The School for Social Entrepreneurs

People, not pizza: reflections on social franchising

I’ve been fortunate enough over the last few months to design, recruit and deliver a social franchising programme for SSE, called Scaling to Success. It was aimed at social entrepreneurs and social enterprise leaders who had a proven model and were seeking to replicate it: and looking at a franchise-type approach to that replication. It was not “franchise is the answer” but more “a practical look at replication through the lens of franchising”; and the outcomes will hopefully also be very practical and implementable.

The programme was built around SSE principles (action learning, cohort of peers, practitioner-based content, diverse group etc), and we were fortunate to have some fascinating people and organisations take part, with people attending from right across the country: London, yes, but also Devon, Stoke, Yorkshire, Birmingham, Kent and Ireland (kudos to Dara for flying over…).

And we also got a great mix of people to come and speak and participate: from the worlds of funding (Big Lottery Fund, Esmee Fairbairn, Big Issue Invest), the charity sector (one great panel involved Tony Hawkhead of Groundwork, Paul Farmer of Mind, and Simon Blake of Brook), social entrepreneurs with franchising experience (Owen Jarvis, Colin Crooks, Simon McNeill Ritchie), and from the commercial world (Linklaters, Barclaycard, Tie Rack / Le Pain Quotidien, The Plant, and more). Many thanks to all who gave their time.

As the programme progressed, we worked as a group to try and extract as much learning as possible, and create a bit of ‘group memory’ for people to refer back to. I referred to this as ‘nuggets of learning’ in our first session and, given our franchising focus, the group had somewhat inevitably renamed this ‘McNuggets’ by the final day. There were countless such pieces of practical learning over the course of the programme, but here are five McNuggets that stood out to me:

• Franchisees (or local partners) are another set of social enterprise customers, in addition to beneficiaries/clients and funders/investors…
• …but don’t lose focus of the end user / customer through that intermediation
• The balance between flexibility and control in replication is often about the leader’s personality as much as the requirements of the organisation
• Going slow (or piloting properly) means you make most of your mistakes with fewer partners…
• ...but everyone (even the big commercial franchises) make plenty of mistakes, and they are surmountable

The differences are manifold between social and commercial franchising (incentives for good performance, sharing:protecting IP, types of franchisees, appropriate finance, etc) but I retain the belief that it is underused in the field. Providing as it does that balance between the social (propensity to share and partner) and the enterprising (a business that grows and trades and innovates).

And during the course of the programme, I think we found our strapline too.
Social franchising: growing the business of people, not pizza.

[Nick Temple can now also be found blogging at NickTemple.org]

Why 'adapt’ is the new ‘nudge’ (and why that’s good for social entrepreneurs)

  I’ve written before about my love of podcasts, and how they can spark off new ideas or generate new thinking on the way to and from work. My current fave is More Or Less, the Radio 4 programme about statistics, numbers, and how they relate to the news events of the day (often to politics and policy).  This covers everything from the real value of the national debt to the comparative effectiveness of different contraceptives. It’s more interesting (and entertaining) than it sounds, and  it is particularly useful to have that rational discipline and questioning mindset when, like me, you are giving a lot of thought to an organisation’s measurement and evaluation.

I mention all this because the main man of More Or Less is Tim Harford, also known as the FT’s Undercover Economist (incidentally, the book of that name is a great intro to economic thinking and gives useful insights into pricing, costing, markets and much else besides).  He has a book being launched later this year called Adapt: Why Success Always Starts With Failure, and I’m looking forward to it to an almost indecent degree.

Why? Well, if you read my recent piece on how social entrepreneurs learn, or anything about SSE’s approach to learning, you’ll know that we are keen advocates of action learning or learning by doing. That the best learning comes from action, and that the most successful initiatives are not those with the perfect business plan, but those which learn from failures, mistakes and imperfections. That things get figured out on the frontline, not in back offices;  that it is not academic ‘experts’ who solve complex problems, but practitioners with experience; that solutions are often better generated from bottom-up action and adaptation than top-down planning and grand strategies.

Indeed, it is that flexibility, agility, and adaptability that is identifiable in the best social entrepreneur-led organisations around, explaining their ability to both continuously improve and innovate their product and service, and also their readiness to seize opportunities and utilise untapped resources. The blurb for Harford’s book resonates strongly with this, saying that ‘out’ go experts, plans and (top-down) leaders, and ‘in’ come adaptation, improvisation, failing and learning (and trying again). And it looks like he will apply that thinking to big problems (Iraq, global warming, terrorism) and ‘small’ ones equally (everyday decisions in life and business).

While ‘nudging’ focuses on influencing (and changing) behaviours, adapting is more fundamentally about encouraging action before planning, overcoming obstacles as they arise, changing approaches rapidly and, most of all, about shifting the culture of risk-aversity to one of risk-awareness and even risk-acceptance. And further accepting that there will be failures along the way.  It is an approach that makes most sense in a world in which contexts and circumstances shift rapidly, and in which the pace of society’s development (and life generally) seems to outpace the best-made plans of policymakers and theorists.

So 2010 might have been the year of ‘nudge’, but 2011 should be the year of ‘adapt’ (and the year after that....).

[NB - Some might then advocate for an ‘adapt’ unit at the heart of government, perhaps headed up by Tim Harford himself; but obviously that would be a top-down, strategic plan for adaptation with an expert at the centre...which wouldn’t really work at all :0) ]

 

 

Unintended outcomes and impact measurement

I had the pleasure of visiting the SSE programme in Wigan and Leigh last week, to facilitate an ‘introduction to social impact measurement’ session with the students on the programme. I do love that experience of arriving in on a train to a place you’ve never been before, wandering down the road to a building, following the signs....and finding an SSE programme there just like the ones across the network.

I think the session went pretty well: great to meet the students and their projects at different stages, and help them think about the story that lies behind their work (aka ‘theory of change’), what tools and methodologies to think about using, and how much time and resources to commit to evaluation at this stage of their work. I like the process because on the one hand it challenges you to put numbers and objectives to the activity you are thinking of doing (and to what tangible difference you hope to make), and on the other it forces you to take your head out of the day-to-day of delivery and think about the broader context and overall story. Both timely and relevant activities for early-stage social entrepreneurs as they plan, work on communications, and set up systems and processes.

In the course of the couple of hours, before heading across to Liverpool SSE’s steering group meeting, we discussed ‘unintended outcomes’ as well: being open and alive to positive and negative effects that might not have been part of the original plan. They told me of a perfect example (which I’m reporting second-hand): how one Liverpool SSE student became Facebook friends with another one on the programme; via that network and a couple of conversations, he identified that this SSE student lived near his ex-partner and, as a result, close to his son...who he hadn’t seen for almost 18 years. He was able to get back in touch, and, in an appropriate tying up of loose ends, his son then attended his father’s SSE graduation.

Unintended indeed, but a great outcome. :0)

The Life of an Intern

Hey everybody, it's Ryan the intern!  I just wanted to take a few minutes and write about my experience here at the SSE so far.

From day one, it has been fantastic working here.  I've never had an office job before, although I do have a bit of other work experience.  What I thought was going to be a month of being bored to death, cooped up in an office with a bunch of old people turned into being one of the most inspiring, exciting jobs with the greatest bunch of people I have ever worked with (and they aren't even old, or at least you can't tell)!!  

Business, for me, has always been something I've studied only because it seemed like a practical way to get a job in one of the worst economies that the USA (yes, I'm American so excuse my different spelling of words) has ever seen.  I don't know whether it's the English charm in this office, the fact that I feel like my work has meaning, or just the overall vibe in the office that we are all helping other people, but whatever it is, coming to work is a great part of my day and I'm sad to say I will have to leave at the end of the month to go back to school for my final semester before heading out into the real world.  That said, I must repeat the first thing I learned in this office and that was where the tea is.  How English! :)

Specifically, I'm working under Nick doing things like contacting the press, working back and forth with fellows and current students to finish up certain jobs, and organizing/analyzing (not analysing haha) data from evaluations and such.  It's been great fun as every day is a bit different, so it keeps me interested.  

Finally, it's just really interesting seeing how a non-for-profit works; it's neat how we have to go about different strategies to keep things working like obtaining grants and the like because the SSE doesn't rely on its program as its only source of income.  

Well, that's all from me for now.  I'll be back next Monday with another update of sorts, I'm sure.

Cheers! 

New podcasts: leadership, social entrepreneurs and numbers

The benefits of having lost the argument over who should have the long commute with my wife is that I have plenty of time to catch up on podcasts and a bit of work-related listening on the way in (and back). Though the journey itself is routine, it also provides a chance to listen to things that are outside the normal sphere of work stuff, and stretch the brain a bit.

At the moment, there's a few programmes I'd heartily recommend:

1) Guardian Charity Effectiveness Podcast: this time on What makes a good leader? and withan excellent line-up including Debra Allcock-Tyler from DSC and James Partridge from Changing Faces (who is one of the most admired leaders here at SSE). And a bit of SSE representation from SSE Fellow Debbie Ariyo from AFRUCA, phoning in on the lack of diversity in leadership in the sector. All produced by another SSE Fellow Jude Habib's organisation SoundDelivery.  Plenty of nuggets here on leadership, challenges ahead in 2011, and keeping focus whilst retaining a long-term view.

2) Peter Day on Not for Profits: Peter Day is a genius, as far as I'm concerned, and have often mentioned his great podcasts about the world of business here before. This episode includes his recent appearance at the Good Deals conference a few weeks back, and looks at the recurring issue of scale. Does the non-profit sector need to become more like the market? Challenging and valuable listening.

3) More Or Less: There are, of course, geeks in the sector, many of whom are operating in the evaluation field (I was delighted to learn on a recent visit to New Philanthropy Capital that they had a feedback form after their Xmas party: that's devotion to the evaluative cause right there...). My own inner geek loves More Or Less, which is all about looking at the numbers behind the stories: this week it looked at the issue of student debt, and how much people would actually pay. The sanest, most reasoned take on that issue heard all month.

4) An interview with Matthew Taylor: Podcasting in the sector is rare, so also been enjoying this recent initiative from Social Investment Business; Matthew Taylor, Chief Exec of the RSA is a really interesting thinker on a lot of big current issues: Big Society, civil society, engagement + membership, citizen-centred social action, the power of networks and more. Very much worth 10 minutes of your time

Happy listening....

New SSE videos from Hampshire

Couple of new videos from our Hampshire franchise which are great at getting under the skin of social entrepreneurship in general, and the SSE programme (and its action learning approach) in particular. Thanks to all who feature, and especially to Peter @ Shedlight and Conroy at HSSE.

Enjoy:

Hampshire School for Social Entrepreneurs from Shedlight on Vimeo.

 

Action Learning Sets - Hampshire School for Social Entrepreneurs from Shedlight on Vimeo.

Yin and Yang: the top 5 balancing acts for social entrepreneurs

It feels like such a busy and fast-moving time at the moment, that it's been difficult to take time and reflect, and get the head up to look around, meerkat-like. Which has got me thinking about balance, and the different areas that social entrepreneurs need to balance.

1) Passion and pragmatism:  I was speaking at an UpRising event recently, along with Young Foundation Director Geoff Mulgan, about the Big Society and how to react to it. There were some passionate reactions in the room, and those encouraging direct action and activism rather than engaging with the movement. I made the point that engagement with policymakers was about understanding their perspective, holding true to your values / principles / opinions, and seeking a constructive way forward. Sometimes a constructive way forward requires disagreement (and constructive criticism), but when that blurs into anger or aggression, the dialogue isn't there...and any opportunities dwindle. That line between passion and pragmatism is always key.

2) Self and organisation: The balance that gets talked about most in this context is work-life balance, which tends to ignore that for many social entrepreneurs (indeed, entrepreneurs of all types), work and life are not that easily divisible. It might be that this is more about ensuring time is portioned off for non-work, for friends and family, for rest and reflection. Inevitably, it's at the busiest times when this gets squeezed, and it's at those times when it is most valuable. Focus requires concentration and good health; somehow it's never easy to drink more water, sleep enough, eat well and do a bit of exercise. But we all know it works. And we also know that people need to earn a living, even if it's a job they've created themselves.

3) Mission and money: Very much the core of social enterprise + social entrepreneurship, the balance between mission and money is crucial: especially for decision-making. Some now talk about it as "impact-first" and "finance-first" (particularly in the realm of finance), but even just having that level of awareness about different choices is important. Some opportunities might bring in money that allow you to cross-subsidise activities that would have more impact in line with mission. It's the awareness of where the decision lies and why it's being taken. [see slides 9 + 10 in this powerpoint which has a mission-money matrix + the same matrix in tough economic times]

4) Attention to detail and big picture: I find this a tough one, personally. It's easy to get bogged down in the detail of things that aren't really important (as with the cartoon above) or to get very focused (rightly) on delivering to the highest quality; but sometimes that comes at the expense of looking a little long-term and thinking strategically. That's particularly true right now, when the climate is forcing people to act hand-to-mouth and day-to-day. But those who can think about thriving in 2-3 years as well as surviving the next 6 months, will be in an advantageous position. Having said that, I also have huge admiration for those people who in the midst of intense periods of activity, still remember to reply to a (less important) e-mail, write a letter of congratulation, or make an introduction they think might be useful. Well, I did say it was tough....

5) Objectivity and subjectivity: This takes me back to the Big Society and that debate, and also a little to the line between self and organisation. It's about judgement, and trying to take the 'personal' out if it. Thinking about the organisation's best interests and taking out personal feelings and interests as far as possible. Not easy when your contract or grant has been cut, or someone else wins the contract over you; and not easy when that organisation is "your baby", but important. To be ready for the next opportunity, to be on the front foot (not dwelling on what's just happened), to maintain relationships, to think about the intentions of those making the decisions, and to put things in context. Judgement isn't just about what to do and when to do it, but about what you say, how you communicate, and your ability to empathise. Which gets tougher at tough times.

So what's the advice? Take time to reflect; be a bit selfish (otherwise it won't happen); have people near who put things in perspective; keep money + mission at the forefront at all times; look ahead. Which is all a lot easier to write than do.

 

 

Social enterprise and entrepreneurship links from September

Slightly delayed due to the SSE residential, but here's my round-up of interesting, relevant and topical links in the world of social enterprise and entrepreneurship from September:

- Not officially September, but as I'm late, two events from early October worth following up on were SoCap 10 and SBC10. Check out the tweets (#socap10 #sbc10) and videos etc online if you couldn't be there like me.

- Stats + definitions: a generation hangs their head as the debate continues.... new research questioned how many social enterprises there are, which also prompted a call for clarity of definitions

- More forward- (and outward-) looking was Pamela Hartigan's interview on Dowser.org explaining why you don't have to be a social entrepreneur to make change, but it's good to know what they are...

- I'm pretty much in whole-hearted agreement with many of Malcolm Gladwell's points in this New Yorker piece on the limitations of Twitter + Facebook in creating change

- Global social entrepreneurs were excited by the Unreasonable Institute and Echoing Green applications opening. SSE is a pipeline partner to Unreasonable, so we're looking forward to seeing who they get on board this year; hopefully some SSE Fellows will be encouraged to apply

- Suffolk was the county on everyone's lips as they announced their intention to outsource "virtually all" services to social enterprise....

- ...while Suffolk councillor (and social entrepreneur) Craig Dearden-Phillips wrote openly about the need (and lack?) of financial incentives for social entrepreneurs

- Sean Stannard-Stockton took impact into a new holistic era, beyond reductive metrics (on Social Edge)

- Big Society-wise, I have mostly been enjoying Karl Wilding (NCVO)'s neat overview presentation, Paul Hodgkin (SSE Fellow / Patient Opinion)'s article on importance of conversation + technology, and Radio 4's Analysis programme on Big Society (hat-tip to SSE colleague Ian Baker for the latter)

- Jonathan Jenkins (from UnLtd Ventures / Advantage) is as good as anyone on social investment, and this article on the need for angel investment brings out some of the key points, and the key current problems, of this emerging market

- David Robinson, one of the most quietly effective leaders in the social sector, writes about (and welcomes) the first pilot Social Impact Bond

- Social Entrepreneurs Ireland held their latest awards event, which I heard was fantastic: round-up and article on the event here

- Rod Schwartz got a good debate going about mergers, partnerships and egos in social enterprise

- Paul Light is a US professor who's been beavering away at social entrepreneurship for many years; he knows his stuff, as this Just Means interview makes clear

- The Social Enterprise Ambassadors programme had its closing event: details and photos on the website

- Tim Harford, who I'm a fan of on More or Less, has written a couple of interesting critiques of 'nudge' theory (behavioural economics stuff); see Nudges are for Markets, not Nations and To Nudge is One Thing, To Nanny Another

- And finally, because everyone loves a list, Inc.Com's 10 tips for managing a one-person sales force (a concept familiar to many of our students...) and this great post of 15 excuses for not making ideas happen.

Presumably no. 16 is writing a blog post to delay other work. On which note, over and out.

Learning from failure (and social entrepreneurship)

I attended a fascinating lunchtime seminar the other week. It's not often the words 'fascinating', 'lunchtime' and 'seminar' are used in juxtaposition, so thought I would share some of the key points from the session. It was called, Trial, Error and the Big Society though it was more 'trial, error and failure in the public policy sphere' in reality (it would appear you're actually not allowed to hold any event currently without the words Big + Society in the title...). Aubrey Fox, who has been working at the Young Foundation, was talking about the lessons from his work at the Center for Court Innovation, and his associated book Trial and Error in Criminal Justice Reform: Learning from Failure

Despite my lack of knowledge about the criminal justice system, Aubrey was thankfully making some points of more general relevance which I was able to make sense of. And I think there are some interesting lessons for both social entrepreneurs and those who support them. This is all in the context of "there is failure in anything you do" and "failure is difficult to talk about":

1) Failure is in the eye of the beholder: a binary view of pass/fail does not reflect the complexity of most project outcomes, nor the experiences of those taking part in it in some way; success looks different to different people, and so does failure

2) Working once doesn't mean it will work forever (or somewhere else): this is a fascinating one for us, because we franchise our model and are passionate about replication that works; but there are countless external factors beyond 'the model', and a constantly changing environment

3) Leadership is crucial: Aubrey made the interesting point that 'boring' leaders are better than 'heroic' leaders; it is also about different stages of leadership for different elements of a project....and how to achieve those leadership transitions (often a point of failure)

4) Work to close the gaps between policy + practice: still these two groups are not effective at working together (I know, shock!); but ways to avoid failure involve a two way street of nudging or incentivising or de-risking or facilitating policymakers to be more creative, and also training, supporting, developing practitioners to effectively run and sustain what they do and not to fall into the trap of...

5) ...the 'seductive power of unrealistic expectations': another great phrase, and one that I've termed the risk of "overpromise and under-delivery"; actually, changing behaviours and cultural norms at an individual level (never mind organisational or system level) is very difficult; and there is an assumption (is this correct?) that "projects would not win (public) support with modest results"; but that is a short-term win rather than a long-term success outlook.....

Further points of interest were

- that the consequences for individual failure differ depending on the project or sector (i.e. it's fine for James Dyson to trial 550 different hoovers and throw them out, it's not the same with, say, young offenders)

- that structural leadership (of teams, of coalitions) with agreed analysis and measurement is important

- defining what success looks like too early can put a limit on ambition (aka "sometimes you need to hold your nerve")

- the burden of proof in the sector is often on the new, rather than the existing

- the value of "calculated candour" (a phrase I love), which speaks to the need to be open without being reckless, to being as straightforward as possible about what has worked and what hasn't; because openness builds trust, which builds credibility builds support....

- areas ripe for innovation might be those where the risk (and cost) of the status quo is higher than the risk (and cost) of innovation

- couple of interesting questions; one that doesn't get asked (what is your expected failure rate?) and one that was difficult to answer (what is the motivation for individuals to take risks and to admit failures?)

At that point, brain expanded, and tried to come back to work...learning and failing, learning and failing.

[hat-tip as ever to the wonderful Indexed blog for the image; buy the postcard book via the site!]

Social enterprise and entrepreneurship links from August

Lots to do, lots to read, lots more to do....

My last post-holiday round-up seemed to go down well, so thought I'd do the same for August as I did for July. No particular rationale, just stuff I've found interesting or think might be relevant. Hope it is. Enjoy:

- The big hairy article of the month was in the Economist (I assume by Matthew Bishop), titled "Social innovation: let's hear those ideas" which covers how the US and UK governments are seeking to encourage social innovation and social entrepreneurship. Also includes cogent round-up of Big Society agenda to date.

- If you're interested in working out what the hell is happening with Local Enterprise Partnerships (*entire readership switches blogs*), then this round-up is the best place STILL to do so.

- Some interesting stuff written about the Big Society. Dai Powell of HCT's ("The clock is ticking on the Big Society") and Geoff Mulgan of Young Foundation's ("Can the Big Society be more than a slogan?") stood out for me, along with Craig Dearden-Phillips call for a constructive, engaged response See http://del.icio.us/SSE/bigsociety for more

- Twenty by Twenty: twenty essays on future of social enterprise, charity et al by good (as well as big) names

- Great social media decision-making guide for social entrepreneurs / non-profits from US experts Idealware

- Good piece in the New York Times about a social entrepreneur (don't be put off by the title): What Exactly Is A Social Entrepreneur?

- Giving is no longer a government preserve: interesting piece in the Telegraph touching on social entrepreneurship + big society

- Amanda Jones of RedButtonDesign in Director magazine on the trials and tribulations of raising funding/investment as a social enterprise

- Nice (Canadian) round-up of summer reading for social entrepreneurs which of course you can buy in the SSE bookstore

- Social enterprise start-up: 3 lessons to learn....by Involver

- Worry isn't work: Don't be Anxious! wise words from Dan Pallotta in Harvard Business Review; now if I could just follow his advice...

- Happy tale of a women's social enterprise (minicabs for women only) struggling, thriving and becoming the subject of a BBC comedy show

- Ten tips on elevator pitches; I think the Brits aren't as good at this stuff (myself included); I think we do escalator pitches....so will try and read 5 lessons from 150 start-up pitches as well

- Merger advice for small and medium orgs + collaboration advice from Bassac and others....

- ....and, for balance, an argument on DSC against merger: Total efficiency is the enemy of freedom

- Pollgate: the results of the storm in our own particular UK #socent teacup; but gratifying nonetheless!

- Freeing the Social Entrepreneur: a piece in Stanford Social Innovation Review well worth reading, covering founder syndrome, leadership and much more

- Great video on the Homeless World Cup and its impact: warms the cockles and all that

- The Social Intrapreneur: a field guide for corporate changemakers.... ; well, those MBA-ers had to come up with something :0)

- Alex Nicholls says Social Entrepreneurship Is Growing Up on Dowser.org. Which I would heartily endorse. So I'll end with the good professor's words. Cheers:

”We're moving into a period of much more critical analysis of social entrepreneurship. We've ridden a wave of consensus; we're all hugging each other and patting ourselves on the back. There's been lots of money pouring into this and support from governments. I think all that's changing. We've had an economic calamity, governments are looking at austerity, foundations are pulling back, the media and others are getting more critical. I think we're going to have a critical decade for social entrepreneurship, and that's great. It's high time we looked at the stuff that's useful and does have impact and the stuff that has no impact at all, and I think we're going to have a big reality check. The hero-worshiping, self-congratulatory period's over. I don't see that as a challenge; I see it as a sign that we're growing up.”