why cowbells, 3-year olds, and punching bags are a better way to create social enterprise policy

"We need to get more experimental with creating national policy" - is the encouraging takeaway I took from my recently being part of the global Social Enterprise World Forum Policy Forum event.

Showcasing a range of insights and experiences from around the world, the Forum offered a rare opportunity for people within all parts of the wider social enterprise ecosystem (from start-up social entrepreneurs, to global policy managers in the UN), who wouldn't normally be able to meet each other to question, challenge, encourage, and inspire in ways that don't usually happen.

It was also far from what some might have expected in terms of how research was shared, ideas provoked, and people engaged, as the title of this blog post suggests!

Listening to the debates; reflecting with others in the speed networking slots; (and yes, for those of you who know me, I was also doing lots in the chats of each session I joined); it struck me that a lot of policy we've seen in the UK over the last 20-30 may actually not have been that great for the impacts they've created.

Sharing stories through the conversations made me realise/re-enforced my ideas that:

- the reason we have an apparent glut of social investment that most lenders are struggling to 'get out', is because it was a government policy agenda that said it would be a 'magic bullet' that the sector needed (but with little research or evidence to substantiate this)?

- it was also government policy that gave us the Community Interest Company (CIC), at a time when it admitted that the wider sector had no stated need or appetite for any new legal forms. It also created them in a way that simply 're-badged' various existing company features as something 'new and unique'. Perhaps this the is reason why CICs seem to have always struggled to have more longevity than regular private businesses, and are usually more reliant on grants than charities are?

- and those early policy agendas also drove the impetus for social enterprises to be delivering public sector contracts: yet the researches that have been published in subsequent years point to most social enterprises not using this as a mainstay of how they trade, and for those that do, they often do so at a trading loss?

But despite this, having had separate policies as we have, has meant the profile and awareness of the concept of social enterprise is higher than it might have otherwise been.

However... I was also reminded as I traded stories with others in the Forum, that most of the research about the specific needs of social enterprises shows that they have more in common with private businesses than not - and in the very early days of the explosion of interest and activity around social enterprise (at the turn of the millennium), it was 'regular' business support bodies and services, and the policies that informed them, that sought to integrate the majority of support for this 'new' sector.

There was subsequently a 'parting', but now, 20-ish years on, I'm starting to see some signs that there's thought and interest in exploring how they might be re-integrated (through the likes of Growth Hubs, Shared Prosperity Fund programmes, etc). 

And perhaps this emerging possible refocussing of policy is coming about because we've now had sufficient time to understand the impact of these early policies? As one of the key speakers suggested, "it can take at least 5-10 years to understand the impact and effects of a policy, so we need to treat them as more experimental". In those early days of social enterprise, there was scant data to base policies on, in comparison to what we now know and understand - so maybe policy makers need to start being braver in resetting the paradigms that they're working with? 

However, creating such a shift will take time and effort - and for those making the policies, represents a scaring foraying into new unknowns.

Maybe the best way we can be part of bringing this change about, was an idea shared that social enterprises might best create influence amongst policy makers by 'stealth': offering and asking to engage in staff secondment schemes, so that those informing the design of future infrastructure get first-hand experience of the realities of how it would be likely to be actually experienced by those it's intended to benefit. This may not be the usual 'showy' way that we're encouraged to try and lobby and advocate (with huge petitions, and PR stunts), but reminds us that everyone in the wider (eco)systems are ultimately human beings, and we can best get things done by engaging and building relationships with each other as such.

For more reflections on the Forum, see - https://sewfonline.com/empowering-rural-communities-and-youth-sewf-policy-forum-highlights/ 

I'm lovin' it (but I'm not sure I should?)

"What's your motivation for doing this?" is a key question I ask new and emerging social enterprises and social entrepreneurs, in start-up programmes for them that I'm invited to support from time to time.

And while everyone always talks about impact in some way, there will always be some who reply that it's because as a social enterprise they can create more impact than a private business can. And for those people, I set a challenge, that (so far) no-one has ever been able to beat:

"Go and read up on McDonald's UK's impact - and then come back and tell me how you're not ashamed when you compare yourself to them as a private, for-profit, business."

In the 20 years of my setting this challenge, no-one has ever come back to me.

That's because McDonalds UK has done a pretty good job of:

• examining how they've designed their supply chain and invested in their suppliers; 
• thought about the behaviours of their customers and staff at a local level in how they can be the best 'corporate neighbour'; 
• as an employer, designed processes and systems which (amongst other things) mean they regularly win awards as one of the best large employers to work for, and also won the contract to train all of the changemaker volunteers at the last London Olympics (to the shock of all volunteering support and training bodies); 
• have a strong stance on animal welfare; 
• model a lot of good and best practice in how they're approaching how they manage their impact on the natural environment; 
• undertake national programmes to encourage childhood literacy; 
• are the biggest non-charitable supporter of community sports; 
• and the list goes on...

But they don't seem to use any of the above as part of their core marketing messages or reasons why we should eat with them (in contrast to the cause-relating-marketing messaging of most organisations in the social economy) - they're simply doing these things because they recognise that there's a strong business case for them to, other than what their customers seem to prioritise in their buying decisions.

But why am I sharing this here, now, if I've been apparently so enthralled by this fast food chain for so long?

Well, they've recently published what I think may be the first impact report that takes a 50-year perspective (organisations usually only publish their impact reports based on the last year, or a specific funded project) -   

https://www.mcdonalds.com/content/dam/sites/uk/nfl/pdf/uploads/mcdonalds-at-50-social-and-economic-impact-report.pdf  

(They've also been quietly producing annual impact reports since 2016 on all aspects of their business model, and the impacts they're creating -

https://corporate.mcdonalds.com/corpmcd/our-purpose-and-impact/impact-strategy-and-reporting/performance-reports.html)

Which can't help me start to wonder - as well as setting a quite high bar on what impact and good it's possible to create within a trading model that isn't reliant on grant income or support (as many social enterprises are), is McDonalds now shaming the social economy further by how its approaching understanding its impact from such a 'whole life' perspective?

However, perhaps I should share a slight possible bias about my apparent extolling of the Golden Arches in this post - although I think there's better tasting burgers to be had elsewhere, and will always prioritise eating out in locally owned independent cafes and restaurants when I can, we do share the same landmark birthday. 

And as an unpaid carer who's also self-employed, it was in one of their restaurants that I chose to (belatedly) celebrate mine with them, by treating myself to their birthday 'cake'. 

chocolate, taboos, impossible choices, and tax - the present and possible futures of freelancers with caring roles?

Each October is the global Freelance Business Month – a coming together of freelancers from different countries to share encouragement, support, insight, and general building up of each other.

This year, I was invited to lead one of the sessions, to explore the ways in which freelancers from around the world who are also unpaid carers approach balancing the often-conflicting demands of these roles.

In the run up to it, the topic seemed to be drawing a lot of interest, based on responses, comments, and reshares to social media posts about it on different platforms; and, on the day, the number of windows in my zoom app from people joining only just all fitted onto my screen…

As part of the conversations, everyone agreed that it would be important to try and capture some of the stories shared, as an encouragement and support to our peers who are similarly juggling these roles and circumstances - which is what you're now reading in this blog post.

Caring around the world

We opened with a brief reflection on what unpaid caring and freelancing looks like in different countries. Based on my own researches over the last few years, we know that in the UK, unpaid carers who are also freelancers:

• Number in the region of approximately 500,000;
• Are twice as likely to be in poverty than their counterparts who are able to be in some form of salaried work, and that’s largely because we suffer a ‘caring penalty’ in the form of lost earnings of up to £20,000 each year because of our caring responsibilities;
• Were usually freelancing before gaining a caring responsibility, in contrast to popular belief;
• Aren’t recognised or offered any rights in law (as other carers are), and as a result have no caring or business services designed in recognition of their specific circumstances.

Others in the session shared a similar lack of recognition and support available in their respective countries. 

The stress is universal, unavoidable, and causes problems

Some talked about how the pressures and stresses of taking on and managing a caring role can mean that we may be more prone to making mistakes in how we manage our affairs as a freelancer - one person shared that the process of becoming a carer meant that they were so distracted during one of their annual filings of accounts, they are now paying more tax than they should be (and at a time when they are now also earning less because of the caring role).

This theme of enhanced stress was echoed by all, in wanting there to be a greater understanding and recognition of the psychological stresses and mental strains that becoming (and acting as) a carer places on us as freelancers. As one person shared in the chat: 

“It [being a carer] seems to be both an obligation and a choice. There is also the choice to NOT be a carer, but…”

Balancing it all 

We moved on to sharing some of the ways in which we’ve been approaching creating our own balances to keep our earnings as a freelancer continuing, with fulfilling the responsibilities of having a caring role (or in some instances as was shared, having multiple caring roles! One freelancer shared how they’re now the sole unpaid carer for multiple family members in their immediate household):

• Some have chosen to purposefully limit their earnings/avoid certain types of work and clients as part of trying to reduce the increased stress that being a carer brings;
• Some shared how they have identified and accessed counselling support for themselves as part of managing the stress, via memberships of professional freelancing bodies – but all agreed that we should all be trying to access this through other means where we may be able to, as part of trying to manage our personal well-being in this dual role;
• Some shared that despite having less earnings, they have reduced their personal disposable even more in order to pay for private health care plans so that they can better manage their own health needs around those of the people they care for, and in working as a freelancer.

We also talked about how there was a need for better education and understanding about the needs and circumstances of freelancers in our position – 

“if you’re not in the situation, you would never understand just how it feels and what you’re faced with having to manage”.

Which in turn, led to a consensus on the importance that as a community of freelancers we need to take opportunities where we can (and are able/comfortable to) to share our stories in breaking the taboos around unpaid caring as a freelancer, if we’re ever going to be better recognised and encouraged as such, (which includes finding encouragement in/from our peers).

This led to a lively discussion around if / how / when to disclose to our clients that we have a caring role.

'Coming out' as a carer

Nearly all present stated that they’d told at least one client they work with about their caring responsibilities, and that in the main, it strengthened the working relationship by that client then seeing them as subsequently being more authentic – and in our also disclosing this in ways that included examples of how we would mitigate the risk of this impacting on our work with them, that we’re seen as also being more trustworthy, too.

One freelancer shared a story of a how, after disclosing their caring role to a client, the client had stated that they wouldn’t be able to work with them after all, owing to the nature of how the wider programme that they were managing had been designed. However, the following week, the client returned to say that after reflecting with their own colleagues, they’d decided to redesign their programme so that the freelancer could be commissioned to support the delivery of it after all.

This was heard by all in the session as a massive encouragement as it showed:

• If we openly work with them, clients can better understand our circumstances and respond – but they'll probably have never before thought about this, until we forced them to;
• A validation for the value and worth of how that freelancer is viewed by their client.

Another unexpected outcome shared in the session by another freelancer after they ‘came out’ as a carer to a client, was that client suddenly being able to share their own caring story with someone who they knew would ‘get it’ – it built more points of connection with a fellow human being, and highlighted that it’s not just freelancers who struggle to be able to find ways to talk about the realities of being a carer in workplace settings.

What's good for freelancers who care is good for all of us (and vice versa)

Finally, we shared our ‘magic wish’ with each other – the one thing that we would like to see happen or change for freelancers who also having caring responsibilities:

• More chocolate to help us manage our stress;
• More understanding from clients and governments;
• Having some form of basic universal income;
• Bringing in an equality of access to benefits and supports that employees who are carers can access, but which we as freelancers who are also carers currently can’t;
• Changes to the tax systems as part of a wider recognition of financial supports freelancers need, owing to the displacement/loss of earnings that having a caring role forces.

Interestingly, many of these wishes are relevant (to lesser degrees) to all freelancers in all countries, regardless of them having an unpaid caring role or not – which suggests that any changes introduced to support freelancers with caring roles, would also be of benefit the wider freelancing community too (and vice versa).

And none of what was shared by people seemed to be specific to any one country – which suggests that our experiences are pretty universal, meaning that it would be easy to learn from and support each other more in progressing these.

 

Special thanks and recognition 

I'd like to thank those of you who were part of the conversation for your openness, honesty, and bravery in not only talking about your caring stories and experiences, but also for encouraging me to share this all on with the wider world.

I'd also like to recognise those who were there who shared that they're at the start of their own personal caring journey as an existing freelancer, for your proactiveness in seeking opportunities and ways that you can better support yourself and inform the choices you're starting to face (I wish I'd had your foresight when I started my own caring journey 7 years ago...)

And, my thanks again to the organisers of this years’ FBM for allowing me to host this space in it, and for also changing the format this year to a ‘free for all’ access – instead, asking for donations to support pancreatic cancer: https://ti.to/freelance/fbm24/with/freelance-business-month-donation

(if you didn’t already know, freelancing is one of the ‘life activities’ that puts us at an increased risk of developing cancer in the future! https://www.freelanceinformer.com/news/cancer-alert-40-of-cases-linked-to-lifestyle-freelancers-are-you-at-risk/)

 

how desperate unpaid carers really are...

Carers UK recently published research into how many unpaid carers are in poverty (spoiler: being a carer means you're x2 as likely to be in poverty than if you're not).

Despite being lauded by government and other agencies in recognition of the roughly £160 BILLION that we save the government EACH YEAR, there's still plenty of disgruntlement amongst us for the lack or recognition and support we receive in turn - for example: for those eligible to qualify to be able to apply for carers allowance (plot twist: despite having sole unpaid caring responsibilities for several family members in my immediate household, I'm only eligible to receive £6 each week), this only offers about £2 per hour that we can receive in recognition of the time we spend caring, which prevents for from being 'economically active' otherwise: earning money to support ourselves as others can. For comparison, the legal minimum wage we would have to be paid for any job, however menial, starts at £6.40 per hour.

The report by Carers UK digs into this topic in painful and shocking detail. And while others have done far better jobs that I in looking at the wider dimensions of how carers suffer inescapable poverty because of the nature of the role: https://numbereighteeninthecorner.blog/2024/09/19/carer-servitude/, - I'm focussing here on what this latest research tells us about how being an unpaid carer affects those of us who are also self-employed. 

Now, before we get into Carers UK's research, to 'set the scene' here, self-employment in general is:

• one of the worst things you can do for your mental well-being; 
• likely to mean you earn less for doing the same job than if you were salaried;
• worse than being employed for your long-term health.

And yet roughly 500,000 of us who are unpaid carers are choosing this way of working on top of being a carer, which in itself is recognised as being:

• highly stressful;
• leaves us socially isolated;
• bad for our mental well-being;
• roughly, up to £20,000 worse off EACH YEAR. 

So lets do the reveal: unpaid carers who are also self-employed are x2 more likely to be in poverty than their employed counterparts, who also have caring responsibilities (and to 'rub salt in the wound', we don't get the same legal recognition or protection as they do...) 

So why are so many of us pursuing this apparent nonsense of pushing ourselves even further 'over the edge' by 'doing' self-employment alongside our caring role, when all the evidence above says it's the worst thing anyone could do to themselves?

As Carers UK research highlights, nearly half of people who were salaried before becoming carers are forced to give up their jobs, because they find the two roles aren't compatible. 

The current rules on carers allowances (assuming you're eligible to be able to be apply for it, then and lucky enough to get it) means that you can't earn more than £151 a week. Combined with the max carers allowance of £81.90, this would mean you have a maximum income potential of roughly £12,000 a year to live (covering housing, food, utilities, clothing, etc). That's less than half of what's recognised as a person needing to earn in order to have a minimum acceptable standard of living. This means that many carers simply can't afford to apply for/live on carers allowance, and as previously highlighted, quite a lot of demands and requirements of being an employee are incompatible with being a carer.

Which means that short of picking the winning numbers on the lottery, or robbing a bank, the only other choice is either living in deep poverty or doing self-employment (although as the research shows, doing self-employment is no guarantee you won't escape the poverty trap).

And I've also heard of some of my contemporaries in this space who've openly shared that taking on this most stressful of all employments was the best way they could find to help them find a counter-balance to the stresses and responsibilities of being a carer. Which takes us back to the earlier point of how tough being a carer is - but how tough must it be, for the most stressful of all employments to be seen as a type of respite from it?  

So for anyone out there who's also a carer as well as being self-employed: I hope you take some comfort from this post, in it offering you a recognition of how tough life really is for you. And for anyone who isn't: I hope you can use some of the feelings that this post has (hopefully) stirred up in you to act in support for carers of all types. 

how better support for carers could instantly see growth in 20% of businesses across the economy

I've written in the past about how unpaid carers are usually invisible and overlooked, and that for those of us who are also self-employed, we're even more so, because we're not even recognised in law (unlike our counterparts who may be in salaried employment, and despite there being an equal likelihood that if you are able to work while also an unpaid carer, you'll be doing it in this way).

I've also shared the statistics about how this lack of support for those of us who are (trying to) trade and maintain caring roles, means that 'UK plc' is at least £5billion a year worse off than it might otherwise be.

But I've recently also started to have conversations with some different local business support bodies', and start-up programme, managers who are beginning to recognise that they perhaps aren't doing anything/enough to consider the design of their offers and encouragements with regards to the circumstances and realities of people with caring responsibilities.

This came to the fore for me recently, as part of an event organised by the Collective Leadership Group, who'd invited me to showcase some of my research and efforts around the realities of being an unpaid carers and an entrepreneur.

As part of this event, Hatch Enterprise shared the findings of a recent study that they'd undertaken into the experiences and barriers people face in relation to the concept and idea of entrepreneurship. One of their question prompts from their surveys in this was about barriers entrepreneurs were experiencing that were hindering and limiting the success of their respective ventures. As well as questions around gender, geography, ethnicity, and disability (which remain depressingly entrenched), their survey also asked about caring responsibilities:

For me, this is an exciting chart, because it highlights and challenges:

1) the extent to which all existing businesses are being constrained, because of a lack of relevant and appropriately designed support available to them by business support providers and caring bodies;

2) that there's near parity in how men and women are affected - caring is usually associated with women, but as I've been seeing over the last few years, there's far more men doing it than might be otherwise expected.

The wider session was also encouraging, as as I shared my notes and ideas based on the research and evidences I'm identifying around this topic, people agreed that there's a lot of 'blindness' to not only how carers are thought about (or not) when programmes and projects to support different groups of people and communities and being designed and run; but also to the very limited and outdated stereotypes about the scope and range of understanding that most people have in relation to what caring roles can look like and involve, and who has them.

 

too many badges for my own good?

Anyone who's seen the opening page of my impact report this year, will have been overwhelmed by the number of logos of bodies that I'm a signatory to/accredited by (and this doesn't include the even longer list of professional memberships I have!).

There's a story behind each one as to why I specifically made the effort to be able to show it off next to my name (in time, cost, and energy) - but none of which are to do with it helping me to win work (my feedback from clients is that they've never been interested in this type of thing when it comes to deciding who to commission to support them).

And I'm wondering if there's therefore a parallel here with the various accreditations, honours, and recognitions that I have in the form of the tins of 'alphabet soup' that I can arrange either side of my name - they've similarly never impacted on the work I've won, and if anything, most of the groups, communities, and people I work with find them a turn-off...

But I'm proud of these recognitions from different bodies as to how I conduct my business, and the impacts it creates (otherwise they wouldn't have accepted my applications to them), so don't want to completely hide them away... which leaves me wondering what the right balance is in shouting about them: both for the value of what they represented, and that they've endorsed me as being 'alright' by their standards.

If you're curious about any of these 'badges', etc, see below for the links to each: 

Organisation of Responsible Business

Charter for Inclusive Entrepreneurship

Prompt Payment Code

Good Business Charter

Fair Tax pledge

Armed Forces Covenant

Co-operativesUK

Social Value UK

Institute of Small Business and Entrepreneurship (ISBE)

Voluntary Sector Studies Network (VSSN)

UK Society for Co-operative Studies

Locality

Better Business Network (BBN)

Federation of Small Businesses (FSB)

Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, manufactures, and commerce (RSA)

Shakespeare, Einstein, and now me - how imposter syndrome has been understood and managed through the centuries

After I accidentally wrote and self-published my book about imposter syndrome, I found that people started to want to invite me to guest on their podcasts to talk about it - and rather than see this as an opportunity for some additional promo (although that never hurts, right?), I saw it as an opportunity to reflect on my research and ideas afresh, from new critical perspectives.

Recently, this saw me conversing with fellow RSA Fellow Dr Nia Thomas, on her Knowing Self, Knowing Others series - you can 'listen again' to the whole episode here: 

https://podcast.knowingselfknowingothers.co.uk/2031015/15446370-73-unraveling-impostor-syndrome-self-doubt-and-personal-growth-with-adrian-ashton

And she's also taken out some snippets about how to rob banks, the risks of lemon juice, etc that came up during our conversation on her TikTok channel here:

https://www.tiktok.com/@knowingselfknowingothers 

But for those who would rather have the main headlines from it - my listening back highlighted how 'imposter syndrome':

• can act as a form of protection - both for ourselves, and others;
• is sometimes weaponised against us by others for their own agendas and aims;
• has emerged as a social construct, and as such can usually be more limiting than helpful;
• is linked to a wider conspiracy theories;
• and is a truth illusion: not only with reference to its own origin story, but also in how this 'illusion' is subsequently being perpetuated...

I also found myself referencing Shakespeare (for his guidance on how we balance our understanding of our own self, with not becoming paralysed with what we start to recognise and realise), and Einstein (for how he managed his own feelings of imposterism) - which shows that these feelings aren't new and were otherwise waiting to be discovered by Clance and Innes in their 1970s paper, but that we've perhaps simply started to get better at having the vocabulary to talk about more, and to recognise how they interconnect with our wider selves and others.

If you're interested to see how Nia's own reflections on our conversation pulled out different themes and prompts, you can check out her blog post on it here: 

https://knowingselfknowingothers.substack.com/p/top-takeaways-tuesday-unraveling 

I also talked about why it is I sometimes feel uncomfortable walking into a room full of women, but you'll have to listen to the podcast for the answer to that tease...