Author Archives: sse

Deep impact: the how, who and why of social enterprise measurement

Posted on by

MeasureIt was a full day of impact measurement on Wednesday this week. Which for an evaluation + metrics geek such as myself, is a day of utter joy….

First up, I did my "Introduction to social impact measurement" workshop with the new SSE Cornwall cohort of social entrepreneurs. The starting point for us is to help them get a full understanding of the story of how they make a difference (their "theory of change"), before diving into indicators, tools and methodologies. As well as demystifying some of the measurement jargon…

What's always interesting about the process of mapping that story out (a methodology unapologetically cribbed + developed from the new economics foundation) is that it is also an incredibly useful planning tool, and also leads to better communication of the project or idea. The message I emphasised was the importance of measurement in the current climate: funding or investment or contracts without strong evidence will be extremely scarce. So it is more crucial than ever. And there are no excuses for not measuring our social impact; a point I was also making in this video (quickly!) at Chain Reaction's Stronger Communities get-together on the Big Society.

Having come back from Penzance on the longest-train-journey-in-the-world (possibly), I headed down to the Garden Museum for the SE100 awards event, wondering who would win. Read more about the winners and the event here. It is an excellent initiative which recognises growth in turnover, but also has impact measurement built into its very core. Congrats to Mow and Grow, FRC Group and Create Leeds, and to all the nominees. And congrats to Tim West and the team at Social Enterprise Mag (along with all their various partners + sponsors) for pioneering the index. As Doug Richard noted in his closing words, when a sector or movement has an index, it's getting serious. And for me, an important development to have the recognition of awards tied to demonstrable evidence and proof of success: again, incentivising others to grow their impact, and measure that impact. Which, as Peter Holbrook and Nick Hurd said, is exactly what will be required in the current economic situation. I'm hopeful that some of those Cornwall SSE students, and others around the UK, will be applying for the trailblazer award next year.

It is well worth reading the full SE100 documentation, which includes some interesting discussions about the Future Jobs Fund (which was crucial to Mow and Grow's growth), regional breakdown of the 100 organisations, and several really good practical case studies of how impact can be grown and measured.

Finally, it was interesting to note the announcement on the same day by Nick Hurd of the end of Futurebuilders in its current form. Future revenue from the fund (i.e. in loan repayments) will be used to give grants to stimulate the creation of groups and initiatives at a local + neighbourhood level; to be called "Communities First", according to a speech by Francis Maude. On the one hand, I largely agree with this decision: in the manifesto pulled together by social entrepreneurs and social entrepreneur support agencies, we called for freer, direct local investment in locally-based social entrepreneurs through seedcorn grants and support (see here for detail); we recommended this because "many start-up and fledgling social entrepreneur-led initiatives are
responding to needs in their own communities not being met by any
current, commissioned public service provision" and that freer local investment is key to "encouraging innovation, active citizenship, and devolution of power"; I think this has much crossover with what is being proposed.

On the other hand, as we're discussing impact, the evaluation of Futurebuilders is worth a look (full report pdf here). Reading it for me, I don't think there's much doubt that it became more efficient, in its second incarnation, at giving out funds and selecting appropriate organisations for those loans (conversion rate, disbursement etc). Indeed, the evidence for impact on organisations' financial health and ability to deliver public services is strong; that for social returns and outcomes much less so. And there are some strong findings about the fact that these were new, 'unbankable' loans not being made elsewhere, providing new capital (i.e. they were highly 'additional')

Around 19% of loans went to smaller organisations (income under £100k) which is higher than I thought. Though it is interesting to also see that those organisations only won 10% of the contracts that FB investors gained (large orgs with turnover over £1m gained 46% of contracts by value). One assumes that all this has been fed into the decision-making process, otherwise (in effect), why do it: certainly, the evaluation's conclusion notes that social investment of this type will have to be looked at again in the context of more constrained social finances. And it is perhaps a decision also as much about policy emphasis (on social capital, community responsibility, and so on, as opposed to a relatively restricted version of 'public service delivery contracts') as about the type of investment (grant rather than loan). It will be fascinating to see what form the Big Society Bank takes, which Nick Hurd has stated is top of his agenda, and how it builds on all the experimentation and experience of the full range of social investors, including Futurebuilders.

Share Button

The determination and commitment of social entrepreneurs

Posted on by

Entrepreneur_black It is easy to grow accustomed to conversations about social enterprise and entrepreneurship that centre around the money-mission balance, on the need to move away from a Victorian version of charity that relies on handouts, on social investment and SROI, and on the need to explore hybrid business models and different governance options that widen ownership.

All of those remain relevant and important. But entrepreneurship is also about characteristics and traits, about personal behaviours, attitudes and mindsets. About people, not theories.

I don't want to write politically about the situation in the Middle East: people will have their views on recent events already, as I have mine. But I do want to draw attention to Ken O'Keefe who is a student on the current London programme, who was on the Gaza flotilla. We are extremely glad here at SSE to learn he is safe and well in Istanbul, and on his way back to London soon. You can read more about his story here (and view some graphic photos of Ken).

And as well as drawing attention, perhaps also to prompt thoughts about some of those (social) entrepreneurial traits + qualities we look for and are periodically humbled by:

Independence, determination, prone to action, risk-taking, commitment, perseverance, goal-oriented, integrity.

Share Button

Learning by doing: a social entrepreneur’s take on Big Society

Posted on by

LearningRevI've been reading a few of the responses to the Big Society vision outlined by the new government. For example, you can get Stephen Bubb's take at ACEVO (pdf), and Martin Brookes et al's perspective at New Philanthropy Capital. Both worth reading if you get the time, raising some interesting challenges.

But a response that resonated with me from our work here at SSE was one that came through to me on my TheyWorkForYou alert (timely, seeing as we are now in a new era of open data): Lord Mawson, who founded (with others) CAN and the Bromley-By-Bow Centre, put forward his thoughts in the House of Lords in the Queen's Speech debate. You can read the whole thing here, but I've selected a few sections that stood out to me from the social entrepreneur / practitioner's perspective. Seeing how this was picked up and covered once I'd tweeted it round, it seems that others also found it relevant. Key points? Back people, not structures; encourage "learning-by-doing" environments; cross-sector partnerships; don't reinvent, but build on the work of those who have innovated.

Lord Mawson:

"We all know that it is crucial for a new Government to lay solid
foundation stones on which real change and development can grow. Real
change is elusive and may not come to fruition until a Government have
left office. Effective innovation can take a generation and requires
committed individuals to champion it. It is rarely captured in a policy
document, written by what my colleagues affectionately refer to as "the
bright, young things". Real change has to be grown and deeply rooted in
communities, otherwise, as I suspect that new Labour is discovering, it
will be blown away like the sand when the first gust of wind comes
along.

[….]

"…What are the lessons? How do you create a big society and lift the game
in education, health and welfare? First, I would suggest that this
Government support organisations that already have a successful record
of reforming public services. Do not reinvent the wheel, but build on
what works. They should back success and learn from their many years of
detailed practical work. Do not, as new Labour so often did, take their
best ideas, pass them to the Civil Service machine and exclude these
experienced innovators. Let them take the wheel. Support them and enable
their efficiency. Do not think that it is now the Government's job to
take control. It is not. They should take the long-term view.

[…..]

"I would ask the Minister how he will practically encourage new
environments where people 'learn by doing'. Will he get his hands dirty
by planting the seeds of enterprise in the fertile soil outside the
comfortable but dry world of theory? If this new generation of
politicians is to gain any understanding of how the real world works in
practice, and not hide in the bubble of Westminster, I would humbly
suggest that each Member of Parliament should become involved in one
project in their constituency to play their part in building the "big
society". Do not pontificate about it: do it. Legislators might then
begin to understand the relationship between legislation and practice
because attempting to deliver a new school, health centre or service is a
practical nightmare nowadays, given the number of contradictory hoops
laden with half-baked ideology that practitioners like me have to jump
through. The confusion that exists between delivery and democracy is a
minefield. The micro is the clue to the macro. Learn from it and gain
the public's respect in the process.

[……]

"the idea that devolving power to local authorities will deliver a
plurality of outcomes is not always correct either. Local authorities
are not neutral when commissioning services. They often have an aversion
to selecting innovative approaches because they do not understand them.
Many of their staff have only ever worked in the public sector. They do
what they have always done, but change the wording on the forms to
please the Government of the day. Look carefully and you will still see
the same bodies under new clothes. Local authorities are often the least
likely to choose an innovative approach to service delivery…

[….]

"Partnership is a great thing and the present financial crisis is the
time to embrace innovation. Never miss the opportunity presented by a
good crisis. If you are to deliver, I would humbly suggest that you do
not rely on structures or theories, but on people. Back the best people,
be they in the business, public or social enterprise sectors, and,
funnily enough, you will be fair to everyone."

———–

On reading it all again, I'm also struck by his focus on relationships, and trusted relationships as the foundation of useful, productive partnerships. This was also something that came up continually at the Chain Reaction Stronger Communities event last week, and seems central to painting the right pictures on the canvas of Big Society.

Share Button

Social enterprise + social entrepreneur links of the week (June 2nd)

Posted on by

DoubthesitationEnjoyed this graph to the left, as it summed up either a) why social entrepreneurs are often prone to action (it removes doubt!) and b) how those waiting for potential cuts might feel as that wait continues….and in the interests of not hesitating here any longer, on with the round-up:

– First up, speaking of cuts, the Future Jobs Fund was first to go, realistically being much to early to decide whether it was a success or a failure; Peter Holbrook (of Social Enterprise Coalition) and Allison Ogden-Newton (of Social Enterprise London) both came out in strong defence of FJF on their blogs.

– The Big Society debates continue on twitter + blogs + pubs. Best recent contributions? I enjoyed Nat Wei's seabed-coral reef – fish analogy, Andy Westwood's take + constructive critique from the left, and Adil Abrar's practitioner's perspective . I also found it useful to get an outsider's view of it all, so check out Canadian social entrepreneur Al Etmanski on what he makes of all this (a "fork in the road worth watching")

– Scale seems to have been a theme this week as well. Whether it's Nat Whittemore writing about the lack of ambition in social entrepreneurs (prompting some debate in the comments!), Martin Brookes of ew Philanthropy Capital arguing for scaling up evidence-based solutions, not scaling out individual involvement, or Sally Osberg (of Skoll Foundation) writing on how social entrepreneurs can punch above their weight

– There was a good piece in the Guardian about CICs being used as a vehicle for water power investment

– Also in the Guardian, a piece on Lambeth Council (which we now have to follow with "The John Lewis Council" :0) ) which attracted some interesting and very informed comments

– Karl Wilding over at NCVO gave the best view so far of how the cuts might affect this sector

– There was much delight (though I'm not completely sure why) that the words "social enterprise" came out of the Queen's mouth

– Grameen Bank is coming to Glasgow.

– Some interesting leadership moves as Social Enterprise Ambassadors Maria Donoghue-Mills and Matt Stevenson-Dodd both got new jobs at SCA and Street League respectively

– And on a final SSE note, there is now a list of all the SSE students / Fellows on Twitter (let me know if I've missed anyone….), and two SSE Liverpool students are up for Liverpool Woman of the Year. Please cast your votes for Claire Morgans or Pauline Pendleton, and congrats to both on the nominations.

Share Button

Social entrepreneur weekly wisdom: 8 quotes to ponder

Posted on by

Been another busy week at SSE with little time for posts, although we have been adding a few articles of interest to the SSE del.icio.us bookmarks, and continuing to post on Facebook + Twitter. Just thought I'd share some things I've heard this week that have got me thinking (so might do for you too).

– "Businesses obsessed with shareholder dividends are focusing on the scoreboard not the game"

[Gary Hamel, being interviewed by the brilliant Peter Day]

– For social entrepreneurs working with private companies, "building of mutual trust is crucial, otherwise the dialogue remains superficial"

[David Carrington, chairing part of the Venture Partnership Foundation's mini-conference]

– it should be about a "competition for impact, not just a competition for resources"

[Simon Maddrell, from the fascinating Excellent Development, on competing social entrepreneurs]

– "Social businesses are like engines that never stop running and need no fuel from the outside"

[Muhammad Yunus, in town to speak at the RSA]

– Let's "crowdsource the cuts"

[Karl Wilding  from NCVO, here, asking everyone to help build a picture of how the cuts are having impact]

– "The 'rising tide lifts all boats' theory of economic progress does assume that everyone has a boat…"

[can't remember, but has stayed with me….]

– "The role of social enterprises, charities and cooperatives in public services will be enhanced"

[er…The Queen. More important for who said it rather than what in this case….]

– "There's nothing wrong with focus and growing slowly. Walmart was one store for 12 years."

[Can't remember where I heard this either, but similarly stayed with me. Such a crucial message for those who feel they are being compelled to scale too early]

Share Button