Noisy Leadership

Are you a quiet or noisy leader? What works best? I was at one of our ACEVO regional meetings in Oxford last week, and we had a fascinating debate on this in the wake of recent controversies.

A key role for any social leader is 'speaking truth to power'. But how do you do this? There are some CEOs who believe you must never speak out in public and do all your lobbying behind closed doors. They fear that if they are publicly critical they will be cut off from access or 'got at' in some way. 

This is wrong. No politician or senior official will pay you much attention if they think you will never speak out. That would mean they can safely ignore you. They will pay attention if they think you might speak out publicly, and if they think that what they are proposing is going to be criticised in the public domain. We social leaders hold a vital weapon in our hands. The media love us and we are trusted. When a politician or government official is interviewed the public are inclined to be skeptical. When we appear, there is trust in what we say and claim. Ipsos MORI’s trust surveys (like this one usually indicate that around 15-20% of the public trust politicians, while more like 60-70% trust charities.

Being quiet, then, will not achieve what you want. Of course, the power to speak out must be used judiciously. You should be careful to modulate your criticisms with praise when it is due. Always slamming everything just doesn't work. But on occasion you must be noisy.

I'm certainly not regarded as a shrinking violet. On the Oxfam issue I have been very outspoken. Indeed my views featured in opposition to some backbench government MPs on Friday's BBC Radio 4 World at One. But I have tempered this with lots of work with government when there are issues we care about as a sector. I doubt I was asked by David Cameron to write the choice and competition report in the listening exercise because I'm a quiet leader, or to speak with him when he launched the Open Public Services White Paper because I was seen as docile.

An independent and robust civil society must not whisper but make itself heard. That is why we must avoid the temptation to keep quiet over the election period. CEOs and their trustees must determine to speak out when that is needed, and tell people if they feel they are being gagged. Lord Finkelstein, for one, as he said in Parliament last Thursday would like to hear if charities and campaigners feel gagged by the provisions of the Lobbying Act.

This may sometimes get uncomfortable. I didn't exactly enjoy the dirt heaped over me after my robust defence of professional salaries for CEOs or the sarcasm of Daily Mail columnists. But leadership is often uncomfortable. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen - as they say. And good leaders are able to juggle when backdoor diplomacy is best and when it isn't.

There are many leadership styles. As many as there are leaders I suspect. But being noisy has its place!

And on the subject of noisy leadership I guess you could add the recent example of the Prime Minister in Europe. I was interested in the interview with Jeremy Hunt MP on Today this morning. He made the point that "leadership can be lonely" and he is right. Leadership is not always about seeking or getting a consensus. Sometimes a decision needs to be taken that may not be universally popular - as we saw with the row over Junker. That may be a decision you have taken that may not be universally popular with your Board or your staff, and that's a lonely position.

I remember one of the early ACEVO posters which said (over the picture of a mountain) "it’s lonely at the top". That is exactly why an organisation like ACEVO exists; to support and advise CEOs and to provide a peer network that gives that support when difficult decisions have to be taken.

Gagged? We shall see...

So after brave attempts by the Lords to change the 2 most obnoxious remaining bits of the Lobbying Bill we will now have a Lobbying Act. We may live to regret this day.

The real shame was that the staff costs amendment was a tied vote and so fell; which means we only needed one more peer and this would have been carried. It's a lesson for our sector to be more joined up and avoid mixed messages that are used against us.

There are other lessons to learn. Not all bad.

So, for example the work of the cross-sector Commission on Civil Society (www.civilsocietycommission.info) showed how we can come together across the wide diversity of our many, many charities when faced with a challenge.

However our work is not done. We now need to:

•  give advice to charities and campaigning bodies on what they can and can't do
  
• encourage charity leaders not to impose their own gag on what they do. As the recent report of the Independence Panel chaired by Sir Roger Singleton showed, there are strong dangers of self censorship; that CEOs and trustees are frightened off doing any campaigning for fear of falling foul of this new law or the bureaucracy it involves
  
•   we must monitor the effects of this new law. This was one of the key recommendations of the Commission. We'll ensure we have the evidence to persuade the next Government to make necessary changes.
  
• and finally ACEVO - and colleagues in our sister bodies - need to provide the support and advice charities need to get through this new minefield of red tape and to encourage all sector leaders to continue to speak truth to power. Knowing my members as I do I'm sure they won't be put off doing what's right by a piece of mean-minded legislation!

Fun at the House

It was that time of year; the annual meeting of ACEVO and our Parliamentary reception. Last year we had snow but yesterday it was quite mild. I hope that's a reflection of a milder climate for charities and social enterprises in 2014.

"Optimism" was the theme of my speech. Well worth reading (he says without ego!). See it here

I used a fabulous quote from Proverbs to illustrate our historic role:

"Speak out on behalf of the voiceless, and for the rights of all who are vulnerable. Speak out in order to judge with righteousness and to defend the needy and the poor."

Proverbs 31: 8-10

It was highly relevant as a short while earlier in the House of Commons we had the result of the votes on the vital Lords amendments on the Lobbying Bill, proposed by the former Bishop of Oxford Lord Harries. It's a disgrace the Commons have rejected the very sensible proposals of our Commission on Civil Society on staff costs and constituency limits. Both will greatly constrain our role in speaking out for communities and our duty to promote a healthy debate in a democratic society. We will urge the Lords to stand firm. They must assert our right to campaign. And if the Government have any sense they will seek a compromise. We are more than happy to meet with Government to hammer out a sensible middle way, but compromise is the right way forward now and the Civil Society Commission will hope to have those discussions soon.

Our Parliamentary reception brought together Liz Kendall MP, the opposition health Minister, Nick Hurd MP our Minister and the CEO of CAF Bank. Peter Ostacchini.

Liz was great. A former ACEVO member when she was the CEO of the Maternity Alliance, she was very generous in her tribute to our role in supporting and briefing. She said she would "fall on" our briefings about what was going on as essential reading. And she was clear that our sector must play a major role in better public services.

It was a theme picked up by Nick Hurd. As he said: "The big question for any Government will be how do we give people better public services with less money?" And we are crucial to that answer.

He also made the point about the trust in our sector as opposed to so many other institutions. He argued that where trust goes, power flows. So whatever we might think about the challenges of 2013 on pay, lobbying or ethical investment, there is much to be optimistic about.

Good to see many of our members turning up for our AGM and then at our reception. Always fun to do that in Parliament where we can network with our legislators more informally. And, of course pick up gossip.

I'm now on my way to Liverpool where I'm donning my Social Investment Business Chair's hat to launch our Local impact Fund; a new £2m loan fund for the sector which is supported by the Local Economic Partnership and Liverpool Council. More on this later.

I always love a chance to visit Liverpool. I have 8 dead relations there, as I shall tell the Mayor!

Ethical Investment

Time to pull our socks up.  The Panorama programme this evening, which in many aspects was rather thin, has nevertheless highlighted an issue the sector needs to grapple with.

When organisations have endowments (like many Foundations) or big reserves they must invest these both for the good of their beneficiaries, and ethically, for the wider good.

Charity Commission advice used to be too blunt and unhelpful: that trustees should only invest for the maximum return. Now their advice (CC 14 to be precise) is more nuanced and encourages 'mission driven' investment. Not enough charities are taking notice of this new more flexible approach. They need to.

Because, quite simply, it doesn’t seem right that charities invest in tobacco or arms companies.

We need more people in the sector looking seriously at ethically managed funds. The argument is that they don't give as good a return. But you might be surprised to learn the size and strength of the ethical investment industry. There is around $34 trillion under management in funds that subscribe to the UN’s Principles for Responsible Investment. That’s about a third of all money under managed funds anywhere in the world. So there’s plenty of choice and we expect that choice to grow.

Impact investment funds, though in their infancy now, may also become an investment option of choice for charities further down the line. Why shouldn't our sector be looking at how we can expand opportunities for social finance; for loans to develop and grow our sector

So, I'm giving our sector and those associated with it a call to action. I have two messages.

One is to the fund managers themselves. Why are you not alerting your charities to ethical problems with proposed investments?  Before you put our money into an investment you think raises issues then consult the charity trustees responsible. Fund management companies need to get their act together and understand the ethics of their investment decisions.

Secondly, to charities. Charities traditionally delegate their investment decisions to a sub committee and they in turn appoint fund managers. So many trustees simply do not know where their investments go. Time for the full board to review investment policy. The full board should review the Charity Commission advice and question whether they are investing in line with their mission and with their own ethos.

The sector needs to do more to engage with ethical investment principles. Ensuring that their investments conform to the particular and the wider good will help ensure that our sector remains true to our collective mission in all aspects of our work.

This is our wake up call.

Adieu, Sir Nick...

We were going round in circles at the time (in the revolving restaurant of the BT Tower as it happens) . Apt somewhat, as I was chatting to Andrew Lansley MP about the Lobbying Bill – as you might expect. I was making my helpful suggestion of a "pause" and listening exercise on the Bill; as suggested by the superb report from the Commission on Civil Society. He laughed, which I think means no. But we will see. There is major support for the work of the Commission across the Lords (and the Commons too). All the talks that acevo has been having across the parties indicates deep concern. So I'm sure the Lords will make amendments! Even if we don't win the argument on a pause. The trick then is to persuade Government to accept those changes.

A gathering of the great and the good to celebrate the work and achievements of fellow Knight and friend Nick Partridge, who has run Terence Higgins with such distinction for years. He is the sector's guru on mergers, having done over 30 of them.

The story of HIV/ Aids has been an object lesson in how citizens or "patients" can make an impact on the medical profession in the way treatments and care are delivered. And an object lesson in challenging stereotypes and bigotry. It was fitting that Norman Fowler was there; he was SoS of Health at the time the AIDS scare was at its peak. He provided strong leadership in challenging prejudice and was behind one of the world's most successful advertising campaigns; the tombstone ones that many of us will remember. At the time I was the Chair of the Landmark, which was South London's equivalent of the more famous Lighthouse (though Diana also was involved with us and indeed opened the Centre).

Nick with the new interim CEO of Terence Higgins.

Looking at my house on Brixton Hill (can you spot it?). 

 Home late, after an unhealthy amount of canapes, champagne, gossip and  sector companionship (good old BT for providing such a fitting send off)!

Nail in coffin of Lobbying Bill?

The Commission on Civil Society (www.civilsocietycommission.info), chaired by Bishop Harries, has produced its first report today. My Chair Lesley-Anne is a member. The report clinically dissects the Government's arguments that this is not a threat to civil society's right to engage in public debate at election time and our right to speak truth to power. And its proposals try to make the most of the opportunity the Bill gives us, to help write better election law.

It is now down to the Lords to argue that more time and consultation is necessary to get this right. It's clear the Electoral Commission have grave doubts about the workability of this Bill so it must be right to pause and consult. There is time to do this. Let's hope wise counsels prevail and the Lords do their job as the revising chamber.

Here's a copy of the report