When organisations over-focus on taking credit for social value, what are the consequences? We had a chat with fellow social value consultant Carrie-Ann Huelin about why organisations are so prone to overclaiming, and why it’s time to do something about it.
At CHY, we’ve known social value consultant Carrie-Ann Huelin since the early days of social value. When she popped up in the comments for our recent article about additionality asking why organisations are so rarely content with simply playing their part – we asked her if she’d have a chat with us to share her thoughts on why organisations are often more concerned about how much they can claim than the actual impact they have enabled.
“Construction frameworks can be a good example of this,” Carrie-Ann says. “They exist to embed collaboration and collaborative culture. They help initiatives get co-delivered, and it’s great when that happens. But when frameworks are re-procured, the social value questions are often asked and scored in a way that encourages bidders to claim as much as they can.
“When I was involved in scoring bid submissions, I'd often see multiple claims to have 'led' a joint event, but I knew it was unlikely that everyone was in a lead role. It’s a collective effort. If anyone should be taking credit, it’s probably the framework that brought you together, asked you to do it, and catalysed the whole thing in the first place.”
“I’ve seen a lack of understanding of who should take or get credit for social value in award submissions too. Often a budget holder sees themselves as the one who created all the impact for a scheme, without giving those who delivered activity the credit for their part.”
It’s no surprise that organisations do this so often when you consider how we’ve all been taught to do business. Taking credit for as much as possible feels essential to success.
But is it?
“We've been taught, wrongly, that business is about winning,” says Carrie-Ann. “And for that to happen, others have to lose. So you have to do it first, you have to do it further, you have to do it better. That's why everybody wants to say we delivered that, we own that, that was our money, our resource.
“It's a complete turnaround to then say, actually, our aim is not about us and our success. It's about the success and the happiness of the people around us.”
It’s a change that needs to be made if the sector is to move forward. When organisations compete for credit rather than share it, there’s less incentive to collaborate on the next initiative. They’re less willing to invest in shared aims because there's no individual payoff.
It moves us further away from where we need to be – which is working as a collective for something bigger than ourselves.
We need evidence that sharing credit and collaborating, selflessly, can be done successfully without making your business appear weak or vulnerable.
That, in fact, it shows true strength.
Collaboration has to play a part. The more we can work together, the easier it will be for organisations to break out of individualistic thinking and focus on a mission bigger than themselves.
CHY’s work with Mix Manchester (a 60-acre science, innovation, and manufacturing campus located next to Manchester Airport) demonstrates how powerful regional collaboration can be when local authorities get it right. The Mix Manchester development is supported by the Manchester Southern Inclusive Growth Partnership, whose social value delivery group (coordinated by Manchester City Council) brings together developers, employers and skills providers, as well as community and voluntary sector organisations, to tackle social value as a joint force rather than in silos.
Putting stakeholders in the same room, encouraging them to share targets, giving them a shared mission and allowing them to collaborate means they are more motivated to work together for the common good. It’s more satisfying for everyone involved – not least the communities in question.
And at a contractor level, when it comes to sharing the figures? It’s time to be bold – and trust that transparency and honesty will ultimately move everyone forwards.
“I think there have to be some early adopters that show that it's safe and no one perceives them as weak.” says Carrie-Ann. “Obviously there are a lot of factors influencing people's willingness to do things differently at the moment. But do think there are a few organisations in multiple sectors – public private and third sector – that could potentially be part of a movement.”
For Carrie-Ann, her next aim is encouraging clients to make a pledge: next time they collaborate on a piece of social value, they’ll write up each other’s report.
Not only does this mean they’ll have to fully understand what their partner contributed, they’ll have to champion that contribution. It’s this kind of trust and mutual support that’s the real key to making a change.
As Carrie-Ann says, we need to get closer to organisations being content to “play their part, big or small, in making humans happier.”
If you, or any organisations you know, are already doing this – we’d love to hear about it!
You can find Carrie-Ann on LinkedIn.
Or find out more about CHY at chyconsultancy.com.
.jpg)
.jpg)
-min.png)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.png)
.jpg)
.png)
.png)
.jpg)
