We left Australia in 2013 to explore social innovation, social enterprise and systems change in the UK and Europe.

What we found was a mature impact sector. There are multiple well-established specialist intermediaries that produce hundreds of tools and resources, and an event and conference schedule that no one could keep up with. There are sector specific funding bodies, a maturing social impact investing marketplace and emerging financial models like community shares. There’s a legal entity tailored to the social enterprise model. While Government could always be more engaged, there are well developed campaigning efforts that see new government money flowing and supportive policy in place.

Some of the things I learnt in my time there were:

1. In a crowded marketplace where everyone shares the same vision, partnerships are a game-changer.
2. Without intermediaries that speak for the sector, bring it together and support it to grow, the sector will stay small and vast amounts of innovation would never happen.
3. Enabling the sector to speak in one voice, with a shared ‘brand message’ is the best way to get engagement with audiences beyond the sector itself.

My UK and European experience was invaluable – a defining time both personally and professionally (more on the wider learnings in another blog). But after seven years it was time to come home.

We landed back in Australia just as COVID hit. Despite the more than unusual and challenging times, what we found was a social enterprise sector full of energy, optimism and action. A sector with talented and passionate people doing inspiring work – game-changers, risk-takers, and never-give-up-ers. My kind of people.

It’s been a privilege to be welcomed back home to the Australian sector with such open arms and to join the fabulous Social Traders team. It’s been quite surreal being stuck behind a computer screen. But in every new conversation (tech failure or not!) I’ve left feeling inspired and energised by what’s possible for the social enterprise sector here.

The Australian social enterprise sector has a different opportunity to the UK. Australia’s sector is more emergent and the intermediary market that supports it is less crowded. And that’s exactly why it’s exciting.

Rather than creating a marketplace with overlapping offers and competing campaigns, we can grow together in a more coherent and more impactful way. We can shape the market strategically and collectively.

We all want to see a future world where social enterprise is business as usual. For me, it’s my career purpose.

In the wake of COVID, now is the time to be bold. For social enterprise to claim and celebrate its role in building an economy that is fairer, more just and more sustainable.

We all know that social enterprise was made for this. It’s a ready-made solution that’s been breaking disadvantage and changing lives for decades. It’s not socialism or charity. It combines profit and purpose in one business model, using the market to create impact.

Now is the time for the social enterprise sector to unite, organise and build on its past success. If we don’t make the most of this unique moment in history, we will look back and wish we were braver, bolder and more ambitious.

Most important, now is the time for us to work together. We’ll never achieve the scale of impact that Australia needs if we don’t combine and align all our talents, efforts and experience. And we’ll definitely never achieve it if we work at odds with each other.

We are an ecosystem. Like a mosaic, we all hold a piece, but it takes all of us to create the complete picture – to be more than the sum of our parts.

I have loved rediscovering that there’s a strong spirit of collaboration in Australia. In only my first four months, there have been a string of new collaborations forming with a long-term ambition to build a strong social enterprise ecosystem for a fairer Australian economy.

It’s a pivotal moment for the Australian social enterprise sector. It feels like a key point in the next phase of the sector’s evolution, building on the foundations in place. What we do now will shape the sector for the next decade and beyond. Let’s build a market where our efforts reinforce each other, so social enterprise can claim its place as a crucial part of our economy.

I can’t wait to see what we can achieve together.

What a time to be home.

The post Never a better time to come home to the Australian social enterprise sector appeared first on The Dragonfly Collective.

As a marketeer I’ve always been fascinated with behavioural science and how to change the values and beliefs that drive our behaviours.

So far, the only time I’ve seen a real change in beliefs is when someone experiences an issue for themselves. It’s about lived experience, or human to human connection that makes the issue tangible and personal.

Having come from a family that struggled financially, I have the benefit of that lived experience. The knowledge that poverty is not so much a practical challenge, but an emotional one. The shame, helplessness and stress it causes are far more dangerous symptoms than not having food on the table.

It’s that lived experience that drives me and my commitment to building a more equal economy where no one has to live in poverty.

The thing about something like poverty or inequality, is that it’s not contagious. So it’s easy to ignore. It’s something that happens to other people, in other places.

On the other hand, Coronavirus could impact any of us. Rich or poor. Young or old. Black, white or something in between.

World leaders and movie stars have caught the virus. People with steady jobs were stood down overnight. Flourishing industries have been brought to their knees. Some of the richest nations have the highest number of cases.

Coronavirus has equalised us.

Coronavirus has reminded us all that we are all human.

It’s that knowledge – the fear that this could impact me and the people I care about – that has driven us to completely change the way we live our lives. We have seen behaviour change on a worldwide scale, practically overnight.

Therein lies an opportunity. Our society and economy has been upended. We can choose to take this moment to rediscover our shared humanity and use it to shape what we create on the other side of the pandemic.

If we can hang on to our shared humanity as we emerge from the crisis, I hope our collective empathy will grow.

We have unfortunately seen some disgusting examples of people capitalising on this crisis to the detriment of others. Corporate CEOs standing down their staff without pay while they retire to their mansions. Airlines quadrupling the price of flights for people that just need to get home. Fraudsters offering fake testing for the virus as a way to enter people’s homes and steal.

But we have seen so many more examples of hope, support and kindness. From live streaming of concerts, to parents continuing to pay their fees when schools have closed, to Woolworths offering jobs to Qantas staff, to (dare I say it) the conservative government’s fiscal stimulus packages that prioritises the most vulnerable.

Humans have an amazing innate drive to go out of our way to look out for each other. But for some reason, when we put on suits and enter board rooms, we tend to forget our shared humanity. The ‘us and them’ separation blinds us to the view from outside the boardroom walls.

But through this crisis, we are all as vulnerable as each other. We all need to work together and do our bit to get to the other side.

I hope the result of working together and building our empathy will be a commitment across our economy to strengthen the structures that give everyone the opportunity and support to live a decent and dignified life.

Structures like a bigger and more respected social enterprise ecosystem, so that the majority of businesses in our economy are social enterprises that put the health of people and our planet above profit.

Structures like a more expansive safety net – one that provides benefits that any politician themselves feels they could reasonably live on.

Structures like new partnerships (of equals) between the corporate and third sectors, that allow for cross-pollination of skills, experience and resources to increase the ability of both sectors to deliver more social impact.

We can’t let this crisis go to waste.

Let’s use this experience to remind ourselves that when it comes down to it, we are all one global tribe. We all depend on each other. And that when everyone is taken care of, we all benefit.

We have a once in a generation opportunity to hit the reset button on our economy and our society. Let’s use it wisely. And with empathy.

The post Could this crisis create the empathy we need to build a fairer society? appeared first on The Dragonfly Collective.

1. Resilience

In January 2017, we posted a blog with this introduction: given the political, economic and cultural earthquakes of 2016, the year ahead could look pretty terrifying and uncertain. We may feel anxious. We may have visions of moving to a remote island where we could block out the worry and anger about the increasingly unattractive western world. But there is another option. Resilience. With a big dose of hope.

It can feel like not a lot has changed – except it has! Climate change activism is alive and well. Real poverty in the two-thirds world has been reduced significantly. While democracy is under attack, those committed to its survival are active across the world.

Raymond Williams said that “to be truly radical is to make hope possible, rather than despair convincing”. Resilience is our best antidote to fear, anxiety and withdrawal.

There are four types of resilience (psychological, political, economic and spiritual). Let’s draw on them all in the year to come!

2. Collaboration for collective impact

Working alone, in isolation, as rivals, in silos or as competitors has reduced impact in the social sector where it is most needed. Over the past year we published a series of blogs and articles focused on collective action as a solution that successfully addresses key challenges both locally and globally.

We must work together, not against each other. Poverty for example is one real challenge, but so is distrust, polarisation, competition and personal ego amongst those wanting to end poverty. We could all do with a dose collective impact. Not for our own health, but the health of an economy that works for both people and planet.

3. Leadership

We will have all seen quotes on LinkedIn or Facebook about the attributes of leadership. And we can always look to others to lead. We can also look at our own lives and figure out where we can authentically lead and be part of a solution.

At the risk of being negative (in an effort to be solutions-focused), we’ve all experienced a lack of leadership whether at an organisational level, a national level or a global level. We know what bad leadership is. Ego, hubris, greed, power, control as well as the out-of-fashion attributes of envy, jealousy, malice and pride all figure highly in bad leadership.

A simple act of leadership can change the world, whether it is local or global. Speak the truth even if your voice shakes – is a simple beginning for all of us.

We don’t have to be courageous, charismatic or a white man to be a leader. We can all lead in finding solutions and be inspired by the ‘not what you’d expect’ examples of leadership – thanks Greta!

4. The social economy

For many in our neoliberal world it is abhorrent when the word ‘social’ is associated in any way with the word ‘economy’. There is plenty of opposition and misunderstanding – it all sounds too ‘political’, and isn’t ‘social’ part of that word ‘social’-ism (short-hand for communism)? Despite this, the ‘social economy’ is maturing and becoming much more than yet another ‘bloody coffee cart social enterprise’ (although we can’t get enough good coffee is our way of thinking).

At its heart, the social economy works for people and profit. Or people before profit – not profit before people. Just like in the market focussed economy, businesses in the social economy seek to make a profit. The difference being that in a social economy, the profit is used to meet social objectives, not generate individual wealth. It’s that last bit which makes this type of economy different. Wealth is more evenly distributed.

By prioritising social objectives, the social economy is an innovative way to tackle social, economic and environmental needs in society that have been overlooked or inadequately addressed by the private or public sectors.

Supporting the social economy in 2020 means purchasing with a purpose and well as selling for a purpose. A simple example is choosing to purchase from a social enterprise even though it might cost more than in the general market. The purchasing provides the economic stimulus to drive the social economy with its social objectives to create greater benefit for more and more people, not just the few.

There are plenty of opportunities to engage with the social economy. Who you buy from as well as what you buy can make a difference. There are social economy businesses everywhere. See what you can find in 2020. Spend your money wisely and make an impact!

5. Discipline and focus

Being a ‘change agent’, wanting to ‘do good’ and have ‘purpose’ is all well and very good and way better than the alternative. But we need to be clear about what we want to do and what impact we want to make. We need to be disciplined and focused in measuring and achieving those outcomes.

Whether it is a social business/enterprise, an ethical business for a social purpose, a cooperative, an employee owned business or an attempt at ‘conscious capitalism’, we need the disciplines of strategic planning, social business modelling, theory of change analysis, impact measurement, good governance and generating profit. Generating profit, as we have argued before, is crucial for the survival of all the above – it is how profit is distributed and who benefits from the profit that’s the central justice issue.

In 2020 we will be working in all these areas. We will be resilient, we will lead where we can, we will collaborate with others fighting for the same cause, and in doing that we hope we will help the social economy to thrive.

Join in! We can all be part of the solutions for 2020.

The post Solutions for 2020 appeared first on The Dragonfly Collective.

Given the political, economic and cultural earthquakes of 2016, the year ahead could look pretty terrifying and uncertain. We may feel anxious. We may have visions of moving to a remote island where we could block out the worry and anger about the increasingly unattractive western world.

But there is another option. Resilience. With a big dollop of hope.

Raymond Williams said that “to be truly radical is to make hope possible, rather than despair convincing”. Resilience is our best antidote to fear, anxiety and withdrawal.

There are four types of resilience (psychological, political, economic and spiritual), and we’ll need to draw on them all in the year to come.

Psychological resilience

Resilience is one element of psychological capital – practices that we can use and hone to keep us strong in the face of the biggest blows:

• Self-efficacy – how confident and self-assured we are when faced with a difficult task;
• Optimism – how positive we are about doing well now and in the future;
• Hope – how determined we are to strategise and work hard towards a goal; and
• Resilience – the extent to which we can bounce back from something tough (like losing a job or a contract).

While hope and optimism might feel tough right now, these are tools that we should draw on every day to keep us focussed and unafraid. We’ve got them on the wall in our ‘thought centre’ (our office) for good measure.

Political resilience

There are lots of people working on political resilience. For example, the Compass report, Secure and Free, highlights affordable, feasible, gradualist and sustainable proposals from a range of people and groups to build resilience through policy and politics:

1. Make above inflation increases in the national minimum wage the norm in periods of economic growth (Centre for Social Justice), and make improving productivity and improving the quality of employment mutually reinforcing policy objectives (Smith Institute).
2. Develop a state-supported house building programme designed to the highest environmental standards (The Good Right), improve security for home-owners through a ‘right to sell’ and a ‘right to stay’, so that those who can no longer meet mortgage repayments can sell their properties but remain as tenants paying fair rents (Friends of the Earth), and curb future rent growth to improve security for tenants (Civitas).
3. Unleash the power of the social sector (Centre for Social Justice) and implement non- financial help for families and relationship support (various).
4. Make early childhood education and care a specific and distinct element of the universal care and education system, free at the point of delivery (various) and create significant real increases to child benefit (Fabian Society and Sir Tony Atkinson).
5. Build agreement around a shift from welfare for some, to social security for all, right through to older age (Compass).

While advocating for these political changes we can also achieve political resilience through the time-honoured practice of resistance and the emerging practice of collective impact. Both start with collaboration and deny that we’re powerless in the face of the political and cultural forces we face. We are all one part of the mosaic working for change, and collectively we are a force for political resilience in the face of fear, xenophobia and hate.

Economic resilience

The key components of economic resilience have been around for a while – think locally act globally – but are still important. Rethinking the way we live at a local level will ultimately impact the wider world.

We become citizens of the world by becoming citizens of healthy communities. Understanding the principles reflected in local planning can give insights into the principles reflected in the world community. Local solutions can provide an effective alternative to globalisation structured by highly centralised organisations pursuing interests in ways that are destructive to healthy communities.

Locality is one organisation that models and supports community-led self-sustaining initiatives that tackle the forces of centralisation and globalisation that have alienated and disappointed so many. As George Monbiot writes, “it’s time to champion new approaches to politics, economics and social change. There is no going back, no comfort in old certainties. We must rethink the world from first principles … The market alone cannot meet our needs; nor can the state … There is one element conspicuously absent from the dominant ideologies: the commons”. Communities owning and running their own places and spaces will help make then stronger and feel more in control.

New forms of community and social enterprise that are locally focussed (not the hyped up social enterprise blah-blah that has become so prominent in recent years, and is really just private enterprise by another name) can produce economic resilience and change at the local level, and also have global outcomes. One example is the city of Marinaleda in the province of Seville in Spain. It’s a self-identified social-democratic and cooperative municipality of 2,700 people, where poverty has been eradicated and where there is no police, no crime, little unemployment and the freedom to build your own home on communal land.

Sound unrealistic? Combining psychological, political and economic resilience is at the heart of the story of Marinaleda.

Spiritual resilience

And finally – or perhaps foremost – is spiritual resilience. In the face of religious beliefs that promote oppression and fear we suggest spiritual resilience begins with a fundamental commitment – the rejection of religious fundamentalism in all its forms and the recognition of otherness and the freedom to be at peace with yourself. Other than that we have no prescription – just an invitation to reject the fear and oppression of fundamentalism and embrace freedom.

So as we move out of 16 into 17 we invite everyone to embrace resilience in a way that challenges, informs and transforms fearlessly.

Do not ever give up – or in!

The post 2017: the year for resilience appeared first on The Dragonfly Collective.

We throw our hands in the air in despair and disbelief and ask why? How is it possible that when we ask the public what they want, they choose Trump and Brexit?

But they didn’t choose Trump and Brexit – they chose ‘not this’. Not more of what I have now, because it’s not working for me. They voted for change.

And that offer of change was sold using very simple stories, based on deep emotional truths.

Both the Trump and Brexit campaigns used very clever communication.

US citizens were told they could “take our country back” and UK citizens told that they could “take back control”. And those ideas held huge appeal, because they were a) simple and easy to understand, and b) spoke directly to the lived experience of people who feel left out and left behind.

What voters bought was an offer of more control over the things that matter most to them, even if that offer came without a plan.

Trump picked one feeling and played to it: fear. The Brexiteers picked one feeling too: disempowerment.

Trump’s narrative was simple – good versus evil (or should we say heroes versus “bad dudes”). His solutions were also simple – build a wall, lock ‘them’ up, deport ‘them’, ban ‘them’ from entering the country at all. He spoke about incredibly complex issues in black and white.

Now, the real problem may be that 35 years of neoliberal politics (led by the the very political parties now proclaiming they can save people from the problems they created in the first place) has created an enormous divide between the haves and the have-nots. Inequality is increasing everywhere. But here’s what matters – that’s not the conversation that people are interested in.

It’s not facts or logic that engage. These kinds of choices are made using emotion – what people feel is right and just and fair. Voters feel more than they think.

Those on the other side of the argument watch on in various combinations of horror, despair, anger and shock as ill-thought-out appeals to basic human emotions win the day. And then there is talk that the people who made these choices are uneducated. It’s clearly that they’re not smart enough to understand the ramifications of their choices.

This talk leads to suggestions like reforming the education system, so people can learn about politics and neoliberalism and world affairs. Yes! Let’s teach people to think!

But we don’t have time to make that our preferred solution. Here’s where it’s us who need to stop and think.

We can lament all we like that ‘uneducated’ people are making bad choices, but what does it say about ‘educated’ people if we can’t effectively articulate our point of view? If we can’t give them something to really believe in? People should not need a university degree to understand what the hell we’re talking about.

This is a communications challenge.

The Trump and Brexit votes prove two things again – people are fed up and want more control over the things that matter to them, and the left is terrible at communications.

The left is far too theoretical and analytical. We talk about the complexities of poverty and inequality, suggesting we can’t improve education without improving housing, and that we can’t get people into decent housing without creating more jobs, and that we can’t do any of that unless we start with improving children’s experiences before age five. We do research and we write reports and we look at causal analysis and produce theories of change.

The work we’re doing is all necessary (now more than ever), but while we’re busy making everything as complicated as possible (because in reality, it is), the right gets up on a pedestal and says, “take back control”, and they win.

This is a challenge shared by the third sector more broadly. Too often we use different words (mostly jargon) to describe exactly the same thing.

Take volunteering for example. We could call it ‘volunteering’. And sometimes we do. But we also call it impact volunteering, community action, social activism, civil engagement or charity work. And we argue with each other about which word is most appropriate.

And then we wonder why everyone has stopped listening.

And the other thing we do really well in the third sector is continuously talk to ourselves. The third sector is great at sharing its woes and its ideas with itself.

We need a new narrative, for a much wider audience, that appeals to the heart. We need a simple emotional truth that resonates. It should be about people, told using stories. It should tap into deeply held values and beliefs.

It’s communications 101.

The right are already doing it terrifyingly well – whether deliberate or not – and they’re changing the shape of our world in the process.

So here’s the challenge for everyone on the opposite side of the political spectrum: we must find a way to do the same (as counterintuitive as it might feel). We most definitely need analysis and plans and evidence and new policies and lots of fresh and radical ideas. But we also need a much better story if we’re going to create the critical mass we need.

And our story must turn the narrative of fear on its head. Ultimately what ‘taking back control’ is about is feeling valued, feeling heard and having opportunities.

It’s about belonging. Belonging in a community where every member of that community is valued.

And that’s a narrative we can use. It’s simple, and has emotional appeal.

We need to say it boldly. And proudly. And most importantly, as one.

This is the narrative that belongs to the left – and we must claim it before the right beat us to it again.

Theresa May has already promised “a country that works for everyone” while Donald Trump has named himself a “President for all Americans”. That story should not be theirs to own.

We’ve had two major blows in short succession this year. At this point we can choose to despair. Or curl up in a ball in defeat. Or move to Australia. But now, more than ever, we need to fight back. Now more than ever, we need to work together (using models like collective impact as we’ve suggested) and create communities where people belong and where everyone has what they need to live a decent life.

And we have to share this ambition and all the work we’re already doing using simple, emotional stories.

There’s no time to waste. Let’s get going right now.

The post Post Trump & Brexit: the communications challenge appeared first on The Dragonfly Collective.

Our biggest social challenges demand collaboration

During 2015 some of the biggest social challenges of our times took centre stage. Climate change at the Paris Climate Change Conference, health care in developing countries with the Ebola outbreak, immigration following the European ‘migrant crisis’ and the growing gap between the rich and the poor with calls to ‘even it up’ just to name a few. Against this backdrop, the new Sustainable Development Goals were released. Each of the goals represents an entrenched and systemic challenge that requires a joined-up approach – a shift in the way we view and respond to the challenge. They each demand collaboration.

We know this. We’re already talking, already thinking about it, and already doing it. Collaboration has become a buzz word. Or rather, lots of buzz words: collaborative governance, strategic alliances, open innovation, networked governance, distributed public governance, integrated governance, joined-up solutions, collective intelligence … this list goes on.

There have been lots of effective and sustained partnerships in the UK and around the world. But as Geoff Mulgan has highlighted, collaboration as a discipline seems to be a field that doesn’t learn from the past. And collaborative practices tend to remain on the margins, often deeply antithetical to the normal ways of doing business. There has been limited deep embedding of new, co-productive ways of working, and it would seem the talk about collaboration precedes the substance in some cases. And that may be partly because …

Collaboration doesn’t always come naturally

(Disclaimer – this paragraph contains sweeping generalisations in an attempt to make the complex simple. So here we go.)

The Western world is dominated by neoliberal politics, thanks to the 1980s legacy of Thatcher and Regan. Neoliberal ideology puts market-based competition at the forefront, and when that logic is applied to solving social challenges, the result can be disastrous. Competition fosters social innovation processes that are trapped within a single organisation and are limited to one organisation’s beneficiary group. The question becomes not, ‘how can we enhance what’s already in place?’ but ‘how can I develop my own solution to the problem?’, a discourse fuelled by the dialogue of the ‘social innovation superhero’.

This effect is all too clear in the number of registered charities in the UK – 164,097 according to the Charity Commission, of which 75% have an annual income of less than £100,000 and 41% less than £10,000 (!). Even in the smallest communities there will be dozens of efforts with overlapping goals, members, strategies and funders that have never sat together to discuss how their work overlaps.

The narrowing and fragmentation of social change efforts is intensified by the often short-term and project-based nature of available funding and the demand for evidence of ‘social impact’ that attributes outcomes to the actions of a single organisation or project. And so social change is designed (or retrofitted) to tick boxes on funding applications and look good in an impact report with bar charts all moving in the right direction. But the bigger challenges we’re working to fight (poverty, climate change, inequality – the list is significant) remain stubbornly in place.

The challenge is not about resources so much as alignment and effective use of the resources we already have.

Is there a better way?

Yes we know that in many cases (but not all) we need to collaborate more. It’s a no-brainer – one plus one equals three. But how do we take learning from the past and create a framework that will lead to a step change?

Collective impact is one attempt to codify an approach to collaboration, in response to the recognition that traditional models of social change weren’t going far enough.

It’s a structured form of collaboration first written about by two American social scientists – John Kania and Mark Kramer – and has five criteria:

1. Common agenda: all participants have a shared vision for change including a common understanding of the problem and a joint approach to solving it through agreed upon actions.
2. Shared measurement: collecting data and sharing results consistently across all participants ensures efforts remain aligned and participants hold each other accountable.
3. Mutually reinforcing activities: participant activities must be differentiated while still being coordinated through a mutually reinforcing plan of action.
4. Continuous communication: consistent and open communication is needed across many players to build trust, assure mutual objectives and create common motivation.
5. Backbone support: creating and maintaining collective impact requires a separate organisation(s) with staff and a specific set of skills to serve as the backbone for the entire initiative and coordinate participating organisations and agencies.

Is collective impact any different to other forms of collaboration?

Collective impact as a practice is not new. What is potentially new however is the codification of it, bringing together a range of collaborative approaches into a cohesive framework.

Collective impact is not a panacea, it is not an end it itself, and is not without its complexities and challenges. But it provides a clearly structured approach to collaboration and helps widen a community’s vision. It acknowledges the strengths of existing programmes and the assets of the community and builds on them. It facilitates the scope of action required from people and organisations across all sectors in society, simultaneously, at both a local and system-wide level. Most importantly, it acknowledges that a ‘backbone organisation’ is required to integrate this wide, cross-sector scope of action.

Collective impact is specifically focused on systems change, where all partners consider their impact on the broader ecosystem, not just their own organisations. It acknowledges that large scale social problems are complex, and there is no one single solution, and even if there was, there is no one organisation or individual that could compel all actors involved to adopt it.

Collective impact also has the potential to transcend traditional sector structures. It starts with a process of alignment by mapping what’s already in place, and brings together those who are best placed as a result of their roles in society to make an impact. It makes solving social challenges a shared responsibility, as opposed to the more traditional approach where government is seen as responsible, the third sector fills the gaps they miss, and the private sector carries on serving itself while offering occasional handouts.

Rather than seeing the problem through the lens of a particular organisational agenda or as one organisation’s responsibility, collective impact sharpens a community’s collective vision so previously hidden solutions and resources emerge.

So what will make collective impact work in the UK?

Many organisations around the world have begun to use collective impact as an answer to the established need for greater cross-sector collaboration. While there was a flurry of interest in the UK following the publication of the first collective impact article in the Stanford Social Innovation Review, examples of collaboration that use all five criteria of collective impact seem to be less apparent.

We looked at two collective impact projects in London (the Finance Innovation Lab and West London Zone) to explore what makes it work in the UK, and what gets in the way. We found five barriers and nine enablers.

Barriers of collective impact

1. Existing services with established theories of change: in the UK (unlike the USA) many social services are already in place, and those services have established theories of change and an entrenched interest in maintaining the status quo.
2. Time required to build relationships: collective impact is all about chemistry –it’s built and sustained on relationships, which take time to develop (years), and time is a resource in very short supply.
3. Ego and power dynamics: collaborative working requires working with other people who may even be traditional competitors, so naturally there is some conflict over who gets to be in charge, who takes the credit and who own the risk.
4. The political and cultural climate in the UK: the principle of market-based competition at the heart of neoliberal politics may mean that competition comes more naturally than collaboration to many.
5. Lack of long-term and flexible funding: collective impact requires multi-year funding for general operational costs, linked to long-term and systemic ‘social impact’, which very few funding institutions are prepared to offer (yet).

Enablers of collective impact

1. Understand the ideology and values driving the system: changing systems means challenging and changing the meta-narratives, values and ideologies that give the system oxygen.
2. Stand between the margins and the mainstream: to change a system the most creative space is neither embedded within it nor completely outside it.
3. Embrace conflict and contestation: both are natural and essential in order to move beyond the incremental innovations driven by unanimous consent and create more disruptive change.
4. Find the ‘coalition of the willing’: work with individuals (rather than organisations) who buy into the shared goal and may be ‘unusual suspects’ – collective impact is a mindset and you have to go where the energy is to make it work.
5. Use the context to create urgency for change: embrace and harness discontent with the status quo.
6. Rethink assumptions about ego and power dynamics: this is one of the most commonly cited barriers, but it can be a self-fulfilling prophecy – conversely the energy generated by a shared purpose means participants (in general) will look beyond individual agendas.
7. Lead by stepping back: while a charismatic champion is crucial, they must lead from behind and instead foreground the work/ideas of project participants combining both humility and strength.
8. Locate the backbone in the third sector: the backbone organisation should be neutral and independent, so the third sector may be the best location for it.
9. Follow a process instead of a tactical plan: collective impact is messy, iterative and emergent – the emphasis should be on the goal rather than the method, allowing for continuous learning rather than a pre-set solution.

A fuller explanation of each barrier and enabler is available in our collective impact research paper.

Five things that will support collective impact in the UK

Shifting from isolated impact to collective impact will not happen organically, and it’s not merely a matter of encouraging more collaboration or public-private partnerships. Here are our suggested next steps.

1. New backbone organisations.

The UK needs some new backbone organisations, starting with anyone who has a major piece of the puzzle and a desire to connect the dots. They must have collective impact in their DNA and sit somewhere between the margins and the mainstream. They could be one of two types – those that ‘coordinate’ and focus on changing individual circumstances in local areas (these generally follow the American model of collective impact) and those that ‘transform’ and focus on changing institutions and ideologies on a bigger scale.

2. A shared understanding of collective impact across all sectors.

This could be achieved through forums or conferences (such as the collective impact roundtable to be hosted by NESTA, West London Zone and Generation Change in February) and will rely on sharing practical examples (both from within the UK and internationally).

3. New funding models.

As Collaborate highlighted in its recent funding ecology paper, we need a new approach where funding is provided to coalitions, with less prescription about process or outcome in order to address complex and entrenched problems that require a systems approach. Some models are already in development, for example, independent consultancy Matthew Pike and Associates is developing a new collective impact investment fund, and West London Zone is developing a collective impact bond.

4. Shared learnings from the pioneers.

We need an understanding of where collective impact (and other forms of effective collaboration) is already being applied, and networks that create a dialogue about what’s working well and not so well. Tool kit will help, and many have already been developed.

5. New measurement systems and methodologies.

Measurement systems are as much about determining needs and facilitating action-reflection learning as they are about collecting the evidence that collective impact works (or doesn’t work, and where adjustments in the approach are needed). New models are already being built specifically to capture the ‘impact’ in collective impact, see for example Results Scorecard.

Today we create our tomorrow

What is abundantly clear is that to avoid sleepwalking into a future without change we need to keep looking for approaches that work, building on learning from the past. This blog was written in a spirit of optimism with a belief that change is entirely possible.

In one sense, collective impact is simply a “codification of common sense” as suggested by West London Zone’s CEO. But in practice collective impact work is complex and it’s not easy. Some of the barriers identified are not easily shifted. Achieving systems change is a long-term process, and collective impact practitioners must accept that they might not see results in their lifetime.

But that should not stop us from starting now. The will and passion to shape an alternative future already exists. Collectively the future is very much in our hands, if we choose to act together. That may appear idealistic, but perhaps a small dose of idealism is exactly what’s required.

As the authors of the original collective impact article suggest: “while collective impact remains a messy and fragile process [and] many attempts will no doubt fail … even the attempt itself brings one important intangible benefit that is in short supply nowadays: hope. That alone may be purpose enough to embrace collective impact”.

The post What can collective impact offer in solving our biggest social challenges? appeared first on The Dragonfly Collective.

Some food for thought to get the year started – here’s an interview with Collaborate where we talk about the messy process of collaborating for change. It’s only by aligning our passions, ideas and resources that we’ll ever achieve the scale of change needed to really tackle inequality in all its forms.

We’d love to hear about your experiences with collaboration.

Interview with Collaborate.

The post An interview with Collaborate sharing our experience with collaboration appeared first on The Dragonfly Collective.