Monthly Archives: March 2014

0 Is Social Enterprise an Undisputed Good?

So, twenty years ago, community business was not well-known in England and it is interesting to see how the movement  developed.  The term “social enterprise” caught on, which suggests the enterprise model won out over the business model.

It seems hard to a community or social business; almost everyone says they’re in business when they’re actually a grant aided project.  Maybe this is an improvement if projects run in a more business-like way.  However, the criticism of the enterprise model  in 1990s Scotland was it masked what community businesses were trying to do.

Grant-Aided Projects

Most social enterprises are in neighbourhoods where there is multiple deprivation.  These neighbourhoods may not be able to support a business that provides the job opportunities a grant aided project can offer.  The survivors are the projects that have understood the basic disciplines needed in the private sector and use them to find grants, loans or contracts.  They need grants or loans or contracts because that is the way to bring some social infrastructure into such neighbourhoods.  I support these projects but my concern is the likely result of loss of funding.  Building the necessary capital assets and a market that allows them to be sustainable is a real challenge.

The voluntary-sector mindset is grant-orientated and so I wonder how effective social enterprises are in the medium to long-term?  I know the amount of work that goes into establishing social enterprises and the ones that survive over 20 years build a capital asset base and a market.  I’m also aware many fail, largely because they were unable to find a market and so were unsustainable.

Has the idea of social enterprise slipped its moorings?

Today anyone with social aims can declare themselves a social enterprise and pitch to funding bodies who are desperate to make grants or loans.  You can receive grants and loans for a good idea, whether you have a market for the idea or not.  By market I don’t mean an idea about who ideally you might sell to but an actual list of customers and prospects.

I have seen projects that are really small conventional businesses, masquerading as social enterprises to receive funding.  They have social aims but no organisation other than the people who run it.  Some projects lack both the customers they need to be a business and the community support they need to be a social enterprise.  Their vision may be excellent but their execution leaves much to be desired.

The Self-Employment Route

Why not start out as self-employed?  Because you get no money that way.  Why not test an idea in the marketplace before making it a social enterprise?  If your idea is such a good one, how else can you prove it?  Receiving a grant or loan proves you know how to complete an application form; not viability as a business.

I can understand why an entrepreneur would not want the added complication of a committee, so why not set up a conventional business and find a market?  Prove the idea works before you apply for grants.  Is that really too much to ask?  After all if you can’t show its viable, why put it into the marketplace at all?  For a good idea the problem is lack of business management skills and not viability.

Once an idea works, it can be re-launched as a community business if the owner is so minded.  Many successful businesses start out as enterprises where the entrepreneur takes the risk; the time to decide it is a community business is when it is ready to become a company.

Who Takes the Risk?

Yes, I’m saying the entrepreneur should take the risk, show their idea is viable and then take it into the third sector.  At that point they can apply for funding to expand a viable business, increase the workforce, appoint apprentices, etc.  People who are not entrepreneurs run the grant and loan making industry.  Their goal is to meet outputs and this is not usually compatible with business aims.

Community development workers should take the marketplace much more seriously and their focus should be on helping small businesses become viable and where appropriate choose the social enterprise route.  It may take time and risk individual’s assets but it can build sound foundations for local regeneration.  What do you think?

0 Grant Funding is No Long Term Solution

I’ve been taking part in an online conversation: “If more funding were available for your community; how would you like to see it spent?”  I replied:

I think this question is the wrong way round. We had £50 million spent in my community in Sheffield UK, over 10 years, with a final evaluation in Jan 2012. At the start we had a community forum and a community trust. The New Deal funding had some good revenue results but when the money ran out the partnership dissolved. The capital spend fell foul of the recession and so we have no legacy funding. The Trust and Forum have both collapsed. Other neighbourhoods in Sheffield with similar demographics have Forums and Trusts. If I were offered money for my community I would send it back and ask it is spent where communities come up with viable projects. And yes several of the replies above this one are concerned the most disadvantaged don’t get access to funding. I think that concern illustrates the problem with making money available in this way, it goes to groups that have plans but actually substitutes for mainstream funding. The partners left because they had to chase the next pot of funds. Despite what I’ve written I am optimistic because I think with the recession we’re going to need to re-think our approach to community development. Small businesses, including but not restricted to social enterprise are the solution, not government initiatives.

You can read the story of Burngreave New Deal for Communities here (scroll down to the first, published on 11 November 2013).  I wrote this passage on the fly about 3 months ago and perhaps my point could be clearer.  I’ve seen the cycle many times over the years; a group has an idea, gets funding, has no incentive to build anything sustainable, usually provides a valued service, then the money runs out and the funding body goes away chasing the latest innovation, project collapses, the people involved move on to another project, usually in a different neighbourhood.

A direct reply from Ken:

Chris,

I have no solutions, just agree with you, and raise more questions.

My limited experience in the last couple of years leads me to agree wholeheartedly that grant funding is no long term solution to building the capacity of the community to determine its future. However it can prime the pump, and no doubt we’ll all keep trying.

Naive to think it but what about working firstly on the overlying problems in the UK of:

1. Achieving consensus about the level of government services versus the reliance on an unprepared and under resources community.  There’s so far too little recognition of the need to fund and build sustainable not for profit organisations which take on more responsibility at local level. (Though Locality is doing a wonderful job to raise profile of the problem and find more solutions), and
2. National leadership to act in the national interest and achieve stability for business and the community. Should we any longer accept a system that swings from left to right and back in a generation?

A good start might be the example of good leadership, and for the performance at Westminster at to be transformed into a serious play. Until our leaders in the UK set themselves a priority for stability, cooperation and a single vision, the future seems very bleak to me. (And I’ve always been and remain an optimist!).

Past generations emigrated when things looked better elsewhere, and I can only see that continuing.

Regards, Ken

To which I replied:

I agree there is a place for grants in terms of pump priming.  However, beware “pump priming” is a metaphor and we need to ask about the nature of the pump.  The problem in the UK is since the seventies community development has taken an anti-business road.  It is possible to be anti-capitalist without being anti-business but you wouldn’t know it.  Go back to the century from about 1850, and disadvantaged communities were highly creative through mutuals.  We’ve lost all that and the upshot is communities are forced to accept other people’s agendas through the grants industry.

We need to work out new ways to do business in the local economy.  If a local business has customers and can show it has a social purpose, then it might qualify for grants.  But what all small businesses need, whether or not they are mutuals is investments and they are much more valuable than grants.

We’ve experimented with working with local government as a part of the voluntary sector.  Local residents in a community group are not volunteers.  We need to change the mindsets of local activists to see local trade as one of things activists do.

Ken is right to say he has no solutions; no-one has solutions.  To find something new we need to understand the inadequacies of the old approach.  This blog aims to explore alternatives to grant-aided funding.  This is a desperately important debate, which never seems to get off the ground, presumably because so many projects experience grant dependency.

How effective are grants and what are the alternatives?

0 Adding Navigation to Your Website

The navigation available to you depends upon your chosen theme.  Most themes have primary navigation towards the top of the page or else in a sidebar.  Secondary navigation may be in drop-down menus, in a second menu that appears below the first when you select a page in the primary menu or elsewhere on the page, usually in a sidebar.  Once you’ve chosen your theme you don’t have to use all the available menus but it’s sometimes difficult to add more navigation options.

Some themes provide additional navigation, eg they showcase (usually 3) key pages on the home page.  If you have a few major issues, products or services, this may help visitors navigate the site.

Last time, I mentioned the type of wireframe that can show relationships between pages on your site, your designer uses it to plan your navigation.  You need to decide which pages are in primary and which in secondary navigation.

As your site grows, you can add to navigation, although if the site becomes very large you may have to re-think your site structure.  A designer or consultant will be able to help you do this.

Setting Up a Menu

If you click in “Appearance” in wp-admin and then on menus, you can see how to build and edit menus.  You can

Make sure the words in the tabs are clear both in terms of meaning and appearance.  Contrast should be good in the following modes.

You need to check all this out with your designer / consultant.  What additional aids to navigation do you like to see on a site?

1 Conversation as Paying Attention

The first post in this sequence introduced the topic of conversation between people.  In the second I introduced two other approaches to conversation: prayer and science.

The word ‘prayer’ may be a turn-off for some readers but bear with me. Understanding this is important to getting your message across online and in real life.  I choose a traditional word because we need to make connections into ideas people already understand.  Whatever you call it, paying attention is important.

Simplistically prayer can be understood as conversation with God, similar to conversations between people.  There’s nothing wrong with being simple so long as it doesn’t lead to misconceptions.

So, why is prayer so important?  Through prayer or meditation, you may

All these are essential in conversations with people whether online or in real life.  A lot of exchanges in social media and websites would benefit from slowing down our thinking and producing more thoughtful responses, through paying attention.  Do you agree?

2 Using Keywords on Your Website

Keywords are vectors on your website pages.  Do you remember learning the difference between speed and velocity? Speed is a scalar quantity, which means it is simply a measure of how fast something is going; how many miles per hour.  Unlike vector quantities, such as velocity, speed does not include direction of travel.  With velocity we can work out how long it takes to travel from A to B because we know the direction.

Keywords do two things; explain what the page is about and increase traffic to your site.  The ways in which they increase traffic has undergone recent major changes. These mean you can use keywords to tell visitors what your site is about and not worry about search engines.

They say, if you want search engines to find your site you need to find keywords for each page.  I’ll discuss the need to court search engines in later posts; the point is you need keywords to communicate with your visitors.

Keywords and Relevance

Consider this: how long do you stay on a new site when you visit it?  It depends upon whether the site is relevant to your search.   Occasionally you might be distracted by something you’re not looking for. Usually you have a goal in mind and will stay if the site seems relevant.

As a site owner, you want people to stay who are looking for what you offer.

So, when your page opens, it needs to say clearly what it is about.  This helps visitors who arrive by mistake to go their way.  People actively interested in your site stay and enter into a long-term relationship.

When we get onto search engines I’ll write more about how keywords help people find your site but for now, once they arrive they expect to see the keywords they used to find you!

So, if someone concerned about a plague of frogs, arrives at your site and reads “If you’re experiencing the current plague of frogs this site will give you all the answers you’re looking for …” the chances are that visitor will read on.

They may be seeking frog poison.  If your site advocates building ponds for them, your visitor might be convinced by your copy – so long as it looks as if it’s going to be relevant when the visitor first arrives.

You might like to go to a favourite website and try to find the keywords, perhaps the words that helped you on your first visit to the site.  If you do, add the url and keywords you have identified as a comment and share them with the other readers.

1 Community Business and Community Enterprise

In my review of third sector organisations, I’m moving on to where the third sector intersects with the private.  In this and future posts I shall consider social enterprises, mutuals and then various other projects that don’t fit under either heading.

The term social enterprise has come into vogue in recent years and I’d cheerful send it back out of vogue. What has happened is the statutory sector and the grant making industry have discovered community businesses and enterprises.  The whole currency of the movement is debased as a result.

Back in the early 1990s, Community Business Scotland (CBS) was doing the best work in this area.  I toured Scotland for 2 or 3 days in what must have been about 1993.  CBS was very clear about the distinction between a community business and a community enterprise.

On the surface they are similar.  They were both set up by community groups.  Their profit could be invested into the community in various ways:

A community business measures its success by the amount of surplus generated or better, the number of jobs created.  The community enterprise measures its success by meeting objectives agreed with its funding bodies, it would have to account for every penny and so would not normally have any surplus.

Enterprises funded through grants or contracts do not have to follow strict business guidelines.  I remember we visited an enterprise that included a training café, used by local people.  The manager commented they ought to pay more attention to portion control when we remarked on the generous portions.  A business would have to do that.

In early 90s Scotland, community enterprise continued the usual grant-aided path, whilst the businesses were trying to create  physical and economic assets in the community.  Whilst they can appear similar, they are completely different.  Do you think this debate is still relevant today?

0 Website Review 4: Common Purpose

This is my fourth website review of some community development related websites.  If you haven’t read the others, check out these previous posts to catch up:

The image on the right is the site’s home page.  The reason it’s there is in case the site owners change the site!  I shall comment mainly on the home page for this reason!  Click on the image to open it and click again for full size.

Today’s website is the United Kingdom site for Common Purpose, an organisation I have been aware of for several years, providing innovative training in the sector.  They say, at the top of their “About” page, “Common Purpose runs courses which give people the skills, connections and inspiration to become better leaders both at work and in society.”  This is a disappointing site because it communicates little of their innovative approach to the casual visitor.  I cannot find anything about the content management system they are using.

Their domain authority of 50 reflects their position in the sector, with nearly 6000 back-links from 276 distinct domains.  This is a magnificent performance!  These links must drive a lot of traffic to the site.  However I suspect it does not do well at conversions.  It may deliver a reasonable number of responses from visitors because many visitors will be looking for Common Purpose and have a goal in mind when they visit.  Maybe this means they can afford to ignore conversions, or think they can.

Site Structure

Appearance

The home page starts with a whopping great slider.  I’ve written about these abominations before and so won’t take up more space re-treading old rope.  This one is a beauty though, on my monitor it covers the entire width of the window and little else appears ‘above the fold’.

The logo could do with a tagline.  There is one of sorts in the top right “The heart of leadership development for 25 years.”  I think I probably know what this means but many won’t even if they (a) spot it, and (b) can read it (diagonal in pale grey).

There is a lot of grey text and some visitors may have problems reading it.  Overall the site has a messy blocked approach to presenting content.  On most pages I don’t know what I’m supposed to look at.

Navigation

The primary navigation is clear and there are no drop-down menus.  If someone wants to find out about courses or apply for a course, they can see where to click.  The link to “Home” is not necessary because the logo leads to the home page.

There is secondary navigation and it appears below the primary navigation, when you click a page in the primary navigation.  It appears in an unassuming font and is easily missed.  The colour changes when you click on one of these links, so you know which page you are on.  More secondary links appear in a green box on the right hand side of the page.  I don’t know what distinguishes these two lists of secondary links.  It took me a while to notice the green box and I suspect some visitors never will.

I am at a loss to understand why there are two lots of secondary navigation.  They seem to link to different pages.  This site needs to review its structure and navigation.

Clutter

I’m completely bemused by the higgledy-piggledy approach of this site.  Various blocks of information are slung together on most pages without rhyme or reason.  There may be a reason in the eye of the designer(?) but I haven’t  a clue what it’s supposed to be.

The site abandons the visitor upon arrival and left to navigate the site to whatever it is they seek, that is assuming they know what to look for.

Site Content

Market

If you pause the slider you can work out the market appears to be people!  On their “About” page, they write:

Common Purpose is an independent, international leadership development organisation. We give people from the private, public and not-for-profit sectors the inspiration, skills and connections to become better leaders at work and in society. We develop their ability to work together, innovate and to thrive in different cultures – this helps people, organisations, cities and regions to succeed.

This should have more prominence.

Purpose

I hunted around the “About” page and eventually found a statement about the benefits leaders will gain from Common Purpose.  It’s in the second column and as such lacks prominence on the page.  This is what visitors need to know:

 Common Purpose helps leaders to:

• become better – and significantly faster – at breaking down silos and crossing cultures. We bring together an incredible diversity of leaders from different sectors, cultures and backgrounds.

• operate effectively outside their comfort zone. Our experiential work takes place in prisons, trading floors, schools, hospitals, production plants and more.

• deliver complex change. We take our inspiration from real-life leadership issues and insights.

I think these need more attention.  They’re good ideas but as a visitor who may be new to them, is breaking down silos (whatever they are) my first priority?  Once they’ve been approved they need much more prominence.  Replace the slider with these and people will have a good idea what the site is about and what they might want from it!

Call to Action

Take a look at the home page.  How long does it take to find the call to action?  There is one.  I found it after several scans of the page because I was looking for it.  It’s hidden in plain sight.  And it shouldn’t be.

When you find it, ask whether this is a good call to action.   I think it’s asking too much too soon for a visitor.  They need to be taken through a few steps before they encounter this call to action.  Is this the best call to action for the home page?  They don’t appear to have a list or a blog.  Perhaps they don’t need one.  Perhaps their brilliant reputation gets them the sales they need.  Perhaps …

Neglect

Apart from 2014 in the footer, which may automatically update, the only date I can see is in the second news item, 2015.  The practice of not dating items does not make the site look up-to-date.  It simply means that on any page I have no idea whether I’m dealing with something current.

Verdict:  I find this site disappointing.  It could do so much more to educate the visitor, draw them into the world of Common Purpose.  Common Purpose runs brilliant training courses and must have masses of brilliant insights it could pass on to visitors to its website.  Marketing today is training.  Common Purpose is training but not sharing its insights effectively.  If they shared more online, I’m sure more people would sign up for their courses.

2 Planning Your Pages

This is the sixth post in a sequence about working with your web consultant or designer to build your site.  Today we’ll have a look at the pages you need to post from the outset.

Normally, your designer will discuss this early in your site planning and so at this stage, you will already have a plan for the first site layout.  It is easy to change the layout with WordPress and so you are not stuck with the same page structure for all time.  But if you want to get a basic site online, you will need this early plan.

If you have not already done so, you need to map out the site pages.  You may consider the following, for your first site:

You can create a wireframe, showing the site structure.  This is a diagram showing how the pages relate to each other.  Some pages will be in submenus within your navigation.

If you plan pages in advance, you can work on the content whilst your designer sets up the site.  Your designer is likely to want to create placeholder pages so that s/he can set up the navigation.  You really don’t want empty pages.  Your designer could at this stage show you how to create pages and add in your content.  If you work alongside your designer you can ask for feedback as the site develops.

So, have I missed any common page types for an initial site?  I have omitted the page-types I’ve covered in the sequence about the hidden life of websites, as they are likely to be added later.

2 Types of Conversation

Last Wednesday I introduced this sequence about conversation.  Today, I shall introduce three types of conversation; conversation through dialogue, prayer and science.

What Makes These Conversations?

We live in an atomised world, where the individual is the centre of attention. It is easy to lose sight of progress made through collaboration. Indeed, conversation is the only way anyone can make progress. The response, from a person or anything we encounter, pushes us to think again, to go deeper and find new insights.

These three approaches all do this.  Maybe conversation with non-human objects may seem odd but they are there and their intransigence means we have to be challenged by them.

I’ll write about prayer and science in the next two posts, so that we can see how they work as conversation.

Are there other ways in which we converse?  How do we converse online?

0 Writing Good Copy

Writing good copy for your website is really important.   It takes time to write copy people will read and act upon.  It is the foundation for everything you do online, far more important than the technical side of website development.  If you know html and css, it is an advantage but people read your copy and not your  mark-up  – so it’s worth making the effort to get it right.

Let’s assume you have a cause, product or service and need to make a better case than your competitors.  With non-financial causes, you may have a message to share with the world and want to find others to share thoughts and discuss the cause.  Sometimes you may want your readers to attend a meeting in real life (or a webinar) or else become a member or subscribe to an email list.

Imagine a spectrum from those who wish to simply make money online by any means available, through to those who have a cause and no desire whatsoever to make a penny.

In reality, it hard to occupy either extreme.  The money-maker might want to make money at the start but is likely to discover they have something people value and find they take pleasure in sharing it.  As they develop their reputation in this new area, they will naturally discover ways to generate income from it because they have that mindset.

On the other hand, those who have a cause often find it necessary to generate income to finance it.  In real life this can lead to hours pursuing funding through grant applications and then to find the cause undermined by the need to generate outputs to meet funder’s requirements.  If the cause itself can generate income independently of funding bodies, this can help keep the cause’s integrity.

Generating income and pursuing a cause are not always contradictory and online it is easier to do both together.  Good copy can support both a cause and the need to make sales online.

If you’re serious about your cause then an income can really help.  So you do need to consider carefully whether you or your organisation needs an income.  Are you aware of websites that combine a cause with trading?  How successful have they been?