the late Christmas special from 2024 (aka the one where other people say what I did last year - part 2)

OK - so I'm normally known for always hitting deadlines, and getting things done in a timely fashion, even when the odds are stacked against me.

(And although this time it's slipped a little, I don't think it matters that much.)

If you cast your minds back a mere few weeks to the middle(ish) of December last year, you'll (hopefully) recall that that's when we started to see people sharing posts on social media, and sending out newsletters, with their 'greatest hits' of the year.

I try to do similar myself every so often - but I always try and do it in a different way...

That's because I'm concerned that how everyone else seemed to be doing their own, means they were writing about what they felt was the most impactful and enjoyable things over the year - but that risks such an annual reminiscence becoming no more than a self-congratulatory ego boost..?

So I tried a different approach/experiment:

I used AI to review all of my activity on social media over the year (what I'd been posting about, what of that caught the most interest and response from people, etc), and also a repeat of my occasional adapted 360-degree feedback (the one where I ask a random selection of my contacts one seemingly simple and benign question).

The AI (CoAuthor, if you're wondering) suggested that, by the numbers and data, my most important things in 2024 were to do with:

- challenging accepted wisdom (about imposter syndrome; where the best support for social enterprises actually is; the secret truth about business plans that no-one ever tells you; and other things)

- making an impact both locally and nationally (based on recognitions I was awarded during the year from various bodies)

And I was particularly taken with how this AI summed up its profiling of my year in its final overarching report - having been accused of being many things over the course of my working life to date, it picked up on the reports of my death (the first time someone's suggested I've actually kicked the bucket!) that had being greatly exaugurated:

"To everyone working to make business better - whether you're transforming organizations from within or challenging systems from without - remember that being misunderstood is often a sign you're onto something important. Just try not to be mistaken for being dead while doing it."

https://coauthor.studio/rewind/z6WVn8

ChatGBT seemed to struggle more, when I asked it to summarise either my achievements, or highlights over the year. This is because, as it kept telling me when I asked it in different ways, "specific details about his projects and initiatives are not extensively documented in the available sources". Which suggests that I'm relatively coy about who the groups are that I work with, in comparison with other consultant-types - that's because I've always maintained that it should be my clients story to tell about themselves, I'm there to help them along the way, not use them as banners to promote myself with. (And also some of the projects I get involved in have a high degree of sensitivity for various reasons, so it's either dangerous, taboo, or otherwise improper for me to talk about them...!)

And the 'real human beings' who picked up on this 'game', and were able to offer what they were appreciative of during 2024, because of their contact with me during the year. They talked about:

• "This is a great idea to do on ourselves - and I want to thank you very publicly for all the incredible work you are doing about self-employed carers. Definitely something to celebrate!"
• "You have really helped to make our project [supporting local charities and social enterprises] a success through your overall contribution to it - your are our "go to" person for work related to CICs and trading, as we know you have much experience in these areas: after past experience of seeing groups get poor advice in these areas from other consultants and advisers has left us nervous, it's a great to now be able to feel confident that if I refer a group to you I know that they are in safe hands."
• "It's all your LinkedIn posts that I actually enjoy reading." 
• "You're able cut through all the 'noise', personalities, and BS, in any piece of work to get the job done on time and on budget".  

All of which leads me to conclude, I think, that 2024 was a year in which I managed to keep challenging truth illusions that hold people and organisations back without their realising it; continued to make a difference for individuals, communities, and ecosystems, in ways that they enjoyed and felt more confident by*; and also managed to avoid dying.

Ritual reflections like these are important - they provoke us to pause and look back; to try and find encouragements for the uncertainties ahead; draw learning to help us better navigate the next chapters; and ultimately make some more sense of this thing called 'life' (however we may be experiencing it).

My way of reflecting on this last year is probably novel, and wasn't without risk - but it hopefully helped me to be more honest, and kept me connected with other people that I'd shared it with. After all - whatever business we're in, it's all Human-to-Human in the end... 

*As Bananarama once sang: "it ain't what you do, it's the way that you do it, and that's that gets results"

** For part 1 of this blog: https://thirdsectorexpert.blogspot.com/2024/12/the-one-where-other-people-say-what-i.html 

after 20 years, it's time to go to the toilet

My business is 20 years old.

20 years! Only about 10% of enterprises that start-up get this far. 

To put this in perspective - when I started out, smartphones didn't exist! (it would be another year before the first tweet was posted; 2 years before the first iPhone was released on the world; and 3 years before Dropbox was launched. The typical best internet speed was 1Mb compared to around 900Mb today - we had to rely on using sharpened bones to scratch messages onto stones, and then hope people picked those stones up when we threw them at them).

Now, it turns out that the material associated with this particular anniversary is porcelain - something that most of us here in Britain associated with toilets.

But for me to have gotten this far, porcelain actually seems an apt simile for me:

• it has a high elasticity - to be able to keep up with all the changes in the world over the last 2 decades, the range of work I do, and types of organisations I support across all sectors, means I've had to be able to easily keep stretching myself.
• it has considerable strength and hardness - I've pushed hard on some things over the years, often to personal and professional criticism and opposition. This includes: (successfully) challenging CIC legislation; publishing a book that exposes most of the claims that people make about 'imposter syndrome' to be unproven and/or not based in any factual evidences; shining a brighter light on the 500,000+ unpaid carers who are discriminated against by all the bodies that are supposed to be supporting them because they're the only type of carer who aren't recognised in law for the sole reason that we're also self-employed; and calling out the apparent unprofessional practices of some social investors, which are damaging the wider sector; to name but a few.  
• it's translucent - I've openly published details of how I'm creating (or not) impacts of different types each year; and also been honest in my blog posts about when and where I've gotten things wrong.  
• and it has a high resistance to shock - if you've followed my blog over the years, you'll know that since becoming self-employed, my family has been made homeless twice; my father (who lives at the other end of the country) has almost died twice; I've navigated a difficult divorce; been investigated for tax fraud by HMRC three times (and cleared every time); had 'unannounced police visits' late at night; and so on. So much so, that the few people who know just how much 'shock' I've had to respond to and work through over these last 2 decades, are all amazed that I'm not only still in business, but not needed to be admitted anywhere...

So I'm actually pretty chuffed to be associated with porcelain.

But I also didn't want to miss the opportunity to try and mark this milestone - so, linking back to the toilet analogy, I've decided to twin my office toilet with a school in Uganda via https://toilettwinning.org/

25% of all human beings today don't have somewhere safe, clean, and hygienic to go to the toilet. Not only does this create all sorts of associated 'bio-hazards', it strips fellow people of their dignity. And if schools don't have toilets, then kids will find ways not to go there for those reasons, and as a result, lose the chance for education and so lose the future that they could/should have had, including the opportunity to break generational poverty.

So the next time you're paying a visit to the loo this year, please think of me and what you might be able to do to similarly 'be more porcelain'; and maybe if you might also be able find a similar excuse to twin your toilet with someone else's. 

Caring and screwed - how the government criminalises and forces unpaid carers into poverty (and traps them there)

It seems to be a recurring cyclical message from government of all colours - their recognition of the value and importance of those of us who provide unpaid care to our family, friends, and neighbours.

But recent a recent National Audit Office report into the 'carer's allowance scandal' (how unpaid carers have been overpaid benefits and were seemingly refusing to pay the government back), reveals that the actions of our government (whichever colour badge they wear) completely contradict these expressions and apparent commitment of support for us:

Earlier in 2024, the right to Carers Leave for salaried employees was introduced, as part of an attempt to prevent people being forced to quit their jobs because of the often impossible task of having to balance an employers needs and expectations, with the needs of the person/people we care for. However, most of us who would be eligible to ask for this new legal right can't afford to do so, as it's unpaid - and as carers we're already more likely to be in poverty (even while working) that non-carers. This means that roughly 600 people EVERY DAY are still being forced to leave paid work.   

The actual design of the carers allowance benefit (at the heart of this 'scandal') means 91% of us aren't eligible to even begin to apply for it (I'm statemented as the sole unpaid carer for 3 immediate family members, but can't meet the qualifying criteria of it to even begin the application form). And if you already receive a state pension, you're automatically ineligible for it!

If you are lucky enough to be able to apply for carers allowance, and be awarded it, then you can't have a combined total personal income of more than £12,200 (made up of the roughly £8,000 cap on what you can earn, and the approximate £4,200 of carers allowance payments). Compare that to the national average salary of £37,000 (government's office of national statistics) and poverty line calculated by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation of £28,000 to have a minimum standard quality of life. And to further 'rub salt in the wound', if you do get this support for yourself, the person you're caring for may find that their personal benefits are cut..! https://www.gov.uk/carers-allowance/effect-on-other-benefits  

Which brings us to the recent National Audit Office report about carers being prosected and taken to court for overpayments they received (based on their weekly earnings sometimes exceeding the £151 maximum allowed).  https://www.nao.org.uk/reports/carers-allowance 

This report found that the typical overpayment a carer has received is £988.

To put that in context using the earlier figures in this post, that equates to:

• 3 months of full carers allowance;
• 4% of what's needed for a person to have a minimum standard quality of life (remember that the currently rules on carers allowance means a person is already over 50% short of being able to achieve this!)
• 3% of the average wage in the UK (= 1.5 weeks' wages)

And HMRC and the DWP are keen to recover these overpayments, by forcing carers who are already struggling and are in poverty (because the government's rules force them to be so - remember the limit on what you're allowed to earn?), to endure even more hardship, because of mistakes in these overpayments that these same government bodies recognise and admit to making themselves:

• the government are x5 more likely to chase the debt than forgive it (even though it's relatively little - see above);
• we have a 50/50 chance that in their chasing for these amounts, that they'll instigate a 'civil action' to get the money back off us - taking us to court, which will damage our credit rating, and so keep us in poverty into the future...

But why should this matter to you, dear reader, if you don't have caring responsibilities?

Well, as unpaid carers, we save the wider economy £162 BILLION EACH YEAR. The current total overpayments on carers allowance is £252million - less than 2% of this benefit of savings that the state already enjoys because of our efforts and sacrifices.

So, dear government, how about a little compassion and actual recognition of the precarious state we unpaid carers are in: instead of constantly forcing us (and the people we care for) further into poverty, actually reform carers allowance and support properly?

Otherwise, you might find that we can no longer continue to afford to be able to act in these ways, and you'll have to find that extra £162bn each year (which is equivalent to over 90% of the the £179bn NHS budget).   

"I didn't expect there'd be so much blood..."

I was recently invited to be the 'headline act' at the monthly Facilitators cafe - a gathering of people with an interest in facilitation to hang out with their peers, reflect on practices, tools, experiences, etc.

And I took the opportunity to encourage people to do some 'stick poking' at the worlds of psychometric tools and profiling - things like Myers Briggs, Belbin Team Roles, DISC profiles, etc, which are designed to tell us/others about how we think and behave as human beings (and are usually favoured by lots of HR recruitment teams, even though they weren't originally designed for this purpose...).

My reason for this was pretty much based on the approach I always take with tools and frameworks that are presented to us as the next 'new brilliant thing' - I have an idea that all too often we rush to adopt and start to use them, without first sense checking how safe they may be, what their origin stories are, and if they do actually live up to all the hype around them (based on evidence, research, and experience).

Within the context of the time available (just under an hour, and which also had to include time for people to show off their Christmas jumpers - it was December, after all!), I suggested we create spaces (aka breakout rooms, as the cafe's a virtual one in zoom) for people to reflect on how they'd experienced these types of tools in the context of facilitating different types of groups.

Encouragingly, the consensus that emerged is broadly similar to my own (which is based on looking at different published researches into efficacy, accuracy, and safety of different psychometric frameworks...):

- "they're a tool, not a rule". We shouldn't feel obliged to be a slave to their process, or bound by what they 'score', but rather treat them flexibly, and as circumstances may otherwise dictate; 

- they're designed for individuals to reflect on themselves in a controlled environment, rather than an open facilitated session, so can't and shouldn't be used as they're designed to be. To do so would require a lot of time (which reduces the ability of the group to otherwise progress against the aims of the wider session), and increases the risk of harm and distress amongst individuals within the group in doing then so openly and publicly;

- they should be used 'lightly', with lots of 'safety rails' put in place: as one fellow facilitator shared, when recounting their use of a psychometric with a group as part of a session they facilitated: "I didn't expect there'd be so much blood...";

- it's easy to get caught in a "model muddle": with so many different frameworks out there, and each claiming to be the best, how can we be sure we're playing with the right ones?

Ultimately, we all agreed that tools like these, as with any others, are only helpful to us as facilitators if they can answer the "...so what?" question. If they don't quickly, easily, and safely help to generate insights or outputs which directly contribute to achieving a session's aims, then they're probably going to be a distraction at best.

And intriguingly, one of the cafe patrons shared how they'd taken some of the principles and ideas around psychometrics and adapted these: early on any any session, they now share a short story. Depending on how people react to different parts of that story, or how they respond to it overall, gives that facilitator a working model for how they understand each person is likely to subsequently react to different prompts or stage and elements in the session plan.

Oh, and I also got to 'show off' one of the more playful approaches I use when working with a group that's been established for a while already, and people are used to working together: Ulla Zang, as a relatively safe prompt to help people reflect on, and refresh, how well they really think they know and perceive each other.     

the one where other people say what I did this year

It's that time of year when we're all encouraged to reminisce as business owners, freelancers, and entrepreneurs.

And I've decided to 'play along' too. But rather than doing what most others seem to be (a mixture of the person's reflective anecdotes, dream client contracts won, things that felt the scariest or created the biggest 'splash' for them), I wanted to try and take a slightly more 'scientific' and experimental approach (after all, I do encourage people to play at being 'mad scientists' from time to time...). 

I've instead decided to see what might be the things other people noticed about what I was up to in the year, that they felt were most noteworthy, based on the analytics across most of my social media channels, and awards I've been feted with. 

And the results are... 

Caring about unpaid caring 

Sharing stories about my 'extra curricular' efforts to get better recognition for unpaid carers who are also self-employed, freelance, or small business owners (we're the only type of carer who isn't recognised in law, and therefore have no rights or support services designed for our needs, as carers in other circumstances do), drew the most consistent interest of all the things I talked about that I've been involved in this year.

And because of this, I've had opportunity to influence a national think tank's policy research, who have also subsequently openly published their own position paper on this (hat tip to ipse!); been profiled by a national family support charity (another hat tip to Working Families!); and been invited by the Department for Business and Trade to be part of focus groups they're convening to better understand the experiences of unpaid carers, and their employers, in different employment contexts and environments.

Continuing to feel like imposters

My book, and guesting on others' podcasts etc, about why we should rethink the whole concept of 'imposter syndrome' (on the basis that various published scientific research and study papers suggest that it isn't at all what most people say and think it is), also continues to draw ongoing interest.

Challenging what people think social enterprise is (and should be) about

And my ongoing reflections about what emerging data sets and researches about what the future of the social enterprise sector might look like and act, (and the evolving nature of the types of organisations that make it up), also proved popular (including my extolling the virtues of McDonalds, as an inspiring example that social enterprises should seek to imitate!)

 

Going out of my way to make trouble/try and help

Although my unpaid caring responsibilities now mean that I'm not able to offer as much pro bono, or get involved with events and initiatives as much as I could and did in previous years, I've continued to try and spot and create ways in which I can use my business and voice to influence and encourage others, so that they in turn can amplify this through other channels.

This year, theRSA offered me a Life Fellowship, in recognition of my 'extra curricular' efforts to positively influence the wider ecosystems of policy makers, investors, and infrastructure bodies, that support enterprises of all types; and the Community Foundation for Calderdale recognised me as an "outstanding individual" in recognition for how I've stretched the way my business works to maximise the potential impacts and benefits it can create for the wider local community and economy in contributing to them becoming more resilient and inclusive.

But that's what I think I'm aware of, on the basis of the points in my year that the internet tells me that I've caught the most interest and imagination of others, because of what I was (trying to) do to at the time.

What's been the biggest thing I've done this year, that meant you were glad that I was part of yours?

how to make carer's leave work for carers?

Earlier this year, there was the introduction of a piece of legislation that gives people in work, who also have unpaid caring responsibilities, the right to take up to a 'week off' as part of how the can better support the person who relies on them in that role.

However, as various researches and stories shared to coincide with the recent #CarersRightsDay by various carers bodies highlighted - most employers (and carers) aren't aware of this, and of those that are, most can't afford to ask for it or take it. This is largely because:

• people in work who are also carers are more likely to already be in poverty, so simply can't afford to take this time off unpaid;
• many businesses' workplaces may struggle to offer the flexibility that a person needs (for example - if they're a teacher, work in a clinical role, or as part of a manufacturing or engineering firm);
• lots of carers simply don't recognise themselves as being such, or if they do, are afraid of recriminations or damage to their future careers if they 'come out' to their employer.

And as a result of their not being able to take this leave, carers are:

• leaving their jobs in droves: currently, in the region of 600 people every day quit their jobs, because they can't balance their paid role with their caring responsibilities. This means a growing loss of skill and talent for businesses, and more people entering a life of poverty (because the act of being a carer means that, typically, you 'loose' at least £20,000 in earnings you would have otherwise earned each year);
• increasingly unwell and becoming mentally ill, because they're having to use their holiday leave entitlements to fulfil caring responsibilities. This leaves them no time to rest and recover, which means that they're accelerating when they'll reach burnout and breakdown points. 

All of this has been percolating around the back of my head over the last few days, and if anyone has a magic wand going spare (or knows where I can pick up a magic lamp with a genie it), this is what might help:

1. Extend the government's existing Access to Work scheme: this was designed to support people with disabilities or mental ill health to gain/remain in work, and is based on the Equalities Act. Carers are (in theory) also covered by the same Act, so what if Access to Work could be flexed to recognise and support carers as well? This would enable employers to invest in/introduce practices and systems that they might otherwise struggle to be able to. And yes, this would mean an increase of cost to the government, but it would also mean more people are able to stay in work, and employers are able to retain the skills and talent they need for growth.
2. Create a 'carers note' system, akin to current GP's 'fit notes'. This would help employers be able to better recognise and 'legitimise' employee's needs as carers, and might also help individual carers better identify as such (most of us don't 'claim the badge' until we've been doing it for around 3 years on average). This also then links into the next idea...
3. Get the Treasury to offer employers the ability to reclaim the cost of an employee's salary when they're on carers leave, in the same way they currently can for maternity and other types of family leave. Carer's are nearly always caring for a family member of some type, so it's in keeping with current systems and rules; and this would also mean that Carers could afford to take this leave too. And yes, it would mean a higher cost to the government, but as with extending the Access to Work idea above, the return would surely show it would be 'fantastic' value for money, on the same grounds?
4. Get higher visibility and profile for carers and carers needs in workplaces, not by recruiting 'ambassadors', but targeting the people that most small businesses listen to and trust the most: their accountants and trade bodies.
5. Finally, remove the +20% growth potential requitement that businesses have to evidence to be able to access funded business support programmes, so more employers can get support in working out how to make options best work for them and their employees who are also carers. Otherwise, lots of employers will continue to lose skills and talent, and increasingly perform less well, which will contribute to the wider economy grinding to a halt...

These is all based on existing government schemes, programmes, and legislation, so in theory, not that difficult to introduce or legislate for?

And... for the half a million of us sole traders and freelancers who currently don't have these same rights as our salaried counterparts (in fact, we don't have any!), these would all largely directly apply to us as well, which helps to remove some of the discrimination we currently face in working in this way.


And yes, any changes to systems that offer government payments can be open to abuse and fraud - but there are already safeguards and checks and balances in place for all of the above where these might be needed, including the DWP's own longstanding practice of being able to recognise a carer and authorise them as an 'appointee' to manage disability payments and other benefits that the person they care for is entitled to receive, if that person is not able to do so themselves. So another example of how the systems and infrastructure needed is already there...

But what do others think?

How audacious, crazy, unfeasible might some of these ideas be?

Maslow's doughnut

A lot of people have probably heard of 'Maslow's hierarchy' - it's based on the idea that as human beings, we have different 'levels' of need, and until we can satisfy one, we can't progress to the other (i.e. if we're homeless, it's hard to commit to a course of learning or securing a job).

In recent years, there's also been the emergence of 'donut economics' - the idea that because we live in a closed ecosystem (aka a planet revolving around the sun, and all we've got is what's already on it), we need to try and balance how we consume with how we live, and the donut creates a visual representation of this:

But I've been thinking recently about where these 2 models might/can/should overlap with each other - Maslow designed his model on the assumption that we should all be encouraging ourselves and each other us to be striving to reach the top of the pyramid, and that there would always be enough resources available for everyone to do this in ways that they determined were right for them. But maybe we need to be slightly more nuanced in this 'race to the top'? - not everything that's good for us is good for everyone else.

Could encouraging ourselves to work out what our 'personal doughnut' should be, and then thinking about where we are/want to be (in Maslows' hierarchy) allow us to more sustainably (and so better) achieve and set our personal ambitions, through recognising and understanding how our ambitions and choices affect others, and theirs, us?

(To work out your personal doughnut = https://doughnuteconomics.org/tools-and-stories/118)

Could this 'Maslow doughnut' be a better model for how we think about our personal development in the 21st century?