Business support to third sector organisations contract review: research summary

4 The Just Enterprise Offer

4.1 This chapter reviews the Just Enterprise offer and its fit with the wider business support landscape in Scotland. Chapter 2 has demonstrated the volume of activity and the breadth of service coverage, and Chapter 3 has shown the benefits the service has generated for beneficiaries / recipients.

4.2 This chapter discusses some of the broader questions for the review: whether the business support available to Third Sector organisations is the right offer; how it is viewed and understood by partner organisations; and how it is positioned within the business support landscape in Scotland.

4.3 The chapter also considers operational aspects of Just Enterprise such as how the service has operated and been delivered in practice.

Just Enterprise – Strategic Approach

4.4 The Just Enterprise service is widely regarded by stakeholders as both necessary and important. It is viewed as fulfilling a need for business support for social enterprises and enterprising Third Sector organisations. As one stakeholder put it:

“If Just Enterprise didn’t exist, we would have to create something that looked like Just Enterprise.”

4.5 Certainly, the evidence from the analysis presented in Chapters 2 and 3 substantiates the point that there is demand for the service, and demand for the types of support made available through Just Enterprise.

4.6 There is also a general view amongst stakeholders that Just Enterprise is right to focus on enterprise, rather than “trying to be all things to all people”. As we say below, the understanding that Just Enterprise has a tight and explicit focus on enterprise is not universal. However, for those that are clear that this is the purpose and role of Just Enterprise, the focus on enterprise is deemed appropriate, and necessary to meet what the sector needs.

4.7 Further, it is generally agreed that it is appropriate that Just Enterprise seeks to provide a national service, and that there should be a broad consistency of offer. That said, there is also a recognition that local circumstances vary, and so the consortium approach, with local delivery of service is welcomed. There are some challenges in achieving this consistency of approach, as we discuss below, but the broad consensus is that it is the right aspiration.

4.8 There is also broad agreement that Just Enterprise is right to be demand-led, and that it responds to client need, so that the support offered to each social enterprise is tailored to what they need, rather than what the provider wants to deliver. This user-led approach in a national programme is perceived by partners and stakeholders as bringing particular value to the sector. The collaborative working provides a more comprehensive support package for social enterprises. It is also more straightforward for them to find what they want where they need it e.g. provided locally.

Integration with Mainstream Business Support

4.9 The Just Enterprise service is a bespoke business support service for social enterprises and enterprising Third Sector organisations. A key question for the review is how this business support co-exists, and interfaces, with mainstream business support, via Business Gateway, the enterprise agencies, and indeed the private sector.

4.10 The simple answer is that, whilst the Just Enterprise service was modelled on the Business Gateway service (as the principal mainstream business volume support service), it has largely operated in parallel. Whilst it is true that there are referrals into and out of Just Enterprise from / to Business Gateway (and vice versa), as Chapters 2 and 3 show, there is not a large volume of such referrals. The research indicates that around 8% of all organisations supported by Just Enterprise came via Business Gateway.

4.11 This is perhaps surprising, since much of the support provided via Just Enterprise is similar to that provided to ‘conventional’ mainstream business (business planning, investment readiness, procurement, leadership etc.) and that the issues facing social enterprise are also similar. However, it is also widely understood that the social enterprise sector is in many ways different from the mainstream business sector. Its twin commercial and social objectives, and often its operating context, differentiates the sector, requiring a more bespoke approach.

4.12 Indeed, there are complexities within this arena, including the perception (and often reality) that mainstream business support agencies do not sufficiently understand the social enterprise sector. Again, this is a point in favour of a bespoke enterprise support service to social enterprises. Whilst the picture is variable across Scotland in terms of Business Gateway advisors understanding of social enterprises – there are some very good examples of strong social enterprise support via Business Gateway advisors – in the main, mainstream business support provider understanding of the social enterprise sector remains weak.

4.13 The integration of social enterprise business support with mainstream business support therefore is seen as a long way from being achievable, although this remains an aspiration for many stakeholders. Indeed, there is a view that social enterprises should not be ‘silo-ised’, with some observing a tendency for social enterprises to be directed to Just Enterprise from mainstream organisations “simply because it is there”. Stakeholders who participated consider this to be a sub-optimal use of resources and certainly there are existing opportunities to bring Just Enterprise support and Business Gateway and the enterprise agencies closer together.

4.14 The issue of the need for closer working and integration has been recognised. Chapter 2 cites the introduction of Knowledge Exchange sessions between Business Gateway advisors, Scottish Enterprise and Just Enterprise. These have widely been viewed by stakeholders as positive and useful in sharing experiences and knowledge and deepening the understanding of respective individuals involved.

4.15 A more integrated approach will not be easy to achieve. From the perspective of the social enterprise sector, there is somewhat limited interaction with mainstream business support, and indeed the private sector more widely. So some of this is about breaking down the barriers for social enterprises so they can access mainstream business support, as well as up-skilling the mainstream business support sector to better engage with the social enterprise sector. The future considerations section in Chapter 6 suggests the new South of Scotland multi-agency approach may be an opportunity to pilot greater levels of integration.

Appropriateness of Support Offer

The Core Components

4.16 Within the Just Enterprise service offer, the majority of its components are welcomed and viewed positively by stakeholders who participated in this review. There is a general recognition that Start-up Support is necessary and valuable, as is support to established social enterprises. Further, there was generally positive feedback around the role of Leadership in helping to embed an enterprising and can-do mindset in supported organisations.

4.17 Whilst the basic building blocks of the service have been recognised as the right ones, some have viewed the Start-up service as one that can stand-alone. However, this is more a question of positioning and delivery; all stakeholders who participated considered that there should be Start-up enterprise support to the sector.

4.18 Similarly, with Leadership, whilst viewed as a positive offer, not all were clear that this should form part of the Just Enterprise service. This appears to stem from the fact that Leadership Support is offered via the Social Enterprise Academy out-with Just Enterprise, and also by mainstream agencies (including the enterprise agencies). Again, this is more about positioning, rather than whether the support should be provided, and Chapter 3 is clear on the benefits to Just Enterprise service recipients of this element of support.

Specialised Components

4.19 Within this broad positive feedback, there were components singled-out as offering particular benefits for recipients. This included the introduction of Start-up Lift-up, which has helped close the ‘gap’ between the Start-up offer and the main Business Support. Although this has now been in existence for a few years, there is by no means universal awareness that this support exists, including amongst those from within the sector. However, the introduction of Lift-up has allowed some continuation of support, post Start-up intervention(s).

4.20 There were views expressed on other parts of the offer. The issue of the Pre-investment Support offer was raised by some in terms of whether the support sufficiently meets sector needs. This part of the service has been introduced as the service has evolved, and as highlighted in Chapter 2, the support has been made available to only a small number of businesses. This support is typically (although not universally) for businesses seeking larger amounts of loan finance. However, there is a wider issue in terms of social enterprise access to finance that is worthy of further consideration, particularly in terms of the need for greater investor readiness amongst service users, user reluctance and inability to access loan finance and continued reliance on grant funding amongst many social enterprises.

4.21 The Supported Businesses offer was introduced as a result of the desire to prevent high profile business failings and to give supported businesses the help they required. Again, as Chapter 2 highlights, this has involved a small number of businesses, principally a result of the relatively small number of businesses meeting the definition. Comments from advisers, and direct feedback from some of the Supported Businesses accessing help from Just Enterprise, suggests that the required support has now been provided, and that this has formed the necessary relationships, so there is little ongoing need for a specific offer. More recently, the definition of Supported Businesses has been changed and widened following new European Union Directives, and this wider definition now covers most social enterprises, therefore going forward, there may be little value in differentiating this part of the overall Just Enterprise offer.

4.22 With regard to Business Recovery, this has been viewed as a useful addition to the suite of support. The view here is that, whilst useful, it may also be ‘too late’ in effect by the time the intervention is made. This may in part be a result of the fact that this service offer is (understandably) not widely advertised given that many struggling organisations do not wish their circumstances to be known, and so social enterprises may not be aware of the service. Often, there is an unwillingness for the social enterprise to admit there is an issue. What is clear, however, is that this part of the offer is valued and what is also clear is that sustainability is a strong motivator of support (see Chapter 3). The issue here, as we discuss is how best to help social enterprises avoid reaching the stage where business recovery is required.

Service Gaps and Duplication

4.23 Feedback suggests there are no major gaps in the service offering, although views were expressed that the service could be more proactive in seeing where demand may be likely to arise, or where this is emerging. At present, Just Enterprise responds to demand as it arises i.e. it typically reacts to demand.

4.24 An example given was a Government funding injection for working in / with schools that led to a proliferation of social enterprises in this sector. Through responding to this new demand, Just Enterprise advisors became skilled in this sector, and in meeting the needs of social enterprises.

4.25 However, this reactive approach can take time, and a more planned approach may enable the service to have the right skills in place to meet likely demand increases. The Government commitment to increase entitlement to childcare may become an example where Just Enterprise needs to be ready to meet what may be a significant increase in demand from this sector.

4.26 Some of the potential ‘gaps’ in the offer identified were more about how best to meet community, or sector needs, and not all of this will be appropriate for Just Enterprise. For example, in the Social Care sector example above, including early learning and childcare, the issue may be about how best to meet the sector need by increasing the number of childcare social enterprises.

4.27 This may not be for Just Enterprise, and indeed there are some pockets of activity that are designed to do this, for example programmes delivered by Firstport. It may not be the role of Just Enterprise to drive the development of social enterprises, although it should be sufficiently close to policy agendas and sector development to plan for any likely increases of demand as a result.

4.28 Further, whilst the service offer includes business planning, for example, as do mainstream business support agencies, the context for the Just Enterprise service, and its beneficiaries, is on the whole clear and distinct.

4.29 The exception in terms of potential duplication, and this is new in 2017, is the Procurement support. The Partnership for Procurement (P4P) grant funded support introduced this year is designed to support social enterprise collaboration to access market opportunities.

4.30 In theory, P4P is quite distinct from the Just Enterprise Procurement Support to individual organisations with respect to specific opportunities and the tender process. The Procurement Support via Just Enterprise has been a small but important part of the service offer, and it would be unfortunate if P4P caused this part of the Just Enterprise service to become clouded for the sector.

Appropriateness of the Mode of Support

4.31 The Just Enterprise offer is also broadly viewed as appropriate in terms of its means of engagement. There is broad consensus that short, sharp interventions bring focus to the support provided, rather than open-ended support. That said, some partners would welcome the opportunity to provide longer support. Whilst not a service ‘gap’ as such, this brings in to debate whether some form of mentoring style support would be beneficial, or some form of aftercare support.

4.32 Overall, from the beneficiary perspective, the issue of length of support does not come through strongly as a negative part of Just Enterprise. Partly, this appears to be a result of the use of multiple interventions, which allow Just Enterprise to provide a longer-term service, based around particular projects.

4.33 Nonetheless, a mentoring style programme could form a strand of a continuum of support and aftercare. In this scenario, established social enterprises could mentor early stage and new social enterprises, providing support and sharing their experiences and helping them to navigate issues and develop solutions.

Capacity Building and Early Stage Support

4.34 As we mentioned at 4.6 above, there is a general recognition that Just Enterprise should (as it does) focus on those that are capable of trading. Where views have been expressed as to what the service should additionally cover, some stakeholders cited the need for more early stage support.

4.35 A number of partners hold the view that more early stage support is required, prior to accessing Just Enterprise. Effectively what is being referred to is the need for greater capacity building, as part of early stage support. For some, this is a gap in provision and a demand that is not currently being met.

4.36 As noted, under current contract arrangements, this early stage capacity building is not a role for Just Enterprise. The exception is where capacity building is built into the contract for some groups, notably for Black and Minority Ethnic social enterprises via CEMVO, although even here the majority of the funding for capacity building does not sit within the Just Enterprise contract. Thus here, whilst the capacity building is regarded as necessary activity, and useful in generating Just Enterprise business, this is not a core role for the service. Therefore, currently early stage support and capacity building lies out-with the Just Enterprise service ^[41] . The Third Sector Interfaces ( TSIs) have a remit to promote and develop social enterprise locally (as part of the wider eco system of social enterprise support). In practice, this varies across local authority areas, with some TSIs working in partnership with the local Social Enterprise Network ( SEN), some funding the local SEN directly and others working independently of or without a strong SEN. This is a reflection of the ongoing growth of the social enterprise sector and consequent challenges faced by some TSIs in meeting demand, as well as of the variable knowledge and understanding of the social enterprise sector within some of the TSI organisations.

4.37 Some stakeholders have been vocal about the need for more support for organisations in this early stage space. The Scottish Community Alliance, for example, via their Local People Leading piece, has been critical of the lack of business support for very early stage community enterprises.

Visibility and Partner Awareness

4.38 The chapter has noted on a number of occasions where there has been a degree of misunderstanding as to what constitutes the Just Enterprise offer. This is an issue more widely, with partner understanding of Just Enterprise variable, and in some cases quite poor. This includes some in mainstream business support and in Third Sector membership organisations.

4.39 In part, this misunderstanding stems from a lack of clarity about what Just Enterprise consortium partners deliver, since most (if not all) deliver other support to the sector other than the support they provide via the Just Enterprise contract. It is not always clear to external stakeholders (and service beneficiaries / recipients) which of the consortium partner support constitutes the Just Enterprise support and what is not Just Enterprise.

4.40 The lack of partner understanding also comes partly from a general lack of visibility and information available about Just Enterprise. Many partners stated that Just Enterprise has a relatively low profile and visibility, and that they were not sure what effect Just Enterprise was having, other than what they were being told anecdotally, or in the case of member organisations, via their members.

4.41 Chapter 2 highlighted that the vast majority of the contract value (80% plus) is devoted to service delivery, rather than management and partnership engagement, and this may be a contributory factor.

Potential Overlaps and Duplication

4.42 One consequence of a lack of awareness amongst partners is that overlap and duplication can emerge. We have covered the fact the Just Enterprise service offer is not duplicating other forms of support, however, there are indications in the research that some TSIs are developing more business support to social enterprises.

4.43 This could present a risk in terms of diverting referrals from Just Enterprise to TSIs and also adding a layer of unnecessary duplication. There is also some concern in the sector that this may lead to an environment in which TSIs are competing with their members.

The Consortium Approach

4.44 There was a general (although again not universal) view that a consortium approach is sensible, and appropriate if the objectives of a national service are to be met. The prevailing view was that, whilst a consortium approach may be expected to be challenging, the approach has largely been successful and (from those consortium and delivery partners) had improved over time.

4.45 There is no doubt that the consortium approach delivers economies of scale. A single, centralised management hub means that more of the resource is directed to providing support rather than to management and administration, and the focus on service delivery has been a feature of Just Enterprise.

4.46 The consortium approach also means that there is a national brand which has helped to establish the reputation and profile of the programme (and as noted earlier there are arguments that the brand should be further invested in). The approach successfully combines the benefits of being a national programme, with localised delivery that is responsive to local need and circumstance. This combination is considered to be a significant strength and a key contributing factor to the success of the service.

4.47 As stated, this view is not universal, and the chapter has already touched on the fact the consortium could better communicate the Just Enterprise service to external stakeholders. The strong consortium working may itself have limited the relationships that have been built with members and external stakeholders, including potential referral agencies.

4.48 From within the consortium, there is again a general sense that the approach is beneficial, and necessary, for national coverage to be achieved. That is not to say consortium working cannot be improved. This is covered below.

Delivery Processes

4.49 The chapter has already discussed the appropriateness of the overall approach. What is covered below are some of the specific workings of service management and processes.

Application Processes and Allocation

4.50 In general, as Chapter 3 shows, the application process is regarded as good, although more than a quarter do not rate it as good or very good, particularly amongst Start-up enterprises, and this represents room for improvement. The consortium partners themselves stated that they considered the process of applying for Just Enterprise support to be generally smooth. As one delivery partner commented:

“There is a smooth entry and re-entry point.”

4.51 Within the consortium, the process of allocating cases is also viewed as working reasonably well, as one delivery partner put it:

“The process effectively identifies the most appropriate delivery partner.”

4.52 These processes have been refined over time. Once allocated to a delivery partner, the partner then decides on the most appropriate adviser, based on their skill-set and workload.

4.53 It is a two-stage process, with all enquiries logged and recorded in the first instance by CEiS, as the single point of contact, a process which again is regarded to work reasonably well.

Contract Management and Consortium Working

4.54 Overall, CEiS as the contract lead, provide strong management of the service, acting as the core contact point for applicants and partners. This is considered to be a strength, giving the programme coherence across Scotland. CEiS’s contract management has been a factor in the Just Enterprise service repeatedly delivering against expenditure and activity targets. As one delivery partner put it the service offer is:

“Well conceptualised and well executed.”

4.55 However, whilst strong management has been demonstrated, there is always a challenge to balance this with partnership working.

Consortium Skills and Knowledge

4.56 The consortium comprises a wide range of skills and expertise meaning that it can effectively meet the diverse range of social enterprises’ needs. However, there is a sense that there could be greater knowledge sharing and understanding between delivery partners regarding the specific expertise and specialist knowledge held by respective partners and advisers. If there was better understanding of this expertise, then partners could draw more on each other for, as an example, technical information and knowledge about a particular sector.

4.57 As we have already discussed, the Just Enterprise service typically has responded to needs as they have arisen. This has been reactive in many cases (e.g. Education, or Social Care). Greater knowledge-sharing within the consortium (and outside the consortium with external stakeholders) may help Just Enterprise to see where future demand may come from more effectively and allow for planned utilisation of skills within the consortium more effectively, or bringing in additional skills as required.

4.58 Over time the skills and capability of the consortium has increased considerably. This has been a result of the longevity of Just Enterprise and the establishment of an ongoing service which has allowed continuity and consortium partners to invest in their staff. This has been another strength of the service.

Adviser Training and Expertise

4.59 Aside from the recently introduced Knowledge Exchange sessions with mainstream business support, there appears little direct adviser training and development within Just Enterprise. That is not to say each individual consortium partner does not invest in their staff development. However, more formal and ongoing training and knowledge refresh arrangements may be appropriate, now that the service moves towards further improving quality and impact.

4.60 Further, and as discussed above, a more proactive approach to assessing future demand would be beneficial. This would enable more effective skills development and adviser training, and, if required, new skills to be brought into the consortium (or accessed from external partners).

Data Sharing and Client Tracking

4.61 There is perceived to be an issue with the extent and quality of data-sharing and client tracking between Just Enterprise consortium members / delivery partners. This means that there is less of a joined-up approach to delivery than there could be, and it is regarded as hard to assess the specific impact and progression of social enterprises across the programme.

4.62 This is a difficult issue but one where further attention is required. There are clearly data protection issues, and it may not be appropriate or desirable for all consortium partners to have details for the many thousand organisations and individuals benefiting from the service.

4.63 From a beneficiary / recipient perspective, it also means that beneficiaries may have to provide details more than once if they are working with more than one delivery partner.

Contract Innovation and Flexibility

4.64 Through the successive contract periods, new service offerings have become available. This has been a strength of the Just Enterprise service and the consortium approach, where delivery partners have identified gaps in the service and responded to demand accordingly. In effect, innovation has come from within the consortium; from helping to design new services such as Business Recovery to provision of specific additional workshops to meet new areas of demand, both across the programme and at a local level.

4.65 This innovation and flexibility is also evidenced by Just Enterprise successfully delivering new services such as the Supported Business Intervention, which came as an ‘ask’ for the service, but one which the consortium has responded to positively, working with partners, notably Scottish Enterprise.

4.66 This innovation and evolution, and the swiftness with which it was achieved may not have been possible without the consortium approach e.g. if there were a number of providers operating independently. As an example, Business Recovery and Pre-investment Support were both added to the programme’s offer to fill identified gaps.

4.67 In some ways, given the service is in its seventh year, the addition of some services may have been expected. Overall, the service remains demand-led, and greater levels of flexibility and innovation may well be possible. It may be possible for the service to have some headroom to allow for local responsiveness, or response to specific issues, for example through some form of discretionary funding not tied to contract outputs at the outset.

Summary and Conclusion

4.68 Overall, the Just Enterprise service is widely recognised as the national service for enterprise support for social enterprises, an achievement in its own right, with a broadly appropriate offer, and an ability to respond to sector demand.

4.69 The chapter has discussed a wide range of issues, from the strategic positioning of Just Enterprise within the business support landscape, to the nature of the offer, to partnership working, through to management and delivery arrangements.

4.70 Most stakeholders who participated consider that something like Just Enterprise would need to be created if it did not exist. That is not to say that all external stakeholders are clear on all elements of the Just Enterprise offer, or to say that improvements could not and should not be made. Just Enterprise is arguably not visible enough, in terms of both its offer and achievement, and this risks confusion creeping in, with the potential for provider duplication. The service has very much been about delivering activity to date, and now more needs to be done to celebrate impact and communicate with partners.

4.71 The integration with mainstream business support remains a long way off, yet closer working relationships would be desirable, building on the recent knowledge exchange sessions. There are also a range of service offer modifications and delivery process refinements that would also be beneficial. These form the basis of some of the conclusions and forward considerations identified in Chapter 6.