Interview NEWS A constant issue is ensuring that
your offering aligns with where the customer’s need is evolving to. You can’t continue to deliver the same as you do today, and must predict how the market is developing, how legislation will change, how Brexit is going to affect us – because at the moment we don’t know exactly how that’s going to land – and be constantly aware for every line of business that we need to be at the forefront of technology, testing and capability. As a company that must continue
to be at the forefront of thought leadership in fire protection, we must ensure communications and training are futureproofed. We must continue to develop our online offerings. An essential challenge for a small company is constantly adapting to the demands of the arena, and this arena is changing quite quickly. It’s as much about having the leading people as the leading technology, and the FPA has to continue to make wise selections because it’s a small company – all the staff have to be excellent or have that potential. For me, it’s people first, tools second, but the best people and the best tools are a winning combination. Balancing customers under the
FPA’s different strands is a challenge; the training department for example covers a wide spectrum successfully, but these are totally different to those using the technical department. Managing different customer sets is a huge challenge for a small company, particularly in marketing the business. The FPA sells a very wide range of products, and I didn’t properly understand just how many until I saw it first hand.
Post Hackitt and post Grenfell, how do you see the FPA’s role changing to ensure that change takes place?
The FPA has been in a very strong lead position regarding lobbying the government, largely via the ABI and the CEOs of major insurers, and has been at the forefront of providing advice and guidance within the Hackitt Review and post Grenfell testing regime.
It can offer the right level of
standard that should be achieved in building materials, both combustible and non combustible going forward, and the FPA should expect its opinion to be sought on all building regulation, risk management and standard matters following the quality of what was delivered during and after Grenfell. The FPA must take every chance to be the leading voice on the changes being implemented and continue to lobby for further change – while we welcome the response to Hackitt, we believe it doesn't go far enough.
What should the FPA’s relationship with insurers and the government be? How can it help insurers get messages across to the government?
In addition to the FPA providing its views on building standards and extensively testing equipment and materials, it needs to be in tune with the major insurers to understand what key things are affecting them – which will probably be learned through their claims experience and investigation of major incidents and trends – and ensure that what we offer fits those. Provided we are in tune with those
insurers, delivering value on subjects relevant to them in the given time period, that would lead to insurers and the FPA speaking with one voice; and between the FPA and CEOs of those insurers, they would be able to influence the government, through the ABI, to even better effect. RISCAuthority is the medium
within which we will achieve this, with membership covering 90% of the UK’s commercial insurance market, and it is firmly established as the insurance industry focal point for several things including research, standards setting and training, to name but a few.
What have you learned from your insurance background that you feel the fire industry could gain from?
Physical security and preservation of life should be non competitive, and had all parties been singing from the same hymn sheet before Grenfell, it may never have happened. There are certain topics for the common good
of the public – and industry. We should try and set the best standard possible to achieve life safety firstly, but property protection as well. I’ve spent a career promoting property protection, and firmly believe we can achieve life and property protection, the latter greatly contributing to significantly reduced business interruption and a great boost to the economy and environment. Too many cooks are competing
– everybody knew something like Grenfell could happen at some point, because of the Lakanal House evidence. But did everybody join up, lobby the government and change building standards and regulations? No, they didn’t. The FPA tried, but if we had achieved proper alignment and complete agreement with the insurers, and other organisations, maybe we could have persuaded the government to change the regulations. But it didn’t happen!
What should the FPA look like in the future? And in five years?
The FPA has been the go to company for the major UK insurers and the ABI for advice and guidance on fire protection and risk management for many years. It should further develop the concept of risk management and protection across a broader spectrum. It has many skills that go beyond fire. Post Grenfell, the FPA needs to re evaluate the existing property market, understand changes in legislation and be equipped to adapt to change in testing. We must develop our technical knowledge and physical capabilities in line with that change. Initially I’ll look to the ESG to
deliver on short to medium term plans, which are already in place. Gradually I expect to constructively engage with the board and ESG to positively influence these plans to achieve the right level of growth, but with no compromise in our ability to remain independent and impartial; continuously develop our knowledge and skillset; tirelessly lobby for just causes; retain a high quality of insight and information delivered; make enough profit for reinvestment in people, technology and equipment; and enjoy what we do
www.frmjournal.com MARCH 2019 17
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
