Fake or Fortune?

It has been a while since I decided to put together another of these "articles" as LinkedIn call it. I think nearly 10 months. I was unsure whether to do another one as I was discouraged by some of my family who did say it was rather rambling. I thought I did actually declare that at the beginning of each one as a ramble and that it is always a complete jumble of things that occur to me in my work life at various points. However, I have been encouraged by a work colleague at GMCA (you know who you are) and even being set deadlines to get another rant article published. So here we go. One of you did ask for it. The disclaimer is as always, it will be a rambling load of nonsense; your house will not be at risk if you do not keep up repayments; and no animals have been hurt in the publishing of this article. It is purely for me to vent my frustration or things that keep recurring in my head. Self indulgent of course.

Do you watch the BBC programme Fake or Fortune? For some reason, I enjoy it but don not go searching for it. It is a show featuring Fiona Bruce and Art dealer/expert, Philip Mould. According to Wiki (so it must be true), "In each episode Philip Mould and Fiona Bruce focus their attention on a painting (or a group of paintings), usually related to one particular artist. They travel around the country and the world, studying the artists at exhibitions, meeting up with international experts and following up local leads." The premise is really that an owner of an artwork, approaches the team to see whether their piece of art is more than it seems; is it really an undiscovered master or the copy that they originally bought?

The programme I watch I feel because I enjoy problem solving and getting to the real truth about something. I do find it interesting how they examine all factors and make an informed assessment. This is often a self criticism I have as I tend to want all the detail before making a decision when 80% will do. I do like to have a programme of work going ahead to monitor progress against. I do want to make sure what is happening is totally transparent and visible at the times required to make sure everyone who needs to be, is aware. I am not very good at appreciating negative external influences that interfere with my work programme. This is particularly annoying for me when no one has any idea that this influence was coming or that there was even any involvement from that interest group or influence. Clearly in my work in government advisory and major project delivery, this can be an expected occurrence but it is often a major surprise. It can be extremely predictable or just a Donald Rumsfeld "known unknown". The impact however can also be immeasurable.

In the Fake or Fortune programme, they evaluate a viewer's painting or sculpture and investigate deeply its composition, structure and history to amazingly see if it is a fake or worth a fortune. Surely I would have worked this out from the title.

Is it really a genuine master? The team take it to many different experts around Europe including material specialists comparing it with when certain paints, canvasses etc would have been used; detailed X-ray and photographic examiners to look behind the image highlighting the brushstrokes style; how the paint is layered on and on it goes with some really interesting insights.

However, the finale is always the most interesting part for me as it then goes to the "global authenticators". They are often appear as a secret "society" of experts in that particular artists and governors of the official catalog. They sometimes have even reviewed and examined the painting and refused previously to say that it was a genuine piece. They do not usually appear on camera but seemed to be housed in some incredibly elegant building in a major European city. As the programme goes along with all the evidence being drawn together, you get an idea of where it is going with some areas of possible certainty and some of possible flaws in the argument.

The evidence is then collected and submitted to the "authenticators" with the build up in tension as to will they decide if it is fake or worth a fortune. The letter dutifully returns from the secret body with the answer. The owner is called in for the big reveal and often despite the evidence mainly in their favour, they turn it down. There then follows a scene a bit like the Oscar ceremony faces of the unsuccessful nominees, they all try to remain positive but the underlying thoughts seem to be:

• Who are these people that adjudicate?
• Are they embarrassed that they turned it down before and now have been proven wrong?
• What are the implications for them if they do say it is genuine?
• Are they no longer the experts and the gatekeepers of the fortune if they admit the artwork?
• Do these external influences have any bearing on whether the truth is being revealed or not? Does that matter?

I often see levels of external influence both negative and positive in the areas I work. They work in varying degrees of significance. They can be a costly fake or redirect a fortune. The truth for some can get in the way. The truth can embarrass us all of a decision we made that does not turn out to be the best. The key is often to put your hands up and admit what has happened. I have never had a problem with people coming to me admitting they made a mistake if they have made that flawed decision to proceed for the right reasons. We all have to admit it quickly when we discover what has occurred.

I have been in a position as the person in charge of a project where I have said no to an organisation to their request to obtain more public money for land that they have purchased. In my view they were not entitled to more money from the legal agreement that they had devised and signed up to. However, they went around me to the most senior people in the Government organisation to secure the extra money they needed and did a deal. It happens but I hate it especially when public money is involved. The influence can have major impact that is out of your control.

I was having a great conversation with a very senior colleague in my role at GMCA about these external influences and their impact on decision making. They felt that this did not happen anymore and that I was exaggerating I think. Me exaggerate, surely not. Have they not read this embellished nonsense? They then asked me where this would be visible. As they had never visited a planning committee in their authority, I encouraged them to go and witness the proceedings. Planning committees allow quite rightly the applicant to speak at the decision point in the meeting. This can be a mixture of positive reinforcement of need; the plea of a worried impassioned applicant; to a very smooth oration from the applicants representative. Now clearly not all planning committees will demonstrate over reliance on "lobbying" or the applicant's speech versus the planning officer's report but you can see it at times.

I once watched in my career, in compete horror, a planning committee in action on different occasions concerning two supermarket applications in differing towns in the Borough. I was the Director at the time. One application was approved against the officer recommendation and the other refused against the officer recommendation. In order for the committee to go against the officer recommendation the debate at committee must lead to a defensible rationale as to why the Members of the committee feel there are other factors that have not been considered by the officers. One of the supermarkets had promised a new factory replacing the one on the site they would build their store. The company got their workforce to attend the committee all with pro-supermarket T-shirts on. We did not help ourselves as we changed the venue to accommodate the 150 plus workers who we were told were coming. It became more like a football crowd with boos and cheering depending on who was speaking. Some Members got caught up in the event and were sort of playing to the crowd rather than focusing on the correct procedure.

The other application was singularly about ward politics. With an election coming up, a vote winning game was played out at the committee. I had a session with the Leader and a portfolio holder about it afterwards. They were very honest about what had happened. I had to say that, with us being in a period of austerity, that the Council would lose out on roughly ￡250,000 a year of funding through business rates because of this decision. The site was likely also to remain vacant. Looking on Google maps now it is still vacant a long time later. This is of course democratic decision making that our systems are built upon and can equally mean that the right decision is made.

Needless to say, my senior colleague came back from their first planning committee recently with very wide open eyes.

A recurring theme in my ramblings is my tendency to watch people's behaviour especially on public transport. During my role in GMCA, I have stayed a couple of nights in Old Trafford and get the tram into work. Who doesn't love being in a one bed Airbnb with free parking. I realise now that I love trams, there I have admitted it. I feel the way the system works and the amount of people that get transported through a city in such a relatively efficient manner is excellent. Tram Life is however something to behold.

Using the tram to get to work and to go to meetings around Greater Manchester is great to observe Tram Life. I love the types of different travellers using the network at different points and times depending on where the line starts from or ends up. The office workers getting in early to impress the boss; the retail workers hoarding early to the main shopping areas; the supporters to the football and cricket stadiums; and the logistics and manufacturing workers at various shifts. There are then of course the school children packing in and the trippers to events such a s Bury Market. One thing is extremely common now, the watching of the small screens in their hands and not the world going by. This is across all Tram Riders.

There are so many unusual things you see. There are the people who are on the mobile that must believe they are in a sound proof bubble. This is a Tram Life feature that must be available to only certain people in the form of a cloaking device. It must sometimes not work and they don't realise. I cannot understand how they can reveal so much to so many in such a small echoey space. It must sometimes not work and they don't realise. The other morning a woman was discussing an investigation that was having to be opened into a retail worker who had been heavily discounting clothing to their friends and anyone they fancied it sounded like. It was easy to identify the name of the store and its location. Seriously?

There are the bag people who cannot remove their back pack as it must be welded on. They can then occupy a larger space in the crowded Tram and smash you in the body at regular intervals without knowing as they must not have any feeling from the bag. The obvious space on the floor for the bag between their legs is at all cost to be ignored. The DJs are there too that must be needing the immense set of headphones to mix a new playlist on the Tram Life journey - add in your own Blur sound track there with Phil Daniels. Is it me or are there only certain really cool people that can style out the enormous headphones? The majority of people seem in my limited non fashionable non cool view to look quite odd. There are other DJs who desperately want to share their playlist to ensure we can all hear it. Now as those who know me can vouch for, I do like a bit of Belgian Trance as much as the next man but maybe not at immense volume on my commute.

The small screeners are in the majority in Tram Life with all age groups, genders and types of travellers immediately reaching on entry into Tram Life for their device. Regardless of their position within the Tram, standing, sitting, crowded or clear, the fumble into the pocket and the bend of the elbow to accommodate the device is universal. Like the bag, it now has secured its place in the Tram Life space which must be protected at all cost. Turning and leveling up, the device dances to the sway of the Tram. There is also an add on traveller as well who takes it one stage further, the screener Tram surfer. They ride the Tram with screen elbow cocked but never hold on to the metal bars. They bump into you on numerous occasions but their screen protection is key despite the Tram Life sway. They ride the Tram Life Way and are as cool a normal surf dude. They can style out any movement,stagger or part fall. I am sure the driver can see them on the CCTV and like I would, they try to get them to stagger with rapid acceleration and braking.

I am not a screener but I like to watch the world go by. I feel one of the benefits of sitting or standing in the metal box is all that goes by and is happening outside. The same journey is so different outside each time. My current favourite is the scrap metallers near Cornbrook. Why when there is so much genuine life to see outside are we fixated and addicted to what is presented on our screens? I look within the Tram and see 90% of people looking down at a screen. Is it fake in front of you on your screen or will it make your fortune? Do you really believe it? Who are the "authenticators" of this material invading your thinking? Why is someone putting this to you on a screen? Am I just an old git who does not get it?

I am a creationist and love the design complexity and simplicity of creation even when we have exploited and part ruined it. I suppose that is why I observe avidly the outside and the behaviour on the inside.

I am a vision, values and behaviour person. I look at my own elements of this and how they influence the way I work. Why am I doing what I am doing? What are the lines I will not cross regardless? How do I come across to others and demonstrate my values? Am I really behaving as I would like? Am I kidding myself? Do I influence others negatively? What influences me in my work and do I listen to it? What if the influence goes against what I believe? I feel self reflection and honesty is critical to becoming a better person and better at what you do. I have to keep coming back to the lessons I have learned and remembering when I messed up.

Sometimes you have to be in the pit first to get to the palace but try not to wear the Technicolour dream coat first. You have to be flexible and react wisely to situations and deal with the many impacts and influences. You have to work out quickly what is fake. However that is easy to say and can be difficult to do. For deception to deceive it has to be close to the truth.

For me, I have learnt through experience to trust my gut feel and instinct (no gut comments please). To test whether it is fake or will result in a fortune for the organisation is an initial immediate assessment that can be validated over time. It does give you a warning sign of how it seems or feels that can make you watch more and be alert to the changes that are coming.

All the people;

So many people;

They all go hand in hand;

Hand in hand through their Tram Life