Blog

The Business Practices Debate

October 13th, 2011

Recently mch held a poll which asked the following question:

‘Should Third Sector organisations adopt the language and practices of successful, sustainable businesses?’

The results from the 32 respondents were as follows:

• 62% agreed
• 19% disagreed
• 19% were not sure.

In addition to their vote, one voter provided some personal insights into the differences between the two sectors. Key extracts are as follows:

“The 3rd sector should have compassion at the heart of what its does rather than the pursuit of profit. This is probably and overly stereotypical view of both sectors….but what I would say is that the 3rd sector could really learn many valuable lessons from successful businesses when it comes to professionalism.

In my experience [service users’] personal files are routinely left out on desks. Curiously, low level stationery is locked up, suggesting there is a higher value placed on this than on personal information.”

During the course of the polling, I became aware of a similar debate that was administered by a former employer of mine, McKinsey & Company. The question they posed was:

‘Should social entrepreneurs adopt the language and practices of business?’

Many of the resulting comments were illuminating and you can read them all by clicking on the link at the bottom of this blog post.

One comment that particularly struck me was;

“The false dichotomy of business-model versus a social-impact model is a vestige of a dying world.”

Around the same time, I read Jim Collins’ monograph entitled:

‘Why business thinking is not the answer – Good to Great and the Social Sectors’

A key line from the book is;

“The critical distinction is not between business and social, but between great and good. We need to reject the naïve imposition of the ‘language of business’ on the social sectors, and instead jointly embrace a language of greatness.”

When I think about all the excellent organisations that I know, whether in the Third Sector or Private Sector (and dare I say it in the odd government department) I am indeed struck by how similar they are in the way they operate.

Consequently, perhaps the original poll question was the wrong one to ask! A better one may be:

‘What does it take for any organisation to become great?’

Here, I think the previously outlined resource by Jim Collins is a really useful starting point. As an outline, five of the key ingredients identified by Collins’ research include:

1. Excellent Leadership - Leaders with “a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will.”
2. First ‘Who’, then ‘What’ - Devote time to getting people with the right motivations into your organisation (and the wrong people out of it). Do this before spending too much time on what your organisation is going to do.
3. Confront the Brutal Facts (yet never lose faith)
4. Apply the Hedgehog Principle - Work out what lies in the overlap between: (i) What you’re passionate about (ii) What you can be the best at (iii) What drives your resources (time, money and brand)
5. Build and maintain a culture of discipline

To review all the comments from the McKinsey debate, click here.

Training Preferences within the Third Sector

October 13th, 2011

During the Summer of 2011, mch hosted a poll which asked:

Generally, do you prefer e-learning to other methods of learning?

From the 27 responses the results were as follows:

• Yes - 18.5%
• No - 78%
• Not Sure - 3.5%

On the one hand, such results are not surprising as many people I speak to often state how much they value the face to face element of training and particularly the spontaneous discussions that can develop in such an environment.

On the other hand, when you consider the range of training options, the fact that almost 1 in 5 voters prefer e-learning perhaps shows that this training format has really come of age.

Given the huge array of features e-learning can now incorporate, a problem with such a poll question could be that it is too broad. i.e It depends what type of e-learning you are talking about.

At the recent World of Learning Conference, I attended a seminar entitled:

‘What Learning Methods do Leaders and Managers Really Prefer?’

The seminar outlined the findings of a study by Towards Maturity and supported by LMmatters. A key finding was that the type of learning method varied considerably according to seniority (and by implication age) with the more junior levels favouring online methods.

10 Words to Describe the Ideal Organisation

July 12th, 2011

At a recent conference, a speaker from a social welfare charity shared some research that their organisation had conducted. They had asked over 2,000 adults to choose up to 10 words that they thought best described the ideal charity working in social welfare. The top 10 words were:

1. Caring
2. = Trustworthy, Friendly and Supportive
3. Helpful
4. Professional
5. Honest
6. Approachable
7. Practical
8. Informative

A key omission that struck me was ‘Effectiveness/Impact’: is the social welfare organisation effectively addressing/solving their priority issues.

Does such analysis suggest that despite growing calls for proof of impact amongst funders, proving impact is not such an issue to the typical person in the street?

Also, what 10 words would you use to describe your organisation at the moment? Are there any words on your current list that shouldn’t be there? Are there any glaring omissions?

Trust - What does it take to develop it?

December 3rd, 2010

Trust is a simple word. It’s a state of being which is absolutely crucial to effective working: we think, feel and behave very differently in a trusted environment, relative to an untrusting one. We know it when we see it, or feel it, but what does it take to develop it?

In mch’s view, trust relies of four things:

1. Reliability
   Promising what you do and doing what you promise.

2. Openness
   Being brave enough to share who you really are, what you really feel and what is important to you.

3. Acceptance
   Making others feel that who they are is OK with you.

4. Congruence
   Practicing what you preach. Walking the walk as well as talking the talk.

Consciously focusing on these four areas can greatly accelerate the process of developing trusted relationships.

Does training preach to the converted?

September 15th, 2010

Twice over the last few months, I’ve been asked whether training ‘preaches to the converted’. The first occasion was at a management training session I delivered to Arts practitioners in Manchester. The second was after I gave a presentation on the requirements for successful professional development to a roundtable convened by charities within the music sector.

As a trainer, the definitive answer to this question is; ‘I don’t know’. This is because trainers are rarely involved in selecting the participants that attend their courses. However, more often than not, I think the likely answer is; ‘Yes’. Without meaning to pass the buck, I believe that preventing a ‘preaching to the converted’ scenario rests with the organisation(s) of the participants. This then raises the broader issue of how organisations can influence staff with the greatest development needs to attend appropriate training/learning opportunities.

In my view, the answer lies with the organisation’s culture. If all mch’s training participants came from organisations with a strong culture, where professional development was valued, then I don’t think I would be preaching to the converted. Instead, I would simply be training people who were from organisations where high levels of professionalism and quality were expected and the norm. Sadly though, my experiences in working with dozens of organisations suggest that such cultures are rare.

Given the importance of organisational culture, mch will shortly be producing a briefing paper on the topic, which will be added to mch’s resource centre. To be kept informed of this, sign up to mch’s mailing list via our website. The sign up form can be accessed via the link at the bottom of every page.

Thanks,

Mark Hughes