It is near impossible to standardize the content of a QA process for interim management, because that depends on the job to be done, e.g. the terms of engagement in an insolvent business are quite different to a business that is solvent. More ensuring they exist maybe with a checklist of sub points. For example – it is amazing how many interims operate without proper or suitable terms (maybe having been bullied by a corporate client?) e.g. inadvertently and unwittingly invalidating the terms of their insurance to support the “work in hand”.
If there is one aspect that could be standardized it is more of a completeness checklist to capture the key terms of delivery for example
- client tcs and cs,
- terms of reference,
- review process,
- solvency checks – ignorance is no excuse (Alan sugar recently found 85% of businesses requesting cash required an IP, rather than funding – this is what we find too)
Turnaround specific aspects
An important factor is also not setting out what you are not qualified to do, e.g. turnaround checklist
- steering clear of IP related advice unless you are an IP
- shadow director issues,
- illegal trading,
- companies act 2006 changes
- insolvency act 1986
As a working example – Icebreaker have our own
- in house legal counsel to support us,
- a working audit checkist we use as a team; which we continually refine,
- along with our terms, that we adjust and refine to suit what we learn
- review processes,
- and formal support from our funding and our IP partners.
This is driven by experience of turnaround – cos the most complicated challenges that require the most lateral thinking, and correct action – are turnaround.
The IIM or the IMA-1 would be reluctant to create this content, cos they could be held to account and sued / simply have not got the courage to do so anyway, nor as i suggest before is it possible to create standard content.
Enjoy the snow