneur Sammy Lee, and of course the
Asian steel magnate Lakshmi Mittal, now the richest man in Britain, to name
just a few. Let us forget about preserving the old culture – subjecting
immigrants to Norman Tebbit’s 'cricket test' – and focus on developing
the new.