Taurus CEO Sharon Williams has just returned from Singapore after speaking at the Social Media World conference. Speaking to an audience of marketing leaders, from companies such as Dell and LinkedIn, Sharon discussed how using social media conversation can build your companies future. Points discussed were listening to customers and their expectations via social media, assimilation of customer’s views with company strategy and encouraging consumer participations.

We have been hired to take this fun voice Golf GPS into the Australian market. Well priced, the ideal gift for all golf enthusiasts!

Taurus has been hired to oversee the different components from design to implementation of the Frame Groups new website – good to be working with long standing clients

East River Software are the only company to provide a software solution that allows you to track, monitor and manage your carbon footprint and energy spend.

I’ve just left the High Court in Canberra after being fortunate enough to sit in on day three of the tobacco industry versus the Australian Federal Government (the Commonwealth) Plain Packaging Act. I’ve brought my two teenage daughters down for 24 hours to watch the case in court partly inspired by a professional colleague involved deeply in the case.

I have spent my career involved with brand creation, differentiation and promotion, but as importantly, my citizenship of Australia is perhaps the most affected by this landmark decision about unprecedented government intervention. This case is ground breaking on both issues and a global first.

The tobacco industry worldwide is watching Australia closely to see which way this extraordinary case falls. There are over 174 countries party to the Framework Convention for Tobacco Control which requires it’s signatories to comprehensively ban all tobacco advertising. The Tobacco Plain Packaging Act is intended to implement Australia’s obligations under that Treaty.

We have 21 of our best legal brains working on the case and have seen some of our best advocacy performances ever – you can check the transcripts if you Google ‘High Court’.

I’ve just watched the seven judges retire with their judgement reserved. Although the Tobacco arguments were persuasive this morning, my guess is the outcome will favour the Commonwealth.

What are the real facts being argued?

At the crux of the argument lie two things: the understanding and claim by the Government that cigarettes kill. Nine out of 10 people who try cigarettes become addicted (more than cocaine) and 5.4 million people die from cigarettes every year. Tobacco harms every organ of the body. Despite the huge taxes Governments reap from the sale of cigarettes, the cost in health care is too big.

They have therefore proposed the removal of company logos from packs of cigarettes from December 2012. The packs will be packaged in drab brown with horrific pictures of the physical effects of tobacco on both sides without other distraction. The packs will list the name of the cigarette only with no company logos. Only 25 percent of the packet will be free of graphic photographs and health warnings for the company name to appear in plain text. I’ve handled the packs this morning – they are graphic. The Government wishes to stop the tobacco companies enhancing the buying process.

The tobacco industry is claiming the law leaves them with no way to distinguish their products from competitors. They are fighting the validity of the new Act on the grounds it fails to give them just terms – fair compensation for the removal of their trademark and brand. They argue that the Commonwealth is acquiring their property without compensation – in a similar way to how the government tried to take the home of Michael Caton in the movie The Castle.

In response, the Government claims that a trademark only protects exclusivity, not use. That the main value of a trademark is protection – to stop others using your brand. Until you trademark a logo or brand or mark, we all have the right and liberty to do whatever we please as long as it’s lawful. Therefore the Government claims that by removing the logo, the trademark still exists. Nothing has changed. No other company can use the cigarette companies brand.

It is the difference between the property (the cigarettes) losing value or losing the property itself.

While the tobacco industry is fighting the law, imagine if we removed the brands on cars, or drink bottles, to put it into context.

The difference here is the Government claims it is not lawful to promote a product that causes so much harm and it is their role to protect citizens. If cigarettes were used, as the tobacco industry wants them to be used – in excess – then they will continue to kill people. This is different to alcohol, where the promotion is about relaxation and enjoyment. Alcohol companies don’t promote the excess consumption of their product. There IS a way to drink alcohol responsibly and without harm. But there is NO way to consume a cigarette without harm.

The Government claims there is therefore no lawful need to compensate a person, or company that is marketing a product that blatantly causes devastation. The argument is that the Constitution was never intended to compensate people for being precluded from continuing to engage in a harmful activity and that activity here is the promotion of a product that if used the way it’s intended to be used will cause harm and be potentially lethal. Therefore why should the government compensate a company for ultimately killing people?

This debate between the Government and tobacco companies will have a dramatic outcome for the law around brands, trademarks and probably most importantly, the extent of government intervention. The Tobacco companies are already preparing a separate case to the World Trade Organisation in the US. The fight is a big one, and on a global scale. What are your thoughts? For or against?

We are delving into the academic world with the main pathway provider to UTS in Sydney – overseas students bring more revenue to NSW than agriculture

The Carbon Tax comes into effect on 1st July this year and has been set at a $23 per tonne carbon emissions tax for the nation’s Top 500 polluters. The negative groundswell is rising and from what I can see confusion and hype still prevail. The New South Wales Government is predicting households could soon be paying an extra $300 a year for electricity.

Meanwhile, the Federal Government continues to reject its carbon tax is to blame and the Opposition is animated with condemnation – referring to the tax as ‘’green tape’’ that will jeopardise $900 billion in investments and infrastructure. Green tape or Green circus?

The carbon tax is affecting big business, households and NFP’s. In mid-February this year, Qantas Chief Alan Joyce claimed the airline would be seriously impacted by the tax, which is estimated to add a $110-million-a-year hit on the company. ’’It is going to make it harder to keep employing people in this country,” he told reporters in Canberra. Both Qantas and Virgin estimate the carbon price will add around $3 to $3.50 per seat per domestic sector to the cost of a ticket.

For now, the effect on SME’s is minimal. Small businesses won’t be required to pay a carbon price and we won’t have to count or monitor our carbon pollution or electricity use. According to my reading, the impact of a carbon price on small businesses will vary and most of us won’t be significantly impacted. Not so, outside the workforce however. Our domestic utility bills are rising.

Industry Minister and Climate Change and Efficiency Mr Greg Combet claims, “Any electricity price rise that IPART indicates this week that is attributable to the carbon price coming in, is met by the Federal Government paying tax cuts to families, increasing family tax benefits for families with kids, an increase in the single pension, an increase in the pension for couples, payments for self-funded retirees,” The truth remains to be seen.

Ms Gillard and state premiers will meet with their business advisory forum this week, which includes the heads of the Business Council of Australia, the Australian Industry Group and the Australian Chamber of Commerce as well as business leaders Telstra’s David Thodey, Wesfarmers’ Richard Goyder, BHP Billiton’s Marius Kloppers, and Rio Tinto’s David Peever to discuss. They are calling on Julia Gillard and state leaders “to axe over 240 federal and state climate change and energy efficiency policies, scrap environmental assessment double-handling and fast-track major project approvals”. There are claims past regulations have included “the re-regulation of the labour market, new regulations on shipping and road transport and the introduction of a raft of new taxes with associated compliance costs”’.

Greens leader Bob Brown provides a different view and attacks the complaints against the Carbon Tax as a “war on the Australian people’s quality of life and the environment by the big end of town. These big corporations, many foreign owned, want to bulldoze decades of environmental law which is too flimsy and inadequately policed as it is,” he said.

Back to the Opposition’s views, climate action spokesman Greg Hunt has stated in a meeting of more than 80 steelworkers and government and industry representatives in Melbourne this week, that the price on carbon was a reverse tariff on the steel sector. Australian Workers’ Union national secretary Paul Howes even goes as far to say the steel manufacturers are on the “brink of collapse”, largely due to the high Australian dollar. The carbon tax is a reverse tariff on Australian steel, it will be a tax on our exports, but it will leave imports untouched, so the carbon tax is the biggest threat to the steel sector.” He pushed the shelving of the price on carbon.

Although the carbon pricing scheme will impose costs on big polluters which is expected to create inflationary price increases, in terms of the impact on households. The treasury estimates that an average family will pay $9.90 more per week in the first year of the scheme’s introduction. The government has done two things in an effort to soften the impact of potential price rises. The tax-free threshold will be more than tripled from $6,000 to $18,200, which means that 1 million people will be exempt from the need to pay income tax or file a tax return and people earning less than $80,000 per year will receive a tax cut which could equal approximately $300 per year. And there will be an increase in welfare payments to pensioners and self-funded retirees, as well as family payment recipients.

The carbon tax story remains convoluted and complex and the effect on small business uncertain. While the promises are that we won’t be effected, I think the main issue is trust. After all, we were originally promised there would be no carbon tax. Watch this space! The truth remains to be seen.

I went to the QBE Insurance AGM yesterday in Sydney and listened with personal and professional admiration to how a highly experienced international Board had worked their way through the worst year of natural disasters in their corporate history. The Board who I’ve watched operating for seven years, talked about how they’ve held the wheel tight through, quite literally, a series of very difficult storms. Like most of us, we admire those who unite and show they can stay the course. It’s good to watch teams who can work through the bad times as well as the good.

Watching how one of our largest global companies operate in difficult times was a good lesson. The management team were changing process and budgets to match the times.

Today, as I checked the twitter stream of commentary on small business, the news is about small business owners cutting back on personal expenses to fund their companies. Holidays are being downgraded, expenses are being cut and for many small business owners, this is also a time of stormy weather, albeit on a micro rather than a macro scale.

While I am no economic expert, I do have access to a wide range of businesses and their owners and I am seeing it IS tough out there.

The statistics show that 51.1% of SME’s are considering borrowing in the next six months compared to 77.1% in the same period last year which suggests a trend to scale back borrowings and risk taking. The percentage of SME enterprises who were considering opening a new bank account declined to 10.4 per cent in November last year, compared to 14.4 per cent measured in June 2010. According to The Bibby Barometer Small Business Survey from Dynamic Business on 26^th March, the survival of 22 percent of SMEs has been threatened in the past 12 months due to cashflow issues, with delayed payments for businesses one of the main contributing factors. The report found a staggering 49% of small business decision makers have experienced delays in payment and 27% have experienced bad debts.

A DBM survey suggests a growing dissatisfaction with banking, expressed by many businesses after a rise in satisfaction which occurred last year. Personally, my bank the Commonwealth have been wonderful since I started Taurus 16 years ago and by keeping them regularly informed, they have been a great addition to my informal Advisory Board team.

Following the last Reserve Bank board meeting that held the cash rate steady at 4.25%, RBA governor Glenn Stevens said the pace of economic growth was “somewhat lower” than forecasts in the bank’s February review of the economy. The downgrade in growth prospects is expected to hit the government’s budget, with Wayne Swan conceding it may be more difficult to raise the budget surplus of $1.5 billion in 2012-13.  Since the bank last considered rates one month ago, official data has revealed the economy grew only 2.3% last year, much below the long-term trend rate of about 3.25% the RBA had forecast.

RBA governor Glenn Stevens said the RBA board would wait until the publication of the March quarter inflation data, due later in April, before revisiting the need to cut interest rates. There is a good chance that after reviewing the March figures, interest rates may be cut to 4% from (4.25%) when the RBA meets on the 1^st of May.  So what do we do meanwhile?

The advice is to tread conservatively and carefully. My own top 10 tips for adapting to harsher economic conditions follow:

1. Work with a staff team you trust and keep the communication open
2. Pull in the expertise you don’t have at your fingertips
3. Examine and workshop worst case scenarios
4. Create a practical plan to cut costs where you can and maximise revenue generating activities with key advisors
5. Have accurate financial figures to hand, profit and loss, balance sheet, receivables and payables and cashflow forecasting
6. Be prepared to make the change necessary however radical
7. Keep talking to your bank, customers and suppliers
8. Ask your suppliers for longer payment terms
9. Ask your customers and prospects to pay up front
10. Get some sleep and keep fit

And when in doubt thank those who are important!

Sometimes the writing is on the wall and there are no if’s and buts. It’s time for change and there is nothing you can do about it. So how do you maintain grace in a time when you’ve made that call, and more importantly demonstrate integrity with your personal brand?

This week, a number of people have come in and out of my ‘’örbit’’ closing the door on old chapters and opening opportunities for new.  Working in corporate life sees a range of influencers and influences – some good, some not so good.  The ability to deal with a fast changing world and expectations raised and then not always met is one of the trademarks of survival and being a successful leader. But it is your responses to such situations that reflects truly who you are. You can try your hardest and it still doesn’t work out quite the way you thought. Resilience and tenacity are a good thing.

On a positive note, the universe is constantly looking to introduce you to new influences. Watch out and be ready – you never know who is round the corner.

As someone close reminded me last night, there are always plenty of doors open for you ready with new challenges. What is important is to maintain Grace and stick to who you really are, your true core values, no matter what changes or challenges life brings. The beauty of having a defined personal brand and knowing who you are.

We’ve seen a few examples of this over the last few days. Anna Bligh chose to ‘’call enough’’, when she quit politics last weekend in Queensland saying that the Bligh brand is so tarnished that Labour has no hope of re-building if she remains in the Queensland parliament.  In her eyes, there was nothing more she could do. Time to move on.

Julia Gillard may also face decisions to ‘’call enough, enough’’ shortly – or that decision will be made for her.  That is in spite of her claiming she focuses on running the country rather than what is being said in the polls each day. A dangerous attitude perhaps to not listen to feedback on your personal brand perception. Having risen (or perhaps hovered!) over the ashes of her predecessor Kevin Rudd, her colleagues can’t help be tarnished with sceptism. The Gillard brand permanently stigmatised with back stabbing and back-handedness. Not a great look for a Politician let alone the Prime Minister.

This all taking place in a world where at the next election, there will be close to 1 million newly eligible 18-20 year olds eager to vote with highly tuned, but short term memories to aid their decision. Their influences will be predominantly those left on social media sites – your online personal brand is more important than ever.

Yesterday, I had the pleasure of sitting with 80 senior gentlemen in both experience and success, as a newly elected member of the Cook Society founded by Captain Cook in the 1700’s.  One gentleman pointed me to “Who’s who’ when I asked him about his career. A lovely example of how things have changed. Open a long respected reference book or google someone? How references and research on one’s personal brand have changed.

In spite of calling it a day, and in total contrast, Oprah Winfrey seems to go from strength to strength. The influence of her personal brand with 40 million viewers across 145 countries and some 4 million followers on twitter is a phenomemon. From humble beginnings to multimedia tycoon, she has adapted to the new challenges of calling enough, and is putting her personal brand to new projects.

So what are the rules when you call it quits?

• Surely the most important things is to stay true to self
• Negativity is poisonous, negative or pointed comments always reflect back on oneself, not others
• Focus on what you are good at – you can’t be all things to all people and never will be
• Honesty – don’t make promises you can’t keep or claim to know more than you do – dishonesty destroys
• Be patient, building a strong brand takes time, months and years
• Loyalty is cheap in today’s world and not valued as it once was – there are few things as precious as loyalty
• Don’t procrastinate and put things off. There is no time like the present

Personal branding is about building a long term, genuine perception of yourself and your company. Stay true and stay strong whatever changes or unexpected circumstances come your way

We had fun training key personnel from the finance sector who flew in from Melbourne for presentation and personal brand training with TaurusProfile