Business Opportunity Leads - Are You Aware of the Scammers Selling Their SEO Services?

They are out there! No matter what the business opportunity or service it is, whether it is on the internet or maybe a local brick and mortar type store. Maybe it is a major national bank, insurance company, or oil company...There are unscrupulous people out there working to part you from your hard earned money.

I think everyone and their brothers know both individually and as a whole that we have been getting lied to, cheated, and coerced by insurance, drug companies, oil companies, medical costs, and our banking industry. Oh well...one thing at a time.

What is it that SEO companies are doing unethically?

First off, there are a good number of legitimate SEO companies out there. The problem is that there are many who just want your money. They will tell you all kinds of things. They will even show you how they are able to get keywords to the top positions of the search engines results in days.

If you are new to SEO (search engine optimization), it is easy to be misled. What they do "not" tell you is that the keywords that they brag about absolutely do not produce any traffic! Is not that the whole purpose of SEO? It is so you can drive business opportunity leads to your web site.

These SEO companies will charge you 200 dollars to get top positions for search terms that will not produce. Tell them you want "home based business" or "make money online" and they will say it cannot be done. They want your money and once they have it, will discard you like the butt of a cigarette when you are done with your smoke. I did not mention that when they get your keywords in the top positions, that will be it! They will not do any more for you unless you pay them more money. It is misleading to promise high positions when they do not tell you that your positions will soon drop if you do not keep up with them.

In all reality, the things they tell you are in fact true but are misleading. That is why I refer to them as SEO scammers. Put it this way...I personally can get your keywords to the top position (quickly) in the search engines if it is not something many others are trying to get as well. In many instances, you are competing with literally millions of web sites for any particular keyword or keyword phrase. I personally can get higher level type keywords to the top (and I have) but it takes more than days or weeks. It literally takes months and a lot of hard work.

It all goes back to that old adage..."If it is easy to do, everyone would be doing it". It's not! There are few that can do SEO and achieve high rankings. There is just so much competition for your better keyword phrases.A legitimate SEO company would charge you big time bucks to go for a heavily searched keyword phrase. If you had the money, it would probably be worth it depending on the amount of business opportunity leads or sales you would achieve on a daily basis.

The best piece of advice I could give you would be to do a search in Google for SEO companies. The legitimate ones will be the first ones that come up in your search results.

Generally speaking though, if you pursue using SEO, be careful of the SEO scammers.

There is no better way to get the highest quality of business opportunity leads to your web site than SEO. These are people searching for what you have to offer!

Jim Eberle is currently working with a diverse team of like minded individuals in a co-op type atmosphere to build our business opportunity. This growing team currently consists of people from Ireland, Australia, England, Canada, and the United States. This team of network marketers are combining our efforts to obtain high positions in search engines like Google for higher level type keyword phrases.

Where as many people usually fail when trying to build a home business to supplement their incomes, we work together to ensure everyone has success. Anyone who becomes affiliated with us becomes successful as that is how "we" as a group become successful!

The goal here of course is for many people doing a little instead of several people doing a lot to ensure that success. All traffic and customers are derived from SEO. We do not call anyone unless they request it. We have a number of web sites but I can only submit two here. To learn more go to...

http://www.businessopportunitycoop.com/

http://www.homebasedbusinessteam.com/

Should The G8 Be In Charge Of Education, Sustainable Development And Humanitarian Services

Should the G8 be in charge of education, sustainable development and humanitarian services in the Developing world?

Lessons in life come via formal and informal education, while formal education by most is valued as a human right it can also be utilized to train and develop partakers into self-sufficient contributors and participants towards the development of sustainable societies. Many others take education for granted and use it to spread general and even useless knowledge. Education must be taken seriously to protect Human Rights and enhance peace and sustainable environments in developing societies. Since there are immediate troublesome conditions throughout the world, and especially in developing states in Africa, one must deeply consider what role formal education can play to hasten holistic development of the people towards bringing solutions to conflicts. Many of the G8 nations have been the caretakers of the developing world for at least the last century. Although this time has proven to be quite successful for most of the developing nations, has there really been any measurable success for African people? Has there been measurable success for poor people? And not to unfairly place blame, has anyone besides the G8 even taken the interest or responsibility to find solutions to help educate and assist development in poor countries otherwise?

These strong European and American alliances are the foremost leaders in education and development across the globe. They are creators of most of the religious, social, economic and political organizations that provide programs and services that assist developing nations and they work together to provide humanitarian support to developing peoples throughout the world. Yet, ironically, these European partners are also among those since the beginning of the slave trade in the 1600s, 1885 and beyond that have combined resources to trigger colonialism and neo-colonialism, and setting up bureaucracy that has played a very significant role in the under-development of African states as well. For centuries, this leadership has gathered valuable resources from especially Africa and from other developing nations in South America and had utilized both human and natural resources to service their own national interest and drive their economic and technological development. If in truth this is a historical fact about the history of our leaders, then have our leaders evolved to be good stewards since the active practice of enslavement, apartheid and colonialism? Have they become willing and able enough to create educational services, and social welfare systems that can empower those they once sought to dominate?

A brief 'stroll down memory lane' will allow us to remember the roles that our leaders have played in crimes against humanity. Hate, racism, greed, and having little regard for the human life of poor peoples are some of the human dis-eases recognizable as the causes of both the exploitation and genocide of African related and other peoples. Certain systems of domination were implemented by most of the G8 governments that severely exploited human rights. One such exploitation existed in slavery. Slavery is a system noted by the United Nations Human Rights Charter, to be a severe violation of human rights. Although many of the G8 nations have offered formal apologies for enslavement of humans there had been no reparations or solutions to the poverty that slavery and apartheid and colonialism created, given to most of the people that have suffered and chiefly those of African descent.

These African related people are themselves not respected by other nations and thought to be abusers of themselves and indifferent, and are among the same populations that present in large numbers as the impoverished and needy. On the other hand, since there has been no formal display of remorse to show respect for life in their behalf and no sentiments that seek to replace or rejoin families that were separated. And are there any sincere activities by leading governments to make amends for land, possessions or lives lost for those enslaved or exploited? Has there been a real effort to provide reparations for the lost of life, dignity and human rights? Additionally with no formal activities to address the trauma that these certain groups experienced for generations, is there any wonder how serious social problems including poverty might prevail among those with former slave, apartheid or colonial experiences?

And finally, some ask, how can the same Leaders who appear not to support the reparation of crimes against humanity perpetrated on specific peoples seek to bring other leaders of countries to justice for similar atrocities, RE-SURFACE as the teachers and healers of those same societies and the world? It is possible that governments do have remorse and seek healing from somewhere to learn how to show respect for people they once hated or abused. But let's ask the Afrikaners, if they have healed from the system of Apartheid in the last 20 years, where suddenly in the last 20 years almost 70 percent of the cases of HIV are in Africa, with the most cases in South Africa. Why are these Black African populations suddenly the most infected with HIV, and they appear not to thrive specifically? Could there really be a plan of genocide targeting specific people to gain their resources? I pray genocide in 2007 is not a reality, but if this is the case, human-kind and particularly those who stand up as global leaders are still terrible offenders of Human rights and need serious support in their recovery.

But maybe the same religions that were used to enslave Africans and others are working towards the healing of man-kind and can mend the dis-respect for life that caused exploitation and crimes against humanity such as slavery and genocide? Maybe the government and leadership of yesterday active in committing crimes against humanity did eventually want to rectify human dis-eases that caused exploitation and so they produced a document that would eventually manifest justice as created in the Declaration of Independence of 1776,

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness....But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. --

When the initial colonies wanted freedom from Britain their aim was to create a government that would protect human rights and they themselves were champions of liberty. Today have Americans lost sight of the initial purpose of America---to protect Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness for all men? Since most of us really have faith in life and Liberty it is certain that many would like to support the protection of the quality of life that our constitution as human, as opposed to animal stands for. We do not want to believe that there are leaders operating in 2007 who no longer care about protecting this quality of life. It appears that something has gone astray from the initial declaration of Independence that greatly supported the protection of Human rights and the happiness of mankind?

Consequently, some are not very confident that leading governments want to be successful in providing human services or champions of peace. Certainly, the last 50 years had not hosted a global environment of peace and security to warrant success. Even less than 40 years ago, numerous martyrs were assassinated and imprisoned in the name of human rights and development or peace: remember, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Marcus Garvey, Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Patrice Lumumba and Kwame Nkrumah just to name a few. In more recent history Leaders in the African-American community are still arrested or detained for unifying their communities to enhance the quality of life of economic development: remember Yahweh Ben Yahweh who was arrested and detained from 1990-2007. It is thought, he was arrested just because his community became economically sustainable. This happened in America. It would appear that government leaders in today are not in the business of supporting education systems or services that support the development of leaders that seek to protect human rights, at least this proven to be the case for African related or poor people specifically.

If this is so, can the G8 or other super powers be supported in their lead especially in sustainable development programs and global peace for Africa or elsewhere? Can they continue to take charge of programs and services that are established to protect human rights if their evaluation is not good?

The European alliances through religious missions or programs are the foremost providers and pioneers of services to humanity and continually raise money to serve and protect the needs and wants of developing peoples especially. Consequently, they have had the most potential to champion human development and the peace process. They have been the Global leaders in developing systems in Education, Health, Economics, Social Welfare, Business and Commerce and the pioneers in implementing related programs, services and activities across the globe. Certainly they have been successful in protecting the human rights of some, but it is also evident that they have not supported the sustainable development of Africa. Maybe they need guidance to direct their Human development and Education to insure a better progress for African-related and poor people in the future.

A look at recent history reflects that they need support in providing effective programs or services to Africa specifically. The protection of Human Rights in the last 50 years in Africa shows little progress in peace and sustainable economic development. A 2005 UN Human Development magazine about Africa reported 70 percent of the worlds HIV cases were in Africa alone and 27 percent of the worlds Refugees came from Africa, while Africa only contributed to being 10 percent of the world population. If the G8 have been in charge of Education programs in Health; Peace building and conflict management, then the amount of Refugees and bad health alone reflect little progress with government programs to support peace or human development and education in Africa.

Maybe Government leaders need others to help them with their health education and global peace and conflict management programs because something has gone astray from the intention of American Founding Fathers. We as consumers have a right to direct our support to programs and services that can better relate to the Life, Liberty and pursuit of happiness for all people it intends to serve. There are other leading agencies that can lay the foundation that will protect and service the rights of all humans in the future, which are usually non-governmental and have a genuine interest with no strings attached for human service. Governments in the business of Human Rights and protection should carefully review the Declaration of Independence and restructure to effectively champion Life; Liberty and pursuit of happiness for the good of all humanity. The specific target of groups of human beings for genocide or exploitation is a crime against humanity.

For those whose rights are continually and maybe even unintentionally disrespected, a Champion must arise to help open the door for non-governmental agencies to save innocent people and provide some immediate relief. Many will benefit and many more warrant the protection of their human rights, but targeting those in the most distress in a beginning. Every life is precious even though it appears that poor or people in developing countries are taken for granted. This makes it obvious that Governing bodies need assistance with their global peace and development objectives, especially when they try to serve the poor. The wars that exists today in Africa and the Middle East do demonstrate the lack of progress of super powers in protecting human rights and being real champions of peace.

While there is respect for our powerful leaders some guidance is needed in education and social affairs so that meaningful servicing of Human rights can progress. Non-governmental agencies can better support developing peoples with no strings attached.

My name is Dawnis Ba, I have worked within the field of Human Services for over 25 years. I have worked with both Government and non-governmental agencies towards the alleviation of poverty and addressing social service and human rights concerns. I am currently a private resettlement consultant, trainer and specialist: a problem solver for migration and poverty concerns. The World is calling on a real champion. Blood is a terrible thing to Waste and it cries from the ground. Visit http://www.globalhandincorporated.org

Ireland Shoots To Become Shared Services Center Of Europe

Ireland isn't going to be the next Calcutta or Mumbai. It isn't trying to be the back office customer care contact center Mecca of the Western world. Which is probably just as well.

What it does want to do is build its position as a leading European provider of the next business stage up from contact centers - contact center plus, if you like - offering serious technical support and a whole range of services way beyond giving simple solutions to straightforward customer inquiries. Some are operated by outsourced suppliers but most in Ireland are managed by the companies they serve.

Here, staff are dealing with the entire internal communications system for vast, multi-national operations. They are handling not only traditional Helpdesk calls, but providing technical support to their own staff and business-to-business, dealing with HR issues like recruitment and sick leave, payroll systems, company accounts as well as in-company communications about policy and strategy, staff and customer information and the intranet function.

In its now sophisticated telecoms sector, Ireland boasts 66 contact centres for a range of companies that include 3Com, American Airlines, AOL, Dell, eBay, GE Insurance, Google, Hewlett Packard, IBM, MBNA, Oracle, Starwood Hotels, Symantec and Xerox - and that's just an arbitrary sample.

These centres - Europeans call them Shared Services Centres, but most Americans will be more familiar with the term Managed Services - are where Ireland sees its growth potential, though the Irish have no intention of turning their backs on ordinary contact center investments serving banking and catalog customers for example.

Technology is changing the product. Just answering the phone isn't enough these days. To be successful, the centers need to serve the world in a host of functions.

A Customer Backlash May Boost Ireland's Efforts

A recent survey of 1,000 UK adults by contact center industry analysts ContactBabel found that 142 had switched supplier because their existing one used an offshore service, while three in four said they felt more negatively towards their supplier if they used offshore agents.

Steve Morrell, principal analyst at ContactBabel said in the report: "If UK businesses do not address the concerns of their customers, the level of customer defection will increase and their profits will decline further. "

Therein lies a problem - and for Ireland, an opportunity. In India, university graduates, attracted by the prestige of contact center jobs, earn perhaps ten times the average wage but still cost their employers only a tenth of a European or US-based operation.

Hypothetically, that means a typical bank with 12 million customers and revenues of $400 per customer each year would save over $17 million by replacing 1,000 of its expensive call centre staff with 1,000 in India. The downside is that same hypothetical bank would need only about one per cent of its customers to defect to another bank in protest to have lost all those savings instantly.

"Ireland is the only native English-speaking member of the Eurozone," points out Brendan Haplin, International Media Manager at the IDA, the Irish government agency which seeks inward investment from around the globe. "Ireland offers a first class advanced telecommunications infrastructure that includes vital bandwidth and hosting capacity, and we back this all with solid IDA support, both financial and practical."

The Appeal? Language and Low Taxes?

The landscape in Ireland - corporate and cultural - has attracted far more than its fair share of not only European but US business as well. "Ireland has changed radically from 10 or 20 years ago," Haplin says. "We now have between 60 and 70 shared services centers that are multi-lingual, pan-European and trans-Atlantic."

We're talking about major companies the size and scale of IBM or Dell. On the whole, these organisations are extremely happy with the quality of staff, the quality of life and the delivery of service they have found in Ireland. They bring in selected technical experts from the States and then use locally selected personnel to develop and expand the skills base.

These big operators are evidence of success, not only because they stay there but because they can point to significant cost reduction, increased efficiencies, better quality customer service and a real drive in sales which ultimately delivers better returns to shareholders.

Ireland, adds Haplin, offers an appealing package, complete with low corporate tax of just 12.5% It works hard to minimise bureaucracy and instead to engineer a low-risk, quick start-up, high-performance knowledge economy. "We have a well developed environment for call center and shared services operations because we have all the basic ingredients in place: the skills and knowledge, the experience and availability of IT-literate and multi-lingual staff and the global strategic fit that provides facilities for companies to 'follow the sun' on a 24-hour model."

A Population Increase Bodes Well for Employers

While Ireland may merit a spot on a company's shortlist of potential offshore locations today, what about tomorrow? Will the right talent - an enough of it - be available? According to Dr William Harris, Director General of the Science Foundation of Ireland, the answer is a resounding 'yes.' "The key element in creating knowledge is intangible assets such as expertise, insight, talent, passion, imagination and persistence.

"Investing in such abilities, we believe, is the best predictor of success Ireland could have," Harris adds. "Ireland has a wealth of young talent ready to make science and engineering the next great wave of Irish innovation."

Ireland is one of very few European countries showing an increase in its population, and some 260,000 people, 12.6% of the total workforce, are employed in business services. While the population of workers declines in other countries, boding real problems up ahead, Ireland looks to growing a youthful talent pool on a par with that of the US.

[SIDEBAR] The Irish Landscape: Poised To Compete

Ireland has changed and changed dramatically. Gone are those sad depictions of lovelorn girls waving their tearful goodbyes to men who were set for a life in the New Worlds of America or Australia? They'd make their fortunes and return to build a castle and raise a family in Kilkenny.

In the last couple of decades the Celtic Tiger has been thrusting its way through the jungles of the world economy. He's getting plumper, healthier and more voracious with every paw print he makes.

The Environment Is Hospitable

The quality of life is a fabulous balance of stunning scenery and great leisure options. Golf courses, angling, cycling, camping, hiking and finding deserted bays along the rugged coastline are just a few possibilities to ponder.

Real estate is cheap (except in central Dublin) and land plentiful. Gasoline is about half the price it is in the UK and corporate tax of 12.5% sits alongside the US's 39.5% or the UK's 30% Though Value Added Tax runs at 21 per cent, it won't have much of an impact on companies whose profits are based on export outside the EU and the government has simplified the paperwork. If 85 per cent of your goods or services are for export, then you will be exempted, so you don't have to fill in forms to reclaim VAT.

The Irish are renowned - and rightly - for their warm welcome, and that extends not only to a pint of Guinness with a passing stranger but to those who have come to stay longer.

Unlike some of their European neighbours, the Irish don't resent the arrival of migrant workers but welcome them with open arms as a real and useful addition to the native skills base.

Location and Politics Provide a Counterbalance

Air travel is reasonable but needs more development. The main airport is close to Dublin and offers about 100 direct destinations worldwide. There is a second international airport at Shannon and smaller mostly short-haul facilities at Cork, Belfast and Londonderry. Most international flights are out of Dublin or Shannon.

In terms of moving goods, ferry services are strong but the distance from mainland Europe makes them slow. Although a crossing from Dublin to Holyhead on the Welsh coast is less than two hours, Normandy is 19 hours away. From Belfast and Larne in the north, there are faster crossings to Scotland and England.

A long history of a sluggish, agricultural economy meant Ireland was slow to move into the 20th, never mind the 21st, century. Outside of a few main cities, it remains a wonderfully unspoilt but also under-developed rural society.

Ireland came into the European Union with Objective One status, meaning that its under-developed economic state entitled it to a whole package of major infrastructure grants to help it move forward rapidly. Its heavy rural culture saw the benefits of the Common Agricultural Policy, instantly enabling farmers to access guaranteed markets and guaranteed prices for their produce, even if a lot of it did end up dumped on butter mountains and in milk lakes. Almost half of the EU's entire 44.5 billion Euro budget is spent on agricultural subsidies of one kind or another.

The maze of minor country roads lend Ireland much of its charm but aren't much use for heavy lorries carrying large loads of produce to marketplaces across the world. European Union money helped extend a main road and motorway infrastructure that was essential for economic growth.

All of this helped encourage new investors from other countries to set up facilities in Ireland. The government encouraged them with appealing packages that drew in the likes of Dell, Xerox, Baxter International, Hertz and a host of others before they even got onto contact centers.

But all that Eurozone assistance has gone now. The surge of the Celtic Tiger, the reality of economic growth, has forced Ireland to move from being subsidised by the European Union to being a subsidy provider to other emerging nations, including some of the 10 new countries whose joining has taken the European bloc to 25 in total.

Maggie Stanfield is a national and international business journalist with extensive knowledge of customer services provision around the world. Contact her at: maggie@writtenwords.eu

Customizing Products and Services Presents Entrepreneurs a Great Way to Bootstrap a Business

We live in a world where mass production and scalability have enabled consumers around the world the opportunity to enjoy a wider range of Consumer Products and Services than ever before. Large scale production drives down prices. Items that were once luxuries are now within reach of masses of consumers on every continent.

Overwhelmingly the benefits of scale and industrialization are beneficial to society. Jobs, distribution opportunities, global trade and finance have all thrived in large part because of the benefits of a consumer driven world. The Benetton sweater or MAC cosmetic that is purchased in Denver is the same as a unit of either sold in Sydney.

There is a downside to mass production, a downside that presents opportunities for those seeking to position their enterprise successfully within the whirl of this hyper--competitive consumer marketplace. Most mass produced products are impersonal. They offer value, utility and uniform performance features. They do not, however, differentiate themselves significantly from competitors. This is where the creative and craft minded producers can maximize their offerings.

Hermes purses and scarves are famous, but simple examples of a Brand that has been built from scratch, painstakingly over time and by being extremely protective of distribution channels for their limited production, hand crafted products. Hermes controls the price and design of each unit produced with a discipline that borders on fanaticism. When a design becomes popular and demand soars, the family owned Company caps production far short of maximum sales potential. This is a classic example of a limited distribution strategy that serves to increase Hermes' product desirability among discerning consumers.

Ferrari automobiles, Zegna menswear, Piaget watches, Tory Burch fashions and La Prairie Skin Care and Cosmetics are other examples of Brands that have created world-wide franchises by avoiding any taint of a mass production model. They sell service, customization and personalized product that elite customers demand. The strategy does not need to be limited to exclusive couture brands, however!

The Branding and Marketing Consulting firm that we manage utilizes many different forms of personalized service or customized product assembly to differentiate our clients. In order to be able to compete with behemoth, multi-national brands a new company must be able to identify their Unique Selling Proposition (USP). A better ingredient story or a better mousetrap design will not suffice.

Recently a prospective client approached us with a Perfume concept. The Fragrance world is huge and brutally competitive. The perfumer we met with was keen to commercialize a range of scents, mainly by utilizing generic top notes. We spent a good deal of time trying to define a USP that would differentiate her product, while creating a niche she could occupy. The final, agreed suggestion was to sell a value added personalized blending service with each offering customized, value added and unique to each client. There are a number of added special service features which insure that the Brand will be perceived as unique by her "alpha" clientele.

We have utilized one form or another of this strategy for Gourmet Food products, Toys, Cosmetics, Wellness regimens, Service Providers and many other client projects. An important feature of this strategy is the opportunity to bootstrap the product or service when limited resources are at hand. Local sales can be leveraged to regional sales and beyond. The enterprise can be grown at a pace that is more easily handled by thinly resourced entrepreneurs.

Red Bull, Snapple and Arizona Iced Tea did not start as national and international brands. They were bootstrapped. They found holes in saturated, developed marketplaces and they filled niches. This model is available to creative entrepreneurs who are driven to compete, but understand that they must deal from a different, smaller deck of cards.

by: Geoff Ficke

Geoff Ficke has been a serial entrepreneur for almost 50 years. As a small boy, earning his spending money doing odd jobs in the neighborhood, he learned the value of selling himself, offering service and value for money.

After putting himself through the University of Kentucky (B.A. Broadcast Journalism, 1969) and serving in the United States Marine Corp, Mr. Ficke commenced a career in the cosmetic industry. After rising to National Sales Manager for Vidal Sassoon Hair Care at age 28, he then launched a number of ventures, including Rubigo Cosmetics, Parfums Pierre Wulff Paris, Le Bain Couture and Fashion Fragrance.

Geoff Ficke and his consulting firm, Duquesa Marketing, has assisted businesses large and small, domestic and international, entrepreneurs, inventors and students in new product development, capital formation, licensing, marketing, sales and business plans and successful implementation of his customized strategies. He is a Senior Fellow at the Page Center for Entrepreneurial Studies, Business School, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio.

Questions to Consider When Procuring Professional Security Services

Why contract out security services?

I can immediately think of four reasons. First is the increased value an outsourced company brings to the table because of its professional staff and experience in the security industry. This depth and breadth of experience and knowledge is offered because of relationships with other clients that have faced the same or different challenges. The second reason is the cost. Simply put, because of the expertise and experience that the vendor brings, the financial weight of training, recruiting, hiring and providing benefits for the employees is considerably less to the client than administering these programs in-house. Third is the transfer of liability from the client to the security company. The security company bears the legal load and ramifications of particular incidents that could occur on your property. Lastly, and in my opinion, most importantly is the peace of mind an effective security company can provide so you the client can focus on the everyday business that defines you as a company.

Why Change Security Vendors?

Change vendors when the value is gone, plain and simple, but you have to know what's valuable to you as an individual client. If you have a small budget and need a low bill rate, know that's what you value. If it's superior management and executive accessibility, than know that's what you value. If it's a vendor that can accommodate a client on a national basis, than know that's what you value. When value isn't there anymore and when your vendor's program no longer represents you as a client anymore, it's time to change vendors. However, certain values have repercussions. Low bill rates will produce low wages. National vendors might not give you specific attention on a local level. And having a phenomenal program with high-end personnel combined with strong management will cost you more. You just have to know what you value the most and work off of that.

What are important things to include in an RFP?

First things first, an RFP must be designed to allow you to compare "apples to apples". This is especially important when it comes to the financial proposal from each potential vendor. To achieve this, the pricing structure must include the itemized list of costs to include wages, bill rate, necessary insurance coverage, employee benefits costs, as well as vendor overhead and supervision structure. A well defined scope of work included in the RFP will allow the vendor to completely understand the "job" requirements and price accordingly. When preparing the RFP, remember the more you specify; the more accurate and comparable the respective bids will be.

What comprises the cost of security services?

The cost of security is found in the difference between the client's hourly bill rate and the guard's hourly pay rate. That difference between bill rate and pay rate is the result of an equation based on the value of particular line items, which vary company to company. Examples of these variable items are liability insurance because it fluctuates due to claims against the individual company. Another is worker's compensation insurance which fluctuates in suit. Corporate and branch salaries, marketing, cost of bidding projects, and rent are examples of general administrative expenses that differ. Paid holidays, paid sick time, medical and dental benefits, and more are also factors. Therefore, it's important to know what the benefits are and how much they cost per individual per month in order for you to make a fair comparison of one company to another. Lastly is profit which will vary depending on the company's prerogative. Whether it's low, high or normal, it is a direct example of their business model. Security is an industry where the quality of service should dictate the cost of the program. Never should the cost of security dictate the quality of service.

What are good questions to ask security companies and why?

Four questions that quickly come to mind are the following: First, Who are your competitors? This is important because you want to know what niche a company serves. This will help you gauge whether they are the correct fit for you and your property. Second, what are the responsibilities of the salesman and his guidelines for selling work? This is important because it will reveal management structure and should address a well designed business model. You want to be treated as an appreciated client and not as a number of hours. Third, how many hours are assigned to the area manager? This question will give you an idea of attention you'll be receiving and how loud you'll have to shout to be heard. Finally, how many accounts has a company lost in the past year? This general question might be the tip of the iceberg in regards to attrition rates, wages, performance, and client satisfaction. The commitment to understanding your needs, defining them in the RFP, and asking quality questions of your vendor to produce a perfect fit is the difference between a long term value-based relationship and starting the process over and over again.

By Nick Sapia

The Guardian Force, Inc.

http://www.tgfinc.com

Nick Sapia is the Director of Business Development and an Operations Manager for The Guardian Force, Inc., a private security and concierge provider in Boston, MA.

A graduate of Northeastern Univerisity, Nick Sapia has previously worked for the Executive Office of Public Safety for Massachusetts, top law firms, and presidential campaigns. He can be contacted via email at nsapia@tgfinc.com or nsapia@sapiacorp.com

SSON Roundtable Debate - UK Public Sector Shared Services - Where Now and Where Next?

Sharing services has risen up the agendas of the UK's national and local governments in recent years, propelled by political and financial trends as well as by more concrete factors such as Sir Peter Gershon's 2004-5 Efficiency Review and Sir David Varney's report on transformational government. In an attempt to throw some light on recent developments and to examine where shared services may be headed in future, SSON convened a roundtable debate involving a group of practitioners and advisors at local and national level, chaired by SSON's online editor Jamie Liddell. The results were, indeed, illuminating...

Attending were:

Tony Isaacs

Programme Manager

Warwickshire Direct Partnership

The Warwickshire Direct Partnership is a shared services programme comprising all six local authorities in the county of Warwickshire: North Warwickshire Borough Council; Nuneaton & Bedworth Borough Council; Rugby Borough Council; Stratford District Council; Warwick District Council; Warwickshire County Council; and three private-sector partners in Steria, MacFarlane Telesystems and Northgate Information Systems.

Dominic Swift

Head of Shared Services

Browne Jacobson

Browne Jacobson is one of the largest law firms in the Midlands with offices in Nottingham, Birmingham and London. The firm acts for over 100 local authorities, either directly or through their insurers. It recently published its Shared Services Survey '08, one of the most comprehensive surveys ever carried out into shared services in the UK.

Peter Telford

Chief Executive Officer

Research Councils UK Shared Services Centre

Research Councils UK (RCUK) is a strategic partnership between the seven UK Research Councils. RCUK was established in 2002 to enable the Councils to work together more effectively to enhance the overall impact and effectiveness of their research, training and innovation activities, contributing to the delivery of the Government's objectives for science and innovation.

Ray Tomkinson

Local Government Improvement Specialist and Shared Services Author

Ray Tomkinson is the author of Shared Services in Local Government: Improving Service Delivery (Gower, 2007). Ray managed the Welland Partnership shared services project and currently operates as a consultant.

SSON: Peter, you're at the head of one of the more prominent national shared services centres [SSCs]. Can you explain a little about the drivers behind the move in your organisation?

Peter Telford: Behind the Research Council's business case are benefits focusing on what are seen as financial gains which will be passed back to research and the research community, but probably more importantly in the early stages is the feeling that we can secure better effectiveness in business support to that research community by aggregating the seven Research Councils' services onto one common platform, and transforming them. The business case started with an outline about two years ago. There was a lot of work done on certain parts of the shared service model even before that, but the activity's really come together in the last two years. The full business case was accepted by the Research Councils in line with CSR07 [Comprehensive Spending Review 2007] in August last year, and the intention at the moment is that we will go live on the platform at the beginning of next year. We already have some services live in the IT and strategic sourcing areas.

SSON: Tony, your project's been going for rather longer than that. Would you say that the drivers behind the Warwickshire Direct Partnership are similar?

Tony Isaacs: I think ours were slightly different in that when we started off in 2002/3 the driver behind that was, basically, to capitalise on the money that was available from central government at the time. We made a bid as the Warwickshire Online Partnership, and set up that particular group specifically to bid for that money: a total of £2m. We identified a number of different projects that we would attempt to procure and implement with that money, not least of which was the joint procurement by all six authorities in Warwickshire of a CRM [citizen-relationship management] system and associated telephony systems. We got the full £2m and since then we have actually implemented it; we jointly went to procurement and we've ended up with the Northgate front office CRM system.

Now I don't think the goalposts have changed, but the drivers have. I think the drivers have changed in that there is no money available now; it's exactly the opposite insofar as before there was money splashing about, if you will, from central government, and now it's the opposite insofar as with CSR07, with all the efficiencies and demands that there are on local authorities to save, there is an overriding need to make things more effective and more efficient, and shared services is seen as being one key method of doing that - with the consequence that we are in a position now where our chief executives, our leaders, are very keen in looking at what can be done. And based upon that - or around all this - is the whole area of the two-tier structure within Warwickshire, and the drive that the government may want to push - and seems to be pushing - with regards to unitaries. But Warwickshire is very clear that it wants to retain its two-tier organisational structure and will do so by sharing services.

Dominic Swift: Tony, I just want to follow something through on that, because it's a theme that emerged when we did our research on shared services [Browne Jacobson's Shared Services Survey '08] that certainly efficiency savings and improvements in the way services are delivered are key drivers, but what you've identified as a lack of money was one of the real inhibitors, because in order to deliver shared services there is a considerable cost: You've already mentioned telephony which was obviously put in as part of the grant, and one of the problems that people seemed to face was the immediate increase in costs to deliver a shared services stream before any efficiency savings could actually be delivered.

Tony Isaacs: You're absolutely right insofar as there's a need to spend in order to deliver efficiencies, and what we're seeking to do is to build up good, strong, powerful business cases that maybe looking over a five-year spread, so that while there is a recognition that to begin with you may need to spend money, over the period following that it's anticipated that there will be savings. And Warwickshire may be different, but we don't necessarily regard it just as pounds saved: it could be efficiencies. So it's non-financial benefits as well as financial ones.

SSON: Ray, do you see many differences between the drivers for local and national shared services?

Ray Tomkinson: Yes I think there's one big difference, which is the issue of government compulsion, as it were. There's no doubt about it: central government departments recognise that they really don't have much alternative at the moment to creating some element of shared services - because the Treasury makes sure that they do, because the Treasury controls the purse strings. It's less clear that in local government every council is going to have to go down the shared services road.

As was being made abundantly clear a minute or two ago, local authorities have different ways of approaching their financial restrictions or their political considerations, one of which is the unitary agenda - or the two-tier agenda in other councils. So some councils are going to have to go down the shared services route because it's the only way organisationally that they're going to function. Other councils don't have that imperative at the moment and I'm working with one group of four councils which are looking at sharing services but not because of financial pressures. They're looking at it because they want to make service improvements, to improve resilience of services, and also give opportunities to create new services. So it's a very different agenda between the two.

SSON: Peter, from a national perspective are you seeing an increased pressure from government to implement?

Peter Telford: Yes. Historically I've been in shared services in the private sector, local authority and now central government so I suppose I can absolutely empathise with the previous comments. I think the compulsion from central government is largely fiscal although there is a feeling that the transformational agenda that sits behind it is also very prominent. I think the other difference in central government is it is easier to identify and reach a critical mass where you can actually effect a transformation and deliver efficiency and effectiveness. At the local government level, it is more difficult to create critical mass - which then makes the funding routes and the benefits probably more difficult to determine in the early stages.

SSON: OK. There's been a lot of talk about what advantages other than cost savings can be delivered through shared services. And this brings us on to the issue of benchmarking. When it comes to savings you can obviously benchmark against what you're saving and how much you've saved against previous budgets, for example. But when it comes to service-delivery, how can one establish exactly what you're benchmarking, and against what and against whom? Is there a common thread here in terms of where you go for benchmarking?

Dominic Swift: I think benchmarking's so different, for different projects, is the long and the short of it. What we've seen through our research is that there's a very wide range of different projects - we've already talked about the drivers, and it really depends on what you want out of your project. One of the frustrations that we heard at the national launches that we did of our review, was that there wasn't enough benchmarking of the actual outcomes. And a lot of people said to me "how do we judge whether this has been a success?"

One of the problems is that if you produce a much more efficient service, which is more attractive to the general public (if it is a front-facing service, which more and more are) is that it will actually be used more. And as a result you're getting better value, in terms of hits, but the cost of the service may actually go up. So it is quite a complicated job to benchmark and I think it requires some very clear outputs to be identified at the outset, and to look for comparable projects.

SSON: Tony, you've got a wide variety of services you need to benchmark...

Tony Isaacs: Yes, that's right. I can concentrate really around the CRM system, because all the information we've got is via customer services, and improvements we've made to that around the CRM system. What we've done is take benchmarking as a very serious exercise in its own right, and what we've sought to do is to get customer insight by using different databases, information from the CRM, information from MacFarlane - the telephony system - and pool all that information among all the partners. And what we've done then is to say "ok, concentrate on the areas that we want to concentrate on" and to make sure that we do improve the services that we are seeking to improve. We have got what we call an Improvement Forum, which is a relatively recent creation and which is proving to be very successful as well. And that's looking at the way in which the CRM in particular can add value to the whole process of improving customer services.

We are concentrating as well on a variety of different access channels, so we've got the CRM system, we've got telephone contact obviously, face-to-face via our one-stop-shops - we've got eight of them at the moment, with another eight planned for next year. We've got kiosks as well. But also I think most significantly, in the next few months or so what we're looking to do is drive ourselves forward with web self-serve, and look to try to move people more towards that means of accessing services. And I think that will be a double win because the customer will benefit greatly from that in terms of speed of service, but also we will, because we'll drive down the unit costs, and that quite clearly is a key method of making savings.

SSON: In the private sector a great deal of benchmarking goes on between individual companies and organisations, and as a result you have the idea of world-class et cetera. Is it a pipedream to suggest you might be able to get similar systems set up in the public sector, in which every region and every locality has its own pressures?

Peter Telford: I don't think it is and I think the benefit of the public sector is, by and large we're not competing with each other, and therefore people are much more willing to share information and the assumptions that sit under that information to try to help each other along. And I'm quite heartened by that kind of culture. I think the difficulty with the private sector is that it's usually wrapped in commercial connotations and costings as well, which makes it very difficult to unpick to ensure you are comparing like with like. Albeit that said, the difference is that there is much more evidence when you can find it and it's much more prescriptive in terms of service levels than I would suggest you would find in the public sector.

Dominic Swift: I'm very interested to see whether there can be some sort of worldwide benching or benchmarking which really does define the success of projects. I'd be very interested in understanding more of what Tony's doing and how the measurement takes place, capture of information and then the dissemination of that, to actually judge how that service is being delivered and where the successes are - and where perhaps the challenges are. And also what sort of services you're comparing that with. Because as I see it, shared services range across such a vast array of the different public sector areas - we were talking earlier on about this being local authorities but clearly it goes to health and other public sector bodies as well - and from that point of view the real problem you'll have it seems to me is comparing apples with apples.

Tony Isaacs: I can give you a fairly high-level description of what we're doing, and that is that we're using some software you may be familiar with - Mosaic Data - and we've populated a lot of databases according to the information that we've gleaned from there, and that's proving to be very much the benchmarking process that we're going to go through. And there are certain authorities out of the partnership that are leading on this.

For each of the projects that we have, we have lead authorities who volunteer to lead on particular projects. We've got Nuneaton for example to lead on one, as well as the county, and the county has information that it uses from its observatory, and there's a pooling of information, and there's an agreement via the Improvement Forum for example whereby they do concentrate on specific areas with the data they've accumulated - whether it's county-wide or just individual authority-wide. But basically they work together as best they can to provide these benchmarking criteria. It's not a quick process by any means. But over time we build up that data and then we can use it from year to year to do comparisons to see how things are improving.

In addition to that I don't know if you're familiar with NI14, the latest government key indicator which has just come out, which is to do with avoidable contact with clients - customers - with local authorities. And we'll be using the CRM to glean quite a lot of information via the CRM system. But it is a corporate-wide key indicator, so you will have other services, other departments, feeding in this information as well. That information is supposed to be started in October of this year and it will be used year-on-year to gauge how we're doing, in terms of avoiding avoidable contact, and looking to improve that.

Peter Telford: I think it's fair to say whilst we have not yet built the longevity of data that Tony describes - and I absolutely agree with him that building a profile and a trajectory is invaluable as a benchmark - we haven't really got to the point yet where we are able to benchmark our service delivery over a period of time; what we are doing is assessing our performance as we transfer services. We've got a baseline against some services from the Research Councils and from my own experience and from talking with others in the public sector we will then aggregate what we believe will be appropriate targets for the Research Councils against their baseline. But I'm with Dominic: initially it is very difficult to compare apples with apples and ensure you've got a representative benchmark.

Dominic Swift: Peter, it's very interesting from my point of view. I quite agree with you about the "apples with apples" thing. I think what's been said about the public sector is very true: it's much more transparent, there's much more desire to learn from each other. One of the things I'm doing tomorrow actually is go down to sit in in Kettering where they've been running a shared services project for many years - well, well before Gershon and Varney and the rest. And that's very interesting because people are open about what's happening in shared services and happy to learn from each other. The difficulty seems to be that they range over such a wide area, the danger is that unless people come to some common terminology about what outputs are going to be defined for particular services it may be possible to benchmark over time as Tony's doing, but actually benchmarking across different projects will be very difficult.

Ray Tomkinson: I think that's very valid. One of the issues is that there is no commonality across authorities as to what constitutes a service. So what you tend to find is that people dive for a process - and even when they dive for a process it doesn't tell you an awful lot about the service that you're trying to share. And there's often a real difficulty in stopping trying to find the trees when you're trying to fight your way through the forest. So from that point of view I think benchmarking has on occasion got a very bad name because people use it as an excuse for not doing anything; and it's only in the past couple of years where I think people have been much more prepared to be open about the fact they need to consider sharing as an option and sometimes benchmarking isn't used as a blockage.

SSON: Let's move on from benchmarking. We were talking a little about the private sector a minute ago - are we of the opinion that the private sector is an absolute necessity within UK public sector shared services, and to what extent is it a foregone conclusion that this is going to result in a degree of privatisation of services?

Dominic Swift: This is a question we asked in our survey: the sort of view that we had was that of course the private sector is an important potential partner in shared services, but there were just as many opportunities for the public sector to work together without the private sector. So, yes, it's part of the picture but it certainly isn't necessarily the whole of it. And I don't think that privatisation is an inevitability from shared services: where we saw the private sector coming in, and the survey really highlighted this, links back to the funding issues we discussed earlier on.

Where you needed some sort of IT facility and commonality across a number of authorities and participants, quite often the private sector partner was someone who could deliver that in order to relieve some of the initial cost difficulties of setting up a shared service which frankly couldn't be borne by some of the participating authorities.

SSON: Tony, that's certainly what you were saying about the initial start-up of Warwickshire, isn't it?

Tony Isaacs: Yes certainly: and it's ongoing because we've just finished the renewal of the CRM contract and the telephony contract, so from the beginning of next year we will actually be embarking on new five-year contracts replacing the existing ones. And that's the position of the CRM, the telephony, the ICT systems around it - so yes, it's inevitable that we have to go down that route. We've had good - very good - negotiations with the private sector on this and I'd like to think that all of us have come to a very good, fair new contract.

Ray Tomkinson: I think actually the point that was made about investment is a very good one. There is actually no reason why local authorities can't do sharing on their own without the private sector, and there are lots of examples around now where groups of councils are trying to do public-public partnerships. But I do agree: where there is a real need for investment - particularly around IT - then that's where the problems start for local authorities, and that's why they often do resort to the private sector.

But I do think that it's worthwhile pointing out that as much as there are needs for investment, particularly in IT, there are lots of services which do not need that investment, and I'm thinking of professional services like planning, or building controls are another good example, or environmental health is another good example, where simply you're dealing with people. One of the problems though that local authorities do find in that area is the scarcity of professional planners, environmental health officers, building control officers. And often they have to partner with the private sector simply for that reason.

Peter Telford: We need to get back to the point that I think Dominic made earlier which is in analysing what you're trying to achieve with your SSC you then start to look at how you're going to do it. And how you're going to do it may or may not include the private sector. If you do seek investment from the private sector, they will seek a return on that investment; you just have to recognise that. They may indeed want a profit which may erode the efficiency savings you seek to make.

I think another thing that the private sector brings is experience and expertise in the sorts of change and benchmarking data which you may need. That said, I think the blend of public and private sector in trying to get to a shared service centre is the right one and the transfer of risk to the private sector through doing this is always pretty key in terms of what you want to get out against your project.

Tony Isaacs: I was just going to pick up on the point that if you can go for joint procurement as opposed to individual authority procurement, you can really reap the benefits, and the bottom line will be that you do make considerable savings - not so much a profit will result, but it will produce efficiencies in savings. We found that with our negotiations latterly with Northgate and MacFarlane, and also more significantly during the course of the contract that we've just had, when we as a partnership stuck together and wanted to get individual things out of Northgate, and/or MacFarlane, by standing firm we could really apply the screws to them, and they were forthcoming; so we could really achieve quite significant savings on different aspects of procurement that we did during the course of the four years we've had the system.

In terms of profit, I'm not sure whether profit's the right word as I just mentioned; what we're looking for are savings and efficiencies and I choose to use those terms rather than profit. In essence we can justify what we're doing now: adding value, making sure we are getting the market rate or better, and we can quite happily and justifiably tell our chief officers and members based on the business cases that we've produced that we are getting best value, we are making savings and efficiencies on the basis of this joint procurement exercise.

SSON: Moving on: the future form and structure of shared services in the UK is, it appears, going to be determined in large part by competition between authorities, in a lot of areas. How do you see local shared services existing in the UK in, say, two or three governments' time?

Ray Tomkinson: Two or three governments' time, that's interesting. So that'll be two Conservative and one Labour... I suppose my thinking goes like this: I think that in 15 to 20 years' time you will see a patchwork quilt across - certainly the local government sector; I'm not quite so sure about the central government sector. And what I mean by that is you will have a group of statutory authorities that are all geographically based - whether that's a county or a district - there will be differences across the country.

Secondly they will have different types of shared services in different areas. There will be some that will be public-public; some that will be public-private; and some that will be public-public in terms of different sectors: health will have joined in; the police will have joined in. Because the pressures of the CAA regime coming from the Audit Commission mean that all public sector organisations in geographical areas have got to think whether it's better to work together than to work separately. And as a result of that I think you'll get a really different appreciation across, and in some areas there will be very heavy private involvement and in other areas probably none.

Dominic Swift: Basically I think it'll depend a little bit on the nature of the shared service, to be honest. Sorry - I keep coming back to that point really. It struck us during the course of the work we did that there are two different forms of shared service: the ones which perhaps have been more prevalent to date, which have been the sort of back-office, IT function - ICT-reliant functions - and then the front-office function. Now they have very different possibilities in terms of partners. If you look at the front office it is a locally-delivered service and therefore your partners are chosen by geography, and geography alone: they can't be chosen by much else, other than if you go to some sort of call-centre arrangement. But the other services can actually be amalgamated a lot more and with less sensitivity to geography.

So I think there are going to be some quite different groupings and possibly some legal authorities who particularly drive the delivery of a good service who perhaps sell to a very wide range of local authorities: health, via police, all of these are potential customers for them. And then on the local basis it's going to be a lot more down to politics and the dynamics between the politicians as to how well their shared services are going to be run, and I think some of the political difficulties we have in Nottinghamshire, where I'm based, may make it quite challenging to get some of those local shared services off the ground.

SSON: Tony, I know this is something you've been thinking about, and obviously as quite a successful service provider it must be on the agenda. So let's put you on the spot: do you think you will be at the forefront of a successful selling of services in the next couple of years?

Tony Isaacs: Yes I think I do in the next couple of years, but if you're talking longer-term than that I think - and I hasten to add that this is my own personal view - the likelihood is that there will be an increase in unitaries. And there could well be in Warwickshire as well. I can put forward a very rosy picture in some ways - but at the same time you've got nagging at the back of your mind all the time the difficulty that there is in actually creating successful shared services - and I think that's from a political point of view as well as the straightforward business-case point of view.

I think there will be more and more unitary authorities, to be honest. And I wouldn't be surprised if even Warwickshire eventually ended up with two unitary authorities rather than the six authorities we've got now. I think it's almost inevitable, and I think the government will continue to apply the screws, demand more and more savings year upon year, and the consequences will be that it'll almost be inevitable that there will be more.

Peter Telford: I think this is too early in our development path to consider and I think building a stable service with reference-ability is key before we could go there. The wider central government agenda is pretty clear in terms of convergence of effort and activity onto some of the core shared services in the bigger departments. That's already starting to come because of the requirements laid down by the Cabinet Office. And you can see the agenda already moving to: how do you ensure that there's a commonality of solution and agreement on service levels that are given to customers? How do you allocate customer benefit across a broader-based shared service? How do you prioritise how you would offer services to customers? Those are debates which I think are becoming more prevalent and therefore indicative of activities and departments coming together on shared service platforms.

More Articles: Want to receive more articles like this? Have a tip, learning or case study you want to share? Join our growing community of shared services and outsourcing professionals. Sign up to our eNewsletters and ensure you receive the latest news, articles and features from our growing global community. For more information email enquire@ssonetwork.com

The National Debt Helpline And The Services It Offers

The National Debt Helpline is primarily a telephone service that provides free debt help, advice and information to people in the UK. It is part of the Money Advice Trust, which is a registered charity that tries to promote the availability of free debt help for people with financial problems.

The National Debt Helpline also has an extensive website, which offers a host of written advice, guides and fact sheets that can be downloaded free of charge. One of the most useful of these is the guide to producing your own personal budget. This is the key starting point in dealing with any debt problem.

If you work with a debt management company or other professional advisor, they will always start by analysing your current income and expenditure to see what you can afford to put towards your debts. You can do this yourself too if you know how, and the fact sheet on the National Debt Helpline website takes you through the process step by step.

The personal budget guide includes a blank budget for that you can use to fill in all the details of your finances. You start off with your income, adding details of all the income you receive. This obviously includes any wages from work that you do, but you also need to remember things like tax credits, income support, child benefit, any maintenance payments you receive and any other income you get.

Then you complete the expenditure section, detailing all the things you spend money on. It can be surprisingly tricky to remember everything you have to spend money on over the course of a year, so the guide is a great help in setting out most of the possible types of expenditure you could have.

You need to decide whether to do your personal budget on a weekly or monthly basis. How you get paid and deal with your bills will have a bearing on this and be a factor in deciding which option is best for you. In addition to obvious expenses such as mortgage, rent, gas, electricity and water rates, you also need to build in things that you may not spend money on every week or every month. These could include clothing, life insurance, car insurance, road tax, TV licence, holidays, prescriptions, etc.

By using the personal budget plan provided by the National Debt Helpline, you can begin to get a very accurate picture of your financial situation. Understanding exactly where you money is going, and how much you can afford to pay towards any debts you have is an essential starting point for dealing with debt problems. You will need this information to prove to your creditors that you cannot afford to repay your debts in full, and to justify making reduced payments towards them.

For more information on the National Debt Helpline visit the author's Help With Debt website, which offers free, unbiased advice on a range of debt related issues, including IVAs and using debt settlement companies.