Downing Street, Future Jobs and the realities of delivery

SSE did something unusual this morning: attended a 7.30am breakfast meeting. Not renowned as early risers, Alastair and myself nevertheless made the exception to go to 10 Downing Street. The Prime Minister, along with James Purnell, Hazel Blears, Liam Byrne and John Healey, was launching the Future Jobs Fund and, specifically, discussing how the third sector / social enterprise could contribute to it.

The Fund is, as people keep saying about the recession more generally, both an opportunity and a challenge for the sector. On the one hand, what an opportunity: if 10% of the £1bn fund can be pushed through social enterprises and charities on the ground, that could be potentially transformatory. On the other, it also requires, say, delivery of 10% of the outcomes (150,000 jobs, of which 100,000 for 18-24 year old, and of which 50,000 in the most disadvantaged areas) against fairly short-ish timelines. In the words of the mighty Adam Ant, very much time to stand and deliver.

Much of the talk round the table this morning was also about how it can be ensured that this opportunity is accessible to smaller players and, from an SSE point of view, to allow for the innovation  / risk / time that start-up job creation brings (aka new social entrepreneurs from these kinds of backgrounds / areas / age groups). We'll certainly be following up on this with other organisational partners.

Great to see the breakfast prepared and served by Hoxton Apprentice trainees (congrats to them, and especially Leon who's a fantastic advocate for their work). Also good to see so many social enterprise ambassadors (Peter Holbrook, Dai Powell, Karen Lowthrop, Claudine Reid, Penny Newman, John Bird and SSE Fellow Tokunbo Ajasa-Oluwa) round the table: it was a good mix, I think, of such credible, experienced practitioners with second tier orgs such as ourselves, Social Firms, Social Enterprise Coalition, DTA etc

What is particularly encouraging is to see government departments working together in this way: DCLG, DWP and Cabinet Office, acknowledging that social enterprise and entrepreneurship is delivering outcomes across their departments, and seeking to make a breakthrough push of acceptance, awareness and resourcing.

Share Button

Social enterprise and public service delivery

Yesterday, SSE attended the Smith Institute's launch event for its new policy pamphlet, Social Enterprise for Public Service
(pdf download). Good line-up, including Stephen Bubb (ACEVO, Futurebuilders), Minister for the Third Sector Kevin Brennan and his opposite number in the Conservative party Nick Hurd. Each of them, plus Paul Palmer (Cass Business School) and Tom Titherington (Network Housing Group), spoke for 5 minutes, before it was opened up to questions.

Worth mentioning that the SSE chapter in the pamphlet looks at a few questions of relevance + pertinence to social entrepreneurs: whether entrepreneurship can be commissioned and procured; how can such 'unorthodox' people work with 'orthodox' civil servants; how can they gain legitimacy + credibility when self-appointed; is measurement more important than legal structure; and how can pressure to scale and conform be avoided?

Share Button

Transparency: funding tips for social entrepreneurs (and politicians)

Tokunbo
After watching the Obama inauguration (flicking between various online video streams before ending up with the trusty BBC) earlier this week, I attended a Teach First Ambassadors event, at which SSE Fellow Tokunbo Ajasa-Oluwa was speaking. I won't eulogise Tokunbo and the work of his organisation, Catch 22: he gets enough of that these days, being a social enterprise ambassador and all.

I did, however, want to share some of his useful funding tips to the prospective social entrepreneurs / teachers and former teachers present, as there was some useful stuff. He pointed to some key areas:

research: the criteria, the grants / investments previously given, the size of organisations they were given to (to help gauge what you should go for)

relationships: use the "could you spare me 15 minutes of your time?" rule to get time with individuals at a funding organisation: the higher-up the better, but all staff can give you a feel for the culture / approach; nurture the relationships, and keep them up-to-date with progress; seek ways in; never submit a blind application without talking to someone

realism: about what you will get; about what you can deliver (the old "underpromise, overdeliver" rule); about the challenges you face; about the mission-money decisions (particularly in current climate)

transparency: (if only it began with 'R') be honest and open in your dealings with people; about your promises; and about the success (or lack of) of your projects; transparent reporting and accountability builds trust, and trust builds credibility…and credibility leads to more funding…

I'd add a couple of things to that (Tokunbo had more as well): one is don't take it personally, or think it's (necessarily) about the quality of the funding bid / project. It can be about the level of competition, very subjective trustee opinions or bad timing as much as about what you have written / your idea. The other thing is to be "always on" and don't silo fundraising into one person: everyone in the organisation can spot opportunities, build relationships and develop networks.

On the subject of transparency, worth noting that Obama emphasised it in his speech. Simultaneously, our politicians were trying to become less transparent by hiding away details of their expenses. Thanks to a great campaign co-ordinated by techie social entrepreneur Tom Steinberg and MySociety, this plan was reversed the day before it was meant to go through. Great congratulations to those campaigning, and to those who wrote to their MPs, joined groups, made calls etc. Shame it took such a campaign to make our politicians realise (as Obama does) that transparency builds trust which builds credibility…..

Share Button

What the Iraq War can teach you about strategic planning

Fiasco
Just as optimism reigns in the US, I've been reading about arguably its darkest days of recent times in the Iraq War. Fiasco by Thomas Ricks (a US journalist on the Washington Post) details the build-up to the war, the invasion, the insurgency, and the reconstruction efforts in fascinating detail. It's not an easy read and has left me, by turns, angry, frustrated, depressed but also uplifted, inspired and amazed. So what relevance to this blog and the world of social entrepreneurs? Well, a couple of things really stood out to me:

1) The first is the emphasis the military in the US places on learning (from mistakes). That may sound a bit bizarre, given that Iraq is largely viewed as a Vietnam repeat and, at least to start with, a case study in how not to carry out a counterinsurgency. Time and again, though, senior military figures give realistic assessments of what is happening / going wrong, and highlight what needs to be done to change this: and much of this is done publicly in workshops / publications / speeches and so forth. This happens throughout the first five years of the war, and the military's ability to be honest with itself, to highlight errors (and successes) and incorporate those into its future operations has been crucial in improving (eventually) its performance there. This doesn't apply to all, of course; some of the most senior figures involved consistently made out that Iraq was in a better state than it was, and continue to delude (or contradict) themselves to this day.

2) The second was about strategic planning. Ricks argues that the failure in Iraq was primarily one of strategic planning (or the lack of therein). Firstly, there was a lack of realism (if only their goals had been SMART) and a lack of consistency: their grounds for going to war were based on a worst-case scenario (i.e. Iraq has loads of WMD, Saddam works with Al-Qaeda, the US is under threat) while their plans for the occupation / reconstruction were based on a best-case scenario (we'll be welcomed as liberators, and the country's in an alright state etc).

Secondly, there was a lack of clarity over the actual objective of the invasion: was it about finding WMDs, was it about removing Saddam, was it about regime change, was it about introducing democracy to Iraq, or to the wider Middle East? (some would add, of course, was it about oil?) and so on; and it shifted as the politics demanded it. This was hugely confusing and bewildering for the troops on the ground, because each of these goals requires different operational activity, different tactics and so on. If you are unclear about your mission, how can you decide how you are going to get there and achieve it? How can you make decisions between where you apply resources (and how many are needed)?

Thirdly, there was a lack of planning in and of itself. Phase IV (the reconstruction) didn't have an overall plan in place when people arrived in Baghdad to start, whereas Phase III (the invasion) had been planned and war-gamed to within an inch of its life. 

Fourthly, the US Army had not done its homework on insurgency and counterinsurgency as a whole (though individual commanders had knowledge of, say, Vietnam or Algeria, and applied it appropriately), nor on experiences of occupation. They only started to bring in this learning 2-3 years in, in a formalised way (via pre-Iraq training etc).

Finally, there was also confused leadership / ownership between the State Department (Rumsfeld et al) and the military in Washington, and between the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) and the Army in Iraq. From Ricks' account, this caused untold problems at every level of operations.

So, lessons from the Iraq disaster?

– do your research (it may not involve Vietnam or Algeria, but is necessary)
– a plan is important (entrepreneurs are prone to action, but a thought-through plan is crucial)
– get clear on your overall objective / vision and ensure it is clear to everyone else involved
– be realistic in your planning, rather than overly pessimistic or optimistic
– be clear about leadership and autonomy over particular areas (and who has the final say over what)
– be open to learning, honest about mistakes and constantly try to improve

Not a bad checklist for a social entrepreneur, or for the new US President to insist on the next time someone suggests a military invasion…..

Share Button

The Big Vote…

…was, of course, on which photos were going to win the Social Enterprise Day photo competition. Rarely has an electoral college vote been better used inside the Coalition…..

….or was it about which CAN founder gave the best speech at their 10th anniversary (well done to all at CAN by the way: particularly enjoyed the London Gay Men's Chorus singing Stand By Your Man; a fixture at all social enterprise events next year I hope?)….

OK, just kidding. Obviously, it's all about Obama today. Particularly with our next door neighbours Operation Black Vote having the biggest and best Obama party in town: what a shot in the arm for their work, as well. Amazing.

I'm off doing interviews for Ashoka UK for their second round of Fellows the next couple of days, so not much blog-time. So I'll just link to this in the interim, which was well worth being awake at 5.30am for.

Barack Obama victory speech (17 mins / BBC website)

Share Button