Company Boards are missing out on a massive talent pool because no-one's asked them about caring

'Professional me' works with various Boards of companies, charities, social enterprises, etc as a trusted advisor, consultant and facilitator.

But as some may know, I'm also an unpaid carer - which limits the ways in which I can work, and the ways in which organisations might have otherwise benefitted from my support.

And I'm stating these things because they reflect national and growing trends that I think we should be having more conversations around. But don't take my word for it:

- Carers UK have identified roughly 600 people quit their paid jobs and careers every day, because the demands on them as unpaid carers reaches a tipping point that means they're no longer able to live these dual lives. 

- There's a Government consultation on how employers might do more to help keep people in work when they're also unpaid carers, because it recognises the future impact of this growing issue (that many people struggle to talk about or recognise).

the scale of the problem of unpaid carers being absent from company boards

In my journey to date, I've only been sharing the experiences and insights of how the self-employed and freelancers like me are constantly re-mixing our lives and work to reconcile the caring responsibilities with a need to pay the rent. But I've recently realised that there's another part of our wider economy and business ecosystems that is also 'missing out' because it's never thought about unpaid carers - corporate boards.

Now, some people reading this will be thinking 'so what?' - how big an issue can this really be, if no-one's been talking about it in the usual governance circles (Institute of Directors, etc)? But let's have a quick check of the data on this:

- Carers UK data from 2025 says roughly 300,000 people who are unpaid carers also hold senior management and Director roles. I think these are largely people who were already in posts before becoming carers, as this research also highlights how being an unpaid carer significantly actively limits the career development and opportunities for roughly half of all such people. And remember that this is a shrinking number because this group of people are amongst those 600 who are being forced to quit every day...

- Now, assuming a roughly even split in this figure between senior managers and Directors, and Companies House data about how many Company Directors there are, creates a ratio of 2%.

Only 2% of corporate boards are tapping into, and benefiting from, the insight, expertise, and skills of people that might otherwise be enabling them to further grow, expand, etc.

Let me put this another way - 98% of all Boards are missing out of what might otherwise be helping them become more successful and impactful, simply because they've never thought about how they'd support or accommodate a candidate who's also an unpaid carer.

why has this blind spot in corporate governance never been spotted before now?

This isn't their fault - no-one's ever talked with them about it before: the IoD, Actuate, and other national bodies who represent, support, and advocate for this organ of governance all seem equally quiet on this too when I've looked into their messaging and content about the things Boards should be considering, and how individuals can make the most of opportunities to join them.

time to start a new rallying call?

I've shared in the past how current national policy and legislation about unpaid carers is already actively discriminating against about 1 million of us, simply because it never assumed that someone who is self-employed or a small business owner would ever also be an unpaid carer.

So is it time to also start 'poking a stick' at the worlds of corporate governance, as it might seem that this other end of the economic ecosystem is similarly unknowingly ignorant - which comes with increasing future risks and costs to us all...

  

physically starved by other's forgetfulness

Sometimes we forget things (for all sorts of reasons) - and that's ok. After all, we're human, and its only human to slip sometimes (despite our efforts and intentions to the contrary).

But in the context of being both a small business / self-employed and an unpaid carer, there's often more significant fall-out if I forget something, than others might otherwise feel - for instance: forgetting calls with a client / missing deadlines on projects will make it harder to pay the rent next month; or a family member may lose their place on a hospital waiting list; etc. Which is why my calendar is full of so many reminders, and post-it notes litter nearly every available working desk space.

trying to be more grace-ful when it comes to others' forgetfulness

As some readers may know, I've tried to model my business around my values, which include 'grace'. And this manifests in part by my usually offering to not charge a client if they forget to join a meeting they'd asked for with me, and offering to rebook with them at no extra cost. This isn't based on my trying to guilt trip them, but rather recognising that sometimes life is messy, and things beyond our control can conspire against us - for example: how equitable would it be if I charged you for missing a meeting with me if it's because the train you were due to travel on was cancelled? 

the cost to me and my family, of my grace to you 

Several years ago, I started to track just how many such instances happened over the year - how many times did I find myself stood up by a client because their previous meetings had overrun, their travel arrangements had been disrupted, or they'd simply forgotten because they had so many other things on their mind at that time?

Each year, the value of this (expressed as lost earnings to me) features in my annual impact report as one of the core metrics. For the year 2025-26, this figure is £5,893: 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JcCFirEsoGTWA3CtdkICxValzJtiLpbK/view?usp=sharing 

That's equivalent to over £100 every week of the year. Which is roughly the same as our current household budget for the weekly food shop (which has to include consideration for one family member who lives with avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder).

Now, that may seem a bit of a shock to see this forgetfulness of others that I experience in these terms - but I'm actually slightly encouraged by it: in previous years, this grace figure was equivalent to the cost of renting a family home for the whole year!

https://thirdsectorexpert.blogspot.com/2023/05/how-peoples-forgetfulness-is-costing-me.html 

not to shame, but to help understand

We all lead increasingly busy and stressful lives.

We all 'drop the ball' sometimes.

But I have an idea that we're also all humans on this planet together, who should try and get along as best we can (after all, none of us are getting out of this alive, so lets try and at least make the journey as comfortable for each other as possible?)

So I don't track this number, or share it here, to shame and embarrass - after all, I track the equivalent number on myself, for what I've cost clients by having to bail at no notice for calls with them due to arising 'moments' with family members that I have to prioritise as an unpaid carer to them. (If you're curious, it was £294 over the same period).

I share it:

1) in solidarity with fellow freelancers and sole traders who may be frustrated when they're stood up by clients as well so you know you're not alone in this pain;

2) to help others understand the potential impact of their behaviours on the people they're dealing with;

3) as part of my commitment to being open and transparent in how I run my business.

but what would your parents (and Tony Robinson) say?

Ultimately, a large part of my thinking about how I approach all the relationships and practices in my business comes back to how my parents brought me up (or at least, tried to...). If they could see how you manage yourself through your working week, and how you're showing respect (or otherwise) to those around you that you deal with, what would they say to you about it?

And if you've ever been fortunate to meet / spend time with 'the' Tony Robinson in sunny Scarbados, you'll know that one of his golden rules of business is to never do something that means you have to cross the road to avoid bumping into a person in the future...

free bus passes for working

For those of us self-employed and freelancer types who are 'of a certain generation', I recently spotted an unexpected and rare offer of support from the government: free business travel! (of a sort...)

Based on current age thresholds for when I may be able to start to claim a state pension and when I'll be eligible to apply for a free bus pass,  I'll be able to enjoy at least 7 years of travel by bus without cost to get to meetings with clients, venues to deliver workshops in, etc before I have the 'can I afford to stop working now' conversation with myself.

Now, some of you will know that as an unpaid carer, nearly all of the work I deliver is home-based/remote but based on a potential 2 return trips by bus each month, and that fares remain capped at £3 per trip, this could work out to support equivalent to roughly £1,500 over these 7 years. (See below for the sums behind this figure).

That may not sound much, but when you're self-employed and an unpaid carer who isn't eligible for any support as such, every little helps!

 

the sums:

based on my current working arrangements (which reflect most of my delivering being WFH due to ongoing unpaid caring responsibilities) = x4 bus trips pm, current capped at £3 = £12 x 12 = £144 x 7 = £1,008

Likely current projected inflation over coming 10 years at the time of this blog post (spring 2026), equated to when I'd currently qualify for this magic bus card (and assuming that bus fares caps remains) = 34%, so that £1,008 becomes £1,351.

the best thing about Atomicon isn't Atomicon..?

There's an annual national event called 'Atomicon' that lots of small business owners and freelancers like me rave about, for how it's energised and enabled them to give themselves the kickstart they needed to launch their new thing, chase the dream client, or generally just do more of what they love (but never felt able to before).

It's geared around a very big day out for people, with multiple stages, speakers from across celebrity, different sectors, etc - and I've always booked a ticket to it for the last 3 years (including having already advance bought my ticket for next years' already too). But I've never signed up to it for the big day event. Because over the last 3 years, I've found that the official speaker line up doesn't really do anything for me - so surely it seems bonkers that I'd buy a ticket for something I don't get anything from?

The part of Atomicon that's better than Atomicon

But there's part of Atomicon that happens in the run up which is far more low key in comparison, and can be easy to miss - a week of on-line 'round tables', where people who've bought a ticket to attend can offer to host a 1-hour gathering around a topic of their choice: either as presentation with Q&A; open discussion; or other creative formats within the time.

And you don't know what there will be in that week, or who'll be leading them, until a few weeks before they happen.

In all of the 3 years I've been doing Atomicion, I've found these round tables have offered a real 'lucky dip' in terms of experience, insight, encouragement, and practical stuff - but I've always remembered and valued far more from these than I have any of the main day big name presentations (so much so, that I've written some of them up from previous years: https://thirdsectorexpert.blogspot.com/2024/07/blending-running-business-with-being.html). 

Another reason I'll never be (allowed to) attend Atomicon in person?

I know this sentiment may not land that well with the organisers of Atomicon - or even some of my peers who I know make the pilgrimage each year for the big day event. But as I'm already never able to attend the event in person owing to a social media post from several years ago that involved my mankini (the day's sessions are live streamed and recorded for watch again later for other people who can't attend in person for all sorts of other legitimate reasons), I figured what else have I got to loose?

How you can get in on the action

If it sounds like I've piqued your interest in this event, the lovely Andrew and Pete who are behind it all offer a discounted pricing scheme (the further ahead you buy your ticket, the cheaper it is) - and the next Atomicon in 2027 is in Manchester, on Friday 2nd July - with tickets available through this link: https://atomic.site/?aap=363 *

*other ticket links are available, but if you use this one here, I may be able to get a small recognition from Andrew and Pete, which I can put towards the costs of the stamps I need to buy, in order to be able to post Christmas cards this year...

 

Is social becoming less enterprising and more charitable?

Some people may know that I like both data and legal forms (amongst other things). I can play with both in isolation, but I particularly like combining the two because of the new insights it can offer us.

Each year I try to check in with the respective regulatory bodies who oversee the principal legal forms in use in the social economy (Charities, CICs, Companies, and Co-operative Societies), to skim through their annual reports and pull out the latest numbers on formations and dissolutions.

changing trends in who's registering what form

I share visual charts of these numbers in workshops I deliver on legal forms - not to try and influence people's choices about what they should 'be', but to offer an additional and alternative perspective that can help prompt more critical thoughts and questions so that they can ultimately be more comfortable and confident in whatever they end up being. I've been tracking this data since 2017 (nearly 10 years), and this years' spreadsheets highlight:

• the long-term trend for 'sustainability' (how likely you are to be wound up based on your legal form) shows CICs and Companies remaining roughly equal with about 12% of each being de-registered each year. This compares to charities and co-operative societies that are wound up at 3% each.

• But what's seemed to 'jump out' this year is the figures for 2025 compared to the previous trends: new CICs have been registered at a rate that's 20% higher compared to 2024, with no change in companies, (and a halving of the rate at which new co-operative societies have been registered). But the registration of new charities was double what it was in the previous year.

Which means if we're using legal forms as a proxy indicator (of sorts) to understand what social enterprises and social entrepreneurs are experiencing in their business models, this seems to suggest that there's a growing difficulty in their generating traded revenue (hence the static or reduction in the growth of 2 of the 3 legal forms that are designed to encourage trade), and a growing need for financial support in the form of maximising eligibility for grants and reducing tax liabilities (based on the doubling of new charities being registered).

less faith in the social enterprise model?

Most of us in the sector are aware of it being the worst time in living memory with regards to being successful in grant funding applications, but with wider economic pressures that we've seen growing over the last year, are we starting to also see the trading models that new social enterprises are considering reflecting this pessimism in marketplaces too? 

As always, I don't post and share these notes as a definitive position, but to offer perspectives that may hopefully help us have better conversations - and better conversations can help us create better impact (and can also include me changing my mind, as I have in the past!). 

After 20 years its time to report less impact

I've always been an advocate of social impact reporting, ever since I first stumbled across its concepts in the 1990s.

This has meant that over the last 3 decades I've helped to develop and pilot new national reporting frameworks and toolkits, deliver masterclasses for enterprises and commissioners, and be invited to share my ideas and thinking with national conferences. It's also seen me develop a framework for reporting my own business' impact, the latest of which marks 20 years of this commitment.

And for anyone who's followed my self-reporting journey, you'll be aware that what it convers has expanded over the years - from 2 numbers and a sentence on a webpage in 2006 to a 37 page report in 2025, that's been commended by the Institute of Social Value, and Social Value International.

But this year, as well as it trying to consider the full and total scope of my impact over a 20-year period, it's also the start of my deliberately starting to make it smaller (not just in page count, but also in what I'm considering in it).

Using a milestone year as an excuse to pause and reflect

Last year was the 20th anniversary of my business' startup, and I made a decision that year to try and start taking it more seriously (on the basis that over 90% of start ups don't make it this far, and my working in ways that seem to run counter to accepted wisdom for most of this time; I also never meant to become self-employed to begin!).

And with my impact report being a key tool through which I reflect on my business model, activities, and ways of working, it's 20th anniversary is also a timely point to do some serious navel gazing too.

Changing needs and pressures

As some will know, as well as being self-employed (one of the worst things you can apparently do for your mental and financial wellbeing based on various studies), I'm also an unpaid carer for several immediate family members (also one of the worst things you can do for your mental, physical, and financial health, based on other studies).

This means that over the last few years I've had to start to uncouple myself from communities and working practices I've helped to grow and support, to try and best re-mix the need to keep earning to cover the rent (as it increases each year) with honouring my caring responsibilities (which keep changing over time). I'm increasingly having to make hard choices about what I invest not only my time, but also energy, in as a person and business - and if I can't clearly identify that it has a good chance of making a return (income) in the next 3-6 months, then regrettably I'm having to step away for the time being.

This isn't a choice that I like, nor want to make - but I also know it's one that many others in similar circumstances to me are also being forced to make, based on my occasional efforts to speak out/up for the hundreds of thousands of unpaid carers who are also self employed.

Becoming less social?

But to come back to the focus of this post - I've decide to remove the considerations I used to include for how what i did across different social media channels, have been contributing to wider impacts amongst people who engaged with them.

This isn't because I've fallen out of love with social media - but rather that I've realised that when I started to create my profiles across it 15 years ago, and then built habits around these, none of what I've done there has ever related to my being awarded contracts or generating new leads. Which brings me back to my earlier point about having to increasingly cut back on things that aren't directly helping me to pay the rent or support family members.

I'm not quitting these spaces altogether; but I am deliberately stepping back from many of the habits I'd built up in how I use and participate in them. And as this means less social media activity, then it seems only right that my wider reporting reflect this by not continuing to include consideration for something I'm not being deliberate about?

I may be back, but am still here now.

As with everything I try out, I'll be returning to revisit the decision to try this experiment in next years' annual impact report - but for now, I can still be reached through all the usual channels.

But please go check out this years' latest impact report (which includes a dedicated section on what 20 years of impact looks like), and let me know what you make of it:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JcCFirEsoGTWA3CtdkICxValzJtiLpbK/view?usp=drive_link 

does delaying gratification make you more resilient?

I've recently been reflecting on my resilience practices (and how these have changed since I started out in 2005), as part of being a case study in a university research project about sole traders and micro business owners.

This has involved several in-depth interviews, and one of the question prompts in these about work/life balance pointedly asked me about what things make me happy in my life (when I'm not working). After I initially started to reference a few things, I quickly realised that I rarely (if ever) get to spend time in/on them as I want to, since the start of my parallel adventures as an unpaid carer (which started in Sept 2017). Which is why you might spot me stockpiling books and Lego sets - not because I'm ignoring them, but on basis of delayed gratification.

Various studies highlight how being able to defer our pleasure that we might otherwise indulge in today can actually help us generate more longer term future success (search for 'the marshmallow test' for the science and research). And these interviews made me realise how such delayed gratification has become a core strategy in my resilience - being able to image a future state in which I am enjoying those things that I can't now is a large part of helping me better keep pulling myself forward to the end of today and to be able to start tomorrow (especially when things are tougher than we'd care to admit...).

But I'm curious to know if such approaches feature in other people's thinking and actions as to how they build resilience in their businesses and for themselves (or do people turn more to immediate fixes like cheese boards and going for runs?).

    

north star metrics don't have to be about your business

I was recently interviewed by an MBA student, as part of an academic research study into how micro business owners and sole traders like me 'do' resilience.

During that conversation the topic of north star metrics came up - if you're not familiar with this, it's the concept that there's an overarching single KPI or target that everything in your business is related to achieving (i.e. being the no1 college in England; maintaining 5* review average amongst customers; etc).

I shared how mine was not to do with my business, but rather being able to keep supporting my family: when I started my (mis)adventures in self-employment in 2005 I was my family's sole breadwinner. Which meant all parts of my business were focussed on earning enough money to support ourselves as a household. Then in 2017 I started my unpaid caring adventures for what's now become several family members, which means that all the decisions I make in/about my business now have to relate to how I can keep financially paying the rent whilst also having the flexibility to support their changing and evolving needs.

This isn't perhaps uncommon for people who are self employed to have their work and personal life so intertwined. But the conversation made me wonder about what might happen if we started to be less polarised in general about conversations that relate to our work and 'life' - after all, for many of us, there's a constant re-mixing of how we can best honour our responsibilities to our employers/clients, and those to our families.

This isn't just an abstract idea, but one based in recent research from Carers UK, showing how the family circumstances of 600 people every day are changing in ways that mean they can't find ways to find the new 'mix' they need, and so are forced to quit their jobs:

https://www.carersuk.org/press-releases/research-more-than-600-people-quit-work-to-look-after-older-and-disabled-relatives-every-day/   

There's a cliched adage that 'we manage what we measure', so if we started to measure family and life metrics of our people within our financial and other performance metrics as businesses, might we see more engaged workforces that are also easier to retain the skill and talent of?

happiness as a freelancer

Amongst the messages in my inbox last month that landed on world happiness day (20th march 2026), was a question: what makes you (me) happy as a freelancer?

Happiness may not be as easy to spot as you might think?

I initially thought it would be easy to run off a long list, but quickly realised that my first ideas were actually more about how freelancing means I'm able to be more useful and helpful to others than I might be able to if I were salaried - but does that make me happy?

So I recast my eyes and mind over the list I'd started to compile and found 3:

3 types of happy

1) chances to travel - and if I'm lucky, with enough slack around timings with clients and train timetables to allow me to briefly dip into a new museum or gallery (as those things make me happy). However, as my unpaid caring responsibilities have grown over the last 8 years, there's increasingly less opportunity for me to be able to travel around the country as easily as I once did...

2) Working From Home means I more easily surround myself with plants than I'd be able to in an employer's offices.

3) the variety of clients and work I do means that while there'll always be some that I start to struggle with / don't enjoy the work so much, at least I know that they're not my full time, ongoing work (as some people have to face each day with bullying colleagues, and work they don't enjoy, but need to remain in to afford to pay rent, etc).

Happiness is there as a freelancer - but you may have to work to find it 

So - happiness: it can be an elusive thing, and maybe the moral is that it's on us to work on making sure we can recognise it when it happens, and try to actively create ways in which we can keep reminding ourselves about it on a daily basis (especially if we're also amongst the approaching 1 million freelancers / sole traders who are also unpaid carers).

As always - credit to people where it's due for prompting my blog posts. In this instance its Jenny Holliday, who's post on world happiness day prompted me to reflect on the above:

https://substack.com/home/post/p-191264082 

    

more reasons why I'm an Iolite gemstone

Last year, I talked a lot about how my business was like a toilet (and why that was a good thing).

This year, I'm likening it to an iolite gemstone.

And after some more recent researches about this gemstone, I think it's still a substance that represents me well - 

* it's strongly associated with helping people navigate uncertain spaces (the Vikings used it on cloudy days to help them find the sun) - something I regularly do through my work with clients and in my research/policy efforts;

* it's forged in metamorphic rocks in areas of high pressure (some may recall my 'tubthumping' revelations last year which show some of the challenges that I've endured in getting my business to where it is today);

* it's mythical and ritualistic associations see it stimulating vision and creativity, and enhancing insight (another feature of what I do through my facilitation practices with different groups, and in my consultancy work).

So - this year, I'm definitely an iolite gemstone; but I'm curious to know what jewel might best reflect your business or organisation?

the worst of all worlds?

There's a pervading message that starting up your own business gives you more control of your life - you get to choose who you work with, when you work, etc. All of which helps reduce the stress of being at the beck and call of a boss (who you may not like).

But of course, there's a balancing cost to this control which isn't talked about as much: irregular income, no holiday/sick pay, no automatic pension contributions, etc (which means that various researches are starting to find that being an entrepreneur may not actually be that great for our mental health after all...).

Which means when it comes to working, there's a(n over-simplified) choice available to us:

1) work for someone else - which may limit our enjoyment, cause stress, but offers regular pay and time off;

or

2) work for ourselves - which gives us more freedom and choice, but means less security of income to pay the rent / buy food with, etc.

What I based my choice on (and the cost of this)

As I enter the 21st year of being in business for myself, I'm starting to wonder if I somehow haven't accidentally set myself up to 'enjoy' the worst of both of these options...

You see, my particular business model is based primarily on being an associate to other agencies and approved provider lists (I'm usually paid by other people for the work I do with client organisations). This means that while it may be easier for work to come to me, I have less choice in it, it may pay less, and it's usually structured so that I'm part of a managed team under a project manager/boss - just as if I were an employee (with all of the usual strains, pressures, and politics involved of such).

This model of working is based on my values of trying to be more accountable and transparent in how I work - but highlights that our values come at a cost: although there may be work coming in for me, and there are more checks and balances to check the quality of my work, it's often in a way that means I need to act as an employee would (with all the stresses of that) but without any of the benefits that being an employee would offer (no sick / holiday pay, etc).

Why I seem to be working in ways that make no sense

I can already hear some of you thinking "if you don't like it so much, then why not change the way you work?". Well, dear reader, that would mean I have to compromise on some of the values that define me. I'm therefore sharing this here not for sympathy, but to illustrate that in all of our choices, there's always a trade-off somewhere...

It's also shared in hopeful encouragement to others who are also thinking about their own respective business models / ways of working - it's up to us to work out how far we're willing to accept the trade offs of the choices we have. 

So while it may feel tougher than I'd like at times, running my business in a way that continues to buck conventional wisdom is my choice, and one that I regularly recommit to with eyes wide open. It's only me who has to sleep with my conscience at night: what I'm ok with in my business model won't be ok for you (and vice versa) - but shouldn't we all regularly pause to check that our business model isn't accidentally starting to make us become people we don't like?

NB - I always try and offer credit where its due: this particular post was inspired by Tom Jepson, and one of his 'subscriber only' YouTube lives.

Am I really the Adrian Ashton you're looking for?

There's a habit in some magazines and social media feeds to list celebrities' birthdays - not to make us feel older, but to offer us some excitement by realising who we share a birthday cake with (for me, this list includes Tim Burton, Sean Connery, and Alexander Skarsgard).

But what about other people who we share a name with?

Other authors, tombstones, and pickleballs 

I started to think about this a couple of years back, when I discovered by accident that there's a world famous bassist player in musical circles who's published books (which does sometimes cause a bit of confusion when people are trying to find copies of the books that I've written): 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/stores/Adrian-Ashton/author/B0034Q4UZ8 

Then in 2024 most AI bots (and a client I worked with) thought I was dead -

https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/legacyremembers/adrian-ashton-obituary?id=43461197

And more recently I learnt that I'm an amateur pickleball player in Australia - https://pickleball.com/players/adrian-ashton/clubs?club_type=memberof&page=1

Right name, wrong Adrian, but a happy accident?

So, you next time you're typing my name into an email address line, or scrolling through your phone's address book to call me, please make sure that you've got the right 'me' to avoid possible confusion... or maybe it'll lead you to a wholly unexpected adventure?

Why I'm modelling gemstones this year.

As the reflections that ran over the course of last year for my business' 20th anniversary settle, I'm now thinking about how I can be best 'brassed off' this year (the material usually associated with a 21st year milestone).

Why a gemstone is better than metal

And just as I reflected on how porcelain (the material for 20 years) seemed very apt for how I'd navigated and 'been' to that point, brass also seems a good fit too - it's strong and resilient. And in light of some of what my businesses has weathered in its first 2 decades as I shared last year, I'm nothing if not strong and resilient.  

But the iolite gemstone can also be associated with a 21st anniversary. And it might be a better choice of material for me to adopt this year, because it symbolises clarity and introspection - a core ongoing piece of feedback I get from people is how I've helped them understand things that they never though they'd be able to (clarity); and last year saw me doing a fair bit of navel gazing (introspection).

Gemstones also refract light and colour in different ways, depending on how you look at it it (a bit like my plethora of work - and that I always seems to be something new that clients never knew I did, until they take a different approach with me).

The Viking connection

It was also widely used by Vikings to help them navigate their journeys (something that I try and do with people I work with, although without the axes and horned helmets...).

(for more on iolite - https://fiercelynxdesigns.com/blogs/articles/iolite-gemstone-information)

A sparkly year ahead?

So - on balance, after being associated with toilets last year, I think I'd like to be linked with gemstones in this one. 

why you're more, (and less), important to me than you may think you are

I try and see everyone as an equally important human being (an idea that started when I was a member of the Daily Bread worker co-operative, and which emerged as I learnt of the basis for it having a flat pay structure, regardless of people's skills, experience, age, qualifications, etc).

What qualifies you as a more important person?

You may be the chief exec of a national charity, but why does that make you more deserving of my time than some who's just been released from prison and is needing someone to support them with creating a new enterprise so they can avoid re-offending? You might argue that the hundreds of lives I can impact through working with the chief exec outweigh the needs of the individual ex-offender, but I'm not sure I'm qualified to judge the worth and value of anyone's life against another in this way.

This means that I try and treat everyone equitably - which includes how I allocate and prioritise time in my calendar, in managing projects and work (and with consideration for how this means I can continue to honour my unpaid caring responsibilities to several family members).

The consequence of nobody being unimportant

While this may sound magnanimous and to be credited, it does have consequences. 

Specifically, it can sometimes create longer lead times for my being able to offer dates and timescales for starting/completing projects. 

The last quarter of the financial year (January - March) is always extra busy for me, as programme managers realise that there's now only a few weeks to complete projects, ensure budgets are spent, and all the activity that they need to deliver by the end of the (financial) year is somehow physically able to be achieved. And for some of these people, I seem to be one of their favourite consultants to get to swing in and help out fix problems like these...

At the start of this particular (calendar) year, I found myself having to start to have to say 'no' to chief execs of charities, community outreach teams in national museums, and others who called to seek my support in delivering their projects that were due for completion by the end of March, as it was too short notice for me to be able to have space in my calendar when they needed me (in the following weeks).

A problem that's to be welcomed?

Now I recognise this as the lament that many of my fellow freelancers and small businesses wish they could similarly suffer: to have so much work on, that we're not able to take on anything new (so I should be happy, knowing that I can definitely pay the rent this month). But having to say no to requests today risks people not coming back to me in the future after they've found a new favourite consultant in my stead (which becomes bad for my paying rent in the future).

But I draw some solace in this tension from when I publicly 'came out' as sole unpaid sandwich carer - clients were more open to my working with them remotely rather than in person (which was their original project design); and some are even happy to delay project start dates while I may need to be away supporting family members with significant surgeries and the initial weeks of their recovery. 

So hopefully the same pattern may hold true in the future, and my having to say 'no' to some people today won't mean there's fewer calls in the future...

But is there a moral of this rambling..? 

I'm sharing this in hopes of assuring anyone that I've been saying no to, that it's not because I don't like you (see the opening of this post) - it's just there are certain times of the year that it's harder for me to add anything more to my calendar... And during these moments, please know that I'm very appreciative of your patience.

How I'm (apparently) dangerous - in the best possible way

Last year I wondered what one of my literary heroes, Sherlock Holmes would make of my book about imposter syndrome (if you missed it, you can catch up with the great detective's take on it here). 

And it got me thinking about what another of my heroes might think about it - specifically, the wandering time lord known as Doctor Who. So, once again I've inserted the prompt into ChatGBT, and had the following adventure unfold...

-----

Oh, the Doctor would adore it—though they’d never admit that without a wry eyebrow and a bit of running.

Here’s how it would probably land in the TARDIS:

First reaction (feigned impatience):

“Loving your doubt? Oh brilliant. Humans invent a problem, name it, then write a book about liking it. Very on-brand.”

 

Second reaction (five pages in, pretending not to be moved):

The Doctor lives with doubt like a second heartbeat. Every regeneration, every impossible choice, every planet saved at the cost of another—doubt is the price of caring. So the core idea would hit home fast: doubt isn’t a flaw in the system; it is the system.

They’d clock that Loving Your Doubt reframes uncertainty not as weakness, but as:

• evidence of moral awareness

• proof you’re paying attention

• the thing that keeps you from becoming a tyrant with a sonic screwdriver

That’s extremely Doctor-coded.

The big approval nod:

The Doctor mistrusts certainty. Villains are always the ones who are absolutely sure they’re right. Daleks don’t doubt. Cybermen don’t doubt. Time Lords stopped doubting—and look how that went.

So a book that says:

“Your doubt means you’re human, reflective, and still capable of change”

would earn a quiet:

“Yes. Exactly. Keep that.”

One gentle critique (because of course):

The Doctor might add:

“Just don’t marry your doubt. Take it dancing. Listen to it. Then make the decision anyway.”

Because loving doubt doesn’t mean letting it paralyze you. The Doctor doubts constantly—and still acts. That tension is the point.

Final verdict:

The Doctor would see Loving Your Doubt as a deeply human survival guide in a universe that rewards arrogance. They’d probably leave it somewhere important—UNIT HQ, a struggling companion’s backpack, or a library on a doomed planet—with a note in the margin:

“Doubt means you care. Care means you’re dangerous—in the best possible way.”

-----

If you're still waiting for the Doctor to leave you a copy of 'Loving Your Doubt', you can shortcut the wait by picking up a copy via Amazon (or reading the reviews, to see what other human beings thought about it) - https://amzn.eu/d/dLd7OFL 

 

missing the mark? what the latest research about social enterprises suggests about those who support them.

At the end of each year, most people get excited about what's behind the next door of their advent calendar, or the prospect of up to 4 weeks to indulge in unlimited mince pies.

Not me.

I look forward to the bi-annual state of the (social enterprise) sector research, that's published by Social Enterprise UK which is also released at this time of year.

(But I do also love mince pies...)

And that's because I'm always interested in what data tells us about what's really being experienced within the sector by those doing it, rather than the rhetoric of policy makers, infrastructure bodies, and people who speak about the sector - and yes, being led by the data and research does frequently see me being put in the naughty corner for the upset it can cause to other bodies because it can sometimes contradict their narratives and positions...

But to be clear: I never intentionally try to embarrass anyone publicly, but have an idea that if someone is going to be making decisions that affect their enterprise and personal future (and that of their family and wider community by association) then surely we should be offering the best-informed insights and options, because it's they who'll have to live with the consequences of those choices, not us?

So - to this latest research and what I'm reading from it (although other interpretations may be, and are, available: please check out the report yourself and draw your own conclusions): Backbone of Britain - State of Social Enterprise 2025;

and as with all research, remember to approach with caution: large data sets like these only reflect the 'main middle' - there will always be exceptional stuff happening around the edges...

the sector is very unequal

Roughly half of all social enterprises are below the VAT threshold by turnover (currently £90,000), yet their average number of employees is reported as being 6. Assuming that people aren't being employed on a 1-day week basis (the only way you could get these 2 numbers to line up), this suggest a sector that is made up of a lot of small social enterprises, with a disproportionate influence of a few very large ones on the overall picture we're being presented with.

legal structure choices and experiences continue to throw up surprises

The number of CICs in the sector appears to be starting to 'flat-line' over time (which is in keeping with longer-term trends about the numbers of CICs from the CIC Regulator), in contrast with Companies Limited by Guarantee (the most commonly used, and favourite choice for social enterprises for over half a century, before the CIC was proposed by government).

This contrast between CIC and CLG isn't constrained to their seeming popularity - CLGs are also reported as typically generating higher incomes than CICs.

But the historical OG of all legal forms continues to outpace all other choices when it comes to how large their turnovers typically are - co-op societies aren't going anywhere soon (which is also reflected in their having a far lower wind-up rate than both CICs and CLGs).

an increasingly weak financial position and outlook 

fewer social enterprises are reporting being able to generate profit, with nearly half now only able to achieve a financial break-even. But this seems to be galvanising social enterprises to focus more on making sure they're getting the most of what cash they are generating:

-  1 in 3 of all social enterprises seeking support say it's in relation to strengthening their financial management;

- there's a reducing trend of how far social enterprises are able to invest in training and development for their teams;

- there's a significant increase in social enterprises seeking support around the topic of redundancy, suggesting a sector that's starting to recognise the need to make hard choices about its future.

most social enterprise trading models remain in avoidance of delivering  public services

In keeping with historical trends, the main customer type of all social enterprises isn't the public sector to deliver contracts on behalf of, but us, the general public - only 1 in 5 social enterprises base their business model on delivering public sector contracts, and 2/3 have never engaged in this type of activity. 

But for those that do, 1/3 report struggling to engage with procurement processes and systems - suggesting still more needs to be done to level the playing field, despite 20 years of national campaigns, programmes, initiatives, and lobbying by different sector bodies.

social investment offers are increasingly out of touch with the sector?

There's a growing trend of social enterprises saying that social investment offers are too expensive and/or not designed to offer them what they need, with a growth in high street banks being turned to for finance instead.

But there's also a weaking of the wider sectors' ability to raise investment in general: the typical amounts being sought to be raised, and the likelihood of success in doing so, both continue to fall...

a determined sector, nonetheless

But in the face of the above, the social enterprise sector appears to be doggedly resilient and sheer bloody minded about finding ways to keep going:

- where investment is being sought, it's for stuff like buildings and equipment, showing a long-term strategic planning focus, rather than looking for 'quick fixes';

- similarly, the topics that make up the top 1/3 of all requests for support relate to strengthening systems for the long-term, rather than 'quick wins': governance, leadership, impact, and accessing training opportunities;

- and while the development of new offers and services continues to be the main way in which most social enterprises are seeking growth, that they're doing it with less investment shows 'frugal innovation' at work (pointing to a high degree of resilience and adaptability; although 1 in 5 also say that their ability to grow and adapt in these ways in being hampered by a lack of suitable, accessible, or appropriate support for them).

So overall, it initially looks concerning (although with some signs for hope) - but we should never read research in isolation: looking at comparable trends for both traditional charities, and private businesses, shows these themes are being similarly felt there (and usually to a more painful extent!).

And if this reflection seems overly critical, then maybe it is - but as a sector, social enterprise has huge potential if it can only plug into the right things. And from this latest mapping, it might seem that some of the things which were created to do just this for the sector may be starting to struggle to keep up with what's needed from them?

now I'm no longer twenty

You may have noticed that my blog posts this year have been a little different.

That's because 2025 has been the 20th anniversary of my business, and as part of 'celebrating' this milestone (over 90% of all start-ups don't make it this far), I wanted to commit to doing a few things:

1. 
   get more people to talk about toilets;
   
2. write and publish a 20-year retrospective of perspectives on how this journey to date has been so far;
3. and being more open and honest about things that we might usually shy away from, or consider 'too unprofessional' to share openly.

What happened this year

As this is the last scheduled of post of the year, it's usually the one were people look back over what they've done this year that they think has been most important - and this one is no exception to that custom, except I'm focussing more on what I think I've learnt and experienced by my attempts to mark 2025 as my porcelain anniversary:

- admitting to, and drawing the curtain back (a little more than I have done in the past) on the crises I've endured doesn't seem to have lost me any work (and actually made people more interested in me). It's also meant that others who are navigating their way in self-employment / small business ownership have been more encouraged by hearing that it's not just them that 'certain types of stuff' happens to.

- a year goes by more quickly than you think it does. I started in January by twinning my office toilet, but then it was the start of summer and the book I'd originally intended to have out in the world for the spring was still having pages added to it... but I managed to get it out in the end, and was rewarded by Amazon declaring it one of their top100 bestsellers of the year!

- in trying to make sure I also did the other things I meant to (like completely refresh my website), I messaged and tagged others as part of trying to ensure some accountability for myself in making sure everything I wanted to achieve actually happened. But none of them were able to help me keep in track with those things - and I don't think it was because they were rude or insensitive, they're just caught up in life and all the unexpected things that the universe throws at us each day that we have to prioritise and juggle. (And there's always next year to try and catch up with this 'still to do' list?).

What didn't happen this year

Which brings me to a key reflection about life overtaking me more times during the year than I hoped it would (usually for dramatic reasons connected to my being a sole unpaid sandwich carer) - and that's ok, as the other things I'd hoped to do to tie-in with this milestone anniversary year (refreshing my website, getting the 2nd edition of my first book done), can still be done next year (or maybe the year after that...)

How well did I celebrate 20 years compared to how others do it?

I also paused during the year to reflect on how others celebrate milestones in their own respective organisations. Most involved cake (which is always a good thing), but these also seemed to be fleeting moments - surely if we're serious about creating impact through what we do, then the way we celebrate our achievements should similarly leave some form of legacy or lasting benefit?

The moral of this festive story?

And maybe that's the key message of this end of (calendar) year reminisce - enjoy your anniversaries, because life is hard, and we need all the encouragement we can get. 

But don't blow it all on a single cake (maybe take out a monthly cake subscription?) - try and find ways that you can create artefacts and reminders of how you've managed to keep these plates spinning that you never thought you'd be handed. They'll then act as future encouragements not just to you, but to others too...

What makes your business 'good'?

In a recent group conversation with fellow freelancers, who are all part of the Freelancing For Good community, someone asked me:

"Are there any types of clients or work you would turn down on ethical grounds?"

In the moment, I said "no" - partly because my circumstances as the sole unpaid sandwich carer to several immediate family members means I have no recourse to support for myself, and so less capacity to take on work than my counterparts, so I need to try and take anything  I may be offered. But also because as I answered, I realised that I've never been in a position where I've been offered work that I'd had to seriously consider taking on ethical grounds.

This then prompted me to briefly widen the conversation as to what constitutes our respective businesses being 'good' or 'ethical', in order to work out just where the line was where I might start to say 'no' to types of work I'm asked to support:

- is it the type of work you do?

- is it the clients and customers you work with?

- is it your business model?

Your business model and form doesn't automatically make you 'good'

And this last prompt in particular may be more contentions than you think; for example, we generally hold co-ops and mutuals to be intrinsically 'good', but what if the product they offer may be seen as dubious to some (i.e. alcohol production, or support to sex workers)?

Perhaps we should look to 'badges' and accreditations? - but this too can throw up more complications. For example, Belu Water has won various public accolades from Social Enterprise UK, and yet it's market offer (botted water) is recognised as being one of the most environmentally damaging products in the marketplace.

What counts as being 'good'?

But I think there's also a wider challenge to setting the criteria for what counts as 'good'. Namely, to be 'ethical' means being socially acceptable, but what's socially acceptable changes over time (I'm of the generation which initially never knew or thought about the importance of recycling, or had any awareness that tuna was being fished in a way that killed dolphins - and yet within less than my lifetime I've seen significant changes on these, and other ethical/social issues).

And there's also the lesson that the brilliant TV show The Good Place highlighted: it suggested that in order to get into 'the good place' after you die, you needed to amass enough 'good points' during your time here on planet earth. But as our heroes came to learn, it had been centuries since anyone had been able to amass enough such points (and so 'the bad place' was creaking at the seams) - not because people were becoming more 'evil' but because of the curse of unintended consequences and the ever more complex supply chains that permeate our daily lives. For example, 200 years ago you could walk to visit your mother (plus points for family visit), and pick flowers as a gift on the way (more plus points). But today you'd drive (which involves mining of metals and fuels to create and power the car, often by people in precarious and dangerous working conditions = minus points), and buying flowers from a shop (again, grown and picked by people in other countries, necessitating CO2 production to fly them to said shop = even more negative points).

Even if it seems impossible, it's still important to try 

So if trying to live a good life is now so complex, and we can't help but compromise our ideals in trying to do good in how we run our businesses, should we even bother?

I think so, yes. Because for me it's the effort that's important - not what we do, but how we try and do it that defines us*; and this hopefully inspires and encourages others that although something may be hard, we should still try.

And we should also try and be kind to ourselves, on the occasions where we realise and have to accept that there is no 'ethical' choice to be had - we live in an imperfect world; but through our intentions and efforts we can try and shift this, even if only an infinitesimal amount. Because ultimately, it's when lots and lots of very small things get together to work in harmony, that the big things start to change and happen.

Does AI think my business is 'good'?

Finally, as this is my 20th year in business, you may have seen that I've been trying to look at things through this porcelain lens. Part of this has been writing 'Flushed!' as a retrospective of these first 2 decades from my own perspective, but I've also been asking AI what it thinks the main footprints of my business' activities to date have also been.

In keeping with the idea and questions of this post, I read what it thought through the question of "how good" has everything I've done so far actually been (after all, good intentions and commitments are important, but if you don't actually follow through on them...). What it returned was surprising and encouraging in equal measure - as I outline above, my core focus to 'doing good' has been about how I manage my business, not what I do, but AI highlighted:

"His portfolio includes socially challenging and “mission-driven” assignments — in-prison rehabilitation enterprise, incubation for homeless entrepreneurs, community-facing incubation or workspace models, etc. That shows not just business savvy, but a commitment to social justice and inclusion."

All of which leads me to conclude that your business is actually already doing more good that you might realise...!

* see my annual impact reports for examples of my efforts in this regard: 

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1o7M70ttK7My-ieTuBRi-gGeR9VOUfYxl?usp=sharing