The two way street: mutually beneficial partnerships
October 01, 1997
Taskforce 2002 responds to and build upon the vision of the voluntary sector in the 21st century, set out by Deakin. It is examining the relationship between business and voluntary and community groups, specifically trying to identify the elements and examples of good company/community partnerships. Taskforce 2002 wants to draw on the widest possible range of experience and is holding workshops and seminars, publishing papers and conducting research.
The members of the taskforce(1) are drawn from among leading practitioners among companies and voluntary organisations, with David Grayson as chairman and David Robinson, chief executive of Community Links, as vice chairman.
Views are particularly being sought on:
– why it matters that there is closer understanding and partnership between business and the voluntary sector and what relations between could or should be like;
– the key steps needed to meet the challenges in building more robust relations; and
– models and examples which show how to build mutually beneficial relations more widely.
Deakin’s findings
The Deakin Commission concluded that:
– there is a real lack of understanding in the business sector about the voluntary sector and vice versa, and hence a lack of understanding of the benefits of business involvement in the community – the emphasis is still on the business sector giving to the voluntary sector;
– as a result, there are only about 30 or 40 companies which really understand the sector and genuinely work in partnership with it;
– total business contribution has stagnated since 1990;
– non-cash contributions are becoming and will remain more important.
However, the fact that involvement is moving away from the traditional cash support means that this lack of understanding and consequent lack of involvement are exacerbated.
Professor Deakin also found prevalent stereotypical views that:
– the voluntary sector views business as unreliable partners, dominated by self-interest;
– business sees the voluntary sector as marginal ‘do-gooders’ who cannot manage their finances and need to be led by the hand.
– The Commission concluded that “a successful partnership between the voluntary and other sectors is essential if the challenges facing society are to be confronted. But relationships between partners must be defined so that the voluntary sector is accepted as a partner on equal terms to which it has freely agreed.”
Mutual benefits
The Taskforce feels that the current relations between the sectors fail to achieve the full potential for mutual benefit. Companies can offer much more than cash, such as:
– technical expertise in areas such as marketing and IT;
– ‘firepower’ and credibility – the ability to open doors and be taken seriously;
– a customer-focused, results-driven approach;
– a way to recruit enthusiastic volunteers and get access to other help in-kind;
– possibilities for sponsorship, particularly through cause-related marketing.
The voluntary sector offers much more than a chance for companies to demonstrate philanthropy. The offering includes:
– enhanced corporate brand reputation;
– opportunities for skills development of key staff;
– a barometer of society’s view of business behaviour;
– the possibility of reducing direct business costs, such as in crime and vandalism;
– the potential to increase sales through cause-related marketing, or at least greater understand of trends in key market places of the future, such as young people or minority ethnic groups;
– access to specialist advice and expertise on issues such as disability access.
Taskforce 2002
With these as the starting points, early discussion in the Taskforce has highlighted these central issues:
– why it matters that there is partnership between the business and voluntary sectors, and how to define the contributions and benefits to each in a two-way relationship;
– the need to communicate the case for business involvement – to business, to voluntary and community organisations, to employees in both sectors, and to unions;
– the extent of community involvement by small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and how more businesses may be mobilised;
– how to harness information and communications technologies in order to identify and disseminate good practice faster and more widely; and
– how to enhance the building of capacity to develop and sustain mutually beneficial partnerships, in both sectors.
Increasing partnership
A major part of the work of the Taskforce is to draw together the evidence for what works when it comes to building partnerships and realising the vision. Spreading best practice and facilitating on-going consultation between the sectors will be important elements in the final recommendations, with some central themes and a range of more detailed points for action.
The central recommendations of the Taskforce will address:
– the spread of best practice and the factors for success in business/voluntary sector partnership – to include a “how to” guide and a Web site as a forum for sharing best practice;
– development of the role of business in nurturing relations with voluntary and community partners by adopting the Principles for Corporate Community Investment; support programmes such as training to be made available to underpin these responsibilities;
– facilitating networks among voluntary and community groups, including opportunities for intranet development;
– opportunities for developing strategic alliances and social franchising among voluntary and community groups across the country which have similar interests or objectives, in order to facilitate interface with business partners;
– routes to social enterprise, moving from the contract culture to a culture mobilising ranges of resources;
– incentives and channels for engaging small and medium enterprises;
– making the case to government about the role of the voluntary/community sector in developing competitiveness;
– the availability of IT and a strategy for building capacity and enabling community and voluntary groups to maximise benefit from, for example, on-line services; and
– models of community broking, developing styles and structures relevant to a young generation of volunteers.
Consultation
This gives a flavour of the emerging themes of Taskforce 2002. All practitioners of business/community partnerships are being invited to comment and participate. Questions to address include:
– Does the analysis ring true? Are there any significant omissions in this vision?
– Can you offer examples of outcomes attributable to good partnership between business and the voluntary sector? What are the critical factors contributing to success?
– Can you also offer examples of failures that can be attributed to the absence of understanding or collaboration between the sectors?
– Are there new models of three way partnership including central or local government which are particularly successful?
The issues raised in this paper are also the focus of discussion in a series of seminars throughout the UK. To participate, contact Kyla Brand, secretary to Taskforce 2002, at Business in the Community (tel 0171 224 1600, fax 0171 486 1700) for dates and details or contact the local office of BITC.
The Taskforce is also inviting written comments by mid-November 1997. Please address them to: Kyla Brand, Taskforce 2002, BITC, 44 Baker Street, London W1M 1DH
(1) The 18 members of Taskforce 2002 include: Ben Leadsom, Barclays; Stafford Taylor, BT; Julia Cleverdon, BITC; Anthony Freeling, McKinsey & Co; Simon Ward, Whitbread; and Geoffrey Bush, GrandMet.
(1) The 18 members of Taskforce 2002 include: Ben Leadsom, Barclays; Stafford Taylor, BT; Julia Cleverdon, BITC; Anthony Freeling, McKinsey & Co; Simon Ward, Whitbread; and Geoffrey Bush, GrandMet.
(1) The 18 members of Taskforce 2002 include: Ben Leadsom, Barclays; Stafford Taylor, BT; Julia Cleverdon, BITC; Anthony Freeling, McKinsey & Co; Simon Ward, Whitbread; and Geoffrey Bush, GrandMet.
COMMENTS