Social Value UK

Tag: Social Enterprise

  • Social value is about changes to people’s lives, so we need to ask ‘have we made as much value as we can with the resources available?’

    Social value is about changes to people’s lives, so we need to ask ‘have we made as much value as we can with the resources available?’

    Measuring social value is important – but what we do with that information is even more important. Join our Maximising Value training course in Manchester on 25 May.

    So, as well as asking yourself the question of how to measure social value, we also need to be asking, why are measuring social value?

    The answer to this question is often that we need to prove or demonstrate our impacts to others such as investors or funders – this is and will remain important. But if this is the only reason why we are measuring, we are missing real opportunities for maximising value from measuring the results of our work.

    When we talk about social value, we are talking about how important changes are to people’s lives. And when we have this focus, the question we should be asking is not just ‘how much value has been created?’ We need to be asking ‘how we can make even more value?’

    Remember, this is about changes to people’s lives – so we need to ask if we have made as much value as we can with the resources we have available?

    Social Value UK (SVUK) have been working with leading organisations in the UK and around the world, and we recognise that this approach has helped organisations to identify opportunities to improve the value they create.

    By involving stakeholders to understand the value of changes to their lives – and without increasing the money required, organisations have made changes to their work and targeted their efforts to change the lives of people even more effectively than before.

    Using social value evidence does not replace the expertise and knowledge of people within an organisation, but it does help to provide more information to inform the decisions they take.

    Social Value UK (SVUK) can help you with this way of thinking – we have a one day practical course on Maximising Social Value that will take you through the steps required to design, collect, and analyse data.

    Designed for data analysts and decision makers this is an interactive course that will help you to identify insights to help maximise the changes you help create in people’s lives.

    —–

    Maximising Value training course details:

    £175 + VAT
    25 May, 9.30am – 4.30pm.
    Friends Meeting House, 6 Mount St, Manchester, M2 5NS
    Book online: https://sv-test.wp-support.team/social-value-training/maximising-social-value-training/

    • Are you a Social Impact manager, Finance Director, Senior Manager, or Commissioner?
    • Do you work in an organisation looking at how social value evidence can help you to make decisions?

    Social Value UK can provide you with the practical skills to maximise the value you deliver through your work.

    Our expert trainer Dr Adam Richards will facilitate practical, hands on training.

    Have any questions? Email us. info@sv-test.wp-support.team

  • Is your workplace a fair place to work?

    Is your workplace a fair place to work?

    THE fairplace Award® COMES TO  SOCIAL VALUE UK

    What effect does the management of your workplace have on you, your colleagues and on all the other people in the building–including  contractors’ staff you may never see? What positive contribution does your workplace make to the local community and the planet? What does your workplace say about your company’s values and ethics?  So is your workplace a fair place to work?

    Newest Social Value UK organisational member the Ethical Property Foundation is a registered UK charity dedicated to promoting its vision that buildings should be managed for the benefit of people and planet, not just profit.The Foundation’s  accreditation the fairplace Award® has been developed in partnership with the property industry, civil society and CSR profession. It is a rigorous transformational process which evidences an organisation’s commitment to people in the workplace, the community outside its front doors and the environment, in a single comprehensive measure of excellence. Each Award lasts 3 years, assessed by top property professionals and providing recommendations for improvement.

    The fairplace Award® is also a great business improvement tool, because it  brings together colleagues from across the business, gathering evidence and sharing ideas. Current award-holders include the workplaces of RICS, Sodexo, RBS, EMCOR UK and leading aid charity CAFOD.

    “ It’s a tranformatonal process, Fairplace is the opposite of a box ticking exercise – to gain the award you need to look carefully at actual on the ground practices, not just policies. We have all learned a lot at RBS. We’d recommend any business to go for fairplace.”
    Mike Lynch, Sustainable Workplaces department at RBS

    Now for the good news. The Ethical Property Foundation is offering a 25% reduction on fairplace Award® licence fees to all current Social Value UK member and associates who apply for their work place before 1 July 2018.   

    The Ethical Property Foundation is delighted to be part of Social Value UK and wants to hear from you –  kindred spirits who already understand the power and potential of social value for your business. The fairplace process helps you capture how you create this in your workplace – and indeed by encouraging your suppliers to apply for fairplace too, you can ensure they are also offering their people a fair place to work. More good news is that all fairplace income is ploughed back into the Foundation’s charitable work: supplying free property education and advice to local small voluntary groups. To date the Ethical Property Foundation has supported 3500+ organisations and is currently sole referral partner to the Charity Commission for land & property advice.

    So, put your workplace ethics to the test and apply for your fairplace Award® today!  For more information contact mail@ethicalproperty.org.uk. Full details on the website www.fairplaceaward.com

     

    Press Contacts

    Ethical Property Foundation

    mail@ethicalproperty.org.u

    Social Value UK

    Christina Berry-Moorcroft, Membership and Communications Coordinator, Social Value UK

    E: christina.moorcroft@sv-test.wp-support.team                       T: 0151 703 9229

    About Ethical Property Foundation

    The Foundation works specifically to empower charities and community groups to make the most of the property they occupy and manage, and to improve the environmental and social performance of the commercial property sector. The Foundation is part of the wider Ethical Property Family which includes the Ethical Property Company and Ethical Property Europe. The Ethical Property family is committed to making the best use of property for society and the environment. We work to define what Ethical Property means, to demonstrate it in action and inspire others to put it into practice.

    About Social Value UK

    Social Value UK is the national network for anyone interested in social value and social impact. We work with our members to increase the accounting, measuring and maximising of social value from the perspective of those affected by an organisation’s activities, through our Social Value Principles. We believe in a world where a broader definition of value will change decision making and ultimately decrease inequality and environmental degradation. To achieve our mission, Social Value UK provides training and assurance services, as well as hosting regular meetings and events, creating new tools and resources, and running campaigns. Through supporting and working with our members, and as a National Member Network of Social Value International, we are creating an international movement for change.

  • Trafford Housing Trust’s Tom Wilde honoured for commitment to social value

    Trafford Housing Trust’s Tom Wilde honoured for commitment to social value

    Tom Wilde, Trafford Housing Trust’s Social Value Advisor and Social Value UK member, has been honoured for his commitment to serving the local community at the Social Value Awards. The Social Value Awards, in association with Department for Culture, Media and Sport, took place at London’s Institute of Engineering Technology on Wednesday 8th February and provided an opportunity to celebrate good practice in commissioning and providing social value. The awards relate to the 2012 Social Value Act, which called for all public sector bodies to consider social, economic and environmental benefits to local communities, rather than just cost, when awarding contracts to public services.

    At the ceremony, Tom took home one of the four available prizes on the night, winning the Social Value Leadership Award for an Individual, a category which recognises the work of someone in an organisation that goes beyond the requirements of the Social Value Act, and who is instrumental in leading and engaging others in social value. Tom was up against two other nominees for the award, Brian Bishop from Data Performance Consultancy Ltd. and Cindy Nadesan from Surrey and East Sussex Council.

    It’s amazing to get national recognition for a job that I truly love doing. I’m really lucky to work for an organisation that believes in social value enough that they have created a full-time position that focuses on it.

    Tom’s award was in honour of his work analysing local needs to understand what support or interventions will deliver greatest social value within Trafford, and his key role in the re-design of the Trust’s procurement processes which ensured social value is embedded through the supply chain. Tom has also played a key role in supporting local businesses to align their CSR and social value activities more closely with the projects and organisations which will deliver greatest local impact while also leveraging support from local partners and businesses to address local needs.

    Tom said: “It’s amazing to get national recognition for a job that I truly love doing. I’m really lucky to work for an organisation that believes in social value enough that they have created a full-time position that focuses on it. Getting this award will increase the Trust’s profile as an organisation that champions social value, which in turn will open doors to work with and influence others and spread social value beyond the public sector.”

    Matthew Gardiner, chief executive of Trafford Housing Trust, added: “Tom is fully deserving of this award and it is fitting recognition of the excellent work he has undertaken since joining the Trust. The Trust has long been a champion of the importance of social value, as evidenced by our social enterprise CleanStart, and Tom’s award is further proof that the Trust is at the forefront of public bodies that are committed to awarding contracts that result in positive social outcomes as well as excellent results.”

    The award ceremony was the climax of the fourth annual Social Value Summit, the leading event in its field, attracting over 300 leaders from across the private, public and social sectors. It is organised by Social Enterprise UK and Interserve, supported by Business in the Community.

  • Social Value – A nice-to-have or building blocks?

    Social Value – A nice-to-have or building blocks?

    This is a guest blog by member Emma Back on social value in start-ups. This is part of the Member Exchange Series. Let us know your thoughts in the comments.

    It is a rare event for Day One of operation for a new charity or social enterprise to coincide with Day One of its social value strategy. The much more common scenario is for consideration of social value to be piecemeal and sporadic, like writing about it for a funding application or while at a workshop. Many people I’ve met who are starting social ventures don’t even know what it is and for those who do know, the motivation to measure and to analyse impact is low priority – a nice-to-have but a non-essential. This is understandable – resources are very tight and ‘the impact of social impact’ is not immediately visible if you’re still in the early stages of your venture.

    At the Social Value Members Exchange in November, I heard a lot of stories about organisations which had increased their income, designed new services and deepened their impact purely as a result of paying attention to social value. It’s still too easy for these stories to be lost or ignored by emerging ventures. However, I believe social value is a powerful strategic and operational toolkit which creates its biggest influence while ideas and services are still taking shape – early stage companies and charities are missing out.

    I’ve noticed in my online and offline tours of social enterprise start-up resources that social value information is always cordoned off into a separate section (“so now that we’ve considered your business plan, your competition, your finances and your customers, let’s talk about social value”). This feels wrong and off-putting. The various tools and stages of social value fit very naturally into the chronology of starting a business. Instead of being its own thing, with its own set of separate, intensive resource requirements sitting on top of the normal tasks involved in setting up a business or charity, what if we ask the question, how can social value slot into the normal activities of a start-up?

    Here are some conversation starters:

    Social value as business model

    Of course, the theory of change plays a starring role here. Designing mission and goals using the theory as your framework has, in my experience, been the most succinct way of pinning down just exactly what I want the service to do and to achieve. It is a short-cut to creating a results-oriented business plan which doesn’t waffle.

    Social value as motivator

    I’m right at the beginning of my business idea. This can be lonely and tough at times. My understanding of social value means I’m recognising stakeholder impact as it occurs even though the service hasn’t ‘started’ yet. I’ve moved from seeing the problem and my future solution to seeing what changes for people, whoever they are and whatever stage the business is at.

    Social value as quality management tool

    KPIs versus outcome indicators. Need I say more?! What’s lacking is a demonstration of how it can double up to serve existing certifications, for example, ISO9001 or Investors in People, or simply as your monitoring framework for funders. More usually, advice on your social value indicators focuses on sitting alongside a broader system, not integrating with it.

    Social value as service designer

    Has anyone else noticed the deep affinity between the world of service design and that of social value? Both use ‘Engage stakeholders’ as their core mantras and both have a predilection for mapping – for finding the hidden linkages between service goals, activities and real outcomes. By combining techniques from both, some very powerful stories can emerge.

    For example, we could combine customer journey / experience mapping with the theory of change and an outcomes value map. Take a look at the Intuit experience map and the smily faces – this reminds me of intermediate outcomes… Stick values onto these stages together with the numbers of customers who reach them and you get the start of an accessible SROI analysis – one which offers great visibility for improving the positives and minimising the negatives in your service.

    There are so many business elements where social value has something to offer (marketing, financial management, competition analysis etc). The difficulty start-ups face with social value is not to do with resources. It’s to do with the way the story of social value is being told at the moment. It’s still viewed as a bolt-on, an optional extra worth 5% of a commissioning exercise or an additional section in your business plan. It’s more work. But how wonderful would it be we could demonstrate a way for social value activities and tools to be woven into the natural activities of any new social enterprise or charity? Social Value Principles and methods could become the DNA of our future organisations, not the extra box on the form.


    This is part of the Members Exchange Series, for more information, see here.

  • Collaboration for SROI

    Collaboration for SROI

    This is a guest blog by member Lynn Sbaih on collaboration between smaller organisations. This is part of the Member Exchange Series. Let us know your thoughts in the comments.

    In November 2016 I attended the Social Value Members Exchange by Social Value UK, whilst here I hosted a round table table on collaboration between smaller organisations on SROI’s and funding bids. This discussion came about as a result of a some of us exploring, at a regional meeting, how small community groups are attempting to use SROI to acquire funding. We identified that many community groups are keen to identify their group’s SROI, and how this can be articulated in terms of a financial value. This can then provide commissioners and other funders with evidence of why it is worth investing in them, as a group. However, a number of attendees also identified that arriving at and articulating a SROI value may become problematic, particularly if group members cannot provide detail of how they arrived at their identified SROI value.

    The round table discussion touched on some of these issues, and attendees were also able to share some of their insights into working with small community groups. Insights included: how small groups can and should seek funding; how groups can collect information to help tell ‘tell their story’; the value of ‘the story’ and the ways in which funders view social value. In particular, the role of the stakeholder was discussed, and how important stakeholders are in enabling a group to collect meaningful information that may help them articulate their value to funders. This then raised some questions about who are the stakeholders, for small groups, and how do they get to meet and talk with them. This was viewed as particularly problematic for those groups that spend most of their time delivering services to local people and communities. It was observed, that, for such groups, they may have little time or energy to consider the wider issues of achieving SROI and funding. This led to a discussion about how small groups could come together in a community collaboration, where they can use their combined skills and knowledge to identify and manage all the aspects of what is needed to recognise and articulate their social value to funders. This then raised the question of learning and training and how this can be made possible for small community group members.

    Overall, we had a comprehensive and wide ranging discussion, with a range of shared stories and experiences from Round Table attendees, about the challenges facing small community groups as they adopt SROI approaches. Many of our questions where not answered. However, I think we all left our round table with plenty to think about. What are your thoughts?

    This is part of the Members Exchange Series, for more information, see here.

  • FRC Group, SVUK member, wins Hall of Fame Award in 2016 NatWest SE100 Awards

    FRC Group, SVUK member, wins Hall of Fame Award in 2016 NatWest SE100 Awards

    A Hall of Fame for social enterprises has been created with FRC Group as its first member.

    FRC Group, a social enterprise based in Liverpool, campaigns and runs businesses to help End Furniture Poverty and it has a great track record of success at the NatWest SE100 Awards. The awards celebrate the best achievements of social enterprises across the country and this year FRC Group was inducted into Hall of Fame, a new award created to recognise social enterprises that have consistently performed at the highest level.

    Tim West, founder and principal of Matter & Co who created the awards with NatWest, presented FRC Group with its Hall of Fame award. He told the audience that FRC Group has led from the front on all aspects of measuring and demonstrating its impact, and using social impact measurement to become a better organisation.

    Tim explained:“There was no shortlist for this award. I can tell you that the winner has been a finalist in the Impact Champion category of the NatWest SE100 Awards ever since the awards began. It was the winner in the first year of the awards and also won the Resilience Award last year.  

     “Every year this organisation’s performance has been so impressive that it has been a challenge for the judges not to award it a winner’s trophy each time. So this year we are very pleased to induct this organisation as our first member of the NatWest SE100 Hall of Fame.”

    FRC Group runs businesses that create profit and opportunities to change the lives of people living in poverty and unemployment. These include Bulky Bob’s, collecting bulky household waste for local authorities including Liverpool City Council, reusing and recycling 70% of everything collected. They also sell new furniture to social landlords across the country through Furniture Resource Centre and Buckingham Interiors.  FRC Group aims to reduce and eradicate furniture poverty through its End Furniture Poverty campaign and also creates sustainable employment and better futures for people.

    Shaun Doran, FRC Group’s CEO, said: “We were surprised and delighted to win this award and become the inaugural members of the SE100 Hall of Fame and we are really honoured by this award which is recognition for the whole team at FRC Group and is a great boost to our campaign to End Furniture Poverty.”

    The NatWest SE100 Awards recognises social enterprises who have demonstrated some of the best business practice within the sector and celebrates the growth, impact, ambition and resilience of social enterprises in the UK. They were chosen from almost 1,500 social ventures on the NatWest SE100 Index – which tracks the progress and impact of social enterprises across the UK.

    Rob Wilson, MP and Minister for Civil Society, supporting the awards commented: “Social Enterprises across the country are making a positive impact on our society, and it’s great that these awards have recognised the leaders in this sector across the UK. Congratulations to everyone involved. I hope their achievements will inspire others to help our communities and improve lives.”

    The awards were hosted at the NatWest/RBS conference centre in London by Simon Jacobs, Chief Administrative Officer Commercial & Private Banking at RBS, and Chair of NatWest Social & Community Capital.  Julie Baker, Head of Enterprise at NatWest RBS, praised the winners for their “determination not just to make money but to make a difference.”

    She told them: “We value what you do, both for the economy and for our communities. We want you to shout loud about your achievements because we want to demonstrate that social businesses are also good businesses. That’s the whole philosophy behind the NatWest SE100.”

  • Impact Management – A Matter for the Board!

    Impact Management – A Matter for the Board!

    This is a guest blog by member Jim Brooks, Director of Cogent Ventures on why impact management and social value maximisation needs to be addressed by the board. This is part of the Member Exchange Series. Let us know your thoughts in the comments.

    Imagine this scenario:

    You are the Chair of a charity or social business discussing next years annual cycle of business with other board members. It’s a full on cycle so you suggest that finance should be removed from the monthly agenda to free up time. This is done on the basis that we all know how important financial performance is and anyway, we have all the right policies and procedures in place in any case. You would probably get some odd looks and comments such as “you’re kidding right?”. Most would actually be thinking that its time to get a new Chair because this current one has lost the plot. In short, everyone knows how important financial governance is and quite rightly it has a place as a regular item on the agenda.

    So why, I ask, is it perfectly ok for impact management not to be a standing agenda item for boards. Surely we can’t rely on the same  “we all know how important it is” argument, can we?  But this is exactly what i do hear when talking with people from the  social enterprise and charity sector! Whats more as I increasingly raise the subject I tend to get answers such as. “impact is implied, its why we are here” or “impact in our DNA” or even “we report outcomes in the annual report”. However, most people I talk to quickly realise that of course impact management should be on the agenda and then together we ponder why the heck it is not.

    Let me be clear

    Let me be clear about what having impact on the board agenda means. I’m talking about impact strategy, impact reporting and impact performance improvement, in that order. Firstly, the board should be involved in setting the impact strategy, by which I mean the development of the theory of change that leads to the outcomes for beneficiaries and other stakeholders. This way the board are fully attuned to what it is that the organisation does and how this leads to social impact. Once targets have been set the board should review performance against the targets and clearly this needs to happen regularly, in the same way that management accounts are reviewed by the board. Finally, and possibly most importantly, the board then have an opportunity to engage with the management team in impact performance improvement, whether that be to address poor impact performance or to learn from good performance.

    Think about why you won’t be taking finance off the agenda and then apply the same arguments to impact

    None of the above means that having impact management as a regular item needs to be an onerous task and it may not always require a great deal of time. On the occasions where impact strategy is discussed and agreed it may be a fairly lengthy agenda item, similarly when performance improvement is being discussed. There will, however, be times through the year where the slot could be helpfully used for hearing impact related case studies for example. These sessions are likely to take less time but are just as important as they ensure board members remain grounded in the work that the organisation does.

    It will, of course, be for individual chairs reading this to decide if impact needs to be a stand alone agenda item as opposed to being inherent in other standing items. To these people I say think about why you won’t be taking finance off the agenda and then apply the same arguments to impact.

    This is part of the Members Exchange Series, for more information, see here.

  • Impact management is a state of mind!

    Impact management is a state of mind!

    This is a blog by Ben Carpenter, Operations Manager, Social Value UK.

    There’s a slight change in the air… You may have heard it whispered on the grapevines… “Impact Management” is the phrase on everyone’s lips. No longer are people talking about impact measurement. Now, the word on the street is ‘impact management’! Now this may seem like a very subtle change and perhaps not one that warrants a blog. However, I do want to pick up on this nuance in language. I do think it’s worth a blog and I do think I’m justified in feeling quite excited about it. I want to share with you why this could be the start of a significant shift in thinking and practice for the social sector.

    Look up measurement in the dictionary and it’s defined as “the act of measuring something”; “the size, length, or amount of something”; and; “a unit or system of measuring”. That sounds about right. For years we’ve all been fixated on the measurement of social impact. Is this the right way to measure an ‘outcome’? What’s the best tool/system for measuring this outcome? Look how much impact we’ve had this year?!

    In truth, when I walk into a room and say “Impact measurement” people’s eyes roll, there are groans or if I’m lucky perhaps a polite resigned sigh. “Yes we do it.” But ‘it’ has become a chore, in many instances; measurement is seen as something that has to be done. It’s part of the charade of proving impact to ensure funding continues. For so many; ‘measurement’ and collecting information has become an onerous and often meaningless task.

    What difference will a shift in language make?

    So why am I excited that swapping measurement for management will be any different? Back to the dictionary… Management is defined as “The process of dealing with or controlling things”. Whilst I don’t love the word ‘control’, this immediately sounds much more practical and worthwhile. No longer are we measuring for the sake of measuring. Management to me means ‘making decisions’ and let’s throw in another M word: maximising a situation. So perhaps the new questions will be: ‘how can we have more impact?’ or ‘are we creating the most impact we can with the resources we have?’

    If I walk into a room and say words like ‘agile’, ‘iterative design process’ and (wait for it…) ‘pivot’ people’s eyes light up! (OK it helps if the room is full of ‘lean start up’ types or those who are comfortable with a culture of change). The lean start up movement is all about using information to make decisions about design. Let’s build something, collect information to see if this is working, learn from it and re-design. If you read Eric Reis (whose book the Lean start-up has achieved almost biblical status amongst entrepreneurs) the emphasis is on finding one or two bespoke metrics (not standardised) that can quickly give you the information you need to validate your model or help you re-design to make sure you are maximising your success. This is management, not just measurement.

    OK, before you typecast me with full on hipster beard and shout “Oi! You’re not in silicon valley now mate!” let’s just root this in the context of the social sector: UK charities and social enterprises. I think it’s completely possible and the time is right for these social purpose organisations to start adopting a ‘management’ approach to impact. (Check out Acumen’s recent Lean Data initiative.) Success to a charity or a social enterprise will not be measured with financial profit but that doesn’t stop them from behaving in the same way: using information to inform decisions about programme design to maximise their social impact. This is management.

    The crowd who are sick and tired of collecting information for measurement sake are understandably bored. Nothing ever comes of this data collection. A (soon to be published) piece of research from Social Value UK finds that most organisations do nothing with the impact information they’ve collected. What if suddenly staff at charities and social enterprises were collecting information that was being used to inform decisions and change the way services are delivered? I reckon it wouldn’t seem like a chore anymore.

    Isn’t it easier said than done?

    Quick wins?

    There are some small changes that charities and social enterprises can do very easily that can make a big difference: Make data collection less formal. It’s the form filling, questionnaires and rigidity that kills it. Start having conversations. Regularly sit down with beneficiaries (and other people who are affected by your work) and ask them simple questions like:

    What has changed for you? Was that expected? Has anything else happened? What did that lead to? Out of all of these changes, which is the most important to you? Would that have happened anyway? Who else has helped with this?

    Collect the results of these conversations and discuss them at team meetings! Regularly. It won’t be long until you have a rich picture of the changes that are happening (good and bad) and what’s important to people and probably how you can change things to make it better. This to me is management.

    If anyone says they don’t have the time or the resources to do that, they’re talking nonsense. Charities and social enterprises should be talking to their stakeholders and they should be having internal staff meetings. The new questions may lead to some uncomfortable answers but let’s face it – asking beneficiaries to complete mundane questionnaires is equally as uncomfortable. Trust me I’ve been there.

    This doesn’t sound very rigorous?

    Perhaps it’s time we stopped worrying about rigour when it comes to impact measurement. The parallels with highly rigorous academic evaluation are not healthy and if you look at businesses; low levels of rigour is used frequently to support decisions. (Low levels of rigour often better than nothing) As someone one said to me… “it’s about enough precision for the decision”

    I don’t think my funder will like this!

    You’d be surprised. Most investors I’ve spoken to would love to see a ‘management’ approach by their investees. Access Foundation and Power to Change have recently launched an Impact Management Programme that we are very excited about being part of. Bridges Ventures are a world leading impact investor and have recently published a report titled ‘More than Measurement, A practitioner’s journey to Impact Management.’ And it was a grant maker Nominet Trust that have done some excellent work around lean social metrics and instilled a mantra of: ‘a learning organisation is an effective organisation’. I encourage more funders/investors to be bold enough to move away from shared measurement frameworks and look for evidence of their investments collecting useful information, being agile and responsive to change. (Let’s talk about aggregation another day.)

    If I was an investor, above anything else, I would want to know that my investees are collecting information that is useful. Perhaps the only metric I would be interested in is “How many changes have you made to your service/product based on impact information?”

    I am genuinely excited about a shift to a more management approach to collecting impact information. For the measurement professionals and geeks out there (myself included) there are some technical changes required around what questions to ask, how to analyse qualitative information and then extrapolate that with quantitative data. Rest assured, those blogs will be coming over the next few months. The key thing is that impact management is ultimately about creating a culture within an organisation. A culture that is brave enough to ask the tough questions, listen to stakeholders and embrace change. Impact Management is a state of mind.

     

    Find out more about the work SVUK are doing with NPC and other partners: NCVO/CES, SEUK, SIB, Young Foundation and Impetus PEF by subscribing to the Access Impact newsletter.

     

  • Beware the trip of the tongue

    Beware the trip of the tongue

    This is a guest blog from Vincent Neate, Head of Sustainability Services at KPMG UK. Vincent has over 20 years of experience at KPMG, where he has been at the forefront of creating relationships and practices based on sustainable value creation. Vincent has recently joined the Social Value UK Board.

    The business world, we all know, is excessively enamoured with acronyms and abbreviations.  Few of us will not have sat in a meeting with some clever-clogs pointing out that we have miscalled an abbreviation an acronym.  Whilst we take the mickey out of ourselves and each other for this, these short hands serve useful purposes.  They speed things up.  They make things memorable.  They trip off the tongue.

    Early in my career with KPMG I spent some very happy years in Research and Development.  Here we would spend hours coming up with acronyms beginning with K which were funny enough to amuse our colleagues but subtle enough to pass partner censorship. So, acronyms can be fun too.

    But, the thing is, words have meanings that we cannot necessarily control.  The introduction to the general lexicon may take them beyond the original abbreviation or acronym’s intent.  What started as a great idea because it tripped off the tongue might even become so ubiquitous that it starts to shape the cultural and strategic agenda.

    I don’t know when ESG was first used in the world of sustainable and responsible investment and I must confess that I have not really tried to find out either.  Over the years I have heard it spelled out in many different ways but we all know that it is shorthand for three words – Environmental, Social and Governance.  It is certainly ubiquitous, companies and investment managers have ESG policies and procedures and The Private Equity industry have ESG Due Diligence questionnaires.  There are untold roles in organisations where ESG is either in the job title or job description.

    My itch about “ESG” started around 2005 when I was on the Professional Standards Committee of Invest Europe (then called EVCA) and facilitated the first face to face roundtable between the PE initiative of the UN Principles of Responsible Investment and a number of the largest global buy-out firms held in New York.  Things have changed beyond recognition in the intervening years but my humorous take on PE and ESG at the time was that the managers were happy to deal with ‘E’ and ‘G’ but less so ‘S’. They were happy to deal with ‘E’ because it had calculable cost benefits. They were happy with ‘G’ because the whole industry is predicated on aligning management and investor interests. The problem was that to get them to embrace ESG we would have to help them understand that ‘S’ meant more than just workers’ councils and handing power to trade unions.

    I thought I was funny.

    I think this example illustrates two very important points.  The first is that the three components of ESG are not, from the perspective of business and management decision making, equivalent. The second illustrated point is that our abbreviations don’t just speed up our communication and occasionally supply mild amusement, they positively direct and drive our behaviour.

    I think this example illustrates two very important points.  The first is that the three components of ESG are not, from the perspective of business and management decision making, equivalent.  They are not of equivalent scope, scale, or even importance.  Governance is huge, it is a meta-process which sits above all operational processes and is the thing that determines the parameters and content of conversation at the Board.  Bad governance is a Board deprived of relevant information; failing to properly discuss information or ignoring information.  That information can be anything – financial, risk, market, regulatory, social or environmental.

    Environmental is different.  It is precise and increasingly indisputable.  If you use energy you have a carbon footprint. If you fell a tree the tree is no longer there. So many parts per million of fluoride in the water supply is harmful.  Environmental can be easily regulated and is.  If it were not for the gradualism of the political process and the lobbying of industry (and I concede wider economic concerns) we could control our environmental impact today.

    Social is messy.  What exactly is the relationship between business and society?  Is it different if the business is large or small?  What should we think when the business is resident in our community and sells in our community but produces out of sight in far flung countries of the world?  There is not the same easy measurement of social performance, even though there is much agreement about methodology in the Social Value Community.  It makes me think that perhaps we should have been putting more emphasis on the social leg of this three legged stool for a long time now.

    The second illustrated point is that our abbreviations don’t just speed up our communication and occasionally supply mild amusement, they positively direct and drive our behaviour.  When ‘ESG’ first came out it was already true that everyone agreed governance was important (even if they only paid lip service) and environmental concerns were going to be easier to action than social ones.  My contention is that how we structured our abbreviation pushed consideration by business leaders of Social impact and Responsibility into a very poor third place.

    We are not bad people, but if you tell me to look at three things and I have the time to look at one, I will probably look at the first on the list. It is way past time for us to turn the list around and put social impact first.

    It would be great to here your thoughts on this via the comments section below.

    You can connect with Vincent on LinkedIn here. 

  • The Perfect Blend of Commercial and Social

     

    FRC Group has produced what is believed to be the first integrated financial and social value report.

    As well as producing annual financial accounts, the Liverpool-based social enterprise has produced an award winning Social Impact report for the past 15 years which has always undergone a rigorous audit process but this is the first time the two reports have been brought together in one integrated report, combining financial statements and social value performance.

    The report has been independently audited by BDO LLP and contains an audit report on the financial accounts as well as an assurance report on the social value information.

    This clearly demonstrates the value FRC Group places on the social impact it creates as well as meeting robust audit standards for the financial performance of the charity.

    Graham Morris OBE, Chairman of FRC Group, said: “For the first time our public reporting fully reflects the double bottom line approach that FRC Group takes. Communicating our social value creation alongside our financial performance takes our commitment to transparent and inclusive reporting to the next level. Our finance reporting tells us if we are doing things right whereas our social value reporting tells us if we are doing the right things.”

    FRC Group was created as Furniture Resource Centre in 1988, a Liverpool charity formed to help families by redistributing unwanted, good quality furniture to those in need, and social purpose has always been at the heart of everything the charity does.

    FRC Group is now a leading UK social business, running commercial businesses that produce financial profits and create a social dividend by giving people in poverty and unemployment the opportunity to change their lives.

    Jeremy Nicholls, FRC Group Social Value Committee Chair, CEO SROI Network, said: “Integrating our social and financial reporting is a clear statement that all of this value matters to our stakeholders and that simply looking at commercial performance is not enough.”

     

  • Big Issue Invest Wins Award for Championing Social Enterprise and Social Investment!

    Big Issue Invest Wins Award for Championing Social Enterprise and Social Investment!

    – Big Issue Invest (BII) wins Charity Times 2013 Social Champion Award, demonstrating an outstanding service and commitment to the social enterprise and charity sectors.

    – BII, part of The Big Issue Group, supports social enterprises and charities to scale up through the provision of loans and investments, not grants, from £50K to £1m.

    – Since its inception BII has invested nearly £20 million in over 160 social enterprises, charities and community organisations throughout the UK.

    Big Issue Invest are celebrating their win at the recent Charity Times 2013 Awards. Crowned Social Champion at the Awards Gala at London’s Lancaster London Hotel, the Charity Times Awards are the leading celebration of best practice in the UK charity and not-for-profit sector.

    The Social Champion Award was presented to BII for its outstanding service and commitment to the social enterprise sector and its demonstrable positive social impact, which to date includes:

    • 160 social enterprises invested in with other £20m of funds
    • Over 1.7m lives touched
    • 3,200 people sustainably employed
    • Over 1,400 people trained

    Nigel Kershaw, Chief Executive of Big Issue Invest, said: “We are extremely proud to be named Social Champion at the Charity Times Awards. Big Issue Invest is committed to ensuring that people don’t have to resort to The Big Issue because we’re supporting pioneering social enterprises that are capable of transforming people’s lives.”

    John Bird, Founder and Editor in Chief of The Big Issue, said: “It’s great news when we hear that people recognise the power of prevention in the community. My ambition is always to help the homeless to help themselves; but increasingly we have to prevent people falling into homelessness. This is why Big Issue Invest backs sustainable social enterprises and ventures that help tackle poverty and inequality. Prevention! Prevention! Prevention!”

    Charity Times judges said: “Big Issue Invest has shown a consistently high impact across a wide-range of social needs and on a wide geographical base with clear evidence of effect across a wide range of organisations.”

    The judging panel included Ceri Doyle, Acting Chief Executive of The Big Lottery Fund, Caron Bradshaw, CEO of CFG, Christian Guy, Director of the Centre for Social Justice and Tris Lumley, Head of Development at New Philanthropy Capital.

    BII is a social enterprise itself, paying any dividends generated to The Big Issue, also a social enterprise. This structure helps to demonstrate a commitment to social enterprise and creates credibility and empathy with its target markets.