How I've become a daily 1 minute habit for people in 20 countries around the world

As part of reflecting on 2025 being the 20th anniversary of my business, I started to wonder what else was similarly 'birthed' in the same year.

It transpires that YouTube and I both share the same anniversary!

So unless you've been auto-playing the contents of my channel there, I wanted to take this opportunity to do a mini-audit of how my life on YouTube has played out over our lives together so far.

What I've found is that since launching my channel, and generating content for it, most people who find me there do so through my shorts (the videos, not the apparel) or from a direct link from someone else's website.

They've come from over 20 different countries, and over the lifetime of my channel have watched an average of at least 1 minute of my content every single day of every single year.

That doesn't seem too shabby?

The specifics (if you want to get grainy about it) = 

Firsts

1) The first video I uploaded was in 2010, being interviewed for a national project about empowering adults experiencing mental ill health to create their own social enterprises:

https://youtu.be/8AduAsnWMjE 

2) The first content I purposefully created wasn't until February 2020, and was about why should never trust your business adviser (which includes me!):

https://youtu.be/ZpPYqBlt1Ek

3) and my first short was in November of the same year (2020), celebrating the special relationship that social enterprises share with toilets (the first, but not last, time I sat on the porcelain throne to record content!):

https://youtube.com/shorts/EFLDDvLwOrU?feature=share

Biggies

1) My most viewed short on YouTube was about how I'd made a low-tech Meeting Owl Pro:

https://youtube.com/shorts/flf0GExdbsc?feature=share

2) My most viewed video was a rallying cry to stop people using the word 'pivot' during a pandemic: 

https://youtu.be/4G-iHsWIszQ

Guesting

1) The first video I appeared in anywhere on YouTube that someone else had created and uploaded (to my knowledge) was in May 2013 - effusing about the Responsible Business Standard:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBx1qWHWt_U

2) The most viewed video of someone else's that I guested in, was recorded in Sept 2023, about redefining the concept of social entrepreneurship with Anne Scottlin:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxm8p7w59uQ

Playlists

I curate several playlists in my channel, the most popular of which is my collection of shorts and being interviewed by other people on their podcasts on the topic of imposter syndrome:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLbjwTqLUXg99vP8ZLwQhn_vPYY1xlF0ON

So, if you're a Youtuber too, how does your content and audience compare?

I need to level up my game...

For well over a decade, I've been offering 'beer mentoring' as a model to help me engage with, and support, people who might otherwise struggle to be able to generate the budget, or access funding, for me to be able to work with them on their ideas. 

This has evolved over the years to include 'bacon butty mentoring' (as it's usually frowned on to drink beer before lunchtime), and 'cake mentoring' (because some people are vegetarian).

But recently I came across a fellow business support professional who's obviously been spending more time working on this idea than I have - 'curry mentoring'!! (although I don't usually charge you any more than the bar/café tab at the end of our time together) https://www.altrinchamhq.co.uk/pick-our-brains-over-a-curry 

But these folk in Altrincham have got me wondering if I can/should could start to offer:

• spa weekend mentoring
• Michelin star restaurant mentoring 
• ?

But if you think you'd like me to spend some time with you, in helping to work on your ideas, hopes, issues, etc, and available budget is an issue, please remember that I've always been happy to offer an initial no-fee, no-obligation chat by phone. 

And having been an occasional market trader in the past, I'm also always open to haggling...

So how do you actually start a social enterprise?

'Social enterprise' is a phrase that seems to be increasingly commonplace, and something that we're all being encouraged to start-up to if we think we have an idea for a new project or a business that might do some good in some way.

There's also a lot of 'stuff' about them out there: mapping by Social Enterprise UK; webinars on how they can best report their impact and how they're changing the world for the better by Social Value UK; offers of funding for how they can support local communities continue to recover from the impact of the pandemic; and such like...

But I'm often approached by people who want to know the answer to a much more basic question about social enterprises - how do I actually set one up?

Well, the good news if that I've been running seminars, boot camps, and webinars covering this for about the last 20 years, and hopefully will be able to distil them down into a few pithy bullet points in this blog to help you start to chart your adventure into the lands of social enterprise...

1) You'll already have a (social) idea, but is there actually the potential for a trading enterprise in it? 

Have you identified people or organisations who might be willing to pay you money (which is different to offering you philanthropic grants) for what you're going to be doing? 

2) How are you going to raise the money you need to get it started?

It's very rare than a start-up enterprise of any kind will have customers who line up in advance of it officially opening for business, to pay for the services and goods before they've even seen them. So have you thought about not only how you'll raise the cash you need for those early bills, but also where you'd be happy to seek it from?

3) Do you see yourself as a lone hero, or part of a 'Scooby gang'?

Creating any new enterprise is hard work and risky. Social enterprises even more so, because of the additional dimensions they have (balancing social mission with need to generate cash; trying to keep a set of values and ethics central in every decision made; feeling a responsibility to try and save the world...). So do you feel you can take it all on by yourself, or are you looking to recruit others to work with you in developing, leading, and managing it (and how will you ideally structure these relationships between you all)? 

And what measures can you think about putting in place to support yourself (after all, if you're supporting the birth of this exciting new social enterprise, whose looking out for you in return)?

The next steps in starting up a social enterprise flow from these, and may seem far more mundane in comparison, but are true for any enterprise thinking about starting up:

- create some budgets to help you manage costs and make sure you're going to be charging the right prices;

- pick a legal structure that will help you manifest and protect all of the above;

- register the enterprise with HMRC and whichever regulator is responsible for the legal structure you've picked, and open a bank account;

- do some marketing;

- Oh yes: and get out there to tell people you're now 'here' and so some selling!

Once these are in place, then everything else you come across out there about how social enterprises can thrive and prosper should start to make more sense.

But if you'd like to explore these steps in more detail, chat about how to tell if your idea really does have sufficient potential to be a trading enterprise, or would like to know about any other aspect of social enterprises, feel free to get in touch: I'm always happy to have an initial conversation by phone or video without charge or obligation.

why you shouldn't trust your business adviser

why do we keep insisting on keeping social and 'regular' entrepreneurs apart, when both have the same sh!t to deal with..?

In my experience of supporting various start-up programmes throughout the UK over the last 20 years, and having walked alongside many for part of their journey, most entrepreneurs don't call themselves that. 

They're simply people trying to make a go of an idea to either help them fix a problem they see in their community or help them get a bit more financial security for themselves (usually both).

So I'm increasingly frustrated when I keep seeing national sector bodies re-enforcing a narrative that social and non-social entrepreneurs need special treatment that somehow doesn't seem to apply to the other:

• the School for Social Entrepreneurs recently posted about the 5 ways that social entrepreneurs best learn - but if you took out the 'social' in the title, you'd instantly recognise them as being exactly the same way that any non-social entrepreneur prefers to learn too...

• and the recent Good Deals conference emphasised the impact that being a social entrepreneur has on their mental health - echoing the findings of the World Economic Forums' own research into the mental health of all entrepreneurs around the world... (but not seeming to make any reference or links to this...)

It therefore seems that if you identify as social or not as an entrepreneur, you're probably going to be sharing the same needs, concerns, and preferences for how you access the support you want - and this isn't anything new either: cross-sector research I did into social enterprises, charities, and private businesses all the way back in 2003 (an era of dial-up internet!) found that regardless of which sector people identified as being part of, they all had the same development needs and shared preferences for how they accessed learning and training.

And to my mind that suggests that we're continuing to miss a trick in amplifying the impact that entrepreneurs could be making on society's problems, and the wider economy - why are we creating this artificial segregation of entrepreneurs based on their founding motivations, when the support they need is the same.  And surely by learning and growing together they might better encourage, inspire, challenge, and ultimately "be" more than the sum of their respective camps..?

In the enterprise programmes I've been fortunate to have been able to manage and lead over the years, I've always sought to encourage such a 'mixing it up' philosophy, and although none were ever evaluated on the grounds of it being mixed-sector entrepreneurs, no-one in them seemed to have any problem in undertaking their journey as an entrepreneur with the others who had differing visions or motivations to their own.

So when we will we start to see (social) enterprise support agents admit that these divisions between sectors aren't really that valid or justifiable, and in doing so, be able to be more inclusive in releasing support into our wider communities and economies for the benefit of all..?

a truly 'out of this world' consultant..?

I've always prided myself on trying new approaches and ideas in not only how I manage myself as a provider of enterprise support, but also the ways in which I offer that support.

But I think I may have just overreached myself, and signed up to something that I can't see how I can ever 'top' - being the first freelance enterprise consultant on Mars from next year!

Those lovely people at NASA are planning their next Mars Rover trip for 2020, and as part of the kitting out of the equipment, have offered to engrave my name onto it - so from next year, I'll have a physical presence on another celestial body (although if any would-be interstellar clients want to try and call me, I'm not quite sure what the prefix code is for earth, nor what the roaming charges would be...).

Conventional business wisdom always argues that in order to be successful, you should not just aim to excel at what you do, but be the only person who does what you do. Well, my list of being the only person in the world who does what I do seems to be growing - 

1) the only business consultant to openly publish an annual social impact report on myself;

2) the only business that's deliberately chosen to remain a sole trader to maximise (rather than minimise) the tax that I pay on my earnings;

3) the only adviser who regularly asks for 360 degree feedback from clients in the form of pictures and asking to be likened to superheroes;

3) and now the only freelancer to have a presence on another planet.

Where do I go from here??

accelerating to 'Launch' speed...

I've always been a keen proponent of enterprise education in all its forms, and for all ages too - not just for the sake of encouraging more start-ups, but because I think it can offer genuine benefits in whatever we choose to (or find ourselves doing) in the future.

As part of this, I've always sought to work with Schools, Colleges, and Universities - one of which is Salford University, with whom I seem to have built something of a long-term relationship, as I'm now well into my 7th year of them asking me back to work with their subsequent intake cohorts of undergraduates.

The design of their offer to students who are interested in exploring and launching their own enterprises has changed over the years - including seeing more leaders of courses and schools within the university becoming more interested in 'exposing' their students to speakers like me to help them better understand 'the enterprise option'; (I've always especially liked it when the drama school asks for these as it means I can perform my 1-man startup show on a proper stage!).

But perhaps most excitingly, the university's enterprise team has recently launched a dedicated accelerator on campus, branded 'Launch'.

And rather than assume that just because they have a business school and an MBA programme they know what the best content to teach and offer through it would be, they've linked in with the Growth Hub, Santander, and others to offer students a more rounded, complete, and stronger support offer.

Fortunately for my own enterprise practice, they've asked me to reprise my role as a mentor and adviser to some of the latest cohort in the accelerator, to which end the University recently invited me to the launch of their latest Launch programme.

And it was at this launch that I was inspired to jot these thoughts down for my blog for 2 reasons - what undergraduate students want to get out of being part of an accelerator, and the key message that seemed to be being broadcast to them:

in contrast to what we seem to hear from other national and international accelerator programmes who laud themselves on the investment they help start-ups to gain, students motivations at Salford's Launch feel much more 'earthy' and 'real life':

- people are wanting better clarity over the future of their business

- people recognise that being part of a peer community can offer them the confidence and accountability structures they know they'll need to see their ideas through

- some people feel they's lost their mojo, and the accelerator is a good opportunity to find it again

And as for the key message to these start-ups: "be a sponge (of knowledge and ideas), rather than a sponger".

As to the journey that this cohort will be taking, and what their experiences of it will be - well, I'm going to be fortunate enough to walk alongside some of them over the next few months, so I'll try and check in later this year with some thoughts of what happens at the other end...

based on official statistics, my support to enterprise is far better than what the government pays for...

Business support comes in all sorts of forms, in all sorts of places, and from all sorts of people.

But the question that all entrepreneurs face when navigating the options out there, should be "is it any good?"

And there are all sorts of ways in which you can start to consider the quality, validity, appropriateness, (and even legality!) of the support you find and the advice you're offered through it:

- what qualifications does the person have? (but as I've shown before, a qualification is only an assurance that the person has been taught something, it's usually no indication of how knowledgeable or competent they actually are...)

- what recommendations have others made about them? (but again, I've evidenced how you can't trust any such endorsements a person may have received...)

So what's left? Well, how about statistics relating to performance? After all, it's how the success of any contract or project is usually considered, and the government's flagship business support programme, the growth hubs, are regularly applauded on the basis of these.

But the latest published self-congratulatory statistics about the performance of these growth hubs suggest that they may not actually be that great in practice, and when I compare my own performance against theirs, I seem to come out in a far better light:

Growth Hub - only 5% of all businesses who contact them actually get some 'real' (in person) support

Me - only about 5% of people who contact me by websites, social media, email, or phone don't get the opportunity to have a 'real' (in person) contact and support

Growth Hub - 87% customer satisfaction

Me - 98% customer satisfaction

Maybe this is why I was named as one of the UK's top10 business advisors by Government, and have a trophy cabinet of national and international awards, and the growth hubs don't?

Or maybe it's a case that there's are lies, damned lies, and statistics...?

on being professionally referred to as a 'tool'...

Throughout my professional life, I've been referred to as being/likened to all sorts of things: Darth Vader, Derren Brown, Shakespeare, a Guru, the A-Team, and even a 'neo-liberal stormtrooper'!

However, my most recent public naming was as a 'tool' in front of 50+ students (and twitter!) at Salford University's launch of their enterprise support programme for students and graduates.

I was there as a long-standing supporter of the University's enterprise support programmes and initiatives (although for the sake of some of my other clients, I should probably highlight that I do also work in a similar role within other universities and educational bodies...). The idea of the evening was to inspire and encourage a new intake of students to consider how enterprise could enhance their future options and opportunities, and to that end there were inspiration speakers, details about grant funding available, and pizza. My task was to get those people attending to have some practical experience of what 'being enterprising' might look and feel like in practice through quick activities and games.

However, what was probably the most important part of the event was the Q&A from students to us speakers - in preparing for what we delivered we could only try and second guess what might be most important and relevant to such a large and diverse group; but having time in the programme for open questions helped us to better understand what people's motivations and priorities were. And it was as part of this part of the event that there was a question about the role and value of advisers to a growing business. Jamil Khalil, the founder of Wakelet and keynote inspirational speaker, suggested that he viewed such advisers as 'tools' - in response, I openly wondered if he meant that in the context of a toolbox, or if it was a reflection of poor business support he'd received in the past...

Thankfully he clarified that it was the former, but it created an opportunity to highlight the importance to any enterprise or startup of needing to take multiple approaches: building your own toolbox of resources including professional advice being only part of what you need - there's also value in some of the startup and business planning processes, and my 'games' highlighted the critical need for both a good network of contacts and self-confidence.

So to my fellow advisers and enterprise supporters out there - let's celebrate and revel in being seen as 'tools' ;-)

Why I just did an 8-hour round trip to London by train for a 50 minute chat

I’m on my way back from London where I’ve just spent 50 minutes chatting with a medium sized charity about what I might be able to offer them if they took me on as a ‘critical friend’ to their senior management team. And I know that for most of the conversation, the charity was principally trying to figure out what a ‘critical friend’ might look like and do, rather than hearing how great I might be for them in that role… (they’ve been asked to recruit one by a one of their funders, but not had any guidance and not had any prior experience of what one is!).

I get the strong impression from some passing references made by the charity’s executive team during the chat that I’ve a relatively low chance of success in getting this work; the contract value means that I won’t really make any money on the work if I’m awarded it; and it’s quite a travel distance from my usual patch around the North West, Pennines, and Yorkshire -  so why did I even consider spending time on drafting the initial proposal and then committing to the cost and time of such apparently excessive travel?

1. They approached me direct. This wasn’t an open or advertised call for consultants to bid, but rather they did some pre-selection and research against the sorts of backgrounds that they knew they wanted their new ‘critical friend’ to have. It only seemed polite to reciprocate (and it was very flattering…)
2. The role of ‘critical friend’ to charities and other organisations is one that’s only just starting to be explored and introduced here in the UK, so it was a clear opportunity to be in the inside of this emergent trend and model to keep myself best informed, and also share some of my own experiences and insights (including likening the ‘critical friend’ to that of the historic ‘court jester’) that I’d otherwise struggle to do in not being a published academic or writer of books…
3. It was an opportunity to reflect on my experiences and skills within a different context and framework to that I usually find myself in – a valuable CPD opportunity in keeping myself ‘fresh’ and trying to avoid becoming ‘professionally complacent’
4. I had the time and resource to follow up their invitation: one of the things I think has meant that I’ve been able to develop and keep a successful and profitable freelance consultancy practice going for 13 years is having an inquisitive nature – if someone shows me a door that’s ajar and says they think it might be interesting for me to have a peek inside, I’ll always try to…

So – a mixture of good manners, the opportunity for business and professional development, and personal values, meant that I’ve just done something that I suspect most of my counterparts would have passed on without a second thought. Perhaps another reason why I’m labelled as being ‘not your typical consultant’ in the worlds of facebook and Instagram?

the Korean perspective... (I may be funnier than I think I am?)

I had the opportunity this summer to spend a week mentoring a cohort of South Korean social entrepreneurs as part of the UK leg of their international MBA. And while pictures have been shared on instagram, twitter, and such like, as to the various adventures and activities that people got up to, I thought it might be useful to reflect on what I think that South Korea can teach us about how we do social enterprise in the UK, having spent a week thinking about it from their perspective;

at the end of the week, all the entrepreneurs shared what we mentors had offered and challenged them over which has caused them to rethink either their business models and assumptions, or how they'll launch and scale their enterprises in the future. This was though all giving short presentations to us as the mentors, as well as to their fellow student entrepreneurs, and university professors. And while all agreed that they greatly valued the time we had been able to offer them as mentors, and shared something different in relation to their own specific enterprises, there seemed to be some common themes around:

• the benefits of mentoring in getting 'back to basics' - its good to have assumptions challenged, and start to simplify things to make them more manageable
• testing enterprise ideas with a wider group of mentors, all of whom have different backgrounds and perspectives, is valuable in identifying new options and opportunities
• having a range of mentors to draw upon (rather than a single mentor as many other enterprise support initiatives offer), allows access to a far wider range and number of contacts and other models and initiatives of direct relevance and benefit
• there's also a cultural difference as to what constitutes a 'social need' in South Korea that the UK would struggle to recognise as being relevant for a social enterprise to have as its mission, but perhaps this echoes some of the confusion we still have here in the UK as to the different ways in which we define and recognise a 'legitimate' social enterprise by the forms it can adopt?
• Many also seemed to espouse a new mantra that we mentors think may be attributable to their session with Nick Temple of Social EnterpriseUK - J.F.D.I.

• (and there were also some nice comments that students directly made about me as part of their presentations:
• "As we all came to realise, Adrian is very humorous"
• "Adrian was a great encouragement to my self-esteem as I realised that this enterprise will be the hardest thing I ever do in my life")

I also reflected on some of the themes that seemed to regularly come up as part of the mentoring sessions I was delivering. It's telling that these seem closely related to issues that are also particularly pertinent and relevant to all (social) enterprises in the UK today?:

1. Mapping and reporting the impact we create offers a range of benefits that we don't usually recognise it for:
1. it helps prioritise service and product development
2. it contributes to marketing activity
3. it helps to identify potential future customers who benefit from what we do, but aren't paying us!
2. Branding is an often undervalued and underused 'tool' in helping us to not only differentiate ourselves from the competition, but also between the services we offer were they are targeted at different customers and beneficiaries, to mitigate possible confusion about us in our marketplaces

so perhaps as a sector, social enterprise has more 'common currency' globally that it might think it has - but how can we encourage and support that? Initiatives such as this that are hosted by Sheffield University are by far the exception, but all involved recognise the immense value it offers to everyone who was a part of it.

(And I'm also indebted and grateful to Darren Chouings for pulling it all together, and also my fellow expert mentors - none of whom I'll share the embarrassing pics I took of you here...

Jamie Veitch

Dave Thornett

Morgan Killick

Nickala Torkington

Andi Stamp)

why I don't bother with social media analytics

WARNING: if you're a social media manager or consultant, you should probably stop reading now.

For the rest of you (and those brave enough to remain!), here's why I personally think that the industry around analytics of our on-line activity (page views, number of likes, followers, and such like) is potentially damaging to our respective enterprises. But as with all my ideas, I also recognise that this won't be true for everyone, and that it's a biased/prejudiced view that I hold which is based on my experiences to date (but which hasn't stopped from being nominated as the lead advisor in several funded local and national enterprise support programmes on using social media...)

1) a few years back I was identified as one of the top500 most influential people on twitter, but at the time had less than 1,000 followers (out of over 300 million users) and also (horror of horrors), didn't even have a smartphone to tweet from on the move! (I've also become a hashtag on twitter on several occasions!)

Conclusion: the engagement and relationships I try and nurture through twitter via conversations, etc, is what's important. Not the number of people who follow me (although it's always nice to have more to reassure my ego ;-)

2) I have a lovely website supported by Smart Bear, with google analytics running in the back of it. However the site's there not as a sales tool, but as part of my personal brand, and also as part of meeting clients and markets expectations of me. I know from conversations with clients and others that most people don't look at it (although that have are always complementary)

3) I've an active profile across 13 different social media channels (far too many to list here - but just got started on Vine!), because I recognise that not everyone likes twitter (but 300 million do!), not everyone gets on with facebook, some people are into slideshares, and others into hipster photos - as the work I do and support I offer sees in a wide variety of communities and sectors, I think it's important to show some respect where possible by engaging with clients through their preferred on-line channel (see point 2).

4) But ultimately, all the analytic reports I see always leave me asking "so what?". 

What's the point of thousands of sign ups if none of them want to actually talk with you or buy your product. What's the point of having more followers on twitter if you never get to meet them in person to find out what they like and how you can support each others endeavours in the future?

Of course, all of this is a very biased view drawn from my own experience and business model - I'm not an on-line retailer for whom I recognise such analytics are crucial in understanding where effort is being wasted in reaching customers and where to invest more time and resource.

So I'm writing this as a cautionary note, as I see too many entrepreneurs and enterprises getting caught up in the hype of analytics, when at best it's only a distraction to their business model.

I also like the way the vooza summed it all up in one of their typically excellent short vids debunking hype around trends and fashions in enterprise: 

turns out being one of the UK's top10 business advisors isn't as impressive as you might think...

One of the things that makes me a little unusual as a consultant is that wherever possible, I don't give my clients a bill - instead I prefer to work as an associate of other agencies who hold contracts with various funding bodies and can cover my fee on their behalf (a very equitable arrangement: groups can access the support they need, funders get their boxes ticked, and I get to keep the cats fed!).

And one of the bodies who I've been working with through this arrangement with for about 10 years now is the Plunkett Foundation - a body built on knowledge (rather than money), and who believe that democratic ownership and accountability of rural enterprises to/within their local communities makes them not only more sustainable, but more successful in addressing the social issues those communities face.

And although I've always had a good working relationship with them, I've never actually had any formal induction to 'the Plunkett way' - at least, not until now!

As part of their refreshing of their associate list and expanding this family of advisors who can be deployed throughout the country to support rural co-operative enterprises, they're having a roadshow to allow us to all start to meet each other (and get to grips with their new reporting systems!).

I was able to get to one of these events earlier this week, and (despite the lack of cake at lunchtime), found it a really enjoyable experience to be able to spend time with some of my peers and also reflect on the proud history and role Plunkett is committed to making today in improving rural lives together. It was also great to finally find out exactly what 'the Plunkett way' of doing this is, and to also realise that this family of Plunkett advisors I find myself being part of are a very exciting bunch. After all, where else would you find people who are:

- descendants of kings,

- tv celebrities,

- best selling authors,

- castle owners,

- vampire bat handlers,

- professional revolutionaries,

- football club club owners,

- supporters of Rochdale FC (the team my dad used to play for!),

- accidental train drivers,

- dog sitters for political party leaders, and

- speciality pig breeders?

I used to think that my opening professional introduction of being named as one of the UK's top10 business advisors was pretty impressive, but in light of the above, realise that there are far more exciting vocations and credits that get us excited. Thank goodness people are still calling me a 'social enterprise sex god' on twitter...

is the universe trying to tell me something?

Many people who've shared some of my professional life will know that I seem to be able to engage quite well with most people, and either be able to offer the support they need (however obscure or technical) or know someone who does.

I've always glibly explained it's "because my brain is wired funny", but a couple of recent events are making me wonder if it's actually because I may have inadvertently become the answer to life, the universe, and everything...

Most people know of the famous 'Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy' book, and that in it, the answer to life, the universe, and everything is revealed to be "42". Well, that same number seems to be starting to crop up in relation to me... the number of my twitter lists, my ranking on a delivery schedule - so this is where I turn to you, dear internet: should I consider taking up 'guru' status (something I've always tried to avoid in the past), or am I just suffering from too much 'Deep Thought'?

answers on a postcard, please (or failing that, the comments box below)

I came, I saw, I (possibly) embarrassed myself...

So I was there (as were lots of other people) - the first 5-day festivalof Social Enterprise hosted by Greenwich University (and pulled together by Harsha Patel who we can't thank enough for doing so!). And what's even more exciting was that I wasn't just there to heckle from the back seats and prop up the networking bar, I'd been invited to be part of the headline acts alongside some of social enterprise's rockstars.

And while others can tell you far better (and honestly) how I really was, and how useful and engaging my activities and support offered were, it strikes me that I may have been either very foolish or incredibly brilliant in my contributions as a keynote speaker to the closing debate - 'should all entrepreneurs be social entrepreneurs?'.

You see, many people I have the privilege to walk alongside for a time in encouraging and supporting them to realise their visions (both as individual entrepreneurs and sector bodies) regard me as a fine example of a 'social entrepreneur'. Except I don't think that I am one - a social entrepreneur is motivated by wanting to change the world for the better, and to earn some money along the way to keep the lights on and the cats fed. A 'traditional' entrepreneur has an idea for how to earn some money to keep the lights on and the cats fed... And I fall into the latter camp - following some questionable behaviour just over 10 years ago by a very large regional business in the sector, I'd relocated to the other end of the country and found myself without employment and a young family to support.

But having been raised the way I have, rather than sign on at the job centre (only 2 streets away), I began knocking on doors to find work (and have been hustling ever since). So you see, my motivation is about supporting my family - and part of that is not just keeping the lights on, but also trying to help leave the world is a slightly better place for my kids as they start to make their way into it. And part of how I try and live my life is also trying to manifest certain values and principles in how I work. All of which apparently make me indistinguishable from a social entrepreneur by my actions and impacts.

But what does it matter if people label me as something I don't think I am? If it doesn't get in the way of what I'm trying to achieve for myself and others, am I just having an existential mid-life crisis? Is it more important to consider how we act, and the impact we have on others, rather than what we call ourselves?

And I bared all of this publicly on stage at a national event in front of media, sector leaders, and hundreds of people who were also wondering of social enterprise is the right thing for them.

So - what do you think, was I incredibly clever, disruptive, and have moved the debate on to its next paradigm (never thought I'd use that word in a non-satirical context!), or have I just ruined any professional reputation and credibility I may have had...?

Initial reaction in the room and on twitter seems to be positive - but I think my duck may have had a lot to do with that ;-)

the truth about LinkedIN recommendations and cake

So - most people use LinkedIn to a lesser or greater extent; I'm a fan it it myself, having been around long enough to have had a 'magic rolodex' of people's business cards back in the day that were heavily annotated, only to swear when I'd call one of them up and find that they'd moved job - without their new business card I'd lost them as a contact. 

Until LinkedIn...

Now, over the years, LinkedIn has added various features, and the one that seems very popular is "skills endorsements" where you can 'one-click' on a contact to share what you think they're good at. And people seem to have been very generous in using this to highlight that a lot of them think I'm pretty hot at social enterprise, entrepreneurship, strategy, policy, and governance. But I also know that LinkedIn automates a lot of its site and that people will be offered the option to 'endorse click' me whenever they log in - so how do I know people really mean it?

Well, I had an idea that I've just started to test - I've created a new skillset for my list of 'one click endorsements': "eating cake". And you know what? I've just been endorsed for it by the lovely Michelle Rigby (who I've not had opportunity to share cake with yet, but who has obviously heard of my legendary abilities in this regard!).

So - LinkedIn recommendations: take them with a pinch of salt, but don't be afraid to have some fun with them :-D 

is the honeymoon for CICs over?

I’ll begin by outing myself (again) on the subject of Community Interest Companies (CICs) – I’ve personally never been a big fan of them for all sorts of reasons that include:

• their not offering any features that are truly unique,
• are generally not advantageous in securing income,
• usually allow very weak governance to emerge,
• offer little security for their Members and Directors in light of their regulators’ powers to overrule them...

(all of which are detailed in previous blog posts), BUT I have supported some clients to gain this ‘hallowed status’ and am always pleased (really!) when an enterprise proves me wrong on why it’s the best form for them to adopt.

However, I’m wondering of the wider world may be catching up with me now in light of trending data published by the CIC Regulator themselves that suggests CICs may be increasingly seen as a ‘bad apple’ by those who set them up, and those they engage with...

You see, I’m a geek in oh, so many things, but particularly in the governance of organisations of all types, and as a result, find the annual reports from regulatory bodies fascinating reading. And despite my personal misgivings about the CIC form, I’ve always said that the CIC Regulator published perhaps the best designed and most accessible annual report of all the regulators. And this year I decided to dig into some of the stats they publish in a little more detail –

I looked at the period 2011/12 to 2013/14 (3 years) to see what trends there might be amongst CICs that are emerging and it’s not an encouraging picture:

• as context, over the last 3 years, the total numbers of CICs have increased by 44%;
• but last year, over 10% of all CICs on the register were wound up – a figure that’s also growing year on year (and has floated around the 9% mark in previous years);
• and the biggest reason (70%) for CICs being wound up is that they’ve been struck off the public register by Companies House for failing to meet their associated statutory legal duties! - which amongst other things means that the Directors of them may subsequently face difficulties with being able to act as Directors or Trustees of other organisations as well as against their own personal credit ratings;
• and the number of formal complaints being made about CICs to the CIC regulator has also been doubling year on year as a proportion of all CICs on the register

So – is all well in the land of CICs? More are currently registered every year than are being wound up, but the trends in each suggest that most CICs currently don’t make it past 5 years. And with a growing trend of CICs failing to fulfil their basic statutory legal responsibilities, it’s perhaps illustrative that many are adopting this legal form on the basis of poorly informed advice and guidance. It also perhaps suggests that CICs are approaching a plateau in terms of their prevalence, and are not in fact the ‘magic bullet’ to solving the sectors’ woes and concerns that many have presented them as being? (but as with all things, I’m open to being proved wrong of this...) 

UPDATE - 6th Nov
after sharing a link to this post with the CIC Association, there's been a clear response offered against my closing invitation to 'be proved wrong about this': http://cicassoc.ning.com/profiles/status/show?id=2691611%3AStatus%3A72861

great co-op myths of our time (or why we need more competition and less collaboration...)

Co-ops: they’re great, right? Everybody seems to love them, and they’re often held up as models of enterprise that can fulfil some of the most challenging aspects of our societies: creating sustainable employment, empowering the disenfranchised, addressing poverty, ...

But sadly, there are many myths and mistruths perpetuated about them through ignorance, which are probably part of the reason why co-op enterprises have never really ‘taken off’ in this country like they have in others, and are often treated with trepidation by the wider business community.

There’s plenty of material already out there (if you only look or ask for it) that helps to dispel some of these myths that relate to decision-making needing to involve everyone, all employees needing to be paid the same wage, etc, but I wanted to pick up on one that seems to be creeping in to not just rumours about co-ops, but also has implications for the wider economy too: competition.

Co-ops are defined by a set of universal values and principles, which include ‘co-operation amongst co-operatives’: the sense that the sector grows stronger by actively supporting each itself and each other. But this isn’t the same as not competing with each other as some seem to think (based on a few recent twitter conversations...)

Competition, if open and honest, between co-ops is actually quite important and vital: it forces them to constantly question assumptions about how things should be, what customers want, and if there might be a more effective way of achieving the end goals. That doesn’t mean co-ops have to undercut or metaphorically backstab each other, but as part of co-operating with each other, it should mean that there’s a healthy and open discussion about what each might be able to do that’s different to the others, and which will ultimately also mean more choice and benefit for customers and the wider community and society.

Competition stops us stagnating and being overtaken, and surely better to be in ‘healthy competition’ with people who share our underlying values, than a faceless corporation whose only interest is in making as much money out of people as possible?

And this sense of competition being something we should encourage amongst ourselves shouldn’t be limited to just co-ops - collaboration is being increasingly encouraged between businesses within all sectors and industries, so as with so much else, the co-op movement would seem to have some useful learning for other these other marketplaces and enterprises to draw upon and be inspired by.

 

Competition – it shouldn’t be a dirty word for co-ops, but rather one which should be encouraged and celebrated as a means to make sure we keep upping our game so we can have ever greater impacts on our communities and the wider world.